Cm130917EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
September 17, 2013
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:15 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council
Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Dave Earling, Mayor
Lora Petso, Council President
Joan Bloom, Councilmember
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT
Strom Peterson, Councilmember
Frank Yamamoto, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
ALSO PRESENT
Thea Ocfemia, Student Representative
1. ROLL CALL
STAFF PRESENT
Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic
Development Director
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Roger Neumaier, Finance Director
Carrie Hite, Parks & Recreation Director
Rob English, City Engineer
Leif Bjorback, Building Official
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
City Clerk Sandy Chase called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of
Councilmembers Peterson, Yamamoto, and Fraley-Monillas.
2. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION
PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i).
At 6:17 p.m., Mayor Earling announced that the City Council would meet in executive session regarding
pending or potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). He stated that the executive session was
scheduled to last approximately 45 minutes and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the
Public Safety Complex. No action was anticipated to occur as a result of meeting in executive session.
Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Earling, and Councilmembers Johnson,
Buckshnis, Petso and Bloom. Others present were City Attorney Jeff Taraday and City Clerk Sandy
Chase. The executive session concluded at 7:03 p.m.
Mayor Earling reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 7:05 p.m. and led the flag salute.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO APPROVE THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETSO,
TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda
items approved are as follows:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 1
A. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 2013.
B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #204215 THROUGH #204359 DATED SEPTEMBER
12, 2013 FOR $1,007,587.92.
C. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM MIKE
MCCAUSLAND (AMOUNT UNDETERMINED), JON HIE ($20,000.00), CLIFFORD AND
MARIE HACKNEY (AMOUNT UNDETERMINED), CAROLE AND MERLIN KLEVEN
(AMOUNT UNDETERMINED), JODI SACKVILLE ($500,000.00), AND FRONTIER
(AMOUNT UNDETERMINED).
D. APPROVAL OF EDMONDS BUSINESSES APPLYING FOR RENEWAL OF THEIR
WASHINGTON STATE LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD LIQUOR LICENSES FOR THE
MONTH OF AUGUST 2013.
E. AUTHORIZATION TO CONTRACT WITH JAMES G. MURPHY TO SELL SURPLUS
CITY VEHICLES.
F. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT #4 WITH
DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES FOR THE 76TH AVE. W @ 212TH ST. SW
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Donna Breske, Snohomish, explained she applied for a building permit on June 20, 2013 for her
property at 9330 2181 Place SW. She displayed a copy of the review letter she received from the City,
summarizing there was no reference in the letter to any City Code to support the conclusions. She
displayed the site plan and voiced her frustration with attempting to obtain a permit from the City. She
referred to comments in a review letter from Jeri Machuga: 1) Indicate what was utilized as a datum point
and provide its elevation. Ms. Breske pointed out the DBM shown on the site plan is at the top of the
sanitary sewer manhole. This is a standard elevation datum. 2) Confirm the height of the wall along the
east property line. Ms. Breske pointed out the top and bottom elevations are on the site plan, standard
information on engineering drawings, and can be utilized to determine the 2 foot height. 3) Show the four
corners; corner B does not point to the corner of building but rather the overhang. Ms. Breske stated this
is nitpicky and reflects the type of review comments she has received. Since a pre -application meeting
two years ago she has been asking the City to explain why she is required to divert stormwater. She
asserted her due process was being violated so that the City can charge the $1300 park impact fee that
will be effective October 1, 2013.
Mayor Earling advised a meeting was held with staff today; Ms. Breske will receive a letter from the City
no later than October 2, 2013.
Al Rutledge, Edmonds, thanked the committee who selected the new City Clerk who will begin work on
October 1. Next, he recognized Park Maintenance Manager Rich Lindsay who received an award for 30
years of volunteerism at the Evergreen Fairgrounds in Monroe. He also reported state representatives are
exempt from traffic tickets because they may be speeding to avoid missing a vote. He suggested the
Council contact the legislature about changing this practice.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, questioned why it would take two weeks for the City to send a letter to Ms.
Breske. He referred to construction of a building on SR104 in Westgate that included removing and
replacing the curb and sidewalk. He suggested providing a deceleration lane on SR104 to improve safety
and reduce congestion. Next, he suggested Councilmembers drive through Shoreline where nearly every
street has been chipsealed. He also referred to plans for a multimodal facility at Unocal, recognizing that
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 2
although there was property available there were no construction funds. He recommended any efforts to
obtain funds to build an "impossible ferry tunnel" downtown be routed to the multimodal facility.
6. HEARING EXAMINER ANNUAL REPORT
Hearing Examiner Phil Olbrechts commented his report was similar to last year; he had the same number
of project applications split in the same type of conditional uses, variances, subdivisions and
administrative appeals. He asked if the Hillman litigation had been concluded. City Attorney Jeff Taraday
advised it had.
Council President Petso asked whether any other closed record items were on the list. Mr. Olbrechts
acknowledged the Willowdale variance was on appeal to the Council and he would not address that.
Edgewood Baptist Church Sign and Setback Variance (8/6/13) Approved. This was a variance
request to construct a 36 square foot sign setback 3 feet of 76`' Avenue West. Code only authorizes 24
square foot sign at least 15 feet from 76t' Avenue West. The variances were justified by the fact that
onsite landscaping required by City Code would hide any wall mounted signs from public view and
would also hide a sign located 15 feet from the street. The sign would serve as the only sign for the
church property and would be used to mark the entrance. The sign area variance is usually assigned to the
ADB but was consolidated with the setback variance. ADB variance criteria are more lenient than the
setback criteria and more focused on aesthetic impacts. The ADB recommended approval.
Willowdale (8/6/13): Pending appeal to City Council.
Krumova Conditional Use (5/23/13): Approved. The applicant requested a conditional use permit to
convert an existing 2,400 square foot building to a daycare at 24310 76`' Avenue West in the community
business zone. Surrounding uses include a church, commercial uses and residential uses.
McDonald's Conditional Use (5/9/13): Approved. The applicant requested replacement of McDonald's
on Edmonds Way. A new design is subject to ADB review. Maya Taylor, 7 years old, made an eloquent
plea for a McDonald's play area and presented a petition with 50 signatures. The approval decision
encouraged McDonald's to incorporate a play area as requested by Ms. Taylor.
Hillman Variance and Reasonable Use Requests (4/24/13): Approved with conditions. The applicants
requested street setback variance, side yard variance and two critical area reasonable use requests to build
a single family home at 1139 Sierra Place. The street setback variance involved a request to reduce the
street setback from 25 to 12 feet. The side yard setback was for a reduction from 10 to 3 feet to construct
a retaining wall. The reasonable use requests involved a request to build within a stream and wetland
buffer as well as within the wetland itself.
The setback variances were necessary in order to avoid wetland. The reasonable use requests were
necessary because it was not possible to build on the lot without encroaching into a wetland or stream. A
portion of the property was free from critical areas and their buffers, but accessing it would have required
the construction of a driveway across the wetland, which would cause more environmental damage than
the proposal made by the applicants. He delegated to staff to determine whether the proposal was the
minimum wetland encroachment.
Olson Variances (3/l/13): Applicants requested a street setback variance, side yard variance and height
variance to construct a single family home; street setback variance was approved and the other two
variances were denied. The street setback was necessary to construct a driveway bridge to access the
property which is a steep slope hazard area, sloping downward from its adjoining access road. The only
way to avoid building the bridge was to push the home into the steeper portion of the lot, which in turn
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 3
would require significantly more grading. The side yard variance was requested to provide improved
natural lighting in the basement. There were no special circumstances related to the property that
necessitated this variance request.
Due to the way height is measured in Edmonds, height was measured 2.5 feet below the ground floor
level of the home due to the steep slopes. The applicants requested a variance to increase the allowed
height from 25 feet to 28 feet. The applicants claimed that without the variance they would have to reduce
the pitch of the room which would adversely affect drainage. He ruled the modest loss in building height
caused by the steep slopes did not deprive the owner of the use rights and privileges permitted to other
properties in the vicinity.
Shaw Lane Plat (3/28/13): Approved. This is a six lot preliminary plat located at 8620 218th St. SW.
Gifford Conditional Use (1/25/13): Approved. This is a conversion of single family home to an office
in the RM-15 zone at 23901 Edmonds Way. Surrounding uses along Edmonds Way are multi -family
complexes, a church and an automotive repair shop. A single family residential use adjoins the property
away from Edmonds Way. No significant exterior alterations to the home were proposed.
Megenity Code Violation Appeal (9/18/12): The Megenitys were cited for topping three trees in City
right-of-way to improve their view. The three trees were located on property adjoining the Launcefords'
single family residence which is downslope of the topped trees. The Megenitys contacted the planning
department who referred them to public works; public works referred them to Snohomish County PUD
who indicated they did not plan to trim the trees that year. That was interpreted by the Megenitys that they
could trim several trees themselves. Staff cited the Megenitys for three trees that were cut lower than
PUD would have trimmed. The base fine for trees with a diameter less than 3 inches is $1000 and $3000
for trees 3 inches or more. As the diameter of the two of the trees could not be verified, the base fine for
two of the three trees was based upon the $1000 base fine instead of the $3000 base fine.
Staff only assessed 1/3 of the $3000 base fine for each tree because of the Megenitys efforts to work with
the neighbors and the City. He increased the fine to 2/3 of the base fine on the finding that the Megenitys
exercised deliberate ignorance by not asking City staff if they could legally cut the trees. City Code
requires the base fine be tripled if the trees are topped in the right-of-way or a steep slope. The topped
trees were in both so the $2,344 in base fines was tripled to $7,000.
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the Megenity Appeal and the indication that more trees were
topped yet the only trees the Megenitys were cited for were the ones cut more drastically than PUD would
have trimmed them. Mr. Olbrechts stated the only trees he could consider were the three that were subject
to the Notice of Violation. Staff could have cited the Megenitys for the other trees that were topped.
Councilmember Johnson referred to the upcoming discussion regarding a Code of Ethics, explaining
some cities use the hearing examiner as the hearing officer that reviews Code of Ethics violations. She
asked whether he had an experience with that or if he had any advice. Mr. Olbrechts responded as the
City Attorney for another city in the past, his suggestion was to have a roster of five rotating hearing
examiners who considered Ethics Code violations. He referred to the public impression of a hearing
examiner ruling on a potential ethics violation for a councilmember who will vote on their contract
renewal. Having five hearing examiners on a roster would address that situation. He recalled that city
advertised for hearing examiners to be on a roster and only received two responses.
7. JULY 2013 BUDGETARY FINANCIAL REPORT
Finance Director Roger Neumaier advised he had been asked to provide a brief update on the City's
financials using the July 2013 report and to review the changes he initiated in the format and content of
the report. He highlighted the following in the July 2013 report:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 4
• Property tax is approximately 12% higher than a year ago. This may be due to delinquent taxes
paid when homes are sold.
• July sales tax revenues are up over last year and over budget, trending at 7.5% over budget. This
is good news for the City's financials as well as indicative of the improving local economy.
• Total General Fund Revenue is at 61 % and approximately $1.3 million over last year. The
unknowns with regard to payment of delinquent property taxes may be affecting this amount.
• Intergovernmental expenditures are at 71%. This is likely due to major purchases made early in
the year. A 2% surplus at yearend is anticipated.
• REET revenues are trending significantly above year-to-date, approximately 51 % above budget.
Yearend REET projections are $900,000 compared to $650,000 budget.
Mr. Neumaier distributed the March and June 2013 Budgetary Financial Reports.
Councilmember Buckshnis observed some utility and capital improvement funds and reserves have been
combined. She inquired about Fund 412, 414 and 631. Mr. Neumaier suggested his presentation will
address this.
Mr. Neumaier explained when he was first hired by the City, he was asked to review the monthly and
quarterly budget reports and initiate some revisions. An email was sent to Councilmembers and Directors
on June 12, 2013 asking for their input; he received written and verbal input from a variety of individuals.
Based on that input and his own review he developed a list of proposed changes. Prior to asking staff to
program those changes, he offered each Councilmember an opportunity to review the proposed changes.
Several Councilmembers met with him to review possible changes; no Councilmembers objected to the
changes. The first month the revisions were included was June 2013.
Mr. Neumaier stated much of the information in the prior reports was excellent and is still contained in
the reports. These include summary revenues and variances by fund for all funds, summary expenditures
and variances by fund for all funds, detailed account current year revenues for the General Fund, detailed
expenditures by fund, summary current year expenditures for General Fund departments which now
include prior year expenditures year-to-date, detailed account current year expenditures for General Fund
department other funds, cumulative month -by -month revenues and graphs for key accounts including
aggregate General Fund, REET, sales and use tax, gas, telephone, and electric utility taxes. Revenue from
water meter sales, stormwater sales and unmetered sewer sales were added. He described changes made
to the report package:
Order of the reports within each month was changed so that the reports begin with revenues and
expenditures by fund and then account -by -account detail for each.
Removed report and graph for month -by -month year-to-date total expenditures by department as
they were duplicative of other reports in the package and since departments spend close to their
entire budgets, the visual difference represented in the graphs were generally not illustrative. In
addition the graphs included a projected trend which many people said was misleading because it
was based on straight-line projection rather than analysis of spending. For example, if a
department made a major one-time purchase in the first quarter, the trend predicted a large
negative variance for the year.
Removed fund balance analysis and current year graphs that are heavily impacted by cyclical
changes in revenues and expenditures. Comments he received indicated this was confusing to the
public because fund balances change significantly during the year if tracked on a cash basis. The
City's revenues and expenditures are not evenly spread throughout the year. Edmonds, like most
local governments, does not make yearly, monthly or quarterly accruals. To illustrate, the General
Fund Reserve in March 2013 report showed a year-to-date fund balance reduction of $4 million.
Actually the fund balance appears to be stable if not growing.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 5
Added comparable year-to-date information so revenue or expenditures could be compared to
results for the same time period in the prior year in addition to comparing to the budget. This was
done for all accounts with the exception of the utility accounts because the account structure for
the 412 and 411 changed January 1, 2013.
A 1-3 page analytic report will be included in the front of the quarterly report. The former
monthly and quarterly budgetary report had analysis and descriptive information in various areas
throughout the report.
Removed the dashboard that tracked six revenue elements by showing the relationship to
projections and identifying whether it was a positive, neutral, warning or negative trend. In the
first quarter the trend for General Fund revenues was shown as a positive at 12.04% above
projections. It is difficult to make such a projection early in the year. The July report now predicts
a positive trend for the year of 3%. Making an accurate year-end projection during the first and
second quarter report is problematic.
At the end of the second quarter, the following statement was included: "Year-to-date General
Fund revenues are equal to 56% of budgeted revenues for the year. Revenues year-to-date are 7%
greater than the 2012 year-to-date revenues. However, revenue has been strengthened by greater
than anticipated property tax for the first half of the year. How much of the positive variance
relates to earlier than usual payment of property tax due to home sales remains to be seen;
however, it appears the overall General Fund 2013 revenue will exceed budget." Projections will
be included in each analysis section of the report with proper caveats.
Mr. Neumaier advised he will make a verbal presentation to the Council Finance Committee regarding
each month's report and has been asked to provide the Council a verbal quarterly report. He summarized
the financial reports were good; the revisions strengthened them and made the reports more meaningful.
To Councilmember Buckshnis' question about 411, 412 and 414, Mr. Neumaier explained under former
Finance Director Hunstock, those were broken into 421, 422 and 423. That allocation was recently
completed; it was a major initiative but will provide better information in the long run. The downside is
year-to-date comparables from the year cannot be provided this year.
Councilmember Buckshnis inquired about Fund 631 Transportation Benefit District. Mr. Neumaier asked
for an opportunity to research that.
Councilmember Buckshnis said the new reports use the same format but the charts and graphs are missing
which many citizens like. She noted the reports were modeled after Redmond's reports which use charts
and graphs. She expressed concern the report format was not vetted well before the changes were made.
She recalled Finance Committee Chair Yamamoto asked for last year's information to be included; he did
not ask to have information deleted from the report. She preferred the report return to the old format.
Councilmember Bloom asked why a decision was made to change the reports. Mr. Neumaier answered he
was approached by several people about changes. Councilmember Bloom relayed citizens liked the
former report and it was easy to read. Recalling there was a great deal of effort to develop the old reports
to ensure they were transparent and user-friendly; she asked why such dramatic changes were made when
the reports were working. Mr. Neumaier answered if the Council wants fund balance reports, they can
easily be produced but he believed they were misleading. When he interviewed for the position he
reviewed the reports and was concerned to see that the fund balance was down 40% in the first quarter
before realizing the cyclical nature of revenues and expenditures created that problem. As a CPA he feels
a report should not include that misleading information. The report and graph of revenues and
expenditures by department month -to -month was eliminated because it was not illustrative and the trends
were misleading.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 6
Council President Petso inquired about the elimination of the Change in Fund Balance Summary Report.
She wanted to ensure without that report, information would be available that would lead to the discovery
of something like the "Haines Wharf fiasco." She asked if that information was somewhere else in the
report. Mr. Neumaier responded if a project over -expends, it affects expenditures not revenues. The way
to know if a major project materially over -expends is the variance for expenditures. He emphasized if the
Council wants that report, it can be provided. He did not consider it a good report because the City does
not make accruals during the year. He summarized the interim fund balances are very easy to present;
they just do not have meaning.
Councilmember Buckshnis disagreed, pointing out Mr. Hunstock, Mr. Bailey and Mr. Hines were also
CPAs. She explained the reason the Haines Wharf issue was so sensitive was because Mr. Hines inflated
the General Fund by $750,000 by doing a 511 transfer amendment without Council approval. That is one
of the reasons the Council likes to have the General Fund encapsulated in its entirety. The Council likes to
have that information because they have been stung in the past. Citizens like to look at graphs and the
data in a snapshot. Mr. Neumaier advised he will defer to the Council's decision.
Council President Petso referred to the comment that there had been inadequate vetting of the changes to
the quarterly report. She asked for Mr. Neumaier's input on moving ahead with selecting a report format,
observing that three Councilmembers were absent tonight. Mayor Earling suggested having a discussion
with directors first. This was agreeable to the Council.
Councilmember Bloom said she likes the graphs and the City needs to provide information in ways that
everyone can understand. She was leaning toward retaining the old reports, finding they worked better for
people who do not understand numbers the way a CPA does. She preferred to design the reports for
citizens not the directors. Unless there was strong direction from the directors, she preferred to return to
the old report format.
Council President Petso stated the narrative in the most recent report was excellent and hoped if the
reports returned to the previous format, future presentations would include what was in the narrative.
8. RECOMMENDATION FOR DEPARTMENT PRESENTATIONS DURING 2014 COUNCIL
BUDGET PROCESS.
Finance Director Roger Neumaier reviewed the timeline for review of the 2014 budget:
October 1: Mayor's presentation of proposed 2014 City Budget.
October 22: Department presentations
October 29: Department presentations
November 4: Council Budget Public Hearing
November 12: Possible Budget Work Session (prior to committee meetings)
November 19: Council Budget Adoption
Department presentations will include:
a. Up to three minute presentation on department's 2013 accomplishments.
b. A brief review of the business challenges and uncertainties for the department in the coming year.
c. A brief review comparing department's year end projected actual expenditures and revenues to
budgeted levels with an explanation of how and why there are material differences between the
projected actuals and the budgeted appropriations.
d. A brief review of what is different about the 2014 budget proposal from the current budget. This
review should emphasize decision packages, why those changes and decision packages are being
recommended and what will be the impact on outcomes to the City and its citizens.
e. Responses to Council questions regarding department's budget.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 7
He provided the proposed schedule of presentations:
October 22nd:
1. Municipal Court
2. City Clerk
3. Mayor's Office
4. Council
5. Human Resources
6. Economic Development
7. Finance & Information Services
8. Nondepartmental (Presented by Finance)
9. Development Services
10. Parks.
October 29th:
1. Police
2. Public Works Utilities
3. Public Works Roads
4. Public Works Administration, Facilities Maintenance, ER&R & Engineering.
Council President Petso advised although Council adoption is scheduled for November 19, adoption
could occur later.
Councilmember Bloom observed the schedule only included one public hearing but Mr. Neumaier
indicated public comment would be taken on the dates of the department presentations and the work
session. She asked the difference between a required public hearing and public comment. Mr. Neumaier
advised Municipal Services Research Center (MSRC) recently issued a statement that there should be
public testimony taken at the public hearing as well as other opportunities for public comment. Council
President Petso explained it is easier for the City Clerk to schedule public comment than a public hearing
because a public hearing requires paying for newspaper ads and compliance with all applicable
requirements. Rather than a public hearing on the date of the department presentations, the intent was to
advertise the agenda item as department presentations and public comment.
9. CITY ASSETS INVESTED IN THE COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL
Finance Director Roger Neumaier explained the City Investment Policy emphasizes prudent investments
with the primary objectives being (in priority order): safety; liquidity; and return on investment. Interest
rates have been significantly down from historical levels since 2008. In 2013, partly due to low interest
rates and partly due to change in key personnel, funds in bank balances (for which we receive credits to
be applied to services incurred, but for which no interest will be received) and in the State Treasurer's
Local Government Investment Program (for which we are currently receiving interest of 0.12% annually)
have grown. The City also has $3 million in bonds earning between 0.54% and 0.90%. These bonds all
mature in the next month.
The options facing the City are to:
• Invest in bonds which can include risk and if done on a broader basis requires a higher level of
staffing than the City currently has;
• Continue to invest in the State Local Government Investment Program earning 0.1%; or
• Identify a different model which would meet the City's investment policy guidelines and produce
a higher investment yield.
The Snohomish County Treasurer established the Snohomish County Investment Pool (SCIP) for
investment of multiple county and other districts' funds. The SCIP earns a significant higher return. For
example, in 2012 the State Pool paid 0.17%, the SCIP paid 1% and a 2-year Treasury Note paid 0.27%.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 8
He anticipated investing in the SCIP would result in an increase in revenue in the General Fund in 2014
of $80,000; other funds would also be positively impacted.
Mr. Neumaier explained the City's investment policy is nearly identical to the Snohomish County
investment policy. He is familiar with Snohomish County's investment policy as well as the investment
staff. He and Accountant Sarah Mager met with Snohomish County staff and were informed there would
be flexibility with regard to release of funds and the City could initially identify amounts for six months, a
year and possibly two years. He also recommended continuing to invest in the State Pool as well as
possibly bond funds.
Mr. Neumaier explained he is authorized to make this decision himself but felt he should inform the
Council because it is a policy issue. He did not anticipate any increase in risk or problems with liquidity.
Councilmember Buckshnis inquired about a prospectus with regard to SCIP's investments. Mr. Neumaier
offered to provide SCIP's investment policy to the Council. He explained they invest heavily in very
conservative bonds. He suggested providing that information to the Council this week and scheduling this
topic on next week's agenda. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the MEBT fund earns much more than
the State Pool.
Councilmember Johnson asked what other cities participate in SCIP. Mr. Neumaier answered at this time
there are no other cities; several water districts participate. He offered to provide the Council that
information.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked how long SCIP has been in place. Mr. Neumaier answered their first
year was 2006. Investment staff was investing prior to that for Snohomish County; in 2006 the
Snohomish County Council established it as separate. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the
investment staff is employed by the investment group to function as an investor. Mr. Neumaier answered
yes and they also hire other investors. The SCIP has an investment officer, a skill neither he nor staff
have, to structure the investments. He offered to provide further information regarding the investment
staff and said they could provide a presentation to Council. He summarized while he was employed by
Snohomish County, the county experienced no unusual losses. He was confident the SCIP was secure.
10. PRESENTATION OF 2013 SANITARY SEWER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE AND
PROPOSED SEWER UTILITY RATE INCREASES.
Public Works Director Phil Williams explained the Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan is now complete
and is scheduled for a public hearing on September 24. He recalled a draft plan was presented to the
Finance and Parks, Planning & Public Works Committees in June for their consideration and input. The
draft plan was subsequently presented to the Council for input.
Mr. Williams explained the Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan is:
• One element of the City's Comprehensive Plan
• Guides operations of the City sewer utility by:
o Identifying and proposing solutions to known conveyance, maintenance and other problems
o Details the actions necessary to ensure compliance with applicable local, state and federal
requirements
o Presents an operation and maintenance plan, capital improvement plan, and financial plan
• Since Edmonds is primarily a built out city, most of the identified issue are a result o£
o Aging infrastructure
o Current size of infrastructure in relation to current and future population
o Root intrusion
o Infiltration and inflow
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 9
Mr. Williams explained why the Plan needs to be updated:
• Last plan 2006
• Reprioritize capital projects
• Reflect actual change due to population growth
• Future population growth projections
• Include wastewater treatment plant
• Improved tracking methods
o Video recording of each pipe reach
o GIS
o Use of metering data
Mr. Williams reviewed what the Plan covers:
City Owned Item
Quantity
Flow Meters
10
Manholes (junctions)
3,200
Sanitary Sewer Pipe Main
128 miles
Lift Stations
14
Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)
1
WWTP Primary Clarifiers
3
WWTP Aeration Basins
3
WWTP Secondary Clarifiers
3
WWTP Incinerator
1
Mr. Williams described capital projects in the Plan:
• Conveyance Projects: Provide a basic or essential level of service for the sanitary sewer utility
o Complete citywide pipe replacement/restoration projects
■ Excessive root intrusion
■ Conveyance problems
■ Old/damaged pipe
• Wastewater Treatment Plant
o Replacement of emergency power switchgear system
o Incinerator regulatory compliance improvements
o Recoating of clarifiers
• 100% Sanitary Sewer rate funded (incl. revenue bond payments).
Mr. Williams referred to the rate study conducted by FCS and displayed the recommended rate increase,
an annual increase of 9.5% 2014 — 2018 to create a rate structure that would generate enough cash for
capital projects and begin to wean the City off borrowing $2 million every 2 years for capital projects.
He provided a comparison of current monthly rates (based on 1000 cubic feet):
Seattle
$116.50
Kirkland
$
91.15
Ronald Wastewater District
$
75.14
Arlington
$
70.15
Woodinville Water District
$
65.77
Mukilteo Water and Sewer District
$
57.59
Lake Forest Park
$
55.44
Redmond
$
52.89
Alderwood Water & Wastewater
$
51.46
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 10
Lynnwood
$ 39.57
Everett
$ 34.94
Edmonds
$ 27.85
Olympia View Water & Sewer District
$ 23.66
He provided a comparison of sewer rates - no bonding after 2018 (assumes other cities do not raise their
rates):
Seattle
$116.50
Kirkland
$
91.15
Ronald Wastewater District
$
75.14
Arlington
$
70.15
Woodinville Water District
$
65.77
Mukilteo Water and Sewer District
$
57.59
Lake Forest Park
$
55.44
Redmond
$
52.89
Alderwood Water & Wastewater
$
51.46
Edmonds
$
48.01
Lynnwood
$
39.57
Everett
$ 34.94
Olympia View Water & Sewer District
$
23.66
He provided a comparison of total utility bills:
City
Current
2016 Projected at 3%/ ear
Seattle
$200.24
$218.81
Shoreline
$159.63
$174.43
Kirkland
$155.86
$170.31
Lake Forest Park
$140.46
$153.48
Woodinville
$135.81
$148.40
Arlington
$129.77
$141.80
Redmond
$106.92
$116.83
Mukilteo
$106.35
$116.21
Edmonds
$80.74
$103.15
Everett
$78.24
$85.49
Lynnwood
$74.81
$87.17
Council President Petso asked the amount of the sewer rate increase if the intent was not to avoid bonding
for capital projects. Mr. Williams answered it was 6%/year. Council President Petso inquired about utility
tax, referring to page 11-2 of the Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan that indicates the utility tax was
raised in 2009 from 6% to 10% which resulted in additional revenue to the Utility. She assumed the
additional utility tax revenue should have resulted in additional revenue for the General Fund not the
Utility. Mr. Williams responded the additional revenue is collected by the Utility and transferred to the
General Fund. For example a sewer utility bill may indicate the charge for service is $25.32/month and
10% utility tax is $2.53, for a total $27.85. The $27.85 is revenue to the Utility on which State B&O tax is
charged. The utility tax is then transferred to the General Fund.
Council President Petso commented one of the challenges with infiltration and inflow is political; some
areas of the City may have improperly connected their storm sewer into the sanitary sewer but it is
difficult to convince them not to do that. She asked whether there were any plans to enforce or improve
the infiltration and inflow situation. Mr. Williams agreed it is a difficult topic. He referred to intentional
inflow where someone intentionally connects roof, driveway, etc. drains to the sanitary sewer. Conversely
there is infiltration that occurs accidentally when it rains hard or snow melt results in saturated soil that
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 11
runs into the sanitary sewer pipe. Although there are separate stormwater and sanitary sewer systems,
after heavy rains, there are high flows at the treatment plant. Even with an effective engineering solution
to prevent water from entering the sewer line, the water has to go somewhere and likely will cause a
problem by going somewhere else. Therefore there needs to be a very comprehensive solution such as an
improvement to the storm system. The City does not have any projects that are specific solutions to
infiltration or inflow problems. He knew of incentive programs whereby stormwater rates are reduced if a
property's storm drains are separated from the sanitary sewer system.
Councilmember Buckshnis expressed support for the proposed rate increase due to the increased cost in
the future and unknowns with regard to rates, the City's future finances and bond rating. She asked
whether the rate could be implemented and changed in the future. She inquired about the reduction in the
City's sewer rates in the past. Mr. Williams explained wastewater rates were raised in 2003-2004; the
only change since then was a 2.2% reduction in 2006.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented it was progressive to create a rate structure that would generate
enough cash for capital projects instead of continuing to bond for capital projects. Mr. Williams
commented even with the recommended rate increase, the City would continue to borrow for a few more
years until there was enough rate capital to do capital projects without borrowing.
Mayor Earling declared a brief recess.
11. CONTINUED DISCUSSION REGARDING CODE OF CONDUCT AND CODE OF ETHICS
Mayor Earling inquired about proceeding with Agenda Items 11 and 12 when three Councilmembers
were absent. Council President Petso was hopeful Councilmember Bloom could describe areas of
agreement/disagreement between Public Safety & Personnel Committee Members (Councilmember
Bloom and Peterson) and take Council comments to allow Councilmember Bloom and Executive Council
Assistant Spellman to prepare a draft for Council consideration.
Councilmember Bloom explained the committee was directed to prepare a separate Code of Conduct and
a Code of Ethics. When the Council last discussed this, it was suggested the committee use the Kirkland
Code of Conduct and the Snohomish County Code of Conduct. She also found a section in the Bellevue
Code of Ethics related to conduct. The committee reviewed the three and identified language for a Code
of Conduct. A portion of the Kirkland Code of Conduct relates to conduct in a Council -City Manager
form of government. The committee did not discuss that and she suggested the Council discuss whether to
eliminate it.
With regard to the Kirkland Code of Conduct, Councilmember Bloom explained Councilmember
Peterson and she agreed to bring forward the Kirkland Code of Conduct, with the exception of the
language related to Council -City Manager form of government, for the purpose of developing a draft
Code of Conduct. She advised the title would need to be changed to "A Code of Conduct for City
Council, Mayor and Boards and Commissions."
Council President Petso asked whether Councilmembers Peterson and Bloom agreed on the items in the
Kirkland Code of Conduct with the exception of the language regarding Council -City Manager form of
government. Councilmember Bloom answered yes and suggested the following statements from the
section related to the Council -City Manager be included: "We will not knowingly blindside one another
in public and will contact staff prior to a meeting with any questions or issues."
With regard to the Snohomish County Code of Conduct, Councilmember Bloom said it was primarily
related to Boards and Commissions. Councilmember Peterson and she found the following paragraphs
relevant:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 12
1. Board members are expected to be respectful at all times. Councilmembers had no objection to
the proposed language.
2. Any Board member who is disrespectful, disruptive, divisive or dominating time in a meeting will
be asked, by staff or the Board Chair, to cease and desist such behavior. Repeated behavior of
this type can result in the recommended removal of the board member from the Board to the
County Executive and County Council with a super majority vote of the Board.
Council President Petso explained although she supported the ability for staff or the chair to
prevent domination by one member, she did not like the removal portion for a volunteer
commission or board. Councilmember Bloom answered Councilmember Peterson and she also
discussed including the last sentence of the Snohomish County Code of Conduct, "In the event
that a board members is unable to abide by the "Expectations and Code of Conduct" policies the
Board, with a super majority vote, can recommend removal of the board member to the county
Executive, for action by the County Council." Council President Petso said she would also object
to that language. Councilmember Bloom suggested retaining that language in the draft due to
Councilmember Peterson's interest in the ability to remove board members. That was acceptable
to Councilmembers.
9. Board members will strive to appreciate and respect differences in approach and point of view,
whether from each other, the community or staff. Councilmembers had no objection to the
proposed language.
10. The Board Chair will ensure that all members have a fair, balanced and respectful opportunity to
share their knowledge and perspectives. Councilmembers had no objection to the proposed
language.
4. No Board member shall give anyone the impression they are representing the Board without
express written permission authorized by a simple majority vote of the Board. Councilmember
Bloom advised Councilmember Peterson and she agreed to retain "No Board member shall give
anyone the impression they are representing the Board." There is also language in the Bellevue
Code of Ethics that addresses this. Councilmembers had no objection to the proposed language.
With regard to the Bellevue Code of Ethics, Councilmember Bloom referred to language in paragraphs
B 1-6, page 5, that appears to be more conduct related than ethics related. Paragraphs relate to personal
integrity, working for the common good, respect for process, commitment to transparency, conduct of
public meetings, decisions based on merit. She relayed Councilmember Peterson and she agreed these
could be included in the Code of Conduct. Council President Petso advised that decision was apparent
from the committee minutes; she had not had an opportunity to review that language. She recalled not
being supportive of the Bellevue Code of Ethics.
Councilmember Bloom relayed paragraph 7 regarding ex parte communications could be included in a
Code of Ethics, paragraph 8 regarding attendance could be eliminated, and paragraph 9 regarding
nepotism could be discussed further as part of a Code of Ethics. Councilmember Peterson and she
considered including a portion of paragraph 10 regarding advocacy and suggested it be discussed further.
Councilmember Buckshnis supported Hearing Examiner Phil Olbrechts' suggestion for a rotating team of
hearing examiners or ethics officers to consider ethics violations. Councilmember Bloom responded that
would be addressed in a Code of Ethics.
Mayor Earling referred to City of Edmonds Chapter 10, Employee Responsibilities Code of Ethics, that
was included in the packet. He expressed concern there may be union related issues with regard to a Code
of Ethics. Councilmember Bloom responded the proposed Code of Conduct and Code of Ethics would be
for elected officials and members of boards and commissions. Mayor Earling relayed if the Council was
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 13
interested in a Code of Ethics for staff in the fixture, a) there already is one, and b) there is potential for
significant union issues.
With regard to a Code of Ethics, Councilmember Bloom suggested using the Bellevue Code of Ethics as a
template with the exception of the language that was proposed to be included in the Code of Conduct. She
also suggested adding #4 from Bainbridge Island's ethics requirements for boards and commissions,
Conduct of Public Meetings, regarding disclosure of potential conflict of interest at the beginning of each
meeting.
Councilmember Bloom relayed Councilmember Peterson and she had discussed using an ethics officer
rather than the hearing examiner. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the ethics officer was an
attorney. Councilmember Bloom responded the ethics officer would be an attorney on contract that would
work on an as needed basis. Parks & Recreation/Human Resources Reporting Director Carrie Hite
explained that is a model used by several cities; no charges are incurred if there are no ethics violations.
Council President Petso said she has numerous concerns with the Bellevue Ethics Policy and was not
interested in using it as a template. For example, there was language that would have prevented her
serving as a Councilmember while her son-in-law served on the Sister City Commission. She did not
want a Code of Ethics that made that an issue. She would likely not support a Code of Ethics based on
Bellevue's. Councilmember Bloom advised paragraph 9 in the Bellevue Code of Ethics related to
nepotism was retained for further discussion due to concerns. Council President Petso responded she was
only providing that as an example of her concerns, she had many others.
Councilmember Buckshnis preferred Bainbridge Island's ethics requirements. She did not support having
a citizen ethics board and preferred an attorney or hearing examiner. Councilmember Bloom advised
Bainbridge Island's ethics requirements are much broader.
Councilmember Johnson suggested a Code of Ethics be created in a streamlined fashion to avoid
frivolous or unsubstantiated claims. She also supported limited time to file a claim and found two years to
file a claim extensive. She requested an estimate of the costs associated with an ethics officer. She
preferred to deal with major issues and not minor infractions.
12. DISCUSSION: EDMONDS CITY CODE CHAPTER 2.10 REVISIONS
Councilmember Bloom explained the current code, which requires the Mayor to present three candidates
for Council to interview for director positions, has not always been followed. She suggested City
Attorney Jeff Taraday review the proposed changes. Mr. Taraday explained he initially created a draft to
promote discussion, not necessarily advocating for a particular outcome. More recently by reviewing
committee minutes and attending a committee meeting, he was able to glean areas of committee
agreement and disagreement. The draft now contains bracketed words where alternatives are proposed
due to disagreement between committee members. In addition, after getting some big picture direction
from the committee, he drafted some language that he believed was consistent with their direction but he
was uncertain the committee had adequate time to review the revisions before they were included in the
Council packet. He highlighted the areas of disagreement between committee members that relate to the
interview requirement:
Currently the code requires the Council interview the top two candidates. There is no language in
the code about the ability for the Council to waive that requirement; in practice the Council has
waived that requirement on a number of occasions.
Section 2.10.010.D: The mayor shall appoint, subject to council confirmation, the depai4me
> >
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 14
humanr-esoufees a"-eete appointive officers. The city council shall interview the top [two][three]
three candidates for each position prior to the mayor's final seleetieappointment, PROVIDED
that the city council may waive the [two][three]- interview requirement by motion and may opt to
interview as few as [one candidate] [two candidates] for any vacant appointive office. The
mayor's appointments to all other employee positions shall not be subject to city council
confirmation. rn�2�z, 19991.
Mr. Taraday relayed Councilmember Bloom's position was there should never be fewer than two
interviews and Councilmember Peterson's position was there may be circumstances where the Council
may, via motion to waive, be satisfied with interviewing one candidate.
Council President Petso was uncertain why an interview would be conducted if there was only one
candidate. Mr. Taraday responded the Council still has the ability to not confirm. He presented a
hypothetical scenario: the Mayor recruits and can only find one acceptable candidate. The Mayor
proposes the candidate and asks the Council to waive the requirement and to interview just one candidate.
The Council interviews the candidate, does not find him/her acceptable and does not confirm. Another
possible scenario is the Council interviews two candidates, the Mayor appoints candidate A, the Council
did not like candidate A and does not confirm the appointment. In that scenario the Mayor would not be
required to appoint candidate B just because the Council did not want Candidate A.
Council President Petso recalled a time where Council was told the Mayor had made his choice and even
if the Council did not confirm, the individual had been hired and it was a done deal. She asked if the code
needed to include language that Council confirmation was required. Mr. Taraday was uncertain how that
could have occurred under the current code. His interpretation of the statement in the code that the
appointment is subject to Council confirmation was that an appointment that was not confirmed was void.
He summarized the Council's confirmation was a serious power and could not be ignored by the Mayor.
Councilmember Bloom explained she felt strongly about this because she believed confirmation of the
Mayor's appointment was put in place as a check and balance of the legislative branch, the Council, on
the executive branch, the Mayor. The balance of power is meant to be righted via this process. In her
experience the code has not been followed; three candidates have not been presented for interview by the
Council and in the case of the last Finance Director, the Council did not waive their right to interview
three candidates and interviewed only two candidates. She voted against the confirmation of the Finance
Director because the Council was not presented three candidates as the code required and because she felt
her input was not considered by the Mayor because he received it after he had made his decision.
Councilmember Bloom hoped if the code were clarified it would be followed. She felt the City's strong
Mayor form of government has resulted in a weak Council. She did not want the code to make the
Council any weaker than it already was. Allowing only one candidate to be presented completely ignored
the Council's confirmation of the Mayor's appointment.
Council President Petso observed throughout this chapter there has been an effort to replace "directors"
with "appointed officials." In Section 2.10.020 the word "director" has reappeared. Mr. Taraday answered
that could be changed.
Councilmember Johnson said her comments were not regarding one administration or one director but the
issue from a broad perspective. The department director serves both the executive and legislative
branches of city government. They attend weekly Council meetings and provide information; therefore
the Council needs a strong sense of reliability and trust in the directors. The current code provides for a
well honored system of checks and balances in city government. The Council has the responsibility for
approving the job description and the candidate for department directors and should not relinquish that
responsibility and should fully participate in that process. In a perfect world she would like the Council to
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 15
interview the top three candidates as well as review the job description. In cases where the job description
has recently been reviewed it would not be necessary for the Council to review the job description again.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she was on the fence with regard to this; she understood Councilmember
Bloom's point of view as well as Council President Petso's comment. She recalled emailing the Mayor
prior to the appointment of the Finance Director because she did not support confirming him but because
all other Councilmembers supported him, she voted in favor of confirmation. She suggested
Councilmembers have an opportunity to provide input publicly following the interview so that
Councilmembers knew how other Councilmembers felt.
Councilmember Bloom stated Council may want to include language regarding how Councilmembers can
be involved in the interview process prior to the presentation of candidates. She suggested allowing up to
three Councilmembers to be involved in the initial interviews and if a fourth Councilmember wants to
participate, the Council will select three. She noted it is difficult for Councilmembers to ask only a few
questions and not have an opportunity to learn how other Councilmembers feel about a candidate. For
example she was not aware of Councilmember Buckshnis' position regarding the Finance Director or
what other candidates had been interviewed by the selection team.
Mayor Earling explained he was very aware the Council wanted to be involved in the process of
interviewing the Finance Director; Councilmembers Buckshnis and Yamamoto were involved. In addition
to the Council's reaction, he was also interested in the reaction of staff, citizens and his own reaction. He
noted it is already difficult to manage the number of people involved in the interviews.
Council President Petso liked Councilmember Bloom's suggestion, recalling at least one Councilmember
requested an opportunity to participate and did not, for whatever reason, participate. She supported
revising the code to allow up to three Councilmembers to participate in the interview process.
Mr. Taraday reminded Council that although they may not utilize this opportunity often, the RCWs allow
the Council to discuss and evaluate the qualifications of an applicant for public employment in executive
session. He anticipated that opportunity may alleviate some of the Council's concerns. Councilmember
Bloom suggested reference to the RCW be included in Chapter 2.10 definitions. She was unaware that
option was available to the Council and anticipated many former Councilmembers were also unaware of
that option. Mr. Taraday agreed reference to the process could be included in Chapter 2.10.
Councilmember Johnson agreed with Councilmember Bloom's suggestion. The question was not only the
number of candidates the Council interviews but also the Council's views regarding the candidates.
Mayor Earling referred to selection processes that have occurred in the past few years. In the selection of
the previous Finance Director Shawn Hunstock, there were at least two efforts made to find a Finance
Director that the former administration and staff were comfortable with advancing. The first two efforts
did not yield any qualified candidates. Mr. Hunstock was found in the third effort and he was the only
qualified candidate and was confirmed. He anticipated requiring a certain number of candidates could be
problematic. For example in the most recent effort to hire a Finance Director, if he had been required to
provide a third candidate, the City would have been required to fly him from Kentucky even though the
person was not a candidate he was interested in advancing. He urged the Council to provide some
flexibility with regard to reducing the number of candidates for the Council to interview.
13. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS OF SEPTEMBER 10, 2013.
Finance Committee
Council President Petso advised most of the items the committee discussed were on tonight's agenda. The
remaining item, Bond Counsel for Edmonds Center for the Arts Contract, included a request to restructure
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 16
the City's involvement with the PFD's debt service issues. That request was referred to the PFD Task
Force that met last Friday. A number of questions were asked about the details of the City's relationship
with the PFD; the Task Force will meet again before the next Finance Committee meeting to review the
responses to those questions. The matter will be discussed by the Finance Committee again in October.
She assured there will be a deliberative and informational process before it is forwarded to Council.
Public Safety and Personnel Committee
Councilmember Bloom reported the committee discussed a Code of Conduct and Code of Ethics. The
committee also discussed Council attendance via speaker phone; guidelines will be presented to the
Council at a future meeting.
Parks, Planning & Public Works Committee
Councilmember Buckshnis reported a citizen asked the City to increase the number of chickens allowed
in the City. The committee told him there needed to be more interest expressed from citizens. The
committee was introduced to the Capital Facilities Plan and the Capital Improvement Program which will
be presented to the Council in the near future. The committee continued their discussion on developing a
decision tree for Harbor Square deliberations. A revised decision tree will be presented to the committee
at their October meeting.
14. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Earling welcomed Student Representative Thea Ocfemia.
15. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council President Petso advised she will bring forward a request for payment from attorney Carol Morris
as soon as she has both the invoice and the employment contract.
Council President Petso advised she will be scheduling Harbor Square for consideration by the full
Council, possibly at the October 1 meeting. She will work with the City Attorney to ensure the notice
required by Roberts Rules is provided and will inform Councilmembers when it will be on the agenda.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON, TO
EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER YAMAMOTO FROM TONIGHT'S MEETING. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked all the citizens who called her regarding the City's finances.
Councilmember Johnson welcomed Student Representative Thea Ocfemia.
Student Representative Thea Ocfemia thanked the Council for the opportunity to serve as student
representative. She enjoyed attending Council meetings and looked forward to participating.
16. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION
PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i).
At 9:57 p.m., Mayor Earling announced that the City Council would meet in executive session regarding
pending or potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). He stated that the executive session was
scheduled to last approximately 15 minutes and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the
Public Safety Complex. Action may occur as a result of meeting in executive session. Elected officials
present at the executive session were: Mayor Earling, and Councilmembers Johnson, Buckshnis, Petso
and Bloom. Others present were City Attorney Jeff Taraday and City Clerk Sandy Chase. At 10:20 p.m.,
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 17
Mayor Earling announced to the public present in the Council Chambers that an additional 5 minutes
would be required in executive session. The executive session concluded at 10:24 p.m.
17. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Earling reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 10:25 p.m.
No action was taken as a result of meeting in executive session.
18. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:26 p.m.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 17, 2013
Page 18