01/08/2008 City CouncilJanuary 8, 2008
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Gary Haakenson, Mayor
Michael Plunkett, Council President
Steve Bernheim, Councilmember
Deanna Dawson, Councilmember
Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember
Dave Orvis, Councilmember
Ron Wambolt, Councilmember
D.J. Wilson, Councilmember
ALSO PRESENT
Hilary Scheibert, Student Representative
STAFF PRESENT
Thomas Tomberg, Fire Chief
Al Compaan, Police Chief
Duane Bowman, Development Services Director
Stephen Clifton, Community Services Director
Debi Humann, Human Resources Manager
Stephen Koho, Treatment Plant Manager
Scott Snyder, City Attorney
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
Administration 1. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH OF OFFICE TO NEWLY ELECTED OFFICIALS
of oaths of
Office
Judge Timothy Ryan swore in Gary Haakenson as Mayor.
Mayor Haakenson swore in Peggy Pritchard Olson to Council position 4 and D. J. Wilson to Council
position 5.
City Clerk Sandy Chase swore in Steve Bernheim to Council position 6 and Dave Orvis to Council
position 7.
Reception 2. RECEPTION IN HONOR OF NEWLY ELECTED OFFICIALS
Mayor Haakenson declared a 20 minute recess for a reception In honor of the newly elected officials.
Approval of 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
genda
COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT,
TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
4. APPROVAL OFCONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Plunkett requested Item F be removed from the Consent Agenda.
COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, TO
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items
approved are as follows:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 1
Roll Call
A.
ROLL CALL
Approve
12 -18 -07
B.
APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 18, 2007.
Minutes
Approve
C.
APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #101091 THROUGH #101208 FOR DECEMBER 20,
Claim Checks
2007 IN THE AMOUNT OF $397,254.26; #101209 THROUGH #101304 FOR DECEMBER
27, 2007 IN THE AMOUNT OF $538,596.56; AND #101305 THROUGH #101382 FOR
JANUARY 3, 2008 IN THE AMOUNT OF $189,999.73. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL
DIRECT DEPOSITS AND CHECKS #46016 THROUGH #46062 FOR THE PERIOD OF
DECEMBER 1 THROUGH DECEMBER 15, 2007 IN THE AMOUNT OF $834,225.09;
AND #46063 THROUGH #46099 FOR THE PERIOD OF DECEMBER 16 THROUGH
DECEMBER 31, 2007 IN THE AMOUNT OF $788,974.81.
C laim s for I
Damages
D.
ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM TIM LUCAS
($90.49), AND DAVID CASWELL AND STEPHANIE EBEL - CASWELL ($6,000.00).
Commission on
Compensation
of Elected
E.
CITY COUNCIL CONFIRMATION OF A COUNCIL APPOINTED MEMBER OF THE
Officials
CITIZENS' COMMISSION ON COMPENSATION FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS.
Electrical G. REPORT ON BIDS OPENED ON DECEMBER 1.8, 2007 FOR THE ELECTRICAL
Improvements
at WWTP IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AT THE WWTP AND AWARD TO EWING ELECTRIC,
INC. FOR THE AMOUNT OF $79,184, INCLUDING SALES TAX.
Resfl 1159
Thanking
Peggy Pritchard H. RESOLUTION NO. 1159 THANKING COUNCILMEMBER PEGGY PRITCHARD
Olson OLSON FOR HER SERVICE AS COUNCIL PRESIDENT
MCC Feeder ITEM F: REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE MCC FEEDER
Installation INSTALLATION PROJECT AND COUNCIL ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT
Preject
Councilmember Plunkett asked staff for an explanation of this item. Wastewater Treatment Plant
Manager Stephen Koho explained the purpose of the project was to increase the capacity of the electrical
motor control center in one of the buildings of the treatment plant. Due to the way the treatment plant is
situated, water must be pumped into and out of the plant. During an electrical engineering study, it was
determined the electrical supply to the building was underpowered; therefore, additional conductors were
pulled from that building to the main electrical switch.
COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, FOR
APPROVAL OF ITEM F. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Selection of
Council 5. SELECTION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR 2008
President for
2008 1 Mayor Haakenson opened the floor for nominations.
COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON NOMINATED MICHAEL PLUNKETT FOR THE POSITION OF
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR 2008. COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS SECONDED THE
NOMINATION.
COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, TO
CLOSE NOMINATIONS FOR THE POSITION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Dawson commented that Mr. Plunkett had served the longest of any Councilmember
currently on the Council, had done a fine job as Council President in the past, was an extremely
hardworking and diligent member of the Council and would serve the Council well as Council President
for 2008.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 2
THE VOTE ON THE NOMINATION FOR MICHAEL PLUNKETT FOR THE POSITION OF
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR 2008 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Selection of
Council 6. SELECTION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM FOR 2008
President Pro
Tern for 2008 Mayor Haakenson opened the floor for nominations.
COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT NOMINATED DEANNA DAWSON FOR THE POSITION OF
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM FOR 2008. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PLUNKETT SECONDED
THE NOMINATION.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
WAMBOLT, TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS FOR THE POSITION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT
PRO TEM. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
THE VOTE ON THE NOMINATION FOR DEANNA DAWSON AS COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO
TEM FOR 2008 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Appointment of 7. APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEE REPRESENTATIVES
Committee
Representatives Council President Plunkett read the following Committee appointments:
Committee
Representative
Community Serv. /Dev. Serv. Committee
Peggy Councilmember Olson, D. J. Wilson
Finance Committee
Ron Wambolt, Dave Orvis
Public Safety
Deanna Dawson, Steve Bernheim
Community Outreach
Michael Plunkett, D. J. Wilson
Community Technology Advisory Committee
Ron Wambolt, Peggy Olson
Community Transit
Deanna Dawson, Steve Bernheim (Alt)
Disability Board
Deanna Dawson, Dave Orvis
Downtown Edmonds Parking
Michael Plunkett, Ron Wambolt
Edmonds Economic Development Advisory Board
Peggy Olson
Economic Development Committee
D. J. Wilson, Steve Bernheim
Edmonds Crossing Project Multimodal
D. J. Wilson
Highway 99 Task Force
Deanna Dawson, Ron Wambolt
Historic Preservation Advisory Commission
Michael Plunkett
Long Range Task Force
Ron Wambolt, Dave Orvis
Lodging Tax Advisory Committee
Michael Plunkett
SnoCom
Deanna Dawson
PFD Oversight Committee
D. J. Wilson
Port of Edmonds
Ron Wambolt
Harbor Square Redevelopment Committee
Ron Wambolt
Snohomish County Econ. Dev. Board
D. J. Wilson
SeaShore Transportation Forum
Deanna Dawson, Peggy Olson
Snohomish County Health District
Dave Orvis
Snohomish County Tomorrow
Peggy Olson, Steve Bernheim (Alt)
South Snohomish Cities
I Peggy Olson, Steve Bernheim (Alt)
Salmon Recovery - WRIA -8
I Dave Orvis, Steve Bernheim (Alt)
Council President Plunkett advised the appointments were made using Councilmembers' priorities. If a
Councilmember was interested in another committee, he suggested discussing a change with the
appointed Councilmember.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 3
Res# 1160 8, RESOLUTION APPOINTING A COUNCILMEMBER TO THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY
Appointment to
Health District HEALTH DISTRICT BOARD.
Board
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON,
FOR APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 1160 APPOINTING DAVE ORVIS TO THE
SNOHOMISH COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT BOARD.
Councilmember Dawson recalled Councilmember Orvis' interest in a number of issues affecting the
Health District and was pleased he would be participating on this Board.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Resg 1161 9. RESOLUTION APPOINTING COUNCILMEMBERS TO THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC
Appointment to TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT AREA CORPORATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Community
Transit Board
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON,
FOR APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 1161 APPOINTING DEANNA DAWSON AND STEVE
BERNHEIM AS ALTERNATE TO THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
BENEFIT AREA CORPORATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
Councilmember Dawson commented there were nine members of the Community Transit Board; as
currently configured, seven were city officials and two were Snohomish. County Councilmembers. The
two cities with populations above 30,000 (Edmonds and Lynnwood) had automatic seats on the Board,
three were representatives from medium sized cities and two were representatives from small cities; not
all cities had representation on the Board. Because Marysville's population now exceeds 30,000, the
January 17 Community Transit meeting will include discussion regarding amending the bylaws. She
recommended Edmonds, Lynnwood and Marysville as cities with large population bases have
representatives on the Community Transit Board. She urged Councilmembers to contact other city
officials to express the importance of Edmonds continuing to have representation on the Community
Transit Board.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2008 10. CITY OF EDMONDS 2008 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
Legislative
Agenda Community Services Director /Acting Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton recalled on
November 27, 2007 the City's contracted lobbyist, Mike Doubleday, presented the proposed Edmonds
2008 legislative agenda. Following questions /answers, the Council chose to wait until the 2008 City
Council was in place to take action on the agenda.
Lobbyist Mike Doubleday explained the 2008 Legislative session would be a short 60 day session
beginning on January 14 and extending until mid - March. He anticipated few major issues would arise
during this session; one large issue would be funding for the 520 bridge. He reviewed the top priorities
on the proposed City of Edmonds 2008 State Legislative Agenda:
Transportation Funding - seek additional funding commitments for the Edmonds Crossing
Multimodal terminal. He commented although it was unlikely there would be much new
transportation funding, this was included to keep the Edmonds Crossing in front of legislators
due to the $120 million in the RTID that was not approved by voters.
Cable Franchising - oppose legislation that promotes or allows state takeovers of local
franchising authority. Support maintaining the current requirement for providers to secure
local franchise agreements. He recalled a proposal by the industry last year to make cable a
state versus a local franchise. He anticipated this issue would return in 2008.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 4
Shell Valley Community Emergency Access Road Funding - seek funding for the Shell Valley
community emergency access road. He commented limited capital funds were available this
session.
Mr. Doubleday commented on several of the following support issues:
1. Transportation Ferry Study - monitor the work of the Ferry System Review Phase II Task
Force to follow the ferry terminal discussions. He noted the study due at the end of 2008
would determine the future of terminals and ferry loads.
2. Regional Transportation Governance - monitor legislation to realign regional transportation
governance and seek a voice and a vote for Edmonds or south Snohomish County if regional
transportation governance moves forward. He noted this was on the legislative agenda last
year as well. With the failure of Proposition 1, he anticipated there would be another attempt
to consolidate regional transportation agencies.
3. Phase H Stormwater Funding - seek additional state funding for cities that must meet Phase
II stormwater requirements.
4. Public Records Exemption - monitor legislation that would amend the Public Records Act to
reduce the number of'public records exempted from disclosure.
5. Taping Local Government Executive Sessions - monitor legislation requiring local
governments to tape executive sessions. He planned to monitor this issue and would not take
a position until a bill was introduced. He explained the proposed bill would require taping of
Executive Session and retention of the tapes for two years, with disclosure by court order.
6. Infrastructure Financing - seek improved infrastructure financing options from the state.
7. Climate Change - support legislation that collaboratively addresses climate change without a
mandate on local governments. He explained there were a number of proposals for cities
over 30,000 to amend the GMA to mandate cities to plan for climate change and eventually
require emissions from city facilities be reduced to 1990 levels. He noted most cities did not
want to be mandated.
8. Puget Sound Partnership - monitor efforts of the Puget Sound Partnership in their mission to
restore a healthy Puget Sound.
9. ALordable Housing - monitor the affordable housing issue and support an incentive -based
approach for cities to meet their affordable housing goals. He anticipated a number of
affordable housing bills would be proposed during this session.
10. Snohomish Counyy Emergency Radio Sy stem( ER -support SERS' efforts to seek funding
to switch the Granite Falls emergency communications radio site , from generator power to
commercial power.
11. Washington State Arts Commission Funding - monitor Washington State Arts funding
supplemental budget activities.
Councilmember Dawson pointed out the City's legislative agenda did not include monitoring the issue of
a 4 -year college in Snohomish County. She was interested in expressing support for funding for a 4 -year
college in Snohomish County regardless of whether the parties could agree on the site due to the
importance of a 4 -year college to the region. She referred to recent comments by Governor Gregoire that
funding would not be included in the budget if the parties could not agree on a location.
Council President Plunkett expressed his intent to make an amendment to change monitoring of the taping
of local government Executive Sessions to support. He noted on several issues including the taping of
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 5
Executive Sessions, bills had not yet been presented. He asked if Mr. Doubleday would report to the
Council on any unintended consequences once a bill was proposed. Mr. Doubleday assured he would
describe the issues, potential problem, politics involved, etc.
Councilmember Wilson commented on his interest in the water quality of Lake Ballinger, noting several
of the agenda items addressed that issue. He asked whether bodies of water that did not drain to Puget
Sound would be addressed via the Puget Sound Partnership. Mr. Doubleday responded it was uncertain
whether any action related to the Puget Sound Partnership would occur in this session. He encouraged
anyone interested in that effort to get involved, anticipating there would be a revenue package in 2009.
Councilmember Wilson asked Mr. Doubleday to inform the Council of any opportunities to be involved.
Councilmember Wilson referred to the Climate Change agenda item, asking whether there were
incentives as well as mandates. Mr. Doubleday responded the Futurewise bill was a mandate and he did
not recall that any incentives were included. He offered to provide a website where further information
was available.
Councilmember Bernheim referred to the Climate Change agenda item and asked what local government
mandates Mr. Doubleday was recommending the City not support. Mr. Doubleday answered this was a
policy position; the mandate in the Futurewise bill would require cities to have a climate change element
in the GMA and reduce emissions to 1990 levels. He noted cities tend to be leading the climate change
effort and there was some sense that mandating would stifle creativity. He summarized cities in general
did not support mandates.
Mayor Haakenson explained the Governor's Climate Change Committee's 90 page report was reviewed
by the City's Climate Change Committee who prepared a 4 -5 page recommendation that will be provided
to the Council and Mr. Doubleday later this week. Mr. Doubleday advised the recommendations made by
the Governor's Climate Change Committee would not be formally presented to the Governor until next
month.
With regard to the taping of Executive Sessions, Councilmember Dawson acknowledged a number of
cities were concerned with this and the County Association voted to oppose this legislation. She
questioned why this would be included on Edmonds' legislative agenda when Edmonds already kept
minutes of their Executive Sessions which complied with the spirit of this legislation. Mr. Doubleday
responded he included monitoring of the issue because he was uncertain the position the Council wanted
to take. City Clerk Sandy Chase clarified the City did not currently tape Executive Session; she took
notes during the Executive Session and prepared brief minutes. Mr. Doubleday explained the Attorney
General was expected to introduce a bill that required taping of Executive Sessions; the audio tapes would
then be retained for two years and during the two -year period, the tapes could only be disclosed by court
order.
Councilmember Dawson noted the concern expressed by other cities and counties was people could not
be as candid in Executive Session if they were taped. Edmonds already keeps minutes and taping was not
personally a concern to her.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
WAMBOLT, FOR APPROVAL OF THE EDMONDS 2008 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA.
COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, TO
ADD TO THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA THE CITY'S SUPPORT FOR FUNDING FOR A 4-
YEAR COLLEGE IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 6
Councilmember Dawson read the following email she sent to Councilmembers, the Mayor and Mr.
Doubleday this afternoon:
As noted in the draft legislative agenda in tonight's packet, there will be a number of issues relating to
affordable housing being addressed by the legislature this year. And as noted in tonight's packet, there
will be bills proposed that could have an impact on cities and their growth targets. I agree that we ought
to keep an eye on these proposals in order to ensure that cities like Edmonds do not have more growth
thrust upon them than can be accommodated.
At the same time, I would suggest that there are many proposals related to affordable housing that will be
coming forth this year that we ought to not simply monitor, but also support. Edmonds is a highly
desirable place to live, and as a result housing prices have dramatically escalated in recent years. This
has put a burden on many of our residents, particularly our working families, and our seniors. We as a
city ought to support legislation that will help to ease this burden for our working families, seniors, as
well as the most vulnerable members of our society. Too often, homelessness is viewed as a problem that
exists "somewhere else. " But on any given night in Snohomish County, approximately 2500 people are
homeless.
Affordable housing and homelessness are critical issues.facing our community. To that end, I hope you
will consider adding support for the following items to our legislative agenda:
Affordable Housing Agenda:
1) $100 Million Increase to the Housing Trust Fund - The State's Housing Trust Fund is currently
funded at $130 million. This fund is the State's primary source of funding for housing and
homelessness, and supports the construction, acquisition or rehabilitation of affordable homes. The
Washington Low Income Housing Alliance recommends that the State invest an additional $1 billion
in the Housing Trust Fund between 2008 and 2015 in order to assist in providing affordable housing
to working families, and ending homelessness. In 2008, the State should add $100 million to the
fund, and provide new operating subsidies to ensure that Trust Fund units can serve those most in
need.
2) Invest $8 million for the Washington Families Fund to Provide Needed Supportive Services to
Families in Need - While providing additional affordable housing units is key, for some families
housing alone is not sufficient. The Washington Families Fund (WFF) was established by the
Legislature in 2004, and is a public private partnership supporting service - enriched housing for
homeless families. The Legislature invested $6 million through 2006, matched by nearly $7 million in
funds from private donors, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The Legislature should
sustain and expand this program with $8 million in funding in order to provide the services necessary
to make homeless families self - sufficient.
3) Preservation of Manufactured Housing Communities - Numerous manufactured housing communities
throughout Snohomish County are in danger of closure, putting Snohomish County residents
(primarily seniors) at risk of becoming homeless. The State should create a package of tax incentives
to encourage park owners to sell their park to a qualified nonprofit or housing authority, preserving
a critical affordable housing choice. (See House Bill 1621, proposed in 2007 by Rep Brian Sullivan)
4) Increase the State's Transitional Housing Operating and Rent (THOR) Pro am by $10 Million to
$15 Million - THOR provides transitional housing and rent assistance to homeless families with
children. This proposed increase in funding will allow program eligibility to expand to individuals,
homeless families without children, and those on the verge of becoming homeless. The program
provides services in addition to housing to allow individuals to transition to permanent housing and
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 7
become self = sufficient, including parenting classes, education, treatment, job training, and financial
literacy programs.
5) Support Legislation to Mitigate Impacts of Condominium Conversions - House Bill 2014, proposed in
2007 by Rep. Chase, is expected to be reintroduced in 2008. This bill extends the notification
requirement from 90 to120 days to tenants to be affected by a condominium conversion, authorizes a
city or county government to require a condominium conversion declarant to pay relocation
assistance to low - income tenants in an amount to be determined by the city or county, but not to
exceed three months of a tenant's rent, andprohibits interior construction related to the conversion of
condominiums during the 120 -day notice period unless a building is vacant or unless the declarant
meets specific requirements.
6) Support Legislation under development to support: Financial Counseling for Homeownership and
Foreclosure Prevention, Ending Predatory and Deceptive Mortgage Lending Practices, and
Increasing the Debt Limit for the Washington State Housing Finance Commission's Tax Exempt Bond
Program.
Councilmember Dawson commented if the Council was not comfortable with supporting these exact
proposals, she asked that the Council consider supporting the general concept of increased funding for
affordable housing services, legislation preserving housing choices including manufactured housing,
mitigating the impacts of condominium conversions and programs that support financial literacy to enable
homeownership, preventing foreclosure, ending predatory mortgage lending and increasing the debt limit
for the Washington State Housing Finance Commission's Tax Exempt Bond Program.
COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, TO
ADD SUPPORT FOR INCREASED FUNDING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING SERVICES,
LEGISLATION PRESERVING HOUSING CHOICES INCLUDING MANUFACTURED
HOUSING, MITIGATING THE IMPACTS OF CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS AND
PROGRAMS THAT SUPPORT FINANCIAL LITERACY TO ENABLE HOMEOWNERSHIP,
PREVENTING FORECLOSURE, ENDING PREDATORY MORTGAGE LENDING AND
INCREASING THE DEBT LIMIT FOR THE WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING FINANCE
COMMISSION'S TAX EXEMPT BOND PROGRAM.
Councilmember Wambolt asked where these items originated. Councilmember Dawson explained a
number of them had been supported by the Washington Low Income Housing Alliance although she did
not include their entire legislative agenda. The items she listed above were non - controversial and would
support affordable housing and preventing homelessness in the community. She noted some of the
funding was included in the Governor's budget. Councilmember Wambolt suggested Mr. Doubleday
monitor these issues and contact the Council when support was needed. Councilmember Dawson offered
to amend her motion to monitor these items and express support at the appropriate time.
Council President Plunkett agreed with supporting affordable housing, however, it was difficult to express
support for the specifics without an opportunity to review them. He was more comfortable with Council
monitoring an affirmative affordable housing statement and asking Mr. Doubleday to monitor the specific
bills Councilmember Dawson identified subject to future support.
Councilmember Olson agreed with Councilmember Dawson's suggestion to monitor the issues and
express support as bills came forward.
Councilmember Wilson expressed support for the general principles. He asked whether a homeless
census had ever been done in Edmonds. Councilmember Dawson advised a point -in- time -count of
homeless individuals in Snohomish County would be conducted on January 24. Staff displayed a flyer
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 8
regarding that effort and Councilmember Dawson encouraged Councilmembers and the public to
volunteer. She noted the count could be broken into more discreet areas. She assured there were
homeless individuals living in South Snohomish County and in Edmonds in particular.
Councilmember Dawson restated her motion as follows:
THE COUNCIL EXPRESSES SUPPORT FOR LEGISLATION TO PRESERVE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING AND PREVENT HOMELESSNESS AND MONITOR THE SPECIFICS MENTIONED
IN HER EMAIL. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
With regard to taping of Executive Sessions, Council President Plunkett pointed out most cities did not
keep minutes of Executive Session such as Edmonds did, therefore the public had no recourse to
determine whether the Council was in Executive Session legally. He noted there were only specific
topics the Council could discuss in Executive Session; in his 11 years on the Council, the Council had
adhered to those rules. The legislation the Attorney General planned to propose would require tapes be
retained for two years and anytime within the two years, a member of the public with a question about an
Executive Session could request a judge reveal the content of the taped Executive Session. He favored
open government and citizen access and expressed interest in supporting legislation for taping of local
government Executive Sessions versus only monitoring legislation. He did not agree with those who felt
it would be difficult to speak candidly if Executive Sessions were recorded.
Councilmember Dawson commented her understanding of the bill was a court order would not allow
examination of a tape to determine whether an Executive Session was appropriate. City Attorney Scott
Snyder explained the primary intent was as a discovery tool for someone bringing an open meetings
violation charge. The City already went far beyond what State law required including placing the minutes
of an Executive Session in a public file when the reason for the Executive Session was passed.
Councilmember Dawson asked under what circumstances a judge would review or could order the release
of Executive Session tapes. Mr. Doubleday answered the legislation had not yet been proposed.
Councilmember Dawson did not disagree with Council President Plunkett's support of fair and open .
government but until the Council had an opportunity to review the legislation, she preferred to monitor
the issue. She did not want Edmonds to support the AWC's position of opposing the legislation.
Council President Plunkett pointed out Edmonds kept summary minutes of Executive Sessions; they were
not taped which was a big difference. He noted one of the reasons for proposing the legislation was there
have been political entities for which citizens have wanted to pursue the discovery process but because
the Executive Sessions were not taped, that discovery was not available. He recalled originally the City
planned to oppose this legislation and AWC wanted municipalities to oppose taping of Executive
Sessions. He was satisfied with monitoring the issue until the legislation was proposed.
Councilmember Orvis did not object to recording Executive Sessions, commenting he viewed Executive
Sessions as a public meeting where the public's access to the information was delayed for legal reasons.
Councilmember Dawson asked whether the Edmonds Council could begin recording its Executive
Sessions. She suggested that be discussed at the retreat.
Councilmember Wilson asked the original intent of Executive Sessions and what role the City Attorney
played. Mr. Snyder answered there were limited grounds authorized by State statute for Executive
Sessions: labor negotiations, provision of legal advice regarding pending or threatened litigation, and
purchase of real estate. He noted the current Attorney General's key issues are public record and open.
meetings. Councilmember Wilson asked what type of advice the City Attorney provided in Executive
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 9
Session. Mr. Snyder answered his practice was to provide the majority of his advice in the public record
because he felt it was always better that the public understand the Council's legal choices unless it was in
regard to actual litigation or a practice of the City that could lead to liability.
Because there were limited reasons for holding an Executive Session, Councilmember Wilson did not
support legislation that would force other cities to conduct Executive Sessions in a different manner
particularly with regard to attorney - client privilege.
Councilmember Dawson clarified the intent was not to eliminate Executive Sessions but to allow a judge
to release relevant portions of a tape in response to a challenge. Mr. Snyder advised he had reviewed the
Attorney General's proposed legislation via the Washington State Association of Municipal Attorneys
and it was designed to create and preserve evidence for open public meeting lawsuits. A judge would
review the tapes to determine whether they would be admissible. He noted it was common for attorneys
to have a judge determine what evidence was admissible. He summarized the legislation would not make
tapes available to the public outside a lawsuit but allowed for the creation and preservation of evidence.
Council President Plunkett advised he planned to propose in the future that the Edmonds City Council
begin taping Executive Sessions.
It was the consensus of the Council to retain the wording in the proposed 2008 legislative agenda
(monitor legislation requiring local governments to tape executive sessions).
COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON, TO
DELETE "WITHOUT A MANDATE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS" FROM THE
RECOMMENDATION REGARDING CLIMATE CHANGE.
Councilmember Wambolt asked the intent of including "without a mandate on local government." Mr.
Doubleday answered the intent was to be positive with regard to climate change legislation but avoid
mandates. He anticipated there would be numerous bills proposed with regard to climate change.
Mayor Haakenson commented his concern was unfunded mandates.
Councilmember Dawson spoke in favor of monitoring legislation that collaboratively addressed climate
change, suggesting Mr. Doubleday update the Council with regard to specific bills and any mandates. The
Council could then consider opposing onerous /unfunded mandates.
Councilmember Orvis commented the key word in this item was "collaboratively."
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Wilson encouraged Mr. Doubleday to inform the Council as opportunities arose where
local support may be helpful. Councilmember Wilson suggested Mayor Haakenson write to the Governor
and area legislators in support of a 4 -year university in Snohomish County. Mayor Haakenson agreed.
Councilmember Dawson commented the Council has supported a 4 -year university in the past; it may be
appropriate for the Council to adopt another resolution in support of funding a 4 -year university even if
the parties were unable to agree on the location. Councilmember Wilson and Councilmember Dawson
offered to develop a resolution for Council consideration.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 10
11. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, was encouraged by the Council's dialogue regarding the 2008 legislative
agenda, anticipating the Council would give more thought to issues and work together this year. He
JAos Concern relayed concern with the Architectural Design Board (ADB); either they had not been taught how to do
their job properly or they did not understand their role and/or staff was not doing their job. He recalled a
recent incident where it was the public who pointed out errors in the staff report regarding a building's
height. He pointed out one of the problems was the ADB made their recommendation based on the staff
report rather than processing the application through each section of the code. Another issue was the
information considered by the ADB was not complete enough, for example building elevations were not
required. He urged the Council to determine what the problems were with the ADB, whether it was better
training, different procedures, more specific requirements, etc. so that the Council could do its job and
avoid appeals.
Brian Larman, Edmonds, expressed concern with the rate at which large multi family buildings were
ADS Concern replacing the smaller individual homes that defined the character of Edmonds. He commented on a recent
ADB meeting where the Board considered a 3 -unit condominium on a lot that currently contained one
single family home. Although he was initially encouraged by the Board's discussion regarding the garage
doors, building materials and a portion of the building overhanging the sidewalk, once the builder
remarked they were behind schedule, the ADB almost immediately stopped their discussion and approved
the project with what appeared to be significant issues remaining. He was concerned with the adequacy
of the ADB's review and requested the City Council review the ADB's procedures /processes and be more
aware of how the Board conducted its business, ensure members had the necessary qualifications and
effectively conducted their review to ensure projects met the City's codes.
Elisabeth Larman, Edmonds, recommended all members of the ADB reside within the City limits,
ADS concern noting there were enough talented, interested residents to fill all positions. She objected to people living
outside Edmonds approving building in Edmonds. She recommended the ADB members be reminded
that all codes and guidelines must be followed which would protect the City from poor building practices.
She recommended ADB members visit the proposed site, follow the rules and have the courage to cast
dissenting votes when appropriate. She recalled an ADB meeting two years ago where the past Chairman
claimed the ADB was in place to serve the developers, commenting unfortunately that was still the way
the ADB behaved. She also recommended ADB and Planning Board meetings be televised to provide
citizens access to meetings. She was concerned that at their last meeting the ADB gave the City three
more garage doors just off the sidewalk and eliminated two parking spaces, stating it was becoming more
dangerous to walk on the City's sidewalks due to curb cuts that created uneven terrain and vehicles
exiting garages. She was also concerned with landscaping that was being replaced by concrete. She
recommended the codes with regard to multi family, which were 27 years old, be reassessed with regard
to the City's needs.
Councihnember Wambolt advised he had asked for items to be scheduled on the Council's retreat agenda
that would address the issues posed by the public including 1) review and Council oversight of the ADB
and Planning Board, and 2) review the multi family zoning code.
Mayor Haakenson declared a brief recess.
Appearance of 12. CITY ATTORNEY BRIEFING ON THE APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS DOCTRINE
Fairness
D °ctr'ne Councilmember Wambolt requested City Attorney Scott Snyder also address the waterfront in his
discussion.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 11
Mr. Snyder explained the intent of this item was to inform the Council as well as assist the public in
understanding the difficulties the Council faced responding to questions regarding quasi judicial matters.
He explained these matters were very fact dependent and he encouraged the Council to contact him with
any questions. With regard to open public meetings, Mr. Snyder explained the Open Public Meeting Act
required that no action be taken unless at a duly called meeting. He provided a definition of action, the
transaction of the official business of a public agency by a governing body, including, but not limited to,
receipt of public testimony, deliberations, reviews, evaluations, and final actions (votes). He summarized
the public had the right to hear Councilmembers debate an issue.
He explained the Council's discussion could either be on legislative or quasi judicial matters. A quasi
judicial matter was typically an issue between two contested parties, appeals that the Council hears. As
long as the Council retained the final decision- making authority on certain land use appeals as well as site
specific rezones which the Council was required by State law to conduct, the Council would continue to
deal with the concept of quasi judicial. In a quasi judicial matter, the Council was limited to
consideration of the record of the proceeding. Therefore if a citizen called a Councilmember to discuss a
pending quasi judicial matter /application, the Councilmember could not talk with the citizen as it
constituted an ex parte communication. If the Council received a telephone call, email or letter
inadvertently, the Councilmember must reveal the contact on the record so that the other parties had an
opportunity to rebut the information. Although an ex parte communication could be cleared by disclosing
it, a legal problem could arise if information provided to the Council was outside the record.
Mr. Snyder advised the matter of virtual meetings arose for both quasi judicial and legislative matters. He
described a situation where a citizen sent an email to the Council and a Councilmember "Replied All"
which may result in the Council debating an issue outside the record of the proceeding. A quorum of
Councilmembers (four or more members) participating in serial phone calls or round -robin email
exchange of information was a violation of the Open Public Meeting Act as the Council was deliberating
outside the public record. He clarified a Councilmember could share information with other
Councilmembers particularly on legislative matters without the expectation of a reply. He cautioned the
Council about back - and -forth responses between four or more Councilmembers.
With regard to the waterfront development, Mr. Snyder advised any decision regarding the rezoning of
that property was a legislative matter and the Council was free to consider a wide variety of information
including their own personal knowledge and information they may gather elsewhere. The Council was
free to share information with other Councilmembers but four or more Councilmembers could not enter
into a discussion outside the record. He cautioned the Council against vetting a new proposal by polling
fellow Councilmembers; a Councilmember could talk to 1 -2 others but once four were involved it would
be considered an illegal meeting. He summarized the public had the right to hear the Council's
discussions. He advised the penalty for a Councilmember knowingly participating in an illegal meeting
was subject to personal liability in the form of a civil penalty in the amount of $100 and the
Councilmember could be subject to recall.
Mr. Snyder explained the definition of Appearance of Fairness was whether a disinterested person,
apprised of the totality of a member's personal interest or involvement be reasonably justified in thinking
the involvement might affect the member's judgment. He explained it was intended to be an objective
standard; what a member of the audience might think, not what the Councilmember knew to be true. For
example if a Councilmember owned a house across the street from property to be rezoned, what would a
disinterested person think about the Councilmember's judgment? Mr. Snyder explained neither the
Council nor the Mayor as chair made the decision whether a Councilmember recused themselves under
the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine. If someone challenged a Councilmember, he could advise the
Councilmember, the Council could weight in, but the Councilmember themselves decided whether to step
down; the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine had no provision for removal.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 12
Mr. Snyder provided typical examples of quasi judicial matters including subdivision approval, rezones
and on- record appeals. Quasi judicial actions did not include Comprehensive Plan adoption or general
zoning code amendments which were legislative actions. He noted no person could be disqualified by the
Appearance of Fairness Doctrine for conducting the business of his /her office with any constituent on any
matter other than a quasi judicial action. He noted although development of the waterfront may result in
an application to the Council, pending the presentation of an application to the City, the issues would be
legislative. To that extent the Council was acting as a legislative body and could discuss the matter freely
with anyone outside a meeting other than with three or more members of the Council. Once an issue
became quasi judicial, the Council was limited to the record of the lower proceeding such as the Hearing
Examiner. In that instance the Council could not discuss issues with citizens. If a Councilmember
received information, the information and the source would need to be disclosed.
Mr. Snyder advised some Appearance of Fairness Doctrine issues could be cured, for example an ex parte
communication could be revealed or if four members of the Council were disqualified, destroying the
quorum, all may participate. Things that could not be cured were prejudgment and personal bias or
judgment. He noted statements made in the course of a Council candidate's campaign were not the
subject of prejudgemental bias. He clarified this applied to a campaign for a candidate not running for
reelection; a Councilmember who made statements during a campaign that reflected prejudgmental bias
could lose their ability to participate.
Mr. Snyder explained memberships in organizations could be the subject of an Appearance of Fairness
challenge if topics were discussed and positions taken at a meeting. His preference was that
Councilmembers not attend public meetings regarding pending applications that were in the appellate
process because they could obtain information outside the record and attendance at a forum could be the
basis for objection. He noted homeownership could also make a Councilmember subject to challenge; for
example, a Councilmember who lived across the street from a project.
With regard to conflicts, Mr. Snyder advised Councilmembers may not disclose confidential information
they receive in an Executive Session. Councilmembers may not use their position to secure special
privileges or exemptions for himself or others. A Councilmember may not directly or indirectly receive
or agree to receive any compensation, gift, reward or gratuity for a matter connected with his /her official
duties. He noted the receipt of any compensation, gift, reward or gratuity also extended to public
employees.
Mr. Snyder reviewed the procedures for conducting hearings:
• The Chair announces the subject matter and asks for any Appearance of Fairness disclosures and
challenges. He reiterated if challenged, the individual Councilmember made the decision whether
to recuse themselves. The Mayor's statement regarding Councilmembers' participation was due
to the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine's requirement that for a challenge to be upheld, it must be
made at the earliest opportunity.
• The Chair announces the process and timelines.
• Presentations are made and public comment taken. He recalled the Council had discussed in the
past whether to continue to accept oral argument or to require written argument. He noted
attorneys preferred written argument because it could be reviewed to ensure there was nothing
outside the record. However, requiring written argument strongly favored those experienced in
the process and placed the average citizen at a disadvantage.
• Following public comment, the public portion of the hearing was closed and the Council
deliberates. He cautioned Councilmembers that their decision in a quasi judicial action was on
the record and their decision must be based on information in the record. He recommended
Councilmembers not ask questions that could not be answered by information in the record.
• The Council then takes action and staff prepares findings and conclusions for Council adoption.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 13
Mr. Snyder explained the Land Use Petition Act and GMA require the Council to adopt written findings
of fact and conclusions of law. He referred to Mr. Hertrich's comment regarding the ADB's adoption of
staff's findings implying that was a bad thing. He noted City boards often adopted findings of fact and
conclusions via the staff report as the staff reports were structured to include all the decision criteria and
adoption of the staff report avoids a delay between the decision and the Board's next meeting. He
acknowledged Mr. Hertrich's point was the staff report was incorrect, noting any inaccuracies could be
corrected in a motion.
Mr. Snyder explained Executive Sessions were intended for discussion with legal counsel representing the
agency concerning matters such as enforcement actions, or to discuss with legal counsel litigation to
which the agency, the governing body, or member acting in an official capacity is or is likely to become a
party, when public knowledge regarding the discussion is likely to result in an adverse legal or financial
consequence to the agency. This also includes discussion with legal counsel of legal risks of a proposed
action or current practice when public discussion is likely to result in an adverse legal or financial
consequence. He noted it was rare during a public hearing for him to request an Executive Session to
discuss an issue; his preference was to give legal advice regarding options in an open meeting.
Council President Plunkett observed until an application for a rezone was submitted for the waterfront
property, Councilmembers were free to discuss and have opinions and positions. He asked whether those
positions /discussions could be held against the Councilmember once an application was submitted. Mr.
Snyder answered legislative issues could not be prejudged. For example, legislatively determining
building heights in a particular zone was not a quasi judicial decision; determining ordinance content
under which an application would be considered was not quasi judicial. In that instance, Councilmembers
were free to state opinions regarding the appropriate density, height, etc. He cautioned a Councilmember
about stating an opinion with regard to a specific application, development of specific tracts of
land/properties, action by individual developers, etc. He urged the Council to discuss development in a
general context and avoid prejudging issues via statements regarding individual properties. He
acknowledged there may be some overlap when discussing development of an area as limited in scope as
the waterfront. He summarized Councilmembers should feel free to discuss the attributes of current or
proposed ordinances /regulations and avoid specific discussion of projects, property and developments.
Council President Plunkett observed if a Councilmember's comments were too specific, when a matter
became quasi judicial, their comments could be held against them. Mr. Snyder agreed and provided
examples of the type of comments to avoid. He encouraged Councilmembers to relate their comments to
the Comprehensive Plan and the general needs of the community versus the impact on a specific
intersection.
Council President Plunkett pointed out the Appearance of Fairness applied only to quasi judicial matters.
Mr. Snyder agreed, noting as legislators Councilmembers could consider their experience, comments of
friends, etc. in their decision. Conversely in a quasi judicial matter, facts a Councilmember knew that
were not in the record of the proceeding could not be considered in their decision. He noted it was the
applicant and appellant's responsibility to ensure adequate information was included in the Hearing
Examiner or appropriate Board's record. Citizens have the ability to participate in the process but it was
important to participate at the open public hearing to ensure the record contained the information
necessary to make a decision and not wait for the Council's closed record review. He advised staff was
working on revisions to the City's hearing chapter, Title 20. The changes were being reviewed by the
Planning Board and would be forwarded to the Council soon.
Councilmember Orvis commented even if a Councilmember made the decision whether to recuse
themselves, if they participated when there was a clear violation of the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine,
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 14
the decision could be overturned and could have dire consequences to the City. Mr. Snyder agreed there
was a great deal of accountability.
Councilmember Orvis questioned whether the Council should totally avoid discussing the waterfront with
citizens. Mr. Snyder pointed out the need for a reasonable public debate of issues. He explained Council
action on any aspect of development occurred in the Council Chambers. At issue were conversations a
Councilmember may have with people interested in the site; in that context he encouraged the Council to
discuss it in terms of the Comprehensive Plan and the general benefit to the City. He noted the Council
had the ability to request reports, engage experts, or have information provided via staff, there were ways
for the Council to be proactive regarding the acquisition of information and the making of an appropriate
record.
Mayor Haakenson asked if Councilmembers could talk about building height. Mr. Snyder answered
certainly. Mayor Haakenson pointed out a contract rezone of the site would require different building
heights. Mr. Snyder answered a contract rezone could reduce or place limitations on what a zone
provides, it could not expand the rights provided in the zone. If there was a 25 foot building height and a
developer wanted to convince the Council to allow 30 foot building heights, as a legislative matter, the
Council could discuss any aspect of that other than a specific application.
Mayor Haakenson asked what the Council could discuss if there was a rumor that there was interest in
increasing building heights via a contract rezone. Mr. Snyder reiterated contract rezones could not
expand zoning rights; they were a way for a developer to propose a rezone such as the Hwy. 99 node with
unlimited height in exchange for certain things. He summarized additional building heights could not be
achieved via a contract rezone.
Mayor Haakenson asked what the Council could discuss before any application was submitted if there
was a rumor that a developer wanted to propose a contract rezone to build taller buildings and in turn do
certain things,. Mr. Snyder advised a developer would first need to propose a legislative change to
increase the height in the zone.
Councilmember Dawson asked if a Councilmember who knew there was a rumor that a development
would be proposed, could make a statement regarding whether or not he would approve it. Mr. Snyder
advised a comment such as "I would never vote to increase the height in the zone" was appropriate. A
comment such as "I would never approve an application for a building built by a certain developer" was
prejudgmental bias.
Councilmember Dawson asked whether a Councilmember making a comment that they thought a certain
request was wonderful or they would never approve such a request was appropriate. And if after an
application was submitted, that Councilmember would be in danger on the quasi judicial rezone because
of their comments. Mr. Snyder answered the legally appropriate answer for a Councilmember to give the
public was "I would never vote for an ordinance that would increase the height; if that law were passed, I
would apply it fairly in a quasi judicial capacity based on the ordinance." Councilmember Dawson noted
that had occurred in the past; a Councilmember voted against the creation of a zone and later found
themselves considering an application that utilized the zone. Mr. Snyder agreed as legislators the Council
had broad discretion to adopt a wide variety of approaches. Once an ordinance was adopted and an
application made, the Council was constrained to apply the ordinance criteria based on the evidence
presented.
With regard to the Council creating its own record, Councilmember Dawson acknowledged the danger of
relying on a record created by others. She noted there were issues upon which considerable amounts of
money were being spent such as expansion of Paine Field. She noted moneyed interests could create a
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 15
record that was unrebutted. She asked what limits the Council had with regard to developing their own
record to avoid the appearance of creating a record that was set up to fail in a future quasi judicial
proceeding. Mr. Snyder answered hiring an independent expert to evaluate the economic consequences of
certain actions was appropriate but cautioned against engaging experts to provide site - specific analysis.
He acknowledged developers were at an inherent advantage in the development process because they
spent significant amounts developing plans before filing an application. Once an application was filed,
the City had 120 days to act. Therefore the Council was under considerable pressure to ensure that
decisions were made and that process did not increase development costs. By the time an application
reached the ADB or Hearing Examiner, there may be a limited amount of time remaining. Citizens were
at a distinct disadvantage in terms of the amount of money they were willing to spend.
With regard to amendments to Title 20, Mr. Snyder pointed out the Council was under considerable
pressure to remain as the quasi judicial, final hearing body. One of the advantages of not being a decision
maker was Councilmembers could participate in the process including hiring experts, taking an advocacy
position, developing a record, etc. which as the final decision maker, they could not do. Councilmember
Dawson pointed out the Council was required to be the decision maker on site specific rezones. Mr.
Snyder commented on the use of the Comprehensive Plan process to develop economic or environmental
information, noting that was an appropriate way to assist in preparing a record.
Councilmember Dawson referred to public comments regarding the Council's role with the ADB and /or
Planning Commission including televising meetings and questioning why Councilmember did not attend
Planning Board and ADB meetings. Mr. Snyder favored broad citizen access and supported televising
Board meetings. He explained the problem with Councilmembers attending these meetings was
challenges may arise. Councilmember Dawson commented that could be overcome if a Councilmember
sat in a specified location and there was no mingling at meetings. Mr. Snyder agreed it could be
structured within the law.
Councilmember Wilson asked if there were any current cases or appeals in a quasi judicial status that he
should not speak to citizens about. Mr. Snyder was not certain and suggested staff provide Council notice
of pending applications so that they were aware when they could not discuss an issue with the public.
Councilmember Wilson asked if there was a further penalty for a Councilmember who did not recuse
themselves, whereby the Councilmember incurred personal liability versus professional liability. Mr.
Snyder advised the City had an indemnification ordinance; the issue was whether a Councilmember was
in the course of their official duties. He explained a Councilmember doing their job qualified them for
legislative immunity. He advised on January 24 the Council would be provided a presentation regarding
citizen complaints. He explained the Council had a policy of not responding to the public during public
comment. This was developed as the result of a situation approximately 15 years ago when several
members of a neighborhood complained to the Council about an intersection and the Council agreed to
install a traffic circle later that week. At the following Council meeting, members of the neighborhood
complained to the Council that they could not exit their driveways due to traffic backups from the traffic
circle. He summarized advertising issues to ensure a range of public opinion on an issue was preferable.
Councilmember Wilson recalled discussion regarding the Council allocating funds for visioning of the
waterfront and asked whether any product or participation by a Councilmember would jeopardize his /her
ability to participate in a quasi judicial action. Mr. Snyder answered in most cases no; it could be
structured to preserve a Councilmember's ability to participate. Councilmember Wilson envisioned a less
formal process where citizens could offer their insight and there likely would be a subjective outcome and
subjective participatory views. Mr. Snyder answered that was the reason for the Comprehensive Plan
docketing process. If the Council wanted to update the Downtown Waterfront Plan, it was an adopted
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 16
part of the Comprehensive Plan. The GMA encourages public participation via the Comprehensive Plan
docketing process.
COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON, TO
EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 10:30 P.M. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Wambolt asked whether the Chair had the ability to tell a Councilmember to recuse
themselves. Mr. Snyder answered no, as an elected official a Councilmember's power could only be
removed via a recall petition; a Councilmember made the decision whether to recuse themselves.
Councilmember Wambolt noted if a Councilmember did not recuse themselves, the risk was to the City.
1.3. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION THANKING COUNCILMEMBER PEGGY PRITCHARD
Resolution
Thanking OLSON FOR HER SERVICE AS COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
Council
President Pritchard Olson y Ma or Haakenson read a Resolution thanking Councilmember Olson for her service as Council President.
He presented the resolution and a gift to Councilmember Olson. Councilmember Olson thanked the
Council for their support, commenting serving as Council President was a great experience.
14. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Representative Mayor Haakenson offered congratulations to Marko Liias, former Mukilteo City Councilmember, who
Marko Liias resigned last night because he was appointed to fill Representative Brian Sullivan's seat. Mayor
Haakenson advised he met with Representative Liias this morning to discuss the City's priorities for the
legislative session.
15. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council President Plunkett welcomed the new Councilmembers. He invited Councilmember Wilson to
prepare a resolution of support for funding a 4 -year university in Snohomish County for Council
consideration on a future agenda.
City Council Council President Plunkett noted the Council retreat is scheduled on February 1 and 2, beginning at 9:45
Retreat to be a.m. on February He asked Councilmembers to submit an agenda items to Senior Executive Council
Held Feb. 1 -2 � y a g
Assistant Jana Spellman who would compile topics, consult with Mayor Haakenson and develop a draft
agenda.
strategic Plan; Council President Plunkett advised of three upcoming agenda items, 1) whether the Council wanted to
Taping Retreat; pursue preparation o a Strategic an whether o tape the Council retreat
Waterfront p i f i Plan, p p g � 2) th t t h il P , 3 ) whether Councilmembers
were interested in pursuing park land at the waterfront, either a portion or all of it.
Councilmember Wilson thanked Senior Executive Council Assistant Jana Spellman, Assistant City
Engineer Don Fiene, Community Services Director Stephen Clifton and Administrative Services Director
Dan Clements for their assistance. He also thanked Councilmember Olson and Council President
Plunkett for their assistance.
Councilmember Orvis welcomed new Councilmembers, noting this was a unique Council in that a
majority of the members attained their seat by removing an incumbent.
Councilmember Dawson thanked the two new Councilmembers for their willingness to participate. She
anticipated Councilmembers Bernheim and Wilson would be great additions to the Council as they were
both very bright, talented and engaged in the community.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 17
Public Hearing Mayor Haakenson advised the next Council meeting would include a public hearing on the proposed
on Graffiti graffiti ordinance. With regard to a strategic plan, he offered to provide the Council the strategic plan,
Strategic Plan vision and mission statement developed at the Council retreat in 2004 that staff has been acting on. He
recalled public safety updates had been made to that strategic plan, and an economic development update
was made last year as part of the Comprehensive Plan update.
16. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 8, 2008
Page 18