08/07/2007 City CouncilAugust 7, 2007
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
Peggy Pritchard Olson, Council President
Michael Plunkett, Councilmember
Richard Marin, Councilmember
Mauri Moore, Councilmember
Deanna Dawson, Councilmember
Dave Orvis, Councilmember
Ron Wambolt, Councilmember
ALSO PRESENT
Shaun Callahan, Student Representative
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
STAFF PRESENT
Gerry Gannon, Assistant Police Chief
Noel Miller, Public Works Director
Dave Gebert, City Engineer
Debi Humann, Human Resources Manager
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Marin requested Item E be removed from the Consent Agenda and Councilmember
Wambolt requested Item G be removed.
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON, TO
APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows:
Roll Call
A. ROLL CALL
Approve
B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 24, 2007.
Minutes
C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #97775 THROUGH #97961 FOR JULY 26, 2007 IN
Approve Claim THE AMOUNT OF $1,259,390.16, AND #97962 THROUGH #98146 FOR AUGUST 2, 2007
Checks IN THE AMOUNT OF $287,429.58. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSITS
AND CHECKS #45284 THROUGH #45385 FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 16 THROUGH
JULY 31, 2007 IN THE AMOUNT OF $822,564.77.
Public Safety
Testing, Inc. D. RENEWAL OF THE SUBSCRIBER AGREEMENT BETWEEN PUBLIC SAFETY
[Agreement TESTING, INC. AND THE CITY OF EDMONDS (POLICE DEPARTMENT).
Anderson
Center Seismic F. REPORT ON BID ADVERTISEMENT AND RESPONSE FOR THE FRANCES
Retrofit ANDERSON SEISMIC STRUCTURAL RETROFIT PROJECT AND AUTHORIZE
STAFF TO PLACE A SECOND ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS IN REGARD TO THIS
PROJECT.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 7, 2007
Page 1
Resg 1150
Rules of H. RESOLUTION NO. 1150 AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF CITY COUNCIL RULES
Procedure OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NOS. 292 AND 463.
SR99/76th Ave ITEM E: AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS
w.Intersection FROM CONSULTANTS FOR THE SR99/76�x AVENUE W INTERSECTION SAFETY
Improvements
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT.
Councilmember Marin explained he pulled this item from the Consent Agenda in order to draw attention
to it. He noted this was an opportunity the Hwy. 99 Task Force had been working on, one of many
intersections on Hwy. 99 that needed improvement. This action will fund some design so that the project
would be eligible for grant funding.
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, FOR
APPROVAL OF ITEM E. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Vacate Portion ITEM G: PROPOSED ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
of Right -of
Way Adjacent ADJACENT TO 17008 - 77TH PLACE WEST, EDMONDS.
to 17008 — 77th
PI W. Councilmember Wambolt explained although he supported the vacation of the right-of-way, he did not
agree with the proposed price to sell the property to the property owner. He noted that the proposed price
for the 540 square feet was $1,400, less than $3 per square foot compared with the adjacent land that was
valued at $62.60 per square foot. He explained if the price of $62.60 square foot were used, divided by
half as required by State law, the value of the property would be approximately $17,000. He requested a
Councilmember who previously voted in the affirmative on this issue to introduce a motion for
reconsideration.
Councilmember Plunkett asked whether Dave Gebert, City Engineer, was familiar with the appraisal that
was done on the property by Mr. Wills. Mr. Gebert answered he was not.
COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT,
FOR RECONSIDERATION. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3),
COUNCILMEMBERS WAMBOLT, MOORE, PLUNKETT AND ORVIS IN FAVOR, AND
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS DAWSON AND MARIN OPPOSED.
Mayor Haakenson advised the matter would be scheduled on an upcoming agenda.
A Taste of
Edmonds 3. PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF THE GREATER EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
Proclamation "A TASTE OF EDMONDS" 25TH ANNIVERSARY, AUGUST 10 -1.2, 2007.
Mayor Haakenson read a proclamation in honor of the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce 25th
anniversary of the Taste of Edmonds and presented the proclamation to Chamber of Commerce Executive
Director Jan Vance and Sandra Waldo, Chamber Board Member and Taste of Edmonds organizer.
Ms. Vance thanked the City for the proclamation, commenting on the Chamber's 100th anniversary and
25th anniversary of the Taste of Edmonds. Ms. Waldo encouraged everyone to attend the event.
Sewer Special
Connection 4. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF
Districts CHAPTER 7.30 ECC WATER RATES AND SEWER CHARGES TO ADD A NEW SECTION
7.30.036, SEWER SPECIAL CONNECTION DISTRICTS, ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL
CONNECTION FEE FOR CERTAIN PROPERTIES ON 88TH AVENUE WEST, AND FIXING A
TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
City Engineer Dave Gebert explained the City has completed construction of the 220th Street SW
Improvements project. During the planning for that project, it was determined three private properties
along 220th Street SW within the project limits (21903, 21904 and 21911 88th Avenue West) would be
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 7, 2007
Page 2
sewer customers of the City of Edmonds sewer utility if/when they connected to the sewer system. Due
to the likelihood that these properties would need to connect to the sewer system in the future because of
septic system failure, future development, etc., it was determined by staff and Council to be appropriate to
install a sewer collector stub out for these properties in conjunction with the 220th Street SW
Improvement project to avoid future cutting into 220th Street SW to connect these properties to sewer
after the 220th Street SW Improvement project was completed.
A neighborhood meeting was held in February 2004 to inform affected property owners of the City's
plans to construct a sewer collector stub out in conjunction with the 220th Street SW Improvement project
for future connection of these properties to the sewer system and to implement a sewer special connection
fee. In March 2004, the City Council directed staff to proceed with the construction of the sewer collector
stub out and the establishment and implementation of a sewer special connection fee. Accordingly, the
construction of the 220th Street SW Improvement project included installation of an 8-inch diameter
sewer line from the sewer main located in 220th Street SW to the edge of the right-of-way at the northeast
corner of the intersection of 220th Street SW and 88th Avenue West. The sewer stub out was capped and
available for the future connection of three private properties to the City sewer system. Mr. Gebert noted
the future construction of the sewer collector to connect these properties to the collector stub out installed
by the City would be the responsibility of these property owners.
The City sewer capital improvement Fund 412-300 provided the funds for construction of a sewer
collector stub out for these three properties and the cost of construction should be recovered from the
private property owners who will use and benefit from the sewer collector stub out constructed. Per the
City Attorney, there is no legal requirement for the City to recover the cost from the private property
owners; however, the City should recover the cost for reasons of consistency with past practices and
fairness to other rate payers. The City has historically required private property owners pay the cost of
extending utility systems to serve their private properties. Special connection fees are authorized by
RCW 35.92.020 and must be adopted by City Council ordinance.
Mr. Gebert explained in March 2004 the Council directed staff to proceed with establishing the sewer
special connection fee with the following elements:
• Equitable fee prorated among the private properties based upon actual costs.
• Special connection fee must be paid in full at time of connection.
• The property owners will be allowed to defer connection.
• Include in the ordinance the ability to adjust the connection fee for inflation to account for the
City fronting the money from the time of construction to the time of connection and that the
special connection fee to be in addition to the City`s normal sewer connection fee and all other
applicable permit fees.
• Upon completion of construction and determination of the actual costs, staff present an ordinance
for adopting the special connection fee
Construction has been completed and the actual costs have been determined; the actual final cost of the
sewer collector stub out is $12,852.87, or $4,284.29 per lot.
Mr. Gebert explained in February 2004, preliminary estimates for the sewer special connection fee were
in the range of $2,000 to $3,000 and affected property owners were informed of the preliminary estimate.
The actual amount is higher than the 2004 estimates due primarily to significant increases in construction
costs since then attributed to inflation. The affected property owners have been advised in writing of the
amount of the actual costs and proposed special connection fee and of the scheduled public hearing.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 7, 2007
Page 3
Mr. Gebert reviewed his response to questions posed by the property owners since being informed of the
amount of the sewer special connection fee:
• Could the special connection fee be paid in advance or in installments? Mr. Gebert advised the
fee could be paid in advance but City policy did not allow for installment payments.
• Would properties at 8805 220`h and 21919 88`h Avenue West be allowed to connect to the stub
out? Mr. Gebert answered no as both properties were connected to the sewer system via an
adequately sized sewer connection.
• If one property owner incurred the total cost to install their portion of the 8-inch sewer line to
connect their property and the other two properties did not participate, would the other two
property owners be required to pay a special connection fee and how would the one property
owner recover the cost? Mr. Gebert answered the other property owners would be required to
pay the special connection fee and there were several options for recovering the cost, the most
viable being a latecomers agreement which the City would assist with establishing.
• Why is the actual cost significantly higher than the estimated cost? Mr. Gebert answered the
initial estimate was prepared in late 2003 and assumed construction in 2004, however, the project
was not constructed until 2005. Since that time construction costs have escalated significantly
industry -wide due to increases in material costs as well as the amount of work available does not
require contractors to bid on government jobs and when they do, their bids are high. He recalled
the 220th project received only two bids; the low bid was somewhat higher than the engineer's
estimate and the second bid was significantly higher than the estimate. The actual costs of the
special connection fee are based on the bid unit prices and actual quantities. The property owners
requested a detailed cost breakdown of the work that was done which staff provided.
• Could the Council adopt a smaller amount for the fee than the actual cost? Mr. Gebert reviewed
the following breakdown of the cost elements:
Construction Contract
Total
Construction
Design
Direct
Indirect
Construction
Engineering/
Engineering
Items
Items*
Contract
Management
Total
Cost
$1,162.00
$8,824.17
$1,979.30
$10,803.47
$887.40
$12,852.87
Divided by # of
3
3
3
3
3
3
developable lots
Special connection
$387.33
$2,941.39
$659.77
$3,601.16
$295.80
$4,284.29
fee = total per lot
* Prorated allocation of indirect construction contract costs such as mobilization, traffic control,
surveying, etc.
Mr. Gebert noted the cost breakdown did not include in-house costs. He concluded the Council could
establish a fee that was less than the actual cost as it could be argued that there was benefit to the general
public by connecting these properties to sewer. However, if benefited property owners did not pay for the
connection, the sewer utility rate payers paid the costs.
He noted the general sewer connection fee covered the costs of typical connections and special
connection fees covered special costs. He recalled other funding alternatives had been considered such as
a Local hnprovement District (LID) which would have included additional costs such as appraisal costs,
in-house salary costs, etc. He noted the City also anticipated another special connection fee for a project
on. Olympic View Drive. The fee established in this instance was likely to set a precedent for the fee for
that project. Mr. Gebert recommended the Council adopt the special connection fee in the amount of the
actual cost - $4,284.29.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 7, 2007
Page 4
Councilmember Plunkett asked why the City did not accept installment payments and whether other cities
did. Mr. Gebert answered it was the Finance Department's policy and the advice of the City Attorney for
administrative reasons, and to avoid loaning funds, that the City not accept installment payments. He
recalled this was discussed in March 2004 and a decision was made that the connection fee would be paid
in full at the time of connection.
Councilmember Plunkett recalled the last time there were a number of property owners connecting to
sewer was in Perrinville. Mr. Gebert explained that was done via an LID and there were a large number
of properties connecting.
Councilmember Moore recalled when she lived in Woodway, sewers were installed on Woodway Park
Road and they were assessed twice the amount of the proposed connection fee for the stub out and were
allowed to make installment payments to the Town of Woodway. She encouraged the Council to
consider installment payments if the full cost of the connection fee was adopted. She referred to staff s
comment about inflation affecting the estimate and suggested re -estimating projects closer to the time of
construction or factor in inflation. Mr. Gebert answered for the 220th project, a consultant updated the
engineer's estimate a few months prior to bid using the latest WSDOT bids and the bids were fairly close;
the engineer's estimate was $4.2 million and the low bid was $4.3 million. He reviewed 2003 estimates
for each element of the project that resulted in a per lot connection fee of $1,962. That amount was
adjusted in anticipation of inflation and cost escalation. Property owners were informed the amount
would be in the range of $2,000 to $3,000, anticipating construction would occur in 2004; however,
construction did not begin until 2005. He pointed out the contract bid was a unit price bid; the actual cost
was actual quantities at the bid unit prices. He noted if the quantities were as estimated, the special
connection fee would have been $5,472; the actual quantities were less which resulted in a lower special
connection fee.
Councilmember Moore asked when staff became aware of the $5,472 amount. Mr. Gebert answered May
2005. Councilmember Moore asked whether staff informed the property owners of the increase at that
time. Mr. Gebert answered he did not. Councilmember Moore expressed concern the property owners
were not informed that the estimate had increased. She also objected to staffs comment that staff time
was not factored in, remarking that was the engineering department's job. Mr. Gebert agreed when a
project was for the general utility or general public; however, this was a project for the sole benefit of
specific property owners.
Councilmember Dawson recalled when this was discussed in 2004, the reason for constructing the stub
out in conjunction with the 220th project was to benefit the property owners. She asked the cost to the
property owners if it had not been done in conjunction with the 220`h project. Mr. Gebert answered the
property owners would avoid the cost of cutting into and repairing the street and frontage improvements.
He noted there were also reasons it could cost the property owners less such as they would not be required
to pay prevailing wages as the City was. He summarized the reason the stub out was constructed in
conjunction with the 2201h project was to avoid the property owner's cost of cutting into the pavement and
to avoid a cut and patch on the new street.
Councilmember Dawson asked whether the property owners would be required to connect to sewer. Mr.
Gebert answered the ordinance allowed the property owners to connect when they chose to or needed to.
He explained the City code required connection within 60 days of installation of the stub out; however,
Council direction in 2004 was that they be allowed to defer connection which the proposed ordinance
permitted. Councilmember Dawson pointed out the property owners could begin setting funds aside for
their eventual connection.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 7, 2007
Page 5
Councilmember Dawson inquired about one property owner connecting. Mr. Gebert explained they
would pay only their special connection fee but there would be significant costs to install the sewer line
from the stub up the street to their residence. Payment by the other property owners could be addressed
via a latecomers agreement.
Councilmember Dawson inquired about the indirect costs. Mr. Gebert explained it was a prorated
allocation of costs for mobilization, traffic control, surveying, etc. for the entire contract and not directly
attributable to a single work item. Councilmember Dawson commented that due to the significant
increase in the cost, a rational reduction may be to subtract the indirect costs. Mr. Gebert agreed the
Council could establish the connection fee via subtracting one or more of the cost elements.
Councilmember Dawson acknowledged this may set a precedent for future projects. Mr. Gebert
responded the only other project he was aware of was on Olympic View Drive. In that project a stub out
would be installed for 8-10 lots and laterals installed for 6-7 properties.
Councilmember Dawson asked whether all the costs had been included in prior special connection fees.
Mr. Gebert answered he was not aware of any other special connection fees; in the past connections had
been addressed via an LID. He advised the proposed ordinance established a new section in the Water
and Sewer rates and charges section for special connection districts; this would be the first special
connection district. She asked whether past LIDS had been accessed the entire cost. Mr. Gebert answered
he had not been involved in an LID in the City but believed all costs were included in the Perrinville LID
including in-house costs, appraisal fees, etc.
Councilmember Plunkett asked why the City constructed the stub out rather than requiring the property
owners to install it. Mr. Gebert answered that option was considered; however, it would have required the
property owners install the stub out as well as incur the significant cost of extending the sewer line to
their residences. He noted there was no code language to require the property owners to install the stub
out. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether the property owners would have paid more if they had had
the stub out installed themselves. Mr. Gebert was uncertain, anticipating they would have paid in the
range of the City's costs.
Councilmember Moore commented in addition to the special connection fee, the property owners also
faced the fee to connect to their homes. She asked whether a lien would be placed on the property so that
the fee would be paid when the house was sold. Mr. Gebert answered staff did not intend to place a lien
on the property. Staff would flag the property in the permit system so that the fee would need to be paid
before a permit was issued to connect to the sewer. Councilmember Moore commented the home could
be sold and the property owner had not paid the fee. Mr. Gebert acknowledged one of these property
owners purchased his home in 2006 and was not informed of the special connection fee. Councilmember
Moore recalled Woodway placed a lien on the properties in the amount of the connection fee which
encouraged many property owners to pay the fee immediately. Mayor Haakenson advised that was the
process for an LID.
Councilmember Plunkett expressed concern that a subsequent property owner may not be aware of the
special connection fee. He was uncertain whether the real estate disclosure form addressed that issue.
Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
John Wood, Edmonds, affected property owner, commented they were told one amount, never informed
that the costs had increased and now were informed the fee would be higher. He believed the fee could
have been avoided if the three property owners had installed and connected to the sewer before the 220th
project was completed. He pointed out a fourth house, 21919 881h Avenue, was connected via a side
sewer across a neighbor's yard which he asserted was illegal and unfair. He questioned whether each
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 7, 2007
Page 6
property owner was required to pay for the sewer in front of their home including a property that was
connected illegally through another's yard. He summarized the significantly higher connection fee would
require that they defer connection.
Kim Sharpe, Edmonds, affected property owner, commented they tried several times to connect to
sewer on their own during the past six years, thus had incurred some costs already. He expressed concern
regarding the cost increase, noting they had not been notified that the cost had increased. He suggested
the precedence that should be set was not requiring citizens to pay for the City's overruns. He
summarized it was not that they would not pay the special connection fee but that it wasn't fair and
should be within the range of the estimate provided in 2004. He inquired about the possibility of an LID
with the Olympic View Drive sewer. He noted they had been paying an $8 per month sewer supplement
fee since the 1980s for the privilege of hooking up to a stub in the future.
Mr. Wood asked the amount of the connection fee for residents on 88th Place West located behind their
street and in Snohomish County which had the exact situation.
Paul Samione, Edmonds, affected property owner, explained when he purchased the property in
September 2006 he was not informed of the special connection fee. He expressed concern with the
approximately 43% increase in the connection fee over the high end of the estimate, noting connecting to
the sewer would cost each home an additional $20,000 to $25,000. He emphasized the importance of
communication and more accurate estimates.
Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public hearing.
In response to the comment that the property owners had tried to connect to sewer in the past, Mr. Gebert
noted one of the options discussed at the neighborhood meeting in February 2004 was establishing an
LID to construct their sewer collector on their own. He acknowledged at that time the City planned to
begin construction on 220th in 2004 but was delayed a year. With regard to the increased cost, he
acknowledged the costs had increased and the project was under -estimated due to the delay.
With regard to the $8 per month sewer supplement fee, Public Works Director Noel Miller explained the
unconnected charge was imposed to defray the cost of constructing the wastewater treatment plant large
enough to include future wastewater treatment for this area. He concluded otherwise a smaller treatment
plant would have been constructed.
With regard to the other properties on 88th Place West, Mr. Gebert acknowledged they were Olympic
View Water and Sewer District customers for whom sewer laterals similar to this were installed in
conjunction with the 220th Street project. Olympic View Water and Sewer District did not plan to
establish a special connection fee for those property owners but includes the cost in the base for their
general connection fee. Edmonds' philosophy is the general connection fee is capital costs that are
general system costs such as new sewer lift stations, sewer main replacement, etc. and that capital costs
that serve individual properties should be paid by those property owners. With regard to the alleged
illegal connection across a neighboring property, Mr. Gebert advised he obtained the as -built drawing
from the Olympic View Water and Sewer District that indicated the connection was inspected and
accepted by an Olympic View Water and Sewer District inspector. He did not research whether the
appropriate permits had been obtained.
Councilmember Dawson proposed changing staff s recommendation due to delays associated with this
project that were not anticipated at the time this was presented to the Council and that were no fault of the
property owners.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 7, 2007
Page 7
Ord# 3657 COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, FOR
Special Connection Fee APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 3657, TO ESTABLISH A SPECIAL CONNECTION FEE IN
THE REDUCED AMOUNT OF $2,941.39.
Councilmember Dawson explained these were the direct construction costs associated with this project, it
was within the range of fees that were proposed to the property owners, and was within the amount
considered by the Council.
Councilmember Moore spoke in favor of the motion, suggesting the precedent that should be set was
communicating with residents earlier and accurately.
Councilmember Plunkett commented the real estate disclosure form included a question regarding permits
and if that did not address this situation, there was a catch-all question asking the homeowner to identify
anything a future buyer may need to know. He concluded a property owner would disclose this issue in
that manner. With regard to an installment plan, he pointed out a property owner could do their own
installment plan based on when they planned to hook up. He noted hooking up to sewer would increase
the home's value in excess of the amount required to hook-up to sewer. He urged the Council to approve
the revised special connection fee, commenting it was good for the City and after the investment was
made, it would be good for the homeowner.
Councilmember Marin supported the motion, commenting a reduced amount was justifiable based on.
additional costs incurred during the delay. However, if the stub had not been installed, the result could
have been the property owners digging up and patching the new street. He commented septic failures
were expensive and once a septic system failed, the property would need to connect to the sewer. He
acknowledged costs had escalated and the increases were difficult to predict but it was not the fault of
staff.
Council President Olson spoke in favor of the motion, finding it a good compromise. She acknowledged
the property owners would incur some costs but connecting to the sewer would increase the value of their
homes.
Councilmember Wambolt did not support the proposed special connection fee. Although he empathized
with the increased cost, the homeowners could establish their own installment plan by timing their hook
up. He noted many of the City's bids had been significantly over the estimate due to the atypical
construction climate, not due to any fault of staff. He noted even if staff had informed the residents the
fee had increased, it would have impacted the amount of the fee.
MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT OPPOSED.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Taste of Jan Vance, Executive Director, Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce, commented the Taste of
Edmonds Edmonds had grown over the last 25 years to be the largest community festival in Snohomish County. In
addition to food booths, arts and crafts, commercial booths, a kids' area, beer garden and wine area, there
are also three entertainment stages. She cited facts about the Chamber and Taste, the Chamber runs the
Taste and raises all funds, they have tried unsuccessfully to involve local merchants, there is no public
funding for the Taste and the Chamber pays for City services. She explained the fundraiser pays for a
wide variety of member services made available by the Chamber and finances many other events and
provides funding to sponsor programs and services for a variety of community service organizations, over
$15,000 in the past year. She commented the Taste of Edmonds was the economic engine that made the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 7, 2007
Page 8
41h of July and other community events possible. The Taste of Edmonds this year will be held on August
10, 11 and 12.
Lake Ballinger Dave Page, Edmonds, commented on a newspaper article regarding the unruly conduct of the audience
tnterlocal at a Key Largo, Florida City Council meeting. Next he advised City staff was working on an Interlocal
Agreement Agreement with Shoreline, Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace regarding Lake Ballinger and there were
plans for a basin study. As Lynnwood was a big contributor of untreated water into Lake Ballinger, he
noted it was important that the construction projects proposed on Hwy. 99 address wastewater
management. He advised additional information would be provided in the future and assistance requested
from the City.
channel21 1
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, recalled the July 17 meeting included discussion regarding the use of
Video concerns Channel 21 and the 6-year TIP; however, the meeting was not televised due to poor quality of the video.
He obtained a copy of the tape and a DVD of the meeting, acknowledging the tape was poor quality;
however, the quality of the DVD was acceptable. He was concerned the citizens did not have the
opportunity to view the July 17 meeting including the Council's discussion regarding the use of Channel
21. He questioned whether the DVD could be used to broadcast the meeting on Channel 21 if the tape
quality was unacceptable. Pointing out that the City had a problem with video quality, he urged the
Council to either fix the problem or purchase new equipment. Next, he referred to the property owners
Redevelopment and 33 citizens discussing redevelopment of the old Safeway site. As the project was now public, he
ofoldSafeway suggested Mayor Haakenson discontinue the non -disclosure agreement he signed regarding his
Site
participation in discussions regarding the project.
David Thorpe, Edmonds, thanked the Council, Mayor and staff for the time and energy they devoted to
community members' problems whether 2-3 residents or thousands. He commented Edmonds was a
unique City due to access to government, citing the ease of obtaining information at City Hall. He
commented on Forward Thrust that financed clean-up of Lake Washington as well as other projects,
noting that effort had a vision and required leadership. He acknowledged leadership was often difficult,
eighborhood requiring one be rough at times, gentle at other times, and be understanding of others' views. He urged
centers the Council to listen to the citizens when discussing redevelopment of neighborhood centers. He
Reaovelopment encouraged the Council to temper growth with the environment and the health of the people who live and
work in Edmonds.
channel2l In response to Mr. Hertrich's comments about the equipment malfunction, Council President Olson
video reported a technician was hired who had fixed the problem. She explained the reason the DVD could not
Equipment be used to broadcast the meeting was because it had chapters and stopped at each chapter requiring a staff
member to restart the DVD. She advised the DVD was available for purchase at City Hall for $3.00; it
could not be given away because that would be a gift of public funds.
Broadcast of Councilmember Plunkett advised he requested the next Council retreat include a discussion regarding
Council establishing a Council policy to determine when a Council meeting would not be broadcast. Council
Meetings
President Olson advised Councilmember Wambolt and she viewed the video and agreed the quality was
unacceptable. Councilmember Wambolt agreed.
6. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Haakenson advised next week's Council meeting was committee meetings which were not
broadcast. The next Council meeting will be held on Monday, August 20 due to the primary election on
Tuesday, August 21.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 7, 2007
Page 9
Mayor Haakenson announced he planned to conduct the Economic Development Director interviews on
August 14 and had asked Council President Olson to select two Councilmembers to participate on the
interview team.
7. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council President Olson wished Councilmember Marin a belated Happy Birthday on July 30.
Economic
Development Councilmember Plunkett offered to serve on the Economic Development Director interview panel.
Director
Councilmember Marin announced Community Transit had selected a manufacturer for the Bus Rapid
Transit buses and identified the station locations. In Edmonds, stations would be located at 238th on the
east side near Gobs of Knobs, and in front of Honey Baked Hams on the west side; at 216th near the
hospital and the thrift store; and northbound in front of Schucks at 200th and southbound at 196th in front
of the former Arco and Jimbos. He advised Community Transit was proceeding with purchasing the
required easements and had a contract in place for design/build of the stations.
GrafEti Councilmember Dawson referred to the public hearing later this month on a graffiti ordinance. She
reported approximately 50 people including Edmonds staff attended Snohomish County Executive
Reardon's graffiti summit. The summit included presentations from Snohomish County Code
Enforcement, the Sheriff's office, she made a presentation on Snohomish County's proposed ordinance,
Marysville made a presentation on their regulations and an organization in Seattle described their annual
paint -out event. She announced a Snohomish County graffiti paint -out event on October 6. She relayed
Marysville's comment that if cities did not work together on the issue, the problem would be pushed from
one city to another.
Harbor Square With regard to the waterfront "secret" meetings, Councilmember Wambolt explained the meetings began
Redevelopment in early 2006 between Port Commissioner Bruce Faires and he who met a few times; they then invited
City staff and the Mayor to participate and also had discussions with the Port of Everett regarding their
redevelopment. They soon learned the private property owners needed to be involved. The property
owners set the terms of those meetings which included Mayor Haakenson signing a non -disclosure
agreement. The process has progressed to include the public and 33 citizens were selected to participate.
The group has met three times and he planned to provide each Councilmember with the information that
had been provided to the group. He noted the Port met yesterday to discuss funding the next phase,
noting there was no cost to the City in the next phase as the costs would be borne by the property owners.
He concluded the meetings with the 33 citizens were open to the public and he anticipated further
information would be available in October.
Harbor Square Councilmember Moore asked whether the non -disclosure agreement was still required. Councilmember
Redevelopment Wambolt advised only Mayor Haakenson was required to sign a non-disclosure/confidentiality
agreement. To avoid Councilmember Wambolt signing a confidentiality agreement, it was agreed if there
was anything a Councilmember should not hear because it may taint his judgment, he would leave the
room which he did not recall had ever happened. He offered to ask whether the confidentiality agreement
was now moot as they were not discussing anything confidential. Mayor Haakenson commented it was
part of his job to attend the meetings and Councilmember Wambolt agreed he needed to participate.
07/26/07
Community/ Councilmember Moore encouraged the Council and the public to read the minutes of the July 26
Development Community Services/Development Services Committee Meeting that included public comment on the
Services
Committee difficulties obtaining permits and ideas for improvement; she anticipated a positive outcome as a result of
Meeting the meeting. She advised Councilmember Marin planned to have staff consider the ideas posed and
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 7, 2007
Page 10
return to the Committee next month. Mayor Haakenson advised staff had already met twice and planned
to provide a report to the Council at their next meeting.
cameras ins Councilmember Moore suggested the Council consider upgrading the cameras in Council Chambers as
Conncii the picture quality was not very good. She recalled the Council had identified funds in the budget for
chambers cameras. Senior Executive Council Assistant Jana Spellman advised the cost to upgrade the cameras
three years ago was $15,000.
Student Representative Callahan recognized the Waste Warriors, a group of high school students who
would be picking up trash at the Taste of Edmonds.
8. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 8:32 p.m.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 7, 2007
Page 11