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