Loading...
2023-08-15 Regular MeetingEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPROVED MINUTES August 15, 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 Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., & Human Serv. Dir. Susan McLaughlin, Planning & Dev. Dir. Todd Tatum, Comm./Culture/Econ. Dev. Dir. 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 Olson 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 COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Mayor Nelson described the procedures for audience comments. Gayla Shoemake, Edmonds, said although she did not always agree with all of their decisions, she appreciated the work the council and mayor do in support of the City and the effort they put into the decisions they make. She provided the council a heads up that many members of the community are seriously concerned about the lack of climate crisis action on the part of individuals, families and businesses Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 1 and will soon be coming to the council. Because the 2023 Climate Action Plan (CAP) has no implementation plan, nothing has happened to call attention to what private individuals and businesses should have been doing since 2010. The 2010 CAP includes a plan for implementation; the 2023 CAP does not and is only an update of the 2010 CAP, not a replacement. She suggested adding the 2010 implementation plan to the 2023 CAP which would save time and money and start things moving. Implementation of climate work is a safety issue and she referenced what happened in Maui where there was no plan. Edmonds can no longer ignore the fact that safety is in jeopardy. Resources must be included in the 2024 budget as noted in the 2010 implementation plan. Edmonds used to be a leader in climate change preparation; that is no longer true and Edmonds is now way behind. Taking this action and moving forward with the 2010 implementation plan will at least get the City started. Marlin Phelps, Marysville, commented in 2004 his then wife and he prequalified for a home and were searching for a home in the Edmonds area. They located a home three houses west of Lake Ballinger, perfect due to beach access and his then wife's love of kayaking and him being an avid angler. Two days later he overheard his then wife on the phone with their real estate agent say no to Mountlake Terrace, it has to be Edmonds and two weeks later they purchased a house west of Edmonds-Woodway High School. Years later he learned what that meant, the Zachors and Robert Barker, the lookout and sheep, and what they had in common was Edmonds Municipal Court. When they murdered Thomas Wales, they had a plan to frame him for the murder. All the steps they took to never have a trial; he offered to explain to council all the things they did to him. Thomas Wales' murder is still unsolved, but he can solve it. He appreciated that Judge Whitney Rivera has a conflict of interest but in 2006 James White was set up simply because he was a shoo-in and would have oversight. He did nothing wrong in that case. Kevin Fagerstrom, Edmonds, reported two Saturdays ago he was walking on 6t' Avenue and when he turned on Main, he saw a woman lying on the sidewalk. Concerned for her wellbeing and hoping to provide assistance, he ran toward her. As he neared her, she rolled onto her side and asked what he was doing. Assuming she was hurt, he offered to help her up. The woman explained she was laying on the sidewalk reading a land use action sign mounted on a steel H frame sign stuck in the dirt where the ground was about 8 inches below grade so the sign was at the grade of the sidewalk and the only way she could read it was to lay on the pavement. He helped her up and they had a brief discussion and chuckle about the posting of the sign. He drove to other construction sites in the City including one at the Baskin & Robbins site and a 17 unit planned residential development on SR 104 & 5t1i. The same type of signs were mounted on both those sites. He subsequently read the code and found it is not being complied with; the code only requires the sign be visible to pedestrians. There are no sidewalks on either side of the street near the site on SR 104 so there are no pedestrians to see the 15x18 inch land use action sign and the much smaller written notice and it is much too small for passing motorists to see. He suggested some way whereby citizens are notified of proposed land use actions and how they can provide public comment. Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, referred to agenda item 8.2 which proposes the use of ARPA funds for the Landmark 99 site purchase. He did not feel ARPA funds were an appropriate source of funds for that purpose. ARPA funds should be used for something tangible, not a study. If City staff is interested in conducting a study, they should make a proposal regarding how funds in their budget can be used to gather information the council is looking for. He suggested the council consider what information they were looking for and asked if City staff had approached each councilmember asking what information they needed to make a decision in December. The council is the customer in this case; City staff should be asking that question and councilmembers should indicate what information they need, not necessarily what they want, to make an informed decision in December. Zigman Fraker, Edmonds, commented the proposed Landmark 99 site has long served as a curiosity on the Edmonds landscape, one he only began to explore after more than 20 years living in Edmonds. The Antique Pavilion is a treasure trove known to artists, makers and collectors throughout the region and the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 2 Burlington Coat Factory is an affordable option for those looking to clothe themselves and their families. However, one cannot ignore the fact that the landowner is interested in selling and 10 acres of land on the King/Snohomish County border represents, as Mayor Nelson described, an opportunity. The only question in their mind was how the City intends to use that opportunity. In June Planning & Development Director McLaughlin commented on the breakup of existing communities with construction of SR 99 and in 1964 when the cloverleaf interchange was built to connect SR 104. Her report used the term blight or urban decay to describe the southern reach of the Highway 99 subarea which Councilmember Nand disputed did not reflect the economic contributions of that community. They believed the cultural isolation created in decades past between the more affluent, older and frankly White demographics of the downtown bowl and the diversity of the Highway 99 area represents an opportunity to enrich Edmonds as a whole by encouraging intercommunity dialogue and construction of civic works to bridge those gaps. There is an opportunity to take one small step toward a united Edmonds by taking seriously the comments and public visioning for these 10 acres. As a lifetime Edmonds resident and a business owner with generations of privilege behind them, they still struggle to afford rents higher than many mortgages in the area. Edmonds is under threat of pushing lower income families further and further to the fringe or out of town entirely. There is an opportunity with the Landmark 99 site to build quality affordable housing, community centers or human services, a small step toward healing and unifying the community. They urged the council and mayor to take seriously the comments from those who stand to gain or lose the most from the direction of this and other civic projects in the future. They urged the council and mayor to enthusiastically work with these communities to determine what will best serve their lives, not because it is the most politically expedient to appease the more privileged members of society but because there is an opportunity to heal the wounds done by those who were in power before. Thatcher Boddendeitchel, Edmonds, a member of Carpenters Local 206, commented infrastructure is a very big topic including state funds for affordable housing. He urged the council to consider when planning affordable housing projects to consider using union labor. The Market Share Recovery program allows the City to get a bid from a non -union company and a union -backed company. If the City accepts the union company, the union pays the difference in cost between the two bids so the City can try out union labor and see the difference. He and his neighbors, a union electrician and concrete mason, commute out of Edmonds to build other cities' economy and infrastructure. He would be honored to be able to build in Edmonds, to show his children in the future something he built. He encouraged the council to support union labor. Zach Bloomfield, a resident of the unincorporated area north of Meadowdale Playfields sometimes referred to as the unincorporated Meadowdale area, said 46 homes have Edmonds addresses in the 98026 zip code and are served by the Perrinville post office. Most residents purchased their homes believing they were in Edmonds city limits and even pay Edmonds sales tax on delivered purchases. They recently learned that their neighborhood was designated as part of Lynnwood's municipal urban growth area (MUGA) per the Snohomish County strategic plan, done without consultation with the affected homeowners. For many reasons, primarily their identity as Edmonds residents, there is a consensus among the neighborhood against annexation by Lynnwood and they would strongly prefer to be annexed by Edmonds as represented by a not yet officially submitted annexation petition signed by more than 60% of his neighbors. There was a previous annexation proposal and petition in 2010/2011 presented to the Edmonds council that was never acted upon. While they recognize it is a relatively cumbersome process to be released from Lynnwood's MUGA, annexed by Edmonds and certified by the Snohomish County Boundary Review Board, they would appreciate and urge the Edmonds council to support them in formally joining the city they love. They would prefer their property taxes support Edmonds and that they are able to vote on City matters. His wife, who is home with their 5-year old, asked him to say that they are a very tightknit neighborhood that plans collective events, is filled with kids and is proud to be part of the wider Edmonds community even if not officially part of Edmonds yet. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 3 Tony Schapiro, Edmonds, expressed concern with the proposal to restrict the ability to walk dogs on the jetty that runs on the north side of the ferry dock. There is some confusion whether that restriction would extend to the south side of the ferry, the other side of Brackett's Landing. He and his two dogs enjoy walking in that area. The Parks department does a magnificent job keeping the area clean, grooming the grass, and keeping sand off the sidewalk. Restricting the ability to walk dogs on a leash will not keep dogs from harassing wildlife. In the years he has walked his dogs there, only once has he seen a dog running loose on the north side of the jetty. Instead of mandating that citizens cannot walk their dogs on leash in this area, he suggested new signage with a number to report off -leash dogs. The existing signage has a list of restricted items on the beach; if dogs are the primary concern, there should be a more dominant sign requesting dogs be on leash. Theresa Hollis, Edmonds, referred to agenda item 8.2, Landmark 99 Project Update and Budget Request that includes a transfer of ARPA funds intended for Edmonds business owners to a consultant for the Landmark project. She was opposed to that budget management technique and preferred the intended use of those funds. If staff advises the grant be reshaped to be easier to administer, that should be the next step. There have been fairly significant departmental budget underruns year-to-date; the planning & development department has underrun their budget by $530,000 through June 2023. It is inappropriate for that department to ask for a transfer to take funds away from Edmonds business owners and spent it on professional fees. She understood funds were needed to the vet the concept of this mega Landmark 99 project, but the existing funding provided to parks and planning & development should be adequate to pay whatever professional service fees will be needed in the next couple months. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, explained April 25, 2023 was to be the night Edmonds city council decided between continuing to contract for city attorney services or hire inhouse attorneys. Councilmember Paine stated the following that evening: Per our subcommittee work plan, if the choice is to continue with contracted services, the subcommittee will propose a draft request for proposal/request for qualifications. If the decision is to bring these services in-house, the administration will be asked to start the process of putting together a job description and ultimately publishing the job bulletin seeking applicants. History shows neither of the two options established under the subcommittee work plan happened. A surprise was in store; Resolution 1295 states a mayor participates in discussion and debate only with permission of the city council. Despite this, Councilmember Paine, representing the subcommittee and reading from prepared comments, invited Mayor Nelson to speak first on the issue. Neither Councilmember Paine nor the subcommittee had the authority to invite the mayor to speak. Resolution 1295 was resolved on June 16, 2013. Mr. Reidy continued, as Mayor Nelson started to speak, Councilmember Buckshnis properly raised a point of order related to council's need to vote to allow the mayor to speak. A point of order is a simple thing to handle properly; when a point of order is made, the meeting chair rules on the point of order. That didn't happen, instead Councilmember Paine asked if she could speak to the point of order. Mayor Nelson allowed her to comment on the point of order. While Councilmember Paine was speaking, Council President Tibbott raised his own point of order. Mayor Nelson never ruled on either point of order. Before the April 25, 2023 council meeting concluded, Councilmember Nand made comments about not falling prey to a very vocal minority that have issues with the city attorney. No one made a point of order related to Councilmember Nand's comments. Four councilmembers voted to continue contracting with Lighthouse. Tonight council is being asked to approve a five year contract with Lighthouse Law Group. He requested the council remove it from the consent agenda and address the conduct that took place during the April 25 council meeting and have the subcommittee propose a draft RFP/RFQ as soon as possible. Sherri Larsen Woods, a resident of unincorporated Meadowdale, echoed the comments made by Zach Bloomfield. She has lived in Edmonds for many years and never thought when she bought her home that it Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 4 was not an Edmonds address. They are a very tightknit, family neighborhood that really wants to keep their Edmonds address and be part of Edmonds. She requested the council keep their neighborhood part of Edmonds. 6. RECEIVED FOR FILING 1. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR FILING 2. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS 3. EDMONDS UNDERWATER PARK STEWARD'S 2022-23 STATUS REPORT 7. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. Councilmember Buckshnis requested Item 7.6, Approval of Council Committee Meeting Minutes August 8, 2023, be removed from the Consent Agenda and Councilmember Olson requested 7.3, City Attorney Contract 2024, be removed. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 2, 2023 2. APPROVAL OF REGULAR MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 2, 2023 4. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE PAYMENTS. 5. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS. 7. CONFLICT COUNSEL AND PUBLIC DEFENSE ASSESSOR RATES 8. ORDINANCE TO AMEND ECC 10.55 EDMONDS YOUTH COMMISSION 9. ORDINANCE FOR PFD CHARTER AMENDMENT 10. ORDINANCE TO CLOSE PARKS TRUST FUND 136 11. FIBER CUSTOMER PRICE ADJUSTMENT 12. AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE 2023 OVERLAY PROJECT. 13. APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH WSP FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES ON THE 76TH AVE OVERLAY PROJECT. 14. APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH ATWELL LLC FOR CITYWIDE BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT 3. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 8, 2023 Councilmember Olson referred to the minutes of the 8/8/23 PSPHSP meeting on packet page 50, explaining the committee discussed six or seven hens and decided on six, but the minutes do not mention six. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO AMEND THE THIRD TO THE LAST LINE ON PACKET PAGE 50 TO READ, "...ALLOWING SIX OR SEVEN HENS AND VISITING ROOSTERS..." MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO APPROVE THE COUNCIL COMMITTEE MINUTES AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. CITY ATTORNEY CONTRACT 2024 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 5 Councilmember Buckshnis advised she pulled this item to vote against it. The council should have had an executive session to discuss the performance of an employee or officer and that was never done. For that reason and the reasons mentioned by Ken Reidy, she will vote no on the contract. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO APPROVE THE CITY ATTORNEY CONTRACT 2024. Councilmember Paine commented there is no ability to have an executive session to review an employee's performance for a contracted entity. Councilmember Nand stated for the record the city attorney is a vendor of legal services that the City contracts with and is not [inaudible]. Acknowledging she was new to the council, she was not aware that the council had ever been in a position to discuss a decision to secure the services of vendor in executive session. She invited councilmembers to correct her if this was incorrect. Councilmember Buckshnis assured it had been done it in the past. The city attorney is an officer of the city corporation. She has asked MSRC to provide that guidance. The council has discussed other employee vendors or officers in executive session in the past because it is a personnel issue. The council usually discusses personnel issues in executive session so the City is not sued for speaking freely about a personnel issue. Councilmember Nand expressed support for the motion. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, CHEN, OLSON, PAINE AND NAND AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS VOTING NO. 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS 2023 SECOND QUARTER FINANCIAL UPDATE Administrative Services Director Dave Turley reviewed: • What to expect? o Tonight — second quarter (January — June) financial update, focusing on the first 6 months of the year o Next week — annual Fund Balance Status Report on the General Fund Operating Reserve balance and the Contingency Reserve Fund balance, per the Fund Balance Reserve Policy o October — required presentations reviewing 1) city revenue sources in general, 2) property taxes in particular o Spring 2024 — recap of 2023 and updating final results for the year • Some items to note this half -year are: o Sales Tax is up $136,564 from this point last year, which is a 2.5% increase over last year. o Property Tax revenues are up $116,207, which is a 1.5% increase over last year. o Sales Tax and Property Tax combined make up over 50% of General Fund revenues. Note that inflation has averaged 3.5% to 4% over the last year, causing our General Fund revenues to significantly lag behind inflation. • Year-to-date Sales Tax revenues for the 6 months ended June 30 are $136,564 ahead of last year, and $29,274 under budget • Breakdown by business category of the change in Sales Tax revenue for first half of 2023 compared to first half of 2022 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 6 Quarter -to -date Real Estate Excise Tax revenues for the 6 months ended June 30 $458,118 is behind last year, and $646,933 under budget Interest income is slowly improving. We should see our highest amount of interest income in 5 years. (Not a really significant amount of money to the city overall, but I get a lot of questions about it.) Annual Interest Income $1,400,000 $1,200,000 $Iz 75 $947 931 1091 709 $1,000,00088426 $800,0 a $ 600.0 $400,0 $200,000 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 YTD 2023 • General Fund revenues are higher than last year in the categories of Taxes (+ $500K), Intergovernmental Distributions (grants, liquor and marijuana taxes, etc. + $299K), Charges for Goods and Services (+ $1.2 million), Fines and Penalties (+ $26K), and Miscellaneous Revenues (+ $51K). • General Fund revenues are lower than last year in the category of Licenses and Permits (-$195K). • Overall General Fund revenues are $1.9 million higher than last year. This is offset by General Fund expenditures being higher than last year by $5.2 million. • General Fund Bud et Comparison 2023 Amended 2022 Final (incl. July Budget amendment) Difference City Council $ 498,826 $ 486,719 $ (12, 107) -2% Mayor 444,165 505,239 61,074 14% Human Resources 825,252 1,297,746 472,494 57% Municipal Court 1,606,429 1,927,709 221,281 14% Administrative Services 2,551,607 2,502,670 (48,937) -2% City Attorney 971,780 1,161,780 190,000 20% Non -Departmental 5,502,943 6,917,075 1,414,132 26% Fire Contract 10,071,514 11,571,514 1,500,000 15% Police Department 13,493,696 14,826,373 1,332,677 10% Satellite Office 172,416 230,681 58,265 34% Community Services/Eton Dev 829,589 1,312,555 482,966 58% Planning & Development 4,201,739 5,246,507 1,044,768 25% Human Services 467,009 324,650 (142,359) -30% Parks & Recreation 5,413,359 6,598,994 1,185,635 22% Public Works 3,639,251 4,283,090 643,839 18% Facilities Maintenance 3,450,275 4,877,452 1,427,177 41% $ 54,139,849 $ 63,970,754 $ 9,830,905 18% Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 7 o Increases attributable largely to: ■ Increases to salaries & benefits across the board to keep up with inflation; new positions in HR, Parks, Municipal Court and Police Department; one-time purchase of patrol cars in PD; pass -through CHIP Grant in Non -Departmental, reorganization of Cultural Services into CS/ED; and professional services in Planning & Development and Maintenance. Councilmember Teitzel referred to the Building Maintenance Fund 016, recalling council allocated approximately $1.2M to catch up on deferred building maintenance, but those funds are not being spent. He expressed concern if the City continued not taking care of its building, deferred maintenance needs will continue to increase exponentially. Public Works Director Oscar Antillon answered a lot of those projects are being done with job order contracting (JOC). The contracts are done in the first part of the year; the expenses will be recorded in the second part of year. Councilmember Buckshnis asked how many staff have been added in the last year. Mr. Turley answered 17-18 with a margin of error of 2. The total approved was 256 employees. Councilmember Buckshnis observed expenses are definitely outpacing revenues compared to last year and asked if staff had any ideas how to remedy that. Mr. Turley answered that is what he has been working on for the last two weeks. He will be meeting with Mayor Nelson later this week to talk about that topic. The third week of August is when all the decision packages are finalized and he brings that information to the mayor and the mayor makes the decisions. Councilmember Buckshnis commented it is down about $8M compared to last year. Councilmember Buckshnis asked when council will be trained on the software Mr. Turley advised training on how to be user can be done anytime; staff can provide a user id and password. Once the final budget information is prepared, information will be input into the software and made public. Councilmember Chen referred to the General Fund budget comparison where General Fund expenditures are broken down by department and compared to the prior year. He was hoping to see the revenue forecast and the reserve policy that he emailed Mr. Turley about so he would have a holistic midyear review to help with the 2024 budget, prediction for the future and opportunities to increase revenues. Mr. Turley said that is what he has been working on that for last several weeks; he looks forward to finishing those numbers. Councilmember Nand referred to the breakdown of the Investment Portfolio on packet page 149. She asked whether the City paid any portfolio management fees to Washington State LGIP or Snohomish County LGIP. Mr. Turley answered those are pools; the Washington State LGIP is billions of dollars and requires people to manage it and he was certain fees were taken out, but the pool is so large it is pennies on dollars. Councilmember Paine recalled Mr. Turley mentioning at the finance committee meeting that most grants are pass through, the City receives the grant and passes the money onto another entity. She asked how many pass through grants there are, where it looks like the City is spending money but it is a pass through. She asked if that happened often enough that it needed to be tracked separately. Mr. Turley said it would be better to talk to the departments for specific information regarding those grants. He was familiar with the CHIP grant where the City received $1.3M in revenue and will have $1.3M in expenses. There are similar transactions such as $800,000 received from insurance for damages to the library; some of that has already been spent on repairs and some will be paid to Sno-Isle Library. Accounting for those expenditures makes budgeting more difficult. The General Fund expenditure budget is typically under budget 9-11%/year. Things like a $1.3M grant that comes in and goes out does not produce a budget underrun. Things like that make budgeting more difficult and there have been more of those this year than in previous years. Councilmember Paine suggested highlighting those pass throughs if it starts to skew the expected underspending. For transparency, it is helpful to have larger amounts like that identified. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 8 Councilmember Chen referred to the investment portfolio on packet page 149, particularly the investment in the Washington State LGIP and Snohomish County LGIP, acknowledging he has asked this same question multiple times during the last six months. The City is investing heavily in the lower interest LGIP; in January there was $43M in the Snohomish County LGIP paying 2% interest and $12M in the Washington State LGIP paying 4.4% interest which leaves money on the table in terms of interest income. In June that trend continues with $33-$34M in the Snohomish County LGIP versus $14M in the Washington State LGIP. He recalled Mr. Turley saying he will work with Snohomish County on a reallocation and asked about progress on that. Mr. Turley answered the balance in the Snohomish County LGIP has been reduced by $1 OM over the past 6 months. The Snohomish County LGIP invests differently than the Washington State LGIP and have a limited number of specific investments and have asked the City to give them warning before drawing money out. Another $5M will be transferred out in November and another $5M in January/February. Within about six months, the City will be down to $23M in the Snohomish County LGIP. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the ARPA money is included in the investment portfolio, recalling the investments totaled $72-74M late last year. Mr. Turley answered the ARPA money in the investment pool is no different than any other money, it is part of the $68M in the total investment portfolio. Councilmember Nand asked whether there was any city code or internal guidance restricting where taxpayer funds are invested. She could see the benefit of investing in either the Snohomish County LGIP or Washington State LGIP. Mr. Turley answered the investment policy states where funds can be invested. The City's funds are held in different places, some in bonds, some in the investment pool, some in a checking account. Regardless of the source, it's all taxpayers' money. There is an investment policy on the City's website. 2. LANDMARK 99 PROJECT UPDATE & BUDGET REQUEST Parks, Recreation & Human Services Director Angie Feser relayed staff and the administration's appreciation and recognition of the council's June 23 vote which allowed exploration of this potential acquisition and development project to begin. In the last 6-7 weeks a tremendous amount of exploration has been done. Tonight is an update on the work that has been completed and identifying the next steps and work that will continue to gather information and study options for this parcel. Those include due diligence, master planning, development strategy, project communication and community engagement. This presentation will also propose the use of existing funds to enable this work to continue, to gather data and information and explore options to provide information to council to make an informed decision at the next critical juncture of this project. Staff is asking council to consider approval of a request to allocate $250,000 to the Landmark 99 project to continue this work. Community/Culture/Economic Development Director Todd Tatum advised the update will include a review of the option timeline, actions taken in the last six weeks, a tentative work plan, budget needs, and next steps. Ms. Feser reviewed: • Property information o Address: 24111 Highway 99 o Size: 10.06 acres o Tax lots: 11 o Zoned: GC - General Commercial o Purchase Price: $37M • Highlights o One owner, willing to sell o No significant critical areas Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 9 o Utilities in streets north and south o Public and non -motorized transportation o Burlington Coat Factory lease (January 2029) Mr. Tatum reviewed: • Option to Purchase Agreement o Council authorized mayor to sign option agreement on June 27, 2023 with $100,000 refundable deposit o City has until December 31, 2023 to decide whether to continue with the purchase. Negotiate the Purchase and Sale 120 days for due LLD s to closing 90 Open window to exercise the y g diligence contingency Agreement (PSA) then add to the option and then and only then Option Agreement via an amendment, does the PSAbecome aliving as an Exhibit -effective only if the document Option is exercised o December 31, 2024: If council decides to purchase the property, City provides $1 M in earnest funds followed by 120 days for due diligence contingency o June 30, 2025: Total funds for purchase transferred at closing Actions Taken o Project Organization ■ Project Leadership - Feser, McLaughlin and Tatum - Biweekly meetings held with council president and mayor ■ Steering Team - Antillon, Turley, assistant police chief and City administration ■ Advisory Committee - 2 councilmembers and council president, 2 economic development commission members and 2 planning board members o Research and education ■ Visiting sites and talking with leaders in neighboring cities that have done similar projects ■ Meet with consultants ■ Gather internal knowledge o Near term outreach/strategy/community poll ■ Meet with boards and commissions to educate on facts and potential options for site ■ Initiated community poll to get initial feedback on the community's desires for the project o Timeline, sequencing and co-dependency Is Many cities have done similar projects and have experience in public/private partnerships High level work plan Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 10 hL LZL ' 7vw= Development Strategy Partnership Development/Development Agreement Master Planning RFP/s Financing Strategy Negotiating the Purchase and Sale Agreement o In next several months, seeking to build a solid foundation consisting of ■ Development and financing strategy - Market and financial analysis - How to best time acquisition and development ■ Master planning - Community and council's vision for the site - Programming options ■ Negotiating the PSA between now and December 31, 2023 o Above steps provide confidence to do RFPs in 2024 to identify development partners for a public/private partnerships o Develop partnership relationship which matures into a development agreement that identifies the responsibilities for each party o Financing strategy Mr. Tatum explained once a partner is on board, in his experience, there is a different level of communication, collaboration and ideas, and creativity about what can happen on a site. Partners bring history, depth and knowledge of development, their own desires and needs, and provide a fair amount of their staff to work through the development project. He commented a number of decisions will need to be made throughout the process along with a steady cadence of public process. Updates will be provided to council throughout the process. Planning & Development Director Susan McLaughlin advised a decision is not requested tonight. Staff will return at the August 22 meeting for council action. She reviewed: Budget need categories o Due diligence ■ ALTA survey ■ Critical area analysis ■ Phase 1 environmental ■ Site access o Master planning ■ Site analysisibackground ■ Community design forum ■ Draft design concepts in alignment with community vision ■ Work with financing consultant to evaluate land use options o Development strategy ■ Market analysis ■ Proforma financial analyses ■ Council workshops ■ Partnership structure and timing recommendations ■ RFP development Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 11 o Project communications ■ Raising awareness ■ Preparing community engagement plan ■ Free up staff time to focus on project management ■ Committed to inclusive engagement ■ Community poll is first step in engaging public ■ Plan to do mailing to % mile radius around site • Community engagement plan o Preliminary results of poll — 714 respondents (as of August 14) o Poll asks respondents to rank the top three desirable land uses they would like to see on the site o Poll is still open o Results of the poll will be compiled and brought to a community design workshop at the end of September 2.5 2108 2.08 2.12 2.17 2.24 2.29 1.99 1.99 2 2 1.79 m 1.47 y 1.5 a' i m 1 3 o.s p s• s• s• eo ,ce O Preliminary poll results as of Monday, August 14 (714 respondents) • Budget Request Expenditure Increase (Decrease) 142.000.39.518.63.41.00 Facade Improvement Program $(250,000) 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 Professional Services $ 250,000 Revenue Increase (Decrease) 142,000.39.518,63.41.00 Coronavirus Relief Fund $(250,000) 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 Coronavirus Relief Fund $ 250,000 Ms. McLaughlin explained the ARPA funded Fagade Improvement Program with grants of $25,000 each is a tremendous amount of work for staff, particularly in planning & development who is not accustomed to administering grants. The objective for that program was to revitalize, recognizing the impacts of the pandemic. The ARPA program objective is to build equitable economic recovery from the devastating economic impacts cause by the pandemic. Staff believes investing in the southern corridor of Highway 99 will lead to revitalization at a grander scale than facade improvements on an "acupuncture basis" which is why staff recommends using ARPA funding for this purpose. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 12 • Staff Recommendation o Approve the request to allocate $250,000 to the Landmark 99 project Councilmember Nand referred to the proposal to move ARPA funds out of the Facade Improvement Program into consulting services for the Landmark 99 project. She thanked staff for signaling to council that it was too administratively burdensome for the planning department to administer the Fagade Improvement Program. In keeping with the spirit of Congress' intent in giving ARPA funds to the City, those funds should be provided to the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce and ask them to administer the Fagade Improvement Program. She assured the CEO and employees of the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce know every single business in the community, whether they are members of the Chamber or not, that need fagade improvements so they can compete with businesses lucky enough to be housed in new construction. For example there has been quite a hullaballoo about a new ice cream shop in downtown Edmonds; across the street is a locally owned, minority/women-owned yogurt shop that has been in the community for some time. She did not support proceeding with a Highway 99 acquisition signaling to existing merchants that the City would not also invest in their success, especially businesses who managed to survive the pandemic and have been paying sales tax to the City. Councilmember Nand continued, Treasury's notes states the ARPA funding is supposed to be used for the economic and health impacts of the pandemic. She assured she could spent the $250,000 very fast just looking around the City. For example, all the businesses that were previously located in the Plum Tree Plaza that was fire bombed in a hate crime. Some of those businesses retreated to Ranch Market 99 and may be planning to move back onto new Pacific Plaza and could use help with signage. If it is too administrative burdensome to administer the $250,000, the City should find a community partner and community block grant it out so it still goes to the intended beneficiaries in the City. She noted she was generally in support of staff s plan but did not support this funding source. Councilmember Paine commented there was a lot of information to digest in the presentation. It would be very helpful to have this information on a standalone webpage so the community can see the timeline and targets. There is a lot of interest in what is coming next, touchpoints with council, etc. She asked if the intent was to start a master plan this year. Ms. McLaughlin answered yes. Councilmember Paine asked how that would look, whether it would include the planning board and a consultant. Ms. McLaughlin said master planning is a critical part of the foundation in the council's decision whether to pursue purchase of the site. There needs to be an understanding of how the site will be used including the layout, massing, access, circulation and what it can yield. For example, if park space is one of the leading land uses the community desires, what does that look like on the site? Is it contiguous, is it recreational, is it green space? Understanding the conceptual level layout of the site is critical. Councilmember Paine said she was surprised by that. She asked about the major budget items for the $250,000 budget request, assuming it would be the four items that Ms. McLaughlin reviewed (due diligence, master planning, development strategy, project communication). Ms. McLaughlin answered the top two most critical and most expensive are master planning and development strategy, followed by due diligence and project communications. Councilmember Paine asked if there have been any inquiries about the storefront repairs grants. Ms. McLaughlin answered there have not been any inquiries, but the program has not been advertised as staff has been evaluating resources and their ability to administer the grants. Councilmember Paine asked if $250,000 was a not -to -exceed amount. Ms. McLaughlin answered the master planning budget will be a not - to -exceed amount. Mr. Tatum referred to due diligence, explaining there is about $60,000 in immediate, barebones due diligence with no contingencies. If there are any environmental concerns that need to be researched further, more funding may be necessary. The $250,000 will be enough to get through the development strategy to an RFP. There may be a need for a consultant to assist with a development Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 13 agreement in the future; that is not included in the $250,000. That is not necessarily a request now, but could be a potential in the future. Councilmember Paine recognized there will need to be some money up front to put this together. Ms. McLaughlin said the $250,000 will provide the decision making materials to get the process to the end of the year where council will make a decision whether to exercise the option to purchase. Councilmember Olson referred to slide 12 in the presentation, Community Engagement Plan, which had the preliminary results of the community poll. She referred to the "other" answer, commenting feedback on online blogs, etc., indicate a lot of the "other" responses were that the City should not be pursuing anything at all. She suggested it was fair to be transparent that respondents were offering that feedback. Ms. McLaughlin said staff has done very little analysis of the other category. She agreed a lot of people wrote in do not purchase. Staff s response to any inquiries has been that there is no foregone conclusion that the council will purchase the site. On June 27, the administration and mayor were authorized to sign the option to purchase which basically charged staff with bringing forward due diligence and the other items which is exactly what staff is doing. She encouraged community members to continue to write to their elected officials to voice concern about purchasing the property. This community poll was intended to start to understand desirable land uses if the council decided to purchase the property. Staff will probably, closer to a decision, bring forward some site planning options, information about financing and development strategies and ask the community again. Councilmember Olson said she has thought this purchase was too big and too risky from the beginning. In conversations with builders/developers since then, they have expressed surprise that Edmonds would pursue something like this, that it is usually cities that are much larger and have more bandwidth. Her feeling is the council should walk away. She referred to a comment from a resident that addressed the issue of bandwidth. Based on the location which is not central in Edmonds and on the border of Shoreline, it should be a multijurisdictional ownership approach/management project. Instead of the City of Edmonds being responsible for all expenditures including this initial $250,000, it should be a shared investment by all the jurisdictions near the project including Mountlake Terrace, Shoreline and Edmonds. Councilmember Olson suggested it could also include Snohomish County and King County. If there is not a multijurisdictional conglomerate for the project, council should walk away. The combined bandwidth from a multijurisdictional conglomerate could make it reasonable to consider going forward. Councilmember Olson commented there are also access issues with the site; if the site isn't something the private sector could/would develop due to the expensive access issue that require government involvement, the conglomerate may be interested in making that happen and then the rest could happen by private development or a multijurisdictional conglomerate pursuing the site. She referred to Mr. Ogonowski's comment that staff should be asking the council what information they need to make a go/no go decision. For her, that information is who those partners will be and can the PSA be changed to list all of those entities as a conglomerate in terms of the expense, risk, and management responsibilities for this project. Ms. McLaughlin responded staff has been actively talking with adjacent jurisdictions and exploring various partnerships. That is part of the strategy and is on the work plan. During this initial stage, given the very short timeline to reach a decision in December whether to exercise the option to purchase, it is critical for the City to do its own due diligence. Establishing those partnerships in the amount of time available is unlikely and it is unlikely to yield interest at this stage from a pure acquisition standpoint. Staff is actively looking for partners and continuing those conversations. Mr. Tatum said staff has done a little outreach to surrounding jurisdictions. One of the things he has learned from doing things like this is the importance of having a clear idea to attract partners. When you go fishing in the dark with a worm hoping to catch something, you don't often catch something which has been his Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 14 direct experience in the past. Spending time to structure this will result in a more successful partnership strategy. Councilmember Chen thanked Ms. Feser, Ms. McLaughlin and Mr. Tatum for their hard work on the project. Now is not the right timing for the $250,000 request; the original option agreement was for six months to decide whether to move to the next phase. Once the council makes that decision, on December 31, 2023 or before, more funding can be invested to do due diligence, master planning, development strategy and project communications. With regard to the use of ARPA funds, he wholeheartedly agreed with Councilmember Nand about allocating $250,000 for the Fagade Improvement Program for small businesses impacted by the pandemic. He referred to the 14 businesses in the Plum Tree Plaza that were burned out and tried to survive and look for other space, the 7-Eleven where the clerk was murdered and business disrupted, the pancake house that was broken into multiple times; the list goes on and on. The need is there; the fact that the funds were not distributed, he acknowledged the City was short staffed. Councilmember Chen continued, three directors focusing on this project means opportunity costs. Focusing time and energy on this project takes away from their regular jobs and they are already short staffed. He referred to the price of project, hopeful by December 31, 2023 via inhouse due diligence and negotiation, there would be a draft PSA with a purchase price of $12.5M. He could be supportive of that price for 10 acres. Councilmember Teitzel commended staff for thinking big. One of his concerns was financial; he was not convinced $37M was the right price for the property with the condition the seller wants to add to the sale, 75% non -revenue generating and 25% revenue generating. He could not imagine a developer would pay that price for the property with that condition. He recommended revisiting the appraisal to determine what the property is actually worth before taking the next step. His other concern was related to due diligence; it is important for councilmembers and citizens to know what would happen if the property were sold to a private developer, what fees and taxes the City might enjoy if the property was developed at market rate for mixed use, high rise residential, commercial, etc. If the City purchases the property, that revenue loss is an opportunity cost to the City. He requested an estimated range from low to high of the amount of fees and tax revenue that would be lost if the City, versus a private developer, purchased the property. He noted if staff could not provide that information, possibly the Economic Development Commission could assist with that analysis. With regard to the 75%/25% split, Mr. Tatum said 75% would be used for public purposes, non -revenue generating purposes. Public purpose is not defined in the option agreement; he envisioned low income housing, retail, community center space, etc. could be public purposes. The key factor is that does not apply to the City's purchase; if the City purchases the property, it is the City's to do with as it wants. As currently written in the option agreement, the 75%/25% split comes about in an assignment; if the City assigns its right to purchase a portion of the site, that carries the 75%/25% split. That language and other language is subject to this period of negotiations; the City has the ability to negotiate that language with the seller. The seller has already indicated his willingness to open the discussion regarding that topic; it is not set in stone because the PSA has not yet been negotiated. With regard to revenue the City would forego by purchasing the property, Mr. Tatum said that question does not go far enough. Staff owes council the fiscal implications of a number of options to provide council information to make a decision. He recognized the need for information to make decisions and wanted to provide council more information upfront and sooner than they were requesting. To Councilmember Chen's comment about opportunity costs, Ms. McLaughlin said this project is a catalyst, offering revitalization along the southern corridor in a grand way. She referred to the discussions about the Highway 99 subarea plan, interest in a community center, park space, housing, infrastructure Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 15 needs such as sidewalks, safety improvements, etc. There are benefits of mobilizing on a singular site with a partner and opportunity for cost sharing and funding strategies that could offer widespread infrastructure like sidewalks beyond the project site. The City does not have the capital funds to address the cumulative cost of the neighborhood needs in this area as shown in the EIS for the subarea plan. A partner will be necessary to do that with efficiency. Council President Tibbott commented the presentation and councilmembers' questions addressed a lot of his questions. He recognized the importance of knowing the 750/o/25% split was not set in stone. He asked if the entire $250,000 was needed now to do due diligence in the last 4 months of the year or could staff get by with less and the council budget the remainder in 2024 if the council decides to move forward. Mr. Tatum referred to the budget need categories, commenting $250,000 was a fairly lean estimate for the work that should be done to give council tools to make a decision. With regard to opportunity costs, the directors are interested in seeing where this will go. If the project is funded at a certain level, staff will do the most they can with what is available. With regard to the ARPA funds, Council President Tibbott relayed his understanding that a portion of the ARPA funds were designated for economic development. If this site is viewed as a gateway to further development along the corridor and creating synergy and if the funding for the Fagade Improvement Program is not available, he asked if there was another source in the ARPA funds that could be used to fund this early stage development. Mr. Tatum referred to Account B, Business Support Grants, commenting this $250,000 would expend the initially allocated funds. There are certainly other unspent ARPA funds, funds allocated for green infrastructure would be a possibility. Council President Tibbott relayed his support for the Fagade Improvement Program, commenting on the possibility of funding it in 2024 when staff is ready for it or funding it out of a different category. This an economic development project that could check other boxes such as housing and open space. He suggested researching other ARPA funding for this project. Mr. Tatum offered to present those on August 22. Councilmember Nand thanked Ms. Feser, Mr. Tatum and Ms. McLauglin for their hard work so far. The approach with project leaders, steering committee and advisory committee is a great way to start utilizing and leveraging some of the City's internal resources. She cited other successful public -private partnership such as Civic Playfield; the Hazel Miller Foundation contributed $1.5M and many in the community worked incredibly hard to develop components like Mika's playground, the p6tanque courts, etc. Another example is the Edmonds Waterfront Center whose incredibly passionate nonprofit board put blood, sweat and tears into creating an incredible multiuse space with a private component that also provides incredible public services including financial services for seniors, prenatal yoga, etc. The Edmonds Library is another example; Sno-Isle has a vision for making it a community space, supporting entrepreneurs, providing a makers space, bringing in students, and helping to bridge the gap between children from affluent households and children who need public provisions of support. Councilmember Nand cited the need to bring forward a powerful vision for the community to start getting buy -in and volunteerism. She is going to Washington D.C. in October and would be happy to lobby for grant money from President Biden's Build Back Better program and other levels of government in addition to the nonprofit community. Providing a vision such as was done for the Civic Playfields, the Waterfront Center and the revitalized Edmonds Library will help build the public's and the council's enthusiasm and excitement. Councilmember Buckshnis commented she is retiring after 13 years of public service where people have spoken very candidly to her. She thanked staff for meeting with her and Councilmember Nand to discuss this project, recalling she was frank about the negativity and her concern about spending way too much money. Things take time; the Edmonds Waterfront Center took eight years to develop and Civic Playfield Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 16 took about five years. Time is not on the City's side on this project. The council needs to realize the City has a comprehensive plan update to finish next year that includes economic and cultural development elements, there are issues with the sewer plant, the climate action plan needs to be implemented, adaptive measures need to be addressed to get grant funding for the marsh, the code is terribly inadequate, there is no development code, there are serious budget issues, etc. Edmonds is not New York City, there is no Diane von Furstenberg or Barry Diller to give the city $250M. In her opinion, the council has no place moving forward on this because there are other things that need to get done next year and this is a very expensive and risky venture. Developers should develop; the City is not into developing or doing public -private partnerships and if it was, it takes a very long time, not just six months. She summarized she believed the council should just walk away. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO WALK AWAY FROM THIS PROJECT AND RESCIND THE OPTION AGREEMENT AND REQUEST THE $100,000 BACK. Councilmember Buckshnis said this property is very valuable in its own way. Council was, at least she was, blindsided with the way it was rolled out by the council president and the mayor and a meeting where the council was only given the value of appraisal. She read the appraisal and did not think it was representative of the investment. She believed the council had not been provide sufficient data. She pointed out a survey does not reach everyone, many people don't take surveys and there is a segment of the population that does not use the internet. She believed this would be taking too much risk, staff needs to get the work done that is necessary and let the property be sold and then consider doing a public -private partnership with the new owner. Councilmember Paine commented this is a part of the community that has been underserved for decades. She had issues with the current subarea plan and felt it needed to be reviewed. She was pleased the comprehensive plan will include an EIS for the entire city. The subarea plan was a great start, but this is the most diverse community with a lot of neighborhood commercial development potential. The City just spent $23M on Civic Playfield, a good decision and she loves the park. However, the City is not spending any money on Highway 99 which is unfair to that community and would not stand up to an equity analysis related to infrastructure. She trusted that outreach would be in multiple languages and involve the neighborhood navigators. This is a chance for the council to actually make a real difference in a neighborhood that qualifies for many funding opportunities related to community redevelopment. Although she loves Yost Pool, it needs help; that is something that needs to be consider for this project. There would be space for public safety, development opportunities, green space, etc. Walking away at this point would be very short sighted, particularly for a community that has not been well served. She did not support the motion. With regard to a councilmember's concern with the input and who it was coming from, Councilmember Olson recalled Ms. McLaughlin stating there would be mailed notices. She commented this is not about investing in a community, this is a development plan that is outside the scope of anything the City has ever done before and not something most cities Edmonds size have done. It is unfair to say this is an equity thing when this is its own animal and not a straightforward thing. She agreed it was too big, too risky and too distracting from the City's core functions in terms of staff bandwidth and it takes time and energy away from their other job duties and responsibilities. There are other things to invest in such as ARPA funds for business facades. She preferred to walk away sooner rather than later so more staff effort was not put into something that ultimately the council would have to walk away from. Councilmember Nand spoke against the motion. She recalled being told there was no public space on Highway 99 to address public cooling needs during this potentially deadly heatwave. There is a spray pad that taxpayers in the City subsidize, but she was sure no one in her community was aware of it or that it was publicly available, and there is the Edmonds Waterfront Center. Highway 99 is a very densely Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 17 populated part of Edmonds; she lives in high density housing within walking distance of Burlington Coat Factory and is surrounded by densely populated housing, apartments and townhouses, not standalone houses with yards and shade trees. Apart from Mathay Ballinger and the Mountlake Terrace portion of Lake Ballinger Park, there is no space where people feel safe to send their children on hot summer days. In the Edmonds bowl, there is the waterfront. She referred to the 8/80 split, streets that are safe enough for people 8 or 80 years old to walk down. She sees that in the Edmonds bowl, but not on Highway 99. Councilmember Nand continued, a community space or an arts venue that pays sales taxes to subsidize amenities in the Edmonds bowl would be an important statement toward equity and justice. That part of the community was annexed which is one of the reasons it is underserved, but also it did not have the excellent city planning that occurred in the historic Edmonds bowl that was incorporated in 1890. Walking away from this opportunity at this point without determining if the City could get 50-100% contributions so there would be very little budget impact to acquiring and developing the property would be foolhardy and short sighted and would signal to that community that while their sales tax, property tax and car tab revenue is valued, their participation in the community is not. Councilmember Chen expressed appreciation for the council and staff recognizing that Highway 99 is an underserved area; everyone can agree on that including Councilmember Buckshnis. In terms of site selection, the council needs to be strategic. This site is at the corner bordering King County; it is not in the center of Edmonds and there are other properties available. However, he was not ready to walk away from this opportunity yet. With the original plan, with City staff doing their own due diligence, putting their hard work and energy into it and the consultant that was paid to do this work, there were adequate resources to move forward without this $250,000. It is not the right time to allocate $250,000. He preferred to stick with the original plan, do an assessment up until December 31, 2023 and at that time, negotiate a fair price, not $37M, and go from there. Councilmember Chen continued, the City desperately needs affordable housing, but concentrating all the low income housing in one area is not the right approach. There are 52 units at Edmonds Lutheran Church and thanks to Snohomish County's purchase of a hotel on Highway 99 there will be additional low income housing in the Highway 99 corridor. Affordable housing needs to be spread throughout the City for the health of the community as a whole. Councilmember Teitzel agreed with a comment made by another councilmember that the Highway 99 subarea has been traditionally underserved and that the Council needs to focus more resources in that area. Having said that, he did not agree that walking away from this opportunity was a once in a lifetime deal. There are other opportunities the council and staff should explore in that corridor to enhance public safety and to provide more and better sidewalks, green space and park space, etc. If the council walks away from this opportunity now or in the future, the final story is not written and council will deliver for that community. He was committed to that during his last three months on council and hoped future councils would agree. Councilmember Buckshnis commented change takes time. The Highway 99 subarea plan took 5 years, the International District took 2-3 years, the Hospital District took 2 years. There are opportunities on Highway 99 and she agreed it was an underserved area, but the City is working toward improvements such as the ILA with Mountlake Terrace for Lake Ballinger Park. She referred to Councilmember Chen's suggestion to consider a police substation at the former 7-Eleven site. The amount and risk is too great to continue to use City resources when there are so many other issues facing the City. This is a couple year project, yet staff is proposing to do it by December 31. She summarized there are opportunities that the City can continue exploring such as Esperance Park. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 18 Council President Tibbott did not support the motion. With regard to site selection in the Highway 99 corridor, there is nothing of this size and scale that would accommodate a variety of things. There may be other parcels available, but there is nothing that will have as large an impact as this site. He agreed the Highway 99 corridor lacks community amenities, but there is public transportation, a bike trail a block away that feeds the neighborhoods and even though it is on county border, those create options. He preferred to explore opportunities for community amenities before saying no to this purchase. He referred to a conversation he had with a state legislator last week who was familiar with the area and the importance of potential development who encouraged him to think big. He summarized the council hasn't unpacked the potential of this site; it is a fuzzy opportunity and he wanted to develop a clear idea. Councilmember Olson said she valued this site, relaying she has worked hard during the past 2-3 weeks looking into an indoor sports arena, a fabulous use for that site, and she hoped that would happen regardless of whether the City was in the driver's seat. There may be opportunity for public -private partnership for a community center that could be used by the Boys & Girls Club, classic sports like basketball as a private venture, pickleball courts, etc. It was not that she wasn't excited or did not want projects and amenities in that location, she just did not feel the City could be in the driver's seat on a project this big. She expressed support for the motion. She did not think the only option for making good things happen on the site was to buy it and take on the risk and responsibility for managing the project. Councilmember Paine commented the council heard from Meadowdale residents who want to be part of Edmonds. Edmonds' property values are more stable and higher than neighboring communities because Edmonds is such a great city and being part of Edmonds means a lot. When she was on the school board, an RFP was issued for a development agreement for the 30-acre property north of Alderwood Mall, the largest development project on the west coast at that time, and there was no shortage of development partners. She asked if any developers have expressed interest in this project. She envisioned this project would have immediate attraction for public -private partnerships in the development community. She agreed this was thinking big and was a huge step. The school board took a step off a cliff and agreed to a 100 year lease. If the school board can do that, the City can too. Councilmember Paine asked what staff has been hearing when they float this idea around. Mr. Tatum said he has heard responses from we'd really love to be part of this, we're super excited about it, keep me informed, to huh, that's interesting, here's my contact info, let's stay in touch. He hasn't gotten poo-pooed and assumed if an RFP was issued, there would be interest. Ms. McLaughlin referred to Council President Tibbott's comment that there are no other 10 acre sites this unique and perfectly situated on a BRT line. With regard to being fiscally responsible, and that cities Edmonds' size don't do public -private partnership, she offered to share case studies from cities who have done public -private partnerships because it is fiscally responsible. Providing infrastructure and building capital facilities is very challenging for cities Edmonds' size, especially a catalyst project for community building. There has been interest and in the discovery phase in the last couple months, she had increased confidence the City could find a partner or multiple partners. Councilmember Paine commented if the project survives this motion, she would be interested in hearing about examples of projects in Washington State as case studies. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL CALLED THE QUESTION. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION TO CALL THE QUESTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT AND COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, PAINE AND NAND VOTING NO. Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess. Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, stating there is already a main motion on the floor. The vote taken prior to the recess was on calling the question. City Clerk Scott Passey agreed the motion to close debate failed, so the council is currently debating the main motion. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 19 COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO PAUSE DISCUSSION UNTIL THE PRESENTATION ON AUGUST 22'D. Councilmember Chen raised a point of order, stating the council needed to vote on the main motion before another motion could be made. City Attorney Jeff Taraday said if this is motion to postpone to a date certain, it would be timely. If it passes, the pending motion would be continued until next week. Mayor Nelson ruled it was a timely motion. Councilmember Paine relayed her impression that Councilmember Buckshnis' motion failed. Mayor Nelson advised that was not the case; the vote was on calling the question. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE WITHDREW THE MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. At Councilmember Nand's request, Councilmember Buckshnis restated the motion: WALK AWAY, RESCIND THE OPTION AGREEMENT AND REQUEST THE $100,000 BACK. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT AND COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, PAINE AND NAND VOTING NO. 3. ORDINANCE TO AMEND ECC 2.05 CONCERNING CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY PROSECUTOR Councilmember Nand relayed this is a proposal to permanently constitute the legal assessment committee which was previously formed as the city attorney assessment subcommittee. The committee's powers would be to review the performance of the city attorney and the city prosecutor and provide a recommendation about whether to seek a request for a public process otherwise known as an RFP or otherwise transition either role toward an inhouse position as City employees. Council President Tibbott asked if the committee could include citizens. Councilmember Nand responded as currently proposed, the committee would be comprised of three councilmembers. An amendment could be offered to change that. The proposed language would limit the committee to three members to make the process more agile. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why this was being done now. The council has never done an evaluation of the prosecuting attorney although probably it should have. She questioned the proposal to review the city attorney's performance annually when the council just approved a five year contract. Councilmember Nand answered as currently proposed and reviewed by the PSPHSP committee and Councilmember Olson, the amendment to 2.05.010 states the council may by a majority vote determine to publicize a request for public process for city attorney and city prosecutor services and there would be a standing subcommittee to assess the City's legal needs. The purpose is to ensure decision making regarding who the City contracts with for city services or bringing the role inhouse is open, public and transparent. Councilmember Olson commented this is a good idea. She was aware this had come up on more than one occasion, that renegotiation of the contract did not happen when it was intended and the contract had to be extended to do the work because councilmembers are involved in so many other things and it was important to designate councilmembers to make this a priority. That will be addressed via this change. Councilmember Paine commented she also liked this idea. She asked if funds would be allocated for outside counsel to review the city attorney and prosecutor contracts. Councilmember Nand said she had not Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 20 considered that, but it could be an important component of establishing council as the body to provide overview of the relationship with the city attorney and city prosecutor. The council previously had no role in an annual review of the city prosecutor; this proposal would add that responsibility to the legal assessment committee. Due to the importance services these two vendors provide, it is important to have an independent assessment and review. She agreed if council approves this proposal, a budget will need to be established. Councilmember Buckshnis reiterated her question regarding the proposal to review the city attorney's performance annually when the council approved a five year contract. She asked how this would occur with a contract longer than one year. Councilmember Nand referred to language in Section 2 that states the three councilmembers would undertake the responsibility assessing both the city attorney and city prosecutor's performance on an annual basis. The legal assessment committee from time to time as needed can make a recommendation to council to either continue the present professional services contract, publicize a request for proposal process or seek to transition either the city attorney or the city prosecutor position as employees of the city administration. The language contemplates there would be an annual assessment of the provision of services; the hope would be if there are any issues in the contract, that could be addressed on an annual basis before problems potentially occur and affect the relationship. However, the legal assessment committee would have the power at any time to recommend either seeking an RFP, continuing with the contract or seeking to make either position inhouse. The subcommittee would have the discretion to make that recommendation to full council. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO AMEND SECTION 2 TO STRIKE THE 2ND SENTENCE IN THE SECOND PARAGRAPH THAT READS, "THE LEGAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MAY MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, FROM TIME TO TIME, AS NEEDED, TO THE ENTIRE COUNCIL TO EITHER CONTINUE WITH THE PRESENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTS, PUBLICIZE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS, OR SEEK TO TRANSITION TOWARDS MAKING EITHER THE CITY ATTORNEY OR CITY PROSECUTOR POSITIONS AS EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATION." Councilmember Teitzel said that sentence is duplicative of the second sentence in the second paragraph of Section 1 and is not necessary. Councilmember Nand said the sentence was not duplicative. The language in the second paragraph of Section 1 of 20.05.010 states the city council may from time to time with or without cause by means of a majority vote determine to publicize a request for public proposal. However, the second sentence of the second paragraph in Section 2 regarding Section 2.05.035 empowers the legal assessment committee to make recommendation to the council. The reason she drafted that language was because previously the legal assessment subcommittee had only passively provided information and did not make recommendations. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL AND BUCKSHNIS AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, OLSON PAINE AND NAND VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO ADOPT THE CHANGES AS PROPOSED IN AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING PORTIONS OF CHAPTER 2.05 OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE CONCERNING THE CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY PROSECUTOR. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, PAINE AND NAND AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL VOTING NO. City Clerk Scott Passey provided the ordinance number 4318. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 21 4. PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT TO ECC 5.05.060 Councilmember Buckshnis thanked everyone who wrote in and commented on the proposed ordinance. She recognized everyone has a heart for dogs. This ordinance only deals with Bracketts Landing North which is a marine sanctuary; all other beaches from the ferry south to Marina Beach Park allow on -leash dogs. Only about 1/8th of the entire walkway will be closed with passage of this ordinance. In 2019 the council changed the ordinance to allow on -leash dogs on a test case basis. There have been complaints from the dive park stewards and others about dogs. Even on -leash dogs are considered predators and can create issues for marine life and in the past a baby seal was mauled. The ordinance allows on -leash dogs anywhere on the walkway except at Brackett's Landing North where signs already state no dogs allowed. New signs will be placed in the future. The intent of this change is to protect the marine sanctuary. The dive park stewards are not capable of patrolling the beach, walkway and parking lot. Councilmember Nand commented she is not a dog owner but takes her pet to the beach in pet stroller. She asked if this change would prevent dog owners from bringing their pets to the beach in a wagon or stroller. Ms. Feser answered for Bracketts Landing North beach, walkway, parking lot, no dogs would be allowed in any form or capacity, even in a carrier or wagon. Councilmember Nand asked if it would defeat the purpose of the ordinance to allow people to bring dogs in a pet stroller or wagon. Ms. Feser said that would prove to be challenging, for example if those pets came out of the stroller or wagon, they would in violation of the code. It would be easier to regulate and manage if no dogs are allowed in that small park. She pointed out dogs on leash are still allowed from the ferry landing south to Marina Beach park, which is one mile. Dogs on leash are also allowed on every sidewalk, road and park in the City. This is a very small, isolated area with a high degree of desired protection because it is designated by the state as a wildlife sanctuary. Councilmember Nand said she understood the need for this; she frequently sees dogs off leash there and has received very negative comments when asking people to put their dogs on leash. There needs to be a shift in self -policing in the dog -owner community to enforce the idea that the park is not an off -leash park and leash laws need to be enforced. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO EXTEND UNTIL 10:30 P.M. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING NO. Councilmember Teitzel said he completely supports the notion of no dogs in the marine sanctuary. He asked whether the marine sanctuary encompasses the entire Brackett's Landing North or just the sanctuary north of the jetty. Ms. Feser said the sanctuary designation is actually the water at Brackets Landing North. There is a great map on the State of Washington Fish and Wildlife site. Closing the park to dogs makes it very clear that from the gate at Brackett's Landing North into the park, the parking lot, restrooms, walkway, jetty, and the beach would be off limits to dogs. Councilmember Teitzel commented this seems to largely be an enforcement issue; very few dog owners messing it up for many dog owners. It is an enforcement issue now and will be an enforcement issue in the future if this ordinance is approved. There are signs that say no dogs but people bring dogs in anyways. He asked how this would be enforced and if people would receive a stiff fine to discourage that behavior. Ms. Feser said that is up to animal control in the Edmonds Police Department. Councilmember Teitzel suggested as it is an enforcement issue, it will be necessary to talk to animal control and the Edmonds Police Department regarding how to do a better job of enforcement. Ms. Feser advised parks staff are unable to enforce the code. Parks maintenance workers, park rangers, and recreation staff can ask people, educate them, and convey information, but they cannot cite or write fines or tickets; only a commissioned police officer can do that. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 22 Council President Tibbott relayed his understanding that the marine sanctuary started north of the jetty up to Caspers. He suggested the area north of jetty would be easier to enforce; there could be better signage, a gate or fence or rope identifying it as a sensitive marine area. The area with a lot of human interaction and the walkway does not appear to be much of a marine sanctuary. He expressed interested in removing the walkway, jetty and parking lot from the ordinance and asked if that would be problematic. Ms. Feser answered the wildlife sanctuary area is from the ferry landing north beyond the jetty; the area between the ferry lane and the jetty is part of the wildlife sanctuary. Council President Tibbott suggested dogs be allowed on leash. Ms. Feser advised that is the current rule, dogs on leash are allowed in the park on the walkway, around the restroom and out on the j etty. The proposal is to eliminate that due to a history of problems with dogs being off leash. Dogs can also damage wildlife when on leash. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO REMOVE THAT SECTION OF BRACKETT'S LANDING PARK INCLUDING THE PARKING LOT, WALKWAY, BEACH, AND WATER. Councilmember Paine relayed her understanding that dogs are seen as predators by birds and sea life. Dogs, large or small, on a leash on the sidewalk and on the jetty still cause harm as they are seen as predators which threatens and disrupts wildlife's rest, eating and breeding. She also did want another mauling to occur on the beach. She has asked how many dog owners have been cited, but was there was not sufficient time to provide that data. Dogs on the beach are disruptive for seals, birds, the nesting areas, etc. She wished there was a way to allow dogs, but dogs cause harm by the simple fact of being there. She did not support the motion. Councilmember Chen observed by the title, the proposed ordinance would restrict dogs, but not other animals. For example, someone could bring a tame rabbit there. Ms. Feser answered that was correct. Councilmember Chen suggested that was discrimination. Councilmember Chen referred to the seventh whereas clause in the ordinance, which states, WHEREAS, this proposed change to ECC 5.05.060 would specifically disallow dogs in Brackett's Landing Shoreline Sanctuary Conservation Area, or in Brackett's Landing Park including parking lot, walkway, beach and water. This wording appears to mean the entire park including south and north. Ms. Feser answered the intent was Brackett's Landing North. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO AMEND THE 7Tu WHEREAS, TO REPLACE BRACKET LANDING PARK WITH BRACKETT'S LANDING NORTH. COUNCILMEMBER NAND CALLED THE QUESTION ON COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT'S AMENDMENT. MOTION TO CALL THE QUESTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (1-5-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, CHEN, BUCKSHNIS, PAINE AND NAND VOTING NO; COUNCILMEMBER OLSON ABSTAINING. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Olson encouraged the council to postpone action on this as it was premature to expand the restrictions when the existing condition is above and beyond enforcement. This new restriction will need to be enforced just like the current restriction. Work needs to be done on enforcement before adding restrictions. This agenda item has brought much needed attention to this issue. She recognized there was a problem to solve and her lack of support for moving forward was not because she did not recognize the problem. Any and all solutions to the problem should be on the table, especially those that are most likely to get the desired results. Having dogs on the beach is a big problem and there needs to be enforcement to Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 23 keep dogs off the beach and enforcement needs to be prioritized. She pointed out there are higher fines for speeding in school zones, maybe there needs to be higher fines for dogs on the beach, but there definitely needs to be enforcement because fines change behavior. People have been nasty to private citizens who have tried to enforce, encourage and educate them about the rules, and commissioned officers need to give citations. Councilmember Olson proposed tabling this change and pursuing other solutions such as 1) a JOC source to install a post and rope system with a much smaller entry to the marine sanctuary beach where the no dog sign is located, 2) seek a funding source for that such as federal funds to protect the marine sanctuary, 3) ensure the no dogs warnings are available in multiple languages perhaps via adoption of a QR code, 4) look at the current enforcement of no dogs on the beach, 5) determine if the fines imposed for dogs on the beach should be higher, and 6) public outreach about the reason for no dogs on the beach to protect marine animals. Everyone has a responsibility to protect wildlife due to the marine sanctuary status. She hoped the increased conversation about this and possible action will result in a much bigger uprising from the entire community to be more vigilant. To the conversation about migratory birds, she anticipated people on the beach are not perfect either. The balancing act of responsible pet ownership with dogs on leash should be the focus of enforcement. When that is successful, if it does not protect the wildlife sufficiently, further steps may be necessary. She summarized it is premature to pursue more restrictions when the current restrictions are not being enforced. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT, TO TABLE THIS. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL AND OLSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, BUCKSHNIS, PAINE AND NAND VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO AMEND THE 7TH WHEREAS CLAUSE IN THE ORDINANCE AND SECTION 5.05.060.B TO CHANGE "OR" TO "AND." Councilmember Paine commented "or" is vague and she wanted to ensure the language in the ordinance and in Section 5.05.060 reflects that both areas are restricted. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Buckshnis commented it is an enforcement issue, but it is important to respect the volunteers and parks & recreation staff who manage and steward that park and who have indicated this is a problem. She has stewarded the off -leash area for 17 years and the divers came to her because they did not feel they were being heard. Dog are threatening to the wildlife because they are viewed as predators. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO ADD "NORTH" FOLLOWING `BRACKETT'S LANDING" IN SECTION 5.05.050.B. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. With regard to breed discrimination, Councilmember Nand, understood Ms. Feser's point that it would be cleaner and easier to enforce if dogs were entirely disallowed. Other people bring their pets to the beach in pet strollers where they cannot interact with the environment in a way that would be detrimental to the wildlife. She agreed it was important to keep leashed dogs away because there seems to be a creep, people see a leashed dog and think it's okay to have a dog off -leash. she suggested an amendment to allow a narrow exception for dogs contained in a stroller. She asked if the mixed message would be too difficult to enforce. Ms. Feser responded it would be very challenging to allow someone to bring a dog in a hand carrier, wagon, stroller, cardboard box, etc. It would be necessary to define container and contained. It would be difficult Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 24 to enforce not allowing dogs in the park when someone sees a dog in a container and sometimes dogs hop out of containers. She summarized it would be challenging and confusing, it would send mixed signals and it would be more difficult to enforce. She reiterated parks is not the enforcement branch of the City, it is the responsibility of animal control in the police department. She is only providing her opinion from the viewpoint of parks maintenance, park ranger, and park staff interacting with individuals. Councilmember Nand said she has approached people illegally off -leashing in Edmonds parks. If the dog is not harassing wildlife, she does not say anything. A lot of people tell her they come from outside Edmonds because they know there is no enforcement in Edmonds parks. They could have gone to the off -leash park, but they come from places like Seattle that have a more robust police force and she assumed more than just two animal control officers that issue citations. She was unsure Edmonds Police Department had that capacity. Councilmember Olson expressed support for the change. She expressed to Mayor Nelson, the only person present representing the administration related to enforcement, that this needs to be enforced. The reason the situation exists is because the less stringent rule was not enforced. Her vote is contingent on the fact that she expects there to be enforcement. Councilmember Nand asked if there was a citation for off -leash dogs in Edmonds and if so, what is the amount. Ms. Feser said she was unable to answer that. Mayor Nelson suggested the council cease asking Ms. Feser questions about law enforcement citation issues. She has stated multiple times that she is the parks director and parks does not do enforcement. Councilmember Buckshnis advised the citation for a dog off leash is $100. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO PASS THE ORDINANCE AS AMENDED. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, CHEN, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, PAINE AND NAND VOTING YES; COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING NO. City Clerk Scott Passey provided the ordinance number 4319. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO EXTEND TO 10:45 P.M. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, PAINE AND NAND VOTING YES; COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT AND COUNCILMEMBER CHEN VOTING NO. 5. ORDINANCE ALLOWING SIX HENS (FEMALE CHICKENS) PER SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE Councilmember Olson explained there has been a lot of public input asking for this change due to finding the existing three hen limit in the code untenable because when a hen is replaced, there needs to be at least two new hens to protect the newcomers. The number of hens allowed in other cities include four in Mukilteo, five in Lynnwood, six in Mill Creek, eight in Mountlake Terrace, and five in Snohomish County (more can be allowed based on lot size). Following discussions with staff and councilmembers in those jurisdictions, only Snohomish County had input from residents, some wanted fewer hens allowed and some wanted more. Based on that, and based on the fact that chicks are often purchased by the dozen or half dozen, the committee ultimately recommended six hens. She was confident this changes strikes the right balance between a person who wants to have this at-home sustainability food option and neighbors who do not want it to be a nuisance. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 25 Councilmember Paine expressed support for the change. When this issue first arose earlier this year, she asked if there had been any code violations and was told there were none. Councilmember Nand expressed support for the ordinance as drafted. The committee had a very robust discussion about issues related to animal welfare and responsible animal husbandry. She acknowledged some residents contacted the council stating say chicken feed attracts rats and that is a nuisance. She pointed out fruit trees that drop fruit on the ground and is not picked also attracts rats. She envisioned the impact of this change will be minimal. She suggested having a more robust discussion in the future regarding animal welfare especially keeping animals for food production and minimum size containers, something she did not think was an issue for Edmonds residents who keep chicken. Councilmember Chen said in general he was supportive of the change to increase the number of hens from three to six. He asked if increased density due to HB 1110 was considered. Councilmember Olson said she asked that question; every community that allows chickens will need to review their codes and figure that out. Whether three or six hens are allowed, Edmonds will need to revisit the issue in the context of that bill. Councilmember Chen said he will support the change for now. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO PASS AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON AMENDING THE EDMONDS CITY CODE RELATED TO THE KEEPING OF POULTRY IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Nelson thanked the Chamber of Commerce for the Taste. He acknowledged the Taste generates a lot of opinions, strong feelings and emotions. One of main reason Edmonds is so special is the level of community events. The Edmonds Chamber of Commerce is an event -based organization that would be unable to fund all the wonderful events they put on like the 4t' of July parade without fundraising. The Taste is a key fundraiser for the Chamber, half of their revenue comes from the Taste. He thanked the Chamber for the event, the community for attending and for dealing with any disruption it may have caused. SI�K11110y 11_[KI]u lu 1 D112 i Councilmember Nand reported she attended Taste this weekend and complimented the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce CEO Ryan Crowther and his dedicated staff including Alicia Morena, Eric Sugg and Caitlin Hoover for putting on this gigantic event. As the region is experiencing a heat wave, she commented on the importance of community outreach and urged residents to check on their neighbors especially those who are vulnerable such as people with disabilities, seniors or children. The housed senior citizen community suffered the most fatalities in the 2021 heat dome that claimed hundreds of lives in Washington. By the time someone experiences a heat -related illness, they may not realize they are impaired and are unable to seek help. With the horrific tragedy in Maui, she urged residents to wet down or cut back dry vegetation and consider hardening their yard if there is fire danger. There have been fires along I-5 due to people throwing out cigarettes. The changes due to climate change and extreme weather events are frightening. All branches of government will be working hard to ensure the community is safe and that vulnerable members including seniors and the unhoused are protected. Councilmember Olson commented tonight's conversation about Brackett's Landing North is a great time to appreciate the international attraction in the underwater scuba park. It is profiled in the book, "The 100 Places to Dive before you Die." She gave a shout out to Bruce Higgins, the lead volunteer steward at the underwater park for many years, commenting he and his crew of volunteers are an inspiration and she appreciated each one of them. She announced Jim Traner's memorial is this Sunday from 12-2 p.m. at the Edmonds Waterfront Center. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 26 Councilmember Paine thanked the Chamber for the Taste, a big, exciting event that brings a lot of people into the City and highlights how fun Edmonds is. She thanked Bruce Higgins, the dive park coordinator. Dive park stewards report on Ochre Stars, Ling Cod and kelp. The underwater park has a YouTube channel and the dive park is a source for Edmonds-Woodway High School student projects. The underwater park is a great amenity for the community. Council President Tibbott thanked the council, commenting he always learns a lot from the deliberations. He expressed appreciation for the council's preparations and bringing their best ideas to meetings which help the council make better decisions. Councilmember Buckshnis agreed Bruce Higgins was a treasure. She continues to work on the Highway 99 SEIS. Not conducting an SEIS violated Ordinance 4079. Councilmember Chen invited the public to attend the Edmonds Oktoberfest on September 15-16 at the Frances Anderson Center. Many volunteer opportunities are still available. 11. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:39 p.m. 6: - SCOTT PASSEY; C CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 15, 2023 Page 27