Loading...
20190305 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES March 5, 2019 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Michael Nelson, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Jim Lawless, Assistant Police Chief Mike Richardson, Police Sergeant Shane Hope, Development Services Director Kernen Lien, Environmental Program Mgr. Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 511 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 with the exception of Councilmember Johnson. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Teitzel requested Item 4.5 be removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 26, 2019 2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT 3. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES 4. APPROVAL TO PAY FINAL INVOICE OF $1,862.25 TO KONE CONSULTING Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 1 5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT 1. ORDINANCE BANNING SINGLE -USE PLASTIC UTENSILS Ori aivaI1v Itrrrr .5 Councilmember Teitzel said he was remiss last week in not thanking Council Executive Assistant Maureen Judge for her assistance. He referred to the addition of waiver language in Section 5.95.020.D, observing it captures the legislative intent. He referred to the second sentence, "Such waivers or relief shall be granted only for circumstances where commonly used composting technology cannot produce a suitable compostable utensil" noting it was the Council's intent for the applicant to bear the burden of proof and he wanted to ensure that was clear in the language. City Attorney Jeff Taraday said that is how he understood the language; that same language in contained in Chapter 6.90, the single use plastic container ban. For both, it was his understanding of the language as written that the applicant bears the burden of proving that they are entitled to a waiver. Councilmember Teitzel was satisfied with that explanation. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCK, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NO. 4145, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS WASHINGTON, ADOPTING AN IMMEDIATE BAN ON THE USE OF NON-COMPOSTABLE SINGLE -USE PLASTIC UTENSIL BY CITY STAFF AT CITY EVENTS AND ADOPTING A CITY- WIDE BAN ON USE OF NON-COMPOSTABLE SINGLE USE PLASTIC UTENSILS BY FOOD SERVICE BUSINESSES EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2020. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. PRESENTATIONS SOUND TRANSIT PERMIT PARKING PROGRAM Development Services Director Shane Hope introduced Kevin Shively, Sound Transit. Mr. Shively advised the new Reserved Permit Parking Option is scheduled to take effect in April at the Edmonds Sounder station. Sales of single driver parking permits began on Friday, March 1 and issuance of HOV/carpool parking permits has also begun. He reviewed: • Parking Challenge o High Parking Demand Across System: • 21 ST facilities > 95% occupancy (May `18) • Many fill before 7:00 AM o Edmonds (Oct. 2018): • Station Lot: 156 spaces (95% occupied) • Leased Lot: 103 spaces (95% occupied) • Permit Parking Options o Monthly HOV/Carpool Permits • Available at 25 ST and KC Metro facilities • Spaces reserved M -F during AM Rush Hours (midday: open to public first-come/first- serve) • Eligibility: 2+ regular transit riders (ORCA verified) o Single Occupant Vehicle (SOV) Parking Permits ■ Authorized at select high -demand facilities (90%+) in 2018 • Maintain "First-come, First-served" parking option at all stations (Max. 50% permitted) • Applies only to the station parking lot owned and operated by Sound Transit ■ Manage in a manner that is flexible and adaptable to public's demand/interest in permits • Adjust size of permit area up to 50% maximum over time to ensure parking is well used o Market-based pricing and performance-based management ■ $90/month and $30/month for those eligible for low income or reduced transit fare • Rationale: Why offer a paid SOV Permit? o New reserved parking service Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 2 o Provide certainty and reduce stress by ensuring reliable access throughout AM peak o Expand equity and access: Allow people with different schedules to access transit parking o Ensure parking is used by transit riders (ORCA verification) o Efficient Parking: Maximize transit ridership per parking stall o Efficient Transit: Spread transit demand throughout morning rush hour s Permit Parking: Public Outreach o Rider priorities for program design (in order) 1. "Making sure there's always an open space — design programs to manage demand" (score: 4.3) 2. "Encouraging biking, walking, and carpooling... re- invest revenue in bicycle and pedestrian programs.." (score: 3.0) 3. "Making sure users pay a fair share ... pass along the cost of providing and operating parking to the people who are using it regularly..." (score 3.0) • Board Guidance for Permit Parking o Performance Based Management 1. Goals ■ Maximize the number of daily transit riders per parking stall ■ Prioritize availability of parking for riders seeking to access transit throughout AM peak 2. Performance Targets Utilization of permitted parking at <97% (effective capacity) ■ Wait list for HOV or SOV permits <15% of total number of permits issued ■ To date, 28 applications have been received in Edmonds (maximum of 78 permitted spaces in Edmonds) • Permit Eligible Locations ST Parking Facilities Spaces May 2018 Weekda Utilization Issaquah Transit Center 819 100% Mercer Island TC 447 98% Tukwila International Boulevard Station 600 100% Tukwila Sounder Station 390 95% Angle Lake Station 1160 99% Federal Way TC 1190 97% Sumner Station 302 92% Puyallup Station 364 95% Lakewood Station 601 96% Auburn Station 633 100% Mukilteo Station 63 105% Edmonds Station 259 94% North ate P&R* 450 1 n/a — *Opens in Oct. 2018. Eligible for Proposed SOV Permit Program as a new facility serving Link light rail Edmonds Permit Parking o Permit parking begins in Edmonds in April 2019 o Permit sales/issuance began March 1 o Prioritize HOV/carpool parking permits o Discounted rate for ORCA Lift qualified households o Permit enforcement hours (4:00-8:00 AM) o Permit up to 78 parking spaces (depending on demand) ■ Diagram of permit parking in Phases 1 and 2 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 3 • Equity considerations o On average, existing park and ride users have higher incomes than other ST riders o Permits provide new access for people who can't catch the first trains o Discounted permit fees for ORCA-LIFT-eligible riders limit cost -burden o No disparate or disproportionate impacts per Title VI analysis Councilmember Buckshnis commented this didn't go over well with her husband who sometimes takes the train and sometimes takes the bus. She appreciated that only 50% of the spaces would be permit parking initially and asked why 50% of the leased lot spaces would not be permit parking. Mr. Shively answered the choice was made to concentrate on facilities that Sound Transit owns and operates; permit parking in the leased lot could be considered in the future. He clarified riders are eligible to have a permit and park at the station regardless of whether they take a Sounder train or a Community Transit bus. Councilmember Buckshnis asked about charging for parking at Park & Ride lots. Mr. Shively said there is already a charge for parking at the Northgate Park & Ride. Councilmember Teitzel anticipated enforcement will be challenge and asked if there would be a lot attendant to check for permits. Mr. Shively said Republic Parking NW, who manages a number of public and private parking lots throughout the region, is under contract to administer and enforce the permit parking program. They will be in the Mukilteo and Edmonds lots on a regular basis and if not daily, four out of five days a week for 1/2 to 1 hour during the permit enforcement window. Councilmember Teitzel inquired about the hierarchy of enforcement, whether a warning would be given for the first violation, a ticket for the second and towing on the third. Mr. Shively said the agency does not have authority to issue citations or levy fees associated with a parking violation. The agency will issue two warnings (notices) with no financial impact and upon the third violation, the vehicle is subject to tow. Councilmember Teitzel asked if the warning would include information about the availability of adjunct parking at the Methodist church. Mr. Shively said that was a good idea and that could probably be arranged. They intend to market the availability of that parking and have been talking about it with riders at the station platform. Council President Fraley-Monillas recalled there have been skirmishes and lessons learned in that lot with people parking and being towed. She assumed the Methodist church would remain free parking. Mr. Shively said that is the intent. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if there would be a cost to take a bus from the church to the Sounder station. Mr. Shively said they would pay the standard Community Transit fare. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked how much that was, commenting the $90 permit versus the cost to take the bus may be similar. Mr. Shively was not certain of the fare, commenting it was hoped that would be a convenient option for some people traveling in that corridor. They are also working with Community Transit and talking with riders about a vanpool that could be stationed at the church lot so people who park there can share a ride into the station. Council President Fraley-Monillas assumed with a low income fare, it would cost those riders less to take a bus to the Sounder station. Mr. Shively explained Sound Transit has offered a discounted fare for people who quality for ORCA-LIFT, those with a household income up to 200% of the federal poverty level. Community Transit has not offered a discounted fare but it was his understanding Community Transit and Everett Transit will become part of the program this summer and offer a reduced fare. In response to Council President Fraley-Monillas' question, Councilmember Mesaros explained it was his experience using the ORCA card with Sound Transit and King County Metro, riders do not pay for the bus transfer, they pay only one fee. For example, if someone uses their ORCA card to take a Community Transit bus from the Methodist church to the Sounder station, they pay one fare and there is no additional fee when they reach the train. If the rider does not have an ORCA card, they would pay an additional fare. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 4 Councilmember Nelson asked what the $90/month pays for. Mr. Shively answered parking fee revenue is assigned to the Sound Transit general fund. The 2017-2041 financial plan, authorized around the time of ST3, assumes up to $50M in parking revenue over the life of that plan. Revenue up to $50M system wide through 2041 goes to the general fund to cover the cost of administering and operating parking facilities, operating public transit services, and some of the capital program. The financial plan and ST3 direct that revenue above $50M go to the system access fund which is dedicated to improving access to stations including bicycle and pedestrian, local transit connections, new passenger pickup and drop off zones, and other ways to help people arrive at the station and are dedicated to expenditures within the subarea. Councilmember Nelson concluded if revenue did not exceed $50M, the revenue would not be used for those improvements. Mr. Shively agreed, unless the board of directors makes a different decision in the future in their next financial plan. Councilmember Nelson asked if permit parking had already been rolled out in some areas. Mr. Shively said it is being phased in at a variety of the eligible stations. The carpool parking permit has been rolled out at nine stations and the solo driver permit has been rolled out at the Northgate station; Edmonds and Mukilteo are the next two and they intend to implement it at the rest of the eligible station this year. Councilmember Nelson inquired about the impact on communities and neighborhoods of stations where it has been implemented. He was concerned with the impact on neighborhood when people who do not want to pay $90/month and instead park on the street or in neighborhoods. Mr. Shively said in Northgate there have not been any issues. That parking garage was built as part of the Link light rail extension but was opened two years prior to the opening of the light rail line and is serving bus commuters out of Metro's Northgate transit center. That garage is not full at this time and there has not been any spillover onto local streets in that neighborhood. He acknowledged Councilmember Nelson's point about the need to be mindful of spillover parking into the neighborhoods. He anticipated if it was managed well and they intend to be flexible in their approach, there should not be any substantial change in the number of people parking in a facility. They would expect to see people parking at different times of the day; accommodating transit patrons when they want to reach the facility rather than asking them to arrive at the station earlier than they would prefer. Councilmember Nelson asked if there was a mechanism in place if that does not happen. Ms. Hope said the City is also working with Sound Transit on a separate program, $40M for parking and access in Mukilteo and Edmonds. Mr. Shively assured Sound Transit is committed to looking at how its parking lots function on a monthly basis and each parking facility and the program on an annual basis including collecting data regarding on -street and off-street parking in the immediate vicinity. The City is the ultimate authority with regard to on -street parking and has the authority to regulate and manage it to ensure there are no problems for local residents and businesses. 2. CITY ATTORNEY ANNUAL REPORT City Attorney Jeff Taraday described the City Attorney Team: • Jeff Taraday o City Council meetings o Elected official advice o Land use o Litigation o Coordination/special projects o Office hours twice week • Sharon Cates o Labor and Employment o Contracts and ILAs o Bidding and Procurement Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 5 o Disability Board o Office hours once a week • Patricia Taraday o Public Records Act o Code enforcement o Nuisance abatement o Office hours once a week • Tom Brubaker (retired Kent City Attorney) o Council meeting backup o Special Projects ■ Beth Ford o Research o Writing Legal memo o Briefing o Ordinance drafting o Other litigation work • Rosa Fruehlig-Watson o Council meeting back up o Labor and employment support o PRA Support • Mike Bradley o Cable TV Franchises o Telecommunications Law o FCC Proceedings • Angela Tinker (joined 2019) o Research o Writing legal memos Mr. Taraday reviewed: • Types of City Attorney Relationships o Elected o City Employee appointed by Executive (in-house City Attorney) o Contract with law firm pursuant to City Council's contracting authority • In-house vs. contract o Hiring / Firing authority: does this matter? o Intellectual capacity: 8 brains vs. x brains o Cost: Depends on ■ Level of service chosen (x) under each scenario 01 Who bears budget risk ■ Cities within 20 miles with annointed in-house City Attornevs o Edmonds is in WCIA Actuarial Group 4 (actuarial group based on worker hours) o Total annual cost of Edmonds' contracts with Lighthouse ($575,568) and Zachor Thomas ($286,441) equals $862,009. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 6 Number of 2019 Legal Department WCIA City Executive Civil Budget including prosecution Actuarial Type Attorneys (divided in two for biennial Group budget cities Shoreline City Manager 2 $ 812,935 3 Bothell City Manager 2 $ 996,079 4 Kirkland ity Manager 3 $1,244,950 4 Everett Mayor Unclear $4,775,295 N/A o Edmonds is in WCIA Actuarial Group 4 (actuarial group based on worker hours) o Total annual cost of Edmonds' contracts with Lighthouse ($575,568) and Zachor Thomas ($286,441) equals $862,009. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 6 o There may be other costs not included in above cities' budgets Types of City Attorney Contracts o Flat Fee (status quo): all-inclusive within predefined scope; the fee is both a ceiling and a floor ■ Availability and budget are highly predictable ■ Not aware of any other firm in Washington that offers flat fee that includes litigation o Retainer: the fee is a floor, not a ceiling ■ Availability is predictable; budget is less predictable o Hourly: no floor or ceiling ■ Availability and budget are not predictable • Budget Risk o Flat Fee (current arrangement): Lighthouse assumes budget risk o Retainer: City assumes budget risk o Hourly: City assumes budget risk • City Attorney Team Stats January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018 o Lighthouse worked 3,930 hours for Edmonds o Earned flat monthly fee of $46,119.42 ($553,433 annually) for all civil work including litigation o = $141 average effective hourly • Comparing $141 to the hourly rates paid by other cities in 2018 o Maple Valley (Lighthouse): $186-$258 o Lynnwood (Inslee Best): $175-$260 (with most at $190) o Mill Creek (Ogden Murphy): $225-$325 o Tukwila (Kenyon Disend): $155-$320 ■ Hourly rates apply to litigation work ■ Monthly flat fee of $46,436 apply to regular city attorney and prosecution services o Snohomish (Weed Grafstra): $185-$200 o Woodinville (Porter Foster): $200-$275 (with most at $250) ■ October 2018 City Attorney RFP Responses to Lake Stevens o Only two firms responded: ■ Ogden Murphy proposed hourly rates: General Services: $210 to $275 (with most hours at $275) Project/site-specific land use/ real estate legal services: $245 (associate) - $345 (member) ■ Kenyon Disend proposed hourly rates: — $165 to $350 (with most hours at $215) • December 2018 City Attorney Contracts Awarded by Lake Stevens o Ogden Murphy as proposed: ■ General Services: $210 to $275 (with most hours at $275) ■ Project/site-specific land use/ real estate legal services: $245 (associate) - $345 (member) o Weed Grafstra (outgoing City Attorney): ■ All except litigation: $225 / hour ■ Litigation: $245 / hour Mr. Taraday reviewed: • 2018 top ten matters (by hours worked) [last ear's ranking in parentheses]: Ranking Matter Hours 10 Development Services 5) 97 9. Finance R 114 8. Blomenkam 4) 129 7, 1 City Clerk 6 176 6. En ineerin (NR) 230 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 7 5. Joplin GMHB Appeal (NR) 247 4. Police 7 319 3. Human Resources 2 333 2. City Council l 402 1. Ebb Tide (3) 1,430 • 2018's Toi 5 Litigation matters (by hours worked Ran ng Matter Hours 5. Ronald Wastewater 36 4. Shi en (IC / Trespass) 63 3. Blomenkamp (LUPA) 129 2. Jo lin appeal (GMHB) 247 1. Ebb Tide Dec J) 1,430 • Other 2018 Highlights: o Lighthouse led the efforts to renegotiate the police services contract with the Town of Woodway. o Resulted in the hiring of an additional police officer and an increase in revenue to Edmonds from what had been roughly $50,000 per year to roughly $193,000 per year. • Litigation completed by Lighthouse in 2018 and result o Joplin (GMHB) • The Growth Management Hearings Board dismissed all of Joplin's claims • Pending Litigation with Lighthouse o Shippen v. Edmonds • Landslide case. Parties engaged in discovery. o Edmonds v. Ebb Tide ■ Declaratory judgment. City's easement was ruled to be valid on motion for summary judgment. Parties are engaged in further summary judgment briefing to determine scope. Trial set for June 2019 to resolve any ambiguities that cannot be resolved on summary judgment. o Blomenkamp v. Edmonds ■ LUPA and tort claim. Case has been fully briefed before the Div 1 Court of Appeals. No date yet for oral argument. o Barnard v. Edmonds Former firefighter seeking additional pension benefits • WCIA Coverage o Claims arising from alleged: • Employment related action, e.g. retaliation and harassment ■ Police excessive force ■ Land use damage • Auto liability • Defective street or sidewalk ■ Sewer obstruction • Premises liability ■ Other negligence Council President Fraley-Monillas said when this report came out, she asked the Finance Department to provide a list of other attorney fees the City pays. In addition to the prosecutor and public defender, the City pays about $45,000/year for conflict resolution, internal investigations, and labor negotiations. She asked why the City was contracting with other law firms for that work. Mr. Taraday said all the items listed on that spreadsheet that state conflict resolution are instances when the City is paying different public defender firms because the City's main public defender has a conflict of interest and cannot represent a particular defendant. That is not City Attorney work. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 8 Mr. Taraday was not familiar with the employment investigation matter that is listed; however, it is not unusual for cities to engage an independent investigator because if Lighthouse investigated a case, they may be conflicted out of actually litigating the case. Because litigation is the expensive part especially considering that the City has contracted for a flat fee, it would probably not be in the City's best interest to create that conflict by having Lighthouse do the investigation. The only law firm he was aware of that does work that Lighthouse theoretically could do is the Summit Law Group. The City Council has occasionally chosen to hire Summit Law Group to work side-by-side with Lighthouse on tricky labor matters; the total paid to Summit Law Group in 2018 was $17,000. Council President Fraley-Monillas observed there was $20,000 paid for internal investigation, the remainder was conflict resolution. Mr. Taraday reiterated he was not certain what the internal investigation case was but it was not legal work, it was doing an investigation. In other words, no one was seeking legal advice, the law firm was hired to perform an investigation. That type of work is often not done by the City Attorney to avoid the City Attorney becoming conflicted out of the litigation. Council President Fraley-Monillas observed Lighthouse automatically would not do conflict resolution or internal investigation. Mr. Taraday reiterated conflict resolution is not City Attorney work, it is public defender work. With regard to investigation, it was not automatic and Lighthouse could do that work and it is possible that Sharon Cates has done some of that work. However, if Lighthouse does that work, there is a risk that they become conflicted out of future litigation. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if that would be true for any attorney including an in-house attorney. Mr. Taraday said it is very common to not have the City Attorney do employment investigations. That did not mean it could not be done, but it was not the norm in his experience. He offered to follow-up regarding that matter. Councilmember Teitzel referred to the effective average hourly rate of $141, observing that was on the low end compared to other cities. Observing Lighthouse has a unique arrangement with Edmonds, it appears money may be left on the table by charging that amount, recognizing there was some benefit to predictability. There appeared to be an opportunity to change the billing structure to earn more money and he asked if that was a consideration next year. Mr. Taraday answered it is always a consideration. In the same way the City Council wanted to do more due diligence with regard to their contract, Lighthouse probably needs to do more due diligence with regard to their contract with the City. Every time they propose an updated contract, they do the math and try to figure out what risk they are willing to take in exchange for providing the service. He was surprised to see how low the hourly rate was, it is not tracked regularly throughout the year, and that will be something they talk about when their contract is up at the end of 2019. Councilmember Tibbott commented in 2018 there was a case that was unpredictability complex. He asked whether that was an outlier and what predictability Lighthouse has with regard to typical services rendered in Edmonds. Mr. Taraday said there have been very busy litigation years and other years without a great deal of litigation. The effective hourly rate in 2017 was $188, closer to the expected norm. He did not graph the hourly rate for the last eight years but he could do that to give a better picture of what is typical. One benefit of a one-year contract versus a four-year contract is they are not locked into four years. Had the Council accepted their four-year contract, Lighthouse would not have been able to increase their fee in years two, three or four. Now they will have an opportunity to look at that rate and see what, if anything, they want to change for 2020. With a year-to-year contract, Councilmember Tibbott asked if Mr. Taraday could look ahead to the coming year and adjust rates accordingly. Mr. Taraday answered yes and no. For example, at the end of 2017 looking into 2018, they knew the Ebbtide case was coming up and it would be big. He did not contractually have the opportunity to increase their rate as they were locked into a four-year contract. As the end of the year, it is possible to look at pending litigation, which trials are set, where discovery is, etc. and get a ballpark sense of the upcoming year. Councilmember Tibbott observed in that way the City could have Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 9 some level of assurance its legal bills, assuming there was a different arrangement for City Attorney services. Mr. Taraday agreed if the City wanted to have a model other than the flat fee, there could be some sense of how much to budget. However, if the City were sued on January 15"' in a case that was not anticipated, the budgetary projections could be impacted. Councilmember Nelson wanted to ensure the comparison was apples to apples. He observed Edmonds was not Lighthouse's only city client and asked how many others they had. Mr. Taraday answered they have two other clients where they act as City Attorney. Councilmember Nelson asked if the other contracted city attorneys that were used as comparables have multiple clients. Mr. Taraday referred to the comparison of their 2018 hourly rate to hourly rates paid by other cities, noting those are the firms that practice municipal law in Western Washington. All of them represent multiple cities. Councilmember Nelson asked if the hourly rate reflects the availability of the city attorneys. Mr. Taraday answered it depends on the firm. For example, it was his understanding Kenyon Disend uses the same rate sheet for all their cities in a given year. He did not include Black Diamond on the list but it was his understanding they paid the exact same rates as Tukwila in 2018. Ogden Murphy had a merger recently and have municipal attorneys from another firm and they may not use only one rate sheet. With regard to whether the rate reflects availability, he explained availability is primarily a function of to what extent the city is committed to the law firm. If the city is making a significant commitment to the law firm in the form of a retainer or a flat fee, the law firm will ensure they are staffed appropriately to do that work. The other two cities they represent are on a retainer model; they establish a base amount which allows Lighthouse to staff accordingly and ensure they have attorneys available to do that work. For cities who pay an hourly rate with no retainer, availability becomes a factor because the law firm has no idea the amount of work the city will need and theoretically has a difficult time staffing and being truly available to do the work. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled four years ago the City went through this same exercise with regard to in-house versus contract attorney. She asked for a summary of all the cases, recalling Lighthouse inherited a number of cases. She recalled some cases in the past such as Haines Wharf were labor intensive. She also requested a comparison of each year's hourly rate. She recalled some years were very labor intensive related to talking to Councilmembers and while she was Council President, a tremendous amount of time was spent on conflict resolution. Mr. Taraday offered to provide a line graph of the effective hourly rate over time. Councilmember Buckshnis said she and Council President Fraley-Monillas go back nine years when Lighthouse was first hired and there was the lawsuit against former Councilmember Plunkett and her, Mr. Hines, Haines Wharf, etc. She summarized there was a lot of history that a lot of people may not know about. She suggested not going to much above the current rate because Edmonds is Lighthouse's main client. Mr. Taraday assured he was very mindful of that. They have enjoyed working with Edmonds for the last eight years. It has been a pleasure to with the Council, Mayor and Staff and they hope it is a long term relationship for many years to come. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Mayor Earling described the procedures and advised the three minute limit would be enforced. Nora Carlson, Edmonds, advised she will be submitting a citizen action form and a petition to the Engineering Department's traffic calming program recommending the intersection of 96"' Avenue & 224th Street SW be strongly considered for alteration from 2 -way stop to a 4 -way stop or other viable solution to offer a safer crossing for Westgate Elementary students, parents and staff. Many residents also walk with strollers and dogs on 220 Street SW due to the sidewalk from 95th to 96"'. Due to increased traffic on 224", there is a clear need for the change in the intersection to slow vehicles before proceeding toward 9" Avenue. Her neighbors and she have experienced near misses and potential collisions as a result of vehicles traveling too fast on 220 or driving through the stop signs on 96' and it is a matter of time before there is Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 10 a serious accident on these streets potentially injuring someone. She concluded it was vital to address this intersection sooner rather than later to create safer traffic flow. Don Hall, Edmonds, thanked the Council and staff for banning plastic bags and utensils, and Styrofoam, commenting Edmonds was ahead of other cities and was doing right thing. While in Coachella Valley recently, he learned customers cannot get a straw unless they specifically ask for it. He talked to waiters and bartenders who said they have not had any problems with the public. There are more things the City can do, small things that add up and help the environment. For example, while walking on the Edmonds waterfront, he noticed it was very noisy, did not smell nice and there was a lot of stuff in the air from gas powered leaf blowers. It was his understanding electric leaf blowers were as efficient as gas powered, were not as noisy and did not pollute. He suggested the City consider having the Parks and Public Works Departments switch to electric leaf blowers. Eric Mikkelsen, Edmonds, said in 2017 the City Council allocated $250,000 to address homelessness; from that a report was generated to determine community needs and how to spend the remaining $225,000. Some of the findings were "the environmental factors currently impacting homelessness in Edmonds include rising housing costs, stagnant wages and cost -burdened households" and "When homeless people in Snohomish County were asked why they were homeless in 2018 survey, family crisis was the most frequent reason cited." He asked what constitutes a family crisis, commenting examples would be appreciated. Last week's presentation spotlighted the Edmonds Lutheran Church which seems to be a favorite of the City Council. The report included only one sentence about Westgate Chapel's services, "Edmonds Westgate Chapel food bank who offers a food and clothing bank once a week on Thursdays between 11 and 2." Westgate Chapel's efforts along with those of many other Edmonds churches are worthy of more than just one sentence. He called Westgate and learned in 2018 their food bank fed 2,892 households including 7,707 individuals of which 2,712 were seniors which does not include their Thanksgiving outreach which serves over 1400 dinners. He wished more faith -based efforts were acknowledged in the study. Mr. Mikkelsen said the homeless report also states, "Edmonds does not have a homeless crisis." and "Edmonds has 4.3 unemployment rate," (a 5% benchmark is used to signify a healthy labor market), "Edmonds has a higher median income and two-thirds of the residents are homeowners. In general Edmonds homeowners are more cost burdened than Edmonds renters." He wanted to hear more about how the City will provide help for people aging in place. The Alliance for Housing Affordability (AHA) is providing funding of $655,000 in a housing trust to be used by non-profit agencies, public housing authorities and cities or towns within Snohomish to create housing for homeless households. Councilmember Tibbott and Edmonds Lutheran Church's Bill Anderson, a Woodway Councilmember, are both on the board of that organization. He did not want to see AHA and Edmonds give all or a portion of the funding to Compass Housing Alliance for the Edmonds Lutheran Church project because their Housing First model does not require residents to seek treatment thereby leaving the neighborhood in peril. Jenny Nand, Edmonds, spoke about the about homelessness crisis, quoting former Vice President Joe Biden, "Don't tell me what you value, show me your budget and I'll tell you what you value." She found that very striking given the recent cold snap and the response from cities throughout the area, specifically when the South Snohomish emergency shelter had to close due to facility issues during the freezing life- threatening temperatures. She recalled accusations between the cities of Seattle and Federal Way of shipping their homeless off to the other. If homelessness is already being addressed, she questioned why the emergency cold shelter for this area is not able to function when people's lives are threatened. She questioned what message was being sent to the vulnerable and homeless community if their ability to sleep indoors was only valued when they could lose their lives if left outside. She encouraged the City Council to partner with surrounding cities such as Shoreline, Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace to have more contingency plans in place. She attended North City Elementary in 1992 when a homeless man was found frozen to death under a portable where he had gone to shelter himself. As an 8 -year old, she wondered Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 11 where the homeless went when it was freezing and who helped them. She lives near Lake Ballinger; there is a man named Bob who car camps down the street, there are people camping in the Safeway parking lot and she sees tarps where the homeless are trying to find a safe place to sleep and hide from the police. The response to the homeless community cannot always be move along, you're someone else's problem because that is not a good statement of our values. If the City's budget is not a reflection of the values, she asked how are we showing these people we value their lives. Rebecca Anderson, Edmonds, referred to the presentation on the Edmonds Homeless Assessment and thanked the City for taking the time to look more closely at the issue and spending the resources to do so. Although she was not specifically a homeless advocate or a person who provides direct services to people in need of housing, she was a strong supporter of giving regularly to charitable organizations like St. Vincent de Paul. She also believed in general people will pitch in to help each other when they know what the needs are and when those in need are willing if they are able to participate in helping themselves. There will always be some who need more help than others due to mental illness or disabilities. It wasn't clear to her if the assessment included all the faith -based organizations in Edmonds that serve people in need or just a few. Before the City Council makes any considerable financial commitment to addressing the needs of the homeless, she encouraged them to look for existing programs that are working, where people are moving from crisis to stability in a way that is dignified and allows them to eventually move beyond the need for government assistance. Having tangible metrics can lead to finetuning a plan or even cause it to change course. She urged the Council not to use the model that Seattle adopted where the answer seems to simply be to spend more money. She encouraged the Council to look at the program established in Bourbon County, New Jersey where a regional center -based approach was able to help the chronically homeless move from crisis to permanent housing. Pooling resources can enable dollars to go further and minimize overlap. Regarding the consultant's findings that Edmonds is the only city in the region not funding human services directly, she asked if the cities with dedicated staff are seeing measured success in reducing the number of homeless in their communities. Just because a city has dedicated staff does not mean it is time or money well spent if it is not effective. She urged the Council to look for prudent solutions and not rush into hiring staff or building structures simply to copy what nearby cities are doing before developing a solid and reasonable strategy so Edmonds can be the town that gets helping the homeless right. Dave Guber, Edmonds, referred to a Seattle Times article about a study sponsored by the business community in Seattle who is at their wit's end trying to deal with homelessness issues at their front doors. They tracked 100 homeless people who had been responsible for 3,562 criminal cases that were referred to the courts, approximately 35 per homeless person. Seattle and King County have spent a billion dollars and their response is essentially to de -police the homeless crime problem. Before Edmonds jumps into the Seattle model of how to treat homelessness, he urged them to consider the disastrous results Seattle has gotten, anticipating Edmonds would get the same results if the same approach was used. He spoke as someone who was almost homeless at one time following a stroke; he lost his job and all his savings and was in foreclosure but managed to work his way out which he acknowledged was very, very hard. He was not addicted to drugs and hadn't commit any crimes; he worked 60-70 hours week. If people are enabled to become homeless, become drug addicts, and commit crimes without consequences, they will never take responsibility for their actions. He concluded sometimes it is necessary to make a touch choice, to say your situation is your responsibility, it is not the citizens of Edmonds' responsibility and we're not going to subsidize and enrich the homeless industry with $200,000/year to develop a solution that don't solve the problem and just makes it worse. 8. STUDY ITEMS 1. LAND USE PERMIT DECISION-MAKING AND OUASI-JUDICIAL PROCESS Environmental Program Manager Kernen Lien commented this is the fourth time this has been before the Council. He reviewed: Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 12 Overview o September 4, 2018 Introduction o October 2, 2018 Public Hearing o November 20, 2018 Introduction to Process for requesting Council to File an Appeal Tonight o Looking for consensus on Council Role Mr. Lien reviewed the Type III -B Review Process flowchart • Application received o Staff Review ■ 28 -Day Completeness Review ■ Notice of Application and Public Hearing issued — Under new process, Council gets email notice at least two weeks before hearing ■ Staff Report and Agenda Posted/Published — Under new process, Council emailed staff report and agenda seven days before hearing. Begin to understand whether item is controversial and peak Council attention o Hearing Examiner Review ■ Hearing Examiner Public hearing held — Under new process, option for Councilmember participation at public hearing ■ Hearing Examiner Decision Issued 10 days after hearing - Under new process, Council as party of record (POR) receives decision ■ Request for Reconsideration Filed — POR must file request within 10 calendar days (potential code update to 14 -days) — Under new process, Council as POR could request reconsideration or receives request for reconsideration • Hearing Examiner Decision on reconsideration issued — Decision on reconsideration issued 10 business days after request for reconsideration — Under new process, Council as POR receives decision on reconsideration o Council Review Current Closed Record Review Process Potential Council Judicial Appeal Process Appeal filed to POR files appeal to City Council Request for POR makes request for Council judicial City Council within 14 days of decision on Council appeal within 7 days of decision on reconsideration or original Appeal reconsideration (verbally or at City decision if request for Council meeting) reconsideration not filed. Written Optional. Written arguments, Council Council, City Attorney and staff discuss Arguments rebuttals, and surrebuttal 12 Considers merits of decision in executive session. through 2 days before closed Request for Majority of Council decides in open record hearing before City Judicial session whether or not to file a judicial Council Appeal appeal. City Council May occur over a number of Judicial City Attorney prepares and files appeal if Closed Record Council meetings Appeal Council decided to appeal. Must be filed Hearing within 21 days after decision on reconsideration (or original decision if reconsideration not requested. Any party of record may also file a judicial appeal regardless of Council decision. Council Council may affirm, modify or decision reverse Hearing Examiner decision. With agreement from applicant, decision may be remanded. Judicial Applicant or appellant may file Appeal I judicial appeal Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 13 Mr. Lien said the last time this was discussed, he used a phrase that gave the City Attorney pause, that the City Council would appeal on behalf of a citizen. The Council would not actually appeal on behalf of the citizen, the Council would be appealing as the Council's oversight role of implementation of the code that is adopted by the Council. If someone requests an appeal and the Council agrees the Hearing Examiner erred, the Council is appealing on behalf of the City and how the code is being implemented. City Attorney Jeff Taraday agreed with Mr. Lien's explanation, noting public comment illustrated there was some confusion. The proposal does not involve the City Attorney representing individual citizens. If the City Council decides to appeal a Hearing Examiner decision, it's possible the City's interest is aligned with the interest of citizen who may have requested the appeal but that does not mean that the City Attorney is representing that citizen. The citizen may not participate in the appeal at all. Mr. Lien reviewed: • Appeal process o Does the Council wish to main its current rule in quasi-judicial decisions, or continue to pursue the new role as a potential judicial appellant? o Exhibit 2 — Quasi-judicial Process Comparison Table (components of analysis and considerations for Council to act as judge compared to considerations for Council to act as prospective appellant) • Next Steps? o Preparation of Draft Ordinance Council Consideration o Other related code amendments o New chapter 20.06 ECDC o Elimination of ECDC 20.100.040 o Final subdivision process o Other cleanup and clarification related to decision process Councilmember Buckshnis commented since only six Councilmembers are present tonight and this is an ordinance, the chair cannot vote to break a tie. Mr. Taraday agreed the Mayor could not vote because although there is no ordinance tonight, it would be adopted in the form of an ordinance and there would be no point in having the Mayor vote on this when he could not vote on the ordinance. Councilmember Buckshnis said she will continue to hold her position. The presentation does not mention the human element; if there was a 4-3 vote with 3 Councilmembers who are adamantly opposed to an appeal, the appeal is "toast." In land use issues, it is a citizen's right to do what they want with regard to an appeal and the Council should stay out of the process. Councilmember Mesaros pointed out regardless of what the City Council decided to do, under the proposed process judicial appeal process, a citizen would still have the right to bring an appeal themselves. Mr. Lien agreed. Councilmember Mesaros emphasized the Council would not be impinging on a citizens' right to do what they wanted to do; it would be positioning the City Council to be an advocate with them if the Council felt it was in the City's best interest. Councilmember Mesaros asked if any other cities were doing the new process. Mr. Taraday said not identical to this process but there are cities and counties that have appealed their own Hearing Examiner decisions. The City of Kirkland recently had an unsuccessful case and the City of Gig Harbor has done it in the past. Councilmember Mesaros was in favor of the new process. He liked it because it puts the City Council in the position of being an advocate with a citizen, provides an opportunity to communicate with them early Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 14 in the process and an opportunity to interact more with citizens. He concluded it was a good direction to take. Councilmember Teitzel said as an elected official, he felt a duty to constituents to be an advocate. He had a concern with the current quasi-judicial process, recalling last year Councilmember Nelson referenced the term "quasi" as meaning sort of but not really. In that role the Council is sort of a judge but not officially a judge; the Council is acting in that capacity interpreting the code. It was more appropriate for the Council to support citizens by appealing a case that was ruled on improperly and not according to code and advocate for citizens rather than acting as a judge and jury which he did not feel was his role as an elected official. He was not concerned about the personal liability or the liability of the City under the current role, but wanted the best quality decisions for citizens which could be better accomplished by being an advocate rather than a judge. He expressed support for the new process. Councilmember Tibbott asked about Kirkland's appeal and who they appealed to. Mr. Taraday explained Kirkland appealed a Hearing Examiner decision to the Shoreline Hearings Board. Mr. Lien said it was an odd case in that the City of Kirkland was the applicant; the Hearing Examiner denied the application and it was appealed. The city lost at the Shoreline Hearings Board because no one took the opposite position; there was only one appellant and no one arguing against it. Mr. Taraday said to combat against that, there would need to be an entity defending the Hearing Examiner's decision. In many instances that might one of the other parties defending the Hearing Examiner's decision, but there could be situations like Kirkland's where the City would need to appoint another attorney to defend the Hearing Examiner's decision. He anticipated that would be rare because typically in a contested situation, there would be someone on the other side. Councilmember Tibbott inquired about changes in State law. Mr. Lien answered Section 2.100.040 is the review of approved permits. Mr. Taraday said that code section dates back to pre-LUPA times before it was clear that land use decisions were final 21 days after the decision. The existing language in Section 2.100.040 is problematic because it suggests permit approvals can be constantly revisited. That concept is not reconcilable under State law which is the reason for the proposing change. Councilmember Tibbott said the part of the new process that appeals to him is understanding when an applicant brings something to the Hearing Examiner, it is fully vetted and a decision is made. If the applicant chooses to appeal, the Council is alerted and has the discretion to visit the site or obtain new information. Conversely, under the current process, the Council cannot obtain an additional information. He recalled participating in quasi-judicial reviews where the Council is restricted to the evidence that has already been presented. Under the proposed process, the Council would have the opportunity to come alongside an applicant at the Hearing Examiner. Under those circumstances, he asked how the Hearing Examiner would obtain additional testimony from a City Councilmember. Mr. Lien explained after the Hearing Examiner holds the public hearing, the hearing is typically closed. Occasionally the Hearing Examiner will keep the hearing open to allow additional information. Once the public hearing is closed, no additional information may be raised. In the closed record review process, there are some exceptions that allow new information to be introduced such as information that was inadvertently left out. Under the current process, the only way the Hearing Examiner would hear additional information is following the closed record review the Council remanded the process back to the Hearing Examiner with the agreement of the applicant. Councilmember Tibbott asked about new information in the new process. Mr. Lien answered it would be the same under the new process. Once the Hearing Examiner closes the public hearing, that's it for the established record. With the new process, instead of a closed record review process at the City Council and potentially remanding to the Hearing Examiner, the City Council can ask for reconsideration. If the Council was not in a quasi-judicial role, once the Hearing Examiner issues his decision, the Council could request reconsideration within the first ten days. The Hearing Examiner considers the request for reconsideration and issues a decision on reconsideration. No new additional information would be provided to the Hearing Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 15 Examiner and the next step would be an appeal. Councilmember Tibbott clarified no new information would be introduced but the Council could request reconsideration on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Lien explained the way the code is written, whoever requests the Council file an appeal should have also requested reconsideration. The thought process was the applicant has exhausted all their administrative remedies. Councilmember Tibbott asked if the Council would be requesting reconsideration, not the applicant. Mr. Lien said under the new process, the Council is a POR and any POR can request reconsideration and can appeal. Councilmember Tibbott observed after the decision on reconsideration, it would theoretically go to judicial appeal. Mr. Lien agreed, should a majority of Council choose to do that. Council President Fraley-Monillas appreciated hearing Councilmembers, Mr. Lien and Mr. Taraday's opinions. However, she has a different opinion after doing this for nine years and so far there have been no issues with the Council hearing closed record reviews, no more hiccups than with any other process. She said it was nice to hear that Councilmembers want to get involved in citizen land disputes and disputes in general. However, she was more interested in being an advocate for citizens so they have a place to go if they do not agree with the Hearing Examiner's decision. She understood the proposed process, but she disagreed having lived through it and preferred the Council maintain its current role. Councilmember Nelson said the quasi-judicial hearing process exists in the State of Washington at many levels, probably the most well-known is the Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB). The GMHB does extensive rulings in land use planning and is required by law to be comprised of at least three elected city or county officials. Although the City's process may be imperfect and frustrating, there is accountability. The Hearing Examiner is not elected; judges are elected, Councilmembers are elected. It is important that the Council be held accountable for its decisions which the Hearing Examiner is not. Citizens should have the best access possible and the existing process works. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO HAVE THE QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCESS REMAIN INTACT WHICH MEANS NOT APPROVING OR EVEN DISCUSSING THESE CHANGES ANY FURTHER. Councilmember Teitzel raised a point of order. The Council is missing one Councilmember tonight. This is a very important issue to the City and has direct bearing on how the Council supports its constituents. He said the absent Councilmember Johnson deserved a say so there was full Council vote on such an important issue. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO TABLE THE ISSUE UNTIL COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON CAN PARTICIPATE IN PERSON OR BY PHONE. Council President Fraley-Monillas questioned whether a motion to table was appropriate. Mr. Taraday advised it was. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION TIED (3-3) COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, MESAROS, AND TIBBOTT VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS NELSON AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING NO. Mr. Taraday advised this was a procedural vote so the Mayor could vote to break a tie. MAYOR EARLING VOTED YES, AND THE MOTION CARRIED (4-3). Council President Fraley-Monillas said she will schedule this on an agenda when the seventh Councilmember is available and has been briefed and updated. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 16 Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, asking whether the vote on a motion to table required a supermajority. Mr. Taraday said a motion to table does not require a super majority vote. The Mayor can vote to break a tie on any non -ordinance and any resolution that not involve the payment of money. A vote on a procedural matter is an appropriate use of the Mayor's tie -breaking power. Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. 2. PSRC VISION 2050 PLANNING PROCESS Development Services Director Shane Hope Snohomish, King and Pierce Counties part of PSRC. • Vision 2040 --> Vision 2050 o A strong economy and a healthy environment o Preserve waters, farms, recreation and resource lands o Urban Growth Area and centers strategy o Local actions to achieve regional VISION • 2050 Population Forecast o The long-range forecast is for continued growth ■ The region is projected to grow by about 1.8 million people between 2017 and 2050 ■ The region is projected to add about 1.2 million jobs between 2017 and 2050 ■ Who will be living here? o In 2050, the region's residents will be: ■ Older - 18% of the region's population will be over the age of 65 by 2050, up from 14% today ■ More diverse - Between 2000 and 2016, 81% of the region's population growth was people of color ■ In smaller households - In 2050 there will be 2.36 people per household on average, down from 2.50 today ■ SEPA Environmental Review o Environmental Process Vision 2050 SEPA Process ■ Final EIS issued for Vision 2040 - Spring 2008 ■ Scoping for Supplemental EIS - Spring 2018 • Process to select alternatives - Fall 2018 ■ Issue Draft SEIS, comment period - March 2019 ■ Select preferred alternative - Spring 2019 ■ Issue draft VISION 2050 Plan - Summer 2019 ■ Issue Final SEIS, adopt VISION 2050 - Spring 2050 • Scoping: What PSRC Heard o Housing supply and affordability top concerns o Growth strategy should be achievable and reflect known trends o Address climate, access to jobs, equity, and health o Revisit the role of urban unincorporated areas o Perspectives on implementation ■ Need accountability and incentives to implement ■ Strategy should provide local flexibility • Growth Alternatives o Stay the Course Compact growth focused in Metropolitan and Core cities with regional growth centers - Maintains current adopted strategy - Largest shares of growth to Metropolitan cities of Seattle, Bellevue, Everett, Bremerton and Tacoma Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 17 - Directs more growth to cities and less growth in urban unincorporated and rural areas o Transit Focused Growth ■ Accelerated growth near existing and planned high capacity transit (HCT) investments - Goal for 75% of the region's growth to occur near high capacity transit - Less growth in rural and unincorporated areas without high capacity transit - Uses 2017 OFM population distribution, +5% shift of employment to Pierce, Snohomish and Kitsap counties o Reset Urban Growth ■ More distributed growth throughout the urban growth area - Goal for 75% of the region's growth to occur near high capacity transit - Less growth in rural and unincorporated areas without high capacity transit - Uses 2017 OFM population distribution, +5% shift of employment to Pierce, Snohomish and Kitsap counties o Common to all alternatives ■ Average drive times and distances will be less, but time spent stuck in traffic will increase ■ Transit ridership more than doubles ■ Air quality will improve and greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced ■ All require about 830,000 new housing units It Redevelopment will increase the threat of displacement, which will require mitigation to be avoided Environmental Impacts Equity Analysis o Equity Analysis to accompany release of DSEIS o Measures impact on concentrated low income and minority communities o Displacement risk analysis and updated Opportunity Mapping VISION 2050 Policies o Key themes: ■ Compact, walkable places ■ Leverage our transportation investments at Promote affordable housing in all development ■ Preserve open space and farmlands ■ Social equity & displacement ■ Four -Part Strategy to address climate change How to Comment o Draft SEIS Review: Feb 28 -April 29 Open houses: - March 12 from 4 - 6 p.m. at Edmonds City Hall Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 18 Stay the Course Transit Focus Reset Urban (plan extended Growth Growth Vehicle Delay 31 hours 29 hours (decrease) 32 hours (increase) Job access by biking, Substantial increase Increase Decrease walking or transit Greenhouse gas 41,000 tons/day CO2 39,600 tons per day 41,400 tons per day emissions equivalent CO2 equivalent CO2 equivalent (decrease) increase Moderate density 15% moderate- 19% moderate 13% moderate housing density density (increase) density (decrease) (moderate=townhome, 46% high density triplex, low-rise MF 39% low density Displacement risk Elevated risk Increase Decrease Jobs -housing balance Improved balance Increase Increase Equity Analysis o Equity Analysis to accompany release of DSEIS o Measures impact on concentrated low income and minority communities o Displacement risk analysis and updated Opportunity Mapping VISION 2050 Policies o Key themes: ■ Compact, walkable places ■ Leverage our transportation investments at Promote affordable housing in all development ■ Preserve open space and farmlands ■ Social equity & displacement ■ Four -Part Strategy to address climate change How to Comment o Draft SEIS Review: Feb 28 -April 29 Open houses: - March 12 from 4 - 6 p.m. at Edmonds City Hall Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 18 — March 13 from 4 — 6 p.m. at South Tacoma Public Library — March 18 from 4 — 6 p.m. at Bothell Police Community Room — March 19 from 4 — 6 p.m. at Bremerton City Council Chambers — March 21 from 12 — 2 p.m. at PSRC ■ More info at: www.psrc.org/vision Councilmember Teitzel commented there are a lot of countervailing forces; the environment, managing growth, the housing supply, not displacing those at risk of losing their housing, etc. The environmental impacts slide shows the displacement risk decreasing under the Reset Urban Growth strategy which suggests that strategy would be favorable with regard to addressing homelessness and creating more affordable housing options. Ms. Hope agreed. Councilmember Teitzel commented that was a good thing related to that strategy but it was bad for carbon emissions, cutting down trees, etc. Ms. Hope answered it depends on how and where it goes. For example, assuming the 1.8M population is accurate, if population growth occurs in areas that are already developed, it has less impact than in farmlands. The idea is to reduce what otherwise would be the impact of additional growth if it is done carefully. Councilmember Teitzel noted the GMA has been a hot topic in Edmonds with regard to developing a housing strategy. He asked Ms. Hope to explain the GMA and how it relates to VISION 2050. Ms. Hope explained the GMA was adopted in 1990 and has been revised every year. The GMA operates at a broader perspective, it generally does not go into detail about what each city should do. It establishes goals, specific things cities and counties must do with regard to protecting environmentally critical areas and adopting critical area regulations, adopting conservation strategies if there have agricultural and/or forest lands, adopting Comprehensive Plans and addressing certain things in their Comprehensive Plans, but the GMA does not say exactly what needs to be done and recognizes huge flexibility across the State. The GMA requires cities to review and update their Comprehensive Plan every eight years, consider population needs to reflect growth projected for the area, but does not say which city must adopt which population. That is done via guidance from PSRC in establishing projections for each city. The next level is the countywide process that takes projections from OFM, does reality checks with buildable lands analysis, etc. to identify the likely growth which provides a target to plan for. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled Snohomish County Tomorrow 2040 visioning done in 2010. The GMA is more than adding people to the city; Edmonds has always met its growth targets. She liked that VISION 2050 policies that include social equity and a four-part strategy to address climate change. She concluded there was more to growth management than adding population. Ms. Hope agreed population was only one small piece. Councilmember Tibbott observed Transit Focused Growth is superseding the Stay the Course growth and with the adoption of transportation strategies since VISION 2040 was developed, there are plans for more transit oriented development. Ms. Hope agreed that was likely. Councilmember Tibbott said with that in mind, he studied population trends in Edmonds over the last 10-20 years, and found the growth has been ''/2-1%/year. Ms. Hope said since 2011 the population of Edmonds has increased by slightly more than 2,000. Councilmember Tibbott recognized that was not a super amount of growth and could be accommodated with infill. If a lot of growth occurred in transit corridors such as Link light rail lines, it was likely to impact Shoreline, Mountlake Terrace, Lynnwood more than Edmonds. He asked what impact Edmonds could expected to see relative to VISION 2050 with Transit Focused Growth and 50% population growth in 30 years. Ms. Hope did not envision Edmonds would be strongly effected by either Stay the Course or Transit Focused Growth but she anticipated a little more growth on Hwy 99 where there is BRT. Councilmember Tibbott guessed most of the 1.8M population growth would occur in cities with greater access to transit. Ms. Hope agreed, commenting the current experience has been the most growth has been in Seattle. The next shares of growth have been to other larger cities that have focused transit such as Lynnwood and Auburn, but the biggest share is likely to continue to be in Seattle. That is not required but Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 19 numerically a percentage in Seattle would be a large amount in Edmonds. She expected Edmonds to see some growth as has occurred in the past. Councilmember Tibbott said studies show large percentages of growth in the 1940-50, post WWII, and in 1950-60 when the freeway system was built. Since then growth has plateaued and in has been '/z-1% in recent years. Ms. Hope agreed, advising the projections to 2035 would be 300-350 people/year on average and a similar trend until 2050. 3. COUNCIL DISCUSSION OF HOMELESSNESS ASSESSMENT In response to the comments made tonight, Council President Fraley-Monillas said the touch by Kone Consulting was not meant to be all inclusive, a survey of what all the churches are doing, etc. The consultant touched 50 people, agencies and groups to provide a baseline of where Edmonds is as a city. No one on the Council has any interest in making Edmonds like Seattle and experiencing the pitfalls that Seattle has. There is now more work to do; the first step is public outreach to find out what Edmonds citizens are interested in doing, engagement and education. She recommended using Kone Consulting because they are familiar with the City. She read Kone Consulting's recommendations, "The most common thing that emerged from over 50 interviews KC conducted is there is a misperception of who is homeless in Edmonds. Oftentimes perspectives on homelessness are limited to who can be seen in public or urban spaces when the more common experience of someone who is homeless in Edmonds is someone who may be working but not earning high enough wages to keep up with increasing housing costs." Council President Fraley-Monillas commented there are also people in jeopardy of losing their homes and consideration should be given to what can be done to keep them from becoming homeless. Homelessness is a facet of the report but the report is multifaceted. One of the strategies may be how to keep people from becoming homeless. Until the Council determines the community's interest, she was reluctant to take any other steps. Council President Fraley-Monillas said the second step is considering the issues that are listed in the report which range from coordinating the 39 churches and places of worship, to working with Verdant, police and fire, writing grants for funding, talking with senior services, food banks, etc. As some citizens mentioned, this needs to be a south Snohomish County/north King County response, not just Edmonds. The populations that are being served are transient, and although many are from Edmonds, they move through Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace and Shoreline. She suggested the Council focus on the next step — community outreach and education. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested doing another RFQ or an amendment to the existing Kone contract. In addition to public outreach, she was interested in specific examples of what has been done and how successful it has been and researching what other areas have done and funds they have allocated. She suggested Kone provide recommendations based on what they know and what think can be done. Councilmember Mesaros said this effort is on a good track and there is more to be discovered. He liked the idea of education, commenting it would be nice if everyone operated with the same definitions about homelessness and come to a basic understanding of the facts in order to make decisions. He was taken aback by tonight's public comment and the assumption the City is already going down the path that Seattle has taken. He assured Edmonds was a long way from any path and was still trying to understand the needs and how to respond to them. He was concerned the City did not have enough information and recommended doing a comprehensive assessment of what the faith -based community is doing. Councilmember Teitzel echoed the comments regarding next steps. He agreed with one of the key recommendations in the report, "The City should increase collaborative efforts with providers, neighboring cities and Snohomish County." The report also states, "Another example of regional collaboration to Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 20 address homelessness is the South King Housing and Homelessness Partnership (SKHHP). SKHHP was started in 2015 to bring together a network of South King County stakeholders on issues related to affordable housing and homelessness. SKHHP works with cities, non -profits, developers, faith communities, businesses, civic clubs and others." He recommended Edmonds work with neighboring cities, faith communities, Verdant and others. He suggested Council President Fraley-Monillas invite a representative from SKHHP to speak to the Council in the near future to learn how they pooled resources and to learn from their successes. Councilmember Tibbott concurred with other Councilmembers. He questioned the findings that Edmonds was spending zero on human services, noting Edmonds has an ILA with Lynnwood for a shared social worker, citizens contribute tax dollars to Verdant, the Police Department offers assistance when possible, etc. It was his understanding that although the cold weather shelter at the senior center was closed this year, there was south county center that was open and staffed that provides cots and warm meals. He was concerned with the impression that Edmonds was not involved in providing for people left out in the cold. It was his understanding the Police provide transportation to a shelter when they find someone out in the cold and wanted that information to be part of the public record. He was supportive of an RFQ or additional study by Kone to help identify available resources. Council President Fraley-Monillas explained there is some confusion about Edmonds' embedded social worker. In Lynnwood, the social worker rides with the Police Department and encounters frequent flyers and builds rapport. In Edmonds, the social worker does not go out with the Police Department looking for people, the Police Department sends referrals to her. The majority of referrals have been regarding in-home situations the Police Department has encountered. With regard to engaging citizens throughout the City, she emphasized the need to gather their ideas, what they think the need is and what they think will be beneficial. That engagement will be an important step in learning what citizens are interested in doing, to educate them and to found out where they want to go with this effort. If Councilmembers were interested, she will draft an RFP for Kone and discuss the cost and scope of work with them and bring it back to the Council. Councilmember Mesaros suggested Council President Fraley-Monillas utilize the same subcommittee (Councilmembers Nelson and Teitzel and Council President Fraley-Monillas ) to develop an RFP and bring it back to Council for approval. Mayor Earling asked ACOP Lawless to comment on the approach used by the social worker in Edmonds. ACOP Lawless said there is a difference between Lynnwood and Edmonds on a myriad levels including the clientele they engage, how they come across that clientele, etc. The relationship with Lynnwood is two- thirds/one third; Lynnwood has a much more robust program in their Police Department because they have a larger problem in some areas with a certain type of homelessness. The report addresses various types of homelessness; those that are on the margins of being homeless, the sheltered homeless, and homeless living in encampments. The Edmonds Police Department does encounter individuals living in encampments but not to the degree they are encountered in Lynnwood. ACOP Lawless agreed the social worker rides more frequently with Lynnwood officers but does also ride with Edmonds officers; her efforts are not all reactionary. He described some of her bigger successes as far as getting people placed that are truly homeless; she worked with an individual was living off Hwy 99 near the SRI 04 interchange for several months to build a rapport so the person was no longer service resistant. That individual ended up going to eastern Washington and is doing well. She also placed an individual via a $75,000 grant in a yearlong treatment program in Hawaii. Social Worker Ashley Dawson said the majority of her contacts as a police social worker are people who are law enforcement involved; she does not know all the homeless people in the area especially since there are so many service providers and churches who meet their needs. A lot of her referrals from the Edmonds Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 21 Police Department are people she is already working with in Lynnwood because it is a population that does not recognize city boundaries. Many of the referrals are people who are on their way to jail or she is meeting with in the jail so a slightly different population than are referenced in the report. A law enforcement social worker could not be the only person to serve the population in need in the area. ACOP Lawless said the Edmonds Police Department has been working with Verdant, Lynnwood Police Department, and Swedish on a program similar to Everett and Snohomish County's CHART program to identify high utilizers that are touched by the Police Department, the emergency room at Swedish and Fire Department emergency medical personnel in an effort to better serve them and coordinate resources. Councilmember Tibbott understood from the report that there were some people who are precariously housed such as living in a camper or van and parking in neighborhoods. He noted a member of the audience represents a church with a campground on their property. He asked how the Police Department became aware of people who are precariously housed and how did they interact with them. Ms. Dawson said when someone calls the Police Department to report a vehicle continually parked in an area or parking enforcement gets involved, she develops a relationship with them. It begins with rapport building and understanding what caused their situation, what types of financial resources and/or family they have, and exploring options. It is difficult to find somewhere to park an older RV so oftentimes getting rid of the RV is necessary to lead to a better housing option. There is a housing waiting list of over 8,000 people in Snohomish County so it is very difficult to find housing. She acknowledged there is rarely an immediate change. Councilmember Tibbott asked if she would become aware of a person living in a camper because they were in the criminal system or did she become aware of them before they broke the law. Ms. Dawson said a person is usually given a warning. If the Police Department is working with them, there may be some leniency but there are policies related to how long a vehicle can be parked because homeowners also have rights. They also work with parking enforcement when necessary. Councilmember Tibbott concluded the Police Department works with them even if they are not breaking the law. Ms. Dawson answered yes, if they are interested in services. Councilmember Teitzel asked if Ms. Dawson agreed there was a lack of good coordination between service providers. Ms. Dawson answered the challenge is churches, non -profits, government agencies, etc. each have a different mission that they choose or hope to serve so it can be challenging to coordinate those. This area is lucky to have a community that cares and wants to take care of people in need. She summarized the challenge is that organizations operate in silos, each doing what they feel is best in the moment, sometimes driven by funding. Councilmember Teitzel said if the Council agrees to do another study, it will be six months before the results are available, and people in the community are hurting now. He preferred to move forward instead of waiting for the study results. It is clear there needs to be more collaboration with neighboring cities, Verdant, YWCA, and other providers such as has been done by SKHHP and he recommended that be done in parallel with the study. Council President Fraley-Monillas pointed out faith -based organization are only working according to their congregation; if the congregation changes their philosophy, view or position, their efforts could be lost. That is one of the differences between a faith -based and non-profit/profit organization. She reminded it is not illegal to be homeless in Edmonds or anywhere in the State of Washington. It is not a crime if a person does not have anywhere to live. COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 10:05 P.M. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 22 9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling reminded of the State of the City presentation on Thursday at the Edmonds Theater at 8:30 a.m. 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Mesaros said it was with mixed emotions that he announces he will not be seeking reelection in November. By the end of 2019, he will have served nearly 6 years on the City Council. He found most of the experiences very worthwhile. As with all aspects of life, some days were more fun than others. On the whole, serving the City in this capacity will be a favorable memory. Being on City Council is a chance to represent not just one perspective but to balance the multiple perspectives that citizens have to grow and flourish as a City. He hoped the coming elections will attract many qualified candidates with a desire to serve, listen, learn, grow and develop more understanding of the issues and opportunities facing the City. He was honored to have been first appointed to the City Council and then reelected to a full term and he has sought to serve the City to the best of his ability. He thanked those who have offered advice and counsel to him over the past 5+ years, especially his wife Margaret who has been patient and supportive during his time of service as well as the constant discussions about City politics during numerous social events. They look forward to more freedom to travel and opportunities to experience the wider world. Council President Fraley-Monillas thanked Councilmember Mesaros for his service on the City Council for last several years. Councilmember Tibbott thanked Councilmember Mesaros for the example he set, the integrity offered by his leadership, the many insights he provided and the great memories. Councilmember Teitzel echoed the comments regarding Councilmember Mesaros, expressing his appreciation for the opportunity to serve with him and he looked forward to serving the remainder of the year with him. Mayor Earling said he has some of same feelings Councilmember Mesaros mentioned but they are both in office for 10 more months. 11. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 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. 13. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:04 p.m. DAO. EARLING, MAYOR -.132d . . Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 5, 2019 Page 23