Loading...
08/01/2006 City CouncilAugust 1, 2006 Following a Special Meeting at 6:45 p.m. to meet with an Architectural Design Board Candidate, 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 Deanna Dawson, Council President Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Richard Marin, Councilmember Mauri Moore, Councilmember Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember Dave Orvis, Councilmember Ron Wambolt, Councilmember 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA STAFF PRESENT Tom Tomberg, Fire Chief David Stern, Chief of Police Duane Bowman, Development Services Director Stephen Clifton, Community Services Director Dan Clements, Administrative Services Director Brian McIntosh, Parks & Recreation Director Noel Miller, Public Works Director Kathleen Junglov, Asst. Admin. Services Dir. Jeannine Graf, Building Official Rob Chave, Planning Manager Dave Gebert, City Engineer Steve Bullock, Senior Planner Scott Snyder, City Attorney Linda Hynd, Deputy City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: Approve (A) ROLL CALL 7/25/06 Minutes (B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 25, 2006. Approve Claim Checks (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #89646 THROUGH #89795 FOR JULY 27, 2006 IN THE AMOUNT OF $792,951.05. Claim for Damages (D) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM DUBYAGA OKSANA ($195.80). Old Woodway Elementary (E) OLD WOODWAY ELEMENTARY PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT. School Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 1, 2006 Page 1 96th Ave. w (F) REPORT OF FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE 96TH AVENUE WEST Pedestrian Improvements PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AND COUNCIL ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROJECT. ADB Candidate 3 Betti Jo Smith INTRODUCTION AND CONFIRMATION OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD CANDIDATE BETTI JO SMITH. Senior Planner Steve Bullock introduced Ms. Smith and explained the ADB is comprised of five members who are professionals in the industry and two citizen members. Ms. Smith will serve as a citizen member. Ms. Smith described her background and experience and expressed her delight to be in Edmonds. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO CONFIRM THE MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF BETTI JO SMITH TO THE LAYMAN POSITION ON THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. STAFF RESPONSE TO CITIZEN AND COUNCILMEMBER QUESTIONS FROM JULY 25 MEETING. Edmonds Edmonds Elementary Playground Elementary t El d ll i B t Di ti Parks &Recreaon Director ran McIntosh recalled the Edmonds Elementary School rY hl Playground Committee presented a detailed proposal to the Council on April 18, 2006 outlining their plans to improve the safety and playability of the playground as well as the neighborhood recreation experience. On the June 28, 2006 Consent Agenda, the Council approved $42,500 representing 25% of the cost of the recreation related elements of the project, specifically the play area, basketball court, ballfield repairs and a walking path. Additional projects proposed by the committee include a small student amphitheater and safety improvements to the student pickup area. This project was discussed at the June 12, 2006 Architectural Design Board (ADB) meeting and the ADB recommended not allowing the amphitheater due to the impact on the neighbors adjacent to the elementary school. The Committee and the Edmonds School District plan to resubmit the proposal to the ADB with additional details and drawings at a later date. Mr. McIntosh explained the centerpiece of this project was the playground that will be delivered to the site and ready for installation beginning August 7. He commented on asphalt in that area that had been removed. Many will be meeting in the near future to discuss options for the proposed walking path. Water quality and water detention issues associated with the walking path need to be addressed which may alter the design or add significantly to the cost and feasibility of that element. Development Services Director Duane Bowman displayed an aerial map, identifying the location of the proposed play area and walking path. He recalled a question was raised whether this project impacted Hindley Creek and was subject to SEPA. He explained the project was not subject to SEPA, nor did it impact Hindley Creek. He explained Hindley Creek flowed under the school property in a pipe and daylighted outside the fence, approximately 125 feet from the proposed trail. He explained Hindley Creek was a non -fish bearing stream that required a 75 -foot setback. The project was not subject to a Critical Areas alteration permit and SEPA had no substantive authority absent that permit. He displayed several photographs of the school property, identifying the proposed play area, location of the trail, area where the stream was underground and where the stream daylighted in an area of foliage outside the fence. In response to the issues raised by Mr. Hertrich, Mr. Bowman explained there was no Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 1, 2006 Page 2 special treatment being given to Edmonds School District; they must comply with the City's regulations as does any other applicant. There was nothing in the School District's proposal that impacted the creek; it was not within the 75 -foot buffer and was exempt from SEPA. Mr. Hertrich contacted the Department of Ecology (DOE) who visited the site last week and confirmed there were no wetland or stream issues. For Councilmember Plunkett, Mr. Bowman identified the location where the stream daylights and the property line of the School District property. Councilmember Plunkett referred to a secondhand source (an email dated July 31, 2006) that said the DOE representative had not determined whether Hindley Creek was a spawning stream for salmon and once that was determined, they would measure to determine the required buffer. Mr. Bowman answered he had not heard anything from DOE claiming Hindley Creek to be a salmon- bearing stream. His position was based on the City's critical area analysis and inventory; Hindley Creek had never been classified as a fish - bearing stream. He commented the stream could potentially be fish- bearing as it entered Shell Creek as Shell Creek contained fish but barriers to the west prevented fish from reaching the upper reaches. Councilmember Moore advised the email was the result of a conversation she had with the DOE representative who indicated he would look at the stream. She was pleased the proposed trail as identified on the aerial map was located further to the north than she anticipated. She was also pleased with the amount of asphalt that had been removed. She commented the goals were to get the playground built as well as protect the stream. She asked whether staff had measured the distance from the trail to the stream. Mr. Bowman answered the distance was approximately 125 feet; if it were closer to the required 75 foot setback, a measurement would be required to ensure an adequate buffer was maintained. Councilmember Moore recalled she had suggested the trail be gravel when the buffer was in question to avoid additional impervious surface. She suggested the distance from the stream to the trail be measured. Mr. Bowman commented a pervious trail could be located within a required stream buffer. Councilmember Moore encouraged citizen and environment groups to pursue with the School District daylighting of the creek as a community project. She acknowledged it would take a long time and a great deal of money but there were funds available via private and public grants to daylight streams for environmental purposes. She noted there were a number of invasive species and herbicides being used near the creek. Edmonds I Edmonds Crossing Crossing Community Services Director Stephen Clifton explained on June 14 he prepared a memorandum to the City Council that provided responses to a variety of questions regarding Edmonds Crossing, specifically related to budget, phasing, where funding came from, etc. Since that time, more questions have been raised and a second memorandum dated July 31, 2006 was prepared. With regard to the question, "How much are Snohomish County voters going to be asked to contribute to the Edmonds Crossing Multimodal project and how is the current preliminary $1.23,400,000 amount determined," as stated in the June 14 letter, the Executive Boards from the Regional Transportation Investment District (RTID) and Sound Transit are currently working to develop a range of transportation investment scenarios. The final packages and associated funding options will be presented to the voters in the fall of 2007. Currently contained in a draft Snohomish County RTID list is an amount of $123,400,000 for the Edmonds Crossing project. The draft list was prepared last year and is subject to change depending on what the RTID Executive Board adopts as their final budget for each county within the King, Snohomish and Pierce County RTID. Some projects, such as Edmonds Crossing, have a variety of funding sources which affects the amount needed from RTID to fully fund the project. In 2005, the Edmonds Crossing project used the overall projected construction cost, $171 million, and subtracted the amount appropriated by Federal and State governments to calculate the $123,400,000. In spring of 2006, the State appropriated an additional Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 1, 2006 Page 3 $22,642,000 to the Edmonds Crossing project during the 2015 -2017 biennium. Sound Transit is also considering whether to assist with funding the project as part of Sound Transit 2 transportation package; if funding for Edmonds Crossing is included in Sound Transit 2, the amount needed from RTID should decrease. The Washington State Department of Transportation ( WSDOT) and Washington State Ferries (WSF) will then work with the City and Snohomish County RTID to develop a final number to include in the final RTID transportation package. With regard to the question, "Does the current plan include utilizing two ferry terminals in Edmonds, i.e. one slip at Edmonds Crossing project and retention of the existing terminal at the Main Street location as a backup," Mr. Clifton explained that according to WSF staff, there is no documentation supporting two ferry terminals operating at one time and that was not WSF's intent. Regarding the number of slips planned for Edmonds Crossing phases 1 and 2, the Record of Decision includes two slips as part of Phase 1 and a third slip as part of Phase 2. There is information contained on the WSDOT /WSF website and within the WSDOT capital program that mentions one slip as part of Phase 1 which is contrary to the Record of Decision. He contacted WSF to request the website and the documentation be updated to accurately reflect information in the Record of Decision. What is constructed in Phases 1 and 2 will ultimately be affected by available funding. At a minimum, WSF advised him they could exclusively operate Edmonds Crossing with one slip at least for a couple years. He assured there would not be two separate ferry operations at the existing location and at Edmonds Crossing. With regard to the question, "Is a breakwater included in Phase 1," Mr. Clifton explained a temporary breakwater realizing the existing WSF / WSDOT assets was planned for Phase 1. Phase 2 improvements include construction of a permanent breakwater. Councilmember Marin commented funding for Edmonds Crossing was included in the three scenarios Sound Transit was evaluating at this time. sAEETEA -EU SAFETEA -LU Grants Grants City Engineer Dave Gebert referred to recent citizen comments at Council meetings questioning why the City had not taken advantage of grant opportunities for transportation and walkway projects via the SAFETEA -LU grant program and, more specially, the Safe Routes to School program, an element of SAFETEA -LU. He explained SAFETEA -LU, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, is a Federal Act that provides funding for highways, highway safety and public transportation projects. It builds on its predecessor acts, the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) and the Transportation Equity Act for the 20 Century (TEA -21). SAFETEA -LU was signed by President Bush on August 10, 2005. SAFETEA -LU addresses a number of challenges nationwide, including improving safety, reducing traffic congestion, improving efficiency in freight movement, protecting the environment, etc. He explained there were several reasons the Engineering Division had not yet submitted grant applications under the SAFETEA -LU program including that SAFETEA -LU was only recently established. Last year only schools and school districts were eligible to apply for grant funding under the Safe Routes to Schools program. This year cities are eligible to submit grant applications under the Safe Routes to Schools program, but require partnering with the schools and involvement from the schools on the "education" element of the projects. Although the City was not eligible to apply for grants under SAFETEA -LU's Safe Routes to School program last year, the City unsuccessfully applied for a grant for the 164`h Street walkway under the Bicycle and Pedestrian program. He noted there were a number of different categories of grants under the SAFETEA -LU program, most which are not applicable to the City, such as the Interstate System Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Toll Pilot Program, HOV Lane program, etc. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 1, 2006 Page 4 Another issue associated with applying for grants was that most of the SAFETEA -LU grants required a significant local match and until the recent Council decision to dedicate REST 2 revenues in excess of $750,000 per year to the transportation capital fund, the City did not have sufficient funds for the required local match. He pointed out the City applied for a large grant for the Edmonds Crossing project in the regional competition of SAFETEA -LU; except for that project, most of the City's projects were not eligible for regional or county -wide competition based on the requirement that the project must be in a designed "urban center," which Edmonds is not. The Edmonds Crossing project qualified because it is in a connecting corridor. Now that cities are eligible to apply, this year staff plans to apply for two grants under the Safe Routes to School program — 164th Street SW walkway project, and another on Puget Drive. Further, now that additional revenues are available for local matches, staff will carefully evaluate all grant opportunities and apply for projects that will be competitive. Mr. Gebert pointed out the City had taken considerable advantage of SAFETEA -LU's predecessor grant programs. In the past five years, the Engineering Division had been successful in obtaining seven grants totally over $1.3 million. In addition recent walkway projects completed in the past four years for which the City received grant funds include a $150,000 grant for the Woodway Elementary School walkway, a $167,500 grant for the 96`h Avenue West walkway, and a $4,000 grant for the Seaview Elementary Pedestrian Improvement project. A major element of the 220th Street SW improvement program was sidewalks on both sides; that project received $3.26 million in State and Federal grant funds and another $740,000 in low- interest Public Works Trust Fund loans. He advised the Council packet included the Engineering Division's grant and loan billing status report that lists grants and loans secured since January 2001. Since January 2001, the Engineering Division secured over $9.8 million in grants, low interest loans and partner funding including over $5.8 million for transportation projects and over $3.6 million for utility projects. et'tniti °ns of S etback 5. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION AMENDING THE Setback DEFINITIONS OF SIDE SETBACK ECDC 21.90.050, STREET SETBACK ECDC 21.90.140, AND REAR SETBACK ECDC 21.85.020. Planning Manager Rob Chave explained as a result of ambiguity the Council found in the Code language, the Council adopted an interim zoning ordinance reaffirming the City's traditional interpretation of how setback is applied to buildings and structures. The Planning Board discussed various options and developed suggestions that could lead to Code changes. The potential Code changes would impact various areas of the Code that will be included in the rewrite of the Code. After discussing this issue with the Planning Board, the majority voted to defer changes to the overall Code rewrite and formalize the existing interpretation in the Code. He anticipated this would be in effect for only a short time until the rewrite was completed next year. The option the Planning Board preferred was retaining setbacks for primary buildings with a minimal safety setback on the outer portion of the property of approximately 4 -5 feet from the property line and establishing simple rules with regard to accessory structures. Councilmember Moore stated her understanding that the Planning Board had passed the downtown development code and asked when it would be presented to the Council. Mr. Chave anticipated a presentation to the Council will be made at the third or fourth meeting in August and a public hearing in early September. Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 1, 2006 Page 5 Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, cited as an example the remodel /expansion of an older building constructed with a 7 -foot setback rather than the required 10 -foot setback, which would not be allowed as it would increase the non - conformance of the building. He suggested in making a decision, consideration be given to how the extension of the non - conformance affected adjoining properties. He supported not demolishing older buildings that may have been constructed within the setback. He commented the 4 -5- foot setback may be too small in some neighborhoods, particularly in areas where the residences were built very close together. Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public hearing and remanded to Council for action. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON, TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PRPEARE AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE INTERIM SETBACK ORDINANCE INTO THE CODE. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Old Woodway Colin Southcote -Want, Edmonds, referred to Consent Agenda Item B ( Woodway Elementary Purchase Elementary and Sale Agreement), recalling on June 7, 2005 the City Council voted unanimously to purchase all 11 school/ Interlocal acres. In February 2006, the Council was again unanimous with a Right of First Refusal to purchase the Agreement entire 1.1 acres. The Purchase and Sale Agreement for the Old Woodway Elementary School site included a statement that it superseded all previous agreements. He distributed an Interlocal Agreement between the City, the Edmonds School District and Snohomish County that was effective in June 1999 with a duration of 10 years. Under the agreement, the Edmonds School District was to make the premises available on an equal basis, the City was to provide maintenance and the County provided funds for improvements, funds that had been provided. Since the agreement had three years remaining, he believed retaining the agreement would provide an opportunity to retain the park for an additional three years during which time options for purchasing the remaining property could be pursued. He pointed out the problem with the City's purchase of the 5.5 acres was that it did not provide enough space for fields. Edmonds Diana White, Edmonds, identified several audience members representing a group of citizens who Elementary Playground su pp orted the completion of the playground improvements at Edmonds Elementary without unnecessary delays. They hoped that the needed safety improvements could be completed before the school year began. They supported the future outdoor seating area and walking path due to the enhancements they would provide to the school as well as the members of the Edmonds community. Edmonds Don Kreiman, Edmonds, Woodway Elementary PTA President, acknowledged the incredible amount of Elementary work done by the Edmonds Elementary School families. He expressed concern with delaying the Playgronnd playground improvements by raising additional issues. Also a member of the Transportation Committee, Transportation I he recognized the efforts of City Engineer Dave Gebert, Traffic Engineer Don Sims and Assistant City Committee Engineer Don Fiene. He recalled when the Transportation Committee was initiated, there were few matching funds available and yet staff applied for and received numerous grants. He expressed frustration with requiring staff to make presentations in response to citizen complaints, pointing out Edmonds had one of the lowest costs of providing services due to staff's efficiency. Although he appreciated citizens complaining about issues, he urged anyone who was concerned to join a committee and work on solutions. RTio Ballot, Natalie Shippen, Edmonds, thanked the Council for clarifying the amount that would be on the RTID Ferry Terminal ballot. With regard to the statement that there was no documentation supporting two ferry terminals, she pointed out the existing terminal could be operated with one slip due to the sheltered site; however, the Pt. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 1, 2006 Page 6 Edwards site was more exposed. She recalled the technical committee originally proposed a start -up facility with one slip with a back -up terminal at Main Street, which met WSF's criteria for two slips and would not require a breakwater. WSF staff rejected that plan and the stand -alone facility was developed which requires two operational slips at one terminal at the Pt. Edwards site with a breakwater. She pointed out WSF's most recent capital budget referred to one slip at the Pt. Edwards site. She questioned the comment that WSF indicated the Pt. Edwards site could be operated with one slip, noting that had never been contemplated at the Pt. Edwards site due to the exposed nature of the site. Edmonds Elementary Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, commented the Edmonds Elementary School project was an excellent Playground/ project; however, the Critical Areas Checklist completed by the Edmonds School District erroneously Critical Areas indicated there were no seasonal waters on the site and the site did not contain a year -round creek. He Checklist noted with that incorrect information provided by the School. District, staff made an incorrect determination that the creek was Shell Creek; however, site visits did not find evidence of Shell Creek. He clarified the creek on the site was Hindley Creels. He was pleased Mr. Bowman now acknowledged the creek existed on the site. He offered to provide a map with measurements. He clarified the only reason he suggested the creek be recognized was because any other developer would be required to indicate on a Critical Areas Checklist that the creek existed. He expressed concern that staff had missed a year of potential funding via SAFETEA -LU. He recalled other instances when staff failed to seek grants, commenting staff's attitude appeared to be the problem. Edmonds Finis Tupper, Edmonds, urged the Council to read the minutes of the July 12 Architectural Design Elementary Board meeting when they reviewed the playground project which reflected Mr. Hertrich's and his Playground/ Critical Areas comments in favor of the playground improvements. He described the difficulty Mr. Hertrich Checklist encountered obtaining environmental information with regard to this project until he used the correct terminology and asked for the Critical Areas Checklist following the ADB meeting. He noted the Checklist also did not acknowledge that the stream surfaced in the vicinity of the project. He noted the ADB postponed a decision on components of this project due to a lack of detailed information. He stated Mr. Snyder would have a difficult time claiming an administerial mistake in this instance as staff's actions represented blatant misconduct. Old woodway In response to Mr. Southcote- Want's comments, City Attorney Scott Snyder advised neither the Edmonds Elementary School District's legal counsel nor he were aware of the Interlocal. Agreement, a grant agreement between School / Interlocal Snohomish County, the City and Edmonds School District. The agreement provided for $5,500 in Agreement funding to renovate a ballfield — top dressing for the fields (dirt/sand), installation of two bleachers which have since been stolen, and construction of two dugouts. The School District's only obligation under the Agreement was to make the facility available on equal terms to Snohomish County and Edmonds School District residents; there was nothing in the Agreement that prevented the School District from selling the property and the facilities were not located on the portion of the property the City was purchasing. He advised the Interlocal Agreement would not be superseded by the Purchase and Sale Agreement due to the third party, but the Interlocal Agreement was not a lease of the Woodway Elementary School site; it was a right to use a ballfield not located on the portion of the property the City was purchasing. He explained there were three ways this could be addressed, 1) the last three years of use could be waived, 2) the obligation could be transferred to the portion of the property the City was purchasing, 3) or the City could refund a prorated portion of the original grant - $1,650. Councilmember Moore expressed concern that neither the City Attorney nor the Council was aware of the Interlocal Agreement and questioned why staff had not brought it to their attention. Mr. Snyder answered an Interlocal Agreement was recorded with the County but was not in the chain of title. Councilmember Moore pointed out the Interlocal Agreement was in the City's files and she obtained it from the Parks & Recreation Director. Mr. Snyder agreed after Mr. Southcote -Want raised the issue, he also obtained a copy from staff. Mayor Haakenson explained the Interlocal Agreement was of no relevance to the sale as Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 1, 2006 Page 7 it did not affect the parcel the City was purchasing. The Edmonds School District was selling the property affected by the Interlocal Agreement and would need to work out the issues with the City and Snohomish County. Councilmember Plunkett commented the intent of bringing the Interlocal Agreement to the Council's attention was if the Interlocal Agreement superseded or delayed the Purchase and Sale Agreement, it could provide more time to identify a way to purchase the remaining property. However, staff's determination was that it did not prevent the City from proceeding with the Purchase and Sale Agreement. Mr. Snyder agreed, acknowledging it could represent a $1,650 liability to the City. He noted the City's Purchase and Sale Agreement extended approximately 2t /z feet onto the other parcel and the City had not contracted to demolish those improvements as they existed on the portion of the property that the City was not purchasing. Councilmember Moore commented the Interlocal Agreement was critical information and expressed frustration that the Interlocal. Agreement was in the City's files, yet the Council was not informed. 7. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Haakenson commented although he appreciated Mr. Kreiman's frustration with staff's presentations, he welcomed the opportunity to talk about the good work staff did, particularly in response to questions from the audience. 8. COUNCIL COMMENTS EdmonasNight Council President Dawson expressed her thanks to the Edmonds Police Foundation, the Edmonds Fire & out Police Departments and other volunteers who organized last week's Edmonds Night Out. She commented this well attended event was a great opportunity to celebrate the City's Public Safety professionals and an opportunity for the community to come together. She attended another Night Out in Mountlake Terrace tonight. She commented on the two new communication vehicles displayed at the Night Out Events that Snohomish County obtained with Homeland Security funds, a north county vehicle that will be housed in Marysville and a south county vehicle that will be housed in Lynnwood. She wished her husband a Happy Birthday on Saturday. sudgetReview Council President Dawson advised Councilmember Wambolt and she would participate on the Budget Committee Review Committee. Councilmember Olson recognized Police Chief Stern who cooked hotdogs for the Night Out event. Councilmember Moore referred to Mr. Kreiman's comment, assuring the Council supported the Edmonds Edmonds Elementary project and was not trying to delay it. The issue raised was a result of Mr. Hertrich's EieY1e"'s discovery that the Edmonds School District had incorrectly completed the Critical Areas Checklist. She Playground appreciated citizens such as Mr. Kreiman, Mr. Hertrich and Ms. Shippen, who were willing to participate in government and raise issues, noting democracy needed people who participated in the community. She recommended staff provide measurements in instances where critical areas were involved. Ky oto I Councilmember Moore referred to Mayor Haakenson's memo regarding actions the City has taken on the Agreement 12 items listed in the Kyoto Agreement and asked Mayor Haakenson to identify what actions had been taken. In many other cities who signed the agreement, the Mayor discussed the policy issue with the Council. She urged Edmonds to be a model city in reducing greenhouse gases. She planned to present research to the Council and asked that the Council have an opportunity to consider the Agreement and Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 1, 2006 Page 8 pass a resolution. She noted Seattle preferred City Councils pass a resolution as they wanted action, not just signatures on a document. Councilmember Moore noted the other issue in Agenda Item 4 that was not addressed by staff was a business complaint she raised last week. She clarified her concern was not with regard to that specific Customer I business, her concern was with the City's overall attitude /culture toward customer service and business Service service. She urged the City to be an example of customer service, preferring the City have the reputation and reality of being an easy and fun town to deal with at all levels. She commented if it was the Council's policy to be business friendly, possibly the Council needed to fund additional training for staff. She summarized it was the Council's responsibility to respond to citizen questions and concerns. Response to Councilmember Moore further stated it is her job as well as that of all Councilmembers to respond to citizen citizen complaints. She did so last week by asking the question about the policy regarding customer complaints service - was the city anti business or pro business? She noted there was no specific employee named nor would she ever do that. Councilmember Moore pointed out the Fire Chief responded to her comments /questions in the Council packet, which is now a matter of public record, and she believes his response was misplaced and ill advised. It was not directed at the policy question; it was directed at a Councilmember and that was unfortunate. She commented that staff and Councilmembers are all public servants and have nothing to hide. A frank and open discussion of short comings in a democracy are often necessary to make improvements. Councilmember Moore stated she is here to answer the questions and concerns raised by people. By examining them in open public we can find a way to make the city better in every way. Edmonds Councilmember Orvis thanked the Edmonds Elementary families who attended tonight's meeting in Playground support of the playground improvements and expressed his support for proceeding with the improvements. Edmonds Elementary In response to Mr. Kreiman's comments, Councilmember Plunkett assured the Council supported the Playground Edmonds Elementary playground improvements. Next, he expressed support for scheduling Council Kyoto consideration of a resolution in regard to the Kyoto Agreement. Agreement Councilmember Marin expressed his appreciation for Mayor Haakenson's leadership in providing staff responses to several citizen comments as an agenda item. He noted for citizens watching televised Council meetings, it may appear staff missed opportunities and were not working very hard. To the contrary, in his approximately six year association with City staff, he had observed staff on numerous occasions and was impressed with the work done by all City departments. 9. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 8:23 p.m. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 1, 2006 Page 9