Loading...
20170418 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES April 18, 2017 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Thomas Mesaros, Council President Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Michael Nelson, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT M. Bard, Police Officer Phil Williams, Public Works Director Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir. Shane Hope, Development Services Director Scott James, Finance Director Rob English, City Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Andrew Pierce, Legislative/Council Assistant Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5'h 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 Mayor Earling announced he was withdrawing Agenda Item 7, Salary Commission (Confirmation of Mayor's Appointments). COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- IN CONTENT AND ORDER AS AMENDED. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 11, 2017 2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS 3. RESOLUTION ADOPTING CEMP AND DEBRIS MANAGEMENT PLAN Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 1 4. REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE 238TH ST. SW WALKWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 5. AMENDMENTS TO ON -STREET EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT PROGRAM 5. PRESENTATIONS/REPORTS 1. ANNUAL REPORT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Economic Development/Community Services Director Patrick Doherty explained in January 2016 Economic Development Commission (EDC) was reestablished after sunsetting in 2015. The EDC held their first meeting in March 2016. The code requires an EDC representative provide the Council an annual report. EDC Chair Jamie Reece introduce his daughter, Ansley Reece, a student at Madrona. Mr. Reece recognized the dedicated group of talented professionals who serve on the EDC. The EDC had a very productive year. He summarized the reformed EDC's mission: empowered to advise and make recommendations to the Mayor and City Council and other stakeholders within City government related to strategies, programs or activities intended to generate economic development, jobs and more stable municipal revenues. The EDC is asked to provide an annual report to Council as well as other reports and communications as needed for specific issues and projects. In August 2016, he presented the EDC objectives and priorities to the City Council including shorter term projects such as Highway 99, Civic Field, downtown parking and Five Corners planning as well as longer term projects such as exploring obstacles to redevelopment, revisiting Harbor Square redevelopment, and considering community visioning and branding. The commission approaches these projects with discussion at subcommittees and committees, discussions with staff and the commission as a whole and recommendations are presented in letters memo and to the City Council. He summarized the EDC efforts over the past year: • September 2016 o Communicated with Council regarding Civic Field first iteration ■ Supported plans that included generous organized play facilities, meadow loop walking path, maximizing flexible space for events, remaining flexible of the potential replacement of the Boys & Girls Club structure and including ample lighting for year- round accessibility and considering ongoing costs of facilities • November 2016 o Downtown parking ■ Recommended more consistent enforcement of existing regulations, consideration of more friendly parking fine schedules, collaboration and sharing of information with local stakeholders to determine next steps in improving parking access and availability (talking to area businesses and freeing up weekend parking) o Civic Field second iteration ■ Issued a memo supporting the ongoing planning efforts and encouraging emphasis on play courts and fields, covered/uncovered basketball courts and facilitating rebuilding of the Boys & Girls Club when possible • Support in the community for retaining the skatepark. February 2017 o Highway 99 ■ Encouraged timely action with an emphasis on commercial elements, potential incentives for development and affordable housing and direct communication and collaboration with potential stakeholders in the business and development community Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 2 ■ Encouraged consideration of a catalyst project, public/private partnership to kickoff redevelopment o Five Corners Encouraged decisive action on feasibility study, consideration of development incentives and potential code changes o Downtown pedestrian signage ■ Advocated for lower sign permit costs, more reasonable costs for variances when applicable and collaboration with the BID regarding a signage system for out -of -sight businesses Mr. Reece advised many of the above efforts are in standby/monitor status awaiting further action. He reviewed: EDC's focus in 2017: o Development feasibility including examples where current regulations are obstacles to otherwise beneficial development and pursuing methodology to objectively measure the impact of further development. o Broader economic development strategies, how economic development benefits all districts. o List of existing, opportunity based priorities such as a downtown hotel, attracting a mid to large employer, and Harbor Square redevelopment. Future priorities include: o Finding ways to stabilize recent revenue gains from economic vitality o Possibility of a new hotel in the hospital district o Influence of walkability on economic development Mr. Reece emphasized the importance of City Council's feedback and encouraged the Council to indicate what they want and how the EDC can help. He also encouraged citizens to attend the EDC's meetings and share their ideas and concerns about economic development. Mr. Doherty advised the EDC meets the third Wednesday of every month from 6 to 8 p.m. in the Brackett Room on the third floor of City Hall. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how the EDC is involving the community such as community members for whom English is a second language, who do not live in the downtown core, people of color, etc. Mr. Reece answered the EDC is interested in broader outreach and thus far outreach has been to commissioners' personal networks. The EDC acknowledges the need to do more with the press to invite further comment; he has been authorized by the EDC to write articles for My Edmonds News and the Beacon to inform the community and to encourage input. With regard to diversity outreach, he acknowledged the EDC has been head -down addressing issues and has not yet addressed that issue. It is worthy of discussion and he will introduce it at the EDC's next roundtable discussion. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas expressed concern that commissioners' personal networks likely do not reach everyone in Edmonds and it was important to reach out to people of color, people with socioeconomic differences such as in the working-class neighborhoods near the Highway 99 corridor. Mr. Reece invited Councilmember Fraley-Monillas to share tools for connecting with the community. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested contacting businesses along the corridor, reminding that 22% of Edmonds is not white. Councilmember Teitzel asked about opportunities for economic growth at Five Corners with the new surgical clinic at the former Red Apple Market location taking a major corner out of play for redevelopment opportunity and the larger church on another corner. Mr. Reece relayed the EDC's support for businesses investing in investing Five Corners. The EDC sees Five Corners as a missed opportunity through earlier inaction. Although it is understandable why action not taken due to efforts at Westgate, that inaction resulted in the inability to redevelop some areas. However, three of the five corners still Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 3 present opportunities for redevelopment and Five Corners is not just the corners but the greater area. Opportunity remains and he encouraged forward movement to avoid another missed opportunity. Councilmember Johnson commented the Red Apple Market space had been vacant for a number of years and she welcomed the new veterinary facility. Five Corners is in her neighborhood and missed the grocery store. She was personally interested in more opportunities for car sales on Highway 99 because it is the biggest economic driver during good and bad times. Along with Councilmember Fraley-Monillas' concern about reaching out to different ethnic groups, she commented the International District presents its own special problems, Edmonds Community College and the former Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton worked with businesses in that area in the past. She suggested reaching out to the churches in the International District. Council President Mesaros echoed Councilmember Johnson's comments, commenting opportunities on Highway 99 for the Asian community have resulted in a number of wonderful restaurants. He agreed with the suggestion to reach out and engage the business owners regarding the future of that area. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Mike Shaw, Edmonds, commented at least four Councilmembers share his concerns and he wanted to convince the rest. He applauded the idea of a site survey of the Edmonds Marsh, commenting such a survey has been long overdue and the main issue now is to be absolutely certain the survey is conducted by a truly independent, unbiased scientific group. Studies are often compromised in some manner; Edmonds can do better. He urged the Council to ensure the survey of the marsh is was without comprising political or financial ties to a person or group and is thoroughly competent to ensure a clear, science -based picture of the state of the marsh, its wildlife, ecology, biology, degree of contamination and hydrology. He urged the Council to vet the companies under consideration for conducting the site survey as thoroughly and comprehensively as possible. Alvin Rutledge, Edmonds, expressed concern with the request to the State for funds to repair the Frances Anderson Center roof. He provided history regarding the roof, in 1980 the City took out a 20 - year loan which was paid in 2000 when the City was annexed to the Sno-Isle Library, saving the City $1.2 million. He was concerned if funding was not provided by the legislature, the City would be responsible for funding repairs to the library roof. Don Hall, Edmonds, speaking on behalf of his wife and her store, Garden Gear and Gallery, referred to an Edmonds Beacon article regarding the closing of a store with a similar name. He assured Garden Gear and Gallery is doing wonderfully, is not going out of business and will celebrate their 21" anniversary next month. ACTION ITEM 1. SALARY COMMISSION (CONFIRMATION 4)F MAYOR'S APPOIN'T'MENTS) This item was removed from the agenda via action taken during Item 3. 8. STUDY ITEMS CHAPTER 10.95 AMENDMENTS TO CLARIFY TREE BOARD APPOINTMENT PROCESS Development Services Director Shane Hope explained after Chapter 10.95 was amended last year with regard to other issues, staff realized there was problematic language regarding the appointment process Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 4 and the location of meetings. At a January 2017 meeting, Councilmembers agreed, 1) individual Councilmembers would appoint members and the Council would confirm the appointment, 2) remove term limits, 3) have the Council President appoint the alternate, 4) clarify the role of the alternate board member, 5) make the format of the list of items on which the Tree Board may advise and make recommendations consistent and combine two of the items, and 6) add a location for regular Tree Board meetings. She recommended the Council direct staff to prepare an ordinance for approval on the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Ms. Hope for taking the Tree Board under her wing, assigning Denise Nelson as the staff person and including the Tree Board in the Development Services budget. She suggested once the ordinance is adopted, the Council reaffirm Tree Board members. Ms. Hope advised that would be up to the Council. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS, TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE FOR APPROVAL ON CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. 11 APPOINTMENT OF PID BOAM) MEMBERS Council President Mesaros said as Council liaison to the PFD Board, he was asked to present the two board members for reappointment, Kevin McKay, VP for Finance & Administration, Edmonds Community College; and Larry Ehl, Port of Seattle. The PFD Board approved the reappointment of Board Members McKay and Ehl to serve an additional 3 -year term beginning July 1, 2017. The PFD Board is in the midst of doing strategic planning with the ECA Board and has requested early approval of these nominations for continuity moving forward on this planning. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed the application in the packet was dated April 2016 and asked if the board members were still interested in serving. Council President Mesaros said he attended a PFD Board meeting today and assured they were interested in continuing. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested in the future an updated application be provided. It was the consensus of the Council to forward this item to the Consent Agenda for approval. 3. CONTRACTING & PURCHASING POLICIES UPDATE Finance Director Scott James reviewed amendments to the Purchasing Policies and Procedures including amendments for complying with federal requirements, for apprentice requirements and to increase limits for procurement: 1) Title Paye: Pur-ehasing Contracting and Purchasing Policies and Procedures 2) Procurement of Products, page 4 of the amended policy a) Purchases costing between $10,000 and $25,000 is being amended to $20,000 and $35,000 b) Change reflex's increasing cost of doing business, and c) Most of the smaller projects such as fixing tile around the pool, replacing showers at the pool, etc., fall between the $10 - $20k range, and d) It is time consuming and sometimes difficult to get 3 quotes e) The change is consistent with RCW's 3) Grant Agreements and grant Reimbursement Documents, page 4 of the amended policy a) Federal grant requirements now require an Authorized Official to execute & sign grant agreements and payment vouchers b) Policy now names Mayor as the Official to execute grant agreements c) Policy identifies and authorizes the Director overseeing the capital project to execute documents necessary to implement grant and submit reimbursements Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 5 4) Procurement of Public Works, page 5 of the amended policy a) Policy is being amended to match State Law b) Amendment increases the threshold for City performed work on public work projects c) From $50,000 to $65,000 for projects involving multiple crafts or trades, and d) From $30,000 to $40,000 for projects involving a single craft or trade 5) Apprentice utilization, page 8 of the amended policy a) The amended policy increases the threshold for when apprentices shall be utilized b) From x;000 to $1,000,000 and c) Amends number of hours performed by apprentices d) From 4-5-04 to 10% of the contractor or subcontractor labor hours 6) Records Retention Requirements, page 16 of the amended policy a) Amended policy updates section to comply with Code of Federal Regulations 7) +Conflicts of Interest, page 17 of the amended policy a) Amended policy updates section to comply with Code of Federal Regulations, and b) Requires contract selection participants to sign Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form Mr. James recommended approval of the Purchasing Policies and Procedures as amended. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas requested the amendments be discussed individually as she plans to vote against the change in apprentice utilization. She explained apprenticeships provide training for skilled labor jobs, providing training for people for whom college was not their first choice and the City requires contractors' participation. She expressed concern with the change from a $250,000 project to a $1 million project and decreasing the apprenticeship goals from 15% to 10%. She recognized it can be a hassle for a contractor to hire apprentices but they also create living wage jobs. Councilmember Buckshnis observed most of the amendments were to be in compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations. Mr. James agreed, referencing Code of Federal Regulations Section 200 and pointing out compliance with the regulations was highlighted during the last audit. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the amendment that authorizes the Mayor to execute grant agreements for capital projects in the current Capital Improvement Program and/or Capital Facilities Plan and asked if only the Mayor was allowed to execute agreements, not a designee. She recalled a major project where a director signed the agreement that caused a great deal of controversy. Mr. James answered it was only required on federal grants; the policy as proposed authorizes the Mayor and does not allow the Mayor to designate someone else. Once the agreement is executed, the director oversees the grant. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed support for apprenticeships, relaying her nephew was an apprentice as an engineer. She asked why the project amount was raised from $250,000 to $1 million. Public Works Director Phil Williams said staff also likes the apprentice program and it has the potential to provide the things cited by Councilmember Fraley-Monillas. In practice, after working with it for several years, it does not happen on smaller projects. For example, on a $250,000 project, the contractor may only have 3- 4 employees working on the project. To meet this goal, the contractor would either have to hire an apprentice they do not need which increases the cost of the project or layoff a long term employee and fill the position with an apprentice. If a contractor makes a case to show it is not economically feasible, the rules contain criteria that allow him to waive the requirement. That has been done but it requires a lot of paperwork for little benefit on smaller projects. On larger projects, contractors have more staff. The change from 15% to 10% reflects several years of performance. The existing 15% goal is seldom met, even on projects over $1 million, and 10% is a more reasonable goal. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 6 Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her nephew worked for Hoffman Construction, companies that large can afford to have apprentices. She relayed her understanding the $1 million project limit was selected based on past history. Mr. Williams agreed it was intended to tailor the program to actual experience; it is very difficult to achieve on smaller projects. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the language did not reflect the ability to waive the requirement. Mr. Williams answered if a contractor makes a compelling case, the requirement can be waived but it is a lot of trouble, does not pay off on the smaller projects and may scare away some contractors from bidding. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested monitoring and advising the Council regarding compliance at the end of year. City Engineer Rob English pointed out the waiver authority is in section 5 on page 9 of the redline version. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the amendments regarding conflict of interest tightened the requirements, commenting other cities have had conflict of interest issues. Mr. Williams answered the intent would be anyone involved in the selection process would be asked to sign a Conflict of Disclosure Form, putting them on notice that they are obliged to notify of any conflict of interest. Councilmember Teitzel referred to the Apprentice History that lists 16 projects and that the apprentice goal was not met on 9 projects. He asked the penalty for not meeting the requirement or the incentive for meeting the requirement. Mr. Williams answered there no penalty and no incentive. It is a goal, staff likes to think contractors take it seriously. Councilmember Teitzel said if there is a goal, there should be teeth in it such as a penalty or incentive. Mr. Williams said that has not been discussed, he cautioned against including features in the City's procurement procedures that may result in an adverse outcome on project bids. He agreed with the basic goal of the program, having people receive training and education via apprenticeships. This was viewed as a way to stimulate that effort but it hasn't worked on smaller projects. Councilmember Teitzel expressed support for the notion of apprenticeships which assist people who not on the college track to find meaningful work to support their families but he was concerned there were no teeth in the metric. Mr. Williams said most cities do not have a requirement; Edmonds was one of a few cities trying to promote that effort and these recommendations are consistent with how the program has worked. With regard to raising the threshold to $1 million, Mr. English pointed out WSDOT's threshold is $3 million, Seattle's is $1 million, Shoreline's is $1 million, Vancouver's is 3-8% depending on project size, Snohomish County's is $250,000 and King County's varies depending on the project. Councilmember Tibbott asked what size contracts companies with apprentices on their staff typically bid on, anticipating some construction companies already have apprentices on staff. Mr. Williams answered the bigger the project, the more likely the apprentice goal would be met. Councilmember Tibbott asked how often the City has $5-6 million projects. Mr. Williams answered quite often lately. Mr. English said of the projects in the packet where there was a goal, 10 were over $1 million; the City bid 35-36 projects over that 5 -year period. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding that a project over $65,000 required a bid. Mr. Williams answered there are 2 criteria in state law, 1) the total aggregate of projects that an agency self - performs cannot exceed 10% of the total capital budget for the year, and 2) any single project over $65,000 requires a bid. Councilmember Tibbott asked how close the City was to the 10% limit with the current Public Works projects. Mr. Williams answered the capital budget for 2017 is $25 million; the City is far short of self -performing $250,000. Councilmember Tibbott recalled conversations in the past about the possibility of having more Public Works employees to handle smaller sidewalk projects. He referred to an ADA ramp near hospital, envisioning that project could be done in-house for $200. He suggested considering more Public Works employees to do these projects as a way to save money as well as provide an opportunity for apprentices Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 7 on City staff during the summer months. Mr. Williams agreed there is room to grow that activity. Avoiding project design is a huge cost savings, almost all construction projects have to be designed before they are put out for bid. That cost can almost be eliminated with standard details and communication between workers and engineering. He agreed a $8,000-10,000 ramp would cost considerably less if it was constructed in-house. Councilmember Tibbott asked how that vision for additional in-house Public Works staff matched the $65,000 threshold. Mr. Williams answered $65,000 is for an individual project; projects can be phased, portions of a corridor done in different years, etc. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said the teeth or penalty is not getting the contract and the incentive is getting the contract. She pointed out to Councilmember Buckshnis that apprenticeship are not for college students but rather to create living wage jobs especially in non-traditional roles for those who chose not to attend college, often for financial reasons. Many more local cities than those cited by staff have an apprenticeship requirement. She pointed out Mr. Williams currently has the authority to waive the requirement and while it required paperwork, it provides living wage jobs. She encouraged the Council not to support reducing the apprentice requirement. Councilmember Nelson suggested separating amendments related to compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations such as grant agreements, grant reimbursements, record retention, conflict of interest and safeguard of personal identifiable information; apprenticeships have nothing to do with the Code of Federal or competitive bids. Mr. Williams agreed. Councilmember Nelson referred to the statement that the threshold when projects must be bid competitively is being raised to match the State law. He asked if the City was not in compliance with State law now. Mr. Williams answered the State periodically increases that amount in recognition of inflation in construction costs. This would bring the City up to the amount allowed under State law. Councilmember Nelson asked whether the City could have a lower amount. Mr. Williams agreed that was allowed. Councilmember Johnson referred to the Apprentice History 2012 — 2016, out of the 16 projects listed, 7 were over $1 million and did not meet the apprenticeship goal. She asked how not meeting the goal in those larger projects could be justified. Mr. Williams answered the larger projects have a better track record of meeting the goal; smaller projects struggle mightily which is the reality of the marketplace. He commented it would be a shame to receive a low bid on a $1 million project that is $150,000 less than the next lower bid and have to reject that bid and take the second low bidder for that reason. In that sense the City is hiring the apprentice. He viewed that as an odd reason to reject a low bid, particularly when it was so difficult on small projects. Councilmember Johnson said she understood the difficulty on small projects, and asked how to encourage the use of apprentices when 7 out of 16 projects did not meet the previous goal. Mr. Williams said one could look at the track record over several years and reach a conclusion that the entire program was a failure and abandon it; that was not the proposal. The proposal was to tailor the program to improve the likelihood of success and have a higher level of compliance with these changes. He pointed out the cost of a project is not just labor, on some projects a large percentage of the cost is materials which makes a single number a difficult metric to judge success by. Mr. English referred to the Apprentice History 2012- 2016, pointing out 4 were near the 10% apprentice goal which was the reason for the recommendation to reduce it from 15% to 10%. It was the consensus of the Council to forward the amendments related to compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations to the Consent Agenda and amendments related to apprentice requirements to the regular agenda. 4. REPORT ON CONSTRUCTION BIDS RECEIVED FOR THE 2017 SEWER LINE REPLACEMENT PROJECT Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 8 City Engineer Rob English reported staff opened five construction bids today. The low bid was provided by Shoreline Construction at $924,172; the high bid was $1.49 million, and the engineer's estimate was $1.173 million. He provided project details: ■ Replaces 2500 feet of 10 -inch diameter concrete sewer main with 18 -inch diameter PVC sewer main • Increases capacity • Replaces concrete pipe in poor condition and in need of replacement • Contract includes 80 working days • Construction anticipated to start early -June • Construction anticipated to be complete mid-September, early Oct. • Construction budget o Award amount $924,172 0 15% construction management ($138,600) 0 10% management reserve o Total $1.155 million o Available budget $1.364 million Mr. English explained the next step is to review the bid documents. He recommended forwarding the bid award to the Consent Agenda for approval next week. Public Works Director Phil Williams advised the City has worked with Shoreline Construction multiple times in the past and staff is very happy with the bid. Council President Mesaros asked how much of the $1.3 million was labor. Mr. English said the pricing is inclusive of material, equipment and labor. Council President Mesaros said he was curious in light of the discussion on the previous agenda item how much of a $1.3 million project was labor and materials, recognizing it varied by project. It was the consensus of the Council to forward this item to the Consent Agenda for approval. 5. WASTEWATER TREATMENT, DISPOSAL AND TRANSPORT CONTRACT EXTENSION Public Works Director Phil Williams requested this item be delayed until next week as the Waste Water Treatment Plant Supervisor Pamela Randolph was out after breaking her arm. This was agreeable to the Council. 6. MOTION TO ALLOCATE COUNCIL FUNDS TO INITIATE AN RFP PROCESS TO OBTAIN A BASELINE PLANNING SITE-SPECIFIC SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF THE EDMONDS MARSH WATERSHED Councilmember Buckshnis commented this was the result of working on Option M and discussions with Ecology about the shoreline inventory and the information needed for a site specific study. City Attorney Jeff Taraday explained the intent was to remove the scope of work in one of Shoreline Master Program (SMP) options and take separate action on that concept. He did not make any changes to that scope of work, feeling it was beyond his expertise. The concept is to publish something to request proposals from consultants with this expertise; the scope of work exhibit would be a starting point to start a conversation with consultants who respond to the RFP. The Council would have an opportunity to interview the consultants and ask questions about any changes they propose. He reiterated the proposed scope of work was just a starting point for the conversation with consultants. The scope of work was Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 9 drafted at a time when it was proposed to be used as part of the SMP and as part of a project -level study. Now that the intent is a planning level study, the final scope of work may need to be changed to make it a planning level study instead of project level study. Councilmember Johnson recommended using language from the SMP in accordance with what David Pater, Ecology, said, "we are really asking to update the shoreline inventory and characterization report." She noted that was a document that preceded the work that was done and had not been updated in a long time. Second, the cumulative impact analysis needs to be updated. Both are discrete documents that precede the SMP. Mr. Taraday said he understood Councilmember Johnson's first point, but in regard to her second point, he said cumulative impacts are typically the impacts from something such as a project. In this instance there is not a project so he was uncertain how the impact could be analyzed without a project. Councilmember Johnson responded she took it to mean the many projects anticipated in the future such as the daylighting of Willow Creek, cleaning of the culverts and reordering of the channel. Mr. Taraday relayed his understanding she was referring to restoration projects. Councilmember Johnson said she would defer to the experts but was confident about the shoreline inventory and characterization analysis, noting that exact language was not used in the RFP but it should be. Councilmember Buckshnis clarified this was a motion to allocate Council funds to initiate an RFP. In speaking with Development Services Director Shane Hope, there is a substantial difference between an RFP and an RFQ. In reviewing some of the City's RFP's, they range from three pages to ten pages. This is not the RFP; the scope of work is related to the three broad ecological functions to be evaluated by the site-specific study, 1) biogeochemical functions, 2) hydrologic functions, 3) food web and habitat functions. She will work with Ms. Hope to prepare the RFP. Councilmember Teitzel expressed support for proceeding with a baseline study for the marsh and was supportive of allocating Council funds. He was glad to hear the language in the agenda memo was not the RFP and did not feel Council should be involved in writing the RFP. The Council's responsibility is to outline policy and staff s responsibility is to use the policy to take action, in this instance, create an RFP. He preferred to have staff draft an RFP using the major concepts from the agenda memo. He was concerned it appeared to blend Appendix C with new language that was not consistent. He supported the baseline study focusing on existing conditions, yet there is reference to "The site-specific study should evaluate past, current and projected further ecological functions of the Edmonds Marsh" which he did not view as a baseline study. Council President Mesaros expressed support for the study and was pleased to hear Councilmember Buckshnis say this was a beginning point and there would be further language. With regard to Councilmember Johnson's comments about impacts of existing projects, he agreed with getting feedback from the experts regarding the impacts on the marsh of daylighting Willow Creek and opening the culverts. He echoed Councilmember Teitzel's suggestion about having staff draft a document for Council review. He was supportive of using the language that has developed and having staff develop an RFP inclusive of everything the Council wants. Councilmember Buckshnis confirmed her discussions with Council President Mesaros that there should be strong Council oversight but there was some disagreement whether it should be drafted by the Council Assistant or Ms. Hope. She acknowledged Ms. Hope's wealth of information but did not want to burden her with a great deal of extra work. Councilmember Buckshnis preferred the Council be involved since the Council requested it and was paying for it. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 10 Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked the Council's role in the RFP. Mr. Taraday said it was up to the Council, if the Council wished, it could come to Council for final approval before it was published. He clarified there was a difference between the RFP and the scope for work that the City would ultimately contract for. Even after the RFP language is finalized, there will be an exchange of ideas with the consultants that respond and the consultants will further refine the scope of work to what is contracted via a professional service agreement. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas wanted to have the Council involved in both the RFP and the scope of work, recognizing there are different objectives on the dais and it will be important for all Councilmembers to have input. Council President Mesaros asked Ms. Hope her thoughts, commenting having Ms. Hope involved does not abdicate the Council's involvement. Ms. Hope answered she has developed a number of RFP and RFQs as have many other directors; a bit of science and art is required to get the language right. She and others on staff are happy to assist, particularly while the Council does not have a functioning Admin Assistant. The final language is up to the Council. Interviewing candidates is another step in the process; it is up to the Council who to interview but there are also best practices in the process to avoid any appearance of fairness issues. Councilmember Tibbott asked whether Ms. Hope had enough direction from Council to begin the process. Ms. Hope answered Councilmember Buckshnis and she have discussed this and the Council has provided input tonight. She welcomed any additional thoughts from Council. Councilmember Tibbott said he has not reviewed a RFP in the past and asked if there was a template and/or best practices for developing an RFP. Ms. Hope offered to provide follow-up information to all Councilmembers. Councilmember Buckshnis offered to draft an RFP and send it to Ms. Hope. Council President Mesaros suggested the Council has given Ms. Hope direction/guidance with assistance from Councilmember Buckshnis. He suggested they return with a draft RFP in two weeks. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH SNOHOMISH HEALTH DISTRICT REGARDING SALE OF RUCKER BUILDING Economic Development/Community Services Director Patrick Doherty explained on September 27, 1990 Snohomish County, along with other cities and towns, including the City of Edmonds, entered into an interlocal agreement (the "1990 ILA") to provide for the acquisition of a facility for the Snohomish Health District known as the "Rucker Building." The District purchased the Rucker Building for $5,150,000 in October 1990. The City of Edmonds contributed a total of $160,071 in a series of payments from 1990 through 1995. The District's then -Deputy Director Rick Mockler indicated to the 1990 ILA members that they would each own an interest in the Rucker Building. In 1995 the District paid off the acquisition loan in full, at which time the 1990 ILA expired, leaving unclear whether any continuing property interest continued to accrue to the parties. Indeed the District is now the sole entity listed on the current deed and title. Since that time the District has assumed all financial responsibility for utilities, ongoing operations and maintenance, and capital improvements. Last fall the Board of Health and senior leadership began discussing the option to sell the Rucker Building as part of its 2017 budget preparations. This led to the Board of Health's unanimous approval of Resolution 17-03 on January 10, 2017 indicating its intent to surplus and sell the Rucker Building, as well as encouraging the County and the cities and towns that were party to the original 1990 ILA to relinquish any potential ownership and/or financial interest in the property. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 11 At this time the Rucker Building is officially on the market, listed by Kidder Mathews, who was retained by the District. The Board of Health's real estate committee has indicated a preference to purchase a new location for long-term financial viability (i.e., pay outright and not have ongoing annual lease or loan payments). However, the ILA does include a provision to consider leasing a building, depending on market conditions, timing, etc. The new facility sought by the District should consist of approximately 30,000 square feet and be located within the greater Everett vicinity, with parking and near major transit lines. If a new building is purchased, it is estimated that net residual proceeds would run from $24 million for a capital fund intended to secure a more long-term financial stability to account for future physical plant needs and/or program fund support. Selling the building in the near term would also eliminate up $1-1.5 million in expenditures earmarked in the 2017 budget for needed HVAC replacements. If the District ends up leasing space, they will likely keep the majority of the sale proceeds in a capital/reserve fund for lease and facility -related expenses, together with an eventual purchase in the future. More details of the District's intended sale of the Rucker Building and potential purchase and/or lease of a new building can be found in the 4/5/17 letter from District Interim Administrator Jefferson Ketchel. At this time, the District proposes that the original signatory jurisdictions to the 1990 ILA, including the City of Edmonds, officially relinquish any potential financial interest in the Rucker Building, pursuant to the proposed Interlocal Agreement, including a Quit Claim Deed, which relinquishes and conveys any potential financial or property interest in the Rucker Building. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas inquired about the cost to maintain the building. Heather Thomas, Communications and Public Affairs Officer, Snohomish Health District, advised it was estimated at $100,000 to $300,000/year for ongoing maintenance and operation, exclusive of utilities. The District does not have a capital fund, so funding for building maintenance has come from the operating budget, reducing funds available for programming or public health activities. Selling the building and purchasing or leasing another building would allow the District to establish a capital fund. Councilmember Fraley- Monillas observed the cost has been $100,000/year since 1990. Ms. Thomas agreed, commenting there have been a few larger upgrades over the years; it was estimated over $2.6 million in District funds have been spent in the last 20-25 years. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if any of the cities had been billed or contributed toward those expenditures. Ms. Thomas answered no. Councilmember Tibbott asked the current sales price of the building. Ms. Thomas answered it was technically unlisted. The assessed value is $9 million; the broker is targeting an $8-10 million sales price. Councilmember Tibbott observed the building had appreciated from $5 million to $9 million and after the sale, the proceeds were estimated to be $24 million. Ms. Thomas answered that was the amount after a new building was purchased, tenant improvements were made, moving costs and getting established in the new location. Councilmember Tibbott asked if the intent was to retain that $24 million in a capital account and not use it for operations. Ms. Thomas answered that was the goal, to create a standalone capital fund. Councilmember Tibbott asked if that would ultimately be used to purchase another facility. Ms. Thomas answered the $24 million would be after the sale of the Rucker Building and purchase/lease of a new building. Councilmember Johnson observed the intent was to purchase or lease approximately 30,000 square feet. She asked the size of the Rucker Building. Ms. Thomas answered it was about 90,000 square feet. When purchased in 1990, the District had over 250 employees; it currently has 100-115 employees. Approximately 10,000 square feet is leased by the IRS and the Health District occupies approximately 50,000 and there is vacant space. A few years ago the Board considered renovating the building, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 12 consolidating the District to primarily the first floor and leasing the majority of the second floor. That renovation and the HVAC repairs would cost $4 million; given the District's financial situation, it was difficult to justify $4 million in building improvements. The improvements were reduced to emergency repairs, the $1.5-1.7 million in HVAC repairs. The District is also not in the business of property management and does not have the staff for that or for property maintenance. Councilmember Johnson observed the District currently has approximately half the employees it had in 1990. She asked whether more employees were anticipated in the future. Ms. Thomas answered the District hoped to be able to grow with funding the legislature is considering but she did not anticipate growth of 100 employees. The District has a lease in Lynnwood where some employees could be shifted and then downsize into a smaller facility in the general Everett area that would have enough flexibility to increase the number of employees if funding is provided by the State. Councilmember Teitzel commented this is unusual and represents less than tidy recordkeeping; under the terms of the 1990 ILA, the City held partial ownership in the building but that ownership was loss over time. Conversely the City was not assessed for maintenance, making it possible it was a wash. He found that troublesome from an accounting standpoint and asked if there were other options than the proposed ILA. City Attorney Jeff Taraday answered if all the cities that made contributions were taking the same course of action in the interest of preserving the District, it probably works out. If there was a hold-out city that wanted to recoup their investment while all the other cities waived their rights, that would be a problem. He suggested checking the ILA to determine if there was language that would prevent that from happening, making the City's release contingent on all other parties making a similar release. Ms. Thomas said what happened was frustrating for the District as well. When the District paid off the loan in 1995, there was to be a subsequent real property ILA generated which would have identified cities' explicit interest in the building and liabilities. She was uncertain why that was not done. The District learned Snohomish County did a quit claim deed in 1996 to release their interest in the building, over $2 million. It may have been decided at that time there did not need to be a real property ILA; the District and cities have been unable to find any record. If the building was an asset, cities should have been carrying it on their books as an asset, most have not. In discussing the need for individual quit claim deeds from each city, the District's real estate attorneys said technically the District can sell the building and collect the money. The risk is a city could sue the District unless a quit claim deed was done. The only other process is a quiet title which requires naming all the cities in a lawsuit which the District did not want to do. If a city did not sign the ILA, they would need to provide proof that money is owed to them and potentially file a claim against the District. The intent is the most expeditious route. Almost all the cities have passed the ILA, Brier, Mill Creek, Everett, Index and Gold Bar have not yet signed. Councilmember Teitzel said he was comfortable this was the best course of action. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented it was not just the Health District, cities also did not keep proper records. As the Chair of the Snohomish County Health District, she recommended forwarding the ILA to the Consent Agenda. It was the consensus of the Council to forward this item to the Consent Agenda for approval. Mayor Earling commented he had no issue with forgiving the $160,000 and signing a quit claim deed. He acknowledged the Health District has had financial challenges and the cities have provided funds to assist with cash flow this year. The District has been working on funding in the legislature but that outcome is unknown. He voiced his continued concern that there would be further requests for financial assistance from either the County and/or cities. He was mystified why the District would sell the building and not purchase another building, possibly a lease option. He questioned how the District would sustain itself if the legislature did not provide funding and cities tired of providing funding. He wanted the District to be Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 13 strong financially, but he was not convinced that would happen as easily if the District reinvested all the money in a new purchase. Ms. Thomas answered that was the reason for the change in the ILA. The short term and long term viability of the District and leasing versus purchasing is a continuing conversation with the Board. Mayor Earling commented some sellers will credit a lease payment toward the purchase price. He summarized he was concerned but was willing to support the requested action. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said the District will not be going back to cities for funding. The representatives of the cities at the Health District have been clear with District leadership that this is a onetime shot. The Board intends to look at future planning very soon and how to continue providing community health in Snohomish County if there are funding issues. The District recognizes there may be more difficult decisions in the future. 8. AUTHORIZATION TO CONTRACT WITH JAMES G. MURPHY TO SELL SURPLUS CITY VEHICLES AND SURPLUS CITY EQUIPMENT Public Works Director Phil Williams requested authorization to sell the following at action: • Equipment: 0 1957 Caterpillar D343 250KW generator (with external 550 gal. fuel tank) o Kato Light, KF15-1, 9000Watt 120/240 V, Model G9-FG-B2EPP • Fleet vehicles: 0 1995 Ford 445 Loader 0 2006 Ford Escape • Police seizure vehicle: o 2003 BMW M3 Councilmember Johnson asked if the BMW was a drug seizure. Mr. Williams answered he was not sure, but that was a good guess. Councilmember Johnson asked if the proceeds of the sale of that vehicle would go to the Snohomish County Drug Task Force. Mr. Williams answered it depends on the City's role in process. Councilmember Nelson referred to the 1957 generator and asked the typical lifespan of a generator. Mr. Williams answered diesel powered generators provide service for a long time with good maintenance. Councilmember Nelson commended staff on the good maintenance. It was the consensus of the Council to forward this item to the Consent Agenda for approval. 9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling reported in talking with Senator Liias and Representative Peterson today, they anticipate the legislature will adjourn on schedule but immediately go into an extended session. There seems to be some optimism that the transportation budget may be passed by Sunday. The capital budget will be delayed until a final settlement is reached on the General Fund. Mayor Earling referred to comment by a citizen under Audience Comments about the Frances Anderson Center roof and reference to the library roof, clarifying only the Frances Anderson Center roof will be replaced. Mayor Earling said he has made an appointment to the Planning Board Alternate position but will not announce until the other six applicants have been informed. Mayor Earling reported he has been asked to serve as a judge for Dancing with Our Stars at the Edmonds Center for the Arts on Saturday. Several well-known community members will be guest dancers. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 14 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Tibbott thanked the Council for allowing him to miss last week's meeting. While he was out, he had an opportunity to check out digital books from the Sno-Isle Library, a great way to obtain free reading material. Councilmember Buckshnis reminded of the Arbor Day ivy pull on Saturday at Hutt Park beginning at 9 a.m. Refreshments will be provided, helpers should bring gloves and wear long sleeves and pants. Councilmember Buckshnis advised the RFP for the Edmonds Marsh Site Specific Study will be on the May 9t" agenda as she is out of town on May 2„a Council President Mesaros advised he will miss the Hutt Park event; he and his wife will be attending a conference in Portland. He advised the new format of committee meetings would begin on May 9tt' following a Council meeting. He remind Councilmembers to email him their preference regarding committees and he will make the appointments next week. Councilmember Johnson advised there is still hope for the Public Works Trust Fund in the legislature according to a memo from AWC. She urged anyone interested in supporting that program to contact their legislators. Councilmember Teitzel reported last Saturday the Rotary Club of Edmonds Daybreakers hosted the Easter Egg Hunt at Frances Anderson Center field. Hundreds of kids from ages 4 to 10 participated; the weather was great. Councilmember Teitzel reported on vandalism of a very serious nature that occurred on April 16 in the Westgate and Esperance areas. Swastikas, a symbol of hate and intolerance unacceptable in this community, were painted on several vehicles. He strongly encouraged the Police Department to do a thorough investigation and to prosecute any suspects not as vandals but as perpetrators of a hate crime. Councilmember Nelson said swastikas painted on homes and cars may not be considered a hate crime in the eyes of the law because the targets were not a protected class. However, he viewed it as an assault on the community. A swastika serves only one purpose, to instill fear and to promote hatred, a symbol representing a horrific time in our world's history. Some will say these recent acts are the work of a few rotten apples, isolated incidents; he felt something deeper was happening. He listed 21 cities and counties throughout the U.S. that have been assaulted with swastikas on benches, sidewalks, homes, fences, steps, businesses, churches, trees, bridges, historic buildings and parks in the first 4 months of 2017. The ground is shifting including tolerance of one another. We need to look out for each other, every member of the community, double down in compassion and love of one another, sending a clear message that Edmonds is a loving community because the times we live in demand it. 11. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RC W 42.30.110 1 i This item was not needed. 12. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION This item was not needed. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 15 13. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:03 p.m. DAV D 0. EARLING, MAYOR COTI' PASSE , CITY C K Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 18, 2017 Page 16