Welcome everyone. I, Council Member Tola
Marts, call the Monday, April 6th
committee of the whole meeting to order
at 6:30 p.m. As a reminder, we continue
to have a remote aspect to our meetings.
Both staff and members of the public may
be participating in tonight's meeting
remotely via WebEx. There are multiple
public comment opportunities at
tonight's meeting. There's a general
public comment opportunity at the
beginning of the meeting, or you can
make comments after the presentation and
council question and answer period on
tonight's agenda items. 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 are joining us
virtually and would like to make
comments, please raise your virtual
hand. If you are on the phone, press
star three. If you have joined by
computer or smartphone, look for a hand
icon or send the host a chat message. If
you're in the room and did not sign up,
I will ask for other speakers before
closing this portion of the meeting. I
will wait for a moment to see if anyone
wishes to raise their hand.
>> Clerk, has anyone signed up to speak or
indicated a desire to speak this
evening?
>> Not at this time.
>> Not at this time. As a reminder, written
comments can be submitted at any time to
city council iswah.gov.
Next up, uh, we have agenda item
COOM0227,
public safety and civic facilities
update.
This is Duty Autumn Monahan, our
administrative services director.
>> Thank you. Good evening, members of the
city council. My name is Autumn Monahan.
I'm the administrative services
director. I'm here tonight to talk about
public safety and civic facilities as an
update to council. So purpose of tonight
is to review our work to date and then
to collect your feedback on any
information you need and our proposed
next steps as administration.
So uh our proposal um has shifted a bit
uh since I was before you last in the
fall um which I'll review here uh the
next few slides. But uh to start out the
meeting at this time, administration is
proposing that we do not pursue
construction of a new city hall and that
to pay for the remodel of our police
station that we leverage a councilmatic
bond and pay for that debt service using
some proceeds from the public safety
sales tax. We would also temporarily
temporarily retain this building at City
Hall South for police use during our
remodel
and use one-time funds to hopefully
purchase and renovate an existing
building for city hall use.
Uh I went back uh and looked and I've
been before council to discuss or
present on city facilities 18 times
since 2023. So, I'm not going to bore
you too much tonight with uh too much
background. I know we've got some new
council members, so I'll go quickly on
this slide. We first started uh our most
recent space space planning efforts back
in 2018. I took on the project in 2023.
Uh at that time, we, you know, really
updated what the needs were for our
space and it very much affirmed that
police should stay in its current
building, which is what it was built
for, but to use the entire building and
that it needed a renovation. The council
was also uh very much interested in a
phased approach to our space needs in
but knowing all of that we also knew
okay where will city hall go because we
are using the top floor of city hall. At
that point council asked us to go to the
community and get feedback from the
community and the mayor appointed a task
force uh which met seven times to
develop some recommendations. We also
sold city hall northwest and then just
this year we have moved uh municipal
court out of this building into a lease
facility with King County Courthouse.
The task force recommendations were to
address space needs and um as soon as
possible. So that emerged as a top
priority. Um we heard from many of our
task force members who took tours of our
uh police station um that said how can
we how can we fix this now? Um, so there
was immediate sense of urgency that that
was our number one priority was to
remodel that space and give police uh
the space that they need. Next was to
relocate city hall and develop a plan
for building a new city hall on city-
owned property.
And there were two locations that were
proposed, city hall south and a site at
Pickering.
Next was further study uh locations for
that new city hall, developing a
comprehensive funding strategy, phasing
the projects if needed, knowing that
this was a lot of money, a lot of
resources, a lot of work, continued with
robust public outreach, and then
remained flexible and open to new
opportunities as they arise.
And quickly, this is our previous
building, City Northwest, which we
shuttered during COVID and we sold uh
last year for over 9 million.
Our
project goals that council developed um
and you know that we have um have been
our our guiding light since 2023 are to
ensure safety, responsibly steward
public dollars, provide community
accessibility and convenience, support
economic development, deliver enhanced
community amenities, and embody
environmental stewardship.
So, as part of our work with the task
force, we worked with DLR Group, which
is a consulting firm that helped us in
updating our space needs, supporting the
task force and all of its questions, and
really starting to shape up a what a
plan would look like for us. And as a
reminder, their estimated timelines for
police renovations would be two and a
half to three and a half years. Building
a new city hall would take three and a
half to four years. And then relocating
city hall would take about a year.
The cost estimates from 2025, police
renovations range from anywhere from 15
million to 26 million. And we had a
couple options we were looking at as far
as what could happen for renovations at
police. We need a bit more assessment on
a final design for that. So that's why
the range is is quite large. Uh building
at city hall south on this site would be
anywhere from 44 to 53 million. And then
city hall at Pickering anywhere from 48
to 57 million.
I put this slide in here just as a
reminder. There have been questions in
the past about just what lease costs
look like just as an option. Um so
updated these after talking to our
broker recently. Right now if we want to
move administration out that's about
14,000 square ft. Um that's top floor of
city hall, the Eagle Room, um the city
hall south top floor upstairs and
council chambers. Current lease costs
are anywhere from $40 to $50 per square
foot. So, we're looking at if we were to
lease city hall space uh for the interim
anywhere from $560,000 to $700,000 a
year. And that is um that's based on
availability of like what is actually
out there to lease. And so, this is just
back of the napkin numbers for you to
better understand lease costs.
So, as you'll hear later tonight, there
is a potential for a parks bond renewal
going to Islqua voters this year.
Knowing construction of a new city hall,
and you saw the cost of those numbers
would likely require voter approval.
Administration is not recommending that
approach at this time.
So, instead, we are um recommending that
we do not pursue building a new city
hall. again uh with police knowing that
that is our main priority, working
toward that remodel by leveraging a
council bond and then we can pay for
that debt service with the public safety
sales tax proceeds. Again, using this
building um for uh just overflow as
we're working on that PD remodel. We
know that they're going to that's going
to be a complex puzzle on remodeling
while police are still operating out of
that building. So, I think we'll need
some overflow space and then using a
one-time fund to purchase and renovate
an existing building for city hall use.
Uh, and as just as a a side note, we
have been looking for properties in
Isiqua for many, many years. It's very
limited as far as what's available, what
even exists in Isiqua. uh but know that
we are still pursuing that and and
looking for any opportunity knowing
though that when that opportunity does
come about we have to be really ready to
go uh because uh the market is fast. So
uh know that we are still uh looking at
those options.
So as a next step DLR did some initial
work uh with our police department. We
understand how much space they need. We
know that they can fit in that building
over at um at 130 East Sunset Way. The
next step now is to really refine some
of that design work. So finalizing a
proposed uh building layout, having um
really identified the intent of our
design, thinking through the
construction phasing as I mentioned, um
having a really nailed down project
schedule, and then we'll have much
clearer costs than that wide range that
I just provided you. So we are looking
to re-engage with DLR group and do that
next phase of work. Um and so we are
just finalizing that contract now. That
will also include other things we need
to consider our IT relocation of a lot
of our um kind of our hub IT generator
replacement which is is very much needed
in that building seismic upgrades. So
there is a whole lot that we'll be
identifying and looking at as far as
this project to really have a better
idea of the scope. And so that is really
the next phase of proceeding with the
the PD design work.
As for potential funding sources for
administration's recommendation, uh if
we are successful in finding uh a
building to renovate, purchase and
renovate, we have proceeds from city of
Northwest, which I mentioned, as well as
a food bank uh proceeds. We also have
$3.1 million from the Lakeside
Development Agreement that has been kept
aside for facility use, uh government
mitigation fees, and then interest
earnings that could be used uh for city
hall. All of these are one-time um
revenues. And so that is important to
mention. A lot of these have been set
aside with the intent uh they would be
used for future facility needs. And then
as I mentioned, the idea for police
renovations would be that we uh could
leverage some of that public safety
sales tax. Um so in talking with our
finance director, she estimated um you
know, a debt service about $1.5 million
would be a 20-year counc.
That would get us about $21 million.
Like I said, we need to do further
scoping and really refine that design
work for the PD building for us to come
back to you and say, "Here's what the
actual cost is going to be." And so,
this is just giving you an idea of kind
of the middle of the road of what that
would look like. And so, that's what
we're shaping up towards. Uh but again,
we'll need to refine some design first.
>> Council member Nichols,
>> how many square feet are involved in
that police station renovation?
Oh gosh, it is
I I'm thinking of also with jail so I'm
trying to remember. I think it's I can
get back to you on that number.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah,
>> that's fine.
>> Or I have Jeie on the line. She might be
able to answer that here in a moment.
Look it up for us.
>> I mean there's otherwise reference
14,000 square feet for the current city
hall administration space. So
>> yeah, that includes some of the space in
this building as well that we've been
using.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah.
>> I'll actually ask a question while we're
waiting. Can you remind me Lakeside was
originally 10 million. What did we do
with the other 6.8?
>> I don't recall. It was 10 million. Do
you remember?
>> I thought it was 10.
I can get back to you on that as well as
far as a list.
>> Yeah.
>> All right. Yeah, I can follow you for a
later date. I'm I'm just curious. I'm
sure I'm sure we invested it in in
something serious. I just don't remember
what what we did with the rest of it.
>> It's been a long time, but yes. Yeah.
>> Thank you,
>> Council Member Adair. Again, while we're
here, there's a few questions along the
way, but what this one since this slide
is up for the public safety sales tax,
the 1.5 million a year, how much of the
revenues of sales tax revenue, is that
just saying we'd take 1.5 million of
this or is the entirety of the sales tax
that's coming in 1.5 million?
>> No, that would just be a portion of the
sales tax.
>> Do we know how much the total is looking
like? I know it's new, but
>> yeah, the total was.1
Okay.
>> I believe it was 2.1.
>> 2.1. Okay. So then we'd have another
600,000 a year towards public safety.
Should we go proceed with that? Got it.
>> Council member Adair. This is uh Deputy
State Administer Andrea Leonard. Um I
believe the original estimate was 2.2
million annually. Uh that said, there
have been changes at the state
legislature which may change that number
as more things become exempt. And so I
know we're we're just trying to do
estimates right now, but we're really
going to have to see how those numbers
adjust um once uh we feel the impacts of
those changes to the sales tax, which
will not be um for a few years, but
still something that will cause us to
adjust our estimates. Yeah, the numbers
of what that change looks like for
Isiqua specifically is something that
I'm hoping to see at some point. Yeah,
>> Council Member Walsh,
>> thank you. I just looked up a previous
um time, one of the 17 or whatever times
you were here that showed Isiqua um
police square footage currently is
13,683,
which includes dispatch and jail
administration.
>> And in total, both floors are about
28,000 square feet. I did phone a
friend. I I apologize. I I forget the
square footage based off of it's the
jail or not. So, yeah. Deputy Council
President Jang.
>> Um, so to confirm the $21 million in
renovation costs is for both the
existing police area as well as the
upstairs.
>> Okay. Thank you. Yes.
>> Yes.
>> Council member Nichols.
So, I know you said you'll come back to
us with more op with more detail on
that, but how many how many options have
we looked at as far as
this is this looks like a very high
square footage dollar per square footage
cost from a tenant improvement
perspective? Um,
have we looked at lower lowering that
and what are some trade-offs that might
be there so that we don't have to use
quite this much money?
>> Sure. And part of this project is
renovation for police use and part of it
is a midlife renovation for this
building. And so there is other work
just to I mean this is an an older
building that that does need some um
midlife renovations as well. But we will
be looking at ways that we can reduce
costs knowing that that target of about
21 million I think is important exercise
to go back now and say okay what is it
that this uh project can include? Um and
so that will be a big part of this work
as first design. Our first step was just
what you know what would be what would
police want right in a in a perfect
world and uh you know we've come through
with a couple options but I think now is
really the time to refine that. Um and
like I mentioned some of this too is not
just remodel for PD but it's replacing a
generator that the building needs or um
seismic upgrades that need to happen as
we have an older building now.
But yes, we will be looking at how to
reduce costs.
>> Council member Adair,
>> I can just add to that since I was on
that task force is that that question
was brought up and there was some of the
answers that were given to us at that
time was about police specific
renovations are a higher cost than a
standard renovation due to a lot of the
requests that are part of this are also
a lot of their own uh safety and
security type upgrades and changes that
they needed. So that some of the police
specific costs to this would increase
their their like their square footage
rate versus just like the city hall
square footage rate.
So as far as a timeline, our property
search remains ongoing for city hall
space. We would then proceed um with our
building renovation concept report with
DLR in Q2 and three. return the council
with a more refined remodel plan with uh
more refined costs and details on how to
pay for that and then begin the police
um design remodel in 2027 and start with
um further design and permitting.
And with that, I'm looking just for your
direction on any other information you
need as we work through next steps and
uh your feedback on administration's
proposal.
And of course, we're going to split that
into first Q&A and then have a separate
deliberation.
Council, I think council member,
uh, a couple of just other the specific
questions had along going on. It brought
you brought up that interest earnings
was one time and so why is that one time
when theoretically it's ongoing or is
that counting multiple years of
interest? How is that being?
>> You know, I'll I'll ask our finance
director to get back to you on that. She
had identified this as a one-time
opportunity we could use toward
facilities, but I don't know about
ongoing what the recommendation would be
for that. But yes, I can have her follow
up.
>> Okay. Another just small question I'm
just curious about. So, um, if police
ends up using this space as overflow, so
council chambers would also need would
move during that process or
>> I think a lot of that depends on what we
find for space for city hall and if
there is room for council chambers or
not. Um, or we can think through other
options too. But that will be a part of
us better understanding in this next
design phase how much space we may need
that would use this building or others.
>> Yeah.
>> Other questions before we move to
deliberation? Deputy council president.
Um, out of that 21 million for
remodeling the police station, do you
have a rough breakdown of, you know,
what portion of it is for the police
renovation versus, you know, just like
regular building rehab type things?
>> Um, I can get back to you on that. I
don't think it's that clear of a
breakdown. Um, it was a lot of it was
very much estimates by square footage.
Um, but I can I can look into that and
get back to you.
>> Great. Thank you.
Council member Joe.
>> Thank you. Um Autumn, thanks for all
your hard work on this. I had a little
bit more of a future looking question
for you. Um when the Highlands were
built, we built the police station with
the understanding that when the
Highlands was fully built out, we would
need to expand our police to that full
level. And now we're there 25 years
later, 20 years later. Um, looking at
our future growth, will this police
station sustain us for a while or will
we need to look for another one? And if
so, what kind of timetable are we
looking at for a future facility?
>> The DLR group and their assessment,
we're looking out 20 years and this
building will um will take care of
police's needs for that amount of time.
So, we are good.
>> That's great that we are good. Thank you
very much.
>> Yes.
>> Other questions?
All right. Right. Well, then before we
move into deliberation on this, um I
mentioned at the top of the meeting that
we were going to have two opportunities
for the public to speak to us, this is
the second opportunity. So, if you have
been um holding your opinion, waiting to
talk specifically about this subject,
now would be the time to indicate uh to
the clerk's office uh or to the the
meeting host um that you are interested.
Again, that would be uh pressing star
three if you were on the phone or
looking for the hand icon um to send the
host or sending the host a chat message.
And I will ask the clerk's office if we
have anyone indicating they wish to
address us.
>> Not at this time, chair.
>> All right.
Deliberation on this.
Can you remind me the additional
feedback that you were looking for?
>> Yeah, we're looking for feedback on
administration's proposal um for next
steps on
>> Will you put will you put the elements
of the proposal back up, please?
>> Great.
So, try Havoc and let let's lift the
dogs of war.
>> Uh Council Member Walsh,
>> thank you. Um, Autumn, I appreciate you
continuing to bring this up to us. Um,
as we have gone through the phases of
deciding whether or not City Hall
Northwest was good to keep or sell. And
as we're going through the process here,
um, I would assert that I'm still on the
path that we need a new city hall. um
and that I do not like the idea of
leasing long-term. And so the hope is
that we can find a way so that we don't
have to accomplish that. Understanding
that if we have to lease during a
renovation um or something that is
understandable,
um I like the fact that we have funding
out there. I am
hesitant to think that that will cover
all of our costs including renovations
and anything um needed during the
adjustment. So I think we should just
keep that um in our minds as we are
looking through all of this um kind of
your timeline of Q2 Q3 building
renovation concept report and Q4 return
to the city council with a remodel plan.
I appreciate that we are seeing what
that looks like ahead. Um
I would ask that the remodel plan come
to us with several options, not just
here's what it all looks like. um
because then it becomes much more
difficult for us to figure out you know
how could we adjust based on you know
rising costs or um availability to do
this. So I would look hopefully for a
kind of minimal viable product would be
enable the police um use of the top
floor. A medium would be upgrade
everything for police use um so that
they can use that building very well for
the next 20 years and then a high would
be including the midlife building res
renovations including seismic um because
I think we need to evaluate this on
multiple dis different aspects. Um,
I agree that we need to have the
building um moved over, but I also know
that we are really good at, you know,
stretching our sho strings and all of
those things. And um, I would not want
to evaluate this just on a
top-of-the-line plan. Um, so that's what
I would hope going through as we are
kind of looking at this. Um,
I also want to assert that at this point
I appreciate the potential funding
options and kind of the idea out here. I
want to make sure we recognize that is
still a budgetary decision. So just
because this has been presented as a
potential and is good useful information
for us in evaluating whether that's
possible with funding sources. there
still may be other priorities um that we
have as council for that money. And so I
just want to make sure especially for
newer council members that they
understand this is not us signing off on
something. This is a potential idea that
is out there and we will still have that
ultimate discussion during um budget
season. So thank you
>> council member Adair.
Uh yes, I want to also echo thank you
for such hard work on this and the
options that have come before us. You
know, as a member of that task force,
there was a sense of like, wow, this is
a real problem and no idea how to
actually achieve it. Um due to the, you
know, the issues of the cost to build in
city hall and to try to pay for that.
And I agree with the decisions of trying
to, you know, purchase a building
instead of building a new one. Even
though I, you know, personally love have
my heart set on the idea of a city hall
in downtown, I understand that is lot
likely the, you know, the final option.
Um, but appreciate all the hard work
that's gone into and that this there
does seem to be a viable path here to
address these needs as dictated in the
priority list. Um so so yeah I want to
echo I I agree with these proposals in
terms of the next steps but also echo uh
council member Walsh's points about how
we decide the money of this in that you
know I've also come to council now and
they have real concern about the budget
in terms of this era where we're kind of
on our own and making sure that we hold
money appropriately but spend money
appropriately at the same time and this
is obviously an important need but you
know to like the earlier questions of
like is interest really only one time.
Um, are we going to use up all of our
public safety tax on this when yes, this
is important, but there could be other
uses. So, I want us equally want us to
be clear like the options of what to
spend as well as the options of the
money that's coming in really clear
ideas of this is the money we have or
don't have and what we will lose out
when we spend it on this. Um, so just
make sure that those are very clear as
it comes forward. So, thank you,
>> Council Member Joe.
>> Thank you, Council President. Um
generally I am in favor of the way this
plan is coming together. Thank you for
all that hard work. Um I think the focus
that we have in the sense of moving the
police over concentrate on concentrating
on making sure that they have the
specialized equipment that they need.
They have the um proper facilities to
preserve the chain of evidence for
evidence that they're getting from
different crimes. they have the proper
facilities to detain people in a humane
way and also detain our youth in a
humane way should that become necessary.
Those are special facilities and special
uh rooms that are needed. So, I
appreciate that we're giving thought to
moving everything over to a more
permanent facility right now, investing
in it using the dollars that we're
talking about so that we can um have a
long-term facility that, as you pointed
out, will last for 20 years going into
the future. Um
for the administration, accounting, and
the other departments, um
we saw during CO that it's a little bit
easier for them to work from anywhere if
they have to. Um, having a nice desk and
a nice view out the window with the
computer is a is a great thing, but
we're a little bit more flexible in what
we can do with uh those departments. So,
making the investments in the police,
it's going to it's going to be
specialized equipment, I think, is the
right focus. Keeping the administration
flexible in the future as we go and look
for other places, I think is the right
way to go as well. So, I do support this
plan going forward. Thank you,
>> Council Member Nichols.
Uh once again echoing uh all the thanks
for the hard work here. I appreciate
these 17 other times that you have uh
presented these types of data. Um I will
say uh first off on the as far as the
city hall space goes, I am in general
agreement that we have needs there. Uh
and I support pursuing approaches that
would meet the goal of fixing the
problems we have. Um I also to your
question I agree that we should not
pursue construction of a new city hall
at this time and we should look for
other parcels. Um, I am not myself
concerned with leasing long term. Um, I
think it's it just depends on what the
numbers look like. It's not a it's not a
um I wouldn't rule something out because
of that because I know how difficult it
could be to find the perfect option and
if that was a trade-off that was
necessary. Uh I that would not concern
me versus other things, we might have to
weigh against that. Um also towards
temporarily retaining the city hall
south um for police use during model.
That seems very reasonable. Um, on the
police station itself, um, I agree with
Council Member Walsh on the desire to
have some options. I would really like
to see this book ended. Basically, like
what is what what does this look like if
they get every single thing they want?
Um, and what does it get if they get
what does it look like if they get the
absolute bare minimum that is necessary
for
things like having places, you know,
outside to better uh deal with people as
they're going through the system, etc.
Like what what are the list of the bare
minimum things they need and then what
is the high-end and then hopefully
something in the middle. Um, I'd also
really like to see what other uses this
money could be spent on entirely. um
especially the the the public safety um
sales tax. Um that has a very broad set
of things by my superficial
understanding of that law that we could
be spending that on. Um in including
things like fire and we have very we
have ballooning fire costs that are we
have not succeeded in getting under
control yet if we we have that has the
money has to come from somewhere. It's
ultimately coming from the public. Uh I
think we should make those trade-offs
here as well and not think of this
solely as necessarily for the police.
Um,
finally, um,
when we are looking at remodeling, I'd
really like to see
when what whatever options we're
presented with both on the book ends of
low cost, high cost, and in the middle
as well as other options that we could
look at in the context of the rest of
the budget season. Uh, I'd like to
really understand what the what what the
the per the the square footage cost is
of this type of remodel because that raw
the the rough order of magnitude number
there looked extremely high to me. Um,
having been involved in very complex
buildouts in the Seattle area in the
past 3 years. Um,
I appreciate fire or police stations
probably have complex cities greater
than um your typical office, but there,
you know, there's lots of other complex
things out there that get built in the
area that have much much much lower cost
than this. Like less than half of a
square footage if that's really 21
million divided by 20,000 ft. Um, so I
would be really skeptical of that number
if that's real. Um so bookends would be
good high low as well as a a firm
justification of the cost per square
foot on any tenant improvements that are
needed. Um in comparing also to other if
we can police remodels in the area
knowing that that costs are typically
higher here as well as other highcost
remodels of other high-tech or things
like that. um facilities that require
additional infrastructure that might
justify additional cost so that we can
understand whether the the the design is
reasonable compared to other equivalent
types of designs in the area.
>> Deputy Council President Chang.
>> Yeah, I think this proposal is generally
good. Um, I think, you know, wanting to
make sure that we're maximizing the use
of the money that we already have and
not having to go back out to voters for
a large bond to build a new city hall at
$800 per square foot, given that that's
where construction costs are, I think is
a very reasonable approach. Um, speaking
of cost per square foot, so if the uh
cost to build a new building is $800 per
square foot, um, if we're mathing the 21
million divided by 28,000, that's $750
per square foot, which is, you know,
definitely in the ballpark of building
something new. So, I definitely want to
see, you know, how we're coming up with
those costs. And it very much could be
that, you know, this is just a back of
the napkin calculation, but then once we
get the actual design, the cost could be
lower. But I would definitely want to
understand what that actually looks like
and you know what are some of the areas
where we don't necessarily need the most
goldplated thing while still giving our
police the facilities and um resources
they need to you know do their jobs. Um
and uh yeah, I think um I'm aligned with
this approach. So I'm looking forward to
seeing what the you know final costs are
as we move forward in the design
process.
So, I uh share Council Member Walsh's
concern about leasing. Um leasing is
just a trap, right? You get into
optimizing for cash flow and it's very
attractive and then all of a sudden it's
20 years later and you spend a
ridiculous amount of money that you're
without any equity. So, um I continue to
have that as as a large concern. Um one
way to think about, you know, you've
heard variety of different ways from the
council about wanting to see options.
Uh, one way is to think about
operational versus aspirational, right?
And which pieces of this um are part of
the operational. We have we have one of
the smallest police forces per capita in
the United States. If you say there's
1,200 municipalities in the in the
United States, we're like 50 from the
bottom or something like that in per
capita per or officers per capita. So
that induces operational
uh constraints on the IPD and uh some of
the improvements um have to do with uh
sort of force multipliers on on
operational. Uh an example would be you
know updating the port cullis control
system is operational. Uh a new weight
room is aspirational right just to pick
just to pick on that particular topic.
Um it also strikes me that um it may
well be that a majority of this current
council and almost certainly majority
once we have a seventh member hasn't
done the tour right and so the people
who did the tour that was so the chief
did such a good job of explaining to us
the strengths and limitations of that
building um a minority of us have have
done that tour. I would do it again. Um,
so just speaking speaking as as myself,
but I think it would help as when when
we then get to conversations about what
would be in and what would not be in.
Um, but I I generally support the
administration's plan here. Um, does
anybody want to go for a second? Uh,
additional thoughts. Have you have you
Sometimes you say your piece, then you
hear somebody else talk, you go, "Oh,
yeah, that's that one thing." Anybody
else? Additional thoughts?
Going once?
advice and I will ask the administration
if you have the information that you
need from us on this bit on this
measure.
>> I do. Very helpful feedback. Thank you.
>> All right. Well, thank you uh Miss
Monahan. And we will move on to COOM
0228 potential park bond renewal with
Jeff Watling, our parks and community
services director.
Welcome, Director Watling.
>> Thank you so much, Council President
Marts. Uh good evening, council. Pardon
me as I juggle and begin the share
screen here.
Okay, here we go.
All right, I think we're going. We're
good. Thank you again uh for that. Uh
always fun to do that juggle. Uh well,
thanks um here tonight. Uh as uh Council
President March mentioned, let's hope I
can advance the screen now.
Show tunes.
>> Okay, we'll do it down below.
>> Oh,
>> saved from the show. Andrea
>> Tech help. All right. uh tonight. Uh
yes, the purpose as council president
Martz mentioned is um we have a prior
park bond uh that's expiring um at the
end of this year uh creating this really
strategic consideration uh for the
residents of Isiqua. Um tonight uh the
intent unlike the 18th time of a
conversation, this is the first
conversation to to talk about um uh this
opportunity with you and in taking a
possible park bond renewal uh back to
the residents um of Isiqua this uh
November. Um as a renewal, uh this would
not represent a tax increase, but would
rather um represent an extension of the
the current levy rate.
uh in terms of direction uh requested uh
needed tonight. Uh what we're seeking as
a as a first conversation is really just
overall feedback on this. Um I broke
this into really four sections. Uh would
be very interested to get council
feedback on the ballot measure um
itself. uh in this opportunity to uh
consider a renewal um at the same levy
rate on this expiring park bond. Uh
second um feedback on um the approach
we're taking of utilizing uh previously
prioritized projects uh for creating a
uh package of projects uh for this bond
renewal uh that the bond renewal would
would fund. Uh third, uh based on that
approach of utilizing prior community
feedback through our park strategic plan
and CIP processes, um would really
appreciate your feedback on um an
initial uh list uh that I've been
working on with mayor and administration
of potential projects uh that I'll share
with you tonight in this presentation.
And then last uh just feedback on
additional information uh you would like
um as um we move forward into a possible
decision-making process um on this
rather um shortened or or compressed I
won't want to say timesensitive but time
compressed um opportunity over these
over these coming months.
So, some background um bonding um is um
often used voter approved bonds are used
um to fund capital projects and have
have been done successfully here in the
city of Isiqua as I'll I'll highlight.
Um a note I want to make um on
background and on this slide is bonding
does differ from operating levies. Um,
put really simply, not as a finance
director, but put rather simply, uh,
bonds, uh, provide funding upfront. Uh,
when you go to a bond, you're you're
seeking um a a levy, a sale, a property
tax increase, but, um, you're getting
the the funding upfront. Um, and then
you're paying uh that funding makes it
available for you to do capital
projects. Uh, the property tax is then
in essence paying the debt. Um, and
that's often bonds are all over a longer
term. Uh, so typically a 20-year term
for bonding. Um, unlike operating levies
which provide provide proceeds um and
received and spent year-over-year. So
yearbyear you're spending rather than
putting um putting debt on that. Um, and
that's often a shorter term. Uh, you'll
often see operating levies that the
county does and others done that are
typically a six-year term. Uh this is a
this would be a bond measure that's
expiring and Isiqua has um uh some
history some recent history and success
um in utilizing bond funding and going
to the community for bonds. Um both in
2006 and 2013 this community um approved
park bonds. Uh both of those uh were for
20-year terms. Uh it's that 2006 bond
that u I believe is is expiring. Um
um both of those bonds were approved uh
well over 70% uh voter approval. Uh the
2006 bond um funded a mix of park
renovations, some trail development and
and land acquisition. Uh the 2013 bond
um helped to fund um some needed
facility improvements and system
improvements at the Julius Bone Pool uh
development. It partially funded
development of the turf fields at
Central Park Pad 1. Um it partially
funded Confluence Park phase 2
completion, the the photo of the bridge
there, as well as some other
neighborhood park improvements.
And again, both of those measures passed
um by a significant margin. Um, another
difference between bonds and levies, um,
I'm sure you're aware, uh, a bond
measure requires 60% voter approval,
whereas an operating levy, uh, requires
50% plus one.
Some initial analysis as we look at the
revenue side of of what does this what
would this bond renewal um, generate? U,
this was work um, done with uh, support
and assistance of finance director
Kristen Garcia. So, thank you for that,
uh, Kristen. Uh, um, this same levy rate
of 8 cents per 10,000 that's expiring,
um, renewed over a similar 20-year term,
uh, would generate, uh, just over $17
million in bond revenue.
Um, as we look at funding current park
needs and priorities, we have an
opportunity to leverage then that $17
million with uh, some other revenues. Uh
currently we have about a $3 million
balance in park impact fees. Uh this
would be a great opportunity. Park
impact fees need to be need to be spent
on capital projects that increase
capacity. Uh the projects that you'll
see and we're considering all all
increase capacity uh within our park
system. Uh so uh that $3 million could
be leveraged on top of the 17.3 as well.
the mix of of projects um impactful
projects that we're um considering in
this package and that communities
identified as priorities are some great
opportunities for grant revenue uh and
other revenues. Um conservatively, we're
saying we could generate another three
million. So when um all told uh we could
be looking at a package um in the
neighborhood of just over $23 million.
So, as we look at at um a potential um
generation of additional revenue from
this bond renewal, uh we need to take a
look at how do we want to consider uh
projects and what projects um this
community sees as important within its
park system. Um
this community's identified many many
capital investment needs and and
priorities within our parks, trails, and
open space system. Um that feedback has
really come um um from our uh both the
2018 park uh plan update but also or
park plan u as well as the 2024 park
plan update that was completed. Uh so
thankfully in many ways in terms of
community engagement, we're not starting
from scratch in terms of how to
prioritize projects. Um we have the
opportunity to to really uh see and
understand the community needs and
priorities that were identified in that
plan. uh that also um help to inform our
parks uh six-year CIP as well.
Um the overall vision of the plan um
also helps us in this effort. Um uh what
we see is really an opportunity to look
at um as as we develop criteria um
considering multiple small to medium-siz
priorities um all of which uh singularly
make a really big impact uh but
collectively make even a a greater
impact uh to really incre increase and
improve function um of our existing park
system as well as improve connectivity
um of our park system. Both of which are
very very high priorities. um identified
from the community. Um an important
thing to note as we consider
prioritizing these projects um is that
uh these near-term priorities uh when
you include um all the near-term
priorities of the park system plan
update as well as recent work we've done
uh with the community on a real creative
solution for expanding the Julius Bones
pool. If we were to look at all of those
near-term priorities, uh funding all of
those magically would require us uh
about 80 to hundred million dollars of
funding. And so just that context
reminder as we look at a a a great
opportunity of this community to invest
$23 million into its park system, um
it's not going to fully fund all those
near-term priorities. So there will need
to be prioritization of those of those
priorities. Um, some other really
important factors that that we think um
are worth considering is um making sure
we're we're hitting a variety of
interests um a variety of uses uh that
our community expects and wants within
our park system. No one household uses
and interacts with the Isqua park system
the same way. Uh so how are we making
sure we're hitting that that mix of of
uses and priorities and also looking at
the geography um of our uh community and
um uh considering spreading out those um
investments within the within the
system.
Then following are really a list of um
possible projects to consider. Um as we
went through that vetting and looked at
our uh park system plan priorities,
near-term priorities as well as the the
park CIP. Uh these are eight projects
that I'll I'll quickly highlight um and
talk about um the project itself uh what
the impact and benefit would be and also
just highlight quickly um who our
partners might be in this work. Um I
think all this work um all these
projects have um a variety of partners
that um are are very very intested in
seeing this work happen. Um all of these
projects too as we're um doing what we
can. Robin Spear is here. Thank you.
Robin park planning and development
manager. Uh we're doing all we can to
begin doing a little more deeper dive
into cost estimating these projects. But
even as we do an initial cost
estimation, all these projects range in
the 2 to4 million um um range. Um so
again, a way to um provide multiple um
impactful projects uh with a package of
this size. Uh so first off, uh the e
house. Um we're all familiar. Oh, I did
not mean to do that. Um,
see if I can move this so I can actually
read the screen. That's great. Uh, we're
all familiar with the Yak House. Uh,
this is a historical uh, farmhouse uh,
that is on the northeast corner of
Confluence Park. Um, has long been, uh,
sitting there undeveloped, ready, uh, to
be reinvested in. Uh we really feel like
this um this uh potential bond would be
a great opportunity to fully fund uh
that work uh to uh really accomplish
multiple goals. One is really uh
celebrate and um landmark uh that
building uh but landmark it in a way uh
that also activates it publicly and and
um community is able to to use it. Uh
we've heard time and time again through
Oldtown, through the creative district,
uh the need and interest for more
community space. Uh this would be a some
space that could u host um art exhibits
u something the art uh commission and
and creative districts very interested
in, but also could be a um indooroutdoor
pavilion uh that uh the community could
rent uh for multiple multiple um um
ways. um through our uh work um as we
were considering ARPA funding uh for
those council members that were here as
we were doing that you may recall uh
this site um in this project was
considered for ARPA funding um in doing
that work. We've already reached out to
King County Landmark Commission. They
would be a very interested um and um
enthusiastic partner in this work as
would um our partners at the Isqua Horis
historical museum as well.
Council member Verair. Uh
>> I had a question on this project
specifically um in that like I'm I'm
very interested in like community space
because I've heard that a lot of a
desire for that. So I'm a little um
curious like some clarity on how the
community space for this would work. I
see like in the design there's that
outdoor pavilion which seems similar to
like the senior center um you know
awning you know cover right there. But
how would it work interior? like it's
like the house would just have rooms
that you book or you book the whole
house or what how would that function as
a community space?
>> So, great. What what we've talked about
conceptually is um and as we talked to
the landmark commission um the
historical significance of this
farmhouse is really the exterior, the
shell. And so imagine if the interior
becomes one big room. So take out the
second floor, have one room with big
vated ceilings. Um, interestingly, the
back of the house is least historical.
And so, historically preserving the the
front and two sides, um, and then the
back of the house having some type of
rollup or accordion doors that would
create that opportunity for it to be
fully indoor um, in the winter and in
the, you know, rough season months, but
then, uh, really welcoming and inviting
back out to that back pavilion, which
also happens to be right by the
playground. Uh so again, a great way to
have this building be historical but
really relate to Confluence Park um in a
pretty significant way.
>> Okay. And so if it was so you moved the
second floor in its big area about how
much like what size of gatherings could
you have on the interior if it was like
interior only so to speak?
>> Great question. Um glad you didn't ask
square footage because I don't have that
on top of mind. But I know as we talked
about it, we're talking capacity of 50
to 70 again depending on the type of of
meeting that you're having.
>> Deputy Council President,
>> um, so you mentioned landmarking the EK
House. I'm curious like what the
benefits of landmarking the EK House
are. Is it just, you know, civic pride
type thing or are there other benefits
with regards to funding or things like
that?
>> Great, great question. I think one of
the real benefits of of landmarking and
considering it is access to grant
funding.
So, does that mean that we could use
grant funding to help fund this
restoration?
>> Yes, exactly. As you pursue landmarking,
you're eligible for a lot of state um
and in some cases federal money to to do
the capital restoration. Yep.
>> Thank you,
>> Council Member Nichols.
>> Have we looked at grant funding in the
context of landmarking this building or
not? Um outside the context of this
bond?
uh very briefly, but I yeah, I don't
have I don't have a specific list of of
of grant projects, but that would be
certainly an important next step. Um and
as we're doing cost estimating on each
of these projects, we're also looking at
and listing um each of the grant uh
sources that we may be able to pursue uh
for those.
All right, next slide.
Next project uh that could be considered
and um also on our our park strategic
plan as well as uh sixyear CIP is the
improvements to the Senator Bill Ramos
memorial trail head. We're all familiar
with where this trail head is on the end
of uh edge of Sunset. uh really serves
as um a gateway into both West Tiger
Mountain um as well as many mountain
bikers will use it as their starting off
point uh to go into Grand Ridge. So, a
really really important trail head
serving both of those um um portions of
the Isqua Alps. Um uh this work would
look at um um creating a more functional
um surfacing for the parking area. Um
adding restrooms, adding wayfinding and
historical sign signage um and other um
amenities that you would see um for a
fully developed, fully built uh trail
head.
Moving
on, uh these next two these next two
options and opportunities really
leverage um strategic acquisitions that
we've been so successful on uh these
last five years. Uh the first on Cougar
Mountain uh with the purchase of the
Bergsma property, now uh referred to as
Harvey Manning Park. Um we have a 33
acre corridor that really connects the
valley floor um and Tibbitz Valley Park
um up into Cougar Mountain and to the
regional uh park and the King County
Parks regional uh system. Um uh this um
potential bond renewal gives us the
opportunity to fund actual trail design
and development um uh that would also
connect not only to Cougar Mountain
Regional Park but um provide a
connection for the Talis community uh to
come down um and have a pedestrian
connection to the valley floor.
>> Council member Dair
>> um when you just say trail development,
would the trail actually get built or
would it just be designed? Okay.
>> Yep. Yep. trail trail construction.
Okay.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Yep.
King County Parks has been a long
partner. They were a partner in this
acquisition if you remember back in
2019. They remain a partner in uh
looking at trail design. Um our partners
at Isqua Alps Trails Club as well as
local tribes um would be very interested
in um um assisting us in this design um
and construction work.
Next uh similarly um through uh some two
very strategic acquisitions in this case
uh the the what we call the waymouth
property way property uh acquired 20
acres and now just the recently closed
uh Kilkari 3 um acquisition of 17 acres
creates a 37 acre uh corridor um again
from the valley floor up into this case,
Squawk Mountain and the and the regional
trail system within Squawk Mountain
State Park. Again, a terrific
opportunity to um take and celebrate the
acquisitions that we've done and do the
trail design and trail construction um
uh that would serve u as a as a way to
get up into Squawk Mountain. Also, with
the the width of this corridor, some
great opportunities to do some
neighborhood trail loops uh that support
uh the residential communities. um
around that uh around that portion of
Squawk Mountain.
Again, partners are are ready and
excited to um assist the city and um
help us leverage uh not only their
resources and and knowledge, but also uh
grant funds.
Next on the list, um a very another
strategic opportunity we've heard time
and again from the the community and
that's um renovations and improvements
to our athletic fields. Um as council
member Adair knows as his time on the
park board um we've really had to think
strategically about what how do we solve
athletic field needs here in this
community. uh we are not rich as a
community in flat accessible uh
developable land. Um, and so what that's
really um um allowed us to do and I
think required us to do in the park
system plan is present a um a plan that
looks at leveraging not only our
athletic fields and making sure we're
maximizing their capacity and looking at
things like uh multi-use synthetic turf
uh but also how do we partner and
leverage with the Isqua school district
um how do we partner also with the state
park uh which obviously we've been doing
to make sure access to those fields as a
priority as well. What you see in this
opportunity is before us is um how do we
actually um have now now have the
opportunity not just to talk about it
and we've certainly been in great
conversations with this school district.
They remain very interested now in this
idea of community sports fields on their
campuses. Uh but this um uh levy renewal
would be an opportunity to fund probably
not all four of these examples, but um
what we're looking at is likely two of
these examples. Um all three of the
elementary schools uh that exist within
the city of Isua, Isqua Valley
Elementary. um Clark Elementary School,
both here on the valley floor, and then
Grand Ridge Elementary up in the Isqua
Highlands are are terrific candidates
for uh creating this partnered project
where we would invest funding, make the
synthetic turf improvements to their the
play areas, uh the the field areas, uh
on their campus, uh which would then
become a much improved school asset uh
while school is in session uh for
students at recess. uh but then would
become a a terrific additional capacity
uh for the community to be able to use
on evenings, weekends, um uh the the
full summer months as well. Another
opportunity we've identified within our
park plan on our own property is Central
Park pad 2. Similar to pad one, um the
soil conditions on that on that site are
extremely poor. Drainage is extremely
poor. We have two baseball fields that
are very very underutilized. Uh there's
an opportunity again much like we did
with pad 1 to create um multi-use
synthetic turf which creates year-round
use um and also multiport use uh
lacrosse, soccer, uh baseball, softball,
cricket uh etc.
>> Deputy council president. Um, so on that
on the school thing, how will we ensure
that the school district actually
provides public access? Because there
are already a number of turf fields on
school property that do not have public
access, um, including the one in my
neighborhood, Cougar Mountain Middle
School, and I would love to see us make
sure that we get public access to those
before spending millions of dollars
creating new
>> Yeah, that's an excellent question. And
thankfully, our conversations with the
district have have been um um
multiaceted. And so, we are updating the
joint use agreement um and are very
close to finalizing that update to the
joint use agreement. In that new draft
of the joint use agreement that you all
will see and the school board will see
is is specific language that talks about
capital improvement, partnered capital
improvements and it spells out a method
with which as a partnered capital pro
improvement is identified an addendum is
created to that joint use agreement that
spells out the specifics. Um and in this
case what we've laid out as
administration is um as a city makes
that investment as a community makes
that investment uh the city would then
be the scheduler of of that said field
um thus um creating um a much more um um
it's the right word assurance uh that um
it would be scheduled in a way that um
community has has full access to those
fields. So they would function very much
like central park pad 1 where it'd be
open to the community off hours. Um it
would could be scheduled and rented by
by sports groups and again scheduled and
managed by the city.
>> Um I guess my other question was is
there any progress on getting public
access to some of the existing sports
fields that currently exist on school
district property?
>> That is a that is another great
question.
slightly different, but uh certainly
something that we've pursued and shared
with the district. Um there appears to
be more of an openness um to um um
encourage community to utilize that. I
believe there's a way that residents can
sign up um for access to that field. Um
I can get you that information. It's
something that in that case, since the
city didn't make an investment in that,
the school district manages those uh
those spaces on their own. But I can um
I can get you that in information from
the district.
>> Yeah, I've I've signed up and paid the
$75 before. Um but you know, it's not
great to have to pay money when it
should be anyway.
>> I don't disagree. But again, that's a
that's a school district administered um
program.
But if we're but if we're going to have
a partnership, you know, precisely, we
want to have a a real partnership that's
beneficial for everybody. Can you go
back a slide for a second?
I don't want to litigate today where
we're going to where we would put these,
but I'm going to I'm going to do that a
little bit anyhow. Um, isn't isn't Grand
Ridge Elementary School like 5t from
Central Park?
>> Yeah. ish a little little longer but
>> I'm hyperbole for effect but yes very
basically right there
>> where we already have some some proof
fields so um you know I'll just
>> put that out there that geographic
equity is important as well and and uh
>> I would love to do all of these I mean
you know we
>> there are very few things in this city
that um people seem to universally love
but certainly Turfields is you know as
close as people get to universal joy in
a bottle Uh, okay. Other questions right
now before?
>> No. Carry on.
>> Appreciate that point, Council
President. You're right. Geographic
equity is something we really need to
consider.
>> All right, moving on. Uh, these next two
slides uh pertain to opportunities to
make investments at Tibets Valley Park.
Um, as you know, uh, Tibbitz Valley Park
has a great history. It's lived a great
life. It has many many years uh to look
forward to as a community park, but it
needs it needs a new vision. Um its
neighborhood is about to change. Um we
are in the midst of of kicking off um
some revisioning work um at Tibbitz
Valley Park. Uh we believe that this uh
potential bond renewal has the
opportunity to at least um um identify
um two really critical investments that
will likely be part of that that
revision work. Uh, one is um an expanded
community park- sized uh play area um at
the park uh that would provide um
universal design um an all-inclusive
playground. Uh many of these are called
um uh with the the quite frankly the
neighborhood growth that's happened uh
since that park was developed in the
80s, much less the future development or
future growth that's likely to come
through the central Isqua plan just
north of the park. um expanding uh play
facilities in that park is a is a really
really um um great opportunity and a
much needed investment. Um as I
mentioned earlier that revisioning work
that we would be um engaging with and
like likely completing with the
community next year um will inform the
location of where this play area would
be.
Similarly
um um
before the pandemic we had uh engaged a
lot with the community about a possible
dog park at off leash dog area at
Tibetsz Valley Park. Uh we feel like
this funding is the opportunity to to
complete that commitment. Um again um uh
the revisioning work happening at Tibets
Valley Park would would inform where
this off leash area would go. Uh we're
getting a lot of excitement as we're
nearing completion of the Reineer Trail
um off leash area. If you've been down
there recently, you've seen how close
that's being done. We're going to
celebrate a ribbon cutting here April
20th with all of you. Um uh but if you
remember uh we realized um again with
how land constrained we are as a city to
find one
5 to 10 acre off leash dog area that
would serve our whole community is
really really hard for us to do in our
park system where we have opportunity
and really um can be strategic and
innovative is look at multiple smalleriz
dog parks uh throughout the community.
So, as Reineer Trail Dog Park will
really serve this side of town, um a
similar sized off leash area at Tibbitz
Valley Park um could really serve that
surrounding neighborhood.
And then lastly, um certainly we've
heard um through the park plan process
uh with the emergence of pickle ball uh
but also the resurgence I would say of
tennis. There's been a real resurgence
of tennis. Uh there's a lot of interest
on ways that we can creatively expand uh
court space within our existing park
system. Um and thankfully uh there there
is an opportunity that we think that
this bond um investment could fund and
there that's utilizing the additional
space. Um if you're familiar with
Central Park, the lower fields, what's
known as pad 3, uh there is a um grass
area um um in front of between the
parking lot and the courts that's u not
utilized really at all. Um other than
having existing restroom there, there's
enough space there to create um four
tennis courts andor eight pickle ball
courts or overlays. um create a much
more defined plaza space uh with a
restroom um and some shelter space uh
that would serve both those courts but
also better create a better gateway and
and plaza into uh the field area. Uh so
this would be a another um similar that
small to mediumsiz investment that can
make a really really huge impact on our
uh existing park system.
And there you go. There's an overview of
of eight possible projects that could um
be packaged together. Um again, as we're
looking at cost estimation, but all in
the neighborhood of 2 to4 million, um we
feel like that 23ish million um could
fund um that level of work uh throughout
uh throughout town. Um a look ahead,
some timing and next steps. Um or should
I pause there for questions?
>> Yes. Yes, please. Council member Joe.
>> Thank you, Council President. Um, to
steal Council President's Thunder, uh,
he always talks about cricket and I just
wanted to see if we are meeting the
demand of our Cricut community and, um,
if we are, that's fantastic. If it's
something we still need to work on and
should be part of this, I'd also like to
talk about that a little bit more, too.
Thank you.
>> Yep. You bet. That's a that's a great
question and something that we are
pursuing as well. Um thankfully um our
partnership we embarked with state parks
last year um in uh taking over uh
maintenance and scheduling and and
revenue collection for the the fields um
there at state park. We've actually
created two two cricket pitches. Uh so
uh that is certainly been a a um a huge
um appreciation from the cricket
community. We also um have cricket
scheduled on pad three uh the turf
fields I just showed you um where a
cricket pitch is put between the two
soccer fields. Um as we look at whether
it's the elementary schools or Central
Park pad 2, we'll need to look at
configuration, but we'll definitely keep
that um in mind and realize that um as
we look to meet all of all of our sports
needs, cricket is a real priority as
well.
>> Great. Thank you very much,
>> Deputy Council President. Okay, bear
with me. I have a bunch of questions.
Um, so you mentioned the total list of
near-term priorities is about 80 to 100
million in total costs. Could you um
give an overview of what projects
weren't selected for this package? Cuz
my understanding is the package that's
being presented to us is basically, you
know, roughly the size of what the bond
could be. Um, so I'd love to learn more
about what was not presented and kind of
what the prioritization criteria were.
>> Sure. Sure. Um boy, I'm going to do this
by memory um a little bit, but yeah,
those those near-term projects also
include some pretty significant
projects. Um Tibbitz Valley Park, um
completing the next couple phases of I'm
pointing, but forgive me. Um our uh
pedestrian park, uh memorial field,
depot park, um improvements. Again, a
rather large um next investment. Um, as
I mentioned earlier, uh, renovation of,
uh, the Julius or not res renovation,
expansion of the Julius Bone Pool. Um,
part of that as well. Um, again, all
three of those represent, um,
multi-million, probably 20 plus million
dollar investments on their own. Uh so
that became that question of do we
consider a if we're considering a bond
renewal do we put a majority of the eggs
in one basket or do we try and g
geographically um spread uh the
interests. There are a number of other
um um small um smaller level investments
uh that again could be considered. One
um is the what's known as Anthology the
Anthology neighbor on neighborhood on
Newport if you're familiar. Uh there's a
a boardwalk and trail system that we
manage and maintain functions really
well. There's two really small grass
areas uh there that we've identified uh
for opportunities for improvements. Um
th those aren't on this on this
potential package list, but certainly
could be considered. Um I'd have to take
a look at the actual plan to to remember
all the other ones as well, but um those
two those three big ones really
represent a large amount of funding.
Before
we before we move on to the next
question, I mean confluence master plan
is like $25 million, isn't it?
>> Yes. To to fully do confluence um well
phase three of confluence that also
considers moving the maintenance
facilities, it's probably I mean if you
throw in the cost of moving the
maintenance facilities, that's a that's
probably 80 million on its on its own.
Um so confluence is certainly a
priority. um wasn't identified as a
near-term priority just because of that
need to move maintenance. The
maintenance facilities would need to be
moved before any park improvements could
be done.
>> Great. Yeah, I would love to see the
whole list as well as the rationale for
including versus not including all the
other ones. Um okay, next question. Um
so this bond is 20 years. So, I mean,
are there going to be other
opportunities for additional capital
improvements over the next 20 years? And
would they, you know, how would that the
scale of that compare to the size of
this bond?
>> Yeah, it's a great question. Um, I would
say, you know, considering if we, if we
go back and look at 2006 and 2013 bonds,
um, as the 20 we're still, this
community is still paying off the 2013
bonds. Um other capital projects have
certainly been considered and done as
well with uh with other funding um be it
grant funding or or other. So um again
not to say I know exactly what it's
going to look like but um a bond renewal
like this wouldn't preclude
um other capital conversations or
priorities or work being done.
>> Great. Thank you. And last question. Um,
so on the pickle ball fields, have we
considered other locations that we could
put pickle ball fields?
>> Uh, we've considered a few. Yes. Um, I
think these strategically
um probably make the most sense when you
look at um proximity or lack of
proximity of residential um houses near
it. Uh so we really feel like this is
probably the most viable cost-effective
candidate uh for uh for doing them.
>> Um yeah, that makes sense. I know I
don't know people get upset about the
pickle ball noise. Um I will note that
there is an um in a neighboring city in
Kirkland, they actually converted one of
their old park and rides to have these
like pop-up pickle ball courts. So hope
I hope that that's something that we
could consider as well, especially given
that our park and rides are incredibly
underutilized.
>> Cool.
Council member Nichols,
>> thank you. And uh as others have said,
uh appreciate that putting together a
list like this is hard. Um I' I'd like
to ask
if you could go through a little bit
first of all what your overall thought
if you had what your overall goals were.
I think you alluded to this in the
beginning, but if you could be explicit
about that. So in in part to help us
understand what was considered and what
wasn't. Um, so that's part one of my
question, but I think I can give them to
you all at once because they I think
they'll tie in together. Um, associated
with that, did you look at larger bonds
or were you constrained to this as as
part of the the constraints that you
were declared yourself working on under
or and also um the list that you have,
did you look at was one of your goals to
try to have a large number of things um
or is that did you look at having was
was it possible in the in the way you
were going through your thought process
to have a fewer number of bigger things?
Um, so those are they're kind of nested.
So I'll give them all together even
though it's three separate questions. So
what were your overall
what was your mental model when you were
putting this together so we can
understand what else other things might
be out out there and what were all the
constraints that you either were working
under explicitly or implicitly?
>> Yeah. Okay. I'll I'll do my best. Um, I
would say in terms of overall goal, um,
again knowing that we engaged with this
community, uh, in a rather robust way in
updating the park system plan, it was
really leaning heavily on the feedback
and priorities we heard from that plan.
Um what we heard from that plan from a
vision and goal standpoint is
we have a park system that in is
wonderful and is great but in some cases
is a little tired in other cases isn't
performing or functioning to the level
that we want to. Um um a desire to add
um um city park amenities that residents
and see and utilize in other cities. um
how can we add those to our existing
parks? So um again really playing on
that vision of um adding amenities and
adding performance to what we have in
the park system. And then another I
think real central part to the vision
council member Nichols was we've heard
time and again our community wants a
connected system. It wants a system
that's connected both internally and it
wants a s a system that is connected to
the regional lands around us. And so
that idea of connectivity um um
resonated really really highly with us
through the park plan process and now um
as as we've been again pretty quickly
pursuing this over the last three
months. Um and that's it. Um um
engagement with the park board twice has
really reaffirmed um hey let's let's
utilize that engagement that's been done
with the community. Um and so um the the
guiding principles again of of improving
functionality of our existing parks and
connectivity uh really really big goal.
Another central goal is balance was a
big theme that came out of the park
system plan. And when we mean balance,
it's hey, we're a system and we have
residents that really value how the
importance that our park system plays in
open space and we have other residents
who really value and feel like our the
importance of our park system is
developed city parks. And so balance in
terms of the vision of the plan and
balance in terms of how do we how do we
replicate that sense of balance in a
package that we would consider taking to
residents is how are we meeting both
passive um recreation goals and uses in
the system but how are we also
addressing um active or developed
elements of the park system. Uh so those
were sort of macrolevel considerations
as we looked at this. Um as I said
earlier in the presentation um um
looking at geography and how how these
investments can be spread through the
community um was was a really really
high priority. Um to your question about
have we considered an expanded bond uh
we have not. Um, as we've um again
engaged this um opportunity and with the
mayor and with administration, uh we
really um feel compelled in in this
initial presentation and and
conversation is how do we see this as a
moment to go to the voters and say,
"Hey, we're not asking for any new
revenue. We're not asking for any new
tax. We're just asking for um a um um a
renewal um of the current levy rate that
you have. And here's here's what we
could let's demonstrate what investments
could be made with that same levy rate.
Uh so we consider if we are moving
forward with this if we're putting
together the the elements of a campaign
that again is a relatively short
timeline. um uh as administration and as
park staff, we feel um a renewal uh
presents a a much higher potential um of
approval uh than than considering an
expansion. So, not to say uh that isn't
a possibility, but those were criteria
that we've considered again as we've put
this together as a as a potential
package. What a potential package could
look like.
Council member Walsh.
>> Thank you. I feel like I have to address
the elephant in the room, which I feel
like is the pool expansion. Um, can you
talk about why that isn't in this
project and how we will address
community concerns if we go forward on
this? Um, in saying we've either
depprioritized it or it's it's just not
one of the areas that we feel like we
can fund. Yeah, great, great, great
question. Um, I would say it remains a
super super high priority. Um, I guess
we're faced with choices and trade-offs.
So, um, a pool expansion in and of
itself is probably 20 20 plus million
dollars. So, is this a bond renewal that
pretty much solely funds um, a pool
expansion? And is that um,
more supportive? Does that provide more
community benefit than a array of
investments throughout the park system?
Um, not that one is more important or a
higher priority than the other, but I
would say as administration, we really
feel like a a spectrum of improvements
done throughout the system that all have
a significant impact in the function of
the system provides a broader community
impact for considering an ask to the
residents for renewing this park bond um
to the pool expansion. um as well. Um as
we've talked and as you recall those
conversations when we did the
feasibility study, we don't necessarily
want to be the only funer of that. Um
and we feel like um as a as a county
built pool 40 years ago. Um hey King
County, you don't get to just not be
part of this solution. So we feel like
there is need and opportunity to seek
some county funding. Uh we also um again
in our everinccreasing partnership and
collaboration with the school district
um as as they're considering a fourth
high school um if that fourth high
school has um intercolastic sports like
the other three they're going to need um
to likely have that pool be an asset for
that school as well. And so we've asked
and would hope that uh there is some
funding coming from that agency as well.
When you consider a bond and if we're
taking something to the voters in
November, uh we do not have that other
funding line lined up. And so um I don't
know that we would be ready to say,
"Hey, we're going to we're going to
partially fund the pool and we have to
wait and try and get funding from these
other two partners." And so, um, not to
say it's it's not a priority, it just
has it has a number of other moving
pieces, uh, that some of these other
projects, um, don't. Does that help? It
becomes a trade-off trade-offs
conversation.
>> Deputy Council President.
>> Um, okay. So, uh, tacking on to that
pool conversation. So it looks like the
King County Parks levy does have
significant funding for, you know,
aquatic facilities and there's specific
things in there that are al, you know,
there's allocations for specific cities.
Is that something that we've had
conversations with King County about
included being included in their levy as
well?
>> Yes. So that aquatic funding is twofold.
Um I'm I'm not party to which why what
some cities got dedicated funding and
others don't. Um, I can tell you that
most of that funding is done through a
competitive a very competitive grant
process. And so, um, that's something
we're very aware of. Um, and again, as
we feel like we have answers from the
school district and maybe when funding,
their funding would be available. Uh,
we've pursued King County, they're aware
of our desired pool expansion and
whether um, we seek funding through the
grant process is what we would
absolutely do because that's available
to us. Um um sorry I can't really speak
to why um some others were identified as
as direct funders.
>> That's fair. Thank you.
>> So I have a question. I'm just as we've
been chatting I've been taking a look at
the capital improvement plan the part
the parks portion.
>> Um do do synthetic turf fields sort of
swamp everything else so to speak
metaphorically. I did not intend that as
a pun, but I guess it came out as a pun.
funding cost.
>> The funding cost is it really a
different order of magnitude than some
of the other items we have here? Because
I look at pad 2 and in the plan that's
$9 million.
>> Yeah. And that's $9 million because do
we consider completely moving a restroom
and a sewer system? And I mean there's
other elements that aren't just turf.
>> Okay. um as we evaluate this and and
wouldn't necessarily play with a school
site, but um to your initial question, I
wouldn't say they they swamp
necessarily, but they are they are
expensive, much more expensive per
square foot.
>> They are a different class of solution.
A lot of these are 2 million, 3 million
kind of solutions, but they're they're
bigger, right?
>> Yeah. And again, we will do each each
school site if we're looking at those
three school sites provide or have um
some different site considerations that
we need to keep in mind. None of which
are as big or as complex as Central Park
pad 2. Um so again, we'll have an idea,
but yes, if we did two of them, it's
probably in the order of magnitude to
complete those two 8 to10 million of the
work. Yes. And I just said 10 minutes
ago how much people love Turfields,
right? So I'm I'm not I'm not suggesting
it's a bad idea. I'm just pointing out
that it's in a different, you know, as
you t-shirt these, right? Small, medium,
and large. They're, you know, there's a
bunch of these that are by capital
improvement plan standards sort of
small. Turfields are not small. They're
at least they're they're they're a
decent size investment. They're also um
great projects for uh grant funding. You
may be familiar when we when the 2013
bond funded um Central Park Pad 1. Um
only about a million dollars of the bond
funded that $5 million project. Um that
$5 million project was found with other
some other grant sources and other
funding sources. So we um again feel
those projects um especially and done in
the form of a partnership between two
public agencies could really be great
candidates for some grant funding.
Deputy Council President.
>> Um, so is there going to be an
opportunity for us to, you know,
consider adding additional projects to
this list?
>> Sorry, had to get a drink of water. It's
much better. Um,
your pleasure. Yes. If you want to
either add um I think as we get a sense
of cost of these it's probably add
addition and subtraction
um if there's a desire to add something
you know something else probably needs
to be taken off um but absolutely you
know as we again try and really explore
this over the next couple of months um
those are are definitely considerations.
>> Thank you. I mean I I will add I think
there would be I mean you know we have
we have a list of the the touches that
we potentially have in front of us
services if parts is is is one of them.
I mean, I I I think I I may be hearing
from the council a question about
whether the requirement of just having
it be a replacement um versus something
else um might be a question that we'd
want to address before we said exactly
what was in it because what I'm hearing
is that there are council members I what
what I think I'm hearing is that there's
there's some interest in considering
something more than just a replacement
and and we should think about that um
before we decide decided to add or
subtract things from a administration
recommendation.
I guess we're getting into the the
I just want to point that out to your
question about opportunities for touch.
There's also opportunities for strategic
conversations as well. I'm not notice I
wasn't recommending one or the other.
I'm just saying it could be a
conversation that we would have.
>> I'm sorry, Deputy Council President.
>> Um okay, another question. So, you
mentioned there's the 2013 park bonds as
well. Um, do you know when those are
going to be expiring because potentially
that would be another park bond renewal
opportunity?
>> Yes. And again, I can confirm that with
with finance and as we work a little
closer with the bond council. I if if
they weren't um um
well just 20-year clock that'd be 2033
that we're likely looking at those
expiring. Yep.
>> Great. Thank you.
>> You got it.
Okay,
great questions. Really appreciate it.
Um, timing and next steps. Uh, we've
touched on these a little bit. Um, we've
had some some prior discussions. The
mayor joined Mayor Mullet uh joined us
as staff at the February uh parkboard
meeting to initiate this idea um and
begin to get parkboard feedback. We then
followed up at the March meeting. Um
lots of questions, lots of support um um
in that discussion. More to be had. Here
we are tonight. Um community outreach is
something that is going to be really
really important. And I think as I've
shared with some of you um given the
timing of of this potential bless you
renewal um uh we're um kind of uniquely
doing community engagement at the same
time we're having really really
important council discussion. And I just
I want to be very intentional about and
obvious. I think it's going to be
important to do both of those in
parallel. Not that we're trying to get
out in front of you. Uh but I think
informing and beginning to have
conversations with the community is
important. Uh we're looking at some
creative ideas of doing that. Um
something we would love to do is take
the presentation as we've shared with
you tonight. um share that with uh board
and commission liaison um and invite um
an opportunity for Robin or I or both of
us to go to board and commission
meetings and and get begin to get some
feedback from those residents um and
just find ways to uh begin to percolate
conversation about this idea um um
within the community um obviously as we
head into spring summer as we're doing
potentially more I don't want to jump
the gun but if if there's interest from
council exploring this further um we
would want to be doing community
engagement at some of our spring and
summer events um while at the same time
having uh these possible conversations
and further conversations with uh with
all of you.
So opportunities both as as council
president mentioned uh some upcoming
services, safety and parks committee
meetings, also the city council retreat
on May 9th if this is pera perhaps an
agenda item. um that that meeting um
we're looking for having a park board
recommendation to you um sometime there
late May early June ideally working back
from a November 3rd election uh June
early July we would really be uh really
an important decision point for council
uh to consider making a decision at that
time um it's August 4th that we would
need um ballot measure information to
King County elections
to get on to the November election. So,
just some important dates to keep in
mind as as we consider what further
discussion looks like on this item.
And with that, I thank you so much for
uh the questions through the
presentation.
Is the mouse is getting kind of funny on
me here.
It seriously will not stay in one place.
Um back to the discussion, the direction
needed um uh these four points um in
terms of the idea um how we prioritize
and consider uh projects uh what size
package looks like um and just
additional information. Um appreciate
any and all discussion and feedback you
can give us tonight. Thanks.
Council Council Member Nichols, do you
have a question?
So this is if we don't have any
otherformational questions and are ready
to consider deliberation of the
direction needed, I will ask again to
the public. This is the third and um
hypothetically final opportunity for
public comment this evening um on the
particulars of this item. So once again
it is press star three or look for the
hand icon. Uh or if anybody in the room
looks like we have someone in the room
who's interested in speaking if you uh
would like to give us your name and your
relationship to the city that would be
swell.
>> Yes. Hello. Uh good evening council
members. Uh my name is Christian Canam.
I'm a property owner up in the Squawk
neighborhood in 1080 Ridgewood Circle
Southwest. Um yeah I like the list put
together tonight. I think um it has a
fair balance between as you mentioned
like the city parks and the more
traditional rural parks. Um I'm
definitely someone who leans more
towards the royal parks. Um I bought the
house I have now in Isqua for the sole
purpose or for the primary reason but
that for the trail system in Isiqua for
Cougar Mountain, for Squawk and for
Tiger. Um, I think that's what makes
Isiqua uh sets Isqua apart from the
neighboring towns and what makes it
really special and we should lean into
that. Um, I also think we should
consider some of the recurring costs
that are incurred. Um, like for example,
if you want a pool, um, that's not going
to be cheap to maintain year after year.
I think that's a great idea, but that
should be considered as well. Um
something like a trail would have uh I
believe like more minimal reoccurring
costs. Um so I'd like to see that cost
versus benefit breakdown over time and
how it factors in reoccurring costs. Um
I would like to specifically voice my
support for three of those projects. Um,
so the Bill Ramos trail head, I drive by
that trail head all the time and I see
oftentimes overflowing with cars
spilling out into the neighborhoods and
it's kind of a safety concern. I don't
think the proposal was to expand that
trail head at all, but paving it and
putting lines down will make it more
organized and improve safety. Um, same
with the bathroom. people tend to
figure out their own ways to go to the
bathroom at trail heads and it's not
always the most sanitary conditions. Um,
so I believe a bathroom there would help
a lot. Um, Cougar Mountain and the
Squawk Mountain corridors,
that's kind of my own selfish thing. I'm
on the trails every day running or
hiking. More trails the better. Um, and
also I would like to propose
uh additional project there. Um, there's
the bullet fireplace trail head up in
the Squawk neighborhood that I believe
um should be considered for a bathroom
as well. Um, I also see I've know seen
friends who have gotten their cars
broken into in the neighborhood or that
trail head. I think it's sort of
neglected. Um, so if we can put cameras
kind of up in that um, trail head area
and also the East Sunset or the Bill of
Ramos trail head, I think that would be
a huge benefit as well. Um, yeah, thank
you.
>> Thank you. Thank you for your comment.
And I will ask the clerk whether we see
any indication that anyone online wishes
to speak to us at this time.
>> Not at this time.
>> Not at this time. All right. So, we can
move into the deliberation on the four
points above. Um, I think we can take
them as a group. I don't think we have
to go through them item by item. Uh, I
see I saw Council Member Nichols uh uh
flick his camera first.
>> Technically, it's a microphone. Sorry,
not your camera. Your microphone. Um, it
was close. I so I I really only have
highlevel comments and that's in part
because my comments are really about the
way that I think this was constructed
that might have limited
it coming up with the best possible
options. Um
I want to start by saying that I don't I
don't really believe in the concept of a
bond renewal. Um if we don't renew it,
taxes go down. Um and that we should be
very cognizant of that. like this is
something that people should be vote
when they're voting on are aware of and
we need to be as well. Um so it's not a
renewal. We're asking for more money to
do new things. Yes, it's at the same
rate that people have been paying, but
fundamentally this is a new ask. Um and
I don't think we could we should or it's
fair to justify to voters just based on
the fact that they got used to paying a
certain amount. Um,
I think that's important also because I
think the voters are primarily voting on
how important they feel a a thing or a
package is. Um, and in whether the
public really believes in funding that
or those those that concert of
activities. I I think we saw this very
um
this this point was very well made uh
over the course of the the school
district's recent bond efforts to fund a
new high school. Like the fact that the
significant decrease in the second
effort there and the total cost of that
high school having essentially zero
impact on the overall outcome of that
vote is indicative of the fact that
voters are they're they're looking at
the value of the specific thing.
whether they can get excited about it,
whether they're really interested in it,
and if we do a good job picking the
right things and selling them on it, um
that it's that it's worth spending their
their hardearned tax dollars on. Um
that's what we should be focusing on. I
think setting the overall vision first,
not being constrained necessarily
constrained to the specific dollar
value. Now, of course, we we we have to
still be reasonable. Like, at the end of
the day, we're we're going to want to
propose reasonable
bond packages, but having that as an
initial constraint, I think might have
impacted this in a way that is is kind
of catastrophic for the overall set of
things to come together. Because when
when I look at this, um it looks like we
don't really have a vision that we were
going towards. It looks like we have a a
kind of a laundry list or it looks kind
of like a Frankenstein effort in some
ways where we're trying to piece
together a variety of independently
useful appendages. Um, but without
necessarily a master plan except that it
has to fit X dollars. So without that
central vision, it's really hard for me
to imagine myself showing up at
somebody's door and selling this thing.
like I like all these things
individually, but I don't genuinely know
what I would say to somebody if I was
trying to convince them to vote for
this, at least with those those packages
as is, without a better central vision
that ties it all together. Um, which is
not to say I don't like any of these
things. I I like that whole list. I
would I love them all. They all sound
great. Um, they also maybe sound like
kind of smalish things that we could
consider doing on a year-to-year basis
or looking for grant funding, as you
mentioned, for some of those. Um so my
my perspective is that this needs
one of a couple things. A central vision
that ties these things together in a way
that we can broadly understand and
believe ourselves and then communicate
to the public that um says what these
things are um and why we should why they
why they make sense together as a single
package. I don't want to debate that
right now. I think that needs a lot of
input and there's a lot of good ideas
there. That central vision could be a
halo project like a pool. Um it could be
a trail system that really connects alto
together. There's a b bunch of things
that I could imagine that that could
where you could have a vision and then
part of your approach of getting there
is coming up with the right things that
meet that vision. But just
being constrained at the beginning to
a dollar value and then trying to pick
kind of peanut butter around different
projects that are all kind of smallalish
to different areas to fit within that
that dollar value feels uncompelling to
me in a way that I think the voters may
also not buy into. Um, and it also seems
like a missed opportunity in part
because some of these projects we really
could probably do on a on a year-to-year
basis if we get grant funding for them,
etc. We can't probably do that with some
of the bigger things or with some of the
more visionary things that we that you
could in principle put together as part
of a more unified
I would dare I say visionary package.
Thank you. Uh, I believe it was Council
Member Adair was next.
Um, so obviously I want to lead with
Jeff
very much appreciate all your hard work
and all the time with this. Um, I can so
for me and especially coming from the
parks board, I can say when this was
brought to me and I looked through it, I
became very excited. You know, I'd
worked in there for a while. I'd seen
many of these projects and others be
listed as these things we want to do one
day. and seeing a list of oh, we can
knock we can actually do these um now
made me very excited and happy to see
this package. You know, I support this
idea a lot because I do think our city
takes a great deal of pride in our
parks. something that anytime I talk
about people love Isiqua Parks and so
the idea of a vote you know that they
need to continue taxes or new taxes I
think is would be widely supported in
this community because it's some it's
just I think our parks are a point of
pride and so I I I do think this um I
would encourage the full council to if
you haven't to read the park plan uh
which actually at least a lot of these
you know the short-term ones that are
listed here as well as others that are
in there as well as I do think there is
a vision in it. Um though I can see your
point council member goes about you know
how we sell that vision within these
because it is a bunch of disparate
ideas. How I've seen it is that I I feel
it's as as stated so many people get
take something different out of the
parks. What they think of isqua parks is
different and some people think it's the
trails some people think it's the
playgrounds some people you know think
it's the fields that they get to use.
And so by having this where it addresses
multiple needs, it's us telling the
community, hey, we hear all of you and
we are want to improve our parks, add to
our parks, and we're trying to um answer
m multiple needs for everybody here. So
I feel like there is a vision in this.
Maybe there's a better way to clarify it
and that might help. Um but I, you know,
saying I fully, uh endorse and like this
plan. My kind of notes to it is that one
of the big things for me which was
brought up is and also in connection to
our earlier discussion about city hall
is that community space has been a big
priority and I've heard it a lot and I
see that we are addressing it a bit with
the e house and I look through the plan
to try and see if there were others.
That's something I would just want to be
considered if there is other
opportunities for community space within
some of our other plans. I I don't know
that there is. I did do a pass on it and
I did not see that but I do know that
that is um desired a great deal and
demanded a lot and if there is any other
opportunity that may add one more space
amongst our projects would be great. Um
the other thing that would be nice is
because I know you've been so successful
at grants and things like that if there
is like a second tier list that's like
if we're able to get grants and actually
have money left over of some other
little projects that could be done. For
example, I know also the other big ask
has been the different types of park
amenities, you know, more community
gardens, archery, you know, other types
of activities that we might be able to
incorporate that could be maybe cheap,
but like where we could fit in another
little activity here and there to again
continue making a very well-rounded and
accessible park space for everybody. So,
those are kind of the two thoughts I've
had in this, but um overall um I support
this a lot and this vision. Thank you,
Council Member Walsh.
>> Thank you. Um, as I look at this, I
mean, my first reaction is gosh, we
really love our parks in Isiqua. We
highly value our open space, our sports
facilities, our playgrounds, our trails.
All of this can be seen by the users of
our parks and um, also by the portion of
our budget that we already commit to the
park system. Um,
all of that being said, I want to take a
step back from everything because
this does feel like it's coming up
because there is a potential for a
renewal and it's not coming up at the
same time as our budget season where we
can really highly understand and
evaluate all of our potential needs and
costs.
Um,
and so that's that's part of my concern.
Um, also when I look at page 37 of our
capital improvement project or plan, I
see that of the 53.8 million in parks
projects that are allocated for that
six-year period, we already have 46.1
million of identified revenue. that
covers 85% of what we have said we were
going to do over a six-year period. Now,
that doesn't include all of these
projects that are being presented here.
Um, but for the four projects in this
proposal that are in the six-year CIP,
there's only a gap of $4.5 million in
needed revenue. And so the rest of that
is already
proposed to be funded by REIT and park
impact fees and grants.
So I come back to this. Do we need to
pause for something?
No. Okay. Um, I come back to this and on
the one hand, I want to celebrate our
ability to prioritize and find funding
for our parks needs, but also question
whether this is truly the place where we
need additional revenue and a bond. um
when I am taking that step back and
looking at all of our comprehensive
needs in the city, I would say there are
many areas where we have a lot of both
capital needs and operational needs that
we don't have revenue for. So when we're
looking at our CIP, our municipal
facilities area where we have six years
of projects, our identified revenue only
covers 45%. And so that's an area where
I feel like we have bigger gaps and
maybe more of a need to go out to voters
for coverage, but I'm also really
concerned about tax fatigue. Um, we are
not the only ones that are going to be
going to voters asking for funds. Uh,
King County certainly has uh projects
out there that they're planning to take
to voters. And I think we need to take
our consideration. you know, we had a
plan for the different revenue sources
that we felt like we could go to voters
for. Um, and then there are other things
that have come up such as East Side Fire
and Rescue. And so that's going to be
potentially a big ask to the community.
Um, I also get concerned that doing this
smaller $17 million bond may eliminate
or postpone our ability to effectively
go to the community for a larger park
district, which could cover not only
capital needs, but also operational
needs at potentially a much higher rate.
So, I want to make sure we are not
shooting ourselves in the foot either
for additional revenue needs um such as
Eastside Fire and Rescue, but also
larger revenue from a park district that
could create that kind of comprehensive
idea of here are the things that we love
about our parks. Um and then finally, I
will say our operational needs. I I
if we are going to go to the voters for
anything, I feel like uh we can make
choices to cut back on capital projects.
Um where we cannot make as easily make
cuts is many of our operational and
staffing needs. And so when I'm just
coming through all of this, I love these
projects, but I also feel like many of
these projects are already have
identified revenue in RCIP. I know CIP
is not a budget. I get all of that, but
seems like we already have a plan for
many of these. So, I'm not connecting
the need for a bond with these projects
being something that um voters would
necessarily pass.
>> Thank you, Deputy Council President
Chang.
>> Um great. Thank you, Council President.
So um on the point of REIT, so if you
look at in the capital improvement plan,
I think last year when we were talking
about this, we we said for the first
time ever, we actually don't have a
balanced cap capital improvement plan
for the first two years of this one
because we don't know with economic
uncertainty. And so our projected ending
balance in REIT by 2032 is $42 million.
So projects that have identified REIT as
a potential source, that doesn't
actually mean that we're going to have
the money to do them from REIT. Um, so I
just want to make that clear that just
because we think that we, you know, it's
like, oh, what money are we going to
use? Well, REIT is a funding source that
exists, that is not actually the case.
Um, and the amount of revenue we're
bringing in from REIT is just nowhere
near the amount of projects that we've
identified that we think are going to be
funded from that. On the point of
community space, this is a little bit
tangential to this discussion, but I do
think we could be doing a better job of
advertising some of the community spaces
that already exist. For example, did you
know that every fire almost every fire
station has a meeting room that can be
used? It is really easy to book them,
which indicates to me that people don't
know about it. And so I think that could
be something like on the website, you
know, oh, are you looking for community
space? Here are some places. Um,
and and before I I think this kind of
goes to my point on, you know, the turf
fields, like before we spend $5 million
on a new turf field, can we at least try
our best to get public access to the
turf field that has already been built
and exists. Um, I want to echo council
member Walsh's point on the need for
operational funding. So, Isiqua's park
staff are amazing. Last year I actually
had the opportunity to volunteer at this
elementary school um cross country meet
and when I was there I mean Isiqua had
the biggest team by far. We had like a
hundred something kids. The next biggest
one was 30ome kids. I ran into my friend
who lives in Belleview who sends his kid
to the Isiqua program because he says it
is just so much better. And and so you
know these are the types of programs
that are beneficial to our residents.
And I think
we really do need to think about, you
know, how we continue those. Um, when I
was talking with some of the staff
there, you know, given where we were at
in the last budget cycle, there were
some budget cuts. And so, there are some
things they weren't able to do last year
that or this year that they were able to
do in previous years. I would hate to
see that cut more. And so, I'd love for
us to think about, you know, what's the
right balance of operational versus
capital funding when we go out to
voters. That said, I am generally very
excited about the bond. Um I do
especially the trail uh projects given
that I'm president of Isiqua Alps trails
club. I think you know we've done a lot
of great work on acquisitions but you
know we haven't really activated those
ac acquisitions. Um so this is a really
good opportunity for us to do that. Um I
also want to echo um council member
Dar's point on the additional amenities.
Um, I have another friend who uh
basically had to wait 3 years to get a
community garden plot because there's
only, I don't know, a couple dozen in
the entire city. This doesn't seem like
something that would be really
expensive, but you know, especially as
we want to build more dense housing and
folks aren't going to have backyards.
Um, I think this is going to be
increasingly an important amenity for
folks, you know, who want to move to
central Isiqua. So, I would encourage
the inclusion of that. It's honestly
probably like really small compared to
putting in a huge turf field. So would
encourage that as well. Thank you.
One more thing. Sorry. Um so I would
also love to see um a breakdown of for
each project, you know, what's the
expected cost and how much grant money
we're able to leverage. My understanding
is this one, you know, it's like 17
million and we think we're going to be
able to leverage about 3 million grant
funding. That seems really low. Um, our
2013 bond, I found some PDF that says
the bond amount to voters was 10 million
and the grant amount was 6.3 million. So
that's 60% of the bond value that we
leveraged in grants. So I would love to
see our number for this bond be, you
know, closer to that instead of like 16%
or whatever. Um, but overall, you know,
I think I want to thank you for all the
hard work on this. Um, but definitely
want to see some more of these details
on projects that weren't included, how
much grant funding are we expecting to
leverage, etc., etc.
>> Council member Joe.
>> Thank you, Council President. Um,
Jeff, thanks for all your hard work on
this. Uh, I remember being on council in
2006 when we passed the first one of
these. And it does take 60% of the
public to to um approve them. And uh the
way that we had put them together when
Margaret Mloud was with the parks
department and when Anne McIll was
running things is we wanted to make sure
that the bond had an appeal to a wide
audience. A little bit to kids, families
with kids, a little bit for people that
had kids in the little league program,
little bit for the trail system. It
wasn't a great deal of money that we put
aside, but we took a little bit aside
every year and and squirreled it away.
Because we did that, we were able to
leverage those monies to get the Kolkari
property. We're able to leverage that
money to get the other pieces of
property, to preserve our wooded
hillsides, and to preserve our streams.
And when we do that, as many of my
council members recall, we're able to
come to the table with some money. And
when we do that, we're able to say, "We
are committed to this project. We are
putting our own money in that we have
saved and had a vision for our future
and we're putting that money on the
table." Doing that increased our
viability or our b our rating for that
particular application and got us
further up in the scale so that we could
be eligible for those funds. Um the
projects that we put aside in 2006 and
2013 weren't big, but we put away a
little bit of money every year um so
that we could make that happen. Um
getting to the point of the the park
plan because we started that back in
1999 because we did it in 2006. The park
plan that came out that council member
Adair uh mentioned outlines
the system that we would like to see and
the investments that we would like to
see in the future as we go forward. So,
we've acquired the Kolkari property and
the other other pieces and as council
member as deputy council president Jen
points out, we're trying to leverage
that trail system now by getting uh
amenities near that trail system so that
we can make it accessible to as many
people as possible. and we want to
continue to work on acquiring land
around our creek and preserving our
forested hillsides. Um so in general I
think that this plan has been well
thought out. It has appealed to
different uh audiences in the in the
group. We heard from um our audience
commenter who talked about why the trail
system was important to him and he even
suggested some additional things that we
could consider when we're trying to
leverage our funds for uh funding from
King County and the state and other
organizations that might come forward.
That conversation is important, but
getting this piece in place so that in
November it can be on the ballot is that
first touchstone that makes everything
else possible. And so I'm really excited
about the program that's here. I'm
excited about the pieces that are in
there. Um, and I would hope that we
would be able to move forward with them
so that it reaches a wide audience and
as many people as possible and leverages
the money that we have in a way that is
going to be long-term vision for the
future of our community. As we look at
this from 2006, 20 years later, here we
are, but we started from very, very
humble and small beginnings. I want to
thank you for all the work that was done
and um, I'll call Ann McIll um, tomorrow
morning to thank her as well. Thank you.
>> Tell her I said hi. Uh, so I want to try
to put some thoughts around what I've
I've heard in the last 20 minutes from
the rest of the council. Um, boy, do we
feel passionately about our parks.
You know, we talk about traffic and we
talk about housing and we talk about a
lot of things. Um, but clearly what you
what you've heard tonight is is just an
amazing passion. um for our park system
and uh a real desire to have uh uh any
bond that we move forward with be
impactful, right? Um
tangentially maybe a little bit is this
this conversation around community
spaces. I just want to mention um I I
love the idea of us trying to do force
multipliers on our community spaces. I
miss meeting at the Isqua Trail Center,
right? I for years and years I loved
meeting in that space and um you know
it's just an example of community
spaces. But um this question about a
replacement bond versus what I think of
as swinging for the fences. I mean
they're both viable solutions, right? Um
when you go with a replacement bond,
what you're saying is historical
stewardship, right? You're saying um
we've done this before. You've told us
that it was important before and we are
going to uh we would like to continue
doing it, right? we would like to
continue putting together uh things that
uh like we have done in the past, right?
And I think that's a viable conversation
you can have with the public. I think
it's also possible that swinging for the
fences is important, right? Um just to
pick the one that I always love to think
of, Confluence Park could be the number
one municipal party park in King County.
It could be, you know, it could top the
lists of of municipal parks in this
entire county. I believe um and it's a
and there's a huge investment to get
there, right? To to integrate and
connect to the creeks um in the way that
it would take in the way that it wants
to be in the way that we've talked about
would would be a large investment,
right? But that would be an example of
swinging for the fences, right? And
there's other things that we could do.
You know, finishing we don't call it the
green necklace anymore, but you know,
doing the green necklace, being able to
walk from the south end of of of the of
the city to the lake would be amazing,
right? that that's a swing for the
fences. And I think that the public
genuinely responds to that. And and the
challenge, you know,
I'm not going to critique what what we
came up with here today, but the the the
passion that you're hearing in the room
is because the transportation bond that
we floated a few years ago was a camel,
right? It was a a camel is a horse
designed by committee, right? And so we
want to not have a c we don't want to
present a camel to the public. And I
don't know, you've certainly heard a lot
of feedback and and and about what's
fundable and what's not fundable. And I
and anticipate and look forward to
hearing back from you in the future and
hearing back from the work of services
and safety and parks to address some of
these questions. But I I think you're
hearing, you know, just a a love for the
park system and a wanting to make sure
whether we do a replacement bond or
whether we do something that is more
swing for the fences. Um but a a love of
our park system and wanting to engage
with our constituents in a in a way that
that everybody's excited about. So
that's just my own thinking on it this
evening. And I see deputy council
president wants a second round.
>> Um just a quick question. Would you be
able to share this confluence park
master plan document because I don't
I haven't. This is like the first time
that I'm hearing about it and I would
love to read more.
>> Sure, we can we can get that. I believe
it was adopted in probably 2014ish
13ish somewhere in there, but yeah, we
can we can find it. Yeah.
>> And then deferred ever since
>> again again yeah phase three implies
moving the shops facility somewhere. Um
but yes, happy to happy to share that.
It is it's very exciting and
aspirational.
other uh second round of of thoughts.
I'm not seeing anybody rushing for the
mics. I will of course ask the question
that I was asked, which is did you get
the feedback and the direction that you
were looking for from the council this
evening?
>> We sure did. Uh thank you. Really
appreciate and applaud your passion for
parks um as a first conversation on on
this opportunity. I really really
appreciate the feedback and uh certainly
uh do not feel um offended in the least.
Uh all of your feedback is is fantastic.
So thank you. We will get to work and uh
continue to work with you council
president during council leadership and
identify if we want to target one of
those services, safety and parks
committee meetings as a as a next step.
But thank you very helpful.
All right. Well, with that we are done
with COM228 and I will ask if anyone um
uh uh any council members have anything
for the good of the order this evening
hearing none. We are adjourned. Oops.
at 8:33 p.m. Thank you.