Cmd070720EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
VIRTUAL ONLINE MEETING
APPROVED MINUTES
July 7, 2020
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Luke Distelhorst, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Vivian Olson, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Laura Johnson, Councilmember
ALSO PRESENT
Zach Bauder, Student Representative
CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Angie Feser, Parks, Rec. & Cultural Serv. Dir.
Pamela Randolph, Treatment Plant Manager
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
The Edmonds City Council virtual online meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m. by Mayor Nelson. The
meeting was opened with the flag salute.
LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember Distelhorst read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the
original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes,
who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their
sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land
and water."
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present, participating remotely.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO MOVE AGENDA ITEM 10, PUBLIC HEARING ON WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLAN INCINERATOR REPLACEMENT & CARBON RECOVERY PROJECT
UPDATE AND RECOMMENDATION, TO ITEM 8 AND AGENDA ITEM 8, HOUSING
COMMISSION'S QUARTERLY REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL, TO ITEM 10. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 1
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
DISTELHORST, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER AS AMENDED.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. INTERVIEW FOR COUNCIL APPOINTMENT
1. PFD BOARD CANDIDATE INTERVIEW
PFD President David Brewster introduced the candidate for Public Facilities District Board Candidate
Position 1, Gregory Hinton. Mr. Hinton has works at Edmonds College as vice president of finance and
operations. His application is in the Council packet.
The Council interviewed PFD Board candidate Gregory Hinton. He responded to the following questions:
• (Councilmember Buckshnis) Your background is needed due to the pandemic and economic crisis.
How much do you know about the PFD and the financial aspects? I'm still learning, eager to delve
into that. I've attended their last few meetings but have not been able to work with any committees
at this time. I have an in-depth background in finance and have worked with other non profits. I'm
eager to learn more about the finances and be able to assist and contribute.
■ (Councilmember Paine) Nice to have new people coming into the community and volunteering for
sometimes very difficult jobs. Pleased that Mr. Hinton is from the community college because that
is an alliance that needs to be developed further and she was hopeful he would advocate for the
PFD and its role. What are your thoughts about learning opportunity for students at the PFD. I like
that opportunity. I have done a great deal of volunteer work related to education for the last 20
years.
A hardware failure caused an interruption in the video from approximately 7:07 p.m. to 7:1 1 p.m. When
video resumed, Mr. Hinton was describing cultural performances he has attended. In addition to a financial
background, he is taking the lead on C.O V ID-fy reopening plan for the college.
• (Councilmember K. Johnson) I also have a passion for arts and think he will be a great addition to
the PFD. What do you want to accomplish during your term? I am open to that. I have learned I
don't write my own script. A year ago, I did not expect to be in front of the City Council. I keep an
open mind to learning and opportunities to learn, success, preparation and opportunity. There will
be a lot of changes due to COVID-19. How to bring healing to the community, arts does that and
does it well. I do not have an agenda other than wanting to serve and help. There are a lot of
opportunities and challenges. I am about how to best serve the community.
• Councilmember Distelhorst) What are the top one or two things that help contribute to successful
private -public partnerships based on his experience? Relationships, personal and professional. The
book, The Road Less Traveled, " talks about emotional deposits, putting emotional deposits into
relationships. Building relationships is important and is needed and a requirement to being
successful. I want to add to the strong relationship between the City Council, the PFD and the
community.
• (Council President Fraley-Monillas) I serve as the Council liaison to the PFD so I have seen Mr.
Hinton at PFD Board meetings. I'm impressed you are a Brown alumni and a member of the
Morehouse Parents Association; it's good to see that interest in the community and in places that
benefit families.
Mayor Nelson explained approval of Mr. Hinton's appointment to the PFD Board is on the Consent Agenda.
Once the Council approves the Consent Agenda, his appointment to the PFD Board is approved.
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS (HTTPS:IIZOOM.USIS14257752525)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 2
Mayor Nelson invited participants and described the procedures for audience comments.
Tom Miles, Portland, Oregon, said Pamela Randolph contacted him a year ago and more recently to
inquire about carbonizing systems and biochar from biosolids. He is a biomass energy consultant with more
than 40 years' experience in the design and development of biomass energy systems including pyrolysis,
gasification and combustion. He has worked with research and development as well as large scale industrial
systems and has worked on biosolids drying, gasification and combustion and incineration in several
communities. Mayor Nelson interrupted Mr. Miles and suggested he may want to provide testimony during
the public hearing later on the agenda.
There were no other public comments.
(Written comments submitted to Public Comment( Edmonds.wa.gov are attached to the minutes.)
7. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Buckshnis requested Item 7.1 be removed from the Consent Agenda.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows:
2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 23, 2020
3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM, PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND
WIRE PAYMENTS
4. MAY 2020 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT
5. YOUTH COMMISSION ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS
6. DSHS DEVELOPMENT DISABILITIES ADMINISTRATION INTERLOCAL
AGREEMENT RENEWAL
7. FACILITIES LEAD JOB DESCRIPTION
8. PFD BOARD CANDIDATE CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENT
8. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE I6, 2020 (Previously Consent
Amenda item 7.1)
Councilmember Buckshnis said after discussion with the City Clerk, the minutes will be remanded back to
the City Clerk's Office to correct errors and schedule approval on next week's Consent Agenda.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON,
TO REMAND THE MINUTES TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE TO CORRECT ERRORS IN
THE MINUTES AND SCHEDULE APPROVAL ON NEXT WEEK'S CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
9. PUBLIC HEARING (OPTIONAL) (HTTPS://ZOOM.US/S/4257752525)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 3
1. WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT INCINERATOR REPLACEMENT & CARBON
RECOVERY PROJECT UPDATE AND RECOMMENDATION
Public Works & Utilities Director Phil Williams introduced Pamela Randolph, WWTP Manager, Lorin
Inman, project manager, Ameresco, who also worked with the City on Phase 5; Dave Parry, the City's third
party expert consultant on biosolids management, gasification and pyrolysis; and Scott Bauer, the City's
bond advisor.
Mr. Williams reviewed:
Graph of Plant Energy and Cost Trends
o Energy usage and demand trending downward, while costs are trending upward due to RDC
charges and rate increases
■ 31 % reduction in energy consumption energy cost
* 42% higher without ESCO
City Council Oversight — Path to Sustainability
o August 2014: Staff laid out a long-term plan in a presentation titled "Putting it all Together".
The long-term plan included a staged approach outlining a pathway for this next project.
o After successful completion of Phase 3, 4, and 5 energy projects, in 2017 we approached City
Council with the Phase 6 project which outlined the necessity of replacing the biosolids
incinerator
o In late 2017-2018 an RFQ process developed a shortlist of promising options. In 2018 Council
authorized funding for the design of Phase 6 — a pyrolysis -only technology provided by
Bioforcetech (Project A). After considerable evaluation, several difficulties arose in further
developing this alternative
o In early 2020, the project team began development of a competing but similar technology
produced by Ecoremedy (Project B). Project B can reduce construction cost significantly, does
not require a new building, provides significant carbon recovery, and reduces the
environmental impact of the odor control system. We are now recommending Project B as the
right fit for Edmonds
Project drivers
o Equipment has high O&M cost in terms of electrical usage, disposal costs, operations staffing,
testing, reporting, repair & maintenance and emission controls — approx. $1,000,000/year
o The equipment is currently operating significantly beyond its useful life expectancy — in
operation 32 years
o The equipment was installed at a time when the need to reduce energy and promote the reuse
of bi-products was the not a focus.
o Regulatory burden has significantly increased with the new sludge incinerator regulations
under 40CFR Part 60 Subpart O.
■ § 60.150 states compliance with new emissions standards must be met... "When the
cumulative cost of the changes over the life of the unit exceeds 50 percent of the original
cost of building and installing the unit (not including the cost of land) updated to current
costs."
o Analysis of Edmonds WWTP incinerator repair and maintenance history shows we are nearing
43% at this time
Basic options available for replacement
o Build conventional digesters followed by production of EQ Biosolids for land application
■ Most common current approach
• Edmonds does not have space for digesters on site
■ Any expansion of our footprint in downtown would be very difficult
• Likely the most expensive option
■ Wintertime management of land application systems
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 4
• Long-term costs of hauling and possibly storage are very high and energy intensive
■ Does not address PFAS residues
o Replace with a new incinerator
■ Appeared to be the second most expensive option after our initial technology screening
■ Would not measurably improve environmental performance including our Carbon
footprint
• Regulations on incineration may well continue to get more stringent
• Basic options available
o Pyrolysis/Gasification options
■ Can produce a range of useable end products
■ More energy efficient
■ Reduce carbon emissions
■ These approaches have been commercially available for many years
■ Most installations in this country have been for organic wastes like agricultural manures,
wood chips, and other feedstocks. Examples using municipal biosolids are limited to 2 but
are growing as several more are in development.
• City staff recommendation - Project B
o Photographs of Ecoremedy system installation in Morrisville, Pennsylvania
o Video of David Mooney, President and Chief Technology Officer, Ecoremedy, explaining how
the Ecoremedy process works
• Ecoremedy is a highly controlled carbon conversion process combining drying, pyrolysis
and gasification into a single vessel
■ Ecoremedy differentiators include:
- Extreme scalability
- Broad fuel tolerance
- Operational simplicity
- Low maintenance costs
• Operating Cost Com arison
Utilities
Existing Incinerator
(Baseline)
Project A
Pyrolysis
Centrisys
Project B
Gasification
Ecoremed
Unit
Utilities
$163,566
$193,479
126 666
Total $/ r
Odor Control Chemicals
$47,768
$74,826
$3,009
Total $/ r
Polymer
$160,000
$160,000
$56,000
Total $/ r
Screenings
$0
$24,000
$0
Total $/ r
Labor
4321,725
$333,271
$3332271
Total $/ r
Annual Maintenance
$89,951
$52,000
$35,000
Total $/ r
Regulatory
$172,183
$120,000
$60,000
Total $/ r
Hauling
$36,000
1 $0
$36,000
Total $/ r
Sub Total All Costs $/ r
$991,193
1 $957,575
$649,946
Total $/ r
o Savings between existing and Project B: $341,247
■ Benefits of Project B - Pyrolysis/Gasification
o Most flexible, efficient and affordable approach to implement and the lowest operational costs
o Produces an environmentally -friendly end product (biochar) while generating its own thermal
conversion from the biosolids. This will move the City closer to achieving the goals established
in Resolution 1389
o No acidic side stream or hazardous waste is produced
o Biochar will likely be land applied in eastern WA. We will also look for sites in western
Washington
• Approximate Financial Impacts
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 5
o All numbers are estimates only at this point
o Includes all sales taxes
o Bond Insurance is not needed
o Interest rates could increase or decrease prior to sale of bonds
o We could evaluate using levelized debt service or a debt service wrap
o Final arrangement could include our partners as well but wouldn't change Edmonds' numbers
o Edmonds Partners Shares
■ Mountlake Terrace 23.174 %
• Ronald 9.488 %
■ OVWSD 16.551 %
1+ Edmonds 50.787%
0 20 year term, levelized debt service, 2.7% Interest Rate
Project Cost
$26 121,250
Edmonds share 50.787%
$13,266 000
Debt Service Reserves
$899,348
Issuance Costs
$220,920
Total Bond
$14,386,268
Insurance
$0
Average Annual Debt Service
$898 203 + 10% UT = $988 023
2020 Projected Rate Revenue (approved 2020 budget)
$12,873,846
New Rate Revenue Needed/Projected 2020 Rate Revenue
$988,023/$12 873 846 = 7.67%
o The Project team estimates savings of $341,247/yr. in O&M
o Edmonds share of that varies but averages approx. 47% or $160,386
o Net Edmonds cost increase = $988,023 - $160,386 = $827,687 or 6.43%
o Single Family Residential would increase from $50.42/mo. to $53.66 or $3.24/mo. This
includes Utility Tax
A Al
iiaphvi�ni�Ll auuYrvpoS�uUIVI
o Proposed 2020 Bond, 20 year Level Debt Service, 2.39%
■ Average Debt Service = $898,203
■ Total Debt Service = $17,964,050
■ Initial Net Rate Impact = 6.43%
■ Approx. $3.24/month
o Proposed 2020 Bond, 20 year Wrap Debt Service, 2.62%
■ Average Debt Service = $766,917 (18 years)
■ Total Debt Service = $18,984,500
s Initial Net Rate Impact = 5.31%
■ Approx. $2.68/month
0 2020 Bonds: 25 Year, Level Debt Service, 2.75%
■ Average Debt Service = $784,500
+� Total Debt Service = $19,612,350
■ Initial Net Rate Impact = 5.46%
Approx. $2.75/month
0 2020 Bond: 25 year, wrap debt service (interest only for 18 years),-3.24%
Average Debt Service = $509,150 (18 years)
■ Total Debt Service = $23,255,500
■ Initial Net Rate Impact = 3.1%
■ Approx. $1.56/month
Comparison of Debt Options.
20-YR Levelized
20-Yr Wrap
25-Yr Levelized
25- r wrap
Interest Rate
1 2.39%
2.62%
2.75%
3.24%
Initial Avg. Annual
1 $898,203
$766 917
$784,500
$509 150
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 6
Debt Service
$18,984,500
Total Debt Service
Pa ments
$17,964,050
$19,612,350
$23,255,500
Total Interest
$6,144,050
$7,129,500
$7,852,350
$11,640,000
Initial Rate Impact
6.43%
5.31 %
$5.46%
3.10%
■ Action — Next Steps
o At the end of this optional Public Hearing, public comment will be closed. Council will then
discuss the input received and entertain taking the following action:
= Authorizing the Mayor to sign all necessary documents between the City and the
Department of Enterprise Systems to deliver this project for the Guaranteed Maximum
Cost of $26,121,040.
o Further Council action in 2020 will likely include selling revenue bonds to support the project.
Consideration should be given to moving forward sooner rather than later in this low interest
market.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she wished the information had been provided in the packet. She asked the
current interest rate for the bonds maturing in 2031. Mr. Bauer answered the current 2011 bonds interest
rate or coupons range from 3% to 4% depending on the maturity, the 2031 maturity on the 2011 bond would
be at 4%. Councilmember Buckshnis commented even with a hybrid of the 25-year wrap it is 3.24%. She
was interested in a way that did not charge as much to utility rate payers. She anticipated there would not
be a need to refund/refinance bond at this low interest rate. She acknowledged the 25-year wrap was more
expensive, but this is very large project that is important to the City. A 3.24% interest rate for 25 years
sounds a little high but it really isn't since it was wrapped and backloaded to the end. She expressed
appreciation for the team developing and reviewing the different options.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked Mr. Williams to forward the presentation to the City Council. She
asked whether the Council needed to determine how to pay for this now or could that be done later. Mr.
Williams answered that could definitely be done later; it was important now to get an approval for the
Mayor to sign the document with the State so the project can be put together. The price will not change,
only how the money is generated so those topics could be separated and he felt it would be a good idea to
separate them. Council President Fraley-Monillas was hopeful the Council could consider them separately
so that Councilmembers would have an opportunity to think longer and harder about the debt options. She
expressed appreciation to the team for their work.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented it was very important to talk about bonding because it impacts
utility rates. She agreed that decision did not need to be made tonight, but the Council needed to consider
it as there is a tremendous difference between 20 and 25 years with regard to what ratepayers pay. She
agreed that decision did not need to be made now, but the Council needed to view and discuss the debt
options and participants in the public hearing may also be interested in commenting on that aspect. She
asked what the team thought. Mr. Williams agreed that was very important which suggests taking more
time to make a decision on the bond structure would be advisable. The team needs a commitment to moving
forward and that the Council will select one of these options or another option to generate the funding to
support the project. Once that approval is provided and the Mayor can sign those documents, the team's
concerns about project deadlines will be much improved and the project can be built in 2021.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked Mr. Bauer his opinion about the 25 year wrap and how it is end loaded.
Mr. Bauer answered there is a policy decision related to the amount of rate increase. Interest rates are
currently at historical lows which can be an argument for putting debt out long. He believed the City may
have additional projects in the next couple years in which that debt could be pulled shorter, setting known
interest rates now and then having the opportunity to pull debt in a bit shorter on a future issuance if the
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 7
Council chose. He summarized that was a little bit of an argument for going out longer than the City
normally would.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented on the possibility that rates may go down further. She supported a
25 year term but was not sure about a wrap. She asked if many cities did a wrap that was end loaded. Mr.
Bauer answered Edmonds has done that in the past. The initial issuance in 2011 was a first issuance and
then the 2013 bonds were wrapped and in 2015 there was a levelized debt structure. He said this absolutely
happens, particularly with utility and revenue bonds; the issue is balancing debt service payments with rate
increases. Councilmember Buckshnis said a rate increase of $2.75 was better than $6. Mr. Williams said
the highest rate increase in the comparison of debt options is $3.24.
Councilmember Paine recalled when this was discussed at a previous meeting, Mr. Williams had said the
amount that needed to be financed was $21 million but it did not need to be paid all at once. She asked if
there was any benefit to portioning out the financials, whether it needed to be covered all at once or could
it be pieced out and when the money was due to ESCO. Mr. Williams answered the City would commit to
all the cost, but there will be a schedule of payments for the total amount; approximately $11.6 million will
be paid to Ecoremedy for the equipment package. The City commits to providing that full amount and the
Department of Enterprise Services enters into an agreement with Ameresco to deliver the project to the City
of Edmonds. Once Ameresco has that agreement in hand with the state, they issue a purchase order to
Ecoremedy for $11.6 million which has payment schedule. There is an initial modest signing cost and
within 45-60 days, a payment of $2.8 million is due followed by a series of additional payments as they
build and deliver the equipment followed by a final payment. In the meantime, design and permitting is
occurring and a significant amount of money is being spent in addition to what is paid to Ecoremedy. He
summarized the bills begin to come in fairly quickly.
Mr. Williams asked whether Councilmember Paine's question was whether it would make sense to do a
smaller bond issue now and another one later for the remainder. Councilmember Paine said she was just
considering all options to ensure she had all the information she needed. She liked the idea of making a
commitment earlier for the full amount because it was right thing to do. The second part of that is when do
the bills start coming into the City; she asked if half would come up fast and furious in the first few years.
Mr. Williams answered not just the first few years; all the money would be spent by late fall 2021. His
explanation above was what that looked like from a cashflow standpoint between now and fall 2021.
Mayor Nelson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Tom Miles, Portland, Oregon, said Pamela Randolph contacted him a year ago to inquire about
carbonizing systems and biochar. He is a biomass energy consultant with more than 40 years' experience
in design and development of biomass energy systems including pyrolysis, gasification and combustion so
his comments will be regarding technology and biochar. He has worked both in research and the industry
with these processes. He has a special expertise in transformation of ash and metals in biomass fuels so he
pays attention to potentially toxic elements like metals, fluorine and PFAS. He is the chairman of the U.S.
Biochar Initiative, a non-profit association of scientists, engineers, farmers and biochar producers dedicated
to the promotion and use of biochars which are safe, stable and sustainable for recovering nutrients for soil
health and to solve environmental challenges and sequester carbon. There are some very good biochar
producers in Western Washington that have been working hard to build biochar markets in the last several
years.
Mr. Miles said he has assisted the development and testing of biosolids to biochar systems internationally
for the last 10 years; in recent years commercial systems have been seen in Europe as well as a couple very
success demonstration and development systems in California, both of which were considered for the City
of Edmonds' project, one of which was Project A. He has experience with processes like the Ecoremedy
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 8
system proposed for the City and has watched their system evolve from processing poultry litter to manure
to biosolids for several years and was happy to see they have one biosolid system now in operation in
Morrisville, Pennsylvania. He believed the Ecoremedy system under consideration was appropriate for the
City's scale, it has good energy balance and good system efficiency. The biochar has a high carbon content
for biosolids compared to other products and provides the control to maintain a constant quality of biochar
which is important in the current market and will allow adjusting the amount of carbon or ash in the residue
as was pointed out in the video and it is a process that has a low to negative carbon footprint. The City will
produce a small quantity of biochar that will need to be marketed. The prospect is good for finding
wholesale markets and can be explored at this early stage of the project.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Nelson closed the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Mayor Nelson asked if the Council was interested in taking action tonight. Councilmember Olson raised a
point of order, whether the comments from the Climate Protection Committee and the Interfaith Climate
Committee needed to be read into the record. Mayor Nelson said he was not aware that the Council had
ever authorized the reading of comments into the record. He invited Council President Fraley-Monillas to
speak to that issue. Council President Fraley-Monillas answered as long as Councilmembers have the
comments and they are included in the minutes, that was fine. If Council was more comfortable, a motion
could be made to that effect.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she was prepared to move this tonight. The Interfaith Climate Action Group
as well as the Mayor' Climate Protection Committee were in favor of Project B and wrote very favorable
letters. She commented the Council did not need to figure out how to structure the bonds right now.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO ALLOW THE MAYOR TO SIGN TO BEGIN THE PROJECT.
Councilmember L. Johnson recalled she voiced the opinion last week that the Council should not make a
decision on the same night as the public hearing. In view of all the overwhelmingly supportive comments,
she was totally comfortable with making a decision tonight to move the project forward.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
City Attorney Jeff Taraday asked for clarification whether Councilmember Buckshnis' motion was
intended to move the recommend motion in packet, "To authorize the Mayor to sign all necessary
documents between the City and the Department of Enterprise Systems to deliver this project for the
Guaranteed Maximum Cost of $26,121,040. Further Council action in 2020 will likely include selling
revenue bonds to support the project." Councilmember Buckshnis agreed that the intent of her motion and
the remaining Councilmembers indicated that was their intent.
Mayor Nelson thanked Mr. Williams and the team for their work on this project.
10. STUDY ITEM
1. BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB LEASE AGREEMENT
Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Director Angie Feser displayed a drawing of the Civic Park design
with the outline of the Boys & Girls Club site highlighted. This is a five year lease renewal with Boys &
Girls Club of Snohomish County for continued use of the field house and surrounding area at Civic Park.
The Boys & Girls Club has leased and used the 5,600 square foot field house since 1968, originally leased
from the Edmonds School District. As a result of the transfer of land ownership, in 2010 the City entered
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 9
into a 5-year lease agreement with the Club for continued use of the facility. This agreement had a 5-year
extension clause that was executed in 2015 and is set to expire in December 2020.
Ms. Feser advised the Boys & Girls Club's preference to remain in this location was incorporated into the
design of the Civic Park, even allowing for potential expansion of the Club's facility up to 20,000 square
feet. The Club has stated interest in exploring a new building in the Edmonds area but have not finalized a
location and wish to continue their lease at Civic Park. The lease renewal was due in May, but was delayed
to this month due to COVID-19 impacts. The agenda packet includes several attachments including the
2015 original agreement, the June 8" letter of intent from the Boys & Girls Club, the redline lease agreement
showing the proposed changes due to the removal of the School District's interest as well as the lease in its
final draft.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said in reviewing the agreement, it appeared there was a 30 day out for
the City or the Boys & Girls Club. Ms. Feser answered there are no penalties for leaving the lease early, it
is just basic notification. If the Boys & Girls Club were to leave and break the lease, the City would more
than likely know more than 30 days in advance. Council President Fraley-Monillas observed the 30 day out
was applicable to both parties; for example, if the City needed to get out of the lease. Ms. Feser agreed it
was for both parties.
Councilmember Buckshnis was confused why this was a study item as she recalled it was on the Consent
Agenda last week and was pulled for clarification. Councilmember Olson answered the original lease
contract contained an extension by mutual agreement. However, due to the material change of the
ownership of the property and therefore the contracting parities, a change, amendment or extension to that
same contract would be improper so the contract was rewritten. This has the same effect as an extension
and is legal.
Councilmember Buckshnis relayed a citizen's comment that the City should do a yearly extension. Ms.
Feser said that could be done if the Council wished, but an annual renewal increases administrative efforts.
If the intent was to revisit both parties' commitments on an annual basis, staff has frequent discussions with
Boys & Girls Club regarding their plans to either find another location or build in this location.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she had no problem with this and supported forwarding it to the Consent
Agenda or making a motion tonight.
Council President Fraley-Monillas was comfortable with lease agreement, knowing there is a 30 day out.
As this is a study item, she asked if the intent was to schedule it on next week's Consent Agenda. Ms. Feser
answered yes.
11. PRESENTATIONS
HOUSING COMMISSION'S QUARTERLY REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
Development Services Director Shane Hope advised this was the Housing Commission's third quarterly
report to the City Council; the Housing Commission has been working hard. She introduced Housing
Commissioners Will Chen, Leif Warren and Keith Soltner.
Commissioner Chen reviewed:
• Background
o Council Resolution #1427
• Established Citizens' Housing Commission
o Housing Commission's Mission
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 10
■ "Develop diverse housing policy options for Council consideration designed to expand the
range of housing (including rental and owned) available in Edmonds; options that are
irrespective of age, gender, race,
religious affiliation, physical disability or sexual
orientation."
o Commission Make-up
* Edmonds residents with various backgrounds working together to fulfill the Housing
Commission's mission
■ Housing Commission Members
Karen Haase Herrick- Zone 1
Tanya Kataria-Zone 5
James Ogonowski- Zone 1
Greg Long -Zone 5
Leif Warren- Zone 1 Alternate
Shirley Havenga-Zone 5 Alternate
Keith Soltner- Zone 2
Jess Blanch -Zone 6
Weijia Wu- Zone 2
Alena Nelson-Vietmeier-Zone 6
Wendy Wyatt- Zone 2 Alternate
Rick Nishino-Zone 6 Alternate
George Keefe- Zone 3
Will Chen -Zone 7
John Reed (dec.)- Zone 3
Judi Gladstone -Zone 7
Eva -Denise Miller- Zone 3 Alternate
Jean Salls-Zone 7 Alternate
Nichole Franko- Zone 4
Bob Throndsen-Mayor's Choice
Michael McMurray- Zone 4
Tana Axtelle-Mayor's Choice Alternate
Kenneth Sund- Zone 4 Alternate
• Housing Commission Support
o City Council Liaisons
■ Councilmember Vivian Olson
■ Councilmember Luke Distelhorst
o City Staff
• Director Shane Hope
■ Associate Planner Brad Shipley
■ Planner Amber Groll
■ Admin. Assistant Debbie Rothfus
o Consultants
■ Senior Associate Gretchen Muller, Cascadia Consulting Group
■ Project Coordinator Kate Graham, Cascadia Consulting Group
Commissioner Warren reviewed:
Policy Proposal Timeline
o May 14 meeting — introduce draft policy ideas and clarifying questions
o May 28 Meeting — Discuss round 1 policy ideas
o June 11 meeting — decide which policy ideas will move forward for community input
o July 9 meeting — discuss round 2 policy ideas
o August 13 meeting — discus community feedback
o September 10 meeting — introduce draft policy proposals
o October 8 meeting — decide which policy proposals move forward for additional community
engagement
o November 12 meeting — refine policy proposals
o December 10 meeting — vote on final policy proposals
Community Engagement Timeline
o May — begin drafting online open house (OOH)
o July — August - Launch OOH and survey and community mailing
o August — close out OOH survey for round #1,
o August — September - update OOH for round #2 (if applicable), in person outreach as allowed,
attend events, tabling
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 11
o September - close OOH round #2 survey
o October- event on draft proposals and online engagement
o December - share final proposals
Commissioner Soltner reviewed:
■ Quarterly accomplishments since March 24, 2020
o March and April meetings were cancelled due to COVID-19
o Held regular monthly public meetings via Zoom on the second Thursday of the month, as of
May. Meetings are recorded and available for public viewing online
o Out of necessity, an additional special public meeting was held in both May and June
o Each committee holds their own meetings via Zoom to discuss housing policies
■ Policy Committees
o City Resources Committee
o Incentives & Requirements Committee
o Housing Types Committee
o Zoning Updates Committee
o City Processes or Programs Committee
■ Summary of Round 1 Policy Ideas Discussed (** = ideas the commission plans to move forward
for public input and more consideration)
o City Resources**
■ Work with other local governments and agencies in Snohomish County toward regional
housing solutions that improve affordability and meet other community needs.
• Use City's existing share of state sales tax (from SHB 1406) for housing purposes in
coordination with other jurisdictions/agencies
- Possible short-term use for housing assistance to Edmonds residents impacted by
COVID-19
■ Advocate for Snohomish County to adopt the optional 0.1% sales tax that is allowed by
state law to provide affordable and supportive housing for low-income households.
■ Work out an agreement with HASCO, the main housing agency in Snohomish County, so
the agency can buy or develop buildings for affordable housing in additional areas of
Edmonds.
Commissioner Chen reviewed:
o Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) **
Allow one [1] attached or detached accessory dwelling per property, where it is associated
with a primary (main) dwelling, in a single-family residential zone
Allow accessory dwellings to be approved through a standard permit process in which staff
may approve the permit if all requirements are met.
+� Develop examples of detached accessory dwelling designs that would help homeowners
who want to plan for such a unit.
■ Require that each accessory dwelling meet City criteria
o Duplex or two -unit townhouse"
Provide development guidance or incentives that encourage duplex or two -unit townhouse
buildings in lieu of one large single-family house
Commissioner Soltner reviewed:
o Transition areas **
■ Allow low -density multi -family residential housing (such as triplexes, four-plexes,
courtyard apartments,
■ townhomes, and/or mixed use) along transit routes that are also adjacent to commercial
zones.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 12
Designate transition areas that are currently zoned RS-8 AND are adjacent to multifamily
or commercial zones. Encourage small-scale multifamily therenamely, duplexes,
triplexes or quadruplexes.
Require all transition areas to provide on -site vehicle parking and usable green space for
people who live there
Commissioner Warren reviewed:
o Development fees
■ Recommend City Council craft a Resolution that expands & defines further uses & goals
under the Transportation Element of the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan, for example,
regarding more parking capacity.
■ Recommend City's Engineering Dept. run a cost analysis in the future on various utility
fees to see if increases are justified
o City processes and programs
■ Simplify zoning regulations. Use diagrams, pictures, and tables in place of text where
applicable. Use plain language where text is necessary. **
■ Streamline the permit process by reducing the number of land uses that must have a
conditional use permit. **
■ Explore establishment of a city -funded childcare programs for families in need.
■ Establish a Community Land Trust (CLT) to preserve affordable housing
Commissioner Soltner reviewed:
o Design guidelines **
■ Require a percentage of larger(3-4 bedroom) units in new multi -family projects.
■ Require a certain percentage of ADA accessible units in new multi -family projects.
* Develop multi -family design guidelines
• Next Steps
o Community Engagement - Online Open House
• Date to be announced soon
■ Announced widely and posted for about 3 weeks
■ To include
— Videos
— Graphics
— Engaging activities
o Commission Meetings — Always open to the public (Zoom meetings until face-to-face meetings
are allowed + video)
o Analysis of data and public input/feedback
o Policy developments
o Policy recommendations finalized
o Final recommendation to City Council in December 2020
• Additional Resources: https://www.itizenshousingcommission.org/
Councilmember Buckshnis said people have been asking her about trees being removed during
development. She recalled discussions a couple years ago about low density housing where trees are
retained and asked whether the commission was looking at any environmentally friendly type of housing
stock and smaller cottage type housing to address tree removal. Mr. Warren, speaking on behalf of the
Zoning Standards Committee, said they were hoping to look a mix of cluster housing or urban villages in
the Round 2 policies. They are in the early stages of discussion but want to move forward with things on
which there is a lot of agreement. Those are both aspects of missing middle housing they would like to
address because the intent of the commission is to produce diverse options and those options are not
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 13
frequently available in Edmonds. If ways to implement them could be developed without impacting the
beloved neighborhood character, that would a positive thing.
Commissioner Soltner said the flexibility of cluster housing is a great opportunity for smaller homes to
retain existing trees, vegetation, landscaping. Urban villages are another way of clustering in mixed use
type buildings with professional or commercial services on the first floor and multifamily in 1-2 stories
above. Urban villages would have parks, walking/bike paths, etc. and would be located in different
neighborhoods throughout the City, thereby eliminating traffic because people wouldn't need to go
downtown.
Council President Fraley-Monillas commented there is a lot of confusion countywide between accessory
dwelling units (ADU), attached dwelling units, which Edmonds already allows, and detached dwelling units
(DADU). She asked if those could be better defined. Ms. Hope answered there tends to be two terms
DADUs and ADUs. (Ms. Hope's virtual participation failed.) Mr. Warren clarified ADUs are accessory
dwelling units and DADU are detached accessory dwelling units.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said in other parts of county there are ADU or DADUs, attached or
detached dwelling units and now there is the term accessory dwelling unit. She observed there was
confusion countywide with those terms and was hopeful there could be a better definition. When she hears
ADU, she things of attached dwelling units not accessory dwelling units. Ms. Hope answered ADU is the
generic term, attached ADUs are allowed in the City. (Ms. Hope's virtual participation failed.)
Commissioner Warren agreed it could be confusing to the public who do not deal with it every day; possibly
there was something the commission can suggest. Commissioner Chen suggested identifying in the
definition whether it was attached or detached. Council President Fraley-Monillas said Snohomish County
uses the term accessory dwelling unit.
Councilmember Paine asked if the commission had discussed the Esperance area. Ms. Hope recalled there
had been conversations about it at the beginning. There is interest in what Esperance citizens think, but the
focus has been on the area within the city limits. Councilmember Paine said some of the development
standards are very different in Snohomish County versus Edmonds. If that area ever annexes into Edmonds,
there will be a big difference in the land use standards. With regard to local control, Councilmember Paine
recalled the legislature passed rules regarding authority for ADUs and parking. She asked about the City's
control over ADUs and parking. Ms. Hope explained the state legislation prohibited cities from requiring
parking in certain locations that are close to major transit facilities; the way it was defined in the legislation,
it is not applicable in Edmonds other than a few lots.
Councilmember Paine recalled when she attended a subdivision public hearing a few years ago, there was
an indication that a great deal of extra parking cannot be required in a townhome subdivision. Ms. Hope
said it would not seem reasonable to require more than was required for a single family house, but as much
or some portion less can be required. Councilmember Paine said her experience in Seattle was a lot of units
on a parcel in a smaller subdivision results in parking on the street because the garages are used for storage.
Ms. Hope answered that sometimes happens with single family houses as well. Councilmember Paine
commented the difference with a single family home is there are not 6-8 vehicles competing for parking.
Councilmember Paine asked whether any budget requests were anticipated for the coming year. Ms. Hope
answered no, it appears the commission will be able to develop a set of recommendations by the end of the
year so there is no need to budget for continuing their work into 2021. There will be implementation, but
that is unknown until the recommendations are made and the Council decides which of those to pursue.
Councilmember Paine liked that the commission was looking at environmental justice as well.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 14
Councilmember Olson thanked the commission for their work; as the liaisons, she and Councilmember
Distelhorst have had a front row seat to their creativity and hard work which she found very impressive.
She cited the creativity of the transition areas and said the land trust idea was an interesting, intriguing
possibility. She summarized she was blown away by the work and the ideas that have come from the
dedicated group of commissioners.
Councilmember Olson reminded the City has incredible state pressure for housing density, specifically the
need for affordable housing. The City can either do it carefully and thoughtfully and in a way that works
for this community or will be imposed by the state. She urged citizens to come to the open houses with an
open heart and open mind and look at being part of the solution of meeting the mission of the Citizen
Housing Commission in the most thoughtful, best way for Edmonds. As Edmonds is an artist community,
she was hopeful artists would be included in the provision of affordable housing. The City's identity is tied
to the artist culture but many artists are not super affluent during their lifetimes. It would be great if artists
could live in Edmonds where they are revered and honored.
Councilmember Olson recognized the hard work that John Reed put into this effort before his untimely
passing. His work was very valuable and he is missed on the commission. She thanked him and wished his
soul well.
Councilmember L. Johnson thanked the commissioners for their teamwork and for the detailed presentation.
She referred to page 257 of the packet, under transition areas and the statement, "designate transition areas
that are currently zoned RS-8 AND are adjacent to multifamily or commercial zones." She noted RS-8 are
single family homes primarily east of 9t' and south of 196"'; the Bowl is mostly zoned RS6, multi -family
and business and north of that are multi -family 10 and 12. In looking at the map, parts of the residential
zone 10 and 6 are also adjacent to transit. She questioned why RS-8 was selected as a focus. Commissioner
Soltner answered they started looking at zones that back up to multi -family zones and many of those were
RS-8. The committee started expanding that and found there was a lot of diversified areas where transition
could work that other than RS-8. He clarified these are not fully developed and there will be more flexibility
as the commission continues its work identifying other single family zones. The commission was interested
in transition areas on the periphery, not in the center of a single family neighborhood which would destroy
the character. Ms. Hope said two of the commission's policy committees worked independently on that
issue; one developed more specific criteria such as particular zoning adjacent to commercial or multi -family
and the other proposal was more general related to transit. The commission is discussing what is the right
balance, but wanted to propose something to get early input from the public.
Councilmember Distelhorst thanked Commissioners Chen, Warren and Soltner for their presentation and
other commissioners for their participation on the commission. The last couple months have been fast paced
with two meetings a month and many of the committees meeting weekly. He echoed Councilmember
Olson's message that the commission needs participation from across the entire City to make this
successful. It takes a decade or more to get into a housing crisis and it takes a decade or more to get out.
Structural changes are needed to materially tackle the housing affordability crisis. When the commission
launches the open house in the next few weeks, he urged residents to provide input regarding what they
want to see in the future in Edmonds. Beyond the environmental aspect, there needs to be consideration of
diversity, equity and inclusion aspects of housing as a lot of housing policies have a strong past rooted in
racism.
12. PRESENTATIONS (CONTINUED
1. CITY ATTORNEY ANNUAL REPORT
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 15
City Attorney Jeff Taraday explained he gives this report every year, usually in the first quarter, but it was
delayed until the OPMA proclamation was lifted. His report will be in 4 sections, 1) the rules of professional
conduct, his role at the City and the attorney -client relationship in the context of a city attorney, 2)
Lighthouse Law Group's legal team, 3) contract matters and economics of the city attorney contract, and
4) matters Lighthouse has spent most of its time on in 2019. He offered to send the slides to Council and/or
have them included in the minutes.
Mr. Taraday reviewed:
► Big Picture
o City has relationships with four law firms:
■ Lighthouse
• WA Cities Insurance Authority (WCIA)
* Bond Counsel
■ Zachor & Thomas
• Who is the client
o RPC 1.13(a) A lawyer employed or retained by an organization represents the organization
acting through its duly authorized constituents
• The attorney -client relationship
Attorney<*Organizational client<*Duly Authorized Constituents
• Duty Authorized Constituents
o City Council
■ Individual Councilmembers
■ Boards & Commissions
o Mayor
■ Directors
■ Staff
o Judge
What about your constituents, the citizens?
o Lighthouse<*Duty Authorized ConstituentsC*Citizens
Same concept applies to the City's relationship with the other three law firms
Oversight role?
o Duty to investigate?
r RPC 2.1, comment 5: A lawyer ordinarily has no duty to initiate investigation of a client's
affairs or to give advice that the client has indicated is unwanted, but a lawyer may initiate
advice to a client when doing so appears to be in the client's interest
o Request to investigate
■ The RPCs do contemplate that lawyers will be asked on occasion to investigate alleged
violation of law
o What if lawyer knows of a violation?
■ RPC 1.13(b): If a lawyer for an organization knows that an officer, employee or other
person associated with the organization is engaged in action, intends to act or refuses to act
in a matter ... that is a violation of a legal obligation to the organization, or a violation of
law -that reasonably might be imputed -to the organization; and that is likely to result- in
substantial injury to the organization, then the lawyer shall proceed as is reasonably
necessary in the best interest of the organization....
o Reporting Up
■ RPC 1.13(b):... Unless the lawyer reasonably believes that it is not necessary in the best
interest of the organization to do so, the lawyer shall refer the matter to higher authority in
the organization, including, if warranted by the circumstances, to the highest authority that
can act on behalf of the organization as determined by applicable law.
o Highest Authority
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 16
RPC 1.13 [comment 5]: The organization's highest authority to whom a matter may be
referred ordinarily will be the board of directors or similar governing body.
o What if "reporting up" doesn't work?
■ RPC 1.13(c) Except as provided in paragraph (d), if
(1) despite the lawyer's efforts ... the highest authority ... insists upon or fails to address
in a timely and appropriate manner an action, or a refusal to act, that is clearly a violation
of law, and
(2) the lawyer reasonably believes that the violation is reasonably certain to result in
substantial injury to the organization.
then the lawyer may reveal information relating to the representation whether or not Rule
1.6 permits such disclosure, but only if and to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes
necessary to prevent substantial injury to the organization.
• Lawyer as a decision -maker?
o RPC 1.13, comment 3: When constituents of the organization make decisions for it, the
decisions ordinarily must be accepted by the lawyer even if their utility or prudence is doubtful.
Decisions concerning policy and operations, including ones entailing serious risk, are not as
such in the lawyer's province.
• Lawyer not decision -maker, but...
o ... when the lawyer knows that the organization is likely to be substantially injured by action
of an officer or other constituent that violates a legal obligation to the organization or is in
violation of law that might be imputed to the organization, the lawyer must proceed as is
reasonably necessary in the best interest of the organization.
• Special rules for city attorney?
o RPC 1.13, comment 9: ... in a matter involving the conduct of government officials, a
government lawyer may have authority under applicable law to question such conduct more
extensively than that of a lawyer for a private organization in similar circumstances. Thus,
when the client is a governmental organization, a different balance may be appropriate between
maintaining confidentiality and assuring that the wrongful act is prevented or rectified, for
public business is involved.
• So you aren't the client... are your communications still confidential?
o RPC 1.13, comment 2: When one of the constituents of an organizational client communicates
with the organization's lawyer in that person's organizational capacity, the communication is
protected by Rule 1.6.
• ... This does not mean, however, that constituents of an organizational client are the clients
of the lawyer. The lawyer may not disclose to such constituents information relating to the
representation except for disclosures explicitly or impliedly authorized by the
organizational client in order to carry out the representation or as otherwise permitted by
Rule 1.6.
■ Advisor
o In representing a client, a lawyer shall exercise independent professional judgment and render
candid advice. In rendering advice, a lawyer may refer not only to law but to other
considerations such as moral, economic, social and political factors, that may be relevant to the
client's situation.
Mr. Taraday described the City Attorney Team;
• Jeff Taraday
o City Council meetings
o Elected official advice
o Land use
o Litigation
o Coordination/special projects
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 17
o Office hours thrice a week
• Sharon Cates
o Labor and employment
o Contracts and ILAs
o Bidding and procurement
o Disability Board
o Office hours once a week
• Patricia Taraday
o Public Records Act
o Code enforcement
o Nuisance abatement
o Office hours once a week
• Tom Brubaker
o Council meeting backup
o Special projects
■ Beth Ford
o Research
o Writing legal memos
o Briefing
o Ordinance drafting
o Other litigation work
• Rosa Fruehling-Watson
o Council meeting backup
o Labor and employment support
o PRA support
• Mike Bradley (contractual relationship with Lighthouse)
v Cable TV fmnehi,sec
o Telecommunications law
o FCC proceedings
• Angela Tinker
o Franchise negotiations
o Research
o Writing legal memos
Mr. Taraday reviewed contract matters and economics of the city attorney contract:
• Types of City Attorney relationship
o Elected
o City Employee appointed by Executive
o Contract with law firm pursuant to City Council's contracting authority
■ In House vs. contract
o Hiring/Firing Authority: does this matter?
■ In-house — Mayor's authority
■ Contract — Council''s authority
o Intellectual Capacity: 8 brains vs. x brains
o Cost: depends on...
■ Level of service chosen (x) under each scenario
■ Who bears budget risk
• Types of City Attorney contracts
o Flat fee (status quo): all-inclusive within predefined scope; the fee is both a ceiling and a floor
■ Availability and budget are highly predictable
o Retainer: the fee is a floor, not a ceiling
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 18
■ Availability is predictable; budget is less predictable
o Hourly: no floor or ceiling
a Availability and budget are not predictable
• Budget Risk
o Flat Fee (current arrangement): Lighthouse assumes budget risk
o Retainer: City assumes budget risk
o Hourly: City assumes budget risk
• City Attorney Team Stats (January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019)
o Lighthouse worked 3,594 hours for Edmonds
o Earned flat monthly fee of $47,964.19 ($575,570 annually) for all civil work including
litigation
o = $160 average effectively hourly rate
• Comparing $160 to the hourly rates paid by other cities in 2019
o Maple Valley (Lighthouse) : $214 - $285*
o Kenmore (Inslee Best): $245 - $265**
o Lake Stevens (Ogden Murphy): $210 - $345***
o Lynnwood (Inslee Best): $175 - 260 (with most hours at $190)
o Mill Creek (Ogden Murphy): $225 - $325
o Tukwila (Kenyon Disend):
■ Monthly retainer of $33,940 for general city attorney services
• Plus hourly rates ($165-350) apply to litigation and special services
o Snohomish (Weed Grafstra): $185-200
*rates in effect from May 1, 2019 through April 30, 2020
**rates result of 2019 competitive RFP process
***rates result of 2018 competitive RFP process
Mr. Taraday reviewed:
■ 2019 topten matters (by hours worked(parenthesis = last year's ranking):
Ranking
Matter
Hours
10
Public Works R)
99
9
Devel. Services 10
110
8
Police 4
132
7
Finance 9
155
6
City Clerk 7
209
5
Shippen v. Edmonds (NR)
211
4
En ineerin 6)
278
3
City Council (2)
350
2
Human Resources 3
413
1
Ebb Tide 1
1,081
• Top Litigation matters by hours worked
Ranking
Matter
Hours
5.
Barnard Pension Cale)
36
4.
Blomenkam LUPA)
36
3,
Justin Lee Grievance
96
2.
1 Shi en (IC/Trespass
211
1.
1 Ebb Tide Dec J)
1,081
r Litigation completed by Lighthouse since last report
o Barnard (Pension)
■ Settled at mediation
o Justin Lee (Grievance)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 19
■ City prevailed at arbitration. Termination of employment upheld
■ Lighthouse and Summit Law Group worked this case as co -counsel
o Blomenkamp (LUPA(
■ Supreme Court denied petition for review. Hearing examiner's decision upheld
Pending Litigation with Lighthouse
o Edmonds v. Ebb Tide
■ Declaratory judgment. City's easement was ruled to be valid on motion for summary
judgment. Easement height has also been established by motion for summary judgment.
March 2020 trial on remaining issues cancelled due to COVID-19. New trial date pending
o Shippen v. Edmonds
■ Landslide case with counterclaim from City to require proper draining installation. Parties
engaged in discovery
o Tupper v. Edmonds
r OPMA related to City's first COVID-19 executive session.
o Appeal of FCC cable franchising order
■ Group appeal with other cities
■ WA Cities Insurance Authority Coverage
o Claims arising from alleged:
■ Employment related action, e.g. retaliation and harassment
• Police excessive force
■ Land use damage
■ Auto liability
■ Defective street or sidewalk
■ Sewer obstruction
■ Premises liability
■ Other negligence
o Packet includes report from WCIA (pave 404-405)
o Good to have WCIA rep talk to Council occasionally about their risk profile
o Risk profiles shows other group members. WCIA groups cities for determining actuarial risk
by worker hours
Council President Fraley-Monillas recalled last year or the year before there was a list of Councilmembers
and the amount time spent with individual Councilmembers. She asked Mr. Taraday if he had that data and
if he would be willing to generate that report. Mr. Taraday answered he did not remember ever doing that
and it would be nearly an impossible task because the billing system has a billing matter set up for City
Council but not for individual Councilmembers.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said she vaguely remembered that information in the past. She was not
suggesting he go to great extremes to provide that information if he had not kept that data. The Council is
the second to third largest number of hours so it would be good to know how that time is spent. She
recognized some of it was City Council meetings. Mr. Taraday said the large number of hours was due to
Council meetings; Council meetings occur weekly and it is not uncommon for them to last 2'/2 to 3 hours
so the hours add up quickly in addition to telephone and email consultation with Councilmembers. He
assured there was not one Councilmember who was overusing the resource. If a Councilmember asks him
to take on a project that seems extremely time consuming, he will usually say this is the type of thing he
would like to have Council direction on because it will be a lot of work.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled in 2014 when she worked on the contract renewal there was a
breakdown by Councilmember and Council President; possibly his system has changed since then. Mr.
Taraday answered Councilmember Buckshnis may have seen billing records; City Council billing records
would show a description such as telephone conference with Councilmember Buckshnis and the number of
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 20
hours. The problem with that is he does not always break it out like that. For example if Councilmember
Buckshnis called him and then Council President Fraley-Monillas him two minutes later, he would just
keep the timer on instead of creating a new timer for each conversation.
Councilmember Buckshnis suggested the City Attorney Report be put on the Consent Agenda so the public
can see it as a number of people had contacted her about it.
With regard to the 2019 top ten matters, Councilmember Buckshnis recognized the Council could not talk
about Ebb Tide but she has asked to discuss it in executive session due to the new Councilmembers. She
asked if there was a way to determine how much of the City Clerk hours were devoted to public records
requests, redacting, etc. She asked whether public records requests were going up or down. Mr. Taraday
answered most of the time billed to the City Clerk is Public Records Act (PRA) related work. It is not
always, he sometimes interacts with City Clerk Scott Passey on Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA)
questions. If the Council ever wants finer detail, new billing matters can be created such as for PRA, and
hours can be billed to that billing matter. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled the City of Gold Bar went
broke due to public record requests. The report does not show a comparison from previous years and she
wondered whether public records requests were going up, down or staying the same.
COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO
EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 15 MINUTES.
Council President Fraley-Monillas suggested moving Reports on Outside Boards and Committees to next
week. Council agreed.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Buckshnis assumed when there is more transparency, there are less public record requests.
That is an interest of hers because Gold Bar went bankrupt two years ago due to a tremendous public records
request. Mr. Taraday said he can run a supplemental report that would show how the City Clerk matter has
trended over time. The City Clerk billing matter is not unique to public records so it would have to be
extrapolated that if the City Clerk matter was going up or down, it was partly due to public records going
up and down. He said compared to other cities, Edmonds has been doing a great job with regard to PRA
compliance. For all cities it is a high risk area and a lot of cities get sued over it. Councilmember Buckshnis
said she was interested in it and people ask her about it. She asked if the Police public records requests fall
under City Clerk. Mr. Taraday answered no, those are billed to the Police Department.
Councilmember Paine asked if he had been identifying hours related to the COVID response and how that
compared to the work that was done during this time last year. Mr. Taraday answered he has not created a
COVID matter; certain matters have gone up this year due to COVID. For example, one department that
was not identified in the 2019 top 10 was Community Services & Economic Development. He has been
working a fair amount with Mr. Doherty on COVID-related matters. He was unsure it would reach the top
10, but that was an area where the hours had increased significantly due to COVID. A lot of the time billed
to the Mayor matter number is also COVID related and a lot of the time billed to all the departments with
respect to trying to figure out whether something necessary and routine theoretically be treated as COVID
related time. Councilmember Paine commented his involvement in emergency response management was
also related to COVID.
Councilmember Paine asked if any of cost would be recoverable through federal funds. Mr. Taraday
answered possibly through FEMA but not through the CARES Act because the CARES Act does not
provide for something that was already budgeted. For example, the City would have paid Lighthouse the
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 21
same amount of money either way so the question would be how the City was harmed. FEMA could
possibly look at that differently.
Councilmember Olson commented it is important to her and to her constituents to follow the City code.
She is working on some issues with Chapter 2.05 related to the city attorney position and things that aren't
being done because they are not in the contract; the code needs to match what Lighthouse has been asked
to do in their contract.
13. REPORTS ON OUTSIDE BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS
Due to the late hour this item was postponed to the July 14' Council meeting.
14. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson commented on the robust fireworks on the 0' of July. Many city officials were contacted
and there were significant responses by the Fire and Police Departments. Every year in the state hundreds
are hurt by fireworks; the overwhelming majority of the injured who go to the emergency room are children
and over half those injuries are burns. Nationally last year half of all the fires on the 4"' of July were caused
by fireworks. He believed a new approach was needed; to help prevent future fireworks injuries and fires
resulting in property destruction and loss of life, he has asked the city attorney to update the City's fireworks
ordinance to better reflect the significant risk that fireworks pose to the community, including significantly
increasing fines and penalties. The updated ordinance will be presented to the City Council. Additionally,
he asked South County Fire District Chief Thad Hovis about an education and enforcement campaign. Chief
Hovis is looking into a Fire Marshal task force to help with education and enforcement.
15. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Olson gave a shout out to Susan Morrow, the mastermind behind the Justice sign project
that resulted in a $4,500 contribution to the Edmonds Food Bank. She thanked Ms. Morrow for her work
on behalf of the food bank. There are still a few signs available at Edmonds Justice25�a7„ MaiI.com or by
emailing her.
Councilmember Olson thanked Mr. Hinton for his comments during his interview today; she found them
very thought provoking such as being friends without having to agree, being part of each other's journey
going forward, and finding a meeting of minds. It is an opportunity to think about offering grace to each
other, including each other in our lives and our journey and figuring things out together.
Councilmember Distelhorst reported effective today by state order, businesses are supposed to refuse
service to anyone not wearing a mask or a facial covering. He realized that potentially put a lot of businesses
and residents in very uncomfortable situations. The way to prevent that and to respect your neighbors,
residents, businesses and restaurants is to wear a face covering or a mask and keep each other safe and
healthy. The current rate of 50 cases per 100,000 is more than double the Phase 2 approved number of 25
cases per 100,000 or 5 times the original Phase 2 rate set by the governor of 10 cases. He urged the public
to follow state guidelines; the number of cases is heading in the wrong direction and people need to take it
seriously when they are out in public. He recommended people not go out in public if they were sick or
feeling unwell.
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Mayor Nelson for his comments regarding fireworks. She received
numerous comments from dog community about how bad this year was. She thanked everyone who
contacted her over the weekend, commenting it was a busy weekend with a lot of fireworks and she hoped
things would be better next year.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 22
Councilmember Buckshnis advised the City's May financials are out; the City is looking very good. In
talking with a realtor friends, one said the inventory of home sales is the lowest in history, a .7 month supply
versus a norm of 3-6 months. The City's REET revenue is looking good. Although Mayor Nelson has
suggested postponing Civic Field, she suggested revisiting that during the budgeting process due to low
interest rates and it will be good to have Civic Park once people can go out. She thanked residents for their
comments, assuring she hears them and encouraged them to write letters to the media. Everyone is trying
to do the best they can, every needs to wear masks as that will be the new normal for a while. She
summarized be happy and suggested having a masks for each day or each mood.
Councilmember L. Johnson gave a shout out to Courtney Wooten for her nomination as a finalist for the
Snohomish County Emerging Leaders Award. To many, Courtney is already known as an established leader
in Edmonds. She is the driving force behind the youth -oriented Martin Luther King Day event, "Our
Beloved Community, she is key in many school district conversations around equity and inclusion and
education, she serves on the Snohomish County Human Rights Commission, she the backbone of the
Edmonds Neighborhood Action Coalition and many are fortunate to call her a dear friend. With all that,
she very humble which is amazing. Presentations are this Thursday. She congratulated Ms. Wooten
regardless as she is a leader and Edmonds is very fortunate to have her working and living in the community.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
EXTEND THE MEETING FOR FIVE MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she wanted to take this opportunity to talk about and explain the situation
that led to a series of articles and posts in the local press. To begin, she acknowledged that some people's
feelings were hurt by her words and for that she was sincerely sorry and assured that was not her intention.
The situation began three weeks ago when she reviewed the Council packet for the June 16"' meeting. She
was surprised that deliberations of the CARES Act was listed as an action item before the Council had been
briefed or had an opportunity to review the proposal. This resulted in a very lengthy meeting and the
discussion was continued the following week. To prepare for the June 16' meeting, she sent an email to the
City's Economic Development Director to discuss many aspects of his proposal including criteria for
distributing funds. Mainly, she was supportive of the use of measurable quantitative data instead of
subjective qualitative data. She felt this criteria should be used in a fair and unbiased fashion.
Councilmember K. Johnson explained she posed a rhetorical question to highlight inherent biases. At the
June 23rd meeting, Mayor Nelson recited the question she had posed and it was not taken well. The
comments were taken out of context and he used it to illustrate a point. Unfortunately, her question was
politically incorrect and offensive to some people. She admitted that there were words that were very
provocative which was the nature of the rhetorical question. She was uncomfortable with this type of
discourse in public; however, because the Mayor broke the rules of decorum at the last meeting, she felt the
need to defend herself. First, her words were taken out of context. Second, she was advocating for a fair
and unbiased process. Third, her words provoked hard feelings and were misunderstood. She felt this kind
of political grandstanding was done to cast her in a negative light. Looking back, it would have been helpful
to know that the CARES Act fund was intended to support minority businesses because her research did
not reveal that. Looking forward, she asked Mayor Nelson to call her to discuss issues of concern to him.
If she was misunderstood, then she would explain and if she was misinformed, she would listen. She
believed all could benefit from better communication.
Councilmember K. Johnson explained the City was awarded $1,265,100 from the federal Corona Relief
Fund and Economic Security Act (CARES) which the state distributed to cities at a rate of $30 per resident.
Financial decisions such as this allocation are the City Council's responsibility. She raised many policy -
related questions in AN email to the Economic Development Director and after the June 16'" meeting
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 23
Councilmembers clarified their direction; for example most wanted to include grants for individuals and
families, most wanted to give extra points for disadvantaged business owners, geographic location and
creative businesses within the Creative District. As she listened, she evolved her thinking. Although she
still felt that objective criteria were important, she also thought it was appropriate to have policy -based
criteria to achieve a social objective. Based on her experience, this has been done for transportation
contracts to support certified minority or women owned business enterprises. After scoring applicants, a
10% bonus was added to their scores.
Councilmember K. Johnson explained she had prepared an amendment for the Council's June 23`d meeting
that incorporated the Council's direction but would result in a more equitable and uniform application of
the three qualitative criteria. She spoke to that motion, explaining that IF an applicant had 7 points total,
then 1 preferential point would equal 6%, and 2 preferential points would equal 12% of the total score.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON, TO
EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 10 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember K. Johnson continued, if an applicant had 6 points total, 1 point would equal 16% and 2
points would equal 33% of the total score. To be more uniform and equitable, she proposed a bonus
approach that incorporated these policy preferences. In the end, the Council adopted the 17 point criteria
proposed by the administration. This is the Council's official position. She was a dissenter because she did
not think the subjective criteria were applied uniformly or equitably. Once the Council has made a decision,
it is the official policy of the body; however, an individual Councilmember can present a dissenting opinion
to their constituents or the press which is what she is doing in explaining her position and thinking. In
conclusion, she apologized again if her words hurt anyone because that was certainly not her intent nor has
it ever been. She welcomed anyone to contact her if they wanted further discussion of this topic.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said words in writing are very important and can be hurtful to many
i S _ ___ __ t everyone
t_ al____1_ _______ _1____7_. 1__1'____ pushing
the send
L._u..... ...........:..11_.
people. Brie enwura�eu evciyuue w uiiiin uiuic uical,y uc>�1c }�uailiilg u1C �o11u uuuvl, c�,},vulal,y
considering everything the Council sends is publicly disclosable. She agreed fireworks were really
obnoxious this year. She woke up to a number of bottle rockets burned in her yard, on her roof and in her
driveway. She went to bed around 9:30/10 p.m. and apparently there were explosions going off all over the
neighborhood that she slept through and luckily her house did not burn down.
Council President Fraley-Monillas offered congratulation to Courtney Wooten and was thrilled she was
nominated. She planned to watch online because she knew a number of the nominees and it will be exciting
to see who receives the Emerging Leaders Award. Ms. Wooten is a great example of someone who is very
community minded. Alicia Crank is the keynote speaker for the event.
Councilmember Paine hoped everyone had had a wonderful Independence Day holiday. She reflected on
the fact that the COVID numbers were going up and up and up. She spent the holiday weekend in
Washington DC where everyone wears masks outside even though it was 95 degrees. She stayed inside
most of the time due to the temperature. When she got home a couple days ago and was picking up her mail
from post office, she had a conversation with a gentleman who was not wearing mask who said, "what are
you, afraid?" That was the second time at the post office where someone confronted a person in a negative
way about wearing a mask. That worried her because the numbers are going straight up; Snohomish County
is barely hanging on to Phase 2 and she hoped going back to Phase 1 would not be necessary although she
recognized it was a real possibility. There are a lot of things people can control, number one is to wear a
mask; it's not that big of an imposition. She summarized we all need to protect each other due to the impacts
on the entire community.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 24
Student Representative .Bauder said it was nice to see everyone and he hoped everyone was doing well. He
had nothing to report tonight but had something in the works for the next Council meeting.
16. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10.27 p.m.
MICHAEL NELSON, MAYOR
SC - PASSEY, C CL K T
Edmonds ON Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 25
Student Representative Bauder said it was nice to see everyone and he hoped everyone was doing well. He
had nothing to report tonight but had something in the works for the next Council meeting.
16. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:27 p.m.
MICHAEL NELSON, MAYOR
SCOTT PASSEY, CITY CLERK
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 25
Public Comment for July 7, 2020 Council Meeting.
7/7/20 Ken Reidy, Subject: Public Comment for July 7, 2020 City Council Meeting
Please ask City Attorney Jeff Taraday the following during his annual report to the City Council
this evening:
1. If an offer to drop a lawsuit is conveyed to the City Attorney, are you required to inform the
City Council of the offer and the conditions required by the offer?
2. How do you convey such an offer to the City Council?
3. Can the City Attorney act with City Staff to meet the conditions required by a settlement offer
without City Council first voting to approve such actions?
4. What is City Council's utmost responsibility if they discover a City Attorney misrepresented a
State or City Law to the City Council during a Public Hearing or during a Hearing in front of a
Hearing Examiner?
5. What is City Council's utmost responsibility if they discover a City Attorney provided
incomplete information to the City Council during a Public Hearing?
6. What is City Council's utmost responsibility if they discover a City Attorney provided
incomplete information, such as applicable Code Sections, to the Hearing Examiner before and
during a Hearing in front of the Hearing Examiner?
7. If two parties sign a land clearing permit application, do the same two parties have to sign a
written request to extend the same permit for an additional 6 months?
8. Can the City Attorney act on what he claims, "makes sense", and email a citizen that "the
city' assumes that a citizen is impliedly joining another party on a written request to extend a
permit? If Mr. Taraday represents that this conduct is legal, please have Mr. Taraday provide
the State and or City law that allows the City Attorney and/or "the city' to do this.
9. Does a City Attorney have the authority to state what the City's position is on a matter or is it
the City Attorney's role to advise the City authorities and officers on all legal matters pertaining
to the business of the city? Are City authorities and officers the parties that actually have the
authority to state what the City's position is on a matter.
10. Edmonds City Code (ECC) Chapter 2.05 is titled "City Attorney". This Chapter clearly
requires the City Attorney to attend all sessions of the Edmonds Municipal Court. Does Mr.
Taraday or a member of Lighthouse Law Group do this?
11. If the answer to Question 10 is no, what is it called when the code is violated? Is violating a
provision of the Edmonds City Code a misdemeanor or a gross misdemeanor? Is each failure
to attend a session of Edmonds Municipal Court a separate violation of the Edmonds City
Code?
Thanks in advance for seeking answers to these important questions.
7/6/20 Terese Richmond, Subject: Comment letter on Replacement of Sludge Incinerator
Please find the attached comment letter for distribution at the July 7th public hearing regarding
the proposed pyrolysis and gasification system to replace the sludge incinerator.
Dear Councilmembers, We appreciate the Council's careful consideration of the
alternatives for the necessary replacement of the existing Sanitary Sewerage Sludge
Incinerator (SSI). We have been following the City's design efforts, through a 2019
presentation by City's Public Works & Utilities Staff to the Mayor's Climate Protection
Committee and more recently through the Staff presentations during four Council meetings
in June 2020. At the June 23, 2020 meeting, Project B was recommended by the City's
Public Works & Utilities Staff. We are writing to provide the C I i m a t e Protection
Committee's input on Project B. Our perspective is as community members who are
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 26
informed and concerned about the imperative to limit the impacts of climate change
through mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to adapt to prepare for the now
inevitable impacts of climate change. As citizen volunteers we bring expertise, knowledge
and interest to the Climate Protection Committee. We submit this comment letter because
of the replacement of the SSI carries with it an important chance to dramatically reduce
our City's carbon emissions. With this perspective in mind, we submit to the Council the
following comments. First, we agree with the Staff that a new incinerator should be
eliminated from further consideration due to the GHG emissions associated with its
operation. Second, when Staff briefed us in 2019 about Project A, we were positively
impressed by their fiscal and environmental responsibility as well as their expertise in the
field. Thus, their recommendation for Project B carries great weight. The shift to Project B
appears to be a logical outcome of further design and the effort to achieve the most GHG
emissions as possible balanced with the City's budget restrictions. Third, Project B is
consistent with the City's leadership on climate change issues and a path to a sustainable
community as called for under Resolution 1389. Project B will increase carbon recovery
over and above the existing SSI; utilize screening and bio-solids as fuel; and lower the
utilization of GHG emitting trucking. In addition, Project B's construction costs are lower
and the project does not require construction of a new building. We urge the Council to
complete its study for Project B (including building a record about the total projected GHG
emissions and Project B's utility as a heat source if district energy becomes feasible in the
future) and then take actions necessary to authorize and fund implementation of Project B.
We acknowledge the economic impact of the pandemic; however, the state of the
infrastructure requires that the City act now to replacement of the SSI anal Project B is tie
best choice, accomplishing the goal of reducing Edmonds' (and the World's) GH emissions.
We urge the Council to continue its steadfast leadership on making wise choices to
reduce carbon emissions and create a more climate resilient community.
Thank you for your leadership. T.0 Richmond, Co -Chair on behalf of Members of the City of
Edmonds Mayor's Climate Protection Committee. http://www.edmondswa.gov/climate-
protection-com m ittee. html
7/6/20 Stan Gent, Subject: Sewage Treatment Plant Upgrade
Please find attached our written comments for the July 7th public hearing on this topic.
0710512020
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 27
1. SITUATION
The City of Edmonds is currently planning to replace its aged sewage
solids incinerator in downtown Edmonds. At the same time, the City of
Edmonds is seeking ways to become a sustainable community by lowering
carbon emissions. Two options have been presentment to Council. There
is a planned public comment period scheduled for July 7th 2020.
2. TWO OPTIONS PRESENTED FROM STAFF
ARBON RECOVERY PROJECT COMPARISON MW
I W 40—
BENEFITS OF PROJECT B - GASIFICATION �—
Ell
x
�, el
i=
ftx�n.mndy nYnzitsnfiil hwmuGpin Iv x
3. INTERFAITH CLIMATE ACTION1 BELIEVES..,
ICA believes that Option B, having the lowest impact on the environment, is
the correct choice for the City of Edmonds. ICA is also pleased that
sustainable solutions are clearly cost beneficial. ICA encourages the City of
Edmonds to move forward with this option quickly.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 28
1 MISSION STATEMENT: Interfaith Climate Action brings together
people from diverse faith traditions to advocate for the moral imperative
of creating a just and sustainable world.
VISION: Interfaith Climate Action envisions a courageous local community
leading the way in creating a healthy, just, thriving world.
7/6/20 Michael McMurray, Subject: Incinerator public comment
Please consider delaying the incinerator decision until this time next year. It would be prudent to
have greater economic visibility on future budget Constraints caused by Covid-19 crisis. It's
concerning that we could be allocating limited credit capacity at this time that may be needed to
meet emergency short falls in other more crucial Areas of our city if crisis continues. One
question is the financial health of our partners in this challenging economic environment (MLT &
Olympic Water and Sewer district), if they default and/or can not meet there financial obligation
on this project, I suspect Edmonds being principal partner would have to cover there share? My
last concern is the new technology being considered, although exciting how many cities actually
have implemented this type of incinerator? I have been informed very few as Edmonds would
be one of the first, that results in some risk without long operation history and if parts and
service will be accessible in future to achieve longest capital return on this machine.
6/30/20 Olivia Latham Brown, Subject: Grant Program Feedback
As a small business owner in Downtown Edmonds for the past 5 years, I wanted to weigh in on
the proposed CARES art grantg from the city. I strongly support a small business grant as it
will contribute to many aspects of the Edmonds economy. For some businesses it may mean
the difference between keeping their doors open and closing forever, or losing their space in
Edmonds and relocating to another city. It may mean the difference also in being able to
reemploy previous employees, or to have stock on their shelves or appropriate PPE and
sanitation supplies to be able to reopen safely. I would also encourage the Council to consider
changing the employee count from 5-30 to 1-30. My business prior to the Covid shutdown had
5 employees (if you count myself as the owner), but many of the very special businesses that
give Edmonds it's unique character have only the owner or perhaps the owner and 1 or 2 part
time employees. These businesses have fallen through the cracks, and many have seen no
assistance of any kind during this shutdown. The City should show it's support for these
businesses by including them in consideration for any grants made available. I also want to
comment that the Edmonds Chamber has been exemplary in its support of local businesses
during this extraordinary time. They have stepped up and kept the business community
connected and informed throughout this time. To lose the current Chamber staff would be a
very sad thing-for--the-Edmonds business -community.- I urge y-ou to consider -language that - - -- -
would allow the Chamber to apply for grant funds as well since the events that usually fund their
operations are impossible this year. Thank you for your time!
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 7, 2020
Page 29