Loading...
06/09/2015 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES June 9, 2015 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Joan Bloom, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Michael Nelson, Councilmember STAFF PRESENT Don Anderson, Assistant Police Chief Phil Williams, Public Works Director Scott James, Finance Director Shane Hope, Development Services Director Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir. Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer Frances Chapin, Arts & Culture Program Mgr. Rob English, City Engineer Kernen Lien, Senior Planner Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder SPECIAL MEETING 1. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) AND A REAL ESTATE MATTER PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(b) At 6:00 p.m., Mayor Earling announced that the City Council would meet in executive session to discuss pending litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) and a real estate matter per RCW 42.30.110(1)(b). He stated that the executive session was scheduled to last approximately 45 minutes and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. Action may occur as a result of meeting in executive session. Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Earling, and Councilmembers Johnson, Fraley-Monillas, Buckshnis, Petso, Bloom (joined executive session at 6:20 p.m.), Mesaros and Nelson. Others present were City Attorney Jeff Taraday, Finance Director Scott James, Recreation Manager Renee McRae, and City Clerk Scott Passey. The executive session concluded at 6:47 p.m. 2. MEET WITH PLANNING BOARD CANDIDATE NATHAN MONROE FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING BOARD At 6:47 p.m., the City Council met with Planning Board candidate Nathan Monroe. The meeting took place in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. All elected officials were present. STUDY SESSION Mayor Earling reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 7:00 p.m. and led the flag salute. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 1 3. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Petso requested Item D be removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. APPROVAL OF DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 2, 2015 B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #214554 THROUGH #214661 DATED JUNE 4, 2015 FOR $244,913.65. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT AND CHECKS #61627 THROUGH #61636 FOR $486,090.72, BENEFIT CHECKS #61637 THROUGH #61644 AND WIRE PAYMENTS OF #422,066.67 FOR THE PAY PERIOD MAY 16, 2015 THROUGH MAY 31, 2015 C. REVISION TO PENALTY ADJUSTMENT POLICY E. APRIL 2015 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT F. LOAN OF ARTWORK FROM CITY PUBLIC ART COLLECTION TO CASCADIA ART MUSEUM G. PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICES CONTRACT AMENDMENT Item D: CONFIRMATION OF NATHAN MONROE TO THE PLANNING BOARD ALTERNATE POSITION Councilmember Petso requested this be rescheduled on next week's Consent Agenda as she had not received additional information she requested. COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO RESCHEDULE THIS ITEM TO NEXT WEEK'S CONSENT AGENDA. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS BLOOM, NELSON AND PETSO VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, JOHNSON AND MESAROS VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE ITEM D. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, JOHNSON, MESAROS AND NELSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS BLOOM AND PETSO VOTING NO. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 2 Scott Blomenkamp, Edmonds, relayed he was extremely happy when he closed on his property on May 12. He moved in on May 23 and on June 2 a developer undercut 4 trees on his property. He has seen no movement from the City's administration and has seen complete incompetency in the Planning Department with regard to their interpretation of the code. He has talked to the department head, the code enforcement manager, and the mayor's assistant. People are worried about a tree code that limits the ability of single family property owners to cut down their trees; this developer cut 13 old growth trees and undercut a 130-foot tree that could land on his house. He has been told the developer is procedurally exempt from the clearing code. Mr. Blomenkamp found this ridiculous and said he moved to Edmonds because he thought there was a reasonable level of environmental concern and development concern. The City has limits on signage and other things but apparently lets this type of thing happen. He questioned the City's ability to enforce a Tree Code when it could not control one developer on one property. He pledged to take every avenue to pursue every developer and person in government who was involved with this. Mayor Earling advised Mr. Blomenkamp and he have an appointment this Friday. Swan Seaberg, Edmonds, an Edmonds resident since 1971, said the Tree Code is ridiculous; the City wants to regulate how he landscapes his yard, get a permit to remove a tree, and pay for an arborist report. He has had two trees fall on his property, one on his house. Another was about to fall so he cut it down. He summarized there were all kinds of problems in Edmonds and the last thing the City needed to do was tell people how to landscape their property. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, relayed he attended the Tree Board meeting the week after the Planning Board's public hearing on the Tree Code. The Tree Board Chair admitted they missed a few things and maybe should have done some things differently but all board members still believed in controlling what happens on private property. He suggested if the Tree Board was allowed to continue, the City was giving too much authority to people who have a passion for a particular thing which resulted in the City being run by committees not by the City government. Next, with regard to Item 10 on last week's agenda, Draft Code of Ethics, Attachment 16, Review Options A, B, C and D, he pointed out the Council did not review Attachment 16 or the options and instead voted on Attachment 13. He objected to having an agenda item published but the discussion that was supposed to occur did not. The rest of the Council allowed Mayor Earling and Council President Fraley-Monillas to control the meeting and agreed to take action on Attachment 13. He was still waiting for review of Attachment 16. Dave Page, Edmonds, said the Council knows how he feels about the invasion of private property and personal liberties; the Tree Board went overboard. He acknowledged some regulations were needed but every committee/council board wants to make a difference. He resigned from the Snohomish County Planning Commission after two years because every staff proposal was accepted. With regard to the conference center, he feared it would be an anchor and he did not recommend the Council purchase it. He supported limited government and felt debate was healthy. For example, Councilmember Bloom has had an impact on the City Council and has changed the way some people do business and the way they think. He summarized the more committees the City has, the more staff is need, the more staff, the higher citizens' taxes are. 7. SNOHOMISH COUNTY TOURISM PRESENTATION Economic Development and Community Services Director Patrick Doherty introduced Amy Spain, Executive Director, Snohomish County Tourism Bureau, who assists and mentors the City in its tourism promotion strategies. Ms. Spain presented the Snohomish County Tourism Bureau 2014 Annual Report. She described the importance of tourism to economic development; visitors to Washington spent $19.5 billion in 2014, accounting for $1.7 billion in local/state tax revenues and creating 163,450 jobs. She displayed a drawing Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 3 illustrating the impacts of tourism on many different aspects of the community. She displayed a graph of national trends, illustrating the United States' loss in market share compared with Europe and Asia. She commented on the State's lack of a Tourism Office: All other states have some form of state funding and/or involvement Washington Tourism Alliance, a membership -funded model, is not a suitable organization o Receive funds from members and $500,000 bridge funding from the legislature to keep the website open and distribute the Visitors Guide. Legislation was introduced in Olympia in 2015 to create a state tourism funding program was not passed She provided a comparison of competitor states' budgets: • Washington $481,000 • Alaska $17 million • Idaho $7 million • Oregon $12 million • California $50 million • Nevada $15 million • Montana $12 million • Wyoming $13 million • Utah $14 million • Arizona $13 million • Colorado $15 million • New Mexico $7 million • Vancouver BC $53 million She provided tourism sector percentages: Accommodations 32% $2,400,000 Food Service 28% $2,100,000 Attractions 13% $ 975,000 Retail 19% $1,425,000 Transportation 8% $ 600,000 Total $7,500,000 She described components of long term funding: • Dedicated funds • Industry sector balance • Sectors determine assessment method She described the impact of travel to the local economy: • Overnight travelers to Washington State (staying in commercial lodging) o Average 2.2 people per travel party o Stay 2.5 nights o Spend $468 per travel party per day o Totaling $19.5 billion • Overnight travelers to Snohomish County (staying in commercial lodging) o Average 2.0 people per travel party o Stay 2.9 nights o Spend $512 per travel party per day o Totaling $992.9 million Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 4 Economic impact of tourism in Snohomish County includes 10,100 jobs, $244.4 million payroll, $17.9 million in local taxes, $49.4 million in state taxes Visitor spending in Snohomish County is $930.2 million per year; up 3.8% from previous year. Ms. Spain displayed a bar graph illustrating the impact of travel to local economy, day traveler (less than $100/day) compared to overnight travelers ($512/day). She described the effect of tourism in Snohomish County: • 10,340 jobs • $256.4 million payroll • 431.2 million local taxes • $63.0 million state taxes • Visitor spending in Snohomish County is $992.9 million/year, up 5.7% from previous year o Restaurants: $289.4 million o Transportation and Fuel: $152.5 million o Retail Stores: $135.4 million o Accommodations: $130.6 million o Recreation and entertainment: $130.5 million o Grocery stores: $60.5 million Ms. Spain provided a brief overview of the Bureau's accomplishments in 2014: • Generated 6,708 requests for information from ads • Website visitation up 9% - over 222,000 unique visitors • Achieved over $272,000 of free media coverage • 31,006 definite and 5,163 tentative group and convention room nights were processed in 2014 representing $43.4 million in economic impact • Visitor centers served 38,402 visitors. Countywide centers served 95,839 visitors • Tourism spending and economic impact of tourism in Snohomish County was $992.9 million — up 5.7% • Hotel occupancy levels were up 4.3% to 71.1%; ADR was up 6.8% leading to an increase in RevPar of 11.3% • Hotel/motel tax collections were up 7.3% She commented their branding "Open Up" permeates all their creative executions, from brochures to advertising and their website. She reviewed convention and group tour sales and services, explaining ads generate leads, support branding and generate interest in Snohomish County as a meeting/event destination: • 2,084 group tour/convention/sports events collateral materials were distributed in 2014 at 20 trade shows and 3 sales missions • 25 familiarization tours were conducted for meeting, group tour and international tour and travel planners and domestic and international media • 5 sales missions to Vancouver BC, Olympia, Seattle, Indianapolis and Orlando along with Lynnwood Convention Center, Future of Flight Aviation Center, Seattle Premium Outlets, Angel of the Winds Casino, City of Lynnwood and 9 county hotels resulting in 32 new leads for hotels and attractions and distribution of 98 packets of information • 20 trade shows generating 183 direct leads and distribution of 2,084 tourism guides, 100 groups assisted; distributing 3,929 guides to attendees • Bar graph of tentative, definite and total room nights for 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 o Large increase in 2014 compared to 2013 attributable to addition of one staff person • Group tour, meeting and event planner bids were prepared which result in 31,006 total definite room nights Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 5 o Additional pending bookings at yearend total 5,163 room nights o Totaling 36,169 room nights o Economic impact of group business: $43,395,198 $37.1 million economic impact from sports The Snohomish County Sports Commission Board of Directors assists the sports marketing staff with resources, referrals, direction and oversight Ms. Spain reported on tourism development: • 6,708 requests for information from ads, down from previous year due to visitors getting more information online • New quarterly E-newsletters o Visitor Newsletter o Sports Spotlight o VIC Times Newsletter o Sports Quarterly • Website visitation up 9% • Over 11,000 visits to RoomsAtPar and StayShopAndSave websites • New collateral materials: o Arts Guide o Aviation Attractions o Camping and RV Parks o Waterfalls o Golf o Top 10 Hikes 85,000 copies of the official visitor guide distributed Public Relations and Media 0 6 issues of StoryLine were mailed to over 1,400 travel writers with each issue o Attended Society of American Travel Writers and Travel Media Showcase 0 8 media fam tours for travel writers 0 17 press releases sent 0 100 media pitches 0 45 articles published o $272,326 in free media coverage o Social Media: Flickr, Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest and YouTube 0 2 television ads launched Ms. Spain reported on efforts to implement the Strategic Tourism Plan initiatives: • Manage Visitor Information Centers (VIC) at I-405/I-5, Historic Downtown Snohomish and at the Future of Flight and Boeing tour • Advertising presence at Alderwood Mall • Unique presence at Seattle Premium Outlets (Snoh Co Yeti) • Electronic kiosks at Lynnwood Convention Center and Tulalip Resort • Mobile VIC operating at events and festivals She provided a visitor snapshot: • 66% from more than 50 miles away 0 6% from other Washington counties 0 31 % from other states 0 29% from other countries • 34% from local area (including surrounding counties) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 6 • Served 95,839 visitors countywide Ms. Spain described training of VIC volunteers including five countywide tourism related programs, monthly hotel hot sheet, tourism industry month tours, Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if there was anything specific to Edmonds. Ms. Spain answered there is a great deal of information on each community on their website including a description of the community, links to the City's website and VisitEdmonds.com, descriptions in the Visitor Guide, Arts Guide, shopping and mobile tour of murals in downtown Edmonds. Council President Fraley-Monillas clarified she was asking about information specific to revenue generation in Edmonds. Ms. Spain did not have specifics regarding visitor spending in Edmonds. The Department of Revenue can provide lodging tax collected in Edmonds. Councilmember Mesaros inquired about the impact of the cruise industry flourishing in King County on Snohomish County. Ms. Spain answered some tour companies provide transportation and some tour operators include Seattle Premium Outlets and Alderwood mall in their shopping excursions as well as the Future of Flight Boeing tour. The trend is when someone comes to Seattle for a cruise, they only explore downtown Seattle unless they do a pre/post cruise tour. The Bureau is working with tour companies in the greater Seattle area to provide itineraries to the Boeing tour which is unique to this area. Pre/post tours tend to be for very short time period. Councilmember Nelson referred to the visitor snapshot, 31 % coming from other states and 29% from other countries. He asked whether more specific were available regarding the countries or states most attracted to the Snohomish County area. Ms. Spain said other research was conducted in 2012 as part of the branding program regarding where travelers come from. Snohomish County is a regional destination; the top three destinations for overnight stays are Vancouver BC, Portland and Seattle. California and Oregon also rank high for visitors. International travels are primarily attracted to the Boeing tour. She offered to send more data to Mr. Doherty. 8. RENEWAL OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY REGIONAL DRUG & GANG TASK FORCE 2015-2016 Assistant to the Police Chief Don Anderson explained Edmonds has been a participant in the Task Force since 1998 with several others Snohomish County cities. At one time Edmonds contributed a detective to participate as a Task Force member. Since Edmonds, Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace formed their own Drug Task Force, the three cities have chosen to continue their support of the Snohomish County Regional Task Force through a financial contribution alone. Task Force funding comes primarily from a U.S. Department of Justice grant with the remaining financial support from Snohomish County and the participating municipalities. Most staff are on loan from the participating agencies and their wages are paid by their home agencies. Other participants include the Snohomish County Sheriff's Office, 20 municipalities, DSHS Child Protective Services, the Washington State Patrol, and Snohomish Health District; all pledge funds to the Task Force based on a local match breakdown described in Exhibit C of the ILA. Edmonds' assessment for July 1, 2015 — June 30, 2016 is $10,548, a $4 increase over last year's amount. Funds are included in the Police Department's 2015 budget. The Police Department requests approval of the ILA and authorization for the Mayor to sign the 2015-2016 agreement on the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Petso relayed she has been contacted by neighbors concerned about activities in their neighborhood; she asked whether this group would assist with that. ACOP Anderson advised within the city limits of Edmonds the South Snohomish County Regional Drug Task Force which consists of members from Edmonds, Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace would handle drug activity. The only time Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 7 the Regional Task Force would be asked to assist the City would be on a case that goes federal and additional recourses, personnel and equipment are needed, or a drug manufacturing lab. Councilmember Petso asked the purpose of the Snohomish Regional Drug Gang Task Force. ACOP Anderson advised it provides drug and gang suppression in all the cities in Snohomish County. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week's Consent Agenda. 9. BRIEFING ON THE 2016-2021 SIX -YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Transportation Engineer Bertrand Hauss distributed a list of projects added to the 2016-2021 TIP since last year's TIP, projects removed from the 2016-2021 TIP, projects where the description/project name was revised since the 2015-2020 TIP, and revisions to the current 2016-2012 TIP. A public hearing is scheduled on July 7, 2015. He reviewed projects added to the 2016-2021 TIP: Project name Reason for Addition Dayton St. from 7th Ave. to 8th Ave. Added since ranked #1 in Short Walkway List (as part of 2015 Transportation Plan ) Note: Description changed from "east side" to "south side" of Dayton 236th St. SW from SR-104 to 100th Ave. W Added since ranked #3 in 2015 Long Walkway List (as part of 2015 Transportation Plan ) Note: Project extended to 100th from 97th consistent with 2015 Transportation Plan 84th Ave. W from 238th St. SW to 234th Added since ranked #4 in Long Walkway List (as part of 2015 Transportation Plan ) 80th Ave. W from 212th St. SW to 206th St. SW Added since ranked #1 in Long Walkway List (as part of 2015 Transportation Plan ) Note: not highlighted on spreadsheet (to be added in next submittal) 218th St. SW from 76th Ave. W to 84th Ave. W Added since ranked #2 in Long Walkway List (as part of 2015 Transportation Plan ) Waterfront At -Grade Crossing Alternative Study Added based on $500,000 recently secured state funding, along with Port of Edmonds and Local Funding Citywide Transition Plan Addition based on required update of Plan, identifying non -compliant ramps and possible funding sources (needed to complete) He highlighted projects removed from the 2016-2021 TIP: Project Reason for removal 212th St. SW @ 84th Ave. / Five Corners Project Completed in'15 Main @ 9th (interim solution) Permanent solution identified in 6-year TIP 15th St. SW from Edmonds Way to 8th Ave. Project Completed in'15 ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave. S Project Completed in'15 Meadowdale Beach Rd. Walkway Ranked #23 in updated Long Walkway List (as part of 2015 Transportation Plan ) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 8 80th Ave. Walkway from 188th to OVD Ranked #12 in updated Long Walkway List (as part of 2015 Transportation Plan ) Walnut from 6th to 7th Ranked #9 in updated Short Walkway List (as part of 2015 Transportation Plan ) SR-104 Corridor Study Completed in ' 15 He identified projects where the description/project name has been revised since 2015-2020 TIP: Project Description change 196th @ 88th Intersection Guardrail Combined with 196th @ 88th Intersection Improvements project Restriping of 76th Ave from 220th to OVD and Both projects combined into Bike Link Citywide Bicycle Connections project (with secured Verdant funding) Sunset Ave. from Edmonds to Caspers project Changed from "sidewalk" to "multi -use path" Dayton St. project from 7th to 8th Changed from "east side" to "south side" Traffic Calming Program Non -motorized Transportation Safety Improvements were added and removed "Residential" Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether more money should be included in the budget if the Traffic Calming Program is being expanded from residential to citywide. Public Works Director Phil Williams responded the funding is proposed to be increased from $10,000 to $20,000. Although not a large amount, it will be helpful as the scope of the projects has been expanded. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested increasing the funding to $50,000 due to numerous complaints about speeding. Mr. Williams noted traffic calming is not just slowing vehicles although that has a safety benefit. There could be other strategies employed that would make car, pedestrian and bicycle travel safer that do not necessarily include traffic calming for automobiles. Councilmember Petso asked whether the Council was expected to take action to adopt the TIP the night of the July 7 public hearing. Mr. Hauss advised that was the intent. Councilmember Petso recalled Council discussion at the retreat when the Council takes action immediately after the public hearing, it can leave the impression that the Council did not care what the public had to say because there was no time to consider their input. She asked whether the schedule could be rearranged so that the public hearing precedes Council action by a week. Mr. Williams agreed that could be done. Councilmember Petso referred to the comparison chart and the label on a walkway, 236t1' Street Walkway from SR 104 to 97th. Mr. Hauss said should have been changed to SR 104. Councilmember Petso referred to the purpose listed for the 80th Avenue Walkway, to provide safe and desirable route to the Old Woodway High School and parks, pointing out that was not located near the Old Woodway High School. Mr. Hauss advised that should be Edmonds-Woodway High School. Councilmember Petso referred to 84th Avenue Walkway from 238th to 234th, which she envisioned was behind Safeway on Highway 99. She has noticed private development putting in sidewalks the length of their property and asked how it was decided which walkways the City does and which ones development does. Mr. Williams agreed that was difficult because it is unknown when development will occur or the scope. Staff selected projects that ranked the highest and applies for grants when possible. If the City can partner with a private sector developer, that reduces the cost of the project. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 9 Councilmember Petso inquired about grant funds shown for the Annual Street Preservation Program in odd -numbered years. Mr. Williams answered in the past two years the City has received two grants for paving projects via distribution of federal funds by Snohomish County that prioritized maintenance paving. The City paved 5th Avenue 2 years ago via a $550,000 grant and a $780,000 grant will be used for the 220th project this year. He was hopeful that same recommendation will continue; therefore some grant funds at about the level received this year were included in the TIP every other year. Councilmember Petso observed one of changes made was to change the Sunset Avenue project from a sidewalk to a multiuse path. At the time the Council takes action on the TIP, she planned to make a motion to undo that change and leave it as a walkway project. Councilmember Nelson asked for examples of traffic calming projects that were not related to speed reduction. Mr. Williams explained many people look at traffic calming as bulb outs, radar feedback signs, speed cushions or other things designed to slow cars down. At key location where vehicles interact with pedestrians, projects elements could be to protect the pedestrian crossing which also slows cars and provides better visibility for pedestrians, a shorter crossing distance, etc. Although that is not necessarily seen as traffic calming, staff would like that type of project to be eligible for the funding. He referred to a very interesting seminar he and Mr. Hauss attended two weeks ago in Everett on accommodating bicycles in a limited right-of-way. He summarized anything that could be done with paint, lights, signage will have some effect on slowing cars but may not be the only benefit. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked whether the eastbound sidewalk at 238th @ Highway 99 was included. She noted it is a steep road with two speed bumps and a chicane where people walk in the street to reach 76th. Mr. Hauss advised it is included in the Transportation Plan but it was ranked fairly low. The TIP does not identify all the walkway projects, only the top 3-4 in the long and short walkway list. Council President Fraley-Monillas commented multiple speed bumps and other traffic calming devices would seem to indicate a higher need on that road. She recalled Councilmember Johnson requested it be included in the Transportation Plan in 2008. Mr. Hauss advised criteria are used for ranking projects; the Transportation Committee was involved in that ranking exercise. That stretch received a top score with regard to pedestrian activity but it ranked lower than other stretches with regard to distance from a school. Council President Fraley-Monillas commented that stretch of roadway leads to the only park in that area and the chicane reduces the area for pedestrians. She suggested looking at that again and potentially moving it up on the project list. Mr. Hauss agreed installing sidewalks on all the stretches like that are desirable in the long term. He pointed out the speed bumps and chicanes reduce traffic speeds. Mr. Williams said the criteria used to rank the long and short walkways are not completely dissimilar to the requirements for grant applications so projects are often matched with grant sources. Councilmember Bloom asked whether "Residential" was removed from the Traffic Calming Program because it limited projects only to residential streets. Mr. Williams explained the program was entitled "Residential Traffic Calming Program" which meant local streets. A lot of the requests the City receives are with regard to speeding and other safety hazards not necessarily on local streets; some are on collector streets. Removing "Residential" broadens the places where traffic calming resources could be used and broadens the list of potential solutions. Councilmember Johnson inquired about the public meeting this week regarding the Transportation Element. Mr. Hauss advised there is an open house Wednesday, June 10 in the Bracket Room, 3rd floor of City Hall from 6:00 to 7:00 p.m. followed by a Planning Board meeting. 10. PRESENTATION OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES FOR THE 2016-2017 WATERLINE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 10 City Engineer Rob English reported earlier this year the City issued an RFQ to seek a consultant to begin design work on primarily the 2016 program as well as preliminary engineering for the 2017 program. This contract and scope of work is for the surveying and preliminary design for 14,000 feet included in both programs. Out of that, approximately 7,000 feet will be selected for the 2016 program. The proposed design fee is $345,000 which includes a $25,000 management reserve for changes and unforeseen conditions. The budget for this year's program is $391,000. Councilmember Nelson inquired about the service life of a water line. Mr. English answered the Water Comprehensive Plan programs replacement of 1 % of the system per year or a 100 year replacement cycle. Mr. Williams commented new pipes have gotten much better; ductal iron is the material of choice now. Wooden pipes were dug up in Main Street that were in pretty good shape although they were no longer in use. Councilmember Nelson asked the service life of new pipes being installed. Mr. Williams answered it depends on the type of soil, pressure fluctuations, etc. Many Water Comprehensive Plans have an 80-100 year replacement schedule. Councilmember Mesaros asked when the pipes being replaced this year were installed. Mr. Williams answered the oldest line that will be replaced in the next 12 months was 1929 vintage. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week's Consent Agenda. 11. PRESENTATION OF A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH KPG, INC FOR THE 238TH ST SW WALKWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT City Engineer Rob English explained this project will be advertised for construction within the next several weeks. The bulk of the work covered by this amendment is related to providing engineering support during the construction phase such as services related to reviewing RFIs, submittals, assisting with change orders, preparing record drawings at the conclusion of the project and attending meetings throughout the course of construction and finalizing the stormwater report and infiltration rates. The proposed fee is $26,025 which includes a 5% management reserve of $12,039. Project funds are primarily stormwater and a Safe Routes to Schools grant will fund the sidewalk portion of the project. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week's Consent Agenda. 12. ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE PROPOSED TREE CODE Senior Planner Kernen Lien described the Tree Code Update: • ECC 10.95.030 Citizens' Tree Board Powers and Duties: o Developing a tree ordinance designed to preserve and protect existing trees, encourage planting of additional trees, safeguard trees on parcels where construction or renovation is occurring or planned to occur, and encouraging the Edmonds citizenry to become active stewards of the urban forest. • Develop a more comprehensive tree code with clear vision, and code which is easier for citizens to understand and more efficient for staff to implement. • Council budgeted $24,000 in 2014 which was supplemented with a $10,000 Urban and Community Forestry Grant from the Department of Natural Resources He described the current Tree Code: • ECDC 18.45 Land Clearing and Tree Cutting • Right-of-way Tree Removal or Trimming Policy (Adopted November 18, 2014) • Critical Area Regulations ECDC 23.40 — 23.90 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 11 • Other Codes and Policies o ECDC 20.13 Landscaping Requirements o ECDC 18.85 Street Trees o ECDC 23.10 Shoreline Master Program He described current tree cutting permits: • Exemptions o Singe family lots ■ No critical areas ■ Not subdividable more than one additional lot o Routine maintenance o Hazard trees/emergencies Permitting differences o Singe family: Type I1, $820 application fee o Multi-family/commercial: Type I, $250 o Right-of-way: ROW Construction Permit $90-$270 o New Development: Reviewed with underlying permit Mr. Lien described major changes in proposed code over existing tree regulations: • New tiered permitting process with same permit fees for singe family, multi -family, and commercial development • Permit required for removal of any tree not associated with a development proposal o Tree removal reviewed with development proposal • Right-of-way tree permit in same location in code • Minimum Tree Density on singe family lots Zoning Minimum Tree units RS-6 2 RS-8 4 RS-10 6 RS-12 9 RS-20 12 Minimum Diameter Tree Units 3-5" 0.5 6-10" 1 12" 2 18" 3 24" 4 Mr. Lien explained staff s concern with the draft code was the policy basis behind the recommendation. When the Tree Board was compiling their recommendation, there were discussions about an Urban Forestry Management Plan which would include the goals and objectives for canopy coverage. The City does not currently have a policy to establish a tree density. The Planning Board held a well -attended public hearing on May 27, 2015 after which the Planning Board forwarded a recommendation to City Council: A. Defer any action on the currently prepared draft. Complete development and adoption of an Urban Forestry Management Plan for the City of Edmonds as proposed within the Comprehensive Plan, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 12 B. Consolidate existing tree code sections under existing policy guidelines during the Edmonds Community Development Code rewrite process currently in progress; and, C. Following development of an Urban Forestry Management Plan, consolidation of potential revised tree code could be written consistent with policy directions provided within the Urban Forestry Management Plan. Mr. Lien provided information regarding the Urban Forestry Management Plan: • Timing o The intent was to develop the code under the existing policy framework o Findings section intended to address expanded policy • Urban Forestry Management Plan o Provides policy framework that guides decision making o Identifies principles, priorities, goals and strategies o Sets foundation to direct and integrate the management of the City's urban forest resources • Urban Forestry Management Plan content o Can address public and private property o May include an inventory o Can address a number of topics ■ View protection, solar access, tree canopy goals, tree protection and regulations on private and public property • Comprehensive Plan Update recommending an Urban Forestry Management Plan be completed by end of 2017. Councilmember Buckshnis complimented Ms. Hope and Mr. Lien on their presentation to the Planning Board. She said the proposed Tree Code is well written although she may not agree with it. She asked whether any of it could be saved or was the intent to draft an Urban Forestry Management Plan and then try to resurrect some of the proposed code. Development Services Director Shane Hope said the intent would be to consider some parts of it during the code update/rewrite process. Mr. Lien said examples of things that relate to the code rewrite process include bringing the Street Tree Policy into the code and including the Subdivision Tree Plan. He recommended items that do not have policy backup wait until an Urban Forestry Management Plan is adopted. Councilmember Bloom thanked Mr. Lien and Engineering Program Manager Jeanie McConnell for their work with the consultant on the Tree Code as well as presentations to the Tree Board. She also relayed praise for their work from the former and current Tree Board Chairs. She noted the community's very strong reaction made it clear the community does not want regulation on private property such as requiring permits. With regard to things that could be saved from the proposed Tree Code, she recalled staff requested clear definition and asked whether the definitions could be integrated into the code. Mr. Lien said definitions could be considered to see how they could be incorporated into the existing code. The existing code includes a definition of a tree. Councilmember Bloom relayed from what she has read and heard, there may have been a misunderstanding about the definition of a significant tree. It was her understanding a significant tree was identified as a diameter of 6 inches at 4%2 feet. Mr. Lien said that is consistent with the current definition of a tree, 6 inches at breast height. Councilmember Bloom observed the difference in the Tree Code was that a significant tree was regulated on private property. Mr. Lien answered significant trees are currently regulated on private property but there are a number of exemptions that apply to private property. For example a 6-inch tree on property with a critical area such as stream, wetland or slope would be a regulated tree. There are exemptions to that such as hazard tree removal. If there was no critical area on a developed single family property that is not capable of being subdivided into more than one additional lot, any tree can be taken down regardless of the size or number of trees. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 13 Councilmember Bloom inquired about a Type II permit. Mr. Lien explained a Type II permit is a staff decision that requires public notice to property owners within 300 feet of a site, publication in the newspaper, website and a few other places. Councilmember Bloom observed that is an existing permit. Mr. Lien agreed, explaining for a single family property that did not meet the exemptions and required a tree cutting permit, there would be Type II staff decision. For Councilmember Bloom, Mr. Lien provided an example when a permit would be required for a single family property: a single family property with a 30% slope which is considered an erosion hazard which is a critical area. The tree cutting code also requires a permit for trees located on slopes greater than 25%. If a property owner wants to remove that tree, a Type II permit would be required if it was not a hazard tree. If it was a hazard tree in the same location, a permit would not be required but documentation of the hazard tree would be required such as evaluation by a certified arborist and if it is in a critical area, replanting would be required. He clarified that was in the current code. Council President Fraley-Monillas thanked Tree Board Chair Hatzenbeler for handling opinions at the Planning Board public hearing with grace and respect. She asked whether the proposed Tree Code was modeled after Seattle's code. Mr. Lien explained the consultant, who has 30 years of experience working on urban tree issues throughout the Puget Sound region, looked at a number of jurisdictions. The main framework of the code came from Lake Forest Park not Seattle. The consultant looked at codes from Seattle, Kirkland, Redmond, Olympia, Tukwila and a number of other jurisdictions in developing the recommendations. Council President Fraley-Monillas said she was glad the consultant looked at other codes but she wanted Edmonds to write its own code. She was familiar with Lake Forest Park and Seattle; their challenges differ from Edmonds. She was not interested in requiring permits via a tiered process for cutting trees on private property. She asked how staff wanted Council's input, observing that could affect the Urban Forestry Management Plan. Ms. Hope said unless the Council directs staff otherwise, staff will not pursue a permitting system on residential properties and the existing policies will remain in place. Staff will draft changes to consolidate/clean up the code and add things like definitions. An Urban Forestry Management Plan will be proposed as part of the budget process to include scoping with regard to what the Plan will cover. For example the Council could decide to have the Plan focus only on public property and rights -of - way. Council President Fraley-Monillas suggested a positive approach that encouraged people to plant trees, what to plant and how to plant. She recognized there needed to be regulations in critical areas or potential hazards. Mr. Lien advised educational outreach could be included in an Urban Forestry Management Plan. Councilmember Johnson commented this has been a wonderful example of democracy in action. First the Tree Board developed a plan, it was sent to the Planning Board for review, the public weighed in with one loud voice and now the City Council has an opportunity for review. That check and balance system also includes an opportunity for the Mayor to veto an ordinance. Her message to the community was to calm down, not cut all their trees, take this in a logical process and avoid unnecessary consequences. For example, one of her neighbors is planning to log his property of over ten mature trees to avoid the regulations and fees. It is important to avoid trees. She said some people love their trees, some love their solar access, others want to garden on their property. The overall message that she heard is to leave private property alone. Her policy direction when an Urban Forestry Management Plan is prepared is to have public land as the first priority, other publicly owned land such as schools, etc. second priority and not include private property. People care very much about their property and do not want to be told what Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 14 to do. She observed it would be a tremendous job for the City to manage the tree density and cutting and pruning. She thanked all the citizens and boards and commissions involved in this process. Councilmember Nelson recalled one of the Tree Board's stated duties was to encourage, not require, Edmonds citizenry to become active stewards of the urban forest. He preferred a carrot rather than a stick approach. He asked whether the process of developing an Urban Forestry Management Plan could be started sooner than 2017. Ms. Hope said it would be included in the 2016 budget unless a grant was obtained sooner. Councilmember Petso relayed her understanding that staff will consider the definitions and bringing the Street Tree Policy into code. She requested staff review the permit cost described earlier; $820 for a non- exempt single family which is a staff decision with public notice. She questioned that the cost of providing public notice was actually $820. Mr. Lien said that did not necessarily need to be done with the code rewrite; the fee schedule is adopted by Council by resolution. Councilmember Petso referred to view protection and solar access, recalling people wanted language regarding the value of view protection and solar access included in Comprehensive Plan, She asked whether that was removed from the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Hope did not recall language was removed; there is draft language proposed about view protection, but she will check on that. Councilmember Petso suggested language such as value is placed on view protection, solar access and trees, even though she recognized those may be conflicting values. Councilmember Petso referred to the incident described during Audience Comments and asked whether there was anything related to that incident that the Council needed to be aware of for tonight's discussion. Ms. Hope answered she did not believe so. She learned of that particular site issue on Friday and assured staff was following up on it. Councilmember Petso looked forward to hearing more about it. Councilmember Bloom recalled one of the things the Tree Board was charged with was looking at the fines. She asked whether that could be considered, noting that was potentially related to the audience comment as well as Councilmember Petso's comment. Ms. Hope agreed that could be considered this year. Councilmember Bloom observed because there was such a strong reaction to infringement on private property rights, some people may have misunderstood the Tree Board's role. She explained the function of the Tree Board is to educate and to support the right tree in the right place and what Council President Fraley-Monillas said. The Tree Board is not able to do much without staff support. She feared the comments about the Tree Board making the decision were based on a people looking for someone to blame. She has worked with the Tree Board for five years; they are a wonder group of dedicated volunteers who meet for two hours a month. She appreciated the work staff did and hoped everyone realized this was a community effort, democracy in progress. Ms. Hope said the Tree Board provides excellent work; developing the ordinance was not the sole focus of their efforts. The Tree Board also wants to work on Arbor Day, another way to provide information, educate the public and have fun. The Tree Board is also interested in a voluntary Heritage Tree Program which the Council previously authorized. Ms. Hope advised the Council did not need to take further action related to this item. Staff will work on the items that were discussed. Mayor Earling declared a break recess. 13. DISCUSSION OF THE 2015-2019 COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION AGREEMENT Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 15 City Engineer Rob English explained this is a renewal of Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) agreement with Community Transit. There are 3 work sites within the City with 100 or more employees — the City of Edmonds, Swedish Medical Hospital and Edmonds Family Medical Clinic. The State provides $1750 per site for a total of $5,250 for a CTR program. Those funds are provided via an Interlocal Agreement to Community Transit. The previous agreement covered 2011-2015; the proposed agreement will extend it through 2019. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week's Consent Agenda. 14. DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION TO SUBMIT PROPOSAL TO ACQUIRE THE EDMONDS CONFERENCE CENTER COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM, THAT THE CITY MAKE AN OFFER TO BUY THE EDMONDS CONFERENCE CENTER FOR $300,000 WITH A DEED RESTRICTION THAT THE PROPERTY BE USED FOR PUBLIC USE FOR AT LEAST 30 YEARS. Councilmember Mesaros explained how he arrived at that number; if the land where the conference center is located is valued at approximately $800,000 and if the conference center were demolished. Testimony and information provided regarding the condition of the building indicates it would take approximately $1 million to rehab the building. The City is not in the business of operating a conference center but the land is very valuable to the City especially due to its location on the arts corridor from Main Street to the Edmonds Center for the Arts. If $200,000 is subtracted from the $800,000 value for demolition and basic cleanup of the property, the property would be worth about $600,000. The restriction on the property for public use for the next 30 years would half the value of the property. He believed the State would listen to that offer and it was a piece of property the City would love to have for that price. Councilmember Petso asked City Attorney Jeff Taraday whether he could provide a sample deed restriction. Mr. Taraday responded, assuming the motion is approved, he anticipated the administration would execute the Council's intent by effectively sending a letter of intent to the State expressing this offer. A full-blown purchase and sale agreement would not necessarily be sent to the State unless the City was specifically directed to do so because the City has no idea where the State is on this. If the State is interested, the City can formalize it through a purchase and sale agreement. He offered to locate language that could be included in a purchase and sale agreement. Councilmember Nelson asked where the $300,000 would come from and whether it would jeopardize any other purchases or projects. Finance Director Scott James answered the Council has not discussed a source of funds. In his presentation a couple weeks ago he identified opportunities and tradeoffs. The tradeoffs were a list of items in the budget that could be sacrificed for this purchase. That is the only information he has presented to the Council. There are other issues that have not been discussed such as what would be done with the building, cost associated with a conference center, etc. Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her concern that demolishing the building and restoring the land into a park would cost more than $300,000. She loved parks but said a public -private partnership with the building would be more advantageous such as a boutique hotel. She asked how much demolition and restoration would cost, anticipating the total cost would be close to $1 million which did not include designing and developing a park. Economic Development & Community Services Director Patrick Doherty said Councilmember Mesaros' explanation estimated demolition and cleanup of $200,000 which he felt was generous. He estimated demolition of a 50,000 square foot building without complications was under $100,000, allowing for unexpected contingencies and cleanup of the site. Because the notion of Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 16 a park or other subsequent use has not been discussed or vetted, he did not have an estimated cost. He acknowledged design and development of park or building would not be an inconsequential cost. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled staff saying because the City had right of first refusal, if there were higher offers the City could still purchase it for $300,000. Mr. Doherty responded that was not correct; the State staff person said her perception of the process, given that the City was another government agency, was the State would deal with Edmonds until either negotiations fall apart or the parties come together and a purchase and sale agreement is issued. If the parties do no come together, the State would move on to other parties. Councilmember Buckshnis reiterated her opinion that it was in the City's best interest to keep civic fields as its priority and the City was not in the business of operating a conference center. She spoke with several former Councilmembers and a former Mayor who agreed the City was not in the business of operating a conference center or purchasing and reselling property. She did not support purchasing the conference center. Council President Fraley-Monillas said her opinion during this process has been that the City should not waste money and that the City was not in the business of operating anything because the City does not have the staff or time to manage it. However, if the property can be purchased for $300,000, she envisioned when the City's finances were better, potentially building a tourism center or a welcome to the arts corridor building to encourage visitors to the 4th Avenue Arts Corridor. She could not see doing that for 10-15 years until the money is right or the City is able to obtain funds from somewhere else. If the City can purchase the property for $300,000, it would be foolish not to attempt it. The City did not need to do anything with the property for a while. The building has value to the arts corridor but she was not willing to consider an amount much over that. Councilmember Petso said neither the funding source nor future use of the property were part of the motion. Information about funding sources indicates this purchase could be made if the Council chose. The City ended 2014 with a General Fund fund balance of $13 million. The 001 Fund, a subfund of the overall General Fund, after excluding reserve funds and various other funds, ended 2014 with $6.4 million. There is also the REET Fund; she recalled when Mr. James made the presentation regarding roads, he indicated the 126 REET Fund ended last year with $500,000 more than expected. The Council voted to spend $260,000 of that on roads. Even the 2015 budget did not expend all the REET 2 revenue expected to be received. Therefore when the Council selects a funding source, it is likely REET 2 will be selected and this purchase is an eligible acquisition from that fund. She suggested the issue of a funding source be put aside. Councilmember Petso also suggested the Council could aside immediate plans for the property. Numerous ideas have been suggested such using the building as an incubator project or as a senior center while the senior center building is built, or when the "building does fall down" it could be used as a park, arts facility or parking lot. She suggested narrowing the focus to whether the Council wants to attempt to acquire this for the price stated in recognition of the fact that is located on the arts corridor. With regard to Mr. Taraday's statement regarding a letter of intent, Councilmember Petso recalled the City already provided the State a letter of intent. It was her understanding the City need to provide something that would pass as an offer and not a second letter of intent. Mr. Taraday responded it is not clear from the State's process exactly what they want to see. Assuming the motion passes, that may be clarified tomorrow. Mr. Doherty said the City already submitted a notice of interest. A letter of interest is a standard real estate term for an intent to make an offer, it could be called an offer letter. The State's representative told him they did not expect a purchase and sale agreement; they expect an offer letter that would begin negotiations and if successful would lead to a mutually crafted purchase and sale agreement. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 17 Councilmember Petso said if she was interested in the contingencies that are included in a typical real estate transaction such as an inspection, title search, etc. did that need to be added to the motion as an amendment. Mr. Taraday said yes if there were substantive additions but if no if they were boilerplate. If the State was not expecting a purchase and sale agreement, there was no need to get into the nitty-gritty details such as the length of the feasibility/inspection period, etc. That would come to Council for subsequent action when the negotiations with the State reach that stage. Mr. Doherty agreed only substantive issues that would affect the deal needed to be identified. Councilmember Petso was uncertain how a title search, damage assessment or inspection would be classified. Mr. Taraday considered that standard and somewhat boilerplate and not a substantive deal term. A title search, environmental phase 1, etc. are standard in commercial property transactions. Councilmember Petso relayed her support of the motion. Councilmember Bloom stated her support for the motion. She appreciated Council President Fraley- Monillas and Councilmember Petso's comments and Councilmember Mesaros' visionary approach. She agreed with looking at it in terms of getting something for a good price and exploring all options for future use. She recalled Ms. Hite saying although she and Ms. Chapin were concerned about the cost and operations, it would be a nice addition to the arts corridor. There is creativity to be had in the City; it could be used for a park, initially for restrooms, an art park, etc. She was excited about the potential and hoped a good price could be negotiated with the State. Recognizing this was a controversial issue, Council President Fraley-Monillas encouraged Councilmembers to describe their thinking and their vision for the building/property before a vote is taken. Councilmember Nelson said his vision is not necessarily running a conference center or other things in the facility due to the extent of the damage and funds required for repairs. It is a unique opportunity to purchase the land; the land alone at that price is a unique opportunity for the City. Councilmember Johnson recalled the last time the Council voted on this she voted in favor of sending a letter of interest/intent because the Council was fairly evenly divided and she wanted to continue the discussion. As time passed, she has learned more about the building that tends to support demolition including structural, construction and maintenance problems as well as materials problems. To invest the City's money to restore the building would be extensive, probably $1.542 million. Although the land is located on 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor and she was a strong supporter of the arts, for her the risks outweigh the benefits and it was not an action she wanted to take. Councilmember Mesaros explained the primary reason for his motion was it is a moment in time for the City; how often will property on the 4th Avenue Corridor become available to the City? If 4th Avenue is an arts corridor, this is an opportunity to provide a sense of place for visual and performing arts. He agreed with Councilmember Johnson that the building is in bad shape. His vision was not to operate the building but to demolish it. If the City is able to purchase the property for $300,000 and he estimated demolition at $200,000, the real cost is $500,000. However that was $500,000 to acquire a property valued at $800,000 which he believed was a bargain price. If the City could get the property at that price, it would be beneficial to the City because it may never be available again. The City has resources available and acquiring this property and demolishing the building will be a good use of those resources. The Council could then begin discussing how best to utilize the property. Councilmember Buckshnis said she was trying to be a realist; she could not believe the State would accept $300,000 for $2.3 million property. She was also a visionary but did not want Councilmembers to feel bad or want to increase the amount if the State did not accept the City's offer. She agreed it was a great property but the City could do a private -public partnership such as with McMenamins or Mr. Spee Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 18 or use the money to enhance the 4th Avenue Corridor. The ECA has a park area in front and there is the Sunset beach nearby. She urged the Council to be realistic, commenting if she was the State, she would be insulted by the City's offer of $300,000 for a $2.3 million property. She summarized this was the point of view of a fiscally conservative, financially minded person who has worked in the industry for a long time. In response to Councilmember Buckshnis' comment, Councilmember Bloom said nothing ventured, nothing gained. She questioned how the City could do a public -private partnership if the City does not own the property. The City does not lose anything by making this officer and the City may be surprised the State sees the value of keeping the property in the community and using it for public use in a way that benefits the arts corridor. She was not afraid of embarrassing herself in front of the State and was strongly in support of the motion. Council President Fraley-Monillas requested as the CEO of the City that Mayor Earling have an opportunity to provide input. Mayor Earling questioned how the Council planned to pay for this when what it will be was not yet known. He understood that a lot of options were available but even if the total cost was $500,000, funds would have to be shifted from somewhere else. There is a list of priorities such as streets, infrastructure and capital project and he saw this as a speculative purchase. Although there was nothing wrong with speculation, there are costs associated with whatever the future project is. He assured this will not just be a $500,000 project; additional work will need to be done including additional costs during the review period. He was also concerned the Council would be handing staff a large project that requires a lot of staff time. He questioned how staff s responsibilities would be shifted to address issues this project brings. Although he is an arts supporter, he is trying to look at this from the City's standpoint. He summarized whatever the project is, it will cost the City substantially more money and staff time regardless of whether it is a park or a parking garage, and whatever goes on the site will require ongoing operational expenses. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. CALL FOR THE QUESTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. UPON ROLL CALL, MAIN MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY- MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS BLOOM, MESAROS AND PETSO VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, JOHNSON AND NELSON VOTING NO. 15. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling had no report. 16. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Bloom provided the following comment (included verbatim at her request): "Based on some responses I got, the biggest news in Edmonds, at least since the opening of T- ball season, was that I left last week's Council session, early. At least, that got attention on a matter that is important for our city. The code of ethics that Council adopted last week is a watered down, tooth -less, ineffective version of the code of ethics, Attachment 16, which was on the agenda. Ms. Fraley-Monillas' version excluded appointive officers (that is, all director -level positions), and contained only general statements from the more substantially defined Shoreline Code of Ethics, which was the model for attachment 16. As anyone knows who's ever been exposed to the legal system, whether the show business version or the real one, you can drive a truck full of weasel -words through general statements. Let me ask a question: Do you believe that the manner in which the code of ethics got adopted last week, managed to break the very code of ethics that was adopted last week? Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 19 Let's see: (1) "Be dedicated to the concepts of effective and democratic government. " The President of our Council, with the aid for the Mayor, squelched all debate regarding the more robust code of ethics, bypassing Attachment 16, which was on the agenda for discussion, and moving forward on Attachment 13, which was not on the agenda for discussion. Next Code of Ethics statement: (2): "Seek to improve the quality ofpublic service, and confidence of citizens. " In conversation on My Edmonds News, residents stated the following: - Bad politics. Attachment 16 should have had a robust discussion - I find the whole code of ethics situation distressing and I have lost faith in this City Council - The stench from something which has been smelling in Edmonds is getting much worse And finally: (3) "Conduct business of the city in a manner which is not only fair in fact but also in appearance. " Do you believe that the Code of Ethics was adopted in a fair manner, in fact, or in appearance? We also have a Code of Conduct, in place, adopted in 2013. Let me ask you if you believe the Code of Conduct was followed? All group leaders (that would include, in this case, both the Mayor and President of the Council) will - Provide all group members (in this case, Council Members) a fair opportunity to participate And all participants, including leaders, will - Respect the individual talents and contributions of others I spent three and a half years attempting to get an effective Code of Ethics in place, culminating in Attachment 16, which Council Member Diane Buckshnis also worked on. It was the only Code of Ethics version on the agenda for discussion, last session, and it was not even given a glance. " Councilmember Mesaros reported last Friday's joint meeting with the Seashore Transportation Forum and City of Seattle Transportation Committee included a robust discussion about transportation issues facing South Snohomish County, North King County and into Seattle. The two groups decided to hold joint meetings twice a year and plan to meet again in November. He envisioned that will be beneficial for discussing issues related to Sound Transit as well as Community Transit traveling south and Metro traveling north. There are tremendous traffic issues on I-5 and the other corridors from South Snohomish County, through North King County and into Seattle and it is good for the municipalities along those routes to discuss them together. Councilmember Petso announced a once in a lifetime opportunity to purchase a heritage brick in front of the Historic Museum as part of their renovation process. Further information is available on their website, HistoricEdmonds.org. The bricks are of significant size and will accommodate up to 3 lines with 18 characters per line. Councilmember Johnson reported the historic Schumacher Building was recently added to the Edmonds Register of Historic Places; a small ceremony was held last week outside the building known as Chanterelles. The Palmer House on Main Street between 8th and 9th Avenues will be dedicated this Thursday. Councilmember Buckshnis clarified although her name was on the code of ethics agenda memo, she did not prepare the agenda memo. The agenda memo states Discussion and Potential Action regarding Draft Code of Ethics, Attachment 16. Review of Options A, B, C and D. Unfortunately Options A, B C and D were included in the May 5 packet but were not included in the June 2 packet. She concurred with Councilmember Bloom that since it was her agenda memo, she should have presented it. Overall it was a process issue with A, B, C, D and not having a complete agenda memo. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 20 With regard to a code of ethics, Councilmember Nelson said the Council now has a code of ethics which is a good thing especially when the Council previously had been able to reach agreement after considering it at least 10 times over multiple years. Love it or hate it, it is a start and it can be amended in the future. Council President Fraley-Monillas relayed her belief that attachment 13 was a starting point and she expected amendments to be made to it which did not occur. Instead Councilmember Bloom chose to leave the meeting because it was not her opinion. Council President Fraley-Monillas suggested working on the code of ethics for over three years and the inability to make a decision or work effectively as a group is a problem with this Council. The adopted code of ethics provides a good basis for future amendments. Council President Fraley-Monillas relayed information from the Snohomish County Law and Justice Commission she attended that Washington state has the highest amount of property crimes of any state in the United States and Snohomish County has highest amount of heroin use and drug dealing of any other place in Washington State. She said those are issues the community needs to work on instead of worrying about things that do not affect all citizens. 17. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) This item was not needed. 18. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN This item was not needed. 19. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:37 p.m. DAVID O. EARLING, MAYOR SCOTT PASSEY, CITY CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 9, 2015 Page 21