so welcome everyone I'm calling the June
12th special city council meeting to
order at 6 30 p.m uh council member Joe
has an excused absence this evening
the purpose of this special meeting is
to conduct a public hearing on the
2024-2029 capital Improvement plan
including the transportation Improvement
program and following this meeting at 7
pm the city council will hold a
committee of the whole meeting to
further discuss the plan
ab8640 the 2024-2029 capital Improvement
plan is the only item for our meeting
and I'd like to invite our Chief
Financial Officer Robert hamoud to make
a presentation welcome Robert
thank you mayor members of the council
good evening members of the public as
well I'm here with Susie monsell our
budget manager and she was really the
one that kind of directed all the
traffic internally to put together the
CIP and the public hearing this evening
and just to recap what is the purpose of
a CIP and again we're in state code
requires cities to hear hearing for the
proposed Transportation Improvement
program that's part of the CIP
Transportation element of the CIP
tonight
and then also we have the public hearing
to inform the public of the CIP the CIP
process and the materials included in it
continue to public hearing will be on
June 26 2023 as well in two weeks three
weeks excuse me and so Susie is going to
continue the hearing
hello I'm short so I'm going to lower
that slightly so
um just starting off high level what is
the CIP and what does it do so it is
ultimately a six-year plan that is
updated every other year
it is a required element of the city's
comprehensive plan it informs the annual
Transportation Improvement program which
is really just the Transportation uh
section of the CIP and really the main
reason we have the public hearing this
evening is that is required for the tip
portion
um the CIP also allows projects to
utilize certain restricted Revenue
sources some require that a project is
included in the CIP before it can use
that Revenue source and uh really it's
also very subject to change it is
um as the final bullet point says it is
a plan it is not a budget it's the
budget itself which the next touch point
should be
the mid biennium budget update which
will come this summer fall that
um puts it into action so for now it's
just what is the city planning for the
next six years it is still very subject
to change but
um a required part of the process
um so I believe we've shown this graphic
before our friends in the parks
department help us develop this but it
really helps show how the CIP fits into
the city's larger planning Capital
planning process in particular so it
starts at the top of the funnel with
these 20-year assessments the 20-year
picture where it's a lot of those Master
plans that have also come before the
council including the master Mobility
plan the park strategic plan utility
system plans
strategic plan the city is Street
strategic plan the climate action plan
and a forthcoming facilities plan along
with some others that are being
discussed and those really look at
that long-term 20-year picture and those
are updated every five or six years or
so for example the park strategic plan
is due for an update in the next year
and a half or so
um and then they really look at the the
long-term needs within that asset
category then we near narrow that down
the funnel to the six-year CIP which
prioritizes that 20-year picture just to
that six-year window
it looks at what we can realistically
fund within that six year window based
on a revenue forecasting
it's updated every two years as opposed
to the five or six years of those
long-term plans and like I said it
really aligns that those big picture
needs with what current resources we
have available within those those next
six years
and then finally at the bottom well
almost to the bottom of the funnel
there's the biennial budget itself where
the council takes action on the items
proposed within the CIP the CIP itself
does not take budget action
and finally once it is approved in a
biennial budget then it becomes a funded
Capital project
um so high level overview of the CIP
itself is this 2024 to 2029 CIP
provides more funding for maintenance
programs than in the past especially
maintaining our current capital needs it
responds to feedback to make more
investments in our infrastructure while
also taking extra care to make sure that
the plan is achievable as we've heard
feedback in the past that we're perhaps
a little overly ambitious in our Capital
planning so we wanted to really make
sure that what we propose for the next
six years is something achievable
um and then finally that it anticipates
some new revenues for transportation
which will um address shortly
um some Public Safety facilities and
park and trails over that whole six-year
Horizon
so at that point speaking of Revenue I
will hand it back to Robert
thank you Susie the next part of the
presentation tonight is on the
transportation benefit district sales
tax and throughout the process of the
CIP we have been discussing with Council
the new as of 2022 the new tool
available to the City of Issaquah which
is a proposal of a councilmatic
transportation benefit district sales
tax which overlays the city and confers
the city boundaries of 0.1 percent
and
the next slide here
the TBD sales tax was actually
recommended originally by the capital
planning task force last year and the
stakeholders
and members of the community that has
first recommended this is one of the
options to fund capital projects in the
future for the city especially in the
transportation side
with the TBD Transportation benefit
district sales tax it distributes the
costs among all the transportation users
not just Issaquah residents so if you
imagine anybody shopping within the city
they drive their car or they take the
bus to the City of Issaquah from
elsewhere they're using the roads
they're using The Pedestrian facilities
they're using the services here when
they shop at Fred Meyer when they shop
at Target when they shop or even go to
the Front Street or restaurants so and
again when you look at the local
employers through the daytime population
is often is higher larger than the
population that lives here so part of
that is with the TBD you actually
generate sales tax from all the
businesses anybody doing business in the
City of Issaquah the burden doesn't just
fall in the residence for this tax
and 2.2 million dollars is anticipated
annually 4.1 percent Transportation
benefit District it would be the same
level of
the 0.1 percent affordable housing sales
tax that the city has in place right now
the proposal for this 0.1 percent TBD
would be to use towards the Northwest
sammamishan on motorized improvements
and also the multi-year intelligent
transportation system implementation
so the impact to Residents the average
annual impact of residents for household
would be less than one hundred dollars
per year based on current spending
habits and again this is a very rough
estimate
almost everybody even
heard of my wife and I have different
spending habits from each other so it
could be higher for some residents it
could be lower for some residents it
also depends if they're making most of
their purchases either online or within
the city limits at retail facilities or
in Bellevue or in Seattle or elsewhere
so we calculated based on an average
household about two and a half residents
that would be about a hundred dollars a
year based on the spending habits so for
example a forty thousand dollar car the
purchase price for the 0.1 TBD would
increase forty dollars
if it's a 500 television it'd be 50
cents
and gas and grocery items and you think
of the things you buy the most the store
most gas is a fixed exercise Taft from
the state there's no sales tax applied
to gas in Washington state so that's not
impacted and most grocery items eggs
dairy non-perishable perishable food
even most non-perishable food products
are not subject to sales tax either so
it's not hitting everything you're
buying on a daily basis
and this is a comparison table of local
sales tax rates and you can see actually
the
the comparison between
Issaquah and many of the East Side
cities Compared to North Bend Snoqualmie
and Covington what that is is Sound
Transit so those cities are outside the
Sound Transit
planning area so as parts of Redmond as
well but you could see we're we're about
10.1 percent Shoreline is 10.3 Seattle
is 10.25 Bellevue is the same as this
across 10.1 there's some areas that are
outside the soundtrack Sound Transit
project area not a lot of retail in
those areas but the areas of those
cities including Issaquah that have some
households outside they're not subject
to that sound transit but then again
that's not the entire city
so the sales tax breakdown you can see
that the state share
right off the top for every
one dollar resident pays in Issaquah
sales tax the city receives
approximately 10 cents and then putting
it into the total of the 10.1 percent
sales tax applied in the City of
Issaquah I can see the state share alone
is 6.5 percent
and the county actually gets a 0.15 of
the local share of one percent so you
can see that our base rate is 0.85
percent our affordable housing is 0.1
percent so it's a very small portion of
what you pay at the stores here very
smart portion actually comes back to the
City of Issaquah the residents and
businesses here
the proposed projects to be funded by
the 0.1 percent TBD sales tax the
intelligent transportation system
improvements and also the Northwest
Sammamish Road non-motorized
improvements right now the its plan and
development aims to
make traffic flow more efficiently and
more safely and for pedestrians so
mobility within the city would be
focused on uh with upgrading Loops
signals at intersections and traffic
flow within the community Northwest
Sammamish Road non-motorize improvements
it's also been called pinch point at
times it aims to provide pedestrian
bicycle infrastructure to better connect
South Lake Sammamish neighborhoods
amenities and services in Issaquah
any questions on the sales tax
next slide here was a request to show
what the property section excuse me
property tax and sales tax per household
impact is the residents here at the City
of Issaquah and before I show some
charts on the following Pages I'm just
going to go through some assumptions so
first of all proposed options assume
that we're going to show is what happens
in 2027 during the CIP during the full
implementation of many of the elements
of the CIP you can see that the
councilmatic point one percent TBD sales
tax this scenario and again it's a
scenario only no action has been taken
assumes a
2.1 TBD approved by 2027 voter approved
property tax revenue for New City
facilities new voter approved Parks
revenues assuming 2 million per year
and that is again just an assumption
just if certain options are taken this
is what the scenario would look like
the cost for new facilities are in the
median ranges that were presented to
council during the cap process and that
includes the city hall campus fire
station relocation court and police
upgrades as well
and inflationary increases are not
factored into the estimated tax data and
so you're also going to see comparisons
to other cities but it's very difficult
because the city's economic bases are
different if you think of Bellevue and
all the high density construction going
on it's a different comparison than our
city
but so is a city such as Snoqualmie that
is dependent on property tax that
doesn't have a lot of local retail and
it's not growing so some of these
comparisons are a little different we're
just looking at property and sales tax
with these assumptions we're not with
facility tax or fees or other Revenue
sources
and so this chart stacked graph I know
for some members of the audience this
might be a little hard to see on this
chart so I apologize on the screen the
estimated average household property in
sales taxes by 2027. you could see when
we talk about the base
property tax you can see current and no
change that base property taxes Below in
blue eight hundred and fifty dollars and
then you see
excuse me that's the 0.85 base sales tax
so that's the base sales tax you pay
that's everybody paid then you see the
gray
so people pay a little bit more on the
property tax the sales tax side than the
actual property tax the property tax
right now again this is an average house
approximately 1.2 million dollars or so
is the current estimated median home
price in the City of Issaquah it's about
688 dollars
per household but again it depends on
certain factors depends when you moved
in the house depends if you have a
senior exemption or not so there's a lot
of a lot of ifs to this but this is just
showing trying to show a comparison
you can see with the 0.1 percent
affordable housing is talked about a
hundred dollars per household for that
point one percent
you can see the current no change just
money coming to the City of Issaquah not
your total tax bill just money coming
from sales tax and property tax is about
one thousand six hundred and thirty
eight dollars per household again
assuming an average household assuming a
median home price about 1.2 million
dollars
if we looked at the median comparison of
the the low estimates we've shown for
City properties and the high estimates
we come up with an average of about two
thousand four hundred and sixty nine
dollars if you factor in Parks revenues
we talked about so a levy that would
equate to approximately 2 million a year
in new revenue for parks by 2027.
and I also break out you could see just
an estimate and these can be
interchangeable of course because all
the estimates will change when we have
different plants for buildings but we're
estimating in this case
you can see red and fire for example 211
dollars
each category is color-coded has
their total amounts they're the
estimates so you can see that if you
went so to speak all in with the median
price for new city facilities
plus again the TBD of 0.1 percent and
plus Parks revenue is a two million
dollars a year you're looking at
2469 and you have a question yes
thank you so just to clarify because
right now the public hearing is about
the CIP yes which doesn't necessarily
make any of these decisions and what
you're presenting here is what I would
count as three separate decisions one
for the TBD correct one for all of the
facilities which includes the city hall
the fire station police and court and
then another even further in the future
potential decision on Parks Revenue yes
so even though we're presenting all of
this none of those decisions have been
made and none of them are being made
tonight is that correct that is correct
okay thank you
and once the capital Improvement plan is
proved approved that does not mean that
those decisions have been made either no
it does not
so again we were trying to show
scenarios just a what if scenario where
this came from and so also if you apply
to the what-if scenario to
our neighboring some of our neighboring
communities we were trying to see where
we stand right now so if it's about 1
638 dollars is the average a household
pays what does that look like for an
average household of
essentially the same assessed value of
Home in Bellevue and Kirkland Snoqualmie
you can see interestingly enough that
Snoqualmie is the highest that's because
they do not have a very they do not have
a sales tax base so they're very
property packed tax base dependent so
Sammamish so because of that they've had
lid lifts and other increases in their
property taxes over time
Bellevue you could see it's about 1900
so we are actually the lowest on this
list right
we have a question
go back one slide just for a second
absolutely
um can you on the slide on the right can
you remind me which part of that is
essentially sales tax base and which
part is essentially property tax right
so the blue the blue is sales tax base
so that's the base and then the 0.1 TBD
is the yellow on the right and then the
dark red or the the burgundy is the 100
that's the affordable housing sales tax
so one so 1050 out of that notional
2469 would be set it would be I'm just
going to say regressively sales tax and
the other 1400 uh
1419 would be progressively uh property
tax base that's correct okay thank you
in this scenario that we're trying to in
this notional scenario that involves
three decisions in the future
thank you have to add that to every
answer yes
and Susie did you want to talk about the
project aspect was there any more
questions about this chart here
close this out real quick so
um this uh this chart summarizes the
um by asset category so by the different
buckets of projects the total proposed
project so active here refers to if it
has cost anticipated between 2024 and
2029 and then the total proposed future
year project count so those are just
projects identified beyond that six year
Horizon and there's an appendix of those
in the back of the document and then
finally the total proposed cost of those
projects just the total buy asset
category to give you an idea of the
grand scheme
and with that
um we are happy to turn it back to the
mayor to open the public hearing
first I'm actually going to see if
Council has any questions before we do
the public hearing
that's council member would it be
appropriate to ask a question about one
of the proposed uh expenditures that you
had in there
yes so the uh traffic Improvement system
uh is this yet the the one that we would
be able to get that would uh tie us to
the states uh light system such that we
could sequence our lights off of the
lights that are controlled by the state
around the various exits
um hi this is Andrea Snyder Deputy City
administrator the intelligent
transportation system for its system is
what you're referring to I think and yes
there's a number of different
Technologies under that umbrella and one
of those Technologies would better allow
us to coordinate with Washington State
okay because that has been something
that I've been asking this question for
the last 14 years I'm very excited to
hear that that would be potentially part
of that because my understanding is that
is as
I want to set people's expectations too
high but that really is a sea change for
what we can do in terms of traffic
management if we off of that system
thank you any additional questions of
council members before I open the public
hearing we do have a few people signed
up to speak
it doesn't look like it so I will now
open the public hearing at 6 51 pm
and if you are joining us virtually and
would like to make comments please raise
your virtual hand or send the host a
chat message if you're on the phone you
can press star three and if you've
joined by computer or smartphone you can
look for the hand icon
uh if you're in the room and did not
sign up I will ask for other I will ask
for other speakers before I close this
portion of the meeting and so city clerk
has anyone signed up to speak or
indicate a desire to speak this evening
no one signed up at this time
um but we do have people in the room
so I'm going to assume that there will
be some comments made
um
if you would like to speak you want to
raise your hand and when you come to the
microphone please identify yourself and
your relationship to the city and five
minutes for me comments who would like
to go first we have four people in the
room
good
come on up Connie
hi Connie Marsh live up on squawk and
I've been to several of the meetings
that toured from community meeting to
community meeting and
um
the new what you're calling Public
Safety
stuff was not within those meetings so I
have to tell you
they were not prioritized we there was
no scanning to understand whether the
community liked the concept or not so I
find it odd that we're having the public
hearing and then we're going to have the
conversation about that what you're
calling safety improvements after the
beginning of the public hearing when
there was an opportunity to talk about
it each at each of these Community
meetings that was not taken up
so
I was just rereading the list that was
provided as a link in the
oddly placed area of the website for
this public hearing and it also did not
include that so I sort of call foul on
that because that is a big conversation
that I feel is being sort of slid in
sideways to this uh conversation I'm
going to stay and talk about that a
little more in the next section where
that's sort of the topic as compared to
now which is mostly the tip so
the one funding question that I was not
able to ascertain from the presentation
was how we use the CIP in the tip for
impact fees
which now we're finding that the people
who want to not build here do want to
build her but don't are complaining
about the size of our impact fees now in
the past City councils have decided not
to put things in the capital Improvement
plan
so that they wouldn't be added to impact
fees
or they decided not to include them in
the studies for some reason because they
wanted the town to be affordable to
build
so which of these items that are going
in the CIP
potentially are going to be added to
impact fees when are those fee schedules
going to be updated so that the people
who are moving in are going to be paying
for these new things that we're supposed
to be doing and
how does
deficit for example of administrative
buildings and safety improvements
because you call it that
going to fit in with our ability to have
New Growth Fund those things what
happens when we get rid of an older
building that we had been using to serve
the purpose and we sell it now where
does deficit fall in one of those
studies
I don't understand I do know that the
community
is carrying a burden already of how much
it costs to live in Issaquah
and uh there's going to be other fees
and charges from other places than
Issaquah that are going to build upon
this funding
I think we want to be very careful of
what we want to add how much we want to
develop what we want to give away to
make people want to develop here who say
it's too expensive and I don't think
that you're that this presentation is is
allowing for sort of that public comment
on the complexity of it all so those are
mainly questions and then maybe in the
next public hearing I can sound a little
more coherent and educated on what
projects I think should be in the CIP in
the tip thank you thanks Connie next
you're fine
there's a little button on the pad that
has to turn the light red
that little button okay and I'm sure
Wendy we do have two public hearings so
if it's confusing
um the clerk will let us know if she
thinks it's a good opportunity for you
to do well I'll tell her that okay my
husband Mark hofto and I are here
basically to talk about
um
walking around Issaquah and downtown
Issaquah and I looked at the
the whole packet on Transportation
because I
as from the perspective of pedestrians
and some of the hot spots that we
encounter quite a lot and so I don't
know if if that seems relevant or not
getting some good head knots all right
well we're daily Walkers and like a lot
of people we love the walkability of
Issaquah but and like a lot of people we
have a dog and we are out every single
day
um
we just live over here on Second Ave
Northeast and we walk over here to the
trails but large a lot of the times we
go through Confluence and head and do
errands and head over to
you know like the REI area we head over
to all the best pets and we head over to
the the post office where we have a post
office box and we cross a lot of streets
and we've been doing this for years and
we have kind of come up with a short
list
of some specific places that are really
repeatedly
um
dangerous to us as as pedestrians just
trying to walk around town
and I had spoken with with mayor Paulie
about this and that's and she encouraged
us to you know come come and let you
know about that so that's why we're here
okay well
um I do have some specific ones if you
want to hear about them
but I could also write something up and
email it to you as well and there would
be more than I just have kind of our
three top uh danger zones
that we encounter on a regular basis and
so
we go to the Post Office a lot and we
often cross through the Gilman Village
area on our walk and then need to cross
the street at that four-way Inner Light
intersection at I think it's Fourth
right there that kind of heads on up
North Juniper and Gilman and fourth yes
yeah okay and
um
we run into this a lot
um
as we're on that West Side crosswalk
going north
um
the
walk sign is on
but the car's coming down forth
actually have green light
to turn right or go straight
and I can't tell you how many times
we've just about been run over and have
had our lives Flash before our eyes
um with cars just doing that and being
very unaware of
the fact that there's a walk sign on for
the pedestrians they're in a big hurry
they Rush up they turn right really fast
and this happens both ways when we're
standing on that that other Corner
waiting to come back
the exact same thing happens and one
thing that's true there is that the post
office big sign on that corner does
block the view of the drivers that are
coming down forth
and I stand out on the corner and act
like a maniac because I want people to
see us but if you're just kind of
standing there on the corner they don't
even necessarily see you and they just
see that green light
and that's all and they don't see the
fact that the walk sign still has 20 30
seconds on it and that is also
we've nearly gotten run over and I'm not
exaggerating when I say that it's really
dangerous
so even if you cross over to the other
side and cross it's a little better but
all the directions people want to turn
right really quick people want to come
and turn left and they're really not
paying attention to pedestrians at all
so if we feel a lot like
there's a certain ambigua ambiguity to
those lights
um
because they're not tuned in as
non-pedestrians and drivers at that
moment
to the fact that the pedestrian light is
going they're tuned into the green light
and
I don't know how I mean it seems like it
wouldn't have to be that hard to somehow
either not let that be a green light or
a change you know what they're seeing or
you know have a much more prominent
um you know yield to pedestrians like
massively prominent way of getting
people's attention because we're all
aware of the distracted driving
and people going too fast especially on
Gilman
it's pretty crazy is that me did I do
something in my time up you can wrap up
okay so that's the number one and and
then there's you know a couple others
the other one I just want to bring in
though really is the Front Street
um what is it Dogwood and where Rainier
comes in because there's another
ambiguous light
and when cars are on Dogwood they're
going to turn left or right there really
is no light for them they're just kind
of guessing Okay do I go now and we
don't have a light in that direction
either as Walkers so people are turning
in front of us and it's kooky and if
there could be some clarity around the
lights it would be great thank you Wendy
and I would encourage you if you've only
seen I can write a top two then send
them your list
okay I have more than two no I was gonna
say send them your entire list and thank
you for coming to do that
looking at Mark looking at Corey would
anybody else like to come up come on up
Corey
Corey Christensen squawk Mountain a
quick comment about this the
presentation sort of follow-up
councilman Mark's comments about the
taxes
um
personally I don't really like any new
taxes that said one thing about the
sales tax is there's a regional element
to that and I think I think that's
important to consider and then on the
current slides in the past when we've
looked at
tax increases for homeowners we've taken
sort of the mythical whatever the value
average value of a home is and so when I
look at those numbers the 1600 and
something I don't quite understand that
that number I do understand the mythical
whatever the whatever the home value
number is because then somebody can do
the math pretty quickly to see how much
they're going to pay so I think you need
to be presenting whatever you're doing
in those terms and also something that
equates to the cost for people that live
in apartments because the all these
taxes trickle down and especially
property taxes and so I think that's
important consider duration thank you
thank you Corey
I'm just going to check with the city
clerk to see if anyone is online
now maybe maybe wishing to make a
comment
we have one person oh actually hold on
here might have had someone else oh we
only have one member of the public
online and they're not indicating a
desire to speak at this time
okay thank you very much
um the administration is recommending to
the council that we continue the public
hearing to the June 26 city council
meeting given that the city council is
still deliberating the plan that they
are you are reviewing
and is there somebody that is able to
make a motion
um I would make a motion to continue the
public hearing to the June 26 2023 city
council meeting
is there a second second
so it's been moved and seconded is there
any discussion
uh seeing none all those in favor please
signify by saying aye aye
those opposed
that carries a six to nothing
unanimously
um so just as a reminder the city
council will be convening a committee of
the whole meeting here in council
chambers at 7 pm tonight or 706 p.m
tonight to deliberate the capital
Improvement plan and so for our virtual
attendees we will use the same WebEx
meeting for this next meeting as well
there being no further business this
meeting is adjourned at 706 pm and we
will take a couple minutes to shuffle
some chairs
foreign
are we ready I see the light on there
but I'll give you a second to trigger us
all onto camera again
okay thank you welcome everyone I
council president Walsh called the June
12th Committee of the whole meeting to
order at 707 PM I would like to note
that council member Joe has an excused
absence this evening uh there are going
to be multiple public comment
opportunities at tonight's meeting there
will be a general public comment
opportunity at the beginning of the
meeting or you can make comments after
the presentation and counsel question
and answer period on tonight's agenda
items
so
um just to give a quick overview of what
is on our agenda we just have the one
item which is the
um
they call it id1344 2024 2029 Capital
Improvement plan feedback from
committees and city council
deliberations but we're going to start
with a public comment so members of the
public May address council at this time
in person or virtually those who signed
up in advance to make comments will be
called on first if you're joining us
virtually and would like to make
comments go ahead and raise your virtual
hand you're on the phone you can press
star three you're on a computer
smartphone you're going to look for that
hand icon or you can send the host a
chat message to indicate you'd like have
a desire to speak here in the room and
did not sign up I'll ask for other
speakers before closing the portion of
the meeting and so clerk do we have
anyone signed up
no one signed up and we still just have
one member of the public on virtually
and they are not indicating a desire to
speak
I believe there are members of the
public in person who would love to speak
come on up thank you
hi Connie Marsh again and this is a cow
so I can talk at this point about
anything and I'm going to talk about
your website
and your multiple calendars that don't
agree
and so you have to toggle back and forth
to the two calendars so I spend an
unreasonable amount of time trying to
figure out when meetings are so that I
think this is my third weekend recently
that I have had to try to
figure out what meeting is what so this
is the special counsel of the whole the
prior meeting was the
special counsel meeting yet the special
counsel meeting was not linked into the
bottom calendar where most of the events
and meetings are linked into and I don't
know how to get it solved because I
I've made people answer me on weekends
and if you want people to actually know
when meetings are have to get them in
all of the calendars and it has to be
easy and this again was was not even
though the subject matter was really dry
and they probably don't care I would
like to get it fixed so that
I don't have to try to do that again and
I don't know how I've tried several
different ways so if Council would ask
for it to be fixed then maybe
it can get fixed thank you
okay anyone else like to speak nope and
nobody else online
at that point
okay
um so looking at anything
else yeah I think at this point we have
our agenda items so calling up we've got
Andrew Schneider Deputy City
administrator Robert mood our Chief
Financial Officer and Susie monsell our
budget manager which one of you wants to
start us all off
okay thank you
round two tonight with you good evening
again
so tonight's meeting
we're going to provide some questions on
Direction needed and then an update
process and feedback
Direction needed
these are four key points uh tonight
that we are asking the direction of
council for
first point is the council generally
supportive of taking the next steps to
pursue a councilmatic 0.1 percent
Transportation benefit district sales
tax
number two is the council supportive of
the projects to be funded by the new
Revenue stream includes intelligent
transportation system projects in
Northwest Sammamish Road non-motorized
improvements or should other unfunded
projects be considered instead
number three does the council concur
with the administration's recommendation
to prioritize parks and Trail projects
in the later year of the CIP
2027-2029 in anticipation of a new
Revenue source
and number four does the proposed CIP
reflect the council's desire to uphold
long-standing infrastructure commitments
they feel the city has made to the
community
just a review or a summary of the CIP
updates first the boards and commissions
refine the criteria for the CIP we
received more feedback in of how the
draft CIP met the criteria and we really
appreciate that feedback it really
helped to drive this process Council
committees reviewed sections of the CIP
and then the committee of the whole
where we're at tonight discusses the
entire CIP and deliberates and then
Council adoption at this point
tentatively slated for the 26th
so the feedback from Council committees
all Council committees generally agree
to the proposed CIP response
to the council goals and outcomes
excuse me the council goals and outcomes
the SSP was generally in support of how
Parks Trails priorities were shown in
the CIP the several council members did
request extensive community outreach and
engagement as Future Park funding
mechanisms are explored
the m i committee generally supported
pursuing a 0.1 percent councilmatics TBD
sales tax
the requested robust Community
engagement prior to a council vote in
the fall if pursued the staff would
return to m i with the public engagement
plan as soon as possible
and M and I also
was in support of proposed projects to
be funded by the 0.1 percent tpd sales
tax and I'll take this time to ask the
council if any members of the committee
wanted to
wanted to make comments
I'm not seeing any so you can go ahead
still short
um apologies that this says additional
the main the first two policy questions
or around the TBD sales tax those slides
were shifted to the earlier presentation
this evening
um so for that next policy question
around prioritizing parks and Trail
projects in the final half for the
second half of the proposed CIP that the
near-term priorities
um for Parks parks and Trail projects in
particular particular are still focused
on those arpa funded projects so there's
the Confluence Park project
um and then there's the uh the larger
one the Veterans Memorial Field Depot
Park pedestrian Park project
along with some of some smaller project
Park priorities the more robust focus on
Park and trail projects is in the late
the latter half of the CIP which is in
alignment with the task force
recommendation of um of pursuing uh of
exploring pursuing an additional Parks
funding source following the pursuit of
a transportation path as well in
Mobility
um and then finally
um we uh we look for feedback on
beginning those discussions of that new
Park and trail dedicated funding source
such as a park bond for example
um beginning really in 26 27 which again
is in alignment with that task force
recommendation
um we're gonna tee up this question
um here but um ask for feedback a little
bit later so I'm a long-standing
commitment Criterion which we added
based on Council feedback was intended
to honor infrastructure commitments the
city may have made in the past
um and to uh you know call those out
then um we did provide a list of active
projects
um and the number of cips in which each
project has been identified those are
provided in tonight's packet materials
um and we heard some board feedback that
we did want to bring to your attention
which was also provided in the packet
but most of the boards that we discussed
did have some concerns around
transparency of this Criterion and the
potential lack of equity considerations
but some still thought this to be an
important to be an important Criterion
and that it should apply to all project
phases
um so finally the proposed CIP includes
many long-standing commitments which
have been evaluated with equity and
other criteria in mind so we wanted to
um to for this Criterion in particular
ask for Council feedback later
um this evening
so bringing it back as Robert mentioned
we are in that dark blue stage or the
dark black stage pardon me of the full
Committee of the whole discussing the
full CIP and pending Council feedback
this evening on these policy questions
will return on the 26th for um to
continue the public hearing as well as
anticipated adoption
um and with that we have the policy
questions back but we're also happy to
take any questions at this point
okay so we'll start with questions
before public comment uh councilmember
Mart
what what does the answer to question
number four mean what would what's the
net
possible impact of a yes versus no one
question number
uh councilmember marks uh we would be
seeking feedback from the city council
if the answer uh so if the answer is yes
that the proposed CIP reflects the city
council's desire to uphold long-standing
infrastructure commitments they feel the
city has made to the community then uh
then we would anticipate Council would
be satisfied generally with a mix of
projects reflected in the CIP and we
would not anticipate changes
um based on that one Criterion if we
heard that Council was
um did not feel that the CIP in its
proposed format reflected the council's
desire to uphold long-standing
infrastructure commitments then we would
ask Council how would Council like to
change the CIP to ensure that it does
reflect what you would like to see
thank you
any other questions at this point
okay so I'm going to take a moment get
some public comment and
put anyone in the audience like to make
public comments
take it away
uh Corey Christensen again I wanted to
comment on the eckhouse Confluence Park
section first I think there's some good
progress in in the the in the packet but
there's still some
um
of the same what I call errors
misconceptions uh in there the first
part in the first part in the first
section on the eckhouse the eckhouse is
being lumped in with the the projects
um on the where the new parks
Maintenance Shop the bridge all of these
things and those those projects that
phase of the park is so far out in the
future so far past 2027 that it's really
unfair to put the eckhouse in there
that's basically Parks Purgatory because
it's going to require so much to happen
that it's it's unfair so please pull it
out of there the the other part
the it's back to the funding and the
landmarking and the timeline I think if
you were to say that we were actually
going to start construction on the
eckhouse in 2026 that's fine the but we
need to be starting the process of the
grant funding excuse me the landmarking
process because that's the key to the
grant funding one of the errors in this
still is that the two sources of grant
funding
the King County Historical preservation
people which is true and the Issaquah
History Museum history museum is not a
grant funding funder there are somebody
that asked for money though they are an
important partner in this project where
money comes from is the state they have
a archaeological and historical
preservation division that then has a
whole host of different Grant grants and
funding sources some matching some not
and and many that the eckhouse
eventually would qualify for and some of
those are fairly substantial some are
small like an educational or
interpretive sort of element and then
the third area or excuse me Grant funder
is or culture and those essentially are
are the three and if you if you take a
look at the King County Historical
preservation website basically
and you read about landmarking and all
this it's a big collaborative effort
where the grant funding
comes from the landmarking commission
the historical preservation people all
of them working on projects just like
the eckhouse and the eckhouse is a very
high value project to them because it is
on public land
it's publicly owned and it's going to be
publicly used and that is not something
that many things that are Landmark are
there they can being all sorts of
different things but not something
that's going to have that huge a public
benefit and so all I ask you to do is
pull down the part about just getting
started because
I think it's it's so important and I
kind of still have this question I keep
asking myself and that is why is the
parks department so afraid of moving
forward with the landmarking I could
even see that if they're so afraid of
moving forward that we could hold off
landmarking until 2024 the actual push
the button and it happens but we still
do all the homework up to that point so
that in 2024 then we're we're getting
in the competition for all the potential
grants and all of that so then by 2026
we could actually be doing something the
current trajectory sort of puts us on
this timeline where we don't even start
for however many three years and the
problem that that I have is that we need
to actually start we need to be moving
forward the process to doing this with
public money bringing back King County
and state money to our to the little old
Eck house and to have this funded not by
the citizens of Issaquah solely but by
money that we've all put in it's going
to be a long process but please let's
let's start this process and let's not
be afraid of collaborating with the
state and the historical preservation
people thank you
our other esteemed member
[Music]
so I have a specific ask to bounce on
off of Corey I think we need a work
plan item
required for eckhouse in order to get
the grant funding in place by the time
they say they're going to do something
with it right now they just have magic
money but at this point in time we don't
have a work item to require the work to
get that money which I see that a lot
throughout the CIP you have money and
it's sort of
pops up which
so looking at a CIP without them the
matching work item is confusing so then
the next one I'm going to go to is what
you're calling safety which really
uh I guess I find that term disingenuous
because it's really more about getting a
new city hall
and less about safety I know safety is
going to get people to potentially vote
because people like the term safety but
people also like the truth and they
don't like the idea that they're being
manipulated by by words so I'd be super
cautious about that the other thing that
freaks me out is there is no dollar
amount in the
um this campus line item and when I go
back to impact fees I don't understand
impact fees with no no dollar amount on
a huge thing
uh and so it doesn't seem to me to be
working like a CIP is supposed to work
given that so my response would be to
just say okay we want to do
City Hall we want the fire station we
want a better Court we don't know how
this is our estimated amount and have it
be as big as you're comfortable with
and put it in the CIP
and you have future conversation you
don't look like you've already somehow
negotiated it to particular options
without including the public in those
negotiations
which you actually sort of have but you
can start anew by just saying okay we
think we need these things and now we're
going to go from here we have a gross
estimate that it's going to cost this
much and that is where you start the
public conversation and
um so I
I guess I'm going to
stop because anything else might
actually help you get more money which
I'm not sure that I am on board with
helping you ask the community to give
you more money
thank you and just do a last check in
online
no one else okay fantastic so
this is where we get to have our whole
Committee of the whole thing and talk
through all of this so I I think we've
been asked for four particular points of
Direction needed
um but I think I would almost add in a
fifth or a 0.5 which is are we feeling
about the CIP process are there you know
how do we feel toward our goals and
outcomes are we moving in that direction
um because this would obviously be that
moment that if something isn't working
out that we want to make sure we're
giving back to the administration so
I will open it up I don't know if
anybody wants to talk about any
particular area I can go down the line
or I can ask each individual all of the
questions or
are you reaching for it Barb go for it
you know I just uh I was slow on the on
the button
um because uh the the question about the
long-standing commitment
number four is to me is slightly
different than whether or not we want
the Criterion
if I read it does the proposed CIP
reflect the city council's desire to
uphold long-standing infrastructure that
could be true whether or not we have a
Criterion in place for a long-term
commitment so could we go back to that
are we being asked to comment on whether
we want that long-standing um
commitment Criterion or are we just
being asked
if we think the CIP reflects our desire
to do that
uh Council memory Michelle thank you for
the question this is Andrea Snyder
um we are wanting to hear what council's
feedback is so if you have strong
feelings on either of the questions that
you raised then we would like to hear
that I think
um what we're trying to do with this
question is try to get to
um the the heart of the matter what we
think was council's intent during the
discussions in January that led to the
creation of this Criterion
um so we we would want to have that
conversation and understand are we
meeting the intent of those January
discussions in the retreat and the
intent of council with the the CIP as we
have it
um if uh you know the discussion of a
criteria as we've talked about in our
committees and the council committees
this really is an art uh more than it is
a science and applying these criteria
and
um there's a lot of really important
things we wanted to discuss tonight and
we didn't want to uh get two caught up
about criteria and how we Define
criteria at this stage knowing the
process that we followed and we really
were trying to get to does this meet the
intent of those original discussions
back in January
foreign
thank you
so I'm gonna take a moment and ask a
question
um
I'm going to reflect back some of what I
heard from Connie's questions about the
impact fees
can you talk about how the tip CIP
H impacts impact fees
um
which items might qualify when they
would start to apply to developers and
then particularly
if we were to sell an existing building
if that would have any effect on impact
fees and then
are there any concerns with the
public facilities project the fc050 not
having a named price does that matter
for impact fees
all three of you we can just just have a
great group conversation thanks
we're going into the weeds so that's uh
my territory a little bit so
um generally speaking when we mentioned
the the CIP tip is a mechanism by Way by
which some projects get a funding source
mitigation and impact fees are the prime
example of that that a project is
included in the CIP or it has to be
included in the CIP
to be eligible for mitigation and impact
fees so generally when those fees get
updated which is activity led by our
community Planning and Development
Department that they take into account
the projects that are included in the
CIP especially in those that near-term
Horizon as those are within the CIP as
those are firmer and then they speak
with us again on longer term priorities
and then that's what gets fed into the
larger formula for calculating impact
fees so that's at least the first part
of the question
um and uh in terms of when those fees
next come up I look over to the deputy
City administrator for that piece
so we are starting the process for the
concurrency update which uh will be
important for uh setting some of our
impact fees and so that process we've
been Gathering data over the past year
to update our model and we will be
looking to get a consultant to help us
with that concurrency update in a matter
of weeks and so that work is beginning
that concurrency update will help
establish some of our transportation
impact fees and other fees and so the we
would be looking at the rest of the
impact fees after the concurrency study
is complete
and then dovetailing on that for the
other parts of that question as well
um as the council continues to
deliberate the larger facilities
questions
um I don't think we're ready I look in
case anyone disagrees with me I don't
think we're ready to
um speak to the other parts of that
question just yet I think we need to see
which paths the council is considering
for those facility planning as well as
the funding mechanisms that are being
contemplated so there's still a lot of
question marks in place on that item
in just a
piggyback off those comments one of the
funding sources when we talked about
cash funding or at least a cash
contribution to New City facilities that
I would would include the sale the
future sale of City Hall Northwest
properties but also we do have about 4.7
million dollars remaining from the
Lakeside development agreement that
would be dedicated for public facilities
so that would be part of the cash source
of that particular project now not
having a dollar assigned to it doesn't
impact anything else just because again
council could take action on obviously
that dollar
dollar amount in the future when we have
plans and options that are more concrete
so to follow up does that suggest that
in some ways setting impact fees
isn't just about 100 pulling numbers for
the short-term period out of the CIP it
also includes considerations for some of
those
other items that might be a little bit
more long-term a little bit more fuzzy
and so it's okay that
fc50 doesn't have a specific
line item for price
at this point this would not have an
impact
let me try to answer that
um so we're not setting impact fees with
this CIP that would come from a separate
process we hope uh one we anticipate
being able to uh develop that concept
that option for City facilities before
we would establish impact fees so we
wouldn't be trying to establish impact
fees on a very
um you know nebulous number that we have
right now for trying to plan ahead for
these needed City facilities
I I guess my thing there is are we
causing any problems by not having a
specific number in there but it sounds
like future conversation decisions will
give us that future number which will
go into the impact fees so that's
correct fantastic
um
I just went off on a tangent of
questions and all of that trying to
understand some of the areas that our
community brought up
we still need to get into all of the
direction needed
um you have a OS okay go ahead a quick
follow-up to that answer that you just
gave Deputy City illustrator so when
you're talking about when and your most
recent comments when we're talking about
like future decisions will impact
um how we're thinking about impact fees
with regard to the new city hall
um we're talking about like this year
next year when you mean future like in
the coming months not like
years talking about like very soon
um it's it's correct that we base our
impact fees off of the project that are
within the CIP
um what we would be doing when we would
establish impact fees for City
facilities or government
um
forgetting exactly the title government
mitigation fees would be uh would we
would take into account what that dollar
amount is our best estimate is for a
city facilities and so and that includes
all of our city facilities needs not
just a new municipal court or other
things but maintenance of our existing
facilities Etc and so
um so we would base the impact fee off
of what is within the CIP but also our
best estimates at the time that we
established those impact fees
does that answer your question I think
so yeah all right the gears are just
spinning on
if there's something that could be
provided written on that too and this
comes back at the next meeting
also to the
sure we can do that
councilmember hunt
thanks uh on the public safety space
needs page which was provided as part of
our packet but is currently separate
from the CIP
it doesn't have a timeline most Pages do
maybe all the other Pages do
um will this have a timeline
when it goes into the CIP assuming that
Council feels it should go in the CIP
yes it will have a timeline and again
there's a lot of factors to it but once
a program or a plan is devised and
supported by Council we go back to
council we get seek Council Improvement
we can do an amendment to the CIP at
that time too
okay so but my question is when we have
the CI this CIP for adoption would it
have a timeline associated with it or
that would come later that would come
later
okay thanks
council member a hey just a quick
question
um I'm kind of binding up on number four
there the long-term commitments so I was
looking at the chart that you provided
that shows the 2024-2029 active project
inclusion history and so there's a whole
bunch of things that are new there's a
couple that have been in one CIP and
there's a bunch that have been in two
cips is there anything that's been in
either the previous or one back CIP
that's not in the CIP
that like a long-standing commitment
that we dropped because that's that I
can't prove the negative I can't find
the negative so there were some things
that we dropped
detailed person
um
we did not go that deep into
um their well one step back yes there
were some projects that were included in
the past two cips that are not included
in this one in most cases that's going
to be because they were completed
um or they were anticipated to be
completed by the end of 2023 this year
um we did not go through all of them
though
um to know you know definitively all of
them are because they're completed but I
would say that's the vast majority
so there there could be some that we
dropped
um because we don't think they're
priorities anymore and then there's the
rest which are done are going to be done
and and then the rest are kind of
carried forward I don't know if I'd
phrase it as they're not a priority
anymore necessarily but um I can't think
of any off the top of my head where
that's the case where we pulled them out
because
um they just weren't a priority anymore
or because we weren't proceeding with
them in most cases in fact every case
that I can think of it was because
they're they're completed or anticipated
to be completed without funding well you
know it's a big difference and and if
you did say
um this was in the CIP last time and
we're not including it and it's not done
then that is really saying it's not a
priority so
um and I'm just trying to get to because
the question is
um you know are we um
the desire to uphold the long-standing
commitment to the city made in the
community in in the CIP and so I'm just
trying to figure out what's been dropped
and and being completed is not being
dropped that's being completed that's a
good thing but if there's anything
that's been completed or um has we are
not moving forward with I'd kind of like
to know
um because I think that's that's an
important
um data point yeah we can we can do some
more digging that'd be awesome
so let's stick on number four
um we've had some questions and we'll
get some more data on that but
definitely want to get into this I saw
councilmember hunt then councilmember
Martz
okay so on number four we
um council member Ray we just we had a
similar discussion about the
having trouble proving what was missing
or seeing what was missing in the CIP in
our
um in our committee discussion on the
CIP so I think that would be helpful and
that would help us
um grapple with this question number
four about whether the CIP is reflecting
this long-standing commitments the other
thing that I think
would help is we do have the city
council the city council president's
letter that is with the CIP and so last
time for example with that letter there
is mentioned there of the squawk
Mountain
sidewalks uphill bike lane at the time
now the name has changed
um but so that was in the prior CIP if
you include that letter and I think
that's another option that Council can
use to single single out things that
have been brought forward by the
community that are these long-standing
commitments and so then we can also
track those over time as a council
and I think that could also help us with
this criteria and it's nice because it's
transparent it's part of the document it
explains our rationale for why we think
that those are the
um long-standing commitments and it will
move forward with the document and and
be with the document for for the future
and I know the equity board had concerns
about this criteria being not very well
defined so I think if we have if we also
include that letter as one of if things
are mentioned in the letter if we
include that I think that will help with
that transparency issue
that's my remarks
thank you so I want to address the the
broad question of the long-standing
equipment criteria and you know I've
said in the past I've sort of been
philosophical and said it's about honor
and one's word given as a guarantee of
performance by definition of honorable
um but let me just focus on the
Practical here for a second if you don't
have something like a long-standing
criteria what you do is you basically
break the ability for a council to defer
something totally let's use the EC
houses right first off we should just
Landmark it right now we should Landmark
it 15 years ago but the money side of it
okay we don't want to spend the money
right now the administration is arguing
we'll spend the money later if we didn't
have a long-standing commitments
criteria I would just be like no you got
to spend it right now because I don't
know what account future council is
going to do but I feel strongly about it
I I wouldn't be able to accept arguments
from the administration to defer things
till later so there's an extremely
practical pragmatic reason to have
long-standing commitments be part of our
process it really breaks our ability to
defer things the later so I I don't know
if we're actually debating whether or
not uh it's unclear to me the
administration keeps asking whether this
is a criteria we care about but I think
there's again one doesn't have to be
philosophical and promised pain you know
to argue why this is important this is
important for us to do the business of
the council before us thank you and yes
I do think through CIP reflects the
council's desire to upheld long-standing
infrastructure commitments but as a
long-standing and probably till the day
I die resident of squawk Mountain I want
sidewalks
councilmember D Michelle
all right well I hate to disagree with
council member Moritz but I will on this
on this one first of all I take uh take
the note that the equity board was
concerned about the transparency of the
Criterion and
um so I for that reason I think we
should take a look at it and see how
it's written in so forth but you know
since I've been on the council and even
before I was on the council there were
two major projects that the council said
gosh darn it we're going to get those
done one was the Providence Point
the light and uh the you know the
reconfiguration of that whole area and
another one is this wonderful project
that we're working on right now uh for
the Lake Sammamish Parkway
neither one of those is was put did the
council pound their the desk on because
there was a Criterion
there was no Criterion it was the will
of the council to get it done and so uh
if if the council has a long-term
commitment to a project I'm not sure
that having a Criterion especially one
that people have questions about
is necessary because the council can
make a decision
to emphasize a project anytime that they
want to
so
um I just take to heart the fact that
the equity board has some concerns about
that in terms of uh the transparency and
the equity
and I think that the council can make up
its own mind about what it wants to
emphasize at any time
and if this is causing this much
discussion is this a criteria that we
actually need to have well I guess I'm
on the other side of that thank you
Council membrane
I'm a little confused
um but I'm also sleep deprived so um
work with me
um I don't think the question has
anything to do with criteria it says did
we
did we uphold the long-standing
infrastructure commitment and you know
did we deliver on it so
criteria or not
um what I want to know is what aren't we
doing that's a long-standing commitment
so I can answer your question so I'm
just kind of baffled I I everything
that's in there looks good but I don't
know what's not in there I can't prove
the negative so if I had that
information then I could give you a
thumbs up and say yeah you don't you've
done good with making our long-standing
commitment so
um I'm going to defer for me personally
on four until I have a little more data
council member Dean Michelle
just thanks council member Ray I did not
conclude my statement correctly which is
yes I do believe that the proposed CIP
reflects the city council desire to
uphold long-standing infrastructure
commitments so so again I think that's
separate
the CIP can reflect that intent without
necessarily having that Criterion
so I'll just throw my comments in here
um having watched the boards who did
excellent work on all of this
um I appreciate that they're concerned
that this particular area isn't very
transparent I think we also
you know
we've created a bunch of new boards who
have a bunch of new plans which are very
forward-thinking which are fantastic You
Know Tab Equity environmental boards all
have these plans and
I don't
think that
the community
would want us to ignore that new
information
and so I think my preference would be
and I don't know whether this blocks me
from really supporting the CIP or not
but I would like to include project
inclusion history as a component of the
community priority criteria because
ultimately we are as
council members Arbiters of the
community's perspective and so I think
it's more important that this has been a
community priority than it has been a
council priority so that's where I think
it would go
um that being said I think this is one
of several criteria and I think even
without that being a thumb necessarily
on the scale the crate the rest of the
criteria did a great job of getting us
to where we need to be unless that
question to council member Ray's uh
thing of not being able to prove the
negative shows that something fell off
but all of the ones that I was looking
out for are on there
anyone else
no okay
um so I'm gonna say we have some
questions but generally I've heard
feedback that it's appearing and no big
agreement one way or another about
removing or keeping the criteria
all of that
um I'm gonna go let's see the other
three kind of all mix in together so
one's about a TBD sales tax the other is
about what you would fund with that
Revenue stream and then the third one is
uh Park and trail projects
later as a new reference news source I
would again say we are just providing
Initial Ideas there is no decision on
any of these with the CIP if we want to
just take this really quick I think this
is mostly just a
does the administration have what it
needs to do more research so that we can
have full conversation so does anybody
have anything on one through three
okay I so council member votes then
council member Ray
uh I think what we've heard from the
public on landmarking of the eckhouse
reflects my own view I've said for a
long time that uh I want to see more
done with the Confluence Park I think
the eckhouse is a treasure and I think
if we if we don't have the money to do
it right now if we want to come up with
other funding mechanisms down the road
sure but I have not been given a reason
why we shouldn't Landmark the eckhouse
and I think we should have done it 15
years ago so I would like to see that
the money stuff we can do the money
stuff when we have the money stuff once
it's landmarked it's at least preserved
thank you
that's my right so I'm going to take
questions one through three but not in
order I'm going to start with number two
um we absolutely have to do its and we
absolutely have to do Northwest
Sammamish Road non-motorized
improvements as council member D
Michelle was mentioning just moments ago
when we decide we're going to do
something like the Providence Point
light we can do it and I think I put
these two initiatives in the same kind
of bucket so
um so we have to do these
um I'm not a big fan of the increase in
sales tax because I'm just not a big fan
of of increasing taxes but I I could be
swayed if that's the only way we can
accomplish what we want to do so
um squarely on the fence there
um and then I don't like the word
prioritizing parks and trails projects
to later years because there were
actually not prioritizing that we're
de-prioritizing them so I think if you
use the word either plan or schedule or
something like that because I was very
confused about what what we were driving
out there but I think it's appropriate
that we scheduled those Parks
initiatives for later in this CIP
planning site
council member D Mitchell followed by
councilmember hunt all right thank you
so much I'll just take them in order
um I generally support uh taking the
next steps to pursue pursue the 0.1
Transportation benefit district sales
tax
um we had an excellent presentation at
the mobility Committee in mobility and
information
infrastructure
and I think that uh I generally am not a
fan of sales tax as well I came into
that being very skeptical
but it is uh I think a manageable tax
and will provide us with some benefits
that our community is asking us to come
up with some solutions that they're
asking us to to find
um Solutions too
um absolutely supportive of the projects
the intelligent transportation system in
the Northwest Sammamish road now
motorized improvements and I want to
speak to the intelligent transportation
system I think was just about the time I
came on the council that we had the
report about how the system was out of
date and how many cameras we needed and
that the programs were not being funded
or supported anymore by their companies
and and on and on and on in our
community really wants that intelligent
transportation system so we need to
invest in that and that is something
that we get a big bang for our buck in
terms of
moving the mobility in our community
into a better place so I absolutely
support both of those projects but I did
want to say a few kind words about its
and then finally yes and I think the
the task force that we had correctly
prioritize parks and trails as our
second priority after transportation and
so I support number three as well thanks
councilmember hunt
thank you
um so in the letter from the mayor which
is in the CIP document it does also list
that the CIP as proposed the TBD as
proposed would support the squawk
Mountain multi-modal improvements TR 068
no
no okay oh that's from the okay so that
is from then the other the other mayor's
letter from last year 2023.
um I
I would like to propose putting that in
so I wasn't sure if it was because of
this but I wasn't sure if that would be
covered or not under the QD but
um I I would like to make sure that we
have funding for that project and I
would like to
um
that's that is a long-standing
commitment that is important to the
community it's been in plans for a long
time
um and there's a real need there are
kids that have grown up without
sidewalks on squawk
um and it's a big safety concern that I
have
um I think it will make that
neighborhood much more
um you know easier to get around and
there are many sidewalks in other
neighborhoods but that neighborhood is
is not is underserved by sidewalks so
I've my whole time on Council talked
about that project and I think if
they're and it apparently you know this
was in the plan as of a year ago to have
the TBD funds that project I would like
to consider I would like to have Council
consider if we do go forward with the
TBD to put that
um
have that be one of the projects that's
funded by that
uh on the second question
um on oh that sort of is the second
question
um other unfunded projects to be
considered as that squawk Mountain
multi-modal improvements would be one
um and then
with the prioritization to prioritize
them later I will note that we are doing
a lot of project
um projects on our parks and trails
currently especially with the arpa
funding that is being used for Veterans
Memorial
Field and the area around the senior
center so I it's not that we aren't
I would say we it's not that we aren't
prioritizing those Park and trail
projects it's
um
I think more the way it's written I
think it's more addressing the
recommendations of that capital
capital task force that you know
recommended looking for other Revenue
later so that we weren't seeking Revenue
to do both parks and transportation
projects at the same time
um but I just wanted to fact that I
don't think we're I don't think that the
CIP is the prioritizing Parks we are
doing a lot of work
um to revitalize our parks in this CIP
um
I think those are my big comments and
then I have
um
some Project Specific questions but I'll
hold those
yeah and I will come back for other
comments and everything
um before I go on to Deputy council
president Hall I did just want to note
that I looked up the mayor's letter on
the CIP and it does include the multi
squawk multimodal
12 Mountain multimodal improvements as
part of the
proposed pbd so I just want to note that
to the administration that depending on
how everything comes out May want to
make an adjustment on that uh or if if
that is something that we decide not
um so Deputy council president Hull
thank you and just to be clear it very
well could be still by the DVD sales tax
and part of the memo talks about after
one-time projects are done this frees up
capacity for more
um
projects that are currently in the cap
because uh so that very well could be
next up
in terms of sales tax and I agree I
found it in the letter too so I guess I
would plus one that that would be a good
Revenue source for for that in addition
to I think what's contemplative right
now is the school safety fund or those
things
um anyways okay so let's take a step
back
um you know like I said at the mobility
and infrastructure uh committee meeting
I do feel
hesitant but generally supportive of our
next steps for the council manic
um sales tax
um as long as there is this robust Union
engagement plan we're able to tell that
why story that that we were talking
about and but I I also want to be clear
that I
um also feel very on the fence here
because the Capital Finance Community
task force did a lot of work and their
recommendation was this as a ballot
measure and it seems like
that would give us the best opportunity
to really ask the community if they
think that our why for additional
infrastructure needs here in Issaquah is
sufficient
um so I am supportive of continuing to
go down this path but I also don't want
that path to be
not available to us and I don't
necessarily know how how we go about
that I would like the ballot measure DVD
sales tax which I think is is it by the
way is it 0.2 for about or is it up to
point two for ballot it's actually up to
point three so you could actually go to
voters for up to point three but if we
wanted to it could be a point one ballot
okay so I just want to make sure that
this option is still on the table of
something we're considering because it
does feel like it would be more genuine
to like asking the community hey we've
done all this all this work now what do
you think
um
and especially because right now as at
this point the closest thing that we
really do have to genuine Community
dialogue around this is the Capital
Finance Community task force and that
was their recommendation
um so that's how I've been thinking
about that
um I do agree that its and Northwest
smash Road are the most pressing needs
for those um dollars if we go down that
path I had um during the mobility and
infrastructure committee meeting asked
for a little bit more information see if
we could potentially do strategic small
capital projects or pavement management
project payment Management program to
kind of fill in kind of what we're
missing from the downturn in three right
um
I do feel satisfied with the information
that we got back from director Moon
though that that these are especially
its aren't one-time project I also just
want to unless counsel uh or just in
case Council listened to my comments
during the meeting I said something to
the tune of the its was a one-time
project and I would rather us you know
look into things that are ongoing
projects director Moon later made the
point that actually no these are
definitely ongoing projects because
we're learning more from it and we're
constantly doing maintenance and
improving systems and stuff too so it
does seem like a very important thing to
be doing an important thing to have an
ongoing funding source
um of course so I'm satisfied with that
that's question two and then
recommendation to prioritize yeah again
this seems to be aligned with the
recommendations that we were getting
from the Capital Finance Community task
force
um and I appreciate it I guess it feels
disingenuous to say their work because
we were on it I appreciated our work on
that
um so other than that I I just want to
Echo what council member hunt said
earlier I think the council president
letter could be in perfect tool for us
to every year or every couple years say
these are the long-standing commitments
that we want to make sure don't fall off
and also to Echo councilman Ray would
definitely like to get that data around
did anything fall off that wasn't
because it was complete
um
I
um I agree with our public comments or I
I think we're being just a tad
disingenuous about the title of the city
hall CIP project page
um I mean even just eliminating and
eliminating the first part of that page
see where was it
um right now it says Public Safety space
needs Police Court and City Hall option
A or B
I think even just saying Police Court in
City Hall space needs would be more
genuine than just starting with Public
Safety space needs especially because
when you look at the breakdown of the
costs it the law the vast majority isn't
going to be in in the public safety
space so
um perhaps there's a small tweak there
that's just some feedback for the
administration to think over and then
also I really
don't think I'm fully understanding what
is going on with the eckhouse so I I
need to get a better sense from the
director what
um if he could kind of take the feedback
that we got tonight and respond to it
ahead of that so that we can kind of
have a discussion at the next meeting
about that I'm not certain I'm
understanding the pros and cons to
Landmark Now versus later
so kind of a
I'll go back also and review our first
meeting on this but I would like to kind
of have a more specific conversation
about that at our next
perhaps
other council members have more
um I think that's everything
um I think before going to Second
comments I'm just going to throw mine in
and then we can go through
um for that so for question number one
I'm willing to have the conversation on
it but I really want to have the bigger
conversation about how much does this
actually move the needle because you've
thrown out this number of 2.2 but then
there was also the concept that we were
going to use that for borrowing so I
really need to know how much potential
money that gives us for what period of
time because right now if I'm just
talking about 2.2 million that's like a
tiny tiny drop in the bucket compared to
the 137 million dollar six year total
for the transportation section
um so I think those are the types of
questions and it looks like there might
be an answer before I go into the next
part
just specifically on the 0.1 percent TBD
it's 2.2 annually you would factor in
maybe you know we could do a forecast
for 10 years but each every 10 years the
council would have to reauthorize that
TBD or voters would have to re-authorize
if it's approved by voters so if it's a
point one percent that's Council Matt it
would come back so it'd be 10 years
worth of that Revenue starting at 2.2
and then growth factors based on
inflation based on economic factors from
that so one of the questions I had asked
by email was hey if you're that goes
toward this second
question
um around which projects you know when I
look at the project page for the
Northwest Sammamish Road non-motorized
improvements it asks for like 13 million
but that's only four years from now so
even if we got the 2.2 million that
would only be 8.8 and so you would talk
something about there's some borrowing
involved so what we could do and we talk
about the project mix and we talk about
future projects funded by the tbds
actually expanding your base so if you
look at it with the revenue sources now
are limited when we're talking about
we're talking about even grants outside
funding state and local this is
increasing our capacity for
transportation projects by 2.2 million a
year going up from there so what that
does is that also increases our
borrowing capacity so it would give us
more room for Debt Service so you could
do a combination of a small issuance for
a couple projects or multiple issuances
and for a bond and because the bond
would actually be on the general
obligation it could actually go beyond
the 10 years but say even if you did a
10-year issue you could do multiple
projects up front rather than each year
just depending on what the council
strategy wants to be
great so those are the types of
questions I need answered as we go into
this conversation about TBD because if
it was just it's going to give us 2.2
million dollars worth of cash and
projects that are valued at 2.2 million
dollars that's really really tiny and
I'm really concerned with the idea of
both adding to people's sales tax or
even going to voters to ask for sales
tax revenue it it's very difficult
unless you really get into this to
understand the scope of the need and if
people are looking at this and going
okay if we give them this it will make a
difference in all of our transportation
woes will go away
and that's not the case so just letting
you know those are the types of
questions I want to talk about when
we're having that conversation not just
are we ready to ask voters to add to
sales tax it's like and what will this
do and what will it not do
so right this pros and cons to each
approach and there's mixtures of
approaches so we can certainly come back
in Future months with the details on
that with the advantages disadvantages
that even project scenarios as well yeah
and one of the ways I'm looking at this
is here's the pie of all of the things
that we've said are needed that's
basically what the tip is and if we have
you know cash funding and funding from
all of these other sources what
percentage of the pie does this increase
and what percentage is still out there
unfunded so I berated that one
um toward that idea I'm really unsure if
its and Northwest Sammamish Road nor
non-motorized improvements are the right
places if we went for a TBD sales tax to
invest the money right of way right away
particularly because we have this whole
question mark on our heads around when
washdot is going to be done with the
culverts and so if we can't utilize
those funds for potentially like four or
five years
um that would feel particularly
difficult to get all of that money from
the community and just sit on it
um so I would like to better understand
how those funds get used and if there
are any other smaller projects that we
can do in the meantime because one of
we tried doing a traffic Levy or
whatever that was
um before I was on Council and one of
the difficulties there is like
you're not seeing projects get completed
and so if we're going for a sales tax
and we don't end up seeing projects
completed for five six years and then
we're looking at this future idea of
going out for a Park and trail
projects a new Revenue Source we're
shooting ourselves in the foot
if we're going to say here we're going
to take this money we're going to hold
on to it not complete anything and then
right about the time we're going to
complete something we're going to ask
for more money for a different type of
thing so I just want to be really smart
about thinking about all of that so I
guess my answers to one two and three
are it really darn depends what we can
actually accomplish with that money and
so I need to have a whole conversation
around that
okay that being said councilmember Mertz
then council member hunt
thank you madam council president um in
my Zeal to discuss uh landmarking the
eckhouse I did not answer the questions
so on question two yes uh its yes of
course North Sammamish Northwest
Sammamish Road uh does the council
concur with the administration's
recommendation yes I chaired the
committee that this initially makes
sense question one first off I want to
mention you said Levy it was actually a
bond oh that it had been a levy because
had it been a levy it would have passed
by a healthy margin but in fact it was a
bond it did not
um so with all due respect to the
Capital Finance community tax task force
I am completely opposed uh to creating
another sales tax I was opposed to
adding sales taxes in 2009 when I first
ran for Council I was opposed to new
sales taxes five years ago and uh I
expect I'll be opposed to sales taxes
for this foreseeable future not because
all regressive taxes are completely bad
if we only had Progressive taxes if we
only taxed the rich uh there would be an
argument that uh we are unfairly taxing
people so in the real world we look at
the combination of progress Progressive
and bless you Progressive and regressive
taxes and we tried to decide uh whether
they are fair or not and this state has
long known that it had
massively too regressive if you compare
us to the rest of the states that invest
in their communities uh we are far more
regressive unfortunately we're more
aggressive than Idaho uh which Prides
itself on being a conservative tax state
whatever that means so uh I am opposed
to increasing that we are one of the
richest communities and one of the
richest states in the richest country in
the history of the world uh let's not
make our taxes more regressive let's
find other Solutions thank you
thank you uh councilmember hunt followed
by council member D Michelle
um so on the Eck house
um I I like councilmember Hall would
like more information I will say
um when we first had this conversation I
about including it with arpa funding my
intent really was to make sure that that
um because that building currently
serves no public function
um it and it also is damaged it has fire
damage on the back side of that building
and so
um my My Hope was that we would use this
funding because we have to
um we have to spend this money quickly
there is a project there's a you know
damaged building that needs uh work
clearly it is on city property so my
Hope was that we could quickly address a
known issue in one of our very beautiful
parks that is one of our most beloved
parks and there's a playground right
next to a building that has fire damage
on the backside on facing the playground
so
um I I My Hope Is that we can accelerate
at least some of that
um
some of that restoration and safety work
and use use funding for that I would I
would like to make sure that we're
taking care of that building putting off
the entire project which seems it seems
like the timeline
um because we're we're contemplating
um a larger project which I can get
behind but I I would like to understand
if we can't
um do something to to help uh restore
that building or
um in the meantime
um
help because right now it's a damaged
building and we are not taking action on
that which doesn't doesn't feel right
and doesn't really line up with my
intent at least with um making sure that
it was
that that work was addressed with arpa
funding
council member T Michelle oh thanks I
just wanted to share that at the
mobility and infrastructure committee uh
uh director of hamoud brought us three
scenarios uh one was the one that's in
front of us the its and the Northwest
Sammamish Road another one was its pair
paired with uh the squawk Mountain
multimodal project and the other one was
its paired with something that I've
forgotten so
um which we uh I think we rated in the
third place so you know that might be a
really good
table to bring back to the whole Council
because within the parameters of what we
are anticipating that we could raise
um it did not make sense to pair for
example the Northwest Sammamish road
project with the clock Mountain
multimodal it just was too much and so
there is sort of a finite
parameter there however
I think we were doing that assuming if
I'm I'm correct that that was the 0.1
percent sales tax I didn't know that we
could do 0.3
so that parameter maybe is a little bit
more flexible than we thought it was or
am I incorrect on that so the point what
councilmember D Michelle very good
questions the 0.1 percent TBD is the
councilmatic authority so the council
only has 0.1 percent now voters can
approve up the capacity is 0.3 percent
so voters can approve up to point three
percent or if the council approved 1.1
percent councilmatically then you can
still go to voters for an additional 0.2
percent
at any rate I if the council wanted to
have you know take a look at that table
that we looked at
um at the mobility and infrastructure
committee and talk that through I think
that might be a good thing and then I
think that
um Deputy council president Hall always
it's a long title uh was saying was we
had talked about that squawk Mountain
would be the next the next project up
um so it doesn't when we were deciding
that these two were our top priority it
wasn't saying that we didn't want to do
that project as well it's just it it
fits the criteria that we were being
given at that point
so that was the discussion that we had
and maybe we want to have a discussion
about that at the full Council so
okay so
um I think we've gone through all four
of the questions there
um just want to check in with Council if
there are any Project Specific any
general any anything else to make
comments on councilmember Hunt
uh thank you this is a small dollar
amount but I think an important item to
flag there was previously in the 2020 to
2022 operating budget for replacement
there was a
safety device that's necessary for the
trolley to run it's 15 estimated fifteen
thousand dollars so it's very small
amount
um but relative to most of these
projects if not all of these projects in
the CIP but I did want to flag it
because though it is uh
and it was it was removed during the
covet related budget cuts and because at
the time the trolley was also not
running and it's still not running
um I flagged that for council's
consideration because it is important I
understand that it is important from the
perspective of the isqua history museums
to know if that will be covered by the
city and I think that given given that
we have this city piece of equipment
um I I do believe that we should make
sure that we do indicate through our
planning process that we do plan on
funding that so that that's not a
barrier to the squad history museums
while they're considering the
feasibility and I understand from
talking to Paul winter sign that they're
currently working through that
feasibility of how how they could resume
the trolley and he's come to this
Council as well and spoken about that so
I wanted to flag that because it did
kind of fall off of the the
um budget previously and seems like this
could be a good opportunity to indicate
that in our plans we do plan on
upholding that equipment need in the
future
okay
um I'm gonna give just a little bit of
feedback seeing nobody else
um all of that so I think we jumped
right into the direction needed but it's
really important for me as we're looking
through all of this just to appreciate
what the process has been we had some
excellent feedback from the boards and
commissions and I just really really
want to appreciate that
um I think there were a lot of comments
there about hey we should make sure to
revisit the criteria and kind of where
things are set for each color area after
we've used this the first time so I want
to reflect that back I will absolutely
put that in the council president letter
um just as a understanding of hearing
that and it's something that we need to
look at as we start to utilize this
um
I appreciated having the active product
project inclusion history added to our
packet I think it should be added to the
CIP I think it's a really important
reference and keeping it with the
document is really important
um I also agree with council member
Ray's request for any projects that were
dropped
I similarly had a hard time with not
being able to prove a negative when I
was going back to the goals and outcomes
chart on this
number one
I
still don't for goal number one I still
don't know
if we have proven that
any new plan
is going to get those items added to a
future CIP
and from my perspective that was what I
meant with the number one I think we've
done a lot of other things on number one
um but I'd like so number one is
projects have a clear path to inclusion
in the CIP you've gone through a lot of
information about criteria and all of
that what I want to make sure is when a
plan is created all of the items are
being put into a hopper and considered
and all of that because one of the
things we had heard from the community
was we make all these plans
and then they either don't appear in
code or they don't appear in the CIP
and again I can't prove a negative there
on that
um so I'll put that as a question mark
on my side as I'm trying to determine
have we satisfied our goals and outcomes
um and then on the number three criteria
or goal which is projects have an
accountable path toward execution and or
completion I think we still need a
little bit more work on understanding
where a project is on the project page
on its way to completion are we in
design phase are we in construction you
know are we waiting to gather money
um I think that level Clarity on a
specific project page is
really important for a future Council
that might come in or for the community
that's trying to understand oh this is a
plan this is an item in the plan and
they're trying to figure out funding for
it or the design work was done 10 years
ago and there hasn't been any work on
construction because
there isn't funding there yet so those
are two things that I'm going to look at
when I'm trying to
see whether we have accomplished what we
set out to I think we've done amazing
things and if we didn't have the goals
and outcomes chart it would be really
easy for me to say yay criteria yay we
went towards the commissions yay we've
um
we've rethought what some of the things
are
but because we have those goals and
outcomes I want to make sure that those
two are satisfied as we go into it
um so that's some of my feedback I'm
going to give Council any other thoughts
questions councilmember hunt
um so before we had this meeting I did
go back and read the prior council
president Council president's letter
from the last CIP
um because I I find that helpful and you
know I think one of the things that we
need to do is just track these projects
that have taken
um for various reasons a long time have
been in plans a long time so
um the sidewalks on squawk is still a
few years out I I would like to make
sure that we have a dedicated funding
source for that and so that that does
begin
um so I think it'd be great if we can
move up the timeline and currently
starting in 2026 but in any event that
was flagged in that last letter as as a
project that we need to prioritize as a
council to move forward so I will I will
flag that it is in the plan it's not not
starting quite yet
um
on another thing in the plan as as you
mentioned is that
um we had
felt like the uh commissions were
brought into the process but they could
be brought in earlier to have a bigger
impact and I think we did see that so I
wanted to complement the administration
um they were brought in earlier and I
think in a meaningful Way by including
their feedback into the criteria that
were applied so that allows allowed for
this engagement at a high level across
the whole plan which I think is really
the the way that our boards and
commissions are able to have
um have that big impact and I think they
they were able to
engage this year and we really benefited
from having that feedback a lot both of
the Committees Council committees and um
and as we are considering the whole plan
so they did a great job and I think the
the process also facilitated that
um
and then one other thing from that
letter uh somewhat miscellaneous but we
had
flagged the large increase in the way
finding and signage project and I I it
it still does have a large future years
spend on it
um and so I think that's one that we
should it's a PK 44 I believe
um and so I think
as we go forward just flagging those
things that we have discussion about and
making sure that we understand why those
are large projects even if they're in
the future years and I think that's part
of our responsibility as a council so I
wanted to flag that one overall I think
the process is much improved I think the
council president's letter is a great
way to flag things that don't make it in
that are long-standing commitments or
something that council grappled with
that we want to make sure we pick up in
the next or that the future Council will
want to pick up in the next iteration
but this overall is a much more
transparent process than last time which
has been great and I think sets us up
well for success as we consider as we
continue to deliberate
I will throw one more thing back
um as well I think we probably need to
have a conversation about the pavement
Management program which is tro30 based
on the memo the funding level that is
proposed in the CIP is from before
receiving that memo
um and so I'd like to understand what
the administration's approach to having
that conversation whether you feel
comfortable having the CIP continue at
that level and then we will have a
policy conversation about what levels we
want to fund arterials versus connectors
Etc
um and when that would happen
um
so uh thank you for that question I
think
um what uh
what we're talking about and what we had
indicated in the materials for this
evening is that we are seeing a decline
in our real estate excise tax revenues
and because of that decline we're
forecasting out for the period of the
CIP
and what we anticipate given that
decline in revenues is uh we have to we
have to balance that out somewhere in
our expenditures and so we proposed uh
in the CIP a reduction of expenditures
towards PMP versus what was approved for
the budget this year and what was
approved for the budget in 2024.
um we also don't that's what our
forecast is now I think as we look at
our mid biennium adjustment for our
budget as we keep an eye on those
forecasts it may be that that Revenue
exceeds our forecast expectations at
this point in time and so while the CIP
is a planning document and not a budget
we look forward to having more of those
budgetary conversations on how to fund
the PMP as we learn more about our
anticipated revenues and as we get to
that part of the process of actually
budgeting we did want to flag that in
the materials tonight that we are seeing
a decline in these revenues and that
means we have to balance it out with how
we apportion that to the expenditures we
anticipate
so the email that I got back to asking
questions about this is that the
estimated Revenue in the CIP is still
showing the four million dollars per
year so it hasn't been adjusted
um what I was asking about is more
in the
so the the amount of expenditure that we
are recommending in the CIP has not
changed for the pavement Management
program
I think I'll ask that as a question and
then
the need seems to be increasing based on
this memo so as far as I understand it
then we're basically
reporting in the CIP under what we might
think there is a need because we really
haven't had the policy conversation
around what level of
pavement scores should we
set
CeCe is going to speak a little bit
about the specific changes but I just
wanted to talk about the what we're
seeing with Reed and where are the kind
of the benchmarks we're going to see in
the future so right now we're seeing a
trend of read decreasing month over
month for the first several months of
this year of 2023 and we were seeing it
try to slow down now we saw large
commercial transactions the past few
years those have diminished rapidly
we're not seeing that that same level of
commercial activity in the city right
now and it's the same thing with
residential residential has decreased
significantly in median home sales
prices have dropped off their peaks
they're still higher than they were in
2019 but they dropped over the peaks of
the past two years so is this a trend is
it six months I know I went to a
presentation by the King County
Economist a few weeks ago that said that
there's still you know a lot of the
forecasts are still showing kind of a
dip bounce where re kind of bottoms out
in the summer then it starts recovering
so it's too soon to tell what 2024 is
going to be it's actually too soon to
tell what 2023 where it's going to land
I think the June July August are kind of
those critical months to see
uh really where where this year is going
to land right now so that being said
that's what we're still looking at 24.
it's just uncertain so we are being
conservative in the budget in the CIP
that you're seeing we're being
conservative because Reed of all the
revenue sources in the city is the most
volatile it's based on
the behavior of the real estate market
because there's so many different
factors in and especially here because
we have such large commercial Parcels
that tend to flip over a lot and turn
over year over year that also drives our
reads so it's it's actually more
has more fluctuations and than other
cities have in that Revenue source and
then Susie's going to talk to the
specifics
a lot quicker so
um so for what's proposed in the CIP for
pavement Management in 2024 compared to
what's in the budget so to clarify one
point
um we're not proposing an adjustment to
the 2023 budget
um I mean now that we've done a biennial
budget technically it's both years but
for the purposes of planning for
contract purposes 2023 is what it is
um that is what's adopted for 2024 we're
proposing at least for planning purposes
in the CIP of reduction
um that uh the 2024 budget anticipated
about 2.7 million the proposed CIP takes
it down to about 2 million
um and as Robert mentioned we will see
how Reit plays out over the course of
this year and certainly into next year
and if we're able to add funding back
to that we can certainly look at you
know where that Revenue goes and discuss
that with the council but for now based
on the Reit revenues that we're seeing
so far at least for the next year what
we're forecasting at least for now for
the next couple years we have reduced
down what's anticipated for 24 and 25
but just for planning purposes in the
CIP if we do take it back to reduce it
that would be part of the biennial
budget process the mid biennium update
later this fall this CIP would not
um codify that reduction that would come
as part of the mid biennium update
so to answer the council president's
question about when we would have this
conversation what I heard you say is
um that you would like to have a
conversation about
um what what score do we want our roads
to have we talk about the pavement
condition index and what our overall
score is what is our goal and let's set
our um our our budget to that goal to
try to help us achieve that goal so when
would we have that conversation I think
what you just heard uh budget manager
Susie moncella say is that we would have
that we can have that conversation
during the mid biennium budget update
thank you appreciate it now I'll ask you
a question did you get what you needed
for the four questions is there anything
else you need from us before we have
that next conversation about the CIP
I have just one quick question just to
clarify on
the for the information for
number two and actually combined with
number one
is the council looking for different
scenarios for
you know multiple projects with an
issuance up front you're looking for
kind of like we presented to the m i
committee where we had a few different
scenarios or do you want a concrete
recommendation on how those funds
I'm not sure I understand the difference
between this
there was we presented options at the m
i committee a few weeks ago that showed
different scenarios a scenario one we'd
fund these projects over this time
period Senator gratuity fund another
group of projects over this time period
are you looking for recommendations from
Administration specifically on which
projects we put in terms of a bond
issuance if we did that up front are you
looking at a couple different options
for the council to decide on
with that funding source
so I guess the big question is does the
council need anything different than
what was presented here which is just
this as a potential sales tax and those
specific projects that would utilize
that funding source uh councilmember
hunt
well um I had raised that the letter
does have the squawk Mountain
um multi-modal project and
um I think that would be good to clarify
um I I think that it would be good to
have a funding source that is
specifically designated for that project
so that we can be sure to do it
um so I that information would be
helpful it sounds like there was a
little bit of a lack of clarity about
around that so it so I would like that
information to be brought back
Council membrane
and I think the other thing and I forgot
who it is that brought it up it was a
really good point the Sammamish
multimodal transportation is out a few
years and so that's not going to be
something with the council president
um we're going to get to so I'd like to
actually see kind of the timing of when
we're gonna if we do the sales tax when
we would start to see the revenue and
then
um superimpose that over the various
initiatives so we can kind of
map those together because I think if
there is a delay in most Sammamish
multimodal we might be able to Pivot and
go in a New Direction so
um so I don't know that we need
Alternatives I think it's really trying
to
um
to map the cash flows to the initiatives
to the schedule all those external
factors that are driving the schedule
um yeah no I agree that would be good
information no and I think that
Alternatives were so option one was
Northwest Spanish Road and its option
two was black nugget retaining wall on
its right and then option three was
squawk mountain multimodal tonight right
okay so yeah that information would be
good to hear and I think the other thing
you had heard from Council earlier was
that like oh well if we have the
authority to go up to 0.3 including the
ballot measure like what mix of products
can we do that may be more
transformative with our entire earth
authority and I don't think there's
necessarily an interest to get into that
right now especially because it seems
like most of us want to go down this
path first and see where that takes us
and there's a limited bandwidth for just
the point one percent councilman
Authority that we have so I don't think
we necessarily need unless anyone else
feels differently I don't think we
necessarily need to get into what would
we do with point two or point three
and Deputy council president Hall just
to clarify if we came back to you in I
guess two weeks with
a proposal that shows different
scenarios to fund those three main
projects the Sammamish Road
multimodal project the squawk Mountain
sidewalk and Trail project and the its
or did you want to see those previous
scenarios too
I think we so let me chime in here so
what I heard Council suggest is the
timing to that the administration return
with more details showing the timing of
when the city would begin to collect
these revenues and how that timing
matches up with the proposed projects
and timelines so that if there's
flexibility within the timing of when we
receive those revenues and perhaps a
project gets delayed what are our
options and what other projects might be
funded so we we can certainly come back
with more detail on the timing of
receiving the revenue our options within
our financing options including issuing
debt in order to pay for these projects
and then the timing of the the project
so we can come back with more
information on all of that next time
Council memory Michelle
I was just going to make the point that
Andrea just did and that is if I'm if
I'm correct the money coming in is not
necessarily the timeline that we're
going to have that timeline will be
determined by how we go out and get
financing based on
the revenue that we're anticipating
that's my understanding of it and so but
it would still be helpful for us all to
understand that and what's possible
under those potential
um timelines so I think it would be
really helpful if we could see all of
that laid out uh and what are our
options and um
do we want to go out to the public or do
we want to just do cancel manic or and
so forth I wanted I want to go back to
something that Connie Marsh said though
and that is we need to bring the public
along with us
and if we get two
uh what would the word be
two sold on one particular way to get
the money or how we're going to handle
it without any input from the general
public I think we're also shooting
ourselves and so it's good for us to
know what the options are I think we
need to be really careful about how much
we get committed to a certain path
before we have gone out in NASA public
their opinion so I just think we need to
be walk a very fine line there making
sure that we are leaving options open to
to hear from our community about what
they want
councilmember hunt
I have um one more information ask for
the next time which is on the
um on the public safety space needs
project which currently has a and b
um
it is
has a starting year of 2025 and
completion year of 2028 so that is
completely within this CIP time Horizon
I think it is
um
I I think this the value of the planning
document is to see how these different
timelines interact and to plan out for
these different expenses and to see what
the entire
um what the entirety of all of these
different projects is going to be over
the next couple years and so I think we
should have a timeline for that one I
think I um it I think in my review it
would be the only project that doesn't
have a timeline if we don't include one
so between it having two options and
having no timeline
um I think I think for our planning
purposes we should have that timeline
there again especially because it's in
completely within this time Horizon that
rcip is covering
um so I would like that to be brought
back and I understand that there are two
options and so it's a bit more
complicated probably with those options
but as it says many times over in this
document it's not
um it's not a budget commitment it is
for planning and so I think we would be
better served and we would also it would
be more transparent for the public if we
have the timeline as it stands now for
that project laid out and I suppose
since we have both options they wouldn't
have to include
both of those options in there
okay
you have what you need
I I believe we do thank you
okay fantastic
great feedback everyone
um much appreciated and so at this point
I think do we have a good of the order
on
the agenda likely anybody have anything
for good of the order
uh Deputy council president Hall
uh announcement on thinking boards and
commissions from Council leadership so
first and foremost thank you to
councilmember hunt for sharing our
thanks with uh planning policy
commission
um as promised I just want to list out
some upcoming meetings again see if
anyone wants to
take any assignments on and so the
lodging Tax Advisor committee meeting is
this Thursday but I do hope that council
member Joe who's out there somewhere can
pass along our thanks to that script
that group I'll follow up with a phone
call to him tomorrow to make sure he's
okay with that environmental board is
this Wednesday evening I volunteered to
take that on unless anyone else feels
strongly that they'd like to
um the sister cities commission is also
this Wednesday evening if anyone would
like to thank that commission the
economic Vitality
um commission is is next Wednesday and
council member D Michelle
potentially
oh that's right okay so we will oh well
then oh yeah both of us will be at AWC
so if anyone wants to take that one on
please let me know I'll send out a
follow-up email of course as well Human
Services Commission is next Wednesday
the Civil Service Commission is next
Thursday and then tab is the last
Wednesday of the month on June 28th
um so just a reminder for that in effect
um calendar invites coming up but if
you'd like to participate in any of this
just let us know thanks
okay and and that we are adjourned at 8
46 pm thank you everyone