20160126 City Council
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
January 26, 2016
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Dave Earling, Mayor
Kristiana Johnson, Council President
Michael Nelson, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
STAFF PRESENT
Jim Lawless, Assistant Police Chief
T. Dreyer, Police Officer
J. Burrell, Police Officer
D. Borst, Police Officer
Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir.
Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir.
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Scott James, Finance Director
Rob English, City Engineer
Kernen Lien, Senior Planner
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
1. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER WITH ONE
EXCEPTION, MOVING ITEM 5K, RESOLUTION DESIGNATING AGENT AND ALTERNATE
AGENT TO APPLY FOR DISASTER ASSISTANCE FUNDS, TO FOLLOW ITEM 5A. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
The agenda items approved are as follows:
A. APPROVAL OF DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 19, 2016
B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #218193 THROUGH #218224 AND REISSUED
CHECK #218225 DATED JANUARY 20, 2016 FOR $383,596.38 AND CHECKS #218226
THROUGH #218273 DATED JANUARY 21, 2016 FOR $177,972.16. APPROVAL OF
PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT AND CHECKS #62038 THROUGH #6204 7 AND CHECKS
#62053 THROUGH #62054 FOR $499,044.96, BENEFIT CHECKS #62048 THROUGH
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 2
#62052 AND WIRE PAYMENTS OF $539,764.98 FOR THE PAY PERIOD JANUARY 1,
2016 THROUGH JANUARY 15, 2016
C. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM TRACY JAY
($1,285.55)
D. CONSIDERATION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ON PROPOSED UPDATE TO ECC 8.50
RELATING TO PARKING ON PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
E. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE TO AMEND REGULATIONS FOR PARKING AND
MOTOR VEHICLE REPAIR IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES
4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
John Reed, Edmonds, speaking on behalf of Allice of Citizens for Edmonds (ACE), relayed their
concern about the discussion and possible outcome of the amendments related to reconsideration of the
Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO), specifically Chapter 19.00.025 International Building Code, adding item
16.12.4.1 lowest flood elevation and Chapter 21.40.030.d height exceptions Item 1. He requested Council
consideration of the following suggested revisions and concerns:
1. Height limit on properties located within the coastal high hazard areas and coastal A flood zones
should continue to be bound by the existing height limits of either 30 feet or 35 feet for Harbor
Square, as measured using the existing four corners methodology.
2. Whatever footage is established for the ground floor distance above base flood elevation as
identified from the applicable FEMA Flood Hazard Map currently stated to be two feet in the
proposed amendments should be included, not in addition to, total building height controlled by
existing methodology.
Action taken at December 15, 2015 Council meeting deleting the height exception 21.40.030 effectively
accomplishes the combined effect of the first 2 recommendations; however, they are concerned the 2 feet
included in the amendments may not be adequate based on observation of the combined effects of high
tides and winds seen during king tides which approached the intermediate 2-foot rise anticipated in the
next 100 years. This concern is apparently shared by the senior center planners who they understand are
planning to allow three feet for the first floor and voluntarily forfeiting one foot of building height. They
are also aware that the Corp of Engineers Corp provided guidance in 2015 to Seattle that in 2090, the end
of the senior center’s design life, the intermediate and high sea level rise might range from 1.6 feet to 3.9
feet. The City should evaluate how using the estimate of two feet in the amendments in light of the Corp
of Engineer’s guidance might affect the level of liability it is exposed to if sea level rise exceeds two feet
and significant property damage and loss of life occurs as a result. He summarized the changes and
concerns and the associated potential risks and liabilities should be carefully and completely considered
before finalizing the IBC and height exception amendments. Existing building heights and view
protection should not be changed in as sensitive an area as the waterfront simply to accommodate the
potential hazards to the ground floor of the area in which the building is located.
Roger Tucker, Environmental Works, architect for the senior/community center project, presented
several slides to illustrate building consideration related to floodplain and sea level rise considerations at
the senior center city as well as other potential new buildings along the waterfront. He displayed:
1. Drawing illustrating base case; height limit measured from average existing grade which allows a
2-story building with 11 foot ceilings on the first floor and 10 foot ceilings on the second floor,
allowing for mechanical space and structural space in between, noting 11 feet is shy for
multipurpose room in a public building.
2. Same building, first floor elevation brought up 2 feet above the flood plain elevation which is 14
feet on the senior center site. He identified area at the top of the building that would be out of
conformance, which would require ceiling heights be reduced to 10 feet and 9 feet which is
minimal for a large multipurpose room.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 3
3. Same building, measuring height limit 2 feet above floodplain and 30 foot building, exp laining it
is virtually the same diagram as Slide 1 where the building is conforming, ceiling heights are
adequate.
4. Specific to senior center site, based on sea level rise consultant’s recommendation to set the
finished floor at 15 feet versus 14 feet. Even with that proposed amendment, some reductions in
ceiling height will be required.
5. Photograph of the king tide elevation
Farrell Fleming, Executive Director, Edmonds Senior Center, advised his remarks reflect the input of
Phil Lovell, volunteer technical advisor for the project. When considering the CAO, he encouraged the
Council to be guided by the latest Comprehensive Plan and the 2004 Best Available Science (BAS)
Report. He referenced a section in the Comprehensive Plan regarding sustainability and implementation,
Keep in mind a number of important principles when linking sustainability, plans and its implementation.
1) integrate: seek to expand problem solving and solutions beyond traditional or institutional boundaries,
2) innovate: go beyond conventional approaches, be experimental, 3) be adaptive, be flexible. Rigid rules
will not always work or result in the most effective solution, and 4) be a leader. He quoted from the 2004
BAS Report, “Consider the following when designing and classifying frequently flooded areas: 1) effect
of flooding on human health and safety and on public facilities and services, 2) available documentation
including federal, state and the like, and 3) potential effective high tides with strong winds, sea level rise
resulting from global climate change.” With regard to the new community center, the facilities will be
sustainable in all technical aspects to the benefit of current and future generations. It will be built and
maintained well beyond the normal 50 year life expectancy of a building like other heavily utilized City
building such as Frances Anderson Center, Edmonds Center for the Arts, and City Hall.
The original draft CAO recommended accommodation of anticipated applicable federal guidelines, the
FEMA FIRM map and provides that any new building in the zone should be elevated a minimum of 2 feet
above the revised 100 year floodplain. Thus the first floor elevation of the new senior center would either
be 14.0 or 15.0 whichever FEMA zone is adopted and applied by the City based on floodplain at 12 or 13.
A November 25 report by a member of their design team, Jeff Parson, a geomorphologist with Herrera
Environment, recommends the first floor elevation of the new community center be at elevation 15 in
recognition of potential sea level hazards associated with high tides, strong winds and resulting storm
surge. A 30-foot building is optimal for a public facility such as this because, 1) program uses,
particularly the first floor ballroom and the second floor exercise rooms, dictate higher ceilings to
accommodate large, active gatherings, 2) the free-span of the second floor over the large open first floor
ballroom requires significant structural steel, deep girders and end beams with no internal columns, and 3)
roof structure needs to be sloped higher to the west and lower to the street to provide adequate runoff of
rainwater. He, Mr. Tucker and Mr. Lovell are present to answer questions.
Joe Scordino, Edmonds, suggested the Council consider returning the CAO to the Planning Board so
that a full public process can convene and consider not only the Council amendments but all the changes
so that the implications of each can thoroughly reviewed and the public can understand what all the
changes mean. Concerns arise with each iteration with regard to the implications of the changes. He noted
there are now inconsistencies in the document where changes have been in one place and not in others.
He summarized it would be helpful for the Council and the public to have the COA reviewed in a
Planning Board format to allow the public and the Planning Board to engage. There are too many details
and implications for the Council to take action quickly.
5. STUDY ITEMS
A. DIVERSITY COMMISSION 2016 WORK PLAN
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 4
Economic Development & Community Services Director Patrick Doherty provided background on the
Diversity Commission:
April 2015 – Diversity Commission Ordinance passed by City Council
October 27, 2015 Mayor and City Council appointed total of 9 members:
o George Basioli
o Tung Bui
o Gayle Ketzel
o Maria Montalvo
o Denise White
o Mario Brown, Chair
o Ed Dorame, Vice Chair
o Adam Khan
o Patricia Valle
Michele Rastovich was engaged as professional contracted staff to the Diversity Commission
Commission met four times since appointment
Regular meetings were established as first Wednesday of each month 6:30-7pm in Council
Chambers (unless unavailable)
Michele Rastovich reviewed accomplishments to date:
Commissioners met three times between the appointment in October 2015 and end of 2015, and
once in January 2016, focused on developing the structure that will be crucial to the success of
the work of the DC including:
o Creating internal operating principles
o Electing a chair and vice chair
o Establishing regular meetings
o Visioning successful work by the Commission by November 2020
o Drafting a preliminary work plan for 2016
Ms. Rastovich reviewed the 2016 Work Plan:
Mission Statement
o Promote and embrace diversity through action, education, and guidance; foster an
understanding that includes, accepts, respects and appreciates each individual member of our
community by:
o Providing information, education, and communication that facilitates understanding of
diversity and to celebrate and respect individual differences;
o Recommending to the Mayor and City Council opportunities to promote diversity programs,
and providing guidance to ensure an accessible, safe, welcoming and inclusive government
and community; and
o Supporting, challenging, and guiding government and the community to eliminate and
prevent all forms of discrimination.
Vice Chair Ed Dorame thanked Mr. Doherty, Ms. Rastovich, and Ms. Cruz for their assistance with the
Commission and Mayor Earling and Council for their selections to Commission. It is a very diverse group
that will serve the community well. The Commission includes individuals from various ethnic, race, age,
gender identity, physical ability, religious beliefs, and socioeconomic backgrounds. He introduced
Commissioners Tung Bui and Pat Valle in the audience. He shared a definition of diversity that Ms.
Rastovich provided at one of their meetings: “Diversity is recognition of individual differences. These
differences can be along the dimensions of race, ethnicity, age, gender, gender identity, gender
expression, sexual orientation, physical abilities, nationality, language, religious beliefs and
socioeconomic background.” Having a good understanding of what diversity means will help them work
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 5
toward their goal of Edmonds being perceived as safe and welcoming with an inclusive government and
community for everyone.
Vice Chair Dorame reviewed the 2016 Work Plan:
2016 objectives.
o Issues associated with an increasingly diverse community are complex and interrelated. In
2016, the Diversity Commission will focus on increasing our understanding of these issues
and of the most pressing challenges currently facing our community. In order to develop
long-term strategies, with measurable outcomes, and to fulfill the mission of the Commission,
we will first concentrate on building relationships, actively engaging and reaching out to the
community and broadening our own perspectives. We will document our learnings with a
report to Council by January 2017.
Goal 1: Increase the capacity of Commissioners
o To ensure that we are well prepared to serve the Council and the community, Commissioners
will:
Participate in listening forums, or learning opportunities, to develop a common
understanding of issues related to diversity.
Develop a common understanding of typically used phrases and words like diversity,
culture, accessibility, privilege, and inclusion.
Increase our awareness of best practices that support diverse communities.
Examine current community demographics.
Assess community services for underrepresented populations.
Identify public policies, both formal and informal, that support diverse communities or
create barriers
Goal 2: Strive to develop a common community understanding of diversity and related issues
o In order to develop a community understanding of local issues associated with diversity,
including our challenges and our assets, the Commission will engage and involve the
community in the following ways:
Coordinate a minimum of four learning opportunities for the Commission, the community,
and local leaders to hear from each other regarding current challenges, barriers and existing
efforts. These opportunities may include community forums, guest speakers to the regularly
scheduled Commission meetings, or facilitated small group dialogues.
Develop a community survey, and/or work with existing survey efforts to include diversity
questions.
Consider key leader interviews
Goal 3: Create a public presence for the work of the Commission
o To further engage the community in the work of the Commission, the Commission will:
Establish a subcommittee to determine how to best utilize the City website, local media
and social media.
Outreach to underrepresented groups, local business, service clubs, public institutions and
the faith community.
Build partnerships with existing efforts.
Enhance relationships with public leaders and with community leaders.
Consider how to create an ‘eye-popping’ event
Budget
o The budget approved by City Council will be utilized as follows:
$6,000 for contracted staff support for Commission
$3,000 community engagement, outreach and educational activities to be determined
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 6
Vice Chair Dorame acknowledged there had been two very unsettling incidences occur in the community
in recent months. Through outreach, education and guidance, the Diversity Commission hopes to do its
part to make Edmonds a safe, welcoming and inclusive community for everyone.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said bravo to the Commission’s efforts, noting it is well thought out and
their community outreach project is fabulous. She envisioned they would be able to reach out to residents
who are not in the inner circle of Edmonds. She is the Diversity Commission’s Council liaison and will be
attending their meetings.
Councilmember Tibbott complimented the team and looked forward to the work they will do. He asked
whether the Commission had considered having a presence during other activities and events such as the
Arts Festival. Vice Chair Dorame answered the Commission has discussed that briefly such as
participating in 4th of July parade, the Taste of Edmonds, the Business Expo, etc. They will try to partner
with other events in the community to make ethnic groups in Edmonds more visible.
Councilmember Nelson asked whether the community survey would ask questions of the community as
well as invite further dialogue. Vice Chair Dorame answered there have only been preliminary
discussions but the hope is to determine demographics and issues in the community and how to address
them. He noted a 2015 survey found 83% of the community is white but there are many other ethnic
groups in the community. Councilmember Nelson expressed support for including diversity questions in
existing surveys. Mr. Doherty commented the Council approved funds in the 2016 budget for a
community survey by the National Citizens Survey Organization. That survey includes questions
regarding discrimination and a customized question could be added.
Councilmember Buckshnis said bravo for the Commission’s work, noting they had a very eye popping
schedule. She noted the $3,000 for events may not be adequate which is why she supported increasing the
City Council contingency fund. Vice Chair Dorame commented he is excited by the Diversity
Commission, views it as very good for the community and expects they will do good things.
Councilmember Teitzel commented he had an opportunity to attend one of the Commission’s meetings;
he was very impressed with the commissioners who are very engaged and passionate about the issue. It is
a great team and he looked forward to great things. He asked if the Commission had had an opportunity to
reach to Diversity Commissions in other communities. Mr. Doherty said he and Ms. Rastovich have
looked into some others Diversity Commissions in the area; it is on the work plan to bring back
information about best practices.
Councilmember Mesaros expressed his thanks and appreciation for the Commission’s great start. He
foresaw one problem; now they need to do all the things in the work plan. He requested Vice Chair
Dorame provide the Council the definition of diversity that he read. Vice Chair Dorame commented what
he found interesting about that definition was many people think diversity is just about race; it is actually
about many other parts of the culture.
Council President Johnson thanked the Diversity Commission for the work they have done. Vice Chair
Dorame summarized the Diversity Commission is a great group of people.
COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO ACCEPT THE DIVERSITY COMMISSION’S 2016 WORK PLAN AS
PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
K. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING AGENT AND ALTERNATE AGENT TO APPLY FOR
DISASTER ASSISTANCE FUNDS
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 7
Assistant Police Chief Jim Lawless explained as a result of the August windstorm, the City incurred
significant direct costs to mitigate damage and clean-up, most borne by the Public Works Department.
With the formal federal disaster declaration made in October, the City has the opportunity to apply for
federal and state emergency funds which require a resolution by the legislative body designating a
disaster coordinator and an assistant disaster coordinator.
COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 1346, DESIGNATING AN AGENT AND ALTERNATE AGENT
TO APPLY FOR DISASTER ASSISTANCE FUNDS. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
B. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSAL FOR NEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION
Economic Development & Community Services Director Patrick Doherty background provided
background:
On June 2, 2009, the Edmonds City Council passed Ordinance 3735, creating a Citizens
Economic Development Commission (CEDC), arising from the Citizens’ Levy Review
Committee, which had been tasked with reviewing the financial situation of the City of Edmon ds,
and its recommendation to develop a broad vision and long-term strategies to make the City’s
fiscal situation sustainable without recurring to votes of the public for increased property taxes.
o The Council at that time stated that it found “it to be in the public interest to establish an
Economic Development Commission in order to take advantage of the large number of highly
qualified citizens who are interested in serving their community as it addresses this problem
(fiscal sustainability).”
The original EDC was approved with a sunset date of December 31, 2010.
Ordinance 3808, passed on October 5, 2010, the sunset date was extended till December 31,
2011.
Ordinance 3868, passed on December 20, 2011, the sunset date was extended till April 29, 2012.
Ordinance No. 3876, passed on March 20, 2012, the sunset date was established as December 31,
2015.
Over time the mission statement for the EDC, as enshrined in ECC Section 10.75.030 Powers and
Duties, was revised slightly to read ultimately as follows:
1. Determining new strategies for economic development within the city of Edmonds
2. Identifying new sources of revenue as a direct result of economic development projects for
the consideration of the city council.
At the 2015 City Council Retreat a study subgroup was called for to study and discuss the CEDC,
its purpose, usefulness, meeting format, subgroups, and whether to extend the Commission or
allow it to sunset.
o The subgroup, comprised of Councilmembers Bloom, Mesaros and Petso, met informally in
October 2015 to discuss these issues, offering several observations and/or recommendations
which were shared with full Council in November.
o City Council considered the recommendations and chose to take no action, allowing the EDC
to sunset on December 31, 2015, as set out in the corresponding Code provisions.
He relayed Mayor Earling’s proposal to create a new ECDC, to be established and seated as soon as
possible, and in accordance with the code structure of Chapter 10.75 ECC:
Membership
o Nine members. Each Councilmember appoints one; Mayor appoints two.
o Members must be residents and should exhibit experience in fields such as private or
nonprofit business, economics, real estate, finance, development, education, or other similar
fields.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 8
o Ultimately two-year terms, initially staggered by two- and three-year terms
o No term limits
o No sunset.
Officers, meetings, forum
o Commission shall elect Chair and Vice-Chair, with similar duties as in previous code
o Quorum is a simple majority of filled positions
o Regular meeting days, times and place shall be established to avoid “special meeting” status
and extra notice requirements every time
o All meetings open to public
Powers and duties
o Advise and make recommendations to Mayor and City Council, and as appropriate to other
boards or commissions of the City, on matters independently generated or specifically
referred to it by the Mayor or City Council related to:
Strategies, programs or activities intended to generate economic development and
consequently increase jobs and municipal revenue
o Annual report to Council and Mayor
o Commission may work in conjunction with other boards or commissions on proposals,
recommendations or projects of common interest, which may be presented to Mayor or
Council jointly
Mr. Doherty recommended the Council discuss and forward this to the February 2, 2016 Council business
meeting for further discussion and approval of a corresponding ordinance establishing an EDC.
Councilmember Buckshnis expressed support for establishing an EDC. She recalled when the EDC first
began there was one Councilmember which later changed to two Councilmembers. There were also
members who represented the Port and the Planning Board. She asked whether the Commission would
include a Councilmember, Port Commissioner and a Planning Board Member. Mr. Doherty answered it
would be up to the Council President to determine there would be one or two liaisons; that is not outlined
code. He suggested the new EDC determine the most efficient/productive way of involving the Chamber,
who was not involved previously, the Port and the Planning Board or others, perhaps via five minute
reports at each meeting. The proposal does not anticipate they would be seated as commissioners.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to the membership requirements and asked what type of
individuals other than non-residents would be excluded from participating. Mr. Doherty recalled
comments last year by Councilmembers that there were no qualifications to be a commissioner. He said
the inclusion of the language “or other similar fields” made the requirements quite broad. He envisioned
candidates’ applications would address how they met this expectation. If they did not have that
background, they likely would not be appointed by Councilmembers or Mayor Earling. The intent is to
encourage people with backgrounds, education or expertise related to the economy or economic
development to apply.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether someone who had stayed home raising children for the
past five years would be turned down. Mr. Doherty said the selection would be the appointers’ choice. He
noted someone who stayed home raising children may have a great deal of education in economics or
business.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to the language “experience in fields such as private and
nonprofit business,” noting most everyone has some level of experience if they have worked in a private
or nonprofit business. She asked whether the intent was administrative experience. Mr. Doherty answered
it would be up to the applicant to describe in their application how they met the qualifications.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 9
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said there was no language regarding removing a commissioner who is
not working out. Mr. Doherty said that was not currently addressed in the code; a general provision could
be added related to boards and commissions. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled there was a
process for removing based on non-attendance. City Attorney Jeff Taraday there is currently no general
provision but if the Council was interested he could draft a chapter regarding the ability to unappoint or
remove appointees for all boards and commissions. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the
Councilmember that appointed the person could unappoint them. Mr. Taraday answered the ordinance
was silence on that issue; an argument could be made that that is inherent in the authority but it was not
clear.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to language in the proposal that the EDC would work on
matters specifically referred to it by the Mayor or City Council. Mr. Doherty explained the EDC would
work on issues referred by the Mayor and City Council as well as matters they independently generated as
a think tank. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled some of things the EDC considered in the past 10
years included casinos, increasing emergency transport fees, and potentially taxing marijuana stores. She
pointed out citizens voted against casinos in the past. Mr. Doherty envisioned the Council liaison could
report to the Council on issues the Commission was discussing. If the majority of Council disagreed with
an issue they were discussing, the liaison could report that to the Commission.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled the Councilmember liaison was not allowed to vote at
Commission meetings. Council President Johnson relayed liaisons have never voted. Councilmember
Fraley-Monillas asked if the liaison was allowed to participate i n the meeting. Council President Johnson
answered yes. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas advised the liaison could state their opinion to the
Commission as well as report to the Council. Mr. Doherty acknowledged the difficult for one
Councilmember to represent the entire Council. The Council liaison is encouraged to participate at EDC
meetings.
Councilmember Nelson said he was generally supportive of nimbler, smaller EDC. He referred to the
ability to work in conjunction with other boards and commissions and asked if that was unique to the
EDC. Mr. Doherty acknowledged it may not be expressly stated for other boards and commissions. The
purpose is recognizing issues that affect economy and economic development cross with other boards and
commission. For example the Westgate Plan, both the EDC and the Planning Board had roles. There may
be other area of the City where both are involved such as the Highway 99 subarea plan; the EDC may
want to offer its observations with regard to that plan, hold a joint open house, etc. The intent was to
recognize economics and economic development is very broad and can overlap with other areas.
Councilmember Mesaros referred to the qualifications that require members be residents, recalling a
previous Councilmember thought this meant a resident of the United States and tried to appoint someone
who lived outside Edmonds. He suggested adding “resident of Edmonds.” Mr. Doherty answered his
presentation was a summary and the code will include that language.
Councilmember Teitzel supported the concept of a EDC and looked forward to having it reinstituted. He
asked whether there was a statutory requirement that a commissioner must be a resident of Edmonds. For
example, could a long time business owner who is a member of the Chamber with extensive business
expertise be a commissioner. Mr. Doherty said the current proposal is that commissioners be residents,
the Council could decide otherwise. Councilmember Teitzel asked if there was any precedent for having
non-Edmonds residents on a commission or board. Councilmember Mesaros pointed out the Architectural
Design Board includes non-Edmonds residents.
Councilmember Teitzel referred to the language, “the commission may work in conjunction with other
board and commissions on proposals,” suggesting that language also include other entities in the City
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 10
such as the Port, Chamber, BID, etc. Mr. Doherty said that bullet is related to other City boards and
commissions. Another bullet could be added regarding engaging with other entities , organizations and
agencies that are involved in similar issues.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether residents of unincorporated Edmonds could serve on the
EDC. Mr. Doherty said under the current proposal they would be excluded. Mayor Earling said the intent
was residents who live within the City limits. He wanted the commission comprised of residents within
the City limits because it is a smaller group and otherwise it may begin to wander afield.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled when she was Council President and a Councilmember attempted to
appoint a resident of Seattle, it was a fiasco. The intent was residents of Edmonds who are dedicated to
the economic development of Edmonds. Business owners who live outside the City can support the EDC.
Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding commissioners would have connections with other
area of the northwest and the nation and bring those connections to the EDC. They could also invite
friends and others outside the City to engage in the EDC’s activities. Even a very qualified person who
lives in a neighboring city could participate but just not as a board member. He asked whether any skill
sets sought such as marketing, economics, etc. Mr. Doherty said those skill sets would fall under the
fields of business, economics, finance, etc. The intent was to be as broad as possible, but provide the
message that people with education, experience or background in areas and skills sets related to the
economy or economic development are the most sought after.
Council President Johnson recalled one of questions that has been raised is the appropriate role for the
EDC with regard to the City’s Strategic Action Plan (SAP). The EDC was very involved in that process
and she questioned their role in monitoring and guiding the SAP in the future. Mr. Doherty explained
much of the heavy-lifting has been done; the Council approved an updated SAP last April, recognizing
that more public process and possibly updates could occur this year. Monitoring is primarily done by staff
or leads from other agencies who “own” action items. This is an issue for the Council when the new EDC
is in place, to determine whether they want the EDC to take leadership of the SAP. Approximately 20 of
the 85 action items are related to economic development; at a minimum it would make sense for the EDC
to monitor and take some ownership of those items. In establishing a new EDC with a conduit to Council
via the liaison, there will be an ability for the Council to inform the EDC what they would like done
rather than including that in the code.
Council President Johnson asked how the Council would communicate their desire for the EDC to
research a topic such as a new car dealership on Highway 99. Mr. Doherty anticipated via the liaison there
would be regular interaction with the Council and if a Councilmember wanted to introduce a topic,
referring it to the EDC could be approved by the Council.
Mayor Earling said he would like to move this quickly. He anticipated passing the ordinance next week,
followed by two weeks for application submittal, give the Council and him one week to make
appointments and have the EDC up and running by the end of February.
C. PRESENTATION OF THE COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION AGREEMENT
City Engineer Rob English explained the City is involved in the Community Trip Reduction (CTR)
Program. The grant agreement will provide $2500 to the City for incentives for the program. The City, as
an employer of over 100 people, is one three work sites within Edmonds that participate in CTR; the other
two are Swedish Hospital and Edmonds Family Medical Clinic. Staff applied for the grant late fall and
was awarded the funds. The $1,000 budgeted for the program in 2016 will be used as a match. Staff
recommends the grant agreement be approved on next week’s Consent Agenda.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 11
Councilmember Nelson complimented staff on applying for the grant and the goal of a 50% increase in
employee ridership.
It was the consensus of the Council to schedule this item for approval on the February 2 Consent Agenda.
D. PRESENTATION OF A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH DAVID EVANS AND
ASSOCIATES FOR THE 76TH AVE AT 212TH ST. INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT
City Engineer Rob English explained this project has been in design since 2012 and is nearing 90%
design. Staff has been working on the right-of-way acquisition for over a year. The goal is to finish both
phases and go out for bid in spring 2016. Before that can be done, additional work needs to be completed.
He highlighted tasks in the scope of work of the supplemental agreement:
Provide a $20,000 on-call budget for the appraisers to support the City Attorney during ongoing
right-of-way negotiations and potentially mediation with property owners on the northeast and
northwest corners of the intersection. The property owners signed a stipulated possession and use
agreement which provides the right-of-way to build the project but they have not agreed to the
valuation of the properties.
Design plans for property restoration on the four corners of the intersection
Additional work related to utility undergrounding
o Temporary traffic signal
o Waterline revision
o Add streetlights
The total cost is $107,550; all the design funds in the design phase have been expended. He was hopeful
there may be surplus funds when the right-of-way and construction phases are complete as a result of, 1)
final valuation of properties, 2) bid price, and/or 3) potentially not using all of 10% management reserve.
He advised a budget amendment may be necessary at the completion of the project.
Councilmember Mesaros expressed support for the supplemental agreement. He pointed out the mileage
reimbursement rate has been reduced from $0.54 in 2015 to $0.51 in 2016.
Councilmember Teitzel observed the narrative states bike lanes will also be added on all approaches
extending approximately 300 feet from the intersection. He asked how bicycles will be protected
especially from traffic turning right. Mr. English described the lane configuration that will include a right
turn lane, a through lane and a left turn lane; he believed the bike lanes will go through the intersection
but there is no physical separation. Councilmember Teitzel asked if the bike lanes will be clearly marked.
Mr. English answered yes, they will be striped.
Councilmember Mesaros commented on bike lane improvements in Seattle, some with separate traffic
signals for bikes and dedicated bike lanes that cross the right turn lane. Mr. English commented the
Verdant grant will add bike lanes from 220th to Olympic View Drive.
It was the consensus of the Council to schedule this item for approval on the Consent Agenda.
E. SECONDARY CLARIFIER NO. 3 STRUCTURAL REPAIR PROJECT FOR THE
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
Public Works Director Phil Williams explained this is authorization to go to bid to repair the secondary
clarifier. The costs listed are totals; Edmonds’ share of the $429,000 construction cost is about half and
the City’s partners pay the remainder. He explained there were originally three secondary clarifiers, large
concrete tanks buried in the ground. He described how the clarifiers work, separating water from the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 12
solids. Shortly after the treatment plant was built, the bottom of clarifier #3 began to crack; it has been
repaired several times. Two consultants were hired, a geotech and designer to evaluate the situation. They
prepared options for repairing the floor and eventually recommended replacing the floor and the structural
slab. Brown and Caldwell designed the project and it is ready to go to bid. The construction cost estimate
is $845,000 which includes a 10% construction contingency. The actual cost of the project will be
determined by the bids.
It was the consensus of the Council to schedule this item for approval on the Consent Agenda.
F. DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2016
BUDGET FOR CARRYFORWARD ITEMS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED AND
APPROVED BY COUNCIL DURING THE 2015 BUDGET YEAR
Finance Director Scott James presented the 2016 Carryforward budget amendment:
2016 Carryforward Budget Amendment Is For Items Not Completed in 2015
There are 35 carryforward requests
The carryforward budget amendment will roll the unexpended 2015 budget into the 2016 budget
All these items were previously approved by Council
Three of the carryforwards had some additional budget added:
o Court/Council Chambers A/V upgrades project. Council added $20,000 on January 5, 2016
o Frances Anderson Center bandshell replacement not fully completed in 2015. Requesting an
additional $80,000 to complete the project as construction cost estimates were $80,000 higher
than approved in the 2015 budget
o Purchase of Civic Field property which will close in February 2016; Council approved an
additional $100,000 on November 20, 2015.
Summary of the 2016 carryfoward budget amendment
o Revenues increased $3,805,257
o Expenditures increased $7,754,831
o Change in Beginning Balance +$3,890,579
o Ending Fund Balance decreased $58,995
Councilmember Buckshnis asked Mr. James to explain in layman’s terms why the beginning balance was
being changed to add $3.9 million. Mr. James explained when the 2016 budget was built, it was
anticipated some projects would be completed in 2015 so the beginning fund balances were lower. Since
the funds were not expended, the beginning balance needs to be updated to reflect the unexpended
amount.
It was the consensus of the Council to schedule this item for approval on the Consent Agenda.
G. HOURLY EQUIPMENT RENTAL RATES FOR EXTERNAL AGENCIES AND THE
TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT
Finance Director Scott James explained staff occasionally recommends updating the equipment rental
rates based on the FEMA equipment rate schedule. The City began using this rate schedule in 2009 and it
was last adjusted in 2011. The rate schedule is used to charge external agencies such as renters, the
Transportation Benefit District and private contractors. Staff recommends establishing a policy where
equipment rates are based on FEMA’s rates which will avoid periodically updating equipment rental
rates.
Councilmember Nelson asked why use the FEMA rental rates. Mr. James said the rate is set by the federal
government; a lot of grants the City receives are federal so the federal rate schedule would be acceptable
to them.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 13
It was the consensus of the Council to schedule this item for approval on the Consent Agenda.
H. SNOHOMISH COUNTY ILA AMENDMENT NO.2
Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite explained this is an amendment to the ILA with Snohomish
County for the purchase of Civic Field. The City is receiving $500,000 of Conservation Futures funds
from Snohomish County to assist with the purchase. One of Snohomish County’s requirements is to file
and record a conservation easement once the property closes to limit the ability to do any recreational
buildings on the easement property. The packet contains a survey that redraws the legal description for
Civic Field, concentrating the unvacated streets on the northwest portion of the property. The legal
description for the easement is called the parent parcel (identified in green) which would be restricted by
deed from development in that area and the area identified in blue would be available for whatever the
City wants such as rebuilding the Boys & Girls facility, siting of another facility, etc.
Due to her and the City Attorney’s concern with language in Section 4 of the draft conservation easement,
she recommended they negotiate with Snohomish County and bring the agreement back next week for
approval on the Consent Agenda. The language of concern is the use of RCWs to define the conservation
easement as no active recreation. In Washington, the RCWs allow active recreation. They want to clarify
the language so when development of Civic Field is planned with the community, there is opportunity to
have tennis courts, grass athletic fields, etc. on the deed-restrict land. She noted artificial turf would not
be allowed in a conservation easement.
Councilmember Teitzel observed the grandstands are in the area with the conservation easement and
asked if that meant the grandstands could not be rebuild. Ms. Hite responded in accordance with the
Recreation Conservation Office, grandstands would be allowed; she was not certain with Snohomish
County. Existing uses can remain but she will confirm whether the grandstands could be rebuilt or
expanded. She commented the existing grandstands are in bad shape; if there was interest by the
community in retaining the grandstands, they would need to be rebuilt.
Council President Johnson preferred to schedule the agreement as an action item on the agenda. Ms. Hite
said she could make a report on the language change at next week’s meeting. She requested the Council
take action next week and not forward it to the Consent Agenda due to the timeline to close by February
9.
It was the consensus of the Council to schedule this item for approval on the February 2 Consent Agenda.
I. REVIEW PARK CONCESSION AGREEMENT WITH DOG DAY AFTERNOON FOR
AN ATM AT RICHARD F. ANWAY PARK
Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite reported there has been an ATM on this site for several years. By
code the Parks Department can make decisions on seasonal concessions but year round concessions
require Council approval. The proposal is a five year agreement that would expire December 31, 2020.
There have been no problems and there have been several compliments about the location.
It was the consensus of the Council to schedule this item for approval on the February 2 Consent Agenda.
J. FISHING PIER REHABILITATION PROJECT CONTRACT AWARD
Public Works Director Phil Williams reported this is the result of several years of discussion, design work
and grant writing. He requested Council award the Fishing Pier Rehabilitation Project to Razz
Construction. Following this project, there may be a request by the State for City to take over ownership
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 14
of the fishing pier. The pier is currently owned by the State; $1.3 million of the $1.4 million of available
funds are from the State. Edmonds committed approximately $100,000 to the project. T he low bid was
approximately $1.004 million; approximately $1.26 million is available for construction. The engineer’s
estimate was $1.248 million. There was a protest of the low bidder’s paperwork which staff determined
was incorrect and the protest was withdrawn.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about the protest of the low bid. Mr. Williams explained one of
the bidders, not the low bidder, was hopeful there were defects in the paperwork submitted by the
apparent low bidder. The City evaluated whether there were material defects in the submittal and
determined there were not. The protest was also not timely. He advised $1.26 million was included in the
budget; the request is $1.004 million plus a $100,500 management reserve, bringing the total cost to
$1.104 million. There is still $160,000 in the budget in the event the 10% management reserve is not
enough.
Council President Johnson commented this is a very popular fishing pier and asked the projected closure
for the repairs. Mr. Williams commented it will depend on the contractor’s sequence of activities. The
schedule was designed to occur at the lowest point in the season. Mr. English said the project will occur
during March to June. Mr. Williams advised the closure dates will be announced as the start date gets
closer.
It was the consensus of the Council to schedule this item for approval on the Consent Agenda.
Mayor Earling declared a brief recess.
L. CONSIDERATION OF THE CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE
Senior Planner Kernen Lien providing background on the CAO update:
Update started in fall 2014 with review of existing code and BAS
Planning Board and City Council review in 2015
Eight Council amendments at the December 15, 2015 meeting
Two ordinances in Council packet
o Exhibit 1: Ordinance with all eight Council amendments
o Exhibit 2: Administration recommended ordinance (maintaining Council amendments 5, 6
and 7)
Staff recommends Council forward Exhibit 1, 2 or a 3rd ordinance for a decision next week.
COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL,
THAT THE COUNCIL REVIEW AMENDMENT BY AMENDMENT.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the motion was reconsideration. Councilmember Mesaros answered
no, it was to review the amendments in consideration of the Mayor’s letter and his indication he would be
forced to veto the ordinance.
Councilmember Buckshnis observed the motion is not to reconsider but rather to review the ordinance
created by the administration without any legislative direction. She asked whether that was appropriate
under Roberts Rules of Order. City Attorney Jeff Taraday said under Roberts Rules, reconsideration only
occurs at the same meeting. Councilmember Buckshnis commented those rule have been bent before. Mr.
Taraday clarified this is technically not reconsideration because reconsideration must occur at the same
meeting. There have been instances in the past where the Council directed the City Attorney to prepare an
ordinance; the City Attorney prepared the ordinance and amendments were made to the ordinance before
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 15
adoption by the City Council. In this instance, the Council has more or less that same opportunity; two
ordinances have been prepared, 1) Council requested and 2) Mayor’s request. He assured there was
nothing procedurally improper about discussing the eight amendments one by one if the Council wished.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled with Highway 99, the amendments were driven by Councilmember
Fraley-Monillas who was not present at the meeting where direction was given. She expressed concern
the public has not had an opportunity to weigh in on the ordinance in Exhibit 2. Mr. Taraday explained
although the GMA requires robust public participation in development of the CAO, he did not read the
GMA to require that every amendment requires another public hearing; that would be beyond robust to
burdensome. The two versions of the ordinance in the packet are the same from a public hearing
standpoint because a public hearing has not been held on either Exhibit 1 or 2. Councilmember Buckshnis
recalled one if not two public hearings were held on Exhibit 1. Mr. Taraday said public hearings were
held on the original staff recommendation at the Planning Board but eight Council amendments were
made at the last meeting of 2015 and no public hearing has been held. He clarified he did not think a
public hearing was required but one ordinance would not be preferable over the other due to having held a
public hearing.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas relayed her concern with the process. The Council directed the City
Attorney to return with an ordinance that was passed by a majority of the Council present on December
15, 2015. Along with that ordinance, the packet includes another ordinance because the administration
didn’t like what the Council passed. She asked whether it was normal to draft an ordinance because the
administration dislikes what the Council passed. Mr. Taraday did not recall being asked to do it before;
however, if the Council does not like that ordinance, the Council will not adopt it.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas clarified her issue was not with the content of the ordinance. The
legislative branch determines the laws, ordinances, zoning and rules; the administrative branch determines
how to implement that and the two shall not cross. Council should not tell staff what to do and
administration should not tell the Council what to do. Having the administration request preparation of
another ordinance because they did not like what the Council approved flies in the face of the Council’s
job. Mr. Taraday disagreed, assuring the Council’s legislative authority had not been usurped in any way.
The City Council has the ability to do exactly what it directed be done on December 15, 2015, have staff
prepare an ordinance and that ordinance is in the packet and the Council can adopt it if they choose. One
of the concerns is the City is past the deadline for adoption of the CAO by about six months. Given the
potential of a veto, it made more sense to streamline the process and include two versions of an ordinance
in the packet so if the Council wanted to avoid a veto, it could simply approve the “veto -free” version of
the ordinance instead of adopting the ordinance the Council asked for on December 15, having the
ordinance vetoed and going back through the process. From his perspective, the goal was to adopt the
CAO as soon as possible given that the deadline has been missed.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas disagreed, pointing out because there are new Councilmembers, if there
are changes to the COA, it should be a new process and not a pieced together process. Mr. Taraday said
while the Council President sets the agenda, the administration assembles the packet. In Edmonds and in
most cities it is pretty common for the executive to propose legislation. Obviously the executive cannot
adopt legislation but he/she does not lose the ability to propose legislation which is essential ly what has
been done with the second version of the ordinance.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas pointed out the Council President sets agenda. Mr. Taraday agreed,
explaining it was completely within the Council President’s discretion to determine at which meeting this
item is on the agenda. But the Council President does not determine which attachments will be included
in the packet; that has always been done by staff. Generally staff defers to what they know the Council
has asked for. He paraphrased Councilmember Fraley-Monillas’ objection that staff should not be allowed
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 16
to include things in the packet that the Council has not asked for. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said
she did not say that. Mr. Taraday summarized he was not aware of any restriction on what staff included
in the packet.
Councilmember Mesaros recalled the Council has made changes to an ordinance it directed the City
Attorney to prepare. The Mayor has made it clear to the Council that if they approve the first ordinance,
he will veto it. Rather than create conflict he preferred to review the ame ndments individually in an effort
to reach common agreement instead of going through the veto process.
Councilmember Teitzel commented he was not on the Council on December 15, 2015 when this issue
was considered. He has reviewed a lot of material and new facts have arisen that compel a different
decision on some of the amendments. In good conscience he could not vote in favor of the CAO as
amended in December.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TEITZEL AND
TIBBOTT VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS
NELSON, FRALEY-MONILLAS AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
JOHNSON, TO PASS ORDINANCE NO. 4017, THE ORDINANCE OF DECEMBER 15, 2015
WITH COUNCIL AMENDMENTS.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON AND
COUNCILMEMBERS NELSON, FRALEY-MONILLAS AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; AND
COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TEITZEL AND TIBBOTT VOTING NO.
Mayor Earling asked Mr. Taraday how soon he could get the ordinance to him. Mr. Taraday said the
ordinance is in the packet as Exhibit 1; he can sign it, not sign it or veto it as soon as tomorrow. Mayor
Earling said he will need to make a decision relatively soon as he will be out of town tomorrow and
Thursday.
6. REPORTS ON OUTSIDE BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported the Snohomish County Health District approved a clean air
zone; prohibiting smoking or vaping within 25 feet of entryways, doors and windows.
Councilmember Teitzel reported the Historic Preservation Commission voted at its last meeting to add the
North Sound Church building at 4th & Bell to the local register. A recognition event is being planned.
Councilmember Teitzel reported the Port of Edmonds meeting included a presentation from John Monroe,
Economic Alliance of Snohomish County, who described the work they are doing and advocacy in
Lynnwood on behalf of cities in Snohomish County as well as development of programs to attract
businesses to Snohomish County. The Port meeting included discussion about non-working street lights
on Admiral Way; the Port energized the street lights this week although the issue of who pays for the
electricity remains. The Port reported they have only 60 available slips The public is encouraged to attend
the Seattle Boat Show January 29 – February 6 where Port will have a booth.
Councilmember Mesaros reported he was unable attend the SNOCOM meeting but ACOP Don Anderson
attended in his place. Chief Compaan is also a SNOCOM board member so the City was well represented
at the meeting. He will attend his first Public Facilities District Board meeting on Thursday.
Councilmember Tibbott reported the Tree Board meeting selected officers, made a few plans for events
and discussed how to engage a consultant. He encouraged interested residents to apply for the vacancies
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 17
on the Tree Board. He will attend the Affordable Housing Alliance meeting next month; he has received
several letters from residents interested in affordable housing issues and was interest in hearing from
others.
7. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Earling reported he has been in Olympia the last couple days; he met with 6-7 legislators on Friday
along with AWC’s Government Affairs Director. He was in Olympia this morning for breakfast with the
governor and 20 other leaders from Snohomish County. He will be in Olympia for the next two days,
returning on Friday.
Mayor Earling invited Councilmembers to a signing at Civic Field on February 3. He reported on plans to
form a task force in the next week regarding pedestrian safety and auto conflicts.
Mayor Earling reported elections were held for the Community Transit Board; the Mayor of Mukilteo and
a Councilmember from Arlington were elected and the remaining seated members were reappointed.
Sound Transit 3 is progressing; the City submitted its letter as have several other subareas. It is hoped a
draft alignment will be identified for further staff analysis in March. That will be followed by further
refinement and hopefully a ballot measure this fall.
8. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council President Johnson reported five Edmonds Councilmembers attended the last Snohomish County
Cities meeting where the Economic Alliance of Snohomish County made a presentation.
Council President Johnson thanked everyone who participated in discussions, wrote letters and testified
regarding the CAO. By its action tonight, the Council decided to adopt the recommendations made at the
December 15, 2015 meeting and Mayor Earling intends to veto the ordinance. The Council will then
begin the review again. She commented this was a necessary step to bridge between the 2015 Council
decision and the 2016 new Council makeup. Although it may seem torturous to some, Councilmembers
want to respect the comments and contributions from everyone who has worked on the CAO for the past
two years. The CAO is a very complex ordinance and the Council wants to ensure the ordinance wil l
serve the City well in the future.
Councilmember Tibbott thanked City staff for their response to a lot of questions this week and requested
the questions and answers be included in the packet to assist the public. Although he is new to the City
Council, the topic of the CAO is not new to him due to the work he did while on the Planning Board. He
also took additional time to read the information the Council provided. Based on that, he thought the
Council could have discussed the amendments tonight. He looked forward to a robust discussion and
encouraged the public to get involved as the issues are complex and multilayered.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported at the South County Cities dinner she was reelected as the
alternate to the PSRC Executive Board, to the Snohomish County Law and Justice Council and to the
Snohomish County Transportation Coalition that looks at transportation choices for those with
disabilities.
Councilmember Nelson reminded of tomorrow’s Waterfront Access Study Open house from 4:30 to 7:30
p.m. at the Edmonds Library.
Councilmember Buckshnis commended the Task Force for the materials they have produced and their
transparency. She reported she was selected by WRIA 8 to be on their funding committee which
considers and awards grants.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 26, 2016
Page 18
9. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION
PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)
This item was not needed.
10. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN
EXECUTIVE SESSION
This item was not needed.
11. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:08 p.m.