City Council - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon, residents of Everett, Washington. I would like to call to order the Everett City Council meeting of July 22nd, 2026, our afternoon meeting. For information on council meetings and how to participate, please visit everettwa.gov slash city council. Please note, we do not allow comments of any kind of campaigning, whether or for or against ballot measures or candidates running for office. We do not accept comments focused on personal matters that are unrelated to city business. Clerk, will you please take the roll?

Mayor Franklin.

Excuse.

Council Member Bader.

Here.

Vice President Ryan. Here. Council Member Burbano.

Here.

Council Member Tuohy. Here. Council Member Weir. Here. Council Member Zerlingo.

Here.

President Schwab.

Here. And for the record, Council Member Zerlingo will be remote. We'll go to old business. Oh, actually, I'm sorry. We'll start off with the landing of the Pledge of Allegiance. I'll get it right today. This afternoon, my schedule is messed up. Let's start with the Pledge of Allegiance.

Thank you.

And Councilmember Barb Barbano, will you lead us in the land acknowledgement?

The City Council wishes to acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Stokhovish people and their successors, the Tulalip tribes. Since time immemorial, they have hunted, fished, gathered on and taken care of these lands and waters. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination and honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water. We will strive to be honest about our past mistakes and bring about a future that includes their people, stories and voices to form a more just and equitable society.

Thank you very much. Okay, now we're getting ready to go through business. I could tell I was anxious to run through the afternoon here. We'll start off with the approval of the minutes for July 15th, 2026. Do I have a motion? Council Member Bader-Samos.

Second.

Okay, motion and second has been made. Clerk, please take the roll.

Council Member Bader.

Yes.

Vice President Ryan. Yes. Council Member Verbano.

Yes.

Council Member Tuohy. Yes. Council Member Weir. Yes. Council Member Zarlingo. Yes.

yes president schwab yes all right now it's time for public comment which includes written comment acknowledgement under our rules written comments shall be considered in the same manner as oral comments the person submitting comments must provide their name and city of residence to be part of the official council record good afternoon angie do we have any written comments or anyone signed up to speak good afternoon president schwab we have a few people

in chambers, but we do have one person online. So if Mason can unmute and turn on your camera, there you go. Once you see the timer, if you could please state your full name, city of residence, and you will have three minutes to speak.

You're muted.

Oh, you're muted. But one moment, I'm going to start the timer.

I thought I sounded perfect.

Go ahead.

Hey, Independence Day was another winner for Everett. I'm Mason Rutledge. I live in Everett. Thank you for the opportunity to share again. And thank you to Councilman Bader for the fantastic parade. Thanks to our police force stretched thin across multiple events. And thanks to Tyler and the team who makes our city celebrations shine. But there was a loss in that fireworks season. And I'm here on behalf of my neighbors and also those with mobility issues and young families. kids on bikes, and those who take pride in our city parks. The Grand Avenue Park bridge elevator suffered major damage from an explosion and is now inoperable. Last year on the 4th, a compacting trash can in Grand Avenue Park was blown apart, debris scattered nearly 100 yards. Two years in a row, the same park, the same season, the same kind of destruction. Grand Avenue Park is a beautiful public space and our new bridge is iconic, but these investments cannot hold their value nor serve their purpose if we do not provide immediate attention, intentional maintenance, and intervening security. Re-engaging the elevator must be a top priority. When it's down, it's not just a broken amenity, it's a message. Visitors from all over the county see it and laugh about Everett. When the elevator is down, the bridge stops being a connector and becomes a divider. Parents with small children can't navigate the steep grade, grandparents pushing strollers turn around, cyclists reroute, and residents in wheelchairs who should have equal access to one of Everett's signature public spaces are effectively told the waterfront is off limits. This is not theoretical. It's happening every day, especially these summer months. And the elevator is not the only sign of a decline in our parks. Wood chips lie where blooming flowers grew. Overgrown trees and invasive species block vistas that were once intentional and purposeful. And now, no park rangers walking our parks. It leaves an overwhelmed police force who simply do not have the capacity to step out of their cars. They have to monitor these spaces on foot. Our officers need help, our parks need help, and our residents, especially families and those with mobility challenges, need us to treat accessibility as a core value, not an optional feature. In the future, we will likely need limited elevator hours to reduce overnight risk. A camera in the elevator shouldn't be a discussion, but at the man. But we also need visible park presence, intentional landscaping that restores sight lines and security measures that match the scale of the investment and the damage opportunity. Other cities, Federal Way among them, have implemented creative solutions and are winning the battle. Everett can as well. We need leadership, immediate attention, and I'll wrap up. I'm asking the council to treat Grand Avenue Park elevator issue as a top priority. Everett deserves better, and the people who rely on this elevator every day are counting on us to deliver it. Thank you, everybody.

Thank you. And for the record, we did not receive any written comments. And so now we will move to, in chambers, if Kent could please come to the podium. And please press the button on the mic on the podium. Yeah. And then please state your full name, city residents, and you have three minutes to speak.

Thank you. My name is Ken Sturgis. I'm a resident of the Delta neighborhood. I live on Virginia Avenue. I want to commend the council for its work on the stadium. it seems like you've had a pretty short span of time to bring all that together, and it's looking pretty good. But I do have an issue. Let me preface it by saying this issue may have been taken care of, in which case I'm wasting your two minutes, but I'm going to throw in my two bits worth anyway. My concern is I'm seeing the facility called the Outdoor Event Center. I've seen that over and over again, and lately I've seen it capitalized, which... It sends up a red flag for me. Surely this will not be the formal name of the facility. The possibilities include major sports figures, military heroes, historical figures, widely admired politicians and public servants, humanitarians. philanthropists geographic name maybe and of course the very real possibility that you'll sell naming rights to a commercial entity anything but the outdoor event center I've looked up a few names around the country and added a few Jackie Robinson Ballpark, Veterans Field, Rio Grande Field, Polar Park, Tiger Park, Hool Today Park, Hank Aronson Stadium, Victory Field. And closer to home, it could be something like Cascade Park, Foghorn Field, Silver Mist Park, Delta Field, Drizzle Fields, Mahomish Park, and maybe none of these really blow your socks off, but why not involve the public in the naming process? Doing so I think would increase the, well, you might get a good name for one thing, and doing so would increase, I think, the public awareness of this project and create a bond between the citizens of Everett and this new facility. So that's my comment. Please take this issue seriously. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, if Dottie could please come to the podium. Please state your full name, city of residence, and you have three minutes to speak.

It's Dottie Medaglia, Arlington, Washington. Council members today, I am coming before you again because the PFD board president, Brian Crowther, said today in the meeting that he has spent too much time on this issue and that they are done. They are done hearing from us about any of our problems. That statement confirmed the very concern that I've been brought here to you. For years, Corey McGorless discouraged us from taking concerns to the PFD. He told us the board did not want to hear our complaints and warned that continually talking and speaking up about these issues would affect our programming. We're being affected. I'm out of programming in two weeks. Now, when we finally bring our complaints to the public, the president says they're done listening. This is a public board and how can they be finished listening to our problems when nothing has been resolved? We have no renewed facility agreement on reliable fall or winter ice. We have nothing to tell our parents or our skaters about what's happening next month. We have kids competing. We have a theater team that goes to Kraken facility to compete next month. Where am I going to have ice for them? Meanwhile, Mink management is being allowed to move forward with its own Aspire program and the same type of programming that Everett Figure Skating has successfully operated for two years. The rink controls the ice, the scheduling, advertising, learn to skate pipeline, and access to families, and opening a competitive programming while deciding whether its nonprofit receives enough ice time to even survive. Everett Figure Skating Club has shown you on our annual report how we've helped the community and how we've helped our sport. We don't need to go about, we don't need to talk about that anymore. I'm asking today to stop the new programming when we don't have enough ice right now for even our current programming. We need to be put back on the schedule for at least what we had last year and all new programming on all sports should be stopped until clear policies are put into place and equal rights to all of us. I'm asking the mayor, this has to be done today. I, again, say I am out of programming for the next two weeks and I am being told that they might have ice time available later. I cannot have six and seven and eight year olds skating, especially during the school year at nine o'clock at night. And that's what most of our skaters are. Please help stop this from happening, and please make some decisions to look at the oversight of the PFD board today, and please make changes. Thank you.

Thank you. Monica, if you could please come to the podium. And please state your full name and city residence, and you have three minutes.

My name is Monica Thurgood. I'm a resident of Everett since 2002. I'm a wife. I'm a mom. I don't have written comments, so I'm just going to speak from my heart. I hope what I have to say is received in that way. So my daughter is 13. She's a figure skater. And she came upon figure skating later. She's figure skated for less than two years, but she's made incredible leaps and bounds, including competing in her first competitions this year. Her very first one was Blades on Broadway, which is one of the biggest competitions in the state, and it's run by Everett Figure Skating Club. I just wanted to express my concern as a parent. I know that I probably don't have all the facts, but I know that the ice rink is publicly funded and was approved by bonds from the voters. And Whether we understand all the intricacies of US figure skating and what should be allowed and what should not, what's immediately clear to me as a parent is we are not being given the opportunity. They, they say they'll give figure skating club time on the ice, but it's becoming less and less. So words and written words can say one thing, but actions can still fall within that and be completely different. They're pushing Everett figure skating club out because of perhaps some personality clashes or other things. Obviously I'm not privy to everything, but I do believe that, um, The rink management has agreements with other organizations like hockey, which is primarily a male dominated sport, and they're unwilling to give us equal time. It is a public facility. So I, my daughter has grown so much through figure skating. As many of you as parents or grandparents, maybe you've seen your kids try different things. And just kind of when my daughter would get to the hard part, she would kind of, well, maybe that's not for me. There are plenty of hard parts in figure skating, but she found something that she loves. And I love seeing her discipline developing, her mental toughness, her physical toughness, her camaraderie with the other girls that are part of the club as well. And not, not least the adults associated with the figure skating club that have the expertise experience and love to care for our young generation that are kind of coming up. So some of you might mistakenly think that It's just a rink and ice times will be available, whether it's run by the rink or the skating club. I'm here to tell you that I don't believe that to be the case. And I know you have a lot of things before you. And I appreciate all the service that you give on all these complicated issues with different competing priorities. But I do want you to think about your own kids or your own grandkids and really consider the issue. So I appreciate your time.

Was that me? Yeah, you're good. Thank you.

That was pretty good without a written statement. Thank you. Great job.

And Janine, if you could please come to the podium. Please state your full name and city of residence. You have three minutes to speak.

Janine Demaret, Everett, Washington. Good evening, missing mayor and council members. Or afternoon. First off, I want to say thank you for the increased presence and communication between the Everett Police and Planned Parenthood. We appreciate the understanding that a random man being mere inches off an escort's face with his own is not an acceptable situation and should be addressed as it was. I also appreciate the communication coming from officers that have experience and understand the situation and set up at the clinic instead of officers that do not understand the base function of barricades is to keep people cordoned off as their function. It leads me to why I'm here. I'm here today asking for a refresh of the understanding between the police and all agitators and advocates outside of Planned Parenthood that we all can refer to in the future to prevent a suck on taxpayer dollars. I know you're afraid of being sued by the kind religious people, but the fight is here and it's time to engage. With over 10 years of my time spent, I will argue that I have more experience with these people and their tactics than any badged or non-badged person in this room or building. So I hope you consider my request. Clarify the rules of the driveway. I'm requesting that the actual driveway lines be put on the sidewalk by the city as it has already been determined that the actual driveway width exceeds the current driveway widths so that there is no more argument about where the barricades go and where people can stand. Just this week, I sent videos to the officer handling this ongoing situation, showing four separate occasions on Friday the 17th of anti-abortion protesters stopping car in the driveway, citing it only applies to Wednesdays. Does obstruction only apply on certain days of the week and only apply under certain circumstances? I understand that no officer is going to act on citations unless it comes from the top, so this rests with the city attorney. Let me see here. Clarify the sound ordinance. Is it only applicable if heard inside Planned Parenthood or if it overwhelms exterior operations, patients, movements, and safety? This is also helpful. After a few groups have shown up, the antis are back to using sound amplifying devices to project their voices. We will engage similarly if this is not clarified. clarify the alley and if protester activity is allowed when we have random groups of agitators that show up they will act how they want unless they know otherwise and if clarification for all parties on that can be made there is no pleading ignorance i have zero concern about pro-abortion advocates going into the alley again we are only out there because they are Consider moving the west side barricade west just past the sidewalk entrance to the clinic. Time, place, and manner is no way violated by that action. The west side has at least twice the real estate as the east side. It will significantly quell the screaming and fighting in front of the building and reduce stress to patients and provide clear access points to the clinic. After all, the load unload was created to quell disruption. Is that not correct? I also asked to clarify how many times agitators can encroach on Planned Parenthood property to put paraphernalia on their property. Is it once? Is it twice? Does it just restart every Wednesday like Groundhog's Day and therefore there is no limit? I just want to know myself so I can be sure to walk up to that line with no repercussions also. I hope that one day I never have to come back here and talk about this trash that women go through just to take care of themselves and stay safe. I also hope that if all of you in this room have the opportunity to stand up, you do so.

Thank you very much.

That concludes our public comment.

Okay, well, thank you very much. We'll move to council comments, and we'll begin with Council Member Bader.

Thanks, Council President. Just a couple of reports here. I attended the Transportation Advisory Committee last week as my liaison assignment. Two interesting issues were discussed. One was about daylighting intersections, the idea of creating more visible areas around the corners of intersections so vehicles and pedestrians could see each other better. And so I think that's moving forward under the leadership of our traffic engineer, Corey Hurt. And then there was also a speed management workshop as part of the Vision Zero effort, trying to figure out, looking at which arterials especially had speeds that needed to be reviewed. And also, I went to the Puget Sound Regional Council Growth Management Policy Committee board last week and two items. One, to alert my fellow council members, too. One, continue to examine the regional centers and particularly looking to see consistency with the new TOD and housing standards and also address insights from recent monitoring of how well we're doing at building new housing. And that will inform new centers applications and the Vision 2050 update. And finally, there was also a report from Puget Sound Partnership about the status of Puget Sound Recovery and what other work they're doing to help make Puget Sound, the Puget Sound Salish Sea itself better and better. more healthy. That's all I have to report. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Ryan.

Thank you. On Monday, I attended the Association of Washington City's Large City Advisory Committee meeting to help with the continued development of our, of AWC's legislative policies for the upcoming long session. So With a longer session comes bigger opportunities to make big change so per usual housing is top of the list for helping to incentivize more housing and new housing and all different types of housing so AWC is going to be focusing on that quite a bit. And then of course public safety concerns and concerns about indigent defense funding as well so they still have an opportunity for folks to participate in the legislative priorities development there's a separate committee that also does that so folks want to join for that other counselors want to join for that that'd be great. Earlier, I guess that was last week, I attended the kickoff for the 2026 Softball Western National Championships here in Everett, which was exciting to join for the opening ceremonies. The Lodging Tax Advisory Committee had given $5,000 to help support the event. tournament here in Everett. So it was good to see that, you know, come to fruition. There were teams from Hawaii and Idaho and California, plus all of their families that are here for the long weekend, staying at our hotels and helping to generate more money for the lodging tax, uh, pot so that we can, you know, pay it forward again next year. So a great event and glad to see those folks here. And it was also a great reminder about how sports bring people together. So, um, uh, thank you, Dottie, uh, Melanie for joining for your comments today. Um, as the liaison for the PFD, uh, it was, uh, It was concerning to hear comments at the meeting about excluding voices of the community, and I don't think that's how we should be moving as public representatives. So I'm glad that you shared that to bring daylight to it today. I know that Council President Schwab will be sharing some more as well about some work we've been doing to make sure we can do all that we can to help provide relief. So thank you.

Council Member Brabantle.

Yesterday, somebody was run over between Casino Road and Airport Road in my district in South Everett. The number of people getting run on that section of Evergreen Way continues to be the same. It seems like there is not really any improvement going on. I went to the Everett database to collect some data about it, and according to the Everett database, it seems like the Everett, when it comes to safety, vehicle safety and road safety, ranks worse than the state average. I also went to the Washington State Department of Transportation database and collected the number of accidents, pedestrian-involved accidents, in that section of the road, which is only a two-mile section of the road. And the numbers from 2025 to 2020 remain consistent. And there is an average of 10 people run over on that section of the road between Casino Road and Airport Road. An average of 10 people being run over every day, every year. Also, it's important to notice that over 10% of the accidents happen in that section of the road. That's pretty high, taking into account that it's only two miles. I have collected the data and I forward that to administration. I would like to hear what's the plan. Apparently, for what the Washington State Department of Transportation database shows, there has been no improvement whatsoever. So I would like to hear from administration what's going on. And it's not okay to have people being run over on the roads. And that's it. Thank you.

Thank you. Council Member Chui.

Yeah, that might be a great topic for the safety committee to take a look at when administration gets some update for us. And I would want to thank our commenters today. I know they were some very passionate folks today. We appreciate that. And I'm hoping that we could get an update on the Grand Avenue bridge elevator when we can expect that. And Hopefully, some of those ideas that Mason had were very good. And then on the outdoor event center, I believe, from what I gather, that they would like to sell the naming rights. So that's to be determined. But anyway, I liked some of your ideas. Thank you. That's all.

Thank you. Council Member Weir.

Yeah, so some of you may have noticed that the new Street Tunes program has kicked off again for the year, and that'll be going for four weeks. There's painted pianos around Everett and all the way down to Casino Road at the Village. This year, the Street Tunes program has been dedicated to the memory of former council member Paul Roberts, who passed away last month. And also things to be looking forward to music at the Marina continues on Thursday nights that's always a great time. There are a number of neighborhood garage sales coming up throughout the Community. As well as national night out programs, the libraries are doing free programs for adults and kids so check those out a lot of that information can be actually be found on the neighborhoods page of the for the city. and encouraging everybody to get out and vote in the primary on August 4th. And that's it for me.

Thank you very much. Council Member Zarlingo.

I'd just like to thank our public commenters for their perspectives and for getting involved. I appreciate that. I'll further report for

Thank you. I'm not used to such a short one. It's an afternoon now. Well, thank you for all the commenters. I'd like just to make a few comments about the public facilities district. In essence, if you provide ice time for a seven-year-old, and you expect them to be there at nine o'clock at night, that basically eliminates the program for that age group. It's difficult, and here, because we are one removed from the process, But it's really disheartening to see that an organization that services our youth is struggling. And really, the big question I have is, what's the policy on the selection of our community members? groups is is it fair and i've i've actually have read several emails and documents and i know we got a statement here last week um but the question i still think that's lingering is um what's the policy for a group that may need in our community that may need a particular ice time um you know, a hockey team and maybe the teenage, I know that it's always limited, maybe perhaps the teenage men's hockey group could practice at night, right? I mean, but I just think that there needs to be a list of some sort of priorities. And it's really important for me that as a community, and we have a facility that is subsidized by the taxpayers, that fairness and equity is considered when we're selecting players. selecting the use of it. So I would hope that we have a representative from either the PFD or perhaps the company that we contract with. And I know the mayor has been having some conversations with him too. So I hope that we can get a resolution very quickly because in essence, if we don't sign a contract with the Everett Figure Skating Club, they're just not going to provide the service. They're just going to go on, hopefully find another location. Um, I think that's all I had for that. And by the way, I am on the, um, well, it's the meetings going on right now. The, uh, uh, Washington city's, um, political action committee is actually going on right now. So I couldn't attend, but, um, do really appreciate the feedback from some of the other committees and, um, I know that one of the biggest challenges for cities is, I know we talk a lot about taxes and tax increases, but it's really the result of costs increase. And we talked about the building construction index going up in double digits. Of course, labor shortages, cost materials. And so that is really our biggest challenge. The taxes are a result of a group like us that are trying to manage those costs increase. So. That's one of the major issues that I'm sure the city will bring back to the legislature here in the winter. Okay, thank you for my report. So we'll move to administration. Good afternoon, Jennifer.

Hello, thank you, Council President Schwab. First, I'll just respond on the conversation around the Angel of the Winds Event Center and the ICE and the Public Facilities District. I think just for clarity, the policy decisions you were talking about are made, of course, by the Public Facilities District Board. And there are some clear legal separations between the city council and mayor and staff. and the board that makes those choices about how the space is managed. But as you know, the mayor agrees that it would be important to hear from the PFD board and have a little better understanding of what their guidelines are and how they've made those decisions to manage the space. It's on my list to invite them to attend an upcoming city council meeting to speak to some of the questions that you guys have heard from the community. Just to daylight that and provide more information about how those choices are made by the PFT board. So that's on the list. More to come on that. I wanted to share my appreciation for the public commenter, Janine, that commented on Planned Parenthood and the fact that our communications have improved. There are specific staff in the mayor's office that are kind of holding that relationship and helping to try to improve that connection. And so it was great to hear that the The conversation with police and the Planned Parenthood folks and staff has improved and is helping that operation. And so I appreciate that and made note of her other feedback. Council Member Burbano, thanks for the email this morning that you referenced. Staff are working on a response to you. And, yeah, and I noted the Grand Avenue Bridge request for an update. And we talked about Vision Zero, which is responsive to what Councilmember Burbano referenced. That'll probably fold into that answer. So. Oh, and I will also add that I encourage anyone listening, if they are interested in good government and being part of the public process, to consider signing up for the pro-con committees for the voters pamphlet for our five charter amendments. You can find it on the Charter Review Committee page. The link to sign up on the city website is there. And I was trying to see if I knew if anyone had signed up yet, but I didn't get an update, so I'm not sure. So I would say the floor is open for folks to volunteer for that opportunity. And it just means that you have to work together with the other folks that sign up on either side of those issues between around August 4th and August 14th. So it's a short volunteer commitment. That's when the statements are due to the auditor. All right.

Question, Councilman Ryan.

For the pro-con committees, if there's more than three folks signed up for pro or con What's the process after that first selection? Because I believe at council next week we'll be approving the slate of names to go to the auditor's office. But how does it – if there's more than three, if we have an overabundance of excited, civically engaged residents that want to participate, what happens then?

Well, just three can officially be assigned, but those three individuals are able to work with anyone that they'd like. And so – They could reach out to the other individuals that signed up if they want to talk with a larger group and then come to agreement with the three that are actually appointed to the committee. They can do that. It's really all in their hands after that. So how they want to handle the writing and everything.

So will the mayor be recommending three to council to approve or will council be selecting three out of a...

I think the last few times we used kind of a random lot draw. I don't think the mayor participated in any way in that. Just at the staff level, we... I think for EMS levy, just a couple months ago, we only had... We didn't hit the max of signups. And I think the time before that, we... kind of did a random selection from what I remember. Ramsey, does that feel right? I mean, actually he should answer because there's some like legal process and how folks are assigned to those to ensure that there isn't a political lens on it. So, or an influence.

yeah i'd have to look again at the statute for that process thank you um but um i i think my recollection the law draw sounds like it's correct but um we will get let you guys know what your role is going to be ahead of time we'll look that and i'll get back to you on that so you'll know ahead of time i'll send you an email hopefully we have the good problem of so many engaged rats that's where i my mind was it's like we can that would be a good problem now

And I had a couple of questions too about that. So if somebody from the Charter Review Committee wants to be one of those, they can, right? Doesn't include them?

Yes. Anyone who lives in the city could sign up to be on those voter pamphlet committees. And yeah.

And then do we have plans to put any more information on like some final scenario on our website? I could, we can talk about the deaf line, but I was wondering if someone to the voters pamphlet, Oh, they can look here.

But yeah, we can, we can talk about that later, but no, I think that would be the, we've, I've posted the ordinance to the charter review page. So that final language is there. Um, but I, I think it would be useful. We have a practice of providing voter information on, um, items that are on the ballot. So I'd like to do the same with the charter.

You put a lot of work into that, to that site.

Well, thanks for giving me like a five day break, but yeah, I'm ready to do like that final task and see it through to hear from the voters on those issues.

So thank you very much. City attorney Ramsey.

No comment, no executive session today.

Okay. Thank you very much. So we'll go to our consent items. We have three, um, Do I have a motion? I hear a motion.

I'm sorry, Bader-Silvas.

Okay, we have a motion and a second on the three consent items. Clerk, please take the roll.

Council Member Bader?

Yes.

Vice President Ryan? Yes. Council Member Burbano? Yes. Council Member Tuohy? Yes. Council Member Weir? Yes. Council Member Zerlingo?

Yes.

President Schwab?

Yes. Thank you. Okay, so now we have our proposed action items. Item number four has been read in the record, second reading, Council Bill 2606-35. Are there any questions or comments from council? Okay, we'll go down the line. Proposed action item number five, Council Bill 2607-36, second reading. Any questions or comments from council? Okay, so item number six, Council Bill 2607-38, second reading. Are there any questions or comments from Council? Okay. Seeing none, we'll move to our action items. Item number seven council bill 2, 6, 0, 6 dash 3, 4, 3rd and final reading adopt an ordinance, creating a new chapter in title 26 for electric assisted bicycles and amending other areas of the city code on motorized foot scooters and electric assisted bicycles in the parks to be consistent with the new chapter. I have a motion.

Mayor Paterson.

Second. Second. Okay, motion second. Are there any questions or comments at this time? I have a motion to amend. Okay, Council Member Bono.

I sent you an email yesterday about the two parts of EMC 46 AD 030, the section four that I would like to amend. The first one is section A3. I would like for half of some The micromobility definition includes non-motorized devices and the way the ordinance is written, if we don't change, if we don't add motorized to parts A3C of the ordinance, then we will be making it illegal for 10 years old kids to- So before we get that, let's just clarify your motion.

You have two amendments to this? Yes, there's two of them. What sections, what would they be added to?

It will be A3C and the other one will be A5.

Okay, just counsel if they are they aware of these additions.

Okay. I am council president.

I would like, I would say. Yeah. Second. Okay. There's a second. All right. Now we can, now, if you want to discuss your amendments.

Okay. So I was saying, um, a three C, um, we need to make the change or else it will be illegal for 10 year olds to use their non motorized micromobility device in the, um, in the urban trail or any sidewalk or share, uh, path. Um, And the other one, the other section is A5. The original text says, it is unlawful for any person to operate a motorized food scooter or micromobility device on any city street with a maximum speed limit above 30 miles per hour unless the device is operated within a designated bicycle lane. I understand that is dangerous for people for devices that go below the speed limit to be on the road. But we also have to understand that there are a lot of folks who cannot drive a car. And their only option for them to get home is to use the road that doesn't have any sidewalks or shoulders or bicycle lanes. So I propose to add A little statement at the end of Section 4 that says, on any city street with a maximum speed limit above 30 miles per hour, unless the device is operated within a designated bicycle lane, or, and this is the change, unless reasonably necessary due to the lack of sidewalks or other alternative route.

And the other customer meter I guess I was wondering if maybe corey or he'll come out and come, hopefully, they assume they were looped in on these proposals, so we'll be grateful for their comments and thoughts thanks.

Thank you good afternoon hill came in from legal. As to the first amendment, I think that was a great catch in terms of using seeing in that definition, what would have been prohibited and adding the word motorized so that it really is addressing kids under 11 using motorized micromobility devices and requiring under the ordinance that they be under direct supervision. Kids riding non-motorized scooters, we don't want to be regulating that. So thank you, Councilmember Burbano, for reading the ordinance in such detail to catch that. That was actually... So we concur with that recommendation. The second one, that is part of the existing code where it's not really safe to be riding a scooter that goes max 20 miles per hour on a road with a 30 mile per hour speed limit. But, you know, in those areas where there is no alternative, this would just make it permissible to ride in the road in those areas where there is no sidewalk or bike lane to be able to do that. The reason that we drafted it, as we did, is it just it isn't a safe practice really to be on those arterials in the lane of traffic, but the proposed language, I think, addresses concern if there are segments of the city that don't have sidewalk or bike lane.

Any other questions or comment comes around.

I'm trying to look through my mental map of the city of everett and i'm trying to imagine which streets would qualify as not having a reasonable alternative for. Which which streets are we talking about how many are there, like how like where and how would this apply to our current grid.

I don't know. I don't know if council member Burbano had a specific street in mind where this could have been a conflict with the ordinance.

100th Street Southwest. I ride my bicycle there every day. And there are sections of that road that don't have a bicycle lane, a shoulder or a sidewalk. So I'm personally affected by it. And the speed limit is 35 miles per hour.

So I'm not aware of other ones, but there do exist sections where that would be the case.

Is there a way that we could also concentrate efforts to provide bike lanes on some of those stretches or are those are those stretches already included in our bicycle master plan is enhancing bike safety.

That would probably be a question for Corey.

Corey that means you have to walk up.

Thank you for the record. Corey Hertz, City Traffic Engineer. Yes, those type of facilities, roads like 100th Street Southwest, are in the bicycle master plan. We do have plans to add bicycle lanes to that facility. So I can't think of any locations where we don't have a plan to add bicycle lanes in those conditions. So that's all I have.

Great. Do you happen to, sorry, I put you on the spot. It's great to have plans, but is there a timeline that goes with those plans as well?

Yeah, projects of that magnitude are going to require outside funding. So we're always out looking for funding opportunities to construct that. That facility is about 90% design. And so, you know, we're moving forward towards sidewalks and bike lanes on the 100th.

Okay. Thank you. And then I guess I'm not sure, um, when we talk about there's not a reasonable alternative, I guess, I'm not sure I understand how reasonable or unreasonable moving over a block is, or like how, where's the line literally and figuratively on what's a reasonable alternative.

On my case, if I'm coming back from work from the Boeing plant, or if I'm riding the Blue Swift lane, and I get dropped off on Airport Road and 100th Street Southwest on the north direction, if it was illegal for me to ride my bicycle there or my micromobility device, I will have to cross the street. on airport road and then ride two or three blocks down to 103 or 106 and then make a left for another six or seven blocks and then make another left to go to my house for another three or four blocks. And that will increase my commute by 20 minutes. When, if I just ride my bicycle from airport road to my house, it takes three, four minutes. Awesome. It is unpractical and pretty much discourages people. Something to point out here is that it shouldn't be a crime not to own a car. In addition, we have to look at this from the practical point of view that what happens if I'm riding my bicycle? And obviously, I'm riding below the speed limit. And the driver behind me, the car, is distracted using his or her cell phone and hits me. And well, we go to the court, talk to the judge, and the judge is going to pull out the law and he's going to tell me, no, Burbano, you were not supposed to be riding your bicycle there, even though I was trying to get home. And then this person who was distracted, who was the person who caused the accident, walks away with it. So in a way, when we have this type of laws, we need to have laws that defend and protect the users, everybody. No laws that make people's life more difficult. So something to say about that.

Council Member Zerlingo.

Yeah, I... I know that sometimes if we, one of the problems with, um, with, uh, safety and crossing these large, uh, large streets is if we divert people around them, if we make it too inconvenient, we do sometimes encourage people to take risks, whether they're legal ones or not. And so I think, uh, I was reading through council member's suggestions and, uh, I agree with both of them and the latter in part, because I think it regularizes. kind of discretion that we would expect our law enforcement officers to um to show anyway and uh clarifies that situation uh for a very for a relatively limited number of streets and one thing because of our topography uh in here in everett there are some real difficulties where there are principal connectors like 100th street but nothing really convenient uh nearby it. So I think for those reasons, I think this is the there are trade offs here. And I think that's a reasonable, reasonable trade off. And again, the discretion of our police officers and reduces the anxiety of people who are pretty much compelled to use these paths.

okay so we thank you for that so we are on the amendment yeah um go ahead someone from over there um on council member ryan's concerns about the term reasonably necessary um councilman barbano could we serve your purpose if um in five we added at the end you know within a designated bike lane where such bike lane is provided And so that would make the prohibition only apply to streets that have a designated bike lane. And then there'd be no ambiguity involved in what reasonable means.

I don't know. I'm sorry. I will have to process it a little bit. Can you go again, please?

So in number five, on any street where the maximum speed limit is above 30 miles per hour, so it starts off, it's unlawful for any person to operate a motorized foot scooter or micro mobility device, then down to five, on any street with a maximum speed limit above 30 miles per hour unless the device is operated within a designated bike lane where such bike lane is provided. And then he'll get your thoughts on that too.

Yeah, I think it's not just the bike lane, but the sidewalk.

Okay.

That is also the concern. I think the ordinance is trying to do two things. Also promote the use of these devices for people as transportation and also highlight the risks of these devices. And I think considering the very few streets where this applies and the need for people to make choices. I think this leaves the appropriate amount of discretion for people to take those steps. It basically says it's dangerous to do so, but if you have to in those situations, then that is the alternative. You're not going to be punished under this law for doing that.

Thank you. Okay, so... When you, when you mentioned that, are you, which language are you addressing? Was the Burbanos Amendment?

Yeah, I think, I think that is the one that covers all the possibilities, bike lanes and sidewalks.

Well, we have amendment before us at this point. Is there any more discussion?

Councilman right thanks i'd like to take them up separately, if we could i'm uncomfortable allowing for our residents to be funneled to a dangerous situation. I don't I think we should be supporting the infrastructure that have. provides safety instead of hoping for future funding to provide future safety for people. So I understand the concerns and I understand wanting to increase bike ability and pedestrian walkability in the city. But when this came about because of increased head injuries that are being Um, uh, seen in our hospitals and if we're having, uh, folks not having safe pedestrian walkways in the city, I'd like to see the infrastructure, um, be provided before we funnel people towards, uh, known dangerous areas. Thanks.

Okay, well, at this time, we have an amendment and a second so we'd have to deal with that I suppose we could amend the amendment that if that's good customer later.

If the maker of the amendment is open to it and it doesn't run afoul of parliamentary procedure, I would support. Our intention that this could be split into two separate amendments if you're okay with that.

No, I think they should go together.

Okay, so before us, we have at this point we have amendment and with the second to add the additional language.

Is there any more discussion or any more but in cancer to a. Yeah, can somebody just read a state the last one with the changes.

With for Bono's amended amendment with.

Didn't we take out reasonably.

At this point, we haven't. It's currently for Bono's amended. We could.

This is it. This is where we're at. Okay.

Yeah. At this point, that's where we're at. There's certainly ideas about changing that language. Right. Okay. Councilor Weir.

I totally hear what policy and that we need to put a strong emphasis on getting to a point where our streets and our sidewalks are safe and that we're not encouraging people to take unsafe practices, but to council member bonos point. He's not going to take that extra 20 minutes route. It's going to take the chance on that. And so then it's just, you're setting people up for failure and for being penalized for something that is going to occur. And so, yeah, it's a toughie because obviously we don't want to put people in dangerous situations at all. But yeah, I just, I don't know what the solution is because it doesn't sound like there's a short-term fix for those bike paths. I mean, we could be talking a year or we could be talking 10 years. I mean, we just don't know. So what's the best solution in the interim to deal with this situation?

I'll just add this particular section is already existing law. So our ordinance already prohibits riding a motorized foot scooter on a street with 30 miles per hour or more. In the course of this, Council Member Rubano identified that in relation to this specific example and is adding this to it. We've already begun some public outreach around electronic motorcycles and electronic bikes and the risks. And upon passage of this, there'll be some additional efforts undertaken both before the school year and then in the spring next year as funding allows. So we will be taking this as a launching point to do a lot of public education about the risks of these devices and places where it's safe to use them, the importance of wearing a helmet, the danger of putting these devices, you know, giving them to kids without proper supervision or training or understanding how to operate them. So I just wanted to add those two pieces to that.

Okay, so on the amendment.

Sorry, one more question for Hill on this is with the definition of micro mobility device. That doesn't include a regular a non powered bicycle doesn't fit into that definition. Is that correct?

It does not.

So this prohibition here, which applies to motorized scooters and micro mobility devices doesn't stop someone from riding a bicycle on these roads. It's whether they can do a foot scooter on these roads. Is that correct? Okay.

And you're speaking to the amendment. Okay. Thank you. All right. Hearing none, we have amendment two sections. Clerk, please take the roll.

Councilmember Bader?

Yes.

Vice President Ryan? No. Councilmember Burbano? Yes. Councilmember Tuohy? Yes. Councilmember Weir? Yes. Councilmember Zerlingo?

Yes.

President Schwab. Yes.

Okay. So on the amended action item number seven, is there any more discussion? Okay. Hearing none, clerk, please take the roll.

Council Member Bader.

Yes.

Vice President Ryan. Yes. Council Member Burbano. Yes. Council Member Tuohy.

Yes.

Council Member Weir. Yes. Council Member Zerlingo.

Yes.

President Schwab.

Yes. Okay. Action item number eight. Council Bill 2607-37, Third and Final Reading Adopted Ordinance, Amending Ordinance Number 3959-23, entitled, Main Library Building Envelope Improvement Project. Is there a motion?

Council Member Bader, is there a motion?

Second the motion. Motion and seconds are made. Is there any discussion? Okay. CNN Clerk, please take the roll.

Council Member Bader?

Yes.

Vice President Ryan? Yes. Council Member Burbano? Yes. Council Member Tuohy? Yes. Council Member Weir? Yes. Council Member Zerlingo? Yes.

Yes, all right item number nine award the construction contract for the main library building envelope improvement project to CDK construction services Inc in the amount of $1,965,012 do I have a motion.

So moved motion.

Second. Okay motion seconds are made, is there any comment or questions. Seeing none, clerk, take the roll and action on number nine.

Council Member Bader.

Yes.

Vice President Ryan. Yes. Council Member Burbano. Yes. Council Member Tuohy. Yes. Council Member Weir. Yes. Council Members Arlingo. Yes. President Schwab.

Yes. Okay. We have a briefing on item number 10, authorized application for Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission House Bill 2015 grant program. And if awarded, authorize acceptance of the grant and authorize the mayor or her designee to execute all necessary documents and agreements to receive the grant. Good afternoon, Chief.

Good afternoon, Council President Schwab, Council Members. Today, I'm requesting authorization for the Everett Police Department to apply for approximately $5.9 million in grant funding through the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission. This funding is available under House Bill 2015, which was passed in 2025, to help communities and law enforcement agencies certified by the Commission in their effort to recruit and retain officers, strengthen alternative response programs, and improve public safety services. Our proposed application focuses on three broad priorities. First, we are requesting funding to add 10 police officers for a two-year period. These positions would strengthen patrol staffing and expand our traffic safety unit, better preparing the department to meet the growing demand for police services in our community. The additional staffing would improve our ability to respond to calls for service, reduce overtime and employee burnout, and allow officers to complete their growing list of required and advanced training without compromising minimum patrol staffing. The request also includes academy tuition costs, uniforms, equipment, and expanded professional development for new and existing officers with an emphasis on de-escalation and crisis intervention. Second, The application seeks approximately $2.57 million to sustain the city's community alternative response, Everett CARES team, and adds a full-time domestic violence advocate. CARE provides an appropriate trauma-informed response to nonviolent behavior, behavioral health, substance use abuse, welfare, and social services related calls. Maintaining these positions would support ongoing six-day coverage, reduce the demand on our patrol officers, and improve outcomes for people experiencing a crisis. The domestic violence advocate would provide immediate victim support, safety planning, referrals, and ongoing coordination with our investigators. This position would improve continuity of services for victims while allowing officers and detectives to focus more of their time on enforcement and investigative responsibilities. Third, the request includes funding for training and technology that improves officer and community safety. Proposed investments include less lethal safety equipment such as star chase pursuit mitigation technology, drone as first responder, and 40 millimeter less lethal launchers. These resources are intended to reduce risk, support deescalation, improve situational awareness, strengthen accountability, and help officers to work more safely and efficiently. Equipping our community bicycle unit with e-bikes expands our community-oriented policing efforts by increasing mobility, enabling officers to remain in the field longer by reducing fatigue. EPD's body-worn camera program is a critical component of transparency and accountability in modern policing. Continued investment in these camera and related systems strengthens our desire to preserve our community's trust. In total, the preliminary application is approximately $5.916 million and includes $2.26 million for 10 additional police officers for two years, approximately $122,000 for the basic law enforcement accounting tuition for 15 new officers, $70,000 in expanded training and professional development, approximately $890,000 for equipment, technology, and related services, and approximately $2.57 million for our care personnel and a domestic violence advocate. If awarded, we will measure the grant's effectiveness through specific outcomes, including meeting our officer hiring goals, reducing mandatory staff-related overtime, improving priority response times, increasing officer training opportunities, sustaining care coverage, diverting appropriate behavioral health calls from patrol, improving victim follow through in domestic violence cases, and reducing risks associated with the force incidents and vehicle pursuits. This is a significant opportunity to use grant funding to increase police staffing, preserve an effective alternative response program, strengthen services for domestic violence victims, and improve safety for both officers and the community. I respectfully request the council's authorization to apply for this grant and to accept it if awarded. And I'm happy to answer any questions.

Questions from council. Councilor Tuohy.

Yeah, this sounds great. Just so it's a total of 5.9 or just right around there. And then when would we hear from them on this, the timing?

Yeah, that's a great question, Councilmember. It's unclear. We hope in the next couple of months, although the first round of grants that have gone out since January, February this year are still going out. And this is the second round of the grant application. So we're still looking at a couple of months.

And then do they just give you all the money up front or is it reimbursement or is it over a set period of time?

The grant itself is a two-year grant. Okay. We anticipate that we will receive the money up front and that we will have to expend it and obviously account for it as we go. Right.

Great. Thank you.

Council Member Bader.

Thanks, Council President. Of course, Chief, I mean, the difficult thing is a two-year grant for 10 new officers and then what happens? I know obviously... several years ago. We had a similar situation, I think, with a federal grant. We moved forward and it seems like it's worked out. Any thoughts about what you'll be doing now in the next two years to help us figure out we don't have a cliff that we drop off of, drop off of for 10 years or two years and have to... Yeah, absolutely.

It's definitely something we'll have to plan for as our community grows. And of course, we anticipate that our community will grow in the near future. And as we... move through the next two years. We also anticipate some retirements and loss of personnel. So as we are today, we're at 10 vacancies and we anticipate continuing those 10 vacancies just because of attrition. And we'll plan for that moving forward. We have some other funding opportunities that may come before us here in the near future, but we anticipate that that's gonna be just a need for us, a basic need for us. The reality is we're spending a lot of money on overtime just to maintain our patrol staffing. And the goal for this, the funding and adding the officers is an effort to reduce that overtime.

Council Member.

Great, thanks. I think that that might pair into my question. So at the city's maximum matching cost of $391,000, you know, we're in a structural budget deficit and we're struggling to make ends meet. So even if there is a reduction of overtime costs, where's, I guess, where's the money going to be coming from for our matching portion?

That'll come right out of our personnel. That's for the 10 new personnel. That'll come right out of salary and benefit savings that we're we're experiencing as a result of the vacancies that we've been carrying for years, not because we want to carry those vacancies. It's just, that is what it takes to the length of time that it takes to hire folks. So it wouldn't be salary benefits.

So it wouldn't be a new general fund obligation.

Well, it would, it will be once we're done with the grant funding. Okay. Thanks.

Okay, seeing no questions. Thank you very much, Chief. I appreciate it. So before us, we have action item number 10. Is there a motion? Move on the summons. Second the motion. Motion, seconds are made. Any further discussion? Seeing none, clerk, please take the roll.

Council Member Bader. Yes. Vice President Ryan. Yes. Council Member Bravano. Yes. Council Member Tuohy. Yes. Council Member Weir. Yes. Council Member Zerlingo.

Yes.

President Schwab.

Yes. And that's with no further action to come before today. Meeting's adjourned.