Loading...
2023-07-25 Regular MeetingEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPROVED MINUTES July 25, 2023 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Nelson, Mayor Neil Tibbott, Council President Vivian Olson, Councilmember Will Chen, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Dave Turley, Administrative Services Director Oscar Antillon, Public Works Director Susan McLaughlin, Planning & Dev. Dir. Rob English, City Engineer Deb Powers, Urban Forest Planner Rose Haas, Planner Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the Council Chambers, 250 5t' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember Buckshnis read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water." 3. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO TABLE ITEM 8.2, RESOLUTION FOR ANNEXATION INTO RFA. AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO PULL ITEM 7.6, RESOLUTION REGARDING 2024 BUDGET PRIORITIES, FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND ADD AS COUNCIL BUSINESS ITEM 3 AND PULL ITEM 7.4, APPROVAL OF MINOR CODE AMENDMENT PACKAGE #2 (AMD2023-0005), FROM THE Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 1 CONSENT AGENDA AND ADD AS COUNCIL BUSINESS ITEM 4. AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Mayor Nelson described the procedures for audience comments. Teresa Hollis, Edmonds, spoke regarding the 2024 comprehensive plan, relaying her opinion the public outreach tasks were not happening at the right times in the consultant's plan, but it could be fixed if staff worked on the detailed project plan. There are two cycles of neighborhood meetings to gather input, but the pain will begin at Task 5.1 when scenarios for growth and zoning maps are produced that show where smaller lots and taller building will be and where land uses might change. However, all the community meetings have been completed by then and residents' only option for engagement is making three -minute comments at planning board and council meetings and sending emails. By design in the current version on the project plan, no two-way conversations happen with the residents in public about the new zoning map or how the state regulations will be implemented on mitigating displacement, planning for middle density and low-income housing. Some residents have been studying housing deficit issues and solutions since the first consultant study over five years ago and have an appetite for a lot of detail. She recommended having a two-way, in -person discussion with them about the scenarios the consultant develops. Residents want to talk to their elected officials more than they want to talk to the consultants about those scenarios. Residents will bring their questions and they look forward to thoughtful responses happening in real time. A three - minute public statement by residents about changes in zoning and solutions to all the housing issues is not the best way to communicate. She was aware of the irony of making that statement tonight about poor ways to communicate. Peter Moon, Edmonds, spoke about mitigating excessive speed on Olympic View Drive. He received the 2020 traffic plan as well as data from the City's traffic engineer regarding a recent tube study conducted on Olympic View Drive that confirmed excessive speeds; he will be working with the city engineer on that. He referred to Item 4, Olympic View Drive Overlay from 196t1i to Talbot Road in the City's Six -year Transportation Improvement Plan 2023-2028, commenting an overlay will only exacerbate the problem, making it a smoother surface for cars to drive even faster. The budget for that project is approaching $750,000; a portion of that could be used for traffic calming on Olympic View Drive. He referred to the mayor's proposal for Edmonds Greenway Loop which he felt was a fantastic idea, very visionary and forward thinking. However, due to constraints in the right-of-way, especially on Olympic View Drive, it will be a massive undertaking that will certainly trigger SEPA and require an environmental impact statement, take a great deal of time, and cost a great deal of money just for the planning stages. The City needs to think about the future, but also the here and now and using resources to address the immediate need, reducing speeds on Olympic View Drive. Linda Ferkingstad, Edmonds, provided an update on what is happening with their property and the tree ordinance. They submitted all their papers; Mr. Clugston put up another email and mailing instead of just the sign put up a year ago for their neighbors to provide comment regarding her property. Mr. Clugston refused to tell her what those comments were and said they would be included as a stipulation in the next report. It is infeasible for her family to pay $200,000 to replant 3 trees for every tree they cut down to build the 3 homes they wanted. The interest in building those homes is gone; her mom passed away. They have been going through this process for 6'/z years. The obstruction and dishonesty on the part of the planning department has really affected her family. Her dad is almost 89 years old, missing her mom for 7-8 months and it is difficult for him to be on his own in Seattle, far away from his daughters. The tree ordinance added three years to this process in addition to the two years due to misinformation they received. They would like to be able to build three homes and pay the maximum amount allowed for their lot, $107,000, in order Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 2 to divide the property, one -quarter of what they paid for the property. The only other option is to only use one -quarter of the property and leave the rest treed. No one would buy their property due to the loss of value. Purchasing a property with trees after the tree ordinance is a very difficult task; why would someone want to pay money to go through what they have gone through? When Ms. Powers provides the council an update on the tree code, she urged the council to ensure it does not impact others the way it impacted her family. 6. RECEIVED FOR FILING 1. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR FILING 2. SURPLUS ASSETS 3. MAY 2023 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT 4. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS 5. OUTSIDE BOARDS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS 7. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2023 2. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE PAYMENTS 3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT 5. APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH TRANSPO FOR SR-104 ADAPTIVE SYSTEM FROM 236TH ST. SW TO 226TH ST. SW PROJECT 7. APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 8.16.040 FROM EDMONDS CITY CODE (ECC), AMENDING THE SPEED LIMIT ALONG HIGHWAY 99 FROM 244TH ST. SW TO 210TH ST. SW 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. 2023 JULY BUDGET AMENDMENT ORDINANCE Administrative Services Director Dave Turley reviewed: • 28 requests tonight; more detailed information including the draft ordinance in the council packet. • The request for tonight is to approve the budget amendment ordinance as included in packet or as amended. • If approved, this budget amendment would increase forecast revenue by $3,169,858 and increase budgeted expenditures by $6,879,619. Fund Number Proposed Amendment Chongein Revenue Proposed Amendment Chongein Expense Proposed Amendment Change in Ending Fund Balance 001 1,372,085 2,238,708 (866,623) O11 - - 111 200,000 162,765 37,235 117 1,122 1,122 126 426,871 (426,871) 127 97,150 54,000 43,150 130 42,117 (42,117) 136 - 172,220 (172,220) 142 210,000 F 210,000 421 130,197 (130,197) 422 75,000 233,523 (158,523) 423 996,564 2,484,054 (1,487,490) S31 65,000 534,967 (469,967) 512 152,937 190,197 (37,260) Total Change 3,169,858 6,879,619 (3,709,761) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 3 Mr. Turley reviewed proposed amendments: 1. Court Salaries Correction Corrects a calculation error in the April budget amendment for the budgeted increase to Court Salaries under the AFSCME Collective Bargaining Agreement for the period 1/l/2022-12/31/2024 2. Unfilled Positions Adjustment Reduces the budget for vacant positions still included in the 2023 Budget. Parks and Police added several positions in the 2023 budget and the budget included a full year's salary for those positions. Knowing all those positions were not hired January 1, 2023, some budget for salaries and wages is being removed. Councilmember Olson said she asked whether this represented all the vacancies and was told it did not. She felt there was some increasing concern about where the City is financially. She requested a full accounting of the vacancies and what areas of the budget that represents in 2023. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO HAVE A FULL ACCOUNTING OF THE VACANCIES AND WHAT AREAS OF THE BUDGET THAT REPRESENTS IN 2023. Councilmember Buckshnis anticipated that would be difficult to do but envisioned it could be done with the new software. It would be advantageous for the council to know how many positions are still vacant. Councilmember Paine commented in her experience working with salary savings and as a manager and director for the City of Seattle years ago, she often relied on salary savings from extended absences or delayed hiring and she would sometimes bring in temp staff to assist with workloads or offer OT utilizing the salary savings. Before moving all the savings into the General Fund, she would appreciate having this data from HR especially for the new positions that have not been filled. If the motion is strictly to ask for this information, she was supportive of it; if it was related to taking other actions, she pointed out that was not part of the budget amendment. Councilmember Olson clarified the motion was to ask for information about vacancies in all departments. Council President Tibbott advised a report from all departments with that information has been compiled and will be available in next week's packet; that was one of the budget consultant's recommendations. In addition, there are plans for a robust mid -year review in August. Those two items may answer this question and he suggested waiting for that before asking for other data. Councilmember Nand commented she and Councilmember Olson are on the PSPHSP committee; during discussions about job descriptions, salary and benefits, there have been indications that there is space in the budget due to unfilled positions. She asked if the information Council President Tibbott indicated will be in next week's packet will detail how much money has been allocated versus how much is being spent on wages and benefits. That would be helpful in processing requests in the upcoming budget cycle for additional FTEs or enhancing job descriptions by increasing the salary and/or benefits. Mr. Turley said he could not speak directly to the information Council President Tibbott referenced. Staff can make an effort to include that type of information in the budget presentation if that would be helpful. Councilmember Nand said she would find that helpful. Councilmember Olson encouraged councilmembers to support the motion. If that information has already been prepared, then the request has already been fulfilled. If it hasn't, she still wants the information. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 4 Councilmember Teitzel relayed his understanding that the motion is a request and once the council approves it, it becomes more formal than a request and more like a directive. He asked if this was intended to be a directive and if not, it should remain request for information and the council should not vote on it. Councilmember Olson suggested that was a better question for the mayor. She recalled there being an issue in the past with a similar request of staff. She wanted to work with City leadership for the benefit of the City, however that can best be achieved. Mayor Nelson said having it come up the way it did sounds like a surprise even though the intent is not to have surprises. The intent in the motion is clear. Mr. Turley has been very forthcoming with fulfilling council requests in the past, but if the council is going down this path, he will need to reevaluate how staff processes requests. Mr. Turley suggested it could be discussed at a committee meeting where there could be a back and forth and question and answer. If he was asked to present a report next week, he was unsure where he would start because he was unsure exactly what the council was looking for. He reiterated a dialogue during a committee meeting would be perfectly fine. With regard to the element of surprise, Councilmember Olson recalled this was discussed via email this week. Mr. Turley said it would be better to have a vacancy report come from HR because they deal with hiring which was one of the reasons he was having difficulty speaking to the question. He is involved in the budget side; HR is aware of the vacancies at any given time. Councilmember Olson said if the preference was to handle this at the PSPHSP committee, she would withdraw the motion. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON WITHDREW THE MOTION. THE SECOND (COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS) DID NOT AGREE. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested all councilmember read Long Term Financial Planning for Local Governments. She did not think asking for a full accounting of open positions and voting on it was any different than asking for clarity. The council voting on the request does not mean it is a directive, it just means councilmembers want the information. It is important for the council to understand their oversight roll; the council can ask HR Director Neill Hoyson for this information. There are some interesting mid- year budget amendments where money is being returned to the General Fund which to her signaled some serious issues. She would like to see which positions have remained unfilled, which is a very simple question. As Councilmember Olson had withdrawn, Councilmember Nand requested an update at next month's PSPHSP committee meeting. She asked if it would be more appropriate to route that request through Ms. Neill Hoyson and have her work with Mr. Turley on the budget impacts. Mayor Nelson suggested a councilmember submit a request for that information at the next PSPHSP meeting although he could not promise it would happen. Councilmember Nand said she was trying to clarify this for the members of the public who are interested in budget impacts and how the vacancies affect that. She invited them to attend the PSPHSP meeting where hopefully the committee would be discussing this. Mayor Nelson asked about the impact of the seconder not agreeing to withdraw the motion. City Clerk Scott Passey said unless the council has adopted rules to the contrary, when a motion is made and seconded, technically the motion belongs to the body. The council has always treated motions as belonging to the motion maker and the motion maker is allowed to withdraw. He concluded permission of the seconder was not required. Mr. Turley explained the intent of these budget amendments, if not requesting additional expenditure authority, is to make the budget more accurate and provide a better view of the City's financial situation. It is not indicative of any dire situation; it is simply to add transparency and make the budget slightly more accurate. 3. Grant Program for Therapeutic Interventions Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 5 Record revenues and expenses related to a state grant program received by the municipal court for therapeutic interventions. For Councilmember Chen, Mr. Turley explained this budget amendment adds expenditure authority and revenue from the grant. When a grant is received, the City must recognize the revenue and budget authority is required to be able to spend the money. Councilmember Chen referred to Exhibit A, Budget Amendment Summary (packet page 391), pointing out with these amendments, the General Fund expenditures are now up to $64,019,505, leaving a 2023 ending fund balance of $5,253,548 in the General Fund balance by the end of year. Based on the fund balance reserve policy, the City is required to have 16% of total General Fund expenditures which is about $10 million. He wanted councilmembers and the public to be aware that the General Fund balance is getting below the required reserve. This applies to the entire list of amendments, especially requests to hire which have ongoing expense implications. Mr. Turley corrected Councilmember Chen's statements, the City is not violating the fund balance reserve policy, there is still a several million dollar cushion before dipping into the 16% reserve. The requirement is to have $8.9 million set aside; he is projecting to have $11.5-$12 million at the end of the year so the City will not be in violation of the fund balance reserve policy at any time during 2023. Councilmember Chen referred to a printout he had Council Executive Assistant Beckie Peterson prepare, commenting the $8.5 million reserve is 16% based on the original adopted budget where the total expenditure was $55,716,788. With the proposed amendments, the budget expenditure is increased to $64 million, an increase in expenditures of about $10 million. If the reserve is based on the original budget, it would require $8.9 million in reserves. The proposed amendments increase expenditures to $64 million and 16% would require about $10 million in reserves. Mr. Turley responded Councilmember Chen's statements contained two errors, first he was quoting the fund balance reserve policy incorrectly. That policy is only related to the adopted operating budget, not budget amendments made during the year so the City is not in violation of the policy. The budget amendments proposed tonight have nothing to do with the policy and the 16% reserve. The other error is what is important is actual dollars spent, not budgeted dollars. When he states he projects a certain amount will be spent by year end, that is the amount on which the 16% should be based, not budgeted dollars which have nothing to do with the fund balance reserve policy. Councilmember Chen commented those are budgeted amounts and the reason budget amendments are done. He was not saying the City was violating the fund balance reserve policy now, just pointing out that the council needs to carefully watch that. Council President Tibbott reminded council this agenda item is related to budget amendments. The discussion has turned to the financial policy which will be reviewed next year per the policy. There may be policies that councilmembers want to amend, but the City is currently operating under the fund balance reserve policy adopted by the council. There will be an assessment done and presented to council next month of where the City stands after six months which will provide a good picture of the rest of the year. According to estimates, the City will be using undesignated General Fund moneys to finish out the year. He summarized it was important not to get into the deep weeds tonight about the fund balance reserve policy and to stay focused on the budget amendments. Councilmember Paine reiterated what Council President Tibbott said. She found it ironic this was being raised with the request from the municipal court which is its own branch of government. She appreciated the opportunity for clarity and attention to the reserve policy, but she was satisfied the City has a good reserve policy and a cushion of $2-3 million. She preferred to address the budget amendments in this agenda item. 4. Estimated 2023 Increase in the Fire Contract Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 6 In addition to the increase in 2023, South County Fire (SCF) will also bill at some point for retroactive payments due to the timing of their contract settlements. The $1.5 million is an estimate of the 2023 increase. This amendment was made with the first quarter budget amendments last year because exact information had been provided regarding the SCF contract. This year the new contract has not been settled so he is making an estimate so that the 2023 budget is as accurate as possible as preparations begin for the 2024 budget. Councilmember Nand asked at what point in the RFA annexation process will council see information on the property tax burden and impact on Edmonds homeowners. Mayor Nelson requested the council's questions focus on the budget amendments. 5. Add Budget Authority for School Zone Traffic Camera Leases Councilmember Buckshnis expressed appreciation for the inclusion of this budget amendment and asked about offsetting revenue. Mr. Turley said all he has been told is the revenue the cameras are expected to generate exceeds the cost. Until the City has its own experience, it is difficult to compare revenue produced by school zone traffic cameras in other cities. 6. Request for a New Grants Specialist Position This position will support multiple departments. The description specifically mentions the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law as potential grant sources. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled the City had a consultant Keely O'Connell that assisted the City with grant writing in the past and there is a grant writer in Parks & Recreation. She did not support the addition of this position and asked how that should be handled. Mayor Nelson suggested waiting to make motions until Mr. Turley has completed his review of all the proposed amendments. Mr. Turley commented there is a person in the human services department who has successful obtained grant dollars but they are not a full- time grant writer and they only work in that department. 7. CHIP Grant Funds for Housing Hope Field Apartment Project. This was discussed and approved by council on June 6. The amendment recognizes the grant revenue and provides spending authority 8. Parks Maintenance Yard Lease Agreement Approved by council on June 20. This expenditure repurposes salary savings. Reduce Expenditure Authority for Repairs to Library There was approximately $800,000 in damage to the library. A previous budget amendment added $800,000 of expenditure authority anticipating the City would receive $800,000 from insurance which would be paid to Sno-Isle. The City has done about $300,000 of work and won't be paying the full $800,000 to Sno-Isle and can retain the $300,000. This amendment corrects the previous amendment by reducing the expenditure authority. 10. Risk Management Transfer $25,000 was transferred in 2021 from the General Fund into a risk management fund. Those funds have not been used and a policy has not been drafted regarding how those funds would be used. This amendment moves the $25,000 back into the General Fund at least until a policy can be adopted. 11. Car Tabs Revenue Increase The council passed an additional $20/vehicle car tab increase on July 18. This amendment records the revenue expected in 2023. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 7 12. Citywide Bicycle Improvement Project On June 27, the council awarded the contract for this project. The increase in funding for the construction phase was $299,000 in REET; previously $251,000 was provided by REET. Those funds will be provided via savings from the 76t1i Avenue overlay project. Councilmember Olson recalled discussion about using REET funds for different projects, but it was not clear why only the differential impacted the budget. City Engineer Rob English responded this mirrors the construction funding provided to council on June 27. The overall shortfall for the citywide bicycle improvement project was approximately $550,000; $251,000 was savings related to the 76' Avenue project and the 2023 overlay project; $299,000 in REET funds were added to provide the necessary funds to move the project forward. Councilmember Olson said the narrative does not mention the $550,000 which is why she was confused about the $298,000impact to the budget. Mr. English said the $298,000 is the actual budget amendment. Councilmember Olson observed that already reflects the REET funds that were moved from the 76' Avenue overlay. Mr. English agreed those funds are already in the 2023 budget. Council President Tibbott asked about the source for the $298,000. Mr. English answered REET 126 is the funding source for the budget amendment. Mr. Turley pointed out the location of the fund name on the amendment form. 13. Landmark Property ption Agreement Payment On June 27, the council authorized the mayor to execute the agreement and the payment of $100,000 for the option agreement on the landmark property. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why the source was Fund 126 and asked whether land purchase was an authorized use of those funds. Mr. Turley answered it is, there are funds allocated for land acquisition in Fund 126. Councilmember Chen clarified this is not purchasing the land, it is only an option to purchase. Mr. Turley agreed it was only the option which is fully refundable through the end of 2023. 14. Close Out Fund 136 — Parks Trust Fund This fund was established in 2003 and there has been virtually no activity for 10-12 years. The purposes of this fund are still carried out by Parks but they use the General Fund and Fund 127. There is an accounting rule that the City should not have more funds than necessary. This fund has not been used so the funds are being moved into other Parks funds for use. Councilmember Olson asked if action needed to be taken to undo Ordinance 3466 that established this fund. City Attorney Jeff Taraday explained the money can be transferred via a budget amendment without eliminating the fund. If the council wanted to eliminate that fund from existence, an ordinance may be required. Councilmember Olson relayed her understanding of Mr. Turley's explanation that the City should not have more funds than necessary. Mr. Taraday advised that could be accomplished via adoption of a separate ordinance. Councilmember Olson suggested scheduling that on the extended agenda. Mr. Turley commented there are other funds with no money or activity that purposely have not been closed as there may be a need for them in the future. For example, the opioid response fund has not been closed because the City may want to use it again in the future. He suggested passing an ordinance to close this fund as there are no plans to use it again. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 8 15. Edmonds School District Support — ARPA Funds The council passed Ordinance 4310 on June 20 to add a one-time expenditure from ARPA funds to provide financial support for the Edmonds School District. This budget amendment authorizes distribution of those funds. 16. Stormwater Capacity Grant The City received a $50,000 grant from the Department of Ecology. Funds will be used to purchase two storm pipe inspection cameras, pay for storm maintenance staff training, and reimbursement of a portion of the expenditures in preparing the stormwater management action plan, which is part of the Storm Comprehensive Plan. This amendment recognizes the revenue and authorizes spending authority. 17. WWTP Natural Gas Natural gas is used during start-up for the dryer unit and gasification system. Possible increased usage in 2023 if dryer is used to produce class A biosolids. This amendment adds $25,000, half of which will be billed to WWTP partners. 18. WWTP Solid Waste Recycling/Haulingg Sludge hauling costs are approximately $6,000 each day. This budget amendment proposes sludge hauling costs be budgeted through the end of 2023. The cost is approximately $2 million; half will be billed to WWTP partners. Councilmember Chen asked if this was part of the contract to design and build the gasification system. Public Works Director Antillon answered only $500,000 was budgeted initially. The project ran into delays which is why this cost is incurred. The project is expected to be running in September, worst case scenario is December which is why it is budgeted through the end of the year. Councilmember Chen observed the delay was caused by the contractor who did not finish the project on time. He asked if the contractor would be responsible for this additional cost. Mr. Antillon answered the costs associated with the delay have not been negotiated or settled. There will be an executive session to update the council on that issue. Mr. Taraday said after the work is completed, a determination will be made whether claims need to be made. 19. WWTP Program Administrator Corrects salary and benefits for the position. Removed by management during the 2023 budget process. Finance staff later discovered that the contract had been extended and was approved on 4/19/2022. Councilmember Olson asked if this is an ongoing FTE unrelated to transition to the new system. Mr. Antillon answered it initially was someone who could take over some workload while staff handled this project. He will likely ask for an FTE to replace this position because it is a key position that is still needed. The contract with the existing person is through April 2024. Councilmember Olson pointed out the contract is through 4/30/24, but the projection for 2024 is for the full year. She relayed Mr. Turley said the 2024 amount is used for forecasting but has not been committed to. 20. Unscheduled Vehicle Replacement Authorization to order 2 of the 2024 scheduled replacements in advance of the approved 2024 budget due to lead time to receive vehicles. The council requested this be included as budget amendment. Due to lead time to receive vehicles, staff s request is to order them now 21. Unscheduled Vehicle Replacement Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 9 On 10/21/22 one of the 2019 Ford Explorer Police Utility Interceptor vehicles was involved in a collision. The vehicle was deemed a total loss. Amendment adds $85,000 to the Fund 511 Equipment Rental and recognizes $65,000 expected in insurance recovery. The excess is for the price increase and outfitting the vehicle with after -market K9 equipment. With regard to vehicle purchases as replacements, Councilmember Nand recalled staff saying it would be difficult to acquire hybrid or electric vehicle. She asked if the replacement vehicle will be an internal combustion vehicle or will there be an effort to purchase a more planet -friendly vehicle. Mr. Antillon advised all the police Interceptor vehicles are purchased from Ford who is experiencing problems producing hybrid or electric vehicles so the only option currently is a regular combustion engine. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the City previously used ARPA funds to purchase police vehicles. She asked if the funds were from Fund 511 because it was involved in a collision or was the City no longer using ARPA funds for vehicle purchases. Mr. Antillon answered this is an unscheduled replacement; insurance will cover most of the cost, the $20,000 from the B Fund is to outfit the vehicle. 22. Fleet Mechanic Addition of 1 FTE Fleet Mechanic to support ongoing growth of the City fleet Councilmember Olson preferred to consider this position as part of the 2024 budget when the council considers all the FTE and program requests. She will make a motion to that effect later. Councilmember Paine asked how many of the vehicles ordered over the past two years have been received. Mr. Antillon estimated 40 have been received this year and he anticipated quite a few more would be received by the end of October when most of the orders placed last year will be filled. Councilmember Paine asked if that was 40 new vehicles or a total of 40. Mr. Antillon answered he was not certain if the 40 were growth to the fleet; some are replacement vehicles. Councilmember Paine asked if the council approved hiring the mechanic, how long would it take to fill the position. Mr. Antillon answered it would take at least another quarter to hire and a couple months to train the person. Ideally, the person would be fully ready to take over the job by January. 23. Teamsters Retro Pay/Reclass To adjust for the Teamsters contract wages and benefits retro payment and to move the annual salary increase for the Parks department into the correct funds, approved by Council in January of 2023. This entry was accidentally omitted from the adjustments made as part of the April budget amendment. Councilmember Chen appreciated staff bringing this omission forward. He asked how this was discovered and whether there were other potential entries that had not been discovered. Mr. Turley answered this is the only one he knows about. 24. Maintenance Cost Increases Software items in the Public Works Engineering/Water/Streets budget were removed from the department budgets but were not included in the IS budget. 25. Maintenance Cost Increases Covers increases from 2022 to 2023 in software and hardware maintenance. Packages include Adobe, Eden, network firewall maintenance, etc. Increases totaling approximately $86,000 were received after preparation of the 2023 budget. 26. Maintenance Cost Increase Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 10 Covers increased licensing on the Clerks records library portal and land use document portal. City recently experiencing high usage levels leading to unavailable resources due to lack of available licensing. This is a public facing portal and residents are experiencing access issues. This increase will allow unlimited access. 27. Maintenance Cost Increase Two decision packages were approved in September 13, 2022 for ongoing budget adjustments. One accommodates increases in Microsoft pricing, the second funded ongoing system security to better protect against cybersecurity concerns for remote work. The packages were incorrectly added to the budget amendment as a negative amount so instead of increasing the Information Services budget to accommodate the approved expenses, the entry reduced the information services budget. This amendment corrects that error. 28. Elm Way Walkway Project On June 27, the City Council awarded the construction contract for the Elm Way Walkway project. The additional funds programmed for the construction phase was $27,641 in REET 126 funds. Existing stormwater utility funding ($43,522) in the 2023 budget will be transferred from the 2023 Stormwater replacement project to this project for construction. Councilmember Teitzel advised the amendment shows a $27,641 charge to Fund 126 for construction projects - roadway and ending fund balance of-$27,641 and the total balance increase/decrease is also - $27,641. He asked if the net should be closer to zero. Mr. Turley said the net effect is increasing the expenditure authority in Fund 126, adding the expense and taking it out of fund balance. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO REMOVE THE GRANTS SPECIALIST POSITION FROM THE BUDGET AMENDMENT. Councilmember Buckshnis commented it is important to present all requests for FTEs during the budget process. Adding them as budget amendments results in budget creep. Councilmember Olson echoed Councilmember Buckshnis' comment. There were unobligated/unspecified professional services in at least the planning department during the last budget cycle and there was an extensive discussion about whether those funds should remain when they weren't attached to specific needs. To the extent this work cannot be handled in-house, the professional service funds already in the budget could be used. That is another reason not to add a position to the budget until the council has an opportunity to see everything during the next budget cycle. Councilmember Paine expressed support for this as a preliminary position just to get it underway. There are a lot of federal funds available as well as funds distributed by PSRC and the state. This will help the City start some bigger projects and as well as get funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act to help support the Climate Action Plan and human services. The grants specialist is a revenue producing position and will help ease the transition into the future from three years of CARES and ARPA money. She supports this position and will vote against the motion. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, CHEN, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, AND NAND AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBER PAINE VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO WAIT ON THE MECHANIC DECISION PACKAGE. Councilmember Olson appreciated the need to increase manpower in this area based on the considerable expansion of the fleet. However, the council needs to look at all the expenditures and weigh priorities at Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 11 one time and if this is a priority, it would be approved at that time. She recognized there may be gaps in providing services, something that is not ideal for the person waiting for the vehicle, but that is the prudent thing for the council to do. Councilmember Nand asked Mr. Antillon to describe the nature of the work that is not being performed due to the absence of these two FTEs and the difference it would make to approve the FTEs now versus during the budget. She was particularly thinking of the snow season when the City will need emergency vehicles. Mr. Antillon answered it is related to readiness of the fleet and it is just one FTE. The backlog of repairs continues to grow. When new vehicles are received, it takes months rather than weeks to outfit them. As a result, vehicles are sitting for months and cannot be released to the police department which, as the number of officers increases, need those vehicles. The City is also outsourcing the mechanic's work due to the lack of manpower. Councilmember Nand did not support removing this FTE although she supported the general philosophy about considering all the FTEs at one time during the budget. She hoped the grants specialist position would be proposed later in the budget season but could see how with the backlog Mr. Antillon described, the mechanic position could be very beneficial to public works' vital and emergency work. Councilmember Paine did not support the amendment. This is the second time this request has been made to the council and it is clearly a need. The council approved the vehicle purchases and now that vehicles are being received, this position is necessary to get them ready for use. This primarily impacts law enforcement officers who spend all day in their vehicles. She recalled hearing during the 2023 budget about the delay in vehicle purchases. It is always better to have new FTEs proposed as part of the budget, but this is the second request and the need is there. She was curious about the cost of outsourcing but was more interested in getting this position filled. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the item description, that states fleet staff was reduced to 2 FTE mechanics in 2008, noting since then the fleet has tripled. Mr. Antillon answered the fleet has increased about 30-40%. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if outsourced work is done as quickly as someone on staff. Mr. Antillon answered no, the City is at the mercy of the car repair shop. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if this was included in the 2023 budget. Mr. Antillon answered yes, it was removed from the budget. Councilmember Buckshnis said she would support this request due to the increase in the fleet. Councilmember Chen asked how many mechanics the City has now. Mr. Antillon answered there are two mechanics and the fleet manager. Councilmember Chen observed that was clearly not sufficient to meet the needs. Mr. Antillon agreed it was not. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (2-5) COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL AND OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, BUCKSHNIS, PAINE AND NAND AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE IN THE PACKET AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. PROJECT UPDATE: TREE CODE AMENDMENTS Planning & Development Director Susan McLaughlin commented a tremendous amount of work has been done, working with the public as well as the tree board and planning board. This presentation is to update the council and is not an action item. Urban Forest Planner Deb Powers explained the current code, adopted in 2021, was to meet Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) Goal 1A, update the tree regulations to reduce development impacts on the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 12 urban forest and focused on tree retention and tree replanting requirements. In 2021 the council directed staff to address property owner tree removals. She pointed out the tree code amendments are strictly focused on the regulatory framework, not public education, programs, and incentives in the UFMP. Ms. Powers reviewed: Project Scope o Consider new property owner tree removal codes o Update existing code: more efficient, easier for ■ Public to understand ■ Staff to implement Timeline Planning Board Project Update Minor/Current (Development) Code Public Engagement Plan City Council Property Owner Property Owner Review Process Tree Removals Tree Removals TREE BOARD 3/2J Community Conv sation pl City Council 3/28 Public Survey Open 5/26 Public Survey Closed --------"-- - _ Project Scope WE ARE HERE Planning Board Planning Board City Council Public Hearing Project Scope Project Update ] Oct IV Public Engagement Events CommunityWorkshops x Focus Groups •3 CPC presentation Earth Fair Watershed Fun Fair Youth Environment Summit Public Engagement o Final report of public engagement efforts posted online on the Tree Code Update Project webpage ■ Wide variety of opinions ■ Public survey with 230 responses ■ Two hybrid workshops with a total of over 40 participants ■ Three focus group meetings, one of which was the tree board exclusively with a total of 25 participants ■ Reports from each event/meeting/workshop is available on the project webpage Draft code has not yet been created Planning board - General approach o Property owners tree removals key code concepts 1. Tree removal allowance - per year ■ Aligned with Kirkland's tree removal approach pre 2021 - Two per: two trees allowed to be removed, any tree any condition, per 12 months - Included a notification process to inform the city and track trees being removed 2. More restrictive for landmark trees 3. No tree removal in critical area 4. Exceptions: hazard/nuisance trees 5. Replacement requirements o Existing (development) code ■ Minor tree code amendments (Dec 2022) ■ Simplify multiple layers of requirements - Retention (currently 3 requirements) - Replanting (currently 5 requirements) - Fees in lieu (currently 4 layers) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 13 ■ Replant removed trees 24" DBH+ ■ Incentives more visible • Tree board — general recommendations o Minor tree code amendments (Dec 2022) o Simplify existing (development) code o Property owner tree removals - undecided Councilmember Nand, council liaison to the tree board liaison, commented on how fun it is to have monthly face time with a tree nerd who is an expert on tree species. Councilmembers receive a lot of comments about clear cutting by developers which she recognized was a different part of the code. She asked how that will be addressed in the tree code. Ms. Powers explained there is interest in simplifying the code. There is a lot of cross referencing in the code and references to code outside the tree code. The code is written in language that is not easy for the general public to follow. For example, there are exceptions to exemptions in the tree code, which is very confusing, instead of just saying what is allowed. Restructuring the code which is a major code amendment would include addressing redundancies, addressing where the current development code does not align with industry standards, and establishing a tree density credit, a quota that can be achieved by a combination of retaining existing and/or replanting new trees. That would be a much more straightforward approach than the current code. Ms. McLaughlin commented it is also important to recognize from a resource perspective, due to the complex and convoluted nature of the code, it takes a lot of time to review each application even if the outcome is the same. For example, tree removal may ultimately be allowed, but it can take a very long time to reach that conclusion. Simplifying the code would also assist with applicants getting a quick responses regarding their properties. Councilmember Nand commented there has been controversy about whether to adopt a landmark tree program in Edmonds, including how that would be implemented and how it would be enforced. She referred to the controversy about the Western red cedar in Wedgewood that is currently hosting two protestors. The Snoqualmie Tribe recently wrote a scathing letter to the Seattle City Council stating they had archaeological basis that the tree was culturally relevant to them. In attempting to implement a program, she asked how to reach out to the local tribes and other stakeholders for what could be a culturally significant tree. Ms. Powers explained landmark tree has been used by Edmonds to describe the size of a tree over 25" DBH. A heritage tree program refers to trees of a certain size, stature, species, or has some historical significance to the community. That criteria has not been defined yet and Edmonds does not have a heritage tree program. It is a goal in the UFMP to develop a heritage tree program for education and advocacy, celebrating a tree that has been maintained and preserved whether it is on public or private property. A community member has offered to be involved with establishing that program. A heritage tree program would be voluntary and would not be run by the City. Anyone can nominate any tree, but criteria needs to be established for nominating a tree, a selection committee established, and decisions made regarding how to celebrate that heritage tree. Cultural significance is an important criteria for a heritage tree. As far as controversy, the way it is laid out in UFMP, a heritage tree is all about education and advocacy, there is no additional protection or code requirement for retaining a tree designated as a heritage tree. Councilmember Nand commented even if the City adopted a heritage tree program to make landmark trees more significant, it would have no impact on the tree code update now or in the future. Ms. Powers answered there would not be a level of protection afforded to a heritage tree in the code. A good example is the partnership between the City of Seattle and Plant Amnesty who have had a heritage tree program for almost 30 years. Plant Amnesty developed a template and if a property owner desires, they can take the template to an attorney and have a conservation easement put on the tree so it is protected in perpetuity. It is totally up to that property owner and is not something the city regulates or requires. Councilmember Nand Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 14 recognized it would be a contract between the property owner and any future purchaser of the property. Ms. Powers agreed, it would be like any other covenant or easement on the title of the property. Councilmember Paine referred to the two per year tree removal and asked if there would be a no/low cost permit or notification to track removals. Ms. Powers answered the two per policy in Kirkland is a notification process; there is no permit or fee. It is basically a way to track tree removal; any two trees regardless of size or condition can be removed in a year. In addition to the two per allowance, a property owner is able to remove trees that fit the hazard or nuisance tree definitions. To promote responsible maintenance and management of trees on one's property, trees that met the hazard or nuisance criteria would not count toward the two per. For example, if someone had three trees on their property and they wanted to remove their two per and the third tree was a hazard tree, removal of the third tree would require a permit and review to determine if the third tree fit the hazard tree criteria. To remove two trees per year, there is no fee, just a notification, anything over two, would require a permit. Councilmember Paine asked when the last canopy assessment was done and whether the City can get canopy data from Snohomish County. Ms. Power answered it was last done in 2020 and yes, the City can get canopy data from Snohomish County. The City has done canopy assessments and has canopy data from 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020. In 2017 flyovers and imagery was done by the consultant who did the public engagement, P1anIt Geo, for Pierce, Snohomish and King Counties as part of a stormwater modeling project. That imagery and canopy coverage data is available; the data in the tree equity score webpage is from the 2017 canopy data. Councilmember Paine asked when Snohomish County plans to do another canopy study. Ms. Powers answered the planning department plans to do one in 2025 to maintain the 5 year cycle which she said was rather frequent to see marked changes in canopy cover, but staying on that cycle will facilitate a comparison at that regular interval. Staff will budget for that and seek grants. Councilmember Paine thanked staff for providing the 2021 minutes and the more recent tree board and planning board meeting minutes. She referred to options for tree retention on private property not related to development packet (packet page 428 - 6/1/21 city council minutes) and asked if any of those options were still relevant or viable. Ms. Powers answered of those options on page 428, option I (require fee permit for removal of any significant tree (6 inch DBH)) was not well received so it is not an option. In reading through the minutes, options 2 (allow X number of trees on a given property to be removed over a period of time), 3 (allow X number of trees less the 24 inch DBH to be removed over a period of time) and 4 (require paid permit for removal of more than the allowed number of trees and for removal of 24 inch DBH trees) had general consensus among the council at that time so 2-4 is the general direction the planning board is moving in which is in line with options the council supported two years ago. Councilmember Paine asked if the tree board and planning board had access to the equity study information. She referred to the discussion at the planning board where some think a universal code for the broad community would be easier but some neighborhoods have different needs. Ms. Powers answered the tree equity score is a web -based tool; she could put a link to it on the project webpage. Equity in canopy cover across neighborhoods in Edmonds has come up often during the planning board's discussion about limiting or restricting tree removal on private property. The planning board kept returning to what would be the most simple approach especially for new property owner tree removal code. The planning board discussed having tree canopy cover or requirements for tree retention or removal on a neighborhood by neighborhood basis, but that raises an equity issue and the planning board wanted to keep it simple and avoid making further code amendments to fix something that was too complex. The planning board has shied away from regulating property owner tree removal at that level of detail. The planning board will be looking at an allowed number of tree removals based on property size at their August 23 meeting although there are concerns with how equitable that is when it is a privilege to have a larger property, etc. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 15 Councilmember Olson thanked Ms. Powers for being on the front line of tree issues in Edmonds, recognizing it tends to be a very emotional subject on both sides. There seems to be more agreement than disagreement on the importance of tree canopy. The differences are with how to achieve maintenance while enlarging the tree canopy. She reread the minutes included in the packet and appreciated staffs including them. She was disappointed the packet did not include the minutes from the January meeting where she recalled a councilmember who was new to the council expressed a desire for an incentive based tree code. She anticipated that was something the community could get behind, such as requiring a 6-12 month delay before a new property owners could remove trees or providing outreach and education about stormwater benefits of large trees. She has always had concerns about the City's liability from telling people not to cut down trees and then something happens during a storm. She preferred not to get into that territory and an incentive approach takes that off the table. Councilmember Olson recalled the input at a January council meeting was from a councilmember who was not on the council in 2021 and several of the people who were on the council in 2021 are no longer on the council. Another option that was not highlighted from the minutes which she felt was very important was to ensure success with enhancing the tree canopy, the City recognizes that voluntary public participation must be encouraged. The following actions will support this objective: having a program of giving away trees for properties that retain a certain number, explore establishment of a property tax rebate, a stormwater utility fee reduction and other techniques that provide a financial recognition of the benefits of tree planting and protection. She has also heard it discussed in the context of the public good, giving a private property owner a benefit for providing that public good makes sense and focusing on enhancing and planting as much as possible on City properties. In the end, this will come before council and there will be political pressure on council. She preferred an approach that 80% of the people can get behind instead of an approach where 50% are totally opposed, noting a stick -oriented approach is just setting the program up for failure. She summarized she was pleading for a method that sets the City up for success. Councilmember Olson commented the concept of a number of trees on a property is a more fair approach. Using Ms. Ferkingstad as an example, it was a very treed lot and to put a home on the lot required removing trees. It set them up for what felt to her as an unfair situation, requiring a property owner pay to remove the trees and not taking into consideration there were a lot of trees on the lot and it was zoned for housing. Ms. Powers said the Project Status: Tree Code Amendments was in Received for Filing at the January 17 meeting. She asked if the council had a discussion regarding the tree code at another meeting. Councilmember Olson recalled there was a presentation to council since Councilmember Nand joined the council and those minutes were not included. She expressly remembered her making that comment. Ms. McLaughlin offered to review the history. Councilmember Olson recalled the comment was about being more incentive oriented than punitive in the approach to the tree code. Councilmember Teitzel referred to public comment tonight regarding the difficulty redeveloping heavily treed property. He noted there are countervailing forces coming soon, housing bills the legislature received and more density and more development coming to Edmonds. There will be single family lots with duplexes, fourplexes, DADUs in backyards, etc. To make those happen, trees will need to be removed. He anticipated having property owners say they were trying to comply with what the law allows, but the tree code is so onerous they are unable to comply. He asked whether the tree board had anticipated any push back from the state such as Edmonds' tree code so restrictive it precludes people from doing what the law allows. Ms. Powers answered she cannot speak to the language of the housing bills specifically related to tree retention, but other cities in the region with fairly comprehensive tree regulations have embraced smart growth and have allowed duplex, triplex, and other diverse housing for many years. It is not as though it is one or other. A building footprint is a building footprint regardless of whether it is single family, commercial or ADU structure and consideration should be given to what are the best trees worthy of Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 16 retention on that lot outside the building footprint. Ms. McLaughlin commented building footprints and development standards in accordance with the housing bills should be balanced with the tree canopy goals. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled after four meetings, the first tree code was passed in 2020 late at night and not everyone could see the Zoom screen. She recalled the UFMP was rewritten by tree board and staff because the California firm did not do a good job. She recalled former Planning Manager Kernen Lien used to provide the council a quarterly or semi-annual report that identified trees that had been removed and why. There are still a lot of trees being removed in her neighborhood. Ms. Powers said by code, the tree board is responsible for providing an annual report on their activities; there is not a codified requirement for staff to provide a report on the state of the urban forest. That is a recommendation in the UFMP but it addresses public tree removals such as by parks or public works. The UFMP also recommends a report on the general status of canopy cover. For example in 2021, the consultant who did the last canopy report made a presentation to council. Councilmember Buckshnis opined it was codified and she sent the code to Ms. McLaughlin and Council President Tibbott. The report Mr. Lien provided to council identified the trees that had been removed and whether they were hazardous or diseased. That report has not been provided since he left the City. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why a consultant from the east coast was selected to consult on the tree code. Ms. McLaughlin clarified this update is on tree code update. Planning & Development will provide required reports as codified. She said Councilmember Buckshnis may be referencing the critical area regulations, not the tree code, and invited Councilmember Buckshnis to send her a reference to a report specifically about tree removal. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why the City was using a consultant from the east coast. Ms. Powers relayed the consultant who worked on the UFMP from Davey, which is a nationwide firm, lives in Shoreline. Councilmember Buckshnis asked about the consultant staff is utilizing now. Ms. Powers answered a consultant was hired for the public engagement aspect of this project, P1anIt GEO, is an international firm based in Denver that works all over the country. They have done projects in Tacoma, Lakewood, the tri-county assessment, Renton, etc. so they are more local as far as urban forestry issues, imaging and canopy assessment than a Kirkland or Edmonds firm would be. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled a tree board member said the City was using east coast consultants. She noted the council discussed a heritage tree program but never established criteria which is why Linda Ferkingstad provided three -minute comments at council meetings for a year. She reiterated the council quickly passed the tree code late at night, put a moratorium on landmark trees, etc. She offered to find the information and send it to staff. Councilmember Chen said he has had residents complain to him that their neighbor's tree is encroaching on their property. It was his understanding the tree code does not address that. Ms. Powers answered the tree code does not address pruning. Per case law, a property owner has the right to prune or remove any portion of a tree that hangs over from an adjacent property. When staff gets calls about that, the property owner is informed it is a civil issue between the property owners. Councilmember Nand referred to the top of page 429 (6/l/21 council minutes) and discussion of a tree voucher program. There is a tree board member who is very excited about pursuing this in Edmonds who has done independent research of the City of Lynnwood's very successful tree voucher program and gives away $500 in trees per year to private residents through approved nurseries. The City of Shoreline also just adopted a tree giveaway program. She was hopeful Edmonds could partner with a community organization to avoid adding to the inhouse administrative burden. Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 17 4. APPROVAL OF MINOR CODE AMENDMENT PACKAGE #2 (AMD2023-0005) Planning & Development Director Susan McLaughlin recalled the new streamlined process for minor code amendments enables staff to bring forward minor code changes that do not have substantive policy implications. This is part of the code modernization work which also includes more major code amendments as well as formatting and structural changes. The goal tonight is for council to adopt the package of minor code amendments. If there are items the council is not comfortable moving forward, those can be extracted and moved to the next minor code amendment package with further refinement, and the remainder of the amendments can be adopted. Planner Rose Haas referenced language in ECC 20.80 from Ordinance 4295 regarding the review process. With the preparation of a package of amendments, council may remove one or more of the proposed amendments from consent for additional discussion about the suitability of an amendment for the minor process or remove an amendment process roster altogether and approve the remainder of the package. She encouraged council to remove proposed amendments they felt warranted more discussion or the council was not comfortable approving now and pass the remainder of the amendments. Councilmember Nand referred to the change throughout the code from citizen to resident. She applauded the planning department for bringing forward this more inclusive terminology, but wondered how it would potentially impact community members who are not residents such as people who work in the City and if there was a way to address that or was that beyond the purview of the code changes. Ms. McLaughlin answered replacing citizen with resident was meant to be a one for one to ensure that inclusive language is being used now and into the future. Reviewing all the references to determine whether to include residents, workers, businesses, etc. is more involved; there were 50+ references to citizen. Staff was not opposed to doing that, but that is not the intent of this minor change and is not the proposal in the package. Councilmember Nand said she was specifically addressing resident complaints under noise abatement, Chapter 50.3. She assumed the language would not preclude a business owner who may not be a resident from making a noise complaint. Ms. McLaughlin answered that was correct. Ms. Rose pointed out the use of citizen would currently preclude that; 7% of the population are not citizens so use of citizens is even a smaller group than resident. If the language remains as is, a non -citizen would not be included. Councilmember Nand referred to board membership in Section 10.95.010, commenting there are certain boards and commissions where the council may want to contemplate allowing people who work in the City who are not also residents to participate. She acknowledged that would be a policy change and not within the purview of these amendments. Councilmember Buckshnis recommended pulling some of the amendment that require a policy change such as donations to Parks in Section 3.26.010; the City wants more than just residents to donate. The section related to dangerous dogs also needs to be changed to citizens instead of residents. Ms. McLaughlin suggested councilmembers reference the number of the item in Attachment 2 that they would like to pull and then the rest of the package of amendments could be adopted. Councilmember Teitzel said in reviewing these individually, he has a number of questions which would take some time. He referred to Section 3.17.010 historic preservation gift fund as an example where citizens was changed to residents and now reads, ...for the purpose of receiving donations from the city's eitizen residents or from any interested party..." The council's intent when Section 3.17.010 was passed was to accept donations from anyone, residents outside the city, businesses, foundations, etc. Ms. McLaughlin pointed out the code currently says citizens which was proposed to be changed to residents which would expand the pool of donors. If he wanted to extract amendment #29 for further discussion or refinement, that could be done. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 18 Councilmember Teitzel said he could do that, but it applies to a number of the amendments. He suggested staff take the complete packet back with council input. As he mentioned in an email earlier today, this is amending the code now, if done in accordance with the council's direction, it would not need to be amended again and would be one step closer to having the code rewrite complete. He suggested amending the sentence to read, "...for the purpose of receiving donations from the *uses any interested party...". COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, THAT THE ENTIRE PACKAGE BE TAKEN BACK AND LOOKED AT WITH THAT IN MIND AND BROUGHT BACK IN THE NEAR FUTURE ON CONSENT. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, CHEN, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON AND NAND AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBER PAINE VOTING NO. 3. RESOLUTION REGARDING 2024 BUDGET PRIORITIES Council President Tibbott relayed the recommendation in the packet is to approve the resolution regarding budget priorities. He understood there were some potential additions. He reminded that the priorities are intended to be general to give some latitude for staff to work on decision packages and budget requests that fit those. The questions are intended to provide direction regarding what the council is looking for in terms of budget action. This document is not about the budget process or the financial policy statement, it is to give some guidance to staff regarding the 2024 budget. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO AMEND TO ADD BULLET POINT #16 TO SECTION 2 OF THE RESOLUTION, "HOW CAN WE FINALIZE PRIOR YEAR'S FUND BALANCE CARRYOVER PRIOR TO 2024 BUDGET BEING ADOPTED SO THAT THE 2024 BEGINNING FUND BALANCE STAY UNCHANGED ONCE ADOPTED?" Councilmember Chen explained the reason for this request is the March budget amendments changed the 2023 beginning fund balances as well as revenue and expenditures. That was impacted by the fund carryover from 2022. He referred to printouts he had provided to each councilmember at the dais. The original fund balance in the 2023 budget totaled $149,543,961. The March amendments resulted in a 2023 beginning balance of $155,021,955 and the revenues and expenditures also changed due to the carryover. Capturing the fund balance when the budget is adopted will give a clear picture of the true revenues and expenses and fund balance. It give a more clear picture of what the year looks like instead of all of a sudden increasing expenditures by $4 million that were not originally budgeted. Councilmember Nand expressed support for Councilmember Chen's amendment. She suggested the amendment be revised to change "stay" in the last line to "stays." Councilmember Chen accepted that grammatical change. Councilmember Buckshnis said she liked the amendment but was unsure it was achievable. She asked if Councilmember Chen had talked to Mr. Turley about it. Councilmember Chen answered they have exchanged emails. Council President Tibbott reminded the council was just asking questions that will go to the directors; the questions do not have to be answered right now. Councilmember Buckshnis commented it would be a tremendous lift to include carryforwards in the budget process. It had been done before using decision packages but not by Mr. Turley. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 19 Councilmember Chen acknowledged it will require work by Mr. Turley and other department heads. Primarily parks and public works will need to estimate the carryover for major projects. He did not foresee a lot of carryforward from other departments. For example, the Highway 99 center median, by November, holiday time and yearend, most projects are idle. AMENDMENT CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER PAINE VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO AMEND THE FIRST BULLET IN SECTION 1, TO READ, "PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES, INCLUDING EMPHASIS OF A PERMANENT POLICE PRESENCE AND RESPO ALONG HIGHWAY 99." Councilmember Nand recalled the council authorized a contract for a consultant to search for an appropriate location for a permanent police presence on Highway 99. She wanted to ensure that priority did not get lost in the shuffle in 2024. UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, PAINE AND NAND VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO AMEND TO SECTION 2, TO ADD ITEM #17, "HOW TO INCREASE CITY REVENUEST' Councilmember Paine expressed interest in new funding streams for infrastructure, human services and addressing environmental degradation and climate resiliency. Those are worthwhile elements that the City has been working on for several years and increasing revenues is necessary. AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO AMEND THE SIXTH BULLET UNDER SECTION 1 TO READ, ENVIRONMENT — WATERSHED RESTORATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPONENTS OF THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN AND ADDRESS ADAPTIVE MEASURES FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE CLIMATE CHANGE. Councilmember Buckshnis said she sent the difference between adaptative measures and mitigation measures. The council passed a climate action plan (CAP) that is GHG specific which is mitigating; the City needs to address adaptive measures which deal with sea level rise, climate change, etc. Councilmember Paine said limiting implementation of CAP to strictly adaptive measures would hamstring the entire CAP and the progress that can be made. Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order and offered to restate the motion. Mayor Nelson ruled point not taken. Councilmember Paine continued these are all identified through degrees of influence and the possibility for mitigation potential as part of the CAP. She would love to see it expanded for better green technology elements. There is a climate emergency and climate crisis; limiting what we are looking at is just limiting the scope of things staff can bring to council who are just as invested in the future as the council. Councilmember Buckshnis clarified the motion stated implementation of components of the CAP so she was not excluding the CAP. She preferred to state implementation of components of the CAP as the entire Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 20 CAP was unlikely to be implemented. Her motion also included "address adaptive measures." Mayor Nelson reminded councilmembers to refrain from referring to other councilmembers directly. Councilmember Nand expressed support for Councilmember Buckshnis' amendment because the City needed to start prioritizing adaptive measures into public works and comprehensive plan updates. There needs to be an emphasis on ensuring there is resiliency in extreme weather events and the more comprehensive language proposed by Councilmember Buckshnis would help achieve that. She noted green technology and sustainable infrastructure were also stricken in the version provided in the packet and the amendment restores some of that spirit. AMENDMENT CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER PAINE VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO AMEND TO ADD BULLET #18 IN SECTION 2, "HOW TO REDUCE EXPENDITUREST' Councilmember Chen commented the July budget amendments dramatically increased expenses. While the City needs to increasing revenues, it also needs to focus on basic functions and needs such as public safety, fire, sewer, streets, etc. AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO EXTEND TO 10:30. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, CHEN, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON AND NAND VOTING YES; COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT AND COUNCILMEMBER PAINE VOTING NO. MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Taraday recommended the council amend the agenda to add an executive session before going into executive session. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO AMEND THE AGENDA TO ADD AN EXECUTIVE SESSION FOLLOWING MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Nelson advised of the community fair this weekend at Edmonds-Woodway High School. 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Nand offered kudos to the two individuals who are identifying as Droplet and Droplet #2 who are trying to save one of the last 6,000 old growth trees in Seattle. Members of the Snoqualmie tribe reached out to the two activists to inform them that this tree is cultural significant and sent a very angry letter to the Seattle City Council whom they did not feel had appropriately engaged with the tribe when they made the decision to issue a permit for the tree's removal. She was unsure if this message would reach Droplet or Droplet #2, but shared a quote from Mahatma Gandhi, in a gentle way you can shake the world. That is what these individuals did when they decided to protest the tree removal; they generated a really important discussion regarding who speaks for the trees and the wildlife that live in trees, something that is often left out of land use discussion. Councilmember Olson shared the loss of Jim Traner last week. He was the co-founder of Traner Smith CPAs in Edmonds and a proud and involved veteran in the community. In addition to being treasurer of Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 21 VFW Post 8870 and the incredible amount of work he put in to initiate the Veterans Plaza outside Council Chambers, he was a great man, a good friend and wonderful family member. He will be missed and she appreciated everything he has done. Councilmember Olson advised the next council meeting will be on Wednesday, August 2 due to the primary election on Tuesday, August 1. She encouraged residents to vote in the primary election which includes the Edmonds mayor position. The August 2 council meeting includes a public hearing for the public to weigh in on whether the comprehensive plan vision statement represents the data collected from the survey and whether it could have been done better. Comment can be provided at the public hearing or via written comment this week. Councilmember Paine reported on the very enjoyable morning she spent at the Heroes Cafe in Lynnwood where she met a lot of people from Edmonds and other places. She agreed the loss of Mr. Traner was a tremendous loss for the community. Mr. Traner was recognized at the Heroes Cafe. She hoped the resolution for annexation into the RFA would come back to the council once additional information was collected. She apologized for not being at the meeting in person, noting she had been coughing a lot. Council President Tibbott referred to the adjustments that he made to the email system for council. He apologized, recalling he had mentioned the potential for changes several times this year but was not sure when the letter would go out notifying of the change. He assured he was trying to articulate advantages of using the web portal, but realized there were also some disadvantages. He is listening and will be talking with council regarding ways to improve the system. If there is no adequate workaround, something else will be figured out. He thanked everyone for their patience as he works to integrate the various ways of communicating and developing a system that works for everyone. Councilmember Chen reported last Sunday he had an opportunity to enjoy the International Art Festival in Bellevue which included multicultural art performance from various cultural backgrounds. He envisioned that would be great event to bring to Edmonds. Councilmember Teitzel, the former market manager for the Edmonds Museum Summer Market, commented the market is very successful and popular for Edmonds residents and throughout the region. The current market manager informed him the City may want to move the market to Civic Field next year. The market is extremely concerned about that as it the market is their largest revenue generator and they fear moving it will undercut their revenue stream. He urged the City to be very careful if they are considering that and for the council to be aware because it could have very negative repercussions on the museum. Executive Session At 10:08 p.m., the city council convened in executive session for approximately 15 minutes to discuss pending or potential litigation per RCW 42.3 0.11 0(l)(i). At 10:23 p.m. Mayor Nelson announced the council requested the executive session be extended for 5 minutes. The executive session concluded at 10:28 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 10:29 p.m. 11. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:29 p.m. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 22 cs:� SCOTT PASSEY, CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 25, 2023 Page 23