Loading...
09/09/2014 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES September 9, 2014 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Diane Buckshnis, Council President Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Strom Peterson, Councilmember Joan Bloom, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember 1. ROLL CALL STAFF PRESENT Al Compaan, Police Chief Don Anderson, Assistant Police Chief Phil Williams, Public Works Director Scott James, Finance Director Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer Rob English, City Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Gerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT BUCKSHNIS, TO ADD A TIME SENSITIVE ANNOUNCEMENT AS AGENDA ITEM 7A. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCIL PRESIDENT BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMLOUSLY. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT BUCHSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda item approved is as follows: A. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 2, 2014 4. PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF BOB & JANICE FREEMAN Mayor Earling commented the community lost a valued citizen when Bob Freeman passed away this past week. He read a proclamation honoring Bob and Janice Freeman for their hard work and dedication in making Edmonds a stronger, better and sustainable community for all. He presented the proclamation to Ms. Freeman. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 9, 2014 Page 1 Ms. Freeman said she was very proud of Bob; he was a man of integrity and common decency. She was proud not just for his work on climate change; he always wanted play the bagpipes. When they moved to Edmonds he found a wonderful teacher and was accepted into the Kenmore and District Pipe Band. She was most proud seeing him playing as part of the Pipe Band in the Edmonds parade. Councilmember Peterson commented some wonderful environmental things have been done in Edmonds including the solar panels on roof of Frances Anderson Center, eliminating plastic bags, low impact development techniques, greening the City's fleet, winning awards for the City buildings; none of it would have happened without Bob and Janice Freeman. He expressed his appreciation to Mayor Earling for the proclamation. He thanked Janice for her continued work and said Bob will be greatly missed. 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Leah Bernstein, Edmonds, spoke regarding Agenda Item 7, explaining gun violence has reached the home front, evidenced by the recent SPU shooting. She joined Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America and learned what can be done to prevent gun violence. Although no ad campaign or single piece of legislation can eliminate the problem entirely, solutions need to be found to the problem, and to try to prevent gun violence. I-594 is a very specific and sensible solution for keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Licensed gun dealers do criminal background checks for every gun they sell; according to FBI data, this system has blocked 40,000 guns sales to people prohibited from possessing guns in Washington. Criminals and others prohibited from purchasing guns can get around background checks by buying from private sellers online or at a gun show. Expanding the law to require background checks for private sales will close this loophole; a seller and buyer meet at a licensed dealer to transfer the gun and complete a background check. In Washington, 98% of residents live within 10 miles of a licensed gun dealer. In the 16 states where mandatory background checks for private sales are required, data shows a 38% reduction in women murdered by intimate partners, 49% reduction in suicides by firearms and 39% fewer police killed with handguns. These numbers represent lives saved; background checks save lives. She urged the Council to pass the resolution to endorse I-594 and urged everyone to vote yes on I-594 in November. At Mayor Earling's request, City Attorney Jeff Taraday explained under Washington state law there is a general prohibition on using public facilities to support a ballot proposition. The exception to the prohibition allows action to be taken at an open public meeting by members of an elected legislative body to express a collective decision to support or oppose a ballot proposition so long as, 1) any required notice of the meeting includes the title and number of the ballot proposition, and 2) members of the legislative body and members of public are afforded an approximately equal opportunity for the expression of an opposing view. The Council cannot take action tonight because the notice of this meeting did not contain the title and number of the ballot proposition. When that agenda item is reached, the Council will provide direction regarding how they want the meeting noticed and action will be taken at a future meeting. Members of the public are free speak tonight during Audience Comment. Council President Buckshnis asked whether a public hearing was required. Mr. Taraday answered technically a public hearing is not required but it is essentially a public hearing because the statute states the public must be afford an approximately equal opportunity for the expression of an opposing view. Lynn Carpenter, Edmonds, spoke regarding Agenda Item 7 and encouraged City Council to adopt the resolution. As the current President, the League of Women Voters of Snohomish County, she relayed the League's support of background checks for gun sales. The League is a member of the Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility, a coalition of 26 diverse organizations around the state advocating for the passage of I-594. Gun safety is a concern of every Edmonds citizens and the City Council needs to be on record with all citizens who see I-594 as an important step. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 9, 2014 Page 2 Christy Cufley, Edmonds, expressed support for the SR 104 crosswalk and right-of-way improvements. She referred to her April 16 letter to the Council in support of the project and subsequent receipt of Hearing Examiner decisions, motions for reconsideration, etc. It was her understanding the project has been approved, citing the Hearing Examiner's May 22, 2014 decision. She encouraged the Council to favorably enact the crosswalk, a good safety measure for Pt. Edwards residents. She shared a story from a Pt. Edwards resident who tried to cross SR 104 twice in the last month and was almost hit by vehicles and suggested the Council take action before someone was hurt. She submitted petitions with 200 signatures of Pt. Edwards residents and asked that the petitions be provided to the Council and/or Parks, Planning & Public Works Committee. Don Ricker, Edmonds, referred to a letter he sent to the City Council regarding the SR 104 crosswalk, stating his personal interest in the project because his wife fell in the middle of SR 104 while attempting to cross. He was aware the project arose suddenly and may not have been on the Traffic Calming Project list but when opportunities arise, it is up to City Council to consider a project, determine whether it has value and whether it should be completed. In his view the City has an opportunity to leverage $10,000 to gain a $300,000 project. He summarized this is not just a crosswalk for Pt. Edwards residents to cross SR 104, with the location of the crosswalk approximately at the City Park gate, it is an opportunity to improve access to the marsh. Alvin Rutledge, Edmonds, commented Bob and Janice Freeman were members of the Friends of Edmonds Library and held meetings at their home. They were also involved with the effort to prevent Brightwater locating at Pt. Edwards. Next, he reported on September 4 the Snohomish County Boundary Review Board denied Shoreline's proposed assumption of Ronald Wastewater District in Snohomish County; it will now go to appeals court. Norma Bruns, Edmonds, commented gun control is one of her passions and I-594 is a step toward good, safe, gun control action. Although she did not think the Council always needed vote the same, she hoped the Council's vote on the resolution to support passage of I-594 would be unanimous. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, said I-594 was gun control, an attempt to control guns by gun registration; it was not saving someone from purchasing a gun in a dark parking lot. He acknowledged people's concern about guns, pointing out most people he knows practice gun safety. He has purchased guns at garage sale and given guns to family members; 1-594 would require registering those transactions so that "when the big guy upstairs decides he's going to come and get them, he has the list." Kristin Milaki, Edmonds, clarified the federal government is prohibited by law from creating a registry of gun owners; I-594 has nothing to do with a national registry of gun owners. I-594 takes the existing law for anyone purchasing a new gun from a store and applies it to all gun sales. It sends the strong message to the community that buying a gun is a serious decision that needs to be taken seriously. It is not significantly more inconvenient to go to a licensed gun dealer to have a background check done. If I-594 passes, it will prevent back alley sales transactions because they will be illegal. She recognized I-594 does not address all gun violence but it addresses impulse purchase, people who want to purchase a gun in the heat of moment will be required to think twice. In states that have passed similar initiatives, there are significantly lower rates of suicide and domestic gun violence. Other rates of suicide do not significantly increase; it prevents heat of the moment decisions. She encouraged the Council to endorse I-594. 6. PRESENTATION ON THE TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM Transportation Engineer Bertrand Hauss provided general information regarding the Traffic Calming Program: • Detailed program identified in 2009 Transportation Plan Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 9, 2014 Page 3 Identified in Chapter 2 (Goals, objectives, and policies) and appendix B (Traffic Calming Program( Program details identified in appendix o 3 -step flow chart ■ Phase 1: Review for qualifications ■ Phase 2: Education and enforcement ■ Phase 3: Installation of traffic calming devices ■ Serves as guidance/general steps to follow He displayed and briefly reviewed the steps in the flow chart, advising the three phases take approximately two years to complete. Prior/since adoption of Transportation Plan (late 2009) stretches have been inserted onto a list following speeding concerns (from citizens) to be considered for further evaluation once funding is available. Since 2011, stretches have been ranked based on series of criteria: • 85th percentile speed (85% of vehicles going below speed/speed used for comparison purposes between all speed study) • Number of pedestrian generators (church, parks, schools, etc.) • Vehicular volume • Uncontrolled distance • Existing sidewalk (on one side, both sides, or neither) • Accident history over last 3 years Points are assigned based on how the stretch fared on the six criteria such as: • 4 points for 85th percentile speed 9 mph over speed limit • 8 points for 85th percentile speed 10 mph over speed limit • 12 points for 85th percentile speed 11 mph over speed limit • Maximum # of points 100 Mr. Hauss displayed a list of 24 stretches and identified the stretches where the 85th percentile was regularly 8 mph over the speed limit and stretches where the 85th percentile was below 8 mph over the speed limit. He noted stretches ranked 1, 2 and 4 were addressed in 2012 with the installation of radar feedback signs. With limited available funding, other stretches have not been addressed. He reviewed next steps for the Traffic Calming Program. In 2015 the draft budget contains $10,000 for this program. There is a request for an additional $10,000 in 2015 for a total of $20,000. The funds would be used to purchase one quick disconnect radar feedback sign and installation of sign foundations at different locations to allowing the sign to be moved from one location to another. Based on research, moving the sign periodically improves the efficiency of the signs and driver compliance with the speed limit. Council President Buckshnis observed Mukilteo has plastic bumps to slow drivers instead of radar. She asked why that had not been considered in Edmonds as a traffic calming measure. Mr. Hauss answered speed cushions were used in 2011 near the Interurban Trail. There is often negative feedback from drivers regarding the speed cushions due to the physical feature on roadway. The speed cushions are an option in the Transportation Plan. Council President Buckshnis relayed drivers on Olympic View Drive often ignore the radar sign once they get used to it. She noted there were many places where there are concerns with speeds that could be addressed with speed cushions. She did not think $20,000 was enough and suggested doing a couple of pilot projects with the speed cushions because the physical feature requires drivers to slow down. With Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 9, 2014 Page 4 regard to the efficiency of the radar feedback signs, Mr. Hauss explained studies were done before and after the signs were installed. Before the signs were installed, speeds on Olympic View Drive were 12 mph over the 85`h percentile; a study done 6-12 months after the signs were installed found the 85h percentile had gone down 7-8 mph. Councilmember Bloom commented she requested this presentation. She expressed concern there were no attachments in the packet and the presentation did not reference a number of aspects of the program that were in the Transportation Plan such as the process. Her intent in requesting the presentation was Mr. Williams' allocation of $10,000 from the Traffic Calming Program to the SR 104 project. She noted the Traffic Calming Program has a detailed process which includes an application form for residents to fill out and it must be completed by eight households. The funds are intended for inexpensive traffic calming measures for the residents that have petitioned for those measures, evaluate them and work toward funding of those measures. Her concern with the SR 104 crosswalk was not that it was not a valid project but that it not on the list of projects in the Comprehensive Plan and to her it was not a neighborhood issue but was a State highway issue. Councilmember Bloom said it would have been helpful to have the process in the Traffic Calming Program explained so citizens were aware how to access the minimal funding that is available. She asked Public Works Director Phil Williams why he independently decided to allocate the $10,000 in the Traffic Calming Program for 2014 to the SR 104 program which seems to not have nothing to do with the Traffic Calming Program. Mr. Williams responded he was not sure he would not consider Pt. Edwards a neighborhood; they do have valid concerns. Of the 23 projects on the list, none of them were the result of a petition submitted by eight households as outlined in the Transportation Plan. By the time the 2009 plan was adopted, staff had already accumulated a lot of emails from residents regarding specific stretches and intersections. Mr. Hauss took that collection of concerns, applied the screening criteria in the plan, and if any passed the initial screening, when funding was available speed studies were done to determine if it met that criteria. Projects were then placed on the list in priority order based on their scores. In the future that is the right way to add new projects. Mr. Williams acknowledged not every feature in the Traffic Calming Program was followed with regard to the SR 104 crosswalk. He had 24 hours to make a decision to provide some funding to the State to help award the project this year. Councilmember Bloom asked why he did not request a budget amendment for the $10,000 rather than using the $10,000 in the Traffic Calming Program that could have been allocated to other projects. She did not understand why he had allocated funds without Council approval from a program with very specific criteria. She agreed Pt. Edwards is a neighborhood but SR 104 does not run through Pt. Edwards; it divides Pt. Edwards from City Park. The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) states the State will take care of the project entirely on their own. Mr. Williams agreed the State was leading the project, providing $310,000 of the $320,000 project cost. The Stated needed some help from Edmonds to compete internally for the difference between the budget and the secured grant. He had 24 hours to make that decision; it was not enough time, unless an emergency Council meeting was called, to take it to the Finance Committee or full Council so he made that decision and was, after the fact, notifying the Council. He would welcome the Council replenishing the $10,000 he provided from Traffic Calming Program from elsewhere in budget and would use the $10,000 to match the $10,000 in 2015 for the project Mr. Hauss described. Councilmember Bloom asked Mr. Hauss to review the process for citizens to follow to request funds from the Traffic Calming Program. Mr. Williams suggested putting something on the City's website and/or a press release to solicit input from residents regarding traffic calming projects. Those could be screened and scored and placed on the list. Councilmember Bloom relayed her understanding of Mr. Williams' Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 9, 2014 Page 5 explanation that the process in the Transportation Plan has never been used. Mr. Williams answered the original list of projects was created as Mr. Hauss described. Councilmember Bloom cited the three phases of the project and asked why the process has not been followed since adoption of the plan in 2009. Mr. Williams answered there have been many more than eight emails identifying Olympic View Drive as a significant source of citizen concern with speeding. Although it was before he was hired, he assumed staff did not see a point in finding eight people to complete an application. The emails identified residents' concern and that was the reason the project was placed on the list. In the future a good way would be to solicit petitions from residents who want staff to screen a project in their neighborhood. Councilmember Bloom asked how he planned to facilitate that. Mr. Williams envisioned a public announcement that would be placed on the City's website; allow a couple months for citizens to submit an application along with eight signatures. He commented the projects from that effort may score more highly than the existing projects on list. Councilmember Bloom asked whether the project identified in a letter to the Edmonds Beacon editor regarding City Park would go through the process of obtaining signatures from eight households. Mr. Williams answered the purpose of the process was to identify locations where there were significant citizen concern. Staff is already aware of some concern and can screen, score and add them to the list of projects. For others, it would be appropriate for citizens to complete the application and provide eight names. He commented it should not be prohibited for that information to come to staff's attention in another manner. The location Councilmember Bloom mentioned near City Park arose as a result of more pedestrian traffic crossing Yd Avenue as a result of the new playground and there probably needs to be a crosswalk installed. He has talked to Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite about that issue and she is trying to include it in the capital project. Councilmember Bloom referred to the Walnut Street crosswalk where Elli Bonanno was killed and asked how residents in that area could petition for a crosswalk. Mr. Williams answered they could submit petition. He noted there was not an issue with speeding in that location where the 85th percentile is over 8 mph above the speeding limit and speeding was not a factor in that tragic accident. If the City desires to have crosswalk there to connect two pieces of trail, that could be could be considered although it was not necessarily a traffic calming project. A petition would be a great way to bring that project to staffs attention. Councilmember Bloom asked whether W. Williams would be preparing information that explains the process and the necessary forms and placing them on the City's website. Mr. Williams answered yes. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to a new park in east Edmonds, Mathay-Ballinger Park, that has a lot of visitors. It is on a street with no crosswalk, no stop signs, speed bumps, islands, roundabouts or any other traffic calming devices. After she and the City received multiple complaints from neighbors, the City put in radar feedback sign on 242nd. When drivers see the sign, they slow down so the feedback to the City was that drivers were near the speed limit. Mr. Hauss advised that stretch is project #20 on the list; when a speed study was done 1 — 1'/2 years ago, the 85th percentile at that location was 8 mph over speed limit. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented that is example of an area she is familiar with due to the park and children walking in the area. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether the list of projects in the 2009 Transportation Plan will be updated with the Transportation Plan update. She noted things have changed in the last 5 years in areas near Highway 99. Mr. Williams advised the City has contracted with Fehr and Peers to develop a new Transportation Element; the targeted completion is mid-June 2015. Revamping the Traffic Calming Program is not part of the scope of that project and the process outlined in the program can be used in the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 9, 2014 Page 6 future. When the new segment of 228th opens, consideration will need to be given to its effect on speeds in adjacent residential neighborhoods. Mr. Williams explained the radar feedback signs do not collect data and do not provide the City any feedback; they provide feedback to the driver that they are exceeding the speed limit. The speed trailer the police uses records and logs data and allows data analysis. That is how the 85th percentile speeds are determined. The cost of a radar feedback sign is approximately $10,000 and does not include the base or the labor to install it. When the first batch of radar feedback signs were purchased and installed, there was an immediate improvement in speeds. A study a year later indicated the signs were still helpful in bringing speeds into compliance. Councilmember Mesaros whether there was any prohibition in the Traffic Calming Program against using the funds for a State route through the City. Mr. Williams answered there is a presumption but maybe it should not be limited to only local residential streets. There are a number of places where there are significant risks on collectors or arterials. The Traffic Calming Program does not mention State routes but the ADT on State highways is very high and he recognized SR 104 was not a local street. Councilmember Mesaros commented SR 104 separates a local neighborhood from the rest of the City. He commended Mr. Williams for his fast action so that the $310,000 for the SR 104 crosswalk was not lost. Councilmember Petso relayed her understanding that the Council's budget authority was at fund level for the General Fund. For example, if $10,000 was allocated for software for the Clerk's office and staff chose to use it differently, there was nothing the Council could do about it. Mr. Taraday answered his recollection of the statute was unless the Council specifies otherwise by ordinance, when the budget is adopted, it is adopted at the fund level. Councilmember Petso asked whether the same is true for the $9.7 million in the 112 Fund or is it different because it is capital money. Mr. Taraday answered fund level meant fund level; if the Council appropriates a certain amount for a capital fund, unless the Council specifies otherwise by ordinance, the appropriation is made for the fund. As long as the fund is not overspent, then the appropriation is consistent with the Council's budgeting authority. Councilmember Petso observed if the Council wished to have greater budgeting authority so that when an amount was allocated to a particular program it was actually spent on that program, the Council would need to do so by ordinance. Mr. Taraday agreed. Councilmember Petso observed this project was not on the list of 23 projects in the Traffic Calming Program, it was not in the Strategic Plan, it was not in the budget and it was not in the CFP. She relayed her understanding that the GMA required some level consistency between what was included in the CFP and how money was spent. Mr. Taraday answered the CFP should be consistent with the budget. One of reasons there is an exception to the once per year Comprehensive Plan amendments is because GMA contemplates there may be occasions where the Comprehensive Plan needs to be amended, particularly the capital portion, to be make it consistent with the budget amendment. The capital plans should be consistent with the budget. Councilmember Petso asked whether the Council could approve an expenditure and later make an amendment to make the CFP and the budget consistent. Mr. Williams said the reason this project is not in any of those documents is because it is a State project, not a City project; the State agreed to take on this project. The issue of additional funding arose quickly and needed a quick decision. Councilmember Petso commented the project is in the TIP but not in the CIP or CFP. She sought guidance for the Finance Committee's discussion regarding whether the plans were required to be consistent. Mr. Taraday explained as a general rule all the capital plans should be consistent; however, they are not all adopted at same time of the year. Because the TIP is adopted in the summer and the CIP and CFP are typically adopted at the end of year, there is typically some lag. Except for calendar lag, they should be consistent. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 9, 2014 Page 7 Councilmember Bloom asked whether funds had already been provided to the State. Mr. Williams answered he doubted it but a commitment had been made. Councilmember Bloom commented since it was only a commitment, the source of the allocation could change. Mr. Taraday answered he doubted the State will care what fund the money comes from. Councilmember Bloom observed the Council could change the source of the allocation, protecting the 2014 Traffic Calming Program funds. Mr. Williams answered that was up to the Council. Council President Buckshnis commented the purchasing policy provides Mr. Williams a $50,000 speeding authority. She considered this a traffic calming project and although she had no problem with the funding source, she recognized that some Councilmembers want to preserve the $10,000 for the actual Traffic Calming Program. She observed the issue could be resolved by doing a budget amendment and asked whether the Council should do a budget amendment. Mr. Taraday answered that is a policy recommendation rather than a legal recommendation but it is legally within the Council's authority to appropriate an additional $10,000 to either fund the State project or replenish the Traffic Calming Program. Mayor Earling commented under the circumstances, a 24 hour turnaround, he completely supports staff's recommendation. He understood some Councilmembers' concerns, but felt on the spur of the moment and the time available, Mr. Williams made a wise decision. 7. A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING PASSAGE OF WASHINGTON STATE INITIATIVE 594 Mayor Earling referred to the City Attorney's caution with regard to taking action on this item tonight and suggested the Council have a brief discussion and give direction to staff. As the author of the agenda memo, Councilmember Peterson apologized the Council was unable to take action tonight as he was unaware of the intricacies of State law. He will work with the Clerk and the City Attorney to ensure the agenda title meets the requirements of the statute. If the Council decides to pursue this item, he asked whether public comment needed to be part of this agenda item and if so, whether time was provided for pro and con statements. Mr. Taraday answered the law does not require that level of precision as long as the Council is not gaveling down one side and allowing the other side to speak. The Council would treat it as any public hearing and allow an equal amount of time per speaker. If there happened to be more people speaking on one side of the issue, it would not constitute a violation of the use of public facilities prohibition. As this item needs to return to the Council for action, he asked for a date and what type of notice the Council wanted to have provided. Councilmember Peterson recalled with similar issues, the agenda item has been noticed indicating public comment would be allowed. As he is unavailable on September 16th and September 23rd is a work session, he suggested scheduling it on the October 7th agenda. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas remarked public comment should be sufficient versus a public hearing. Council President Buckshnis suggested scheduling public comment on September 16th and deliberation and decision on October 7th. Mr. Taraday advised the statute prefers everything occur at the same meeting. Council President Buckshnis advised it would be scheduled on October 7th 7A. TOWN HALL MEETING REGARDING WESTGATE Councilmember Bloom explained a resident emailed the Council regarding, expressing concern that the Westgate proposal was happening quickly, he did not have an opportunity to speak at the public hearing and suggesting a Town Hall meeting focused specifically on Westgate. With the help of Councilmember Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 9, 2014 Page 8 Petso, site will be hosting Town Hall meeting on Monday, September 15 from 7:00 — 8:30 p.m. at Faith Community Church located at 10220 238th St SW, Edmonds. She has asked that the Town Hall be posted on the City website and announced via the City's web email address list. Mayor Earling has denied her request for staff time to help with preparation of materials for the Town Hall meeting. She has not received a response from Mayor Earling regarding her request for staff to post materials on the website so anyone interested in the Westgate proposal can easily find everything that has been discussed. Mayor Earling advised when he has had an opportunity to read her email, he will respond to her. Councilmember Bloom advised it was in the email denying her request for staff time to prepare materials for the Town Hall meeting. Mayor Earling explained his response was based on staff s assessment that an extensive amount of time would be required, coupled with the fact that there have been 30-40 public meetings regarding Westgate over the years. He had no objection if the Council as a whole wanted to have a Town Hall meeting, but if seven Councilmembers each hold their own Town Hall, each requiring staff time, that would be uncalled for. He relayed Councilmembers Bloom and Petso met with Development Services Director Hope on Monday; the questions they asked will take Planning Manager Rob Chave a considerable amount time to research. It was not fair to staff to provide only a week's notice to provide information. He suggested the Council develop a policy under what circumstances a Council meeting can be held; there needed to be four or more Councilmembers willing to address the same issue. Councilmember Bloom understood Mayor Earling had denied her request for staff time to help prepare materials for the September 15 Town Hall meeting. She asked whether he would allow staff to post materials regarding Westgate on the City's website for the public to review prior to the Town Hall meeting. Mayor Earling asked Councilmember Bloom to send him a list of what she would like to have posted; there have been endless meeting with endless reports and he needed a definition of the materials she wanted posted. Councilmember Bloom clarified she was asking to have a summary of the plan be posted as have been posted for other plans such as the Strategic Plan, Five Corners, etc. Mayor Earling answered he will ask staff to determine the time allocation tomorrow and advise her of his decision. 8. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned to committee meetings at 7:26 p.m. r DAVID O. E RLING, MAYOR S PASSEY, CITY K Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 9, 2014 Page 9