20170103 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
January 3, 2017
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Dave Earling, Mayor
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Michael Nelson, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE:
STAFF PRESENT
K. Ploeger, Police Sergeant
Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir.
Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir.
Scott James, Finance Director
Mary Ann Hardie, HR Director
Dave Turley, Assistant Finance Director
Beth Ford, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m, by Mayor Earling in the Council
Chambers, 250 5"' Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
4. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda
items approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 13, 2016
2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 13, 2016
3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM, PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND
WIRE PAYMENTS
4. RESOLUTION THANKING COUNCILMEMBER KRISTIANA JOHNSON FOR HER
SERVICE AS COUNCIL PRESIDENT
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 1
5. CONFIRMATION OF DIVERSITY COMMISSION REAPPOINTMENTS
5. ACTION ITEMS
1. SELECTION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR 2017
City Clerk Scott Passey reviewed the selection process: Each year the Council selects a Council President
and a Council President Pro Tem. The Mayor will call for nominations. No Councilmember may
nominate more than one person until every member wishing to nominate a candidate has had the
opportunity to do so. Nominations do not require a second. The Mayor will repeat each nomination until
all nominations have been made. When it appears no one else wishes to make a nomination, the Mayor
will ask again for nominations. If none are made, the Mayor will declare the nominations closed. After the
nominations are closed, the Mayor will call for a vote in the order that the nominations were made.
Councilmembers will be asked to signify their vote by raising their hand. As soon as a nominee receives
four votes, the Mayor will declare the Council President elected and no votes will be taken on the
remaining nominees. The same process will be repeated for the election of the Council President Pro
Tem.
Mayor Earling opened nominations for Council President,
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS NOMINATED TOM MESAROS FOR THE POSITION OF
COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
There were no further nominations.
NOMINATION OF TOM MESAROS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. SELECTION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM FOR 2017
Mayor Earling opened nominations for Council President Pro Tem.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS NOMINATED MIKE NELSON FOR THE POSITION OF
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM.
COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL NOMINATED NEIL TIBBOTT FOR THE POSITION OF
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM.
COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT DECLINED THE NOMINATION AND NOMINATED DAVE
TEITZEL FOR THE POSITION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM.
There were no further nominations.
NOMINATION OF MIKE NELSON FOR THE POSITION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM
CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBERS TIBBOTT VOTING NO.
3. APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEE REPRESENTATIVES FOR 2017
Council President Mesaros reviewed committee assiini1ients:
Committee
Representative
Affordable Housing_Alliance
Councilmember Tibbott
Community Transit
Mayor Earling and Councilmember Tibbott (Alt)
Diversity Commission
Councilmember Frale -Monillas
Historic Preservation Advisory Commission
Councilmember Teitzel
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 2
Lake Ballinger Work Group
Lod&gg Tax Advisory Committee
Councilmember Nelson & Councilmember
Buckshnis Alt
Councilmember Nelson
Port of Edmonds
Councilmember Teitzel
Salmon Recovery — WRIA 8
Councilmember Buckshnis & Councilmember
Johnson (Alt)
Tree Board Liaison
Councilmember Buckshnis
Transit Oriented Development PSRC
Councilmember Johnson
Snohomish County Emerge3ncy Radio
Councilmember Nelson
System Governing Board (SERS)
Economic Development Committee
Councilmember Tibbott
Council President Mesaros advised the Council may discuss other committees and appointments at the
retreat.
4. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION APPOINTING A COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE TO
THE SNOHOMISH HEALTH DISTRICT 130ARD
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 1378, APPOINTING COUNCILMEMBER
FRALEY-MONILLAS TO THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT BOARD.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION APPOINTING A COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE AND
ALTERNATE TO THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
BENEFIT AREA CORPORATION
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 1379, APPOINTING MAYOR DAVE EARLING AS
THE REPRESENTATIVE AND COUNCILMEMBER NEIL TIBBOTT AS THE ALTERNATE TO
THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT AREA CORPORATION.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. DALE HOGGINS PROCLAMATION
Mayor Earling acknowledged several board and commission members who have retirements. He offered
special attention to the retirement of Dale Hoggins who has been the heart of the Cemetery Board, in
particular working diligently to involve the community in the Memorial Day ceremony that attracts
hundreds of people. Mr. Hoggins has done a marvelous job shepherding that event as well as serving on
the Cemetery Board.
Mayor Earling read a proclamation honoring and thanking Dale Hoggins for his service to the Edmonds
Cemetery Board and to the Edmonds community for the past 20 years.
Mr. Hoggins thanked Mayor and the Council for the proclamation, remarking his great-granddaughter
who wrote his biography will love the proclamation. He enjoyed serving on the Edmonds Cemetery
Board, finding it rewarding and appropriate to his interest in history. When lie joined the Cemetery Board,
he was surprised to learn the cemetery was under the Parks & Recreation Department but found the City
leadership and Parks staff were dedicated to making the cemetery second to none. The Edmonds
Cemetery was rescued from unkempt and abandoned and turned into a place of beauty, pleasantness and
rest. He applauded those who stood up for the City's unique history and preserving its cemetery. He
looked forward to the relocation of the memorial monument from the Edmonds Museum site to the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 3
Edmonds Cemetery and Columbarium. He applauded the efforts of the Cemetery Board and Parks staff to
rescue the monument and site it in the cemetery. The monument has a history of obscure locations,
neglect, abandonment and being unwanted including the recent Veterans Plaza and museum. It will be
sited in the cemetery in a location of prominence and respect and he hoped it would not be disrespected,
unwanted, abandoned or discarded in the future.
Mr. Hoggins remarked Edmonds has had lapses in dealing with historic monuments. As an example, he
asked if any Councilmembers knew where John Glenn's monument was located today. Councilmember
Fraley-Monillas and Mayor Earling indicated they knew the location. Mr. Hoggins advised it is located on
the Public Safety Building site.
6. AUDIENCE_ COMMENTS
There were no audience comments.
PRESENTATIONS
PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION THANKING COUNCILMI MBER KRISTIANA
JOHNSON FOR HER SERVICE AS COUNCIL PRESIDENT
Council President Mesaros read a proclamation thanking Councilmember Johnson for her service as
Council President during 2016.
Councilmember Johnson thanked the Council for the proclamation and wished Council President Mesaros
a very successful year.
2. PRESENTATION ON PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE
Ann Griffin Macfarlane said she looked forward to covering topics that have been covered before but in a
new light as well as other aspects of parliamentary procedure. She offered the following disclaimer: "The
material contained in this presentation is based upon the principles and practices of parliamentary
procedure. I am not an attorney and nothing in this presentation constitutes legal advice."
Ms. Macfarlane reviewed historical background:
• Historical background
o In prehistoric communities, 35% of males died by violence
o In Amazon rainforest tribes today, 25% of males die by violence
o In World War II the Soviet Union lost 14% of its males in combat
o In New York City today, the homicide rate is 0.0004%
o How did we get here? 35% > 25% > 14% > 0.0004%
■ In the beginning
- The king is the source of all earthly power and authority which he receives from...
➢ The Great Chain of Being
God
King
Everybody else
Symbols of authority
- Crown the mace and the dais
- 1215 King John says "The law is in my mouth," but then must sign Magna Carta
Parliament is the king's posse
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 4
- The king needs parliament to raise money, but the nobles are subject to his will. The
concept is "the king in parliament."
- 1595 - Member of Parliament Peter Wentworth criticizes Queen Elizabeth
➢ Point of personal privilege
✓ No such thing at this time. If the monarch didn't like what you said, you were
arrested or executed
■ 1600s
- A long, slow struggle between Parliament and the Stuart monarchs, a fight over
religion and power. Who/what will win?
- 1604 - King James I, "No bishop, no king."
- It's the economy, stupid
➢ When King Charles I can't get the money he wants out of Parliament, he
doesn't bother to convene it. Eventually he has to call a Parliament together,
but he doesn't like the things they're saying.
➢ 1642 - King Charles I tries to arrest 5 parliamentarians - "I see all the birds
are flown."
- The commonwealth
➢ 1649 - Parliament cuts off the king's head. His son goes into exile. Oliver
Cromwell sets up the "Commonwealth" - no king. He keeps it together for a
while but then dies. His son is a wimp.
- The restoration
➢ 1660 - Everybody is sick of Puritanism and no Christmas, so they invite
Charles, son of the late king, back. He returns in triumph with no bloodshed.
He does all right for a while, then dies.
- The rest of the story...
➢ 1685 - Charles' brother James II becomes King and makes everybody
nervous by promoting Catholicism. When his wife has a baby boy, people
figure they're going to be stuck with a Catholic ruler forever, SO....
➢ 1688 - Parliament calls in the Dutch nobleman William III.
o The glorious revolution
■ Parliament has more power
- but there still is a king. The king convenes Parliament and has substantial powers, for
decades more.
- Kings George I, II and III engage with parliament to a greater and then a lesser
degree, UNTIL...
➢ 1776 - We abandon the entire idea that authority flows from God to the King.
Who does authority come from?
✓ We the People
1776 The Colonial Rebellion
The American Revolution
1783 Treaty of Paris and independence
1789 U.S. Constitution takes effect
Ms. Macfarlane reviewed the authority of Council:
■ Authority comes from:
U.S. Constitution
Washington State Constitution
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 5
Washington State laws and regulations
o RCW 35.A
■ The City of Edmonds is a code city with a mayor -council type of government.
• The mayor is the chief administrative officer.
• The council is the legislative body.
o Each party, mayor and council, has duties as assigned by law, regulation and custom....
• ADMINISTRATION is the prerogative of the mayor. Council may not interfere.
• LEGISLATION is the prerogative of the council. Mayor may not interfere.
She reviewed the authority of Councilmembers:
• Two different types of structure
o The mayor and staff form an "accountability hierarchy."
o The council is a "voluntary association."
• Key Points
o Each member has an equal right to speak and to try to persuade others to accept her view.
o During meetings, the chair controls the process so the group can make the decisions.
o During meetings, the chair is the servant of the group, and the group is the final authority.
Flow of authority at a meeting
The group adopts its rules and guidelines.
In attending, members accept the rules of the group.
During meetings, the presiding officer applies the rules for the benefit
of the group.
All persons present at a meeting have an obligation to obey the
legitimate orders of the presiding officer.
1
Any member who disagrees with a ruling, decision or order by the
presiding officer may appeal the ruling.
If another member seconds the appeal, the group will decide by
majority vote whether the ruling, decision or order is legitimate.
1
The presiding officer obeys the group's decision.
What is each person's individual authority?
o As a separate individual, you have NO authority.
• This seems almost anti-American, but it is deeply and profoundly American.
o All members of a governing board share in a joint and collective authority which exists
and can be exercised only when the group is in session. — The Standard Code of
Parliamentary Procedure
Ms. Macfarlane reviewed When Things Go Wrong...
Point of Order
o When ANOTHER MEMBER breaks one of the rules, a member may make a POINT OF
ORDER.
o Chair rules on the point.
o A motion claiming that a mistake has been made.
o According to Robert, can be made only by a member.
■ We recommend authorizing staff to do this also
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 6
o May interrupt a speaker if necessary.
o Must be timely.
o Chair doesn't say "point of order"
■ The chair has the duty of maintaining order and decorum, so doesn't need to say "point of
order." Just needs to take appropriate action.
• When in doubt, ask the group!
— Chair can always ask the group to decide if a point of order is correct ("well -taken")
or not.
• When the chair offends...
o When the CHAIR breaks one of the rules, a MEMBER may make a point of order
challenging the chair's action.
o Chair rules on the point — even though the chair's own action is the issue.
• Appeal
o The most important motion in all of Robert's Rules —and the least known!
o Chair's rulings can be appealed
o The CHAIR enforces order and decorum.
o The GROUP is the final authority.
o Any TWO MEMBERS can appeal a ruling of the chair.
o EXCEPTION: If the ruling is a matter of fact on which there cannot be two interpretations,
the ruling cannot be appealed.
o Chair must take care in explaining vote to members.
o Question being voted on is, "Shall the decision of the chair be SUSTAINED?
o Takes a NEGATIVE vote for the appeal to win. A majority vote or a tie upholds the chair's
decision.
o Some, though not all, appeals can be debated.
o Be alert: the debate process is different from anything else in Robert's Rules.
• The heart of democracy
o By using Point of Order and Appeal, the group is the final authority.
o In our view this is the heart of our democracy.
Ms. Macfarlane reviewed unacceptable remarks during a meeting under Robert's Rules:
1. Personal remarks
2. Discourteous remarks — insulting language, attacks
3. Inflammatory language
4. Referring to another member's motives (except for conflict of interest)
5. Criticizing past actions of the group (unless subject is under discussion, or about to propose a
change)
6. Remarks that are not germane (relevant) to the discussion
She reviewed the legislative process:
• During discussion
o Individual members engage in full, free and frank discussion during the meeting.
o They must speak up if they have concerns.
o Differences of opinion are expected and welcome.
• The vote
o The vote of the majority determines the decision of the council.
o Once a decision has been made, it becomes the decision of the entire council.
o The minority must accept it.
• Suppose the minority is really, really unhappy with the decision?
o Robert's example
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 7
■ "A case of this kind is that of a society which decides to have a course of lectures, and of
members opposed to it talking against the course so as to interfere with the sale of
tickets."
■ "They have no right to talk outside in a way to interfere with the carrying out of the
policy adopted, and such a course makes them liable to having charges preferred against
them for their improper conduct."
• "The members opposed to the action of the society have a perfect right, however, to try to
have the society rescind its action." - Parliamentary Law, pp. 329-330
Suppose the minority thinks key information was ignored?
o Go back to your colleagues.
o Ask them to revisit the issue.
o Otherwise, your duty is to accept the outcome.
■ What does "accept it" mean?
— Live with it, go along with it.
— In a public elected body, members are free to say outside the meeting that they did
not like the decision.
— For example, they could write a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.
— Members may NOT try to prevent the decision from carried out.
— There is a difference between "informing" and "influencing."
Inform vs. influence
o It seems clear that the letter sent on October 25 was intended to influence the Department of
Ecology so that it would not accept the Council's decision, but instead would implement the
minority position articulated in the letter.
■ This constitutes an attempt to change/adjust/alter the decision of the Council.
• Under the rules of parliamentary procedure, this is improper and a violation of duty.
Ms. Macfarlane reviewed What about the First Amendment?
• "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech..."
• The First Amendment is not the last word in local government.
• When a citizen accepts service on an elected body, he/she gives up some First Amendment rights.
• There are considerations of duty pertaining to the work of the Council that have greater force, in a
specific context, than the First Amendment.
• As a parliamentarian, Ms. Macfarlane believed the minority has the duty to agree to these limits,
in order to allow our democratic system to function.
• Is this legal?
o Parliamentary procedure is part of the common law of our nation.
o The courts have found that the First Amendment does have limits.
She reviewed Principles of Democratic Governance:
• It seems so arbitrary
o A single vote made the difference
• Is that really fair?
o However it may seem, that is our system.
o The decision of the majority is the decision of the body as a whole.
o The minority must accept it as their own.
o The motion to execute King Charles I was carried by a single vote.
o "Democracy is the worst system of government in all the world, with the exception of those
others that have been tried from time to time." — Winston Churchill
o Democracy is fragile and depends on mutual acceptance and understanding.
o It can only work if everyone agrees to follow its principles and process.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 8
o "Democratic decision-making requires vigorous contestation of ideas and interests, but also
reasonable compromises born out of mutual trust, respect, and a common sense of
citizenship." — Cornell Clayton and Richard Elgar ( authors of Civility in Democracy in
America)
o Intentions may be the very best, but taking separate and independent action tears apart the
fabric of the council, and of our democracy.
o In the same way, if a member stalks out of the room in anger at losing, it tears apart the fabric
of the council, and of our democracy.
Bottom line
o In a democracy, HOW we decide things is more important than WHAT we decide.
o Courtesy and respect, no surprises, no unilateral action, no end -runs ... these are essential for
the system to work.
o Ms. Macfarlane's wish for the Council was that it be united in its commitment to the
PROCESS.
• Not because the law says so.
• Not because of fear of sanctions.
• But because this is the sacred trust that you hold, from our ancestors and from the people
of Edmonds.
• When we are passionate, this is hard to do!
• We zero in on the substance and sometimes neglect the process.
• Remember those kings, putting people in the tower who disagreed with them.
Ms. Macfarlane summarized:
• We have relinquished violence and the royal prerogative in favor of democracy.
• On your dais, YOU are the authority.
• YOU deploy the power of our nation and our history for the people you serve.
• It is critical that you do so with full commitment to the democratic process.
• More than King John, Queen Elizabeth, King Charles or King James, YOU serve your
community when each and every one of you upholds your role within the whole.
• "The willingness to engage in honest debate and lose on issues you care deeply about reaffirms
your commitment to common citizenship." - Cornell Clayton, Washington State University
• What is the alternative?
o "The ballot box is sacred because the alternative is blood." — Elias Canetti
Ms. Macfarlane responded to questions she had received from the Council, first, regarding a
Councilmember leaving the meeting because they are unhappy. She explained there is no rule in
parliamentary procedure. Some cities have established a rule that a Councilmember cannot leave without
permission. She was hopeful that Councilmembers would choose to stay due to their commitment to the
democratic process. The second question was regarding sanction and censure. Ms. Macfarlane explained a
Council may choose to censure a member or someone else. It was her understanding the person being
censured may vote unless there are formal disciplinary procedures in place. A motion to censure
accomplishes nothing more than stating the will of the Council. She provided an example where a
Councilmember habitually used obscene and foul language and the Council brought him into line with a
combination of censure and removal from meetings. She suggested the Council would need to talk to the
City Attorney before consider any such action. In parliamentary terms, a body has the ability to order a
member to leave the meeting and remove him/her from all non -Council committees and appointments.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled a couple of years ago, the Council sanctioned a Councilmember via
resolution. She asked the different between sanction and censure. Ms. Macfarlane answered they are the
same thing, just different terms; it is an expression of disapproval by the body. Another word for it would
be reprimand. Councilmember Buckshnis asked how the code of ethics fit into Parliamentary Procedures.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 9
She was told the minority did nothing wrong because it was not addressed in the code of ethics; in her
opinion the code of ethics was separate from parliamentary procures. With regard to saying what the
minority did was not wrong because it was not in the code of ethics, Ms. Macfarlane said no code of
ethics can cover all possible offenses. She recalled working with a Utility Board in Oregon, where one of
the board members began videoing a member of the public during public comment. Videoing a member
of the public was likely not covered in the rules.
In case the case of the letter, Ms. Macfarlane said the minority, moved very understandably by concern
about the issue, took an action that they may not have been aware did not ft under parliamentary
procedure. A code of ethics functions as a special rule of order. She referred to the Council's authority
which begins with the Constitution, Washington state law, local ordinances, bylaws/guidelines of the City
Council followed by special rule of order which are any set of policies, principles, guidelines, etc. that the
body adopts. She offered to share an excellent one page document she saw today. She summarized, the
fact that it was not in the code of ethics did not mean it was proper and the Council can change the code
of ethics/guidelines as it chooses as long as it is constant with the basic requirements of law.
Councilmember Tibbott said he had posed this question to Ms. Macfarlane previously but he had not
received a response. His question related to how the Council processed information relative to the
Shoreline Management Program; the Council had eight questions to consider, each one discussed at a
separate meeting. When the Council was considering setbacks, he patiently waited to ask questions that
he felt were very germane to the topic as well as important for the public to know and understand.
However, during the discussion, a motion was made and seconded to adopt the 125 -foot buffer, a decision
that was later passed onto Ecology. When it was his turn to ask questions, he was told to address the
motion instead of continuing his fact-finding mission. He asked whether that was a parliamentary
procedure or the way this Council processes information and whether there were ways to continue fact
finding after a motion has been made.
Ms. Macfarlane responded Robert's Rules of Order was not written primarily for legislative bodies, it was
primarily written for ordinary societies and sometimes there is not a match between what Robert's offers
and what Councils need. One of the critical issues that arises is information processing. There are times
when Councilmembers do not have the opportunity to obtain all the information they want or a single
Councilmembers dominates discussion with staff, taking too long and excluding others. She welcomed
thoughts about how to structure guidelines related to information processing and interactions with staff;
there are none in Robert's Rules of Order. The general rule is if a member wants more information, a
member can make a request for information, point of information, asking a question relevant to the
debate, and the chair has the right to recognize it and decide whether to address it himself, have another
person address it or say we'll get back to you later. Another method is to move to postpone a matter to a
future meeting to allow for further research. A third approach would be to refer to staff or to a committee.
Ms. Macfarlane recalled discussing with Councilmember Tibbott when they met how that was handled
and they had not reached a conclusion whether someone had called the question. She advised the call for
the question is a request by a single person to end debate and vote on a pending motion; it requires a
second and requires a two-thirds vote to pass. Sometimes when a question is called, members are left with
comments they wish they had had time to make or questions they wish they had had time to ask. She
recalled the motion was to approve the letter and there had been previous discussions; there would be no
absolute rule whether it would be proper or improper to address fact finding matters because the letter
pertains to those facts. It would be in the hands of body as whole whether to allow further pursuit of that
line questioning. That may not have happened because the Council was not familiar with the principle of
referring things of contentious nature to the body for a final decision. As a society, we tend to defer to the
chair which can be appropriate but sometimes it is not.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 10
Councilmember Tibbott clarified the meeting Ms. Macfarlane was referring to was one that they reviewed
on video. He sent her a follow-up link to the previous meetings where the Council discussed the buffer in
particularly and during that discussion, the fact-finding part of the meeting was cut short by a motion. In
his opinion that has not been the customary way of running Council meetings; the customary way has
been to allow Councilmembers to ask questions and after questions have been asked, a motion is made. It
was his understanding once the motion was made, he could have continued his fact-finding mission but he
was told to address the motion. He asked whether that was a parliamentary procedure or the customary
way the Council does its business. Ms. Macfarlane said she did not receive that email and requested he
resend it. In general, she suggested this question be taken as a learning opportunity for processing the
Council's work better in the future and that the Council be willing to take 2017 as a new year with a new
Council President and allow some of the passion and difficulties related to this issue to fade. It has
provided learning opportunity and it is very important that the Council, to the greatest extent possible,
accept and affirm that every Councilmember has the best intentions and she hoped these differences and
difficulties would not create a lasting bitterness.
Councilmember Tibbott asked for clarification that instead of speaking to motion, he could have
continued with his fact-finding mission. Ms. Macfarlane said she was unable to address that until she had
an opportunity to review the video.
Councilmember Teitzel said his personal concern, especially with recent events at the national issue,
suggests there are issues with trust and respect in this country. He did not want those issues translated to
the work the City Council does. He agreed it was important in the new year for the Council to move
forward with trust and respect and he pledged to double his efforts in that regard. Speaking for himself, he
did not take lightly the decision to draft and sign the letter that was sent to Ecology; it was undertaken
after a lot of thought and consideration. He and his contemporaries all want the best for the City and it
was in that spirit that the letter was written. This was a unique circumstance; the Council voted to send a
letter to the Ecology but Ecology will make the final decision. This issue was debated in multiple Council
meetings, with representatives from Ecology present to hear discussions about the setbacks and buffers,
the vote on the buffers and setback as well as the vote to send a letter to Ecology. Nothing in the minority
letter was different than what was said publicly when Ecology was present and, in his view, the letter was
intended as a reminder to Ecology regarding what was said and encouraging Ecology to make the best,
informed decision they possibly could. The letter acknowledged and respected the majority as the
decision of the Council. That was the logic and the spirt of the letter; it was with the best intensions for
the City and the environment and it was his hope Ecology would make a good, solid decision that would
protect the environment around the marsh. Ms. Macfarlane quoted her late father, "gentlemen of goodwill
can disagree and ladies too." In her view writing the letter was different than simply summarizing what
had been said but she recognized they could disagree on that.
Council President Mesaros thanked Ms. Macfarlane for her perspective, remarking he particularly liked
her historical perspective; things done today are based on things done yesterday and mistakes made in the
past not repeating them. He referred to Ms. Macfarlane's comment that Robert's Rules was not necessary
written for legislative bodies; the difficulty was trying to apply that document to every situation a
legislative body may face. Legislative bodies on the national, state and county level have a history of
minority reports. For example, a national committee forwarding a report will often include a minority
report where a minority takes a different approach with the best of intentions. He agreed with
Councilmember Teitzel that this was an exceptional moment for City.
As one of the signers of the letter, Council President Mesaros said it offered Ecology the view of three
Councilmembers, not a majority, and the letter states they respect and will follow the vote of the majority
but felt it necessary to express their opinion. It was his opinion that was in the tradition of a good
democracy; that they represented a different voice. Ms. Macfarlane said they can disagree on that. From a
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 11
parliamentary prospective, it her it was improper. Submitting a letter to the editor would have been fine.
She said there is a difference in parliamentary procedure between a committee sending its report to the
authorizing body and a legislative body sending a report to someone else. The tradition of a minority
report, allowed with certain restrictions in Robert's, from her perspective as a parliamentarian does not
apply.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said there may be some confusion; a motion is always appropriate
whether one or more Councilmembers have spoken, that is how a legislative body moves its work
forward. To the comment that a possibly a motion could have been delayed to potentially get more
information, four Councilmembers had enough information to make a solid decision. Motions are not
necessarily delayed to ensure all Councilmembers have an opportunity to provide input; that is the reason
for calling the question. It would be counterproductive if every time a Councilmember was on the losing
end of a vote, the minority sent out letters indicating their disagreement even if it was with the best of
intentions. She observed Ms. Macfarlane's presentation clearly shows to be productive, there needs to be
give and take and even if Councilmembers do not agree with the decision, they stand by the majority
decision. Councilmembers cannot win every vote and learning through experience that it is not personal.
Councilmember Tibbott referred to Ms. Macfarlane's comment about the difference between informing
and influencing and her understanding that the October 25 letter was influencing. He pointed out the
intent of the letter when it was written was informing. He requested further definition of those terms. Ms.
Macfarlane relayed her understanding that Mayor Earling also wrote a letter stating he stands with
Ecology's position, thereby attempting to influence Ecology not to implement the Council's
recommendation. The minority Councilmember letter agreed with Mayor Earling's letter. That was the
basis for her interpretation that the minority letter was influencing; it appeared to her to be an effort to
influence Ecology.
Councilmember Tibbott said the intent/tone of the letter was summarizing the positions. Ms. Macfarlane
said as a parliamentarian, when she read both letters, she concluded it appeared to be attempting to
influence the decision against what the Council recommended and that is improper. How the Council
proceeds in the future is up to the Council; she was encouraged by the Councilmembers' responses and
hoped it would be used to improve and strengthen the Council in the coming year.
Councilmember Tibbott accepted Ms. Macfarlane's evaluation of the letter and said he will attempt to
learn from it. In his opinion, there were three things that he could have done differently, 1) continue with
his line of questioning relative to fact finding, 2) instead of writing a joint letter to Ecology, he could have
written a letter as a private citizen for publication in the local newspaper and another citizen could have
submitted it to Ecology, and 3) use of appeal during the meeting. Ms. Macfarlane agreed with
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas, cautioning it would not be good for the City if Councilmembers who
lose votes immediately flood the newspapers with letters. This was an extraordinarily challenging issue
and feelings ran deep. She urged the Council to focus on what they are doing together; it was better to
influence or change the outcome during the meeting and once a decision is made, to move on if at all
possible.
Councilmember Nelson commented everyone has learned from the experience, both good and bad things
and no one wanted to repeat them. Everyone would like to move forward and 2017 is a wonderful
opportunity to start fresh.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked what the Council as a body can do when the chair attempts to influence
the Council's decision. In this example, the Mayor wrote the initial letter which was reinforced by the
minority. Ms. Macfarlane said she discussed this with City Attorney Jeff Taraday who pointed out the
Mayor's letter was qualitatively different from the letter from the minority since the Mayor has one voice
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 12
with regard to legislation - veto power. Mr. Taraday advised that she, as a parliamentary, should limit her
comments to the Council and its powers. She could not address the issue of the Mayor doing something
and suggested the Council talk to the City Attorney. Councilmember Buckshnis said she has discussed it
with the Mayor who indicated he would have vetoed the Council's decision if it had been an ordinance.
Ms. Macfarlane clarified Mr. Taraday said the question of whether three Councilmembers in the minority
should have written a letter to Ecology is a different question than whether the Mayor should have written
a letter to Ecology. She was not addressing the question of what the Mayor should/should not have done.
Council President Mesaros acknowledged there had been some angst over the action of the minority
writing the letter but he thought it was short lived. As a body, 2016 was a very good year for the Council.
The Council is a good group of people who have the interest of the City in their hearts and minds. He
disagreed with Ms. Macfarlane's characterization that this was tearing the Council apart. Ms. Macfarlane
said that would be great if that was the outcome. Council President Mesaros clarified the outcome was
long past; there were 1-2 weeks of angst and it was acknowledged the letter was not meant to tear the
Council apart but to voice an opinion.
Councilmember Johnson said she had an entirely different perspective than Council President Mesaros
and felt this was something that tore at the fabric of the Council. That concern led her to request Ms.
Macfarlane make this presentation. Her concerns included, first, the letter was submitted without any
discussion at a Council meeting and was done privately, quietly and secretly without any knowledge
which violates the notion of not having surprises. Second, the letter was signed by three Councilmembers
but one was not present for vote; that Councilmember signed letter, indicating that was how he would
have voted. She found it disingenuous to send a letter expressing an opinion when the Councilmember
had not participated in the democratic process. Third, this is still an issue; the City has not heard from
Ecology and does not know what influence the letters will have. Fourth, there has been no
acknowledgement that what was done was wrong, there has been no retraction, no censure and instead she
has heard defensive arguments that it was a short thing, it didn't really matter, it was not in the code of
ethics or I didn't get all my questions answered.
Councilmember Johnson said she brings this up because she wants it to be over but the only way to get
through it is to have a clear understanding that it was not proper or appropriate and there needs to be a
guarantee that it will never happen again. The issue remains about what influence the letter had on
Ecology. The Council is a body of seven individuals working together on one legislative policy. She
found this at best a lack of education, and at worst a disregard for what is common in the City of
Edmonds.
Ms. Macfarlane said it is common to have differing views of an action that is taken. The key issue is what
happens going forward. Her sense from the minority was they did not intend to repeat the action; it was a
special case, and they are committed to the work of Council in future. She would be sorry to see the
majority engage in any formal action and felt it was a wise step by then -Council President Johnson to
seek education. The Council has explored the issue thoroughly and she will provide the PowerPoint for
further reference. She hoped the Council ended up with a deeper and better understanding of the nature of
their endeavors and, on this point, may have to agree to disagree which is also part of the democratic
process.
Mayor Earling recalled the last time Ms. Macfarlane made a presentation, he was awarded a dinosaur
which is still a dear possession. He assured her influence was everywhere.
8. STUDY ITEMS
1. NEW JOB DESCRIPTIONS
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 13
Human Resources Director Mary Ann Hardie referenced the five new job descriptions in the 2017 budget
that were the result of reorganizations, budget decision packages and Council action:
• Deputy Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Director — non -represented, exempt
• Recreation Supervisor— non -represented, exempt
• Safety & Risk Coordinator - — non -represented, non-exempt
■ Lead Custodian — represented, non-exempt
• Parking Enforcement Officer — represented, non-exempt
The represented job descriptions have been reviewed by the unions and legal. The Lead Custodian and
Parking Enforcement Officer positions will be classified into the appropriate union(s) once the job
descriptions are approved. She requested Council approval of the job description.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested the following correction in the Parking Enforcement Officer's
job description:
+ Enforcing animal, parking and other related ordinances to ensure the safety and health of the
public
Councilmember Teitzel observed the essential job functions and responsibilities for the Parking
Enforcement Officer did not include animal control. Mayor Earling advised this was a new position
created by the Council specifically to address parking enforcement.
Councilmember Buckshnis suggested the Deputy Parks & Recreation and Cultural Services Director be
reworded to Deputy Director Parks & Recreation and Cultural Services. Ms. Hardie agreed that could be
changed. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if job description was provided by the consultant. Ms. Hardie
advised the job description was started at that time and has since been updated.
Councilmember Tibbott appreciated the clarity provided by the job descriptions. He was surprised about
the reference in the Parking Enforcement Officer about returning phone calls, responding to complaints,
and helping people understanding parking laws. He asked how much of the officer's time would be spent
on those duties. Ms. Hardie said she could research and respond. It is one of the essential functions, but
the bulk of officer's duties will be parking enforcement although there will be follow-up as part of the
customer service function. Councilmember Tibbott was concerned that would become taxing and parking
enforcement would not get done and suggested monitoring that. Ms. Hardie offered to forward his
concerns to Police Chief Compaan.
It was the consensus of the Council to forward this item to the January 10, 2017 Consent Agenda.
2. FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER BANDSHELL REPLACEMENT PROJECT
MANAGEMENT RESERVE
Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite said the bandshell will be delivered midday on Monday. The
project budget was previously approved by Council; the City's purchasing policy requires identifying
some of the budget as a management reserve. She requested the Council approve the budget for the
Frances Anderson Center bandshell and identify a management reserve of $48,000.
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO AUTHORIZE FROM AN ALREADY APPROVED BUDGET, $48,000 AS A
MANAGEMENT RESERVE. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Johnson
was not present for the vote.)
9. MA'YOR'S COMMENTS
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 14
Mayor Earling welcomed the Council back, commenting it was good for the Council to get away for a
couple weeks. He thanked the Council for their work during 2016. He congratulated Council President
Mesaros and Council President Pro Tem Nelson for their new leadership positions and requested they
determine a day/time for a meeting this week or next. He looked forward to working with Council in
2017.
10. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Nelson said it was good to be back and good to see Councilmembers. He was excited for
2017, action -packed agendas and working together.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas thanked the Council for approving the budget in early December which
allowed the Council to take two weeks off which was important to allow the Council to rejuvenate.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented Edmonds' weather feels like Wisconsin. She welcomed everyone
to 2017 and looked forward to a wonderful year and the Council accomplishing a lot.
Councilmember Johnson echoed Councilmember Buckshnis' comments, stating she looked forward to
2017 and hoped a lot of work gets done.
Councilmember Teitzel wished Edmonds citizens a happy, joyful and productive 2017. He looked
forward to working with Council in the coming year. He announced a forum tomorrow hosted by the
League of Women Voters at the Lynnwood Library regarding HB 1449 passed in 2014 about the safe
transportation of oil on Washington railways.
i3Oullcil r1051UGlll 1vlesaros announuuU allUILIOnal committee a } o nLmenls:
PFD Oversight Committee Council President Mesaros
SeaShore Transportation Forum Council President Mesaros
SNOCOM 1 Council President Mesaros
Council President Mesaros looked forward to working with Council President Pro Tem Nelson and
Mayor Earling on formulating 2017 agenda items and priorities.
Councilmember Tibbott looked forward to 2017, commenting 2016 was a great year, getting to know
Councilmembers and learning a lot about the legislative process. During the break, he and his wife
walked through their neighborhood and several of the City's parks on rainy and snowy days, finding the
City a delightful place to recreate. He wished everyone a prosperous 2017.
11. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION
PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)
This item was not needed.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 15
12. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A_ RESULT OF MEETING IN
EXECUTIVE SESSION
This item was not needed.
13. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
C
DAVID 0. EARLING, MAYORTT PASS—EY, CI E R K
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 3, 2017
Page 16