2023-09-12 PPW CommitteePARKS & PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING
September 12, 2023
Elected Officials Present Staff Present
Councilmember Dave Teitzel (Chair) * Oscar Antillon, Public Works Director
Councilmember Diane Buckshnis * Angie Feser, Parks, Rec. & Human Serv. Dir.
Council President Neil Tibbott (ex-officio) * Rob English, City Engineer
Councilmember Vivian Olson Thom Sullivan, Facilities Manager
Councilmember Susan Paine Mike De Lilla, Senior Utilities Engineer
* committee member Kyle Woods, Parks Project Manager
Scott Passey, City Clerk
CALL TO ORDER
The Edmonds City Council PPW Committee meeting was called to order virtually and in the City Council
Conference Room, 212 — 5` Avenue North, Edmonds, at 7:30 p.m. by Councilmember Teitzel.
2. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
Committee Updates
➢ WWTP - Status of Sludge Transport System
Mr. Antillon reported the issue has been resolved although the processes are still being tweaked. A
problem was created with dust in another area of the plant which staff is working on. The system has been
upgraded to operate 24 hours/day for a few days. The commissioning process is being finished and testing
will begin soon. The updated permit is based on testing. Questions and discussion followed regarding the
air pressure system to move sludge within the plant, plans to operate the system 24 hours/day 5
days/week, and reducing the need to transport sludge.
➢ Feasibility Study for Police Substation on Hwy 99
Councilmember Teitzel asked if the old 7-Eleven property had been considered as a possible site for lease
or purchase. Mr. Antillon answered the consultant's initial survey did not identify that property because it
was not for sale or lease; the survey identified eight properties, two for sale and six for lease. At staff's
request, the consultant located the owner of the 7-Eleven property and is discussing their willingness to
sell or lease. The police department agrees that site is a good option. Questions and discussion followed
regarding why staff was not using Long Bay to identify property, and Long Bay being a subcontractor to
Bob Stowe, the consultant doing the evaluation.
2. Johnson Park Property Demolition Contract Approval
Ms. Feser reported this is phase 2 for the Shirley Johnson property donated to the City in 2021 that
connects Bowdoin Way and Yost Park. The council approved $200,000 in 2023 to secure the site;
approximately $77,000 has been spent to remove debris and clean the house's interior. This proposal is
to demolish the house and outbuildings.
Mr. Woods explained DH Environmental performed the first phase which included removal of
approximately twelve 20-yard containers of contaminated/hazardous materials from the house and garage.
Three bids were received for phase 2, the winning bid by Sky Corp was $116,000. The project will include
removal of invasive weeds, the house, a large garage and an old barn that is 80% collapsed. A mid -
November start date is planned with 30 working days. The neighborhood is well aware of the project and
there has been no illegal camping, vandalism, break-ins, etc.
09/12/23 PPW Committee Minutes,
Questions and discussion followed regarding clearing the property for future use, tree plan, removal of
invasive blackberries, installation of a new fence on the east side of the property due to blackberries pulling
the fence down, phase 3 planned for 2025-2026, how blackberries will be removed, removal of the oil tank
if found, whether projects budgeted in 2023 that had not yet been started could be delayed due to higher
than expected expenses, use of capital funds for this project, concern buildings on the site are an attractive
nuisance, breakdown of the costs, amount of the other bids ($162,00 and $187,000), and estimation that
hazmat was approximately one-third of the bid.
Committee recommendation: Consent agenda
3. Capital Projects - City Facilities Contract Introductions
Thom Sullivan reviewed:
Safety Perimeter Decision Package, Public Safety Pedestrian Barrier
o JOC process non -responsive. Reached out to All City Fence who provided a very responsive
bid and a good timeline for the project. Bid is about $30,000 above budget, but anticipate costs
will be $10,000-15,000 within the original estimate. Questions and discussion followed
regarding when the project will be completed, need for fencing due to increased security issues,
temporary construction fencing for the solar project, automated gates, whether gates will slow
response times, pedestrian use of parking lot, and correction to the total price of $74,940.
Anderson Center Transom Windows
o 2'x2' windows surround all the 1940-50s additions to the building. A past energy project that
insulated the roof resulted in the roof and windows at same level resulting in leaks due to the
lack of a sill. This project will raise the windows, shrink the vertical size by 4-6", add curb and
new window sashes.
JC23-12S - Pubic Safety Court ADA Access, JC23-13S - Public Safety Building RR ADA Doors,
JC23-15S - Public Safety Lobby East Entrance
o Several volunteers need accessibility to meetings at city hall and public safety building. Rather
than making improvements to doors at both, Ms. McLaughlin recommended making the public
safety building extremely accessible and holding meetings at that location. Upgrades will
include motorized ADA doors at the east entrance, hallway/lobby, restroom, and the man door
behind the security guard. This was not included in the proposed bond projects, but meets the
narrative of building upgrades.
JC23-18S - 7th Ave Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter Replacement
o In response to Mr. Antillon's request for a JOC bid, a very responsive bid ($288,000) was obtain
for this section of sidewalk, one-third the estimated cost with completion in 2023. The sidewalk
on 7th needs to be replaced, especially due to increased park use. Mr. Antillon advised
approximately $88,000 is available from stormwater for the curb and gutter, leaving
approximately $200,000 in unidentified funds. The sidewalk is not ADA compliant and patches
are inefficient.
Questions and discussion followed regarding why this sidewalk was not rebuilt as part of Civic Playfield
project like the sidewalk on 6th, difficulty identifying funding due to budget issues, potential funding sources,
whether bond funds could be used for this project, and access from 7th to the inclusive playground.
Committee recommendation: Full council
4. Presentation of GFC Analysis and Future Adoption of a GFC Rate Ordinance
Mr. De Lilla introduced FCS Group has historically done these analyses and is familiar with the City's
finances. The project lead is Chris Gonzalez, Principle, FCS Group. John Ghilaraducci, Principle, FCS
Group, is also present to respond to questions. Mr. Gonzalez reviewed:
• Background
o The GFC is a connection charge that:
09/12/23 PPW Committee Minutes,
■ Is imposed on development to recover an equitable share of system costs
■ Is based on the cost of existing assets and future capital projects
■ Provides a source of funding for capital projects and/or debt service
o Current GFCs have been in place since 2014
■ Calculated in 2011 analysis
■ Approved by Council effective May 2012, phased in from 2012 — 2014
o City requested update to reflect current system costs
GFC Methodology
GFC per ERU =
o Key steps:
■ Define the "cost of the existing system"
■ Compute interest accrued on existing assets
■ Define the capital improvement program
■ Define the applicable system capacity
Water GFC Calculation
Existing Capital Assets
Less: Funding from Grants, Developers, and ULIDs
Plus: Construction Work in Progress
Plus: Capital Improvement Program
Less: Provision for Retirement of Existing Assets
Plus: Interest Accrued on Assets Included in Cost Basis
Less: Net Outstanding Debt Principal
Net Cost Basis ($000s)
System Capacity in Meter Equivalents (MEs)
The GFC calculation
should only include costs
funded by the utility
48,855
$18,126
(918)
(1,098)
1,380
4,188
92,431
46,502
(5,348)
(1,284)
14,583
8,429
147,499 $74,590
23,199 14,772
o Net allocable system cost has almost doubled since 2011 calculation
o Current calculation reflects higher estimate of MEs
■ Based on maximum -day supply capacity; 2011 calculation considered 20 years of growth
Stormwater GFC Calculation
Existing Capital Assets
$ 20,990
$ 9,448
Less: Funding from Grants, Developers, and ULIDs
(3,054)
(2,890)
Plus: Construction Work in Progress
4,661
1,278
Plus: Capital Improvement Program
56,341
21,332
Less: Funding from Grants and Developers
(8,734)
(10,762)
Less: Provision for Retirement of Existing Assets
(4,290)
-
Plus: Interest Accrued on Assets Included in Cost Basis
3,883
1,078
Less: Net Outstanding Debt Principal
(1,002)
(1,778)
Net Cost Basis ($000s)
$68,795
$17,706
System Capacity in Equivalent Service Units (ESUs)
22,039
22,150
1 An ESU is equivalent to 3.000 square feet of impervious surface area.
o Net allocable system cost has almost quadrupled since 2011 calculation
o Current calculation reflects slightly lower estimate of ESUs
■ Based on buildable land inventory; 2011 calculation considered 20 years of growth
• Sewer GFC Calculation
09/12/23 PPW Committee Minutes,
Existing Capital Assets
Plus: Construction Work in Progress
Less: Funding from ULIDs and Treatment Plant Partner Agencies
Plus: Capital Improvement Program
Less: Funding from Treatment Plant Partner Agencies
Less: Provision for Retirement of Existing Assets
Plus: Interest Accrued on Assets Included in Cost Basis
Less: Net Outstanding Debt Principal
Net Cost Basis ($000s)
Svstem CaQacity in Equivalent Residential Units (ERUs)
$87,428
$60,683
31,674
1,343
(45,151)
(30,284)
153,277
14,148
(30,039)
-
(16,191)
-
18,236
15,416
(14,425)
-
$184,809
$61,306
28.010
13.881
o Net allocable system cost has tripled since 2011 calculation
o Current calculation reflects higher estimate of ERUs
■ Based on maximum -month flow/loading capacities; reflects recommended change to assign
commercial ERUs based on meter size instead of estimated water usage
■ 2011 calculation used residential unit counts and commercial water consumption (750 cubic
feet per month per ERU); added 20 years of growth
Single -Family GFC Survey
Woodinville [1] $7,729 1 $16,393 1$24,122
Bainbridge Island $7,125 1 $14884 1 $20,009
Mukilteo $5,630 1 $12.230 I $17,860
Lake Stevens $3,645 1 $13,500 1 $17,145
Bremerton $6,680 11,al $7,797 1 $16,081
Edmonds (Updated) ? {: Y $16,078
Alderwood WWD 1 $4,398 k1,731 AM 1 $14,930
Bothell $7,801 11111,731 $5,380 I $14,918
Shoreline [2] �_ $6,475 1 $7,728 I $14,203
Mountlake Terrace $5,422 L$3,003 1I $4,080 1 $12,505
Monroe $4,111 $7,456 1 $11,567
Edmonds (Existing) r r $10,266
Lynnwood I u000 I $4,000
u Water GFC w Stormwater GFC u Sewer GFC
[1] Woodinville WD's sewer GFC includes King County's capacity charge ($72.50 per month for 15 years)
[2] Shoreline sewer GFC assuming Edmonds wastewater treatment.
Recommendations
o Adopt updated CFCs (can phase in if desired)
�'1'C•lla -�]to] 1II1Yr,Ik;A
Existing GFC $5,050 per ME $799 per ESU $4,417 per ERU
Updated GFC $6,358 per ME $3,122 per ESU $6,598 per ERU
o Review GFCs periodically to ensure that they remain consistent with costs
Questions and discussion followed regarding future project costs in the GFC per ERU calculation, interest
rate used in the calculation, annual cost inflation, charge applicable to new construction or redevelopment
that increases meter size, what is included in construction work in progress in 2023 sewer GFC calculation,
reasons for the significant increase in stormwater GFC, timing to implement the increased GFC, concern
the GFC had not been updated sooner, making periodic inflationary adjustments, information to include in
council presentation, and whether to defer the presentation to council until 2024.
Committee recommendation: Full council
S. Presentation of Utility Rate Study and Future Adoption of a Utility Rate Ordinance
09/12/23 PPW Committee Minutes, Page 5
Chris Gonzalez, Principle, FCS Group, reviewed:
• Background
o City has reviewed its utility rates on a 3-year cycle to:
■ Improve ability to weather financial cycles, risks, and disruptions, stabilizing rates
■ Account for changes that are beyond the City's control (Alderwood WWD Rates)
■ Plan for large future capital projects
o City has used "pay-as-you-go" strategy to fund annual replacement projects
■ Pros: Lower overall cost, helps avoid deferring maintenance
■ Cons: Higher near -term rates, reduced intergenerational equity
- Current customers pay more upfront for facilities oversized for future customers
■ Current study aims to balance near-term/long-term impacts of capital funding strategy
• Historical Utility Rate Increases
8/1/2010 7.50% 8/1/2010 8.00%
1/1/2010 0.00%
1/1/2011 7.50% 1/1/2011 8.00%
1/1/2011 0.00%
1/1/2012 7.50% 1/1/2012 8.00%
1/1/2012 0.00%
1l1/2013 7.50% 1/1/2013 8.00%
1/1/2013 0.00%
1/1/2014 9.00% 1/1/2014 4.50%
1/1/2014 9.50%
1/1/2015 9.00% 1/1/2015 4.50%
1/1/2015 9.50%
1/1/2016 9.00% 1/1/2016 4.50%
1/1/2016 9.50%
1l1/2017 9.00% 1/1/2017 10.00%
1/1/2017 9.50%
1/1/2018 9.00% 1/1/2018 10.00%
1/1/2018 9.50%
1/1/2019 9.00% 1/1/2019 10.00%
1/1/2019 9.50%
1/1/2020 4.50% 1/1/2020 5.00%
1/1/2020 9.50%
1/1/2021 4.50% 1/1/2021 5.00%
111/2021 9.50%
1/1/2022 4.50% 1/1/2022 5.00%
1/1/2022 9.50%
2/1/2023 4.00% 2/1/2023 5.00%
2/1/2023 4.00%
• Overview of Financial Plan
o Defines "cost -based rates" as rates based on aggregate obligations
■ Operating costs
■ Capital project expenditures
■ Debt service payments
■ Other financial needs
o Establishes a multi -year financial plan beyond the current budget cycle
o Key Elements of Financial Plan:
■ Defining revenues and expenses
■ Developing capital funding strategy
■ Establishing fiscal policy "framework"
• Fiscal Policies: Reserves
o This analysis assumes the following reserve structure:
PurposeReserve
■ 60 days (16%) of operating expenses
Operating Fund
- Accommodate difference in revenue /
- Water: = $830,000
expense cycles
- Stormwater = $466,000
- Sewer = $840,000
■ Segregate funds restricted for capital
■ 2% of plant -in-service
Capital Fund
■ Protect against capital cost overruns
- Water = $1,031,000
- Stormwater: = $485,000
• Provide for emergency asset replacement
- Sewer (Collection System): = $742,000
o Goal: Maintain combined operating/capital
balance equal to at least 180 days of operating
expenses (policy recommended by bond rating agencies)
Questions and discussion followed regarding establishing reserves for utilities and the bond rating when
bonds were issued in 2021. Mr. Gonzalez continued his presentation:
• Key Assumptions
o Annual Cost Inflation o Annual Growth
09/12/23 PPW Committee Minutes, Page 6
■ General (CPI): 2.5% Water: 0.8% (= 120 new MEs)
■ Labor: 2.0% Stormwater: 0.3% (= 70 new ESUs)
■ Benefits: 3.0% Sewer: 0.8% (= 135 new ERUs)
■ Water Purchases: 8.0%
■ Construction:4.0%
o Operating Forecast
■ Rate revenue forecasted based on 2022 actual + growth and 2023 rate increase (4%)
■ Other operating revenue generally based on 2023 Budget
■ Operating expenses generally based on 2023 Budget with adjustments for inflation
• Water Utility Capital Needs Forecast
Capital Costs by Year (2023 - 2029) Capital Funding Strategy (2023 - 2029)
$10.0
$9.0
$8.0
$7.0
$6-0
c
$5.0
$4.0
$3.0
$2.0
$1.0
$0.0
2023 2024 2026 2026 2027 2028 2029
■Transmission/Distribution Reservoirs
o $38.6 million in capital projects from 2023 - 2029
■ Mains: $29.OM
■ Reservoirs: $9.6M
o Cash expected to cover = 76% of the planned project costs
■ 24% ($9.2 M) expected to be funded by debt
- Total net issuance of $10.0 M increases annual debt service by ❑ $803,000
• Water Utility Revenue Requirement Forecast
$16,000,000 _
$12,000,000
$8,000,000
$4,000,000
" 0 N N
2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
0&M Expense o Debt Service u Available for Capital
-Revenue @ 2023 Rates ---Revenue with Increases
Annual Rate Revenue Increase 9.00% 9.00% 9.00% 9.00% 9.00% 8.00%
Bimonthly Residential Bill @ 14 ccf $108.48 $118.19 $128.95 $140.52 $153.08 $166.94 $180.21
Change From Prior Year +$9,71 +$10.76 +$11.57 +$12.56 +$13.86 +$13.27
o Rate increases driven by capital funding needs, including cash requirements and debt service
• Forecast of Water Utility Reserves (with proposed/projected rate increases)
Projected Reserve Balances (Water Operating/Capital)
$18,000,000 $9.2 M In bond
VA nnn nnn funding for CIP
$14,000,000
$12,000,000
$10,000,000
$8,000,000
$6,000,000
$4,000,000
$2,000,000
............................... .
Beginning with 2024 bond Issue, minimum balance
defined by 180 days of operating expenses
2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Ending Balance •••••• Minimum Balance
09/12/23 PPW Committee Minutes, Page 7
Questions and discussion followed regarding concern with bonding now when rates are high, anticipated
term of the debt, whether the City has the capacity to take on bond debt and do the projects, impact
delaying capital projects has on maintenance, council direction for a pay-as-you-go strategy for
replacement and bonding for large projects, reservoir capital projects, cost of wholesale water from
Alderwood, and inability to use bond proceeds for capital building maintenance projects for utility capital
projects. Mr. Gonzalez continued his presentation:
• Stormwater Utility Capital Needs Forecast
Capital Costs by Year (2023 - 2029) Capital Funding Strategy (2023 - 2029)
$8.0 ARPA
$7.0 $1.3 mppp-,
5%
w $6.0
c $5.0
$4.0
$3.0
$2.0
$1.0
h LL 70%
$0.0 11 T
2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
o $29.0 million in capital projects from 2023 — 2029
■ Mains: $14.3 M
■ Lake Ballinger Facility: $3.2 M
■ Perrinville Creek Basin: $7.8 M
■ Other: $3.7M
o Utility cash expected to cover = 70% of the planned project costs
■ 25% ($7.4 M) expected to be funded by grants
■ 5% ($1.3 M) expected to be covered with American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds
• Stormwater Utility Revenue Requirement Forecast
$9,000,000
$6,000,000_------;------i----_1_ r_
$3,000,000
2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
fi 0&M Expense o Debt Service Available for Capital
—Revenue @ 2023 Rates ---Revenue with Increases
Annual Rate Increase 13.00% 13.00% 12.50% 12.00% 0.00% 0.00%
Bimonthly Rate per ESU $46.90 $53.00 $59.89 $67.37 $75.46 $75.46 $75.46
Change From Prior Year 46.10 +$6.89 .$7.48 +$8.09 $0.00 $0.00
o Rate increases driven by capital funding needs
• Forecast of Stormwater Utility Reserves (with proposed/projected rate increases)
Projected Reserve Balances (Stormwater Operating/Capital)
$7,000,000
0,
Rate Increases through 2027 needed
$4,000,000
to meet minimum balance target
$3,000,000
$2,000,000
........ ...........................................................................
..
R
$1,000,000
\ Beginning with 2024 water utility bond issue, minimum
balance defined by 180 days of operating expenses
f
2023
2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
-Ending Balance •••••• Minimum Balance
09/12/23 PPW Committee Minutes, Page 8
Questions and discussion followed regarding the infiltration project at Mathay Ballinger, what is included
in the Perrinville Creek Basin project, funding for the Perrinville Creek Basin project, and concern the
amounts related to ARPA and grants were not accurate. Mr. Gonzalez continued his presentation:
• Sewer Utility Capital Needs Forecast
Capital Costs by Year (2023 - 2029) Capital Funding Strategy (2023 - 2029)
$40.0
$35.0
$30.0
e $25.0
c $20.0
$15.0
$10.0
$5.0
$0.0
Debt
$41.4 M
WWTP 39%
Partners
$26.5 M
25°h AdM
2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
w Edmonds Share of Lynnwood WWTP Projects
■ Edmonds WWTP Projects
■ Sewer Projects
o $106.4 million in capital projects from 2023 - 2029
■ Sewer projects: $29.4 M
■ Edmonds WWTP: $53.9 M
■ Lynnwood WWTP: $23.1 M (Edmonds' share)
o Sewer utility cash expected to cover = 36% of the planned project costs
■ 25% ($26.5 M) contributed by Olympic View WSD, Mountlake Terrace, and Shoreline
■ 39% ($41.1 M) expected to be funded by debt
- Total net issuance of $45.0 M increases annual debt service by $3.6 million
• Sewer Utility Revenue Requirement Forecast
$21,000,000
$18,000,000 ______________""""-
$15,000,000 _--------
$12,000,000
$9,000,000
$6,000,0000
$3,000,000
2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
0&M Expense u Debt Service Available for Capital
-Revenue @ 2023 Rates ---Revenue with Increases
Annual Rate Revenue Increase 10.50% 10.50% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00%
Bimonthly Residential Bill $106.11 $117.25 $129.56 $142.52 $156.77 $172.45 $189.69
Change From Prior Year +$11.14 +$12.31 +$12.96 +$14.25 +$15.68 +$17.24
o Rate increased driven by capital funding needs, including cash requirements and debt service
• Forecast of Sewer Utility Reserves (with proposed/projected rate increases)
Protected Reserve Balances (Sewer Operating/Capital)
$18,000,000
$16,000,000
$14,000,000
541.4 M in bond
$12,000,000
funding for CIP
$10,000,000
I�
$8,000,000
$6,000,000
.......................... ............................
t4,000,000
....................................
Beginning with 2024 water utility bond issue, minimum
$2,000,000
balance defined by 180 days of operating expenses
2023
2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
-Ending Balance ...... Minimum Balance
09/12/23 PPW Committee Minutes,
• Bimonthly Single -Family Bill @ 14 ccf
Mountlake Terrace $153.49 [_ $55.92 $158.62 I $368.03
Woodinville (1] $146.16 1$34.671 $166.42 1 $347.25
Lake Stevens $99.08 1 $42.83 1 $198.00 1 $339,91
Bothell $99.70 LgLw $202.22 1 $339.44
Monroe $101.06 8.44 $184.30 I $323.80
Bainbridge Island $65.28 1$37.671 $210.40 1 $313.35
Shoreline [2] $133.77 1 $54.82 1 $107.40 1 $295.99
Edmonds (Updated) $288.44
Edmonds (Existing)
$261.49
Bremerton
1 $67.52 1
$43.00 1 $149.92
1 $260.44
Mukilteo
74.74
.67 $134.96
1 $259.37
Alderwood WWD
$64.06 LdNMlld-
$156.94
1 $258.52
Lynnwood
$77.28
ANO&$132.35
1 $241.32
u
Water Rate
■ Stormwater Rate
o Sewer Rate
[1] Woodinville Water District's sewer rate includes King County's wastewater treatment rate ($104.22 bimonthly)
[2] Shoreline sewer rate assuming Edmonds wastewater treatment.
Questions and discussion followed regarding the $53.9M total cost of the WWTP, cost of the WWTP
nutrient removal project, construction of a new Lynnwood WWTP, and the reason some King County cities'
rates are so high. Mr. Gonzalez continued his presentation:
• Recommendations
o Adopt proposed rate increases for 2024 - 2026
■ Water: 9.0% per year
■ Stormwater: 12.5 - 13.0% per year
■ Sewer: 10.0 - 10.5% per year
Water Bill
$108.48 $118.19
$128.95
$140.52
$153.08
$166.94
$180.21
Stormwater Bill
46.90 53.00
59.89
67.37
75.46
75.46
75.46
Sewer Bill
106.11 117.25
129.56
14252
156.77
172.45
189.69
Total Bill
$261.49 $288.44
$318.40
$350.41
$385.31
$414.85
$445.36
Change from Prior Year
+$26.95
+$29.96
+$32.01
+$34.90
+$29.54
+$30.51
Percent Change from Prior Year
+10.3%
+10.4%
+%0%
+10.0%
+7]%
+7.4%
o Monitor financial status regularly, considering
adjustments
as needed
■ Revisit 2027 -
2029 rate increases sometime around
2026
Questions and discussion followed regarding bonding for capital projects, bond term, updating the
CIP/CFP with new project estimates, and staff responding to questions emailed by Councilmembers
Buckshnis and Teitzel.
Committee recommendation: Full council.
6. Franchise Extension for New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC
Memo from City Attorney Jeff Taraday is included in the packet.
Committee recommendation: Consent agenda.
3. ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m.
09/12/23 PPW Committee Minutes, Page 10
Nicholas Falk, Deputy City Clerk for
SCOTT PASSEY, CITY CLERK