I'll call the City Council regular
meeting for October 16th to order and as
those would like to join the council and
myself in the Pledge of Allegiance to
please stand
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the
Republic for which it stands one nation
under our next item of business as
audience comments citizens comments are
an important part of the public process
we take them seriously and factor them
into the decisions we make any one for
the public who wishes to comment on
tonight's agenda items or other topics
to do so at this time address your
comments to the entire council and not
to individuals it is not a question and
answer session will contact you to
follow up if needed if you did not have
an address on the sign-in sheet
you may leave that information on the
clipboard at the front table after
speaking when recognized use the lectern
and speak into the microphone state your
name address and any relationship to the
city limit your comments comments to
5-minutes
and if you have written comments please
submit those to the city clerk the
visual timer has been placed on the
lectern when it turns yellow you are
within the last minute of your comment
period if you use the full five minutes
the timer will sound to indicate the end
of your a lot of comment time please be
respectful in your comments and again
since the comments written and verbal
are an important aspect of the public
process we take those comments seriously
and I want to thank members of the
public for taking the time to address us
during our meetings and with that I
would ask has anyone signed up to speak
this evening yes Joe verdure
good evening thanks for the opportunity
to voice my opinion I'm standing here to
tell you that I am in opposition to safe
site safe injection sites within the
city of Issaquah I'm personally opposed
to safe injection sites within the city
of Issaquah and the concept of utilizing
City residences tax dollars to support
drug users to continue their drug habit
is repulsive to me the utilization of
illegal drugs is against the law federal
state and local how the city of Issaquah
can even consider such support action in
my opinion is reprehensible drug addicts
chose to use illegal drugs the citizens
and taxpayers of Issaquah did not force
or encourage drug using individuals to
become users and addicts the City of
Seattle jokingly referred to as free
adil may have such an ordinance and a
blind eye to drug addicts and safe
injection sites and as such have
encouraged more drug addicts to move to
our area the very idea that the city of
Issaquah is thinking about safe
injection sites is offensive from
several perspectives including one
encouraging drug users to continue to
use the use of drugs and at taxpayer
expense - the city is encouraging drug
users and addicts to continue to break
the law and using taxpayer dollars to do
so and three encouraging more drug users
to move to is equal force the residents
of the city to deal with the problems
they bring with them
so in closing city government get back
to basics
of running our city without wasting our
taxpayer dollars for a liberal
progressive agenda of the continuance of
dumbing down America thank you thank you
Joe
no one further has signed up to speak
David would you like to speak this
evening please
David Kepler 255 southeast Andrew Street
thank you as a spokesperson for the
liberal progressives in town but Joe and
I agree actually though I spend a week
in New York City usually for the last
eight nine years visiting my daughter
and exploring all over all five boroughs
nothing I found in New York City is as
exciting or scary as part of Vancouver
BC that I happened to stumble into one
day and the ads on television the Willie
Horton ad makers would blush at some of
the ugly ads were seeing on TV about
this topic but at the same time why
spend time of doing a moratorium in
talking about bringing this up in six
months if you believe that we this is
even in the cards at all for Issaquah
you need to say where you would do it
there's like one place in that's
community hall right here we have place
in fire it's not going to happen here
why are we spending all this time
stirring up all the community and
actually was probably doing a disservice
to people who are trying to solve in
help with this problem thank you thank
you David all right Steve
I could even no steeper era when 70
northeast dogwood Street for about ten
years
so several thoughts as I went through
the regular business agenda a b7
three-one-seven vertical mixed-use again
I've asked you to there needs to be more
of a public comment period before this
even comes out to be an attitude a lot
tonight doesn't seem to the night that
should happen specifically previously I
talked about kind of the concept of a
TDR where this kind of becomes a
receiving site for other development I'd
like to hear where development isn't
going to go to counteract putting the
development here in this specific
location part two I had heard public
comment that previously talked about
citizen input that's limited the height
to 85 feet and proposition got forward
about 425 feet what happened with that
gap or understanding item three I'd like
to hear this in context of other
possible vertical mixed-use in the
proposed Costco development agreement
and the rally development agreement how
do they counteract or how do they
interact with each other what's going to
be a larger impact before this gets
brought forward I'd like to hear more
about the traffic plan and how we're
going to accommodate at seven seven
thousand traditional housing units and
the proposal I'd heard at one point was
for gilman boulevard to become one lane
in each direction and parking on the
street and a bike lane so that would
seem to be counteract that out to hear
that out there it gets addressed I like
to hear about school interactions
[Music]
on the safe injection sites I don't have
that really an input one or the other I
like to see community input come forward
on this before the city takes in a stand
or a position however since there's not
currently anything on the books that
wouldn't make it become a safe injection
site I don't want to see you spending
more time talking about it I agree
either do it or don't do it and then
move on to more issues that need focus
today
lastly item F which is the regional
agenda I wasn't there were a number of
items that I wasn't a big fan of when it
talks about I like to see more talk
about the canopy tree canopy being
preserved and retained I'd like to see
more public safety where it talks about
fire protection and restoration since we
are such a wooded hill-side and we see
here a lot about fires going on there
talked about one for education and I'd
like to see some focus or difference
drawn between when maybe the the city of
is croisé and the city of this quest
school and the school district have
seeming to be competing needs or wants
how those get thrashed out not just that
we do whatever that is classical
district says but we find a way to work
together and the Bellevue college
doesn't really seem to be much of a
regional agenda item it seems to be more
of a city of is gwah wants to see
Bellevue college built here I'm not sure
how it's a regional agenda item I think
there could be better focus thanks thank
you Steve
anyone else who desires to speak who has
not signed up anyone else seeing no one
others comments are closed and will now
move to Committee and regional reports
beginning with Mariah Thank You mr.
mayor
the King County Conservation District
for sound cities Association will be
meeting on Wednesday in Renton at 3:30
on the agenda there will be a they will
be looking for a consensus vote on the
recommendations that have been made for
the 2017 regional food system grants
they I have basically sent this to
everyone a little bit late so I would
love to hear any feedback you have I'll
bring it up during the good of the order
and then the meeting is Wednesday so you
can contact me if you have questions or
concerns but the projects were ranked by
the regional food systems grant working
group on a numerical scale based on the
strength of the application and the
competitive grant funding priorities and
the priorities are infrastructure
consumer demand land access food safety
and business management and they also
took into consideration geographic
distributions so there there are there's
a lot of information maps but this was a
very long process that the conservation
district has gone through to try to
focus in on where the biggest needs were
so again if you have questions or
comments or anything that you'd like me
to know before Wednesday that would be
great that concludes my report
thanks thank you bill Thank You mr.
mayor
my first announcement is to let you know
and some of you know already but last
week governor jay Inslee appointed me to
the Washington State Public Works board
and I term started immediately as soon
as I signed my formation sheet and the
first meeting excuse me will be November
3rd it will meet once a month or every
other month and a little
what it does some mass for that it
started in 1985 and it's basically a
board put together to help bring
technical support and financial support
project to jurisdictions particularly
smaller ones that may not have it in
their infrastructure and public works
projects and so they can get financing
much cheaper through this program versus
going through regular bonding and so
forth and all that's just paid back and
so it's a kind of a bank that cycles
through and there's one pays back it
just goes back out again so that's their
task and it's a four-year term the
Infrastructure Committee will not meet
it was scheduled for this Thursday but
it was cancelled because there's nothing
particular to talk about this month so
we cancelled that I was at the emergency
management advisory committee on last
Wednesday and the topic was dams and dam
dam safety so it's interesting to
realize there's over 90 damn licensed
dams in King County and only about a
dozen of them have up-to-date plans on
what happens if there's a failure of
some sort so the county is trying to
work on getting those updated and as a
push to get increased dam safety the
regional transit committee will normally
meet on the third Wednesday of the month
but this year has been moved to the
fourth Wednesday on the 25th of October
I don't have an agenda yet but I will be
there for that and that concludes my
report no congratulations on your
appointment and thank you for your
report thank you all Thank You mr. mayor
last Thursday the 5th we met the growth
management policy board met and the key
action of that meeting was the
authorization the board authorized the
PSR C staff to take the regional the
draft reach regional centers framework
update out for public comment and did
others get an email of notification I
don't know if they just sent it to every
elected or not I did see that
okay I will forward it to make sure
there's makka mint period is through
November 8 I want to say that Cohn
balance I think that this update really
does make some improvements to growth
planning in the region and it really
does no harm to Issaquah our regional
growth center is would be grandfathered
it does set performance measures based
upon on on specific measurable items
there is a there is a decertification
process that it proposes and and the
intent is that you know maybe some
places just weren't intended and they
shouldn't be eligible for regional
funding but that's though that's only
one small part of it it spend a lot of
time talking about manufacturing in
industrial centers but also military
installations and the board moved on
Thursday to staff to make a
recommendation that military the
military centers such as Joint Base
lewis-mcchord to actually go through a
certification process even though they
don't plan under the GMA they have such
big job in transportation impacts in
their local regions that if the nearby
cities want to participate in the
regional funding nearby growth centers
want to participate in the regional
funding because of a military
installation the military installations
are going to have to apply and qualify
under certain criteria so that hasn't
been defined but I think the board
accepted that there would be a
qualification process and so that is
that that is available out for public
comment it's available off on the ESRC
website and then last Thursday on the
12th I attended the second meeting of
the PSR C 2018 project selection task
force now this task force is all it's
doing is setting a policy is
establishing the policy for the project
selection will happen next year by the
transportation policy board and
and really it's it's it's a funny
exercise because we're not going into
there's a lot there and they're quickly
running through kind of policy questions
even though it wasn't on the agenda and
and that as a group there's over 30
people involved are agreeing to just do
everything like we did last time in
terms of the allocation of funds what to
do how what percentage to set as a set
aside policy level things that will
guide this election period process for
next year one of the things to that's it
we did address already is that King
County just like the other counties that
planet or GMA can forward for regional
funds like a set number of projects for
consideration so we have a regional
center within King County if and if we
make an application for a transportation
project related to our regional center
it will have to compete with others
within king county applications and then
the county itself will only propose six
of those four considered funding and
none of that none of that has changed it
hasn't changed in the framework update
it hasn't changed in these in these
funding policies as well and similarly
the other counties have a certain number
that they can forward for funding as
well we don't have any potential
military installations here in King
County but if they were to become
regional centers then Pierce and
Snohomish and even Kitsap counties would
and they'd have to compete for their
slots that those counties can can
propose so the regional centers could
mean more competition for funds but only
within the counties in which they exist
not so much King County therefore no not
so much with us so that's that's my
update on those got any questions and I
will forward to make sure you all have
the email that shows where you can get
the the document for for comment that
concludes my report thank you Paul Toula
thanks mr. mayor council services and
Safety Committee met on Tuesday October
10th we had an update on the transit
oriented development opportunity center
an update on the classification and
compensation
study we had four action items in front
of us at gender bill 74-62 on school
impact fees we recommended it come back
on November 6th agenda bill 74 43
Recreation registration and scheduling
software development agreement we
recommended to come back tonight where
it is on I believe regular business
agenda bill 74 72 Providence points
signalization here we recommend you to
come back November 6 but with some
specific guidance around looking at two
particular options one being a
transportation benefit district and the
other being a levee lid going down that
path and we asked the administration to
come back to full council hoping
November 6 with additional information
how both of those options would impact
residents and businesses in Issaquah so
and then the final bill was 74 80 to
2017 third budget amendment which is the
subject of a hearing this evening sound
cities Association public issue
committee met on Wednesday October 11th
the thing that people here should know
about is we took the first of two looks
at a SCA legislative agenda it has three
planks all three very fairly high level
the first is looking at the property tax
cap it is generally felt that
municipalities would like the option at
least the option to consider beyond a 1%
increase in property tax
the second is investing in public health
services recognition that there's
currently underfunding of public health
services in in the county and then the
third is addressing housing and
homelessness crisis in the county and
what can be done about it
so again these are fairly high-level if
you go take a look at the SCA materials
you'll find they're also a fairly high
level they're about as as detailed as
I've just described to you but if you
have any feedback from me
please let me know offline I intend to
this seems to dovetail with a lot of our
concerns but I would be happy to talk to
folks further if anybody hears anything
there that that sounds sounds like not
good thanks that concludes my report I
call not Mary Lou Nikki mr. mayor I
attended the esight Fire and Rescue
Board of Directors meeting on October 12
I've known our city in the fire chief's
briefing he talked about some of our
fire fighting force heading from
Washington down to work with the wild
fire crews down in California he also
had a consumer warning I guess that he
talked about there was a press release
there are certain vendors out in the
community right now representing
themselves is our local fire department
to do home inspections and they're
charging fees for this they are not in a
firefighting uniform but they are in a
uniform that looks like an inside Fire
and Rescue uniform and so they're trying
to get the word out even in the vite the
vehicles they are driving and also look
like fire fighter vehicles trying to get
the word out to the community they have
had complaints from some seniors who
have been targeted but this is not our
local fire department doing it currently
State Fire and Rescue is having a
discussion with fall city about whether
or not they their Fire Department plans
to do a merger with district 10 so this
would be district 27 and 10 district 10
being one of our partners talking about
a merger and it is just at the beginning
stages right now Maple Valley has also
approached the site Fire and Rescue as
it has many other jurisdictions at this
time asking for Eastside Ferren recipe
to provide a price for a contract for
full full fire and emergency services
again that one's at the beginning stages
under new business the 2018 budget and
revenue expenses the new the 2018 budget
was approved without amendments so that
is something that our finance director
has also been reviewing
another item was a consideration of a
new revenue stream a motor vehicle
accident revenue stream and this is
something that
yfir had discussed five to seven years
ago and had a split board they're
bringing it back now there are very
strong feelings from many board members
as to whether or not this is a good idea
or not but it has been referred to the
Finance and Administration Committee
they're approximately 40 fire
departments that do it now it is allowed
under current our CW's and what it does
is it allows emergency services to bill
insurance company for the cost of
response during motor vehicle accidents
the next Finance and Administration
Committee for reset Fire and Rescue
would be on October 25th at headquarters
and the next board meeting will be
November 9th at 4 p.m. at headquarters
and that concludes my report
Thank You Stacey Thank You mr. mayor
Landon Shore committee met on October
5th two of the items agenda bill 7317
vertical mixed-use and agenda bill 74 83
2017 amendments to the comprehensive
plan are on the our agenda tonight two
of the items end of development
agreements and agenda bill 73 26 Oldtown
sub area plan are still in committee and
agenda bill 73-42 architectural fit and
urban design i don't have my notes with
me but I believe the next stop might be
full council nope back to committee
keith is nodding his head on the 25th
our next meeting is October 25th I don't
have any agenda in front of me but it's
right here at 6:30 p.m. so tune in it's
very important thanks actually see there
will be an executive session held this
evening to discuss acquisition of real
estate for our CWF 42.3 0.1 1 0 / n 1 /
n be potential pending potential
litigation per our CW 42.3 0.1 1 0 / n
one paren I and collective bargaining
sessions for our CW 42 3 0 1 4 0 paren
for these items are expected to take
approximately 60 minutes action is
anticipated to follow in open session
councilmember barber is an excused
absence this evening I am proclaiming
October 16 to 22nd as code enforcement
officer appreciation week in fact thank
our code enforcement officials for
ensuring our community safety health and
welfare
I'm also proclaiming the month of
October is Domestic Violence action
month and urge all citizens to speak out
against domestic violence on October the
3rd the city hosted its fourth annual
brokers forum along with answering a
range of questions we provided
information on its across moratorium and
current transportation projects I
attended the site transportation
partnership meeting on October the 13th
where we reviewed and approved our
operating procedures and agreement and
there were no changes to either of those
agreements so that concludes my report
you now move to the consent calendar and
I've asked the clerk to read the consent
calendar into the record the consent
calendar was distributed to council in
advance for study if authorized council
action will occur by single motion
regarding the following items item a
seeks approval of the accounts payables
in payroll of October 16th items B and C
seeks approval of the minutes of the
special meeting of October 2nd and the
regular meeting of October 2nd item D a
b7 36 0
KCI 90 transportation demand management
partnership agreement seeks to accept
grant items EF and G a B 7 377 water
meter replacement south cove a b7 37 8
2017 water main rehabilitation project
and a b7 403
hood tank improvement project seeks to
accept projects item H a b7 405 end of
certain development agreements relating
to Issaquah Highlands and Tallis seeks
referral to council and in short
committee item I a b7 4-1 for King
County flood district grant for East
Lake Sammamish Parkway south east 56th
Street conveyance improvement seeks to
accept grant items J and K a b7 for 59
termination of Costco easement and a b7
four nine three Lake Sammamish State
Park partnering agreement seeks referral
to Council an inshore committee this
concludes the reading Thank You tisha
I've had the accounts payable and
payroll been approved
they have thank you the Senate
councilmember desire to remove any item
from the consent calendar and considered
under regular business Stacey
I'd moved to adopt the consent calendar
as presented second moved and seconded
all those in favor signify by saying aye
those opposed that carries unanimously
moving now to public hearing agenda bill
7 4 8 2/3 budget amendment again Olson
our finance director for a for the staff
report Jen good evening good evening
mayor Butler tonight's public hearing is
for the council to consider a budget
amendment ordinance this would be the
third and final one for 2015 tonight to
take public comment on the proposed
amendments what's a bit unusual about
this particular budget amendment is that
it includes some fund accounting
adjustments that essentially are some
housekeeping items in nature they do not
change the overall prior to the budget
adjustments they do not change the
overall revenues nor expenditures nor
estimated ending fund balance however
the budget amendments in the on the
exhibit that the council has attached
with the ordinance under the blue
columns
blue highlighted columns are those
amendments that have come from counsel
direction through an agenda bill or are
essentially additional with the with
regards to the debt service the debt
fund where we want to properly classify
bond proceeds and those transfers out
for the use of those bond proceeds from
the prior voter-approved park bonds so
there's information in detail about this
proposed ordinance this item went to
council services and safety and staff
reviewed that with the committee at that
time and was referred back to the
council for your final consideration so
that concludes my very brief
presentation and I'd be happy to answer
any any questions of the council there
any questions
Mary Lou x-gen under the professional
services for the finance department
there was an adjustment of a hundred and
forty thousand for the 2015-2016 audit
was that the actual cost of the audit or
the increased cost of an audit that
would include dollars for the increased
cost of the audit in 2017 we had audit
costs for the 2015 audit as well as the
2016 audit and so we essentially have a
couple years as well as some temporary
accounting services that we have needed
in order for us to comply with and be
prepared for the auditors that are on
site doing audit field work if we broke
it into the two years it's not an
extraordinary cost that's actually
typical it's just two years worth of
additional cost that's that's correct
what we're looking at is approximately
an annual cost anywhere between ninety
thousand and 120 thousand for audit
fieldwork from the state auditor's
office and it looks like the costs for
the work done up in talus the road and
utility repair work is covered in a
couple of places but it looks like
to date the work we did this summer was
a 1.7 million dollar expenditure when we
include everything that we've done that
budget amendment it's actually separated
out from the funds that are going to pay
for it and so this came from agenda bill
seventy four thirty four and so this is
what you're seeing is essentially the
accounting of that so what we have is
the 957 from the general fund and then
we have the portions coming from the
utility funds based on the associated
costs for those utilities that are all
going into the street capital project
fund where the project essentially is
tracked out of her or paid out of the
resident was asking what the total
expended this summer one point seven
would be one point seven million would
be the right number for this summer
that would be based on the agenda bill
okay and then I think the last one was
there was a note somewhere street
capital project fund 2.1 million dollar
Newport Way proposed expenditures
delayed that's correct
so what what what was that is that
something that went to infrastructure
where there was going to be an
expenditure this year but now it's not
happening that's that's correct what
we're trying to do is and especially
with capital projects it's all about
cash flow so if a project is delayed
where the the spending authorization is
not needed we want to correct that in
the budget what you'll see then in the
2018 budget as well as in the capital
budget the 2018 through 2022 CIP that
the council reviewed and authorized is
that that project essentially those
costs and associated funding shifted
then with the changes to that project
thank you
all thank you Jen in on a appendix that
Appendix A the know yes it is it's a
Exhibit A to the ordinance where you
have the fun names and you have the
columns of their changes the very top
ones a general fund it's I think in the
far right column
for all of those funds really it's like
okay with the aggregation of all the
amendments that we've made that's what
we're estimating the end of an ending
fund balance to be for each of those
funds at the time that a budget
amendment or fund balance information is
presented it's a snapshot of the
estimated ending fund balance right okay
what jumped out at me for the general
fund gen was it says ten million
ninety-three thousand and change the
budget document we just got forecasts
and estimated beginning balance for next
year of sixteen million nine hundred and
thousands and change so that's a big
discrepancy well fund balance is a hard
one to provide information in a
published document and as I said it is
something that when we are doing
forecasting and we are getting those
numbers up to date you'll always see and
that's why the budget reflects a better
estimate of that I would never want to
provide you with too much and so fund
balance is one of those things that can
be a challenge to estimate but for the
2018 budget is where we focused our work
on trying to provide a prediction of
what we were going to have in that
because we had some finality to the 2016
ending the ending fund balance from the
audit fieldwork okay so so that's it's
nearly a seven million dollar difference
I mean can you just give me a is it just
because of timing or
a lot of it is because of timing the
other thing that you'll want to remember
is at the beginning balance for you'll
see over in the far left corner is
essential that is the ending once we had
the 2015 audit was was finalized and
remember we had two audits going on so
there was a lot of shifting around of of
information it's not that we don't we
don't know what we have in our cash
balances but in the published document
it is difficult to provide a number and
and then to explain in detail the ins
and outs of the checkbook so the
estimated ending fund balance that you
see in a budget document is based on the
budget the 2018 beginning fund balance
418 is where we're doing forecasted
estimates for the end of 2017 so there
is going to be a difference because
we're looking at the departments are
looking at what they expect to spend and
what we expect to receive in for revenue
so we're trying to get closer to the
actual so it it's a lot of complication
and a lot of detail that I'd be happy to
provide and in another method if it
would please the council to to
understand fund balance at in snapshot
form okay if I may let me let me try to
recharacterize it what I in my own words
what I think I heard is that for this
agenda bill everything that we're
accounting for has gone through some
very rigorous handling with previously
through other attended bills and you're
very certain there are there are both
revenue and expenditure changes
obviously we've dealt with expenditure
changes in previous bills but you do put
some revenue
changes as well and it's I think you
just said that those are pretty absolute
we know these changes happened however
when you're doing the budget for next
year staff brought forward other
forecasts of maybe revenue and already
budgeted expenditures that they that may
or may not happen and you took that into
account when you came up with the
estimated beginning fund balance for
next year's budget that's correct
one thing one thing that is an internal
administrative challenge is the the
moving or the fluidity of information
that's coming when we're creating the
budget and when we're creating when
we're looking at retrospective
information budget versus actuals and
then of course we're going through the
forecasting exercise for the end of the
year from an audit perspective and and
then of course creating that for the
budget document because we want to get
as close as we can to a predicted ending
fund balance for the budget document the
budget amendment is essentially a focus
on the revenues and the expenditures and
not necessarily on the beginning ending
fund balance okay thank you
other questions seeing none then I will
open the public hearing at 7:40 and ask
if anyone has signed up to speak
no there anyone desiring to speak on the
proposed budget changes for 2017 anyone
designed to speak seeing none then the
public hearing is closed at 7:41 this is
coming back from services and safety
Toller do you want to speak to this I do
mr. mayor thank you I would like to move
to adopt ordinance number 2808 amending
the 2017 budget is set forth in
ordinance number 2 791 and amended in
ordinances numbers to seven nine five
and two seven nine eight concerning
revenues expenditures and fund balance
for various funds for the year 2017 and
authorizing the finance director to make
the necessary adjustments and approving
prior expenditures second moved and
seconded additional questions or
discussion seeing none all those in
favor of adopting ordinance number 2808
signify by saying aye aye
I was opposed that carries unanimously
moving now to regular business agenda
bill 7 3 1 7 vertical mixed-use
reference
development moratorium and
our Economic Development Manager hi good
evening
Davis Hayes who's all teed up and ready
to go with a brief staff report yes good
evening
my name is Jen Davis Hayes I work here
at the City and Economic Development and
tonight we're presenting to you the
final recommendations for the vertical
mixed-use changes which as the mayor
mentioned is part of the development
moratorium you may remember we are here
at a work session to discuss these draft
recommendations back in August and since
then have been through several meetings
to refine these even further one of the
things I wanted to mention this is has
been a project has been since last
spring we at first hired a consultant by
the new consulting firm by the name of
iko iko Northwest to look at the market
study and so you in September of 2016 we
presented the findings that they
discovered and so this is just a
reminder of the the study and for those
who are new to the topic but basically
the market study showed that we are
about 5 to 10 years out from vertical
mixed-use happening without additional
incentives and that the real estate
market was moving in the correct
direction any questions about this
initial study we did ok and then after a
lot of discussion with Council we were
directed to look at at the code to make
sure that when the development does come
are we going to get the type of vertical
mix are the type of buildings we want to
see which our vertical mix use that will
add to the vibrancy of our community and
so that scope again looked at our code
and made the following recommendations
here to move forward to ensure that when
development does come it will be in the
form of vertical mix use of the
commercial on the ground floor so
tonight we're going to go into some of
the detail
these are in your packets you these are
the Ament the chapters that are being
amended in our code for the centralized
cost design and development standards
the first section chapter 1 just talks
to basically about the purpose and
applicability so that's a really general
description of vertical mix use and
explaining that that where that it
applies the the next point I want to
just briefly talk about is the geography
about where this will occur so we are
looking at it's kind of a may be hard to
see it's a hatched parcel there's three
actually parcels it looks like multiple
more than that
but it's the hatched parcels that are in
our urban core and the black lines are
where actual commercial space will be
required if there are buildings are
being built along those streets there
any questions about the location
geographic location we've identified yes
yeah thanks Jen so the black line that
little the table in there says it
required ground floor frontages that's
what you just said as well and and and
could you just explain the difference
between that and the other parcels which
are have the that are that are with this
would have the overlay what's the
difference between the entire overlay
and those frontages sure so basically
again so these are there are three
parcels here that are identified so
there's one in the corner of North West
Gilman and twelfth a larger one that
where it says future northwest mall is
currently one parcel and then the third
parcel which is the Commons over here
and so if a developer when developer
comes in to ever develop in this area
most likely there'll be a phased
redevelopments because these are a
larger parcel so you'll be looking at
are you looking at the what the the
grander scheme is if a building is built
and it's along the I'm going to use this
along the
along here again so this area here will
require commercial ground-floor use okay
if the building back in this in this
portion let's just say it's back here
they could have resolved residential all
commercial all retail and there are no
there are no ground-floor requirements
for that now there are other
requirements that we have in the code
that they would have to abide by but as
far as having commercial space on the
ground floor that is required that would
not be required does it not mean they
cannot do that that makes sense and I
did answer your question it does it does
I think the visual is always when is
that when you say vertical mixed-use
it's a given building and it has mixed
uses yep if the ground floor is
something commercial and something
perhaps not commercial residential above
that but with the and so that's what's
required on the black line that's what
the overlay is but the rest of the
parcels it's it's still says vertical
mixed-use that's still the overlay it's
still the overlay right but there's
other conditions they have to abide by
as far as the right just just and so you
know could you just share with us you
know if it's not commercial on the first
floor what would be an example of
vertical mixed-use off somewhere within
those parcels but not on the road
frontage ease so that would not be
required to have ground floor so it
could be so it doesn't it won't require
to be vertical mix it won't be required
to be vertical mix use so it could be
completely residential completely retail
completely office right right and that
was my understanding so I didn't see
this in committee before but I did see
it and preparing for this evening it
does seem a little bit confusing to me
that we have a vertical mixed-use but
we're not requiring work mixed-use on
all the on the entire parcel yes so one
of the things that both consultants
looked at is the amount of commercial
space you provide your community and
whether or not that's it's set you know
a good balance and so I think if you
required in every single building within
the these parcels it may there may be a
chance that there's over
of a retail space and I understand so I
think what you're saying is it's it's
it's it's zoning more or less for a
given parcel a parcel has one zone on it
and this overlay specifically adds the
commercial component on those Road
frontages and some other development
standards yes and this thing as as we
would move along and perhaps we get the
vertical mixed-use in place in all of
the areas that we have defined there and
things are starting to build out is
there a specific time that we've
designated to take a look at it again
and to revisit I'm assuming that then we
could require that potentially other
areas have more vertical mixed-use sure
so this is part of the central Issaquah
development design standards so we do
look at the central swap plan every
three years for kind of a relation of
that and we have I believe an annual
report card so there could be something
that looks at that but at any time and I
know that you may recall serving in the
economic vitality commission that we
looked at several areas throughout the
urban core and actually a lot of
discussion we had previously with
councils is looking at you know what
space actually makes the most sense so
there it definitely we can anytime come
back and look at whether there's what
other locations would make sense once
this is built out thank you
any other questions about the geography
continue okay so and this just so one of
the things we wanted to make sure is
those users who come into our code make
sure that they have the opportunity to
understand that we have an overlay
because we don't have that often in our
code so in the zoning on the zoning map
and it's hard to see here but they those
areas are hatched and then it
specifically calls out to look at the
figure of the map and then on that map
the the figure for for vertical makes
use overlay map that has more
information about where to get
information about the standards so in
the actual chapter four we're looking at
at the table permitted uses again trying
to make it as easy as easy as as
possible for people to utilize and so
what we did was he added two footnotes
to the table where they were added to
specific items or specific uses so along
the ground floor along those black
colored streets we are going to require
vertical mixed use again commercial
ground floor for those areas and on 60
feet from the corner of the building in
you were required to provide either
retail or restaurant uses so those are
that's what's highlight our footnoted
here and then the basically the middle
of the building you're able to provide
the other uses that are currently
allowed in the urban core so again this
these properties are currently in the
urban core and we felt that there are
some uses in there that are vibrant
enough to add to the to the commercial
district as it gets built up and we want
to make sure that some of the spaces in
the buildings are reserved for those
more vibrant uses as restaurants and
retail any thoughts about that our
questions yes
Jen the developments we've seen on the
valley floor in the last couple of years
have just been residential so with with
this approach where we are just
requiring it on alert a certain strip
and councilmember Bateses question about
how often do we look at it what else is
there in here that if over the next two
or three year period again we just say
single-use buildings is it really three
years that we have to wait to do
something or it's something that we
would maybe be tracking annually so that
if we're continuing down the line of
just residential we would have an
opportunity to change and then nothing
would restrict us from setting it this
year doing an evaluation next year and
changing we could be that nipple it's
there's three parcels so it'd be pretty
easy to track yes yep yes oh sorry
and and just you pick these three
parcels and I'm just wondering you know
we don't know what I don't know what
property owners are thinking oh maybe
you're due and that's the question is
there these being considered to
redevelop or these might be sitting
there for 20 years because the people on
them are very content with what they
have or why were these so was there some
of that information used in the
selection so um so part of the analysis
we did a staff and then also the
consultants did is looking at what the
amenities are in the area and what the
future development opportunities are and
also looking at the parcels that are
ripe for development and so the commons
shopping center has shown an interest in
potentially redeveloping over time
they're not looking do anything tomorrow
or you know in the near future but
there's discussion about potentially
looking at talking to them a little bit
more about their development their
future development Town & Country Center
has a style of you know older shopping
center with a lot of parking and so
that's again in the area where we
envision where there's a lot of
amenities ready it's near the Transit
Center and we envision some
redevelopment to be occurring in that
area so thank you
so we are also adding a table that looks
at the standards summary table so again
this is not a new zone this is an
overlay so the people will be directed
to this right below the nor the other
standards summary table and so the
changes here are based on wanting to see
more dense development in this area so
that we don't get single story
single-use development so while we may
not have ground floor commercial in
every building that's built in here we
will have a more dense building type so
we've increased the FA are from for
residential commercial to 2.5 and
currently in the urban core it's it's
less than 1 for them for the minimum
residential and then we've increased the
base to 5.0 and then maximum to 8 we
initially just so you know we initially
had a recommendation to do the maximum
height at 135 feet
it was the Planning Policy Commission's
finding to recommend just remain at the
125 which is currently allowed under
urban core zoning and the administration
concurred with that agreement so we've
had since amended that get to 125 so
again these these standards will help to
ensure that we actually get the type of
building they may not all be commercial
on the ground floor but the market will
also determine so there may be we may
see a lot more vertical mixed-use with
commercial and ground-floor than what we
require if the markets there and that's
what we feel is a good bet any questions
about the numbers
okay and then chapter 8 parking so you
have recently discussed in the past
additional parking requirements for
requiring 50% of required parking in
structured parking we have increased
that for these these parcels to 90
percent and so again that is trying to
avoid having the sea of parking that 50%
of your required parking would allow
because in these again in these areas
you want to make sure that it's as
pedestrian friendly and as compact as
possible
so that is the quick review of our
recommendations and changes to code we
are here to answer any questions all
right Mariah can can you remind me in
the areas where vertical mixed use is
not required are what would encourage
someone to actually go forward and build
vertical mixed-use outside of that
required area yes sir so the market so
that if they if they believe that the
the location was a great use for
vertical mixed-use we took currently do
not have any incentives to require aya
no encourage that but if you know if
they feel like they're a good space
right so this does not preclude anybody
anywhere else in the urban core or in
the central plan area that's
allowed to to develop a vertical
mixed-use building to do so okay but
there's just not a any incentives to do
that this is coming back from land and
shoulder Stacie would you like to speak
to this I can make a motion
I would move to adopt ordinance number
two 809 adopting by reference amendments
to the central Issaquah development and
design standards including establishing
a vertical mixed-use development overlay
establishing the regulations for
vertical mixed-use development and
requiring structured parking for new
development within parcels within the
vertical mixed-use overlay second it's
moved in seconded discussion or
additional questions
Mary Lou thanks and I wanted to say
thank you for all your hard work on this
you were one of the first to come back
before a committee with a moratorium
work item and we sent you back and you
regrouped brought in some more expertise
and this is entirely different than what
you brought the first time I think it's
workable and I'm really hopeful that
we've landed in a great place but thank
you for your patience with us and this
is this is really good it's a complex
topic thanks for pushing us other
questions or discussion all those in
favor of adopting or that's number 2809
as stated in the agenda bills signify by
saying aye all right all right I was
opposed but carries unanimously thank
you Jeff thank you moving now to agenda
bill seven four four three Recreation
registration and scheduling software
professional services agreement
Neph waddling our director of Parks and
Recreation recreation for the staff
report mayor Thank You Trish I promise
to be as quick as I can
Thank You mayor good evening Council I'm
here tonight to talk about a great
opportunity we have to update and
upgrade our recreation and registration
software system and programs I think as
we all know recreation programs and
services that we provide really are a
primary touch point with many of our
resident that many of our residents have
with us as as a city the registration
software system itself is a very
important element and really an initial
element to their customer experience we
are currently operating with a system
that was originally purchased in 1996 so
21 years old few upgrades but certainly
a system that is a little tired and the
vendor informed us last year that they
will no longer be supporting this system
in future years so it really became an
opportunity for us to explore other
options and to seek really what we would
find to be the best system we can find
for our residents and for our own
internal processes well with that in
mind we undertook over a little over a
year ago an RFP process to seek that out
from the very beginning we chose to take
a very integrated approach with this and
partnering directly with IT melissa
ching our admin supervisor and Parks has
served as the project manager Melissa's
here John Trager IT director has been a
really an important part of that team as
well just a subject matter expert and
also helping us navigate this RFP
process so very much an
interdepartmental process that I think
we're very very proud of and I think the
outcome that we have before you really
speaks to the quality of that
of that work we had six proposals that
were submitted through some very
thorough vetting through three phases we
identified a very clear unanimous winner
in a product called perfect mind not
only was this unanimous amongst IT and
recreation staff but finance and
certainly their involvement in this
process certainly were clear consensus
winners we feel like this product gives
us a a real significant improvement in
our internal integration in particular
with munis as well as a number of our
other systems we also feel like very
importantly this is going to be a much
better customer experience for those
that are doing online registrations
we'll be able to for the first time
actually streamline all of our rentals
so all the rental work we do at
Pickering barn and our picnic shelters
and others and incorporate that it that
into this process not only is the online
tool such a marked improvement there's
other sort of 21st century upgrades such
as being much more mobile device
friendly and other tools that we think
our customers are really going to find
value in as we identified in the
services in safety meeting last week a
little bit of a timing thing to work
through here and that this is a 2018
expenditure it was identified in the six
year CIP it's also identified in the
proposed capital budget why we're here
now in late 2017 asking for this
agreement is really it's a contingent
approval that we're asking for with your
contingent approval that is we wouldn't
be expending any funds until 2018 and
that would all be dependent upon 2018
budget being adopted it does allow us to
get on the vendor schedule that allows
us to start to map out as a internal
staff the work that we need to do and
the scheduling we need to do to
ultimately result
a quicker switchover in 2018 so with
that I'm available John and Melissa are
certainly available if you have any
additional questions thank you there any
questions at this time this is coming
back from services and safety
Toula would you like to speak to this or
make a motion
thanks mr. mayor I move to authorize the
mayor to enter into and execute an
agreement with perfect mind incorporated
in 2018 to provide implementation
training and ongoing support of the
perfect mind cloud-based Parks and
Recreation software for an estimated
first year amount of ninety six thousand
twelve dollars and forty-five thousand
twelve dollars annually over the
remaining four years of the five year
period for a total not to exceed two
hundred and seventy six thousand sixty
dollars second moved and seconded
questions or discussion
Ola thanks mr. mayor we we talked
extensively about this the city staff
provided very good feedback on sort of
the trade study that they performed and
the committee asked questions around
some of the line items that we saw and
we couldn't we couldn't find any fault
with it we picked at it and picked at it
and all seemed pretty solid the reason
that we wanted it to come back to full
council is that as mentioned this is one
of the primary interfaces that people
have with the city this is one of the
ways that people interact with their
government and so we are excited about
the possibility of moving into 21st
century technology other Paul you know
thank you Jeff I don't know a lot about
Park software but I know a little bit
about these systems just some basic
questions I think in the 2018 budget I
didn't see any additional headcount so
if you do implementations like this
always takes time always takes cycles
away from somebody so I could you just
say a word about how how you're planning
to staff this implementation because and
that will have an impact on some
people's availability in their work
plans absolutely as I mentioned early
Melissa King will serve as the the
project manager she's been the lead
through this RFP process I know John and
the IT staff will be providing some
support as well and
so it's really both departments have
this in their work plan as we map this
out so we're planning to do it with with
no additional no additional staff okay
and the I have a couple boys the the so
the license fee or whatever you call it
per year whatever the however they refer
to it it's fixed is I assume then there
may its
there's no constraints in terms of like
number of staff users or even external
customer users sometimes there's a
there's a lever there for the way these
are priced so is this have any kinda we
see them shaking their heads no no it's
a five year five year set them out with
that renewal that will certainly to be
dependent upon what our revenue picture
looks like in your six okay and so this
will be there's some talk about data
migration and I'm a parks customer I'm
also a city utilities customer and I
think there's a permit somewhere in the
database about some some work we've done
and and so what is going to be the user
the customer citizen kind of experience
here um we it's it's it is more for John
or anything right we really don't is is
it we any we doing any kind a master
data implementation error this is gonna
mean all of their customers are all
going to repeat it in this just like
they're repeated in the utility side
just like they're repeated and perhaps
in the development services side as well
yeah I think John can speak to that
migration of the data we have in the old
system to this to this new one so I
think your question is more around
centralized data repository of all these
various systems of this is just another
one like the add like the master you
like well that's that is the master data
database is not in scope initially for
this there's a lot of other moving
pieces before we can build that however
there will be data integration with the
ERP system
for back-and-forth transaction
processing between the two and this will
be setting a new precedent for our
e-commerce model because we have other
touches what will be having ecommerce
that we don't currently have so
currently in the city the only
e-commerce is the existing site which is
extremely outdated if anybody here has
used it so this will be the beginning of
a much tighter integration with the
finance system as far as the citizen
touches you know we'll have to have this
available for the places where they may
call and ask questions and any front
office type or front desk type of
positions the user interface is very
easy to use and see you to research
what's going on with particular
customers okay and then just my last
question one of the biggest challenges
to any type of implementation project
like this is legacy data quality if you
have issues and is this accounted for in
the project plan as well when you do
conversions you find out all your
problems with data and it can really
have an impact on timeline when we did a
high-level analysis of the data that's
in there and of course there's all kinds
of issues so there'll be some data
cleanup but that is a point in the
project plan that that's the draft at
this point okay thank you
that's all my questions thanking oh yeah
I just wanted to add around that
question around implementation because
that was one of the things that we
picked out in committee because you know
I've seen implementations of software
packages and so I wanted to we confirmed
that 51,000 in first year costs included
the implementation effort which sizes
about how much you know if that's the
external consultant effort that size is
how big you know any potential internal
support of that external actual you know
frontline work and certainly with the
Parks Department you know that's that's
other size if it was if it was you know
five hundred thousand dollars of
external consulting or even a couple
hundred thousand then I then I would
also be concerned about what the effort
looked like on internal staff but it's a
small enough implementation that it
seems reasonable Thank You Mariah
followed by bill
so when we were talking about this at
services and I do have a question for
you John this is a 21 year old software
that that I think that the change over
it sounds like is going to create a much
better customer experience for everyone
who's who's using that and then be a lot
easier internally because of mostly
because of the integration with with
other departments and John there was
something about some servers that you
were updating as well could you talk a
little bit about that I think you
mentioned oh this is a this is a hosted
service so we won't be having to run
servers like we currently do for the
existing system that's that will take
you know replace did you have some that
worth you were phasing out and this was
a good move exactly so our overall
strategy for the city and part of our
technology strategy is to move to
cloud-based applications where it makes
sense there are always there always be
exceptions but the amount of servers
that will be hosting has been dropping
and this is continuing to lower that
number to reduce our footprint because
the costs of complexity of managing that
is getting on more difficult for the and
the amount of staff it requires to run a
big server farm it's not something that
we're it's an are not in our strategy
roadmap at this point so cloud-based is
our goal for this particular application
as we are currently cloud-based for the
munis ERP system and we're also our
city's website is cloud-based and so
there's a lot of platforms that touch
the public there are a cloud-based
already so this was just catching up
with the rest thank you no thank you
question on the customer experience so I
saw here in one place it says it doesn't
allow credit card offer credit card
processing but but it talked about it'll
allow it some ways is the old way that
it's done so I'm just asking what the
customer experience is they can come
online and
pay for their stuff with their credit
card and that would be a seamless
experience or not of course it would I
mean they currently do that and this is
the current system has a lot of
difficulty with refunds or other changes
unless a perfect transaction is easy
everything else is difficult with our
current system the new systems grace
greatly simplifies all that and makes
that a lot easier for a customer
experience people schedule events and
then they cancel all that kind of stuff
and then it's the integration piece into
our e-commerce to be much more
straightforward currently it's not very
easy for us to process ok and just to
notices recreation of management pays
fifty six thousand dollars in virgin
transaction fees that's the credit card
fees for people use it the three percent
or whatever and that doesn't go away we
still have to use you know these things
to everybody you know so that's really a
no change essentially we are in a
different for effort as part of the
unit's program I'm looking at see we can
get a better rate by bringing in these
other e-commerce pieces I was talking
about so if we can you know negotiate a
better rate with the Clearinghouse it's
got a credit card Clearinghouse is what
it's called we might be able to do a
little better on that and when we start
bringing in other services that people
buy currently with checks or other types
of payment for example utility billing
thank you any additional questions or
discussion seeing none then all those in
favor of authorizing the mayor to enter
into and execute an agreement with
perfect mind Inc and 2018 to provide
implementation training and ongoing
support of the perfect mind cloud-based
Parks and Recreation software for an
estimated first year amount of ninety
six thousand twelve dollars and forty
five thousand twelve dollars annually
over the remaining four years of a
five-year contract period for total not
to exceed two hundred and seventy six
thousand sixty dollars signify by saying
aye
I supposed that carries unanimously
moving now Krish who agenda bill 7 4 8 3
2017 amendments to the Comprehensive
Plan fish Hainan for the staff report
thank you thank you I had the worst
trouble with the screen and then just
rise and just started
thank you thank you technical
difficulties okay we're here for the
annual comp plan amendments there are
very few this year because we did so
many moratorium pieces so there's only a
few there's the land-use element that we
do every year with the Office of
Financial Management giving us our new
population and household numbers we
added our new housing units to our state
target we changed our potential
annexation areas map and the annexation
history maps because of the King County
Island and the Bellevue utility parcel
we did a few redesignate Sandri zones to
newly owned city property and we put in
the Transportation Improvement Program
that you already adopted that officially
goes in the comp plan through this
process the first one quickly is how
many housing new housing units were
actually final this year that we can
count for towards our state target there
was just over a thousand new units in
2017 and so there's just a little over a
thousand remaining in our 2031 state
target have a question oh okay go back
one Trish please
so that can you clarify the twelve
ninety two units remaining to the twenty
thirty one target we've already got
projects in the pipeline and so if you
if and I realized technically we don't
include those correct that if were you
were to account for those what do we
have remaining for our two our twenty
thirty one target we I think Keith did a
rough estimate at Landon Shore and we
had like 800 in the pipeline so that
would be then pretty close to being the
target hitting the target so that in the
note 192 - 800 if they all come online
next year they'd all have to be final to
count but not just next year actually
right yes that are in okay so it's four
or five hundred left correct
Thanks correct other questions on this
we have an answer so could we go to the
transportation improvement slide that
the okay that's at the end the oh I'm
sorry I'm generally I had on the weight
which is fine but go ahead you're gonna
miss all the excitement I don't want to
miss the excitement okay we have a new
population number from the state we're
up to 36,000 and 30 very exciting and we
also because of the end of development
agreements we were able to really key
into the what's left for the entitlement
for the talus and the highlands so our
population chart is a lot more accurate
than it's been we've always just had
that end number because we just never
were really sure how it would sort out
so that's a lot more accurate in this
go-around as well this is our new
potential annexation area map it's I
think it's pretty beautiful there's only
one left which is very different than
when I first started here
I'm warned you had asked about the
little pieces up by Grand Ridge and I'm
in a discussion with King County about
those we had always understood they call
them on their map the Issaquah Highlands
gaps or something they don't call it a
PAA they don't call it things that it's
a quest should take in the near future
so I have contacted them we're going
back and forth because when we
negotiated Issaquah Highlands those were
always meant to stay King County so it
seemed odd to us that perhaps they want
us to take them over now so wanted you
to know we're still in discussions about
that this is the very busy annexation
history map from the dinosaur age and
the one that's a little more clear to
understand is how busy we've been since
1990 these are just the ones since 1990
and again this is updated to have can
counting island and the bellevue utility
parcel we did as i said some redesignate
Sandri zones we sent
letters to 300 property owners within
300 feet of all of them so they would
know that some reasons are going on near
them the first group is the for the road
project that's going to Costco these are
all gonna be remain open space and part
of them will be floodplain improvements
this one was purchased in part with fire
impact fees this one's at an East Lake
Sammamish Parkway
Church can I just ask a question sure
that one partially purchase with impact
fees are fully purchased with him I
don't have the whole record of them but
I was hurt I was told that at least part
of them what part of this was paid for
with fire impact fees
yeah it's fully paid with fire impact
fees I think fully paid but thank you
okay I knew that it was a bunch this is
actually owned by the over Dale property
owners association and they wanted it to
be a conservation easement if you can
recall Janet wall did this last year
with her property up there and so they
wanted to go through the same parcel so
this is actually privately owned but
they wanted a conservation easement on
it so we're proposing to rezone this as
well to Conservancy recreation as we did
with Janet's
last year and this one is right down
here on Front Street and this is part of
the park sock was acquisition that they
used park bond money for this one that
will someday be a park of some sort
along with the others that we own that
some of the pieces to the north as well
I have a question on that one to Trish
so that is the one that is currently
grass where houses were demolished I'm I
haven't been by there Jeff recently but
I did check with Jen Fink on Friday to
be sure that it had been purchased with
Park bond money and she confirmed that
it was park bond money just maybe I'll
discuss it with the chair of land and
sure but it would be interesting to know
if this one
is going to be zone community facilities
recreation as its proposed after its
proposed car but the interim uses might
be and before this is built out as a
park but I'll just talk with the chair
of linen chore and see if that's
something that we could get more
information on in a later date sure or I
couldn't be a park for a while right or
I can contact Jen and have her sure do
you want me to follow up on that back
you're gonna okay I just put it up to
the chair and let her decide if she
wants okay thanks now Mariah we're at
the six-year TI p and this is the same
one that you all adopted I believe it
was early in the summer and so we
haven't changed anything we're just
updating the document from last year
with the document that you've approved
and sent to the state already so that's
what this is showing and that's oh did
you have a question on there
I did so when the breakout I don't think
it's it's not on your presentation but
the breakout of the transportation
improvement projects in this spreadsheet
now I'm trying to find it it was
actually taken from the summary page
that's what we got from Sheldon okay so
I'll just ask my question as I'm trying
to find this so in in the package it's
like as page 16 of 35 but it's where
we're basically listing the 2018 to 2023
transportation improvement plan so I
could be confused but when we were
talking about the capital improvement
plan which include included
transportation back in September on
specifically on 0 o to 8 which was
Northwest Sammamish Road that had to do
with when wash dot comes in and is doing
some shoulder work that we had that I
had proposed adding money in for
2018-2019 to coincide with that project
and I don't see it here I'm assuming I
should see it here it's just a good sign
this is just what Sheldon gave me to put
in the comp plan
and so I was assuming it was the adapted
version but I don't know a detail like
that that might have changed I can
follow up good evening Keith Niven
development services director and
economic development director so I think
so you're right you did make a
recommendation for a million dollars
being going towards the pinch point and
I think procedurally what would need to
happen is if that gets adopted I think
it's in the budget the the budget has
it's been presented by the mayor's
office and so if that gets adopted by
the council then that would go into a
docket item for next year to be added
because it's it just hasn't happened yet
the recommendation that you've made is
now I think part of the proposed 2018
budget and then if that gets adopted by
the council then we would put that into
a 2018 comp plan docket item so it's not
in the 17 work items because it's it's
behind okay I I thought it might be
something procedural and so I just
wanted to ask about that thank you
it's a good question via Emily urging
Jensen here tonight but it may be an
Emily question or Bob question and that
is that I thought we adopted the CIP I
didn't think we were adopting the CIP
during budget I thought we adopted it
and so I had assumed any changes that
were in it would show up in the CFP or
the comprehensive plan amendment of us
oh I think this is just a timing and
sequence issue and I and I don't think
it's a significant one I think
everything keeps said is accurate you
you made a motion at the tail end of our
capital improvement program adoption to
request some more immediate funding for
that project we have
updated the capital improvement program
to reflect that change that's posted
it's available for all the C online and
we've taken steps to implement it via
your proposed budget as well as a first
year capital program and we'll talk more
about that when we get into budget
deliberations what that looks like in
the adopted budget then we can talk
about the actual work program for that
item as well I I don't think it's
significant enough that it needs to be
reflected in this map but we can
incorporate it when we go through at its
next time these things always lag each
other to some degree we will make
changes we're gonna have this from time
to time we're gonna have it next year
when we do an update to the capital
improvement program
you're not going to immediately probably
have the right sequence with adopting
the comp plan on amendments next year as
well so you're going to be playing
catch-up on on one of the two documents
other questions or discussion this is
coming back from Landon Shore station I
would move to adopt ordinance number 28
10 adopting by reference several
amendments to the comprehensive plan for
the city of Issaquah by updating the
land-use element the transportation
element and related Maps and amending
the land use designation map and zoning
map for community facilities properties
and the King County Island annexation
area second it's moved and seconded
additional discussion or questions Mary
little question for Trish I think
Emily's explanation makes sense but from
a transparency point of view I find it
kind of confusing why under the comp
plan then wouldn't we actually footnote
that table and refer to the actual
governing document like it seems odd to
me to have a CIP that says one thing and
a comp plan that says something else why
why don't we cross-reference why don't
we explain it seems weird to have it
stated differently in to garden it's I
think for the comprehensive plan being
the policy document were required by the
state to have the Transportation
Improvement Program as part of our
document even though it's previously
been adopted months ago and so it we
sort of have to wait and tuck it in when
we're ready to adopt ours and so the
whole part of asking for funding and all
that because you do that at a whole
different time then ours we could
certainly try to say to footnote
whatever it is that's coming next year
or that's on its way but that gets a
little odd to that all of a sudden it's
March and there's a strange footnote
about there's an extra million proposed
that's in so the footnote but I think be
confusing to it might be less confusing
but it's still it's still odd because
the documents aren't just one yeah I
think I meant to ask a different
question okay I understand that the CIP
is approving projects and the budget is
approving funding for projects the CIP
is a project list and the comp plan is
project list
and they don't match and my suggestion
is why not footnote something somewhere
either in this CIP or in the comp plan
that says that there's a companion
document not saying call it a million
dollars to talk about one project oh
that they are just project list both of
them right and they're different and
neither one is funding approval so I'm
not confused about the budget piece it's
having two programmatic documents that's
differ okay I was gonna suggest we could
just amend the map because it is in the
budget and it's in the capital plan and
if you want if we want to capture
mitigation fees for that project that
really should be on the CFP list so we
could amend a map and just incorporate
that as part of the we approve it
tonight without the amended map just
provide direction to amend the map yes
yeah I the direction is clear enough so
I think yeah I think it is and they and
the document also references the CIP and
the CIP is adopted so I think I think
we're covered there my point is just our
capital plan is always it's a plans
planning document will change over time
and so that's the catchment that we have
but here I think you have the clear
linkage to the adopted CIP and while the
map may not have reflected one of those
last-minute changes I think you have all
the backup that you need Thanks oh thank
you I want to make sure I understand all
this as well Bob I the the project is
actually already on T IP the the
Sammamish Road project so it's already
eligible for mitigation funds and and so
what we did late recently was amend in
the light I was it changed to the CIP so
so when we may actually expend some of
those funds the project is already
eligible for mitigation fees
all right Araya
and i just wanted to clarify it wasn't
actually the map i was looking at it was
the it was the spreadsheet that goes
through everything and breaks it down by
year so I was just expecting to see that
in 2018 and 2019 to coincide with that
project so but we could maybe have that
he updated in two sections so like just
for the benefit of counsel
so the council didn't make that motion
to put a million dollars into the budget
we adopted that that's done what we and
at that time what we mentioned was we
still don't know when wash that's going
to do their project because it's going
to tie with that you know there's a
possibility maybe through four years
before they actually do that based on
you know additional data that they're
getting and then if they're doing
eastbound or westbound first so I think
I just want to qualify that while we
believe it's in the budget for next year
we got a million dollars in there
there's a possibility that it may not
get done within the next couple years I
just wanted to say and that's something
that we we talked about when we were
talking about this amount of money and
and the purpose of putting that forward
was just that when the project does come
forward that helping out with that road
and adding a sidewalk and dealing with
some of the issues that those
neighborhoods have all been dealing with
would would be there so understanding
that it could be a little bit further
out but that was the purpose of bringing
the money forward and not having it all
sit in future years other questions or
discussion
all those in favor of adopting ordinance
number 28 10 as stated by the chair of
the land and Tour Committee signify by
saying aye aye I was opposed that
carries unanimously
moving now to agenda bill 7 4 7 1
opposing community health engagement
location safe injection sites in
Issaquah this is coming back from the
administration Bob for the staff report
Thank You mayor
so if council recalls the administration
had proposed the resolution that would
have banned safe injection sites and
this was in front of the council Rob did
you go to the podium sure to make sure
you're on TV you don't get many
opportunities for this
Thank You mayor and council Bob Harrison
city administrator and so this item had
come to council that there's a lot of
conversation obviously amongst a number
of communities and King County for the
safe injection sites there was an
original resolution that was proposed I
would ban the sites and based on public
input there was a desire to look at
getting some additional feedback in the
community and from the Human Services
Commission at that same time when the
resolution was passed there was some
consideration about doing a moratorium
and so there's really two kind of
companion bills this evening and we've
based on input that we got from the
services committee chair where this
would have been referred to eventually
and council leadership we've decided
that perhaps a better tack would be what
we're proposing this evening and so
first of all I'm September 5th the
council did refer this to the safe Human
Services Commission and services and
safety there was a countywide initiative
to ban safe injection sites scheduled
for the February 28th 18 special
election there was a decision made in
superior clerk this today that
overturned that ban
I'm sorry that overturned that proposed
legislation
I left the article and unfortunately at
my desk so that will not be going in
front of voters as of the decision today
although that certainly could be
appealed so just to be clear that was
the citizens initiative as a citizen's
initiative initiative and King County
Superior Court determined that that
initiative had too broad of a reach to
be a valid initiative and that group has
vowed to appeal an appeal to the state
Supreme Court of necessary I just wanted
to be clear about what that was it
wasn't that County Council yeah thank
you for clarifying it that's exactly
right the judge decided that local
legislative bodies have the authority to
determine budgets and i-27
initiative 27 impinged on that
legislative authority of the county and
it's an entirety extends beyond the
scope of the local initiative
the judge also wrote that state law
gives governing officials
decision-making authority and public
health measures in initiative 27
interferes with the Health Board and the
County Council's duties and obligations
so that decision was made earlier today
which really gives strength to the
argument that was proposed by council
leadership and the services and safety
chair that we look in a moratorium which
is a way to deal with the issue on a
zoning perspective so the first item is
what we're suggesting is to discharge
the agenda bill from consideration by
the Human Services Commission and
council services and Safety Committee
and indefinitely postponed consideration
of agenda bill 7 471 proceed to consider
and adopt a moratorium as outlined
independent agenda bill seven four eight
nine the more term of the community
health engagement locations and so that
would be the item that would come up
after this item and we can talk a little
bit about that when we get there
can you talk a little bit about the
effect of the first agenda bill the
effect when it says discharge from Human
Services mission talk about the effect
that that would have on the ability of
the Human Services Commission to
continue to have that conversation and
then what it does to any referral to
services and safety so that's a good
question and so the original motion
would have been a direction by the City
Council to the Human Services Commission
to review that item and then come back
with a report to the City Council at
that time by discharging this it
discharges the official council action
of taking it to that commission and
expecting a report back the Human
Services Commission still has a full
authority to review investigate and
gather more information if they choose a
community conversation around this issue
and then report back to the mayor at
some future of date which is within the
charge of their kind of commission
responsibilities what this action though
does is it just takes away that council
directive that the Commish
and file that report at some future date
with the Services Committee and then
back to the City Council other questions
or discussion I'll appreciate that
clarification and I'm wondering if if I
say it this way this is correct too
because the the the action that had
taken then it had asked the Commission
to make a recommendation on a very
specific bill that included a resolution
with very specific language in it and
and all what this bill but with this
action that we may be considering I
don't think we have a motion for it all
right so what is is simply saying you
don't need to consider that that bill
and that resolution is very specific to
the previous legislation it's not topic
broad it's just to a specific piece of
legislation that they were asked to make
a recommendation on that's correct okay
so it's not it's not stopping
conversation about a topic it's it's
just stopping a given specific
legislation okay thank you Stacy there
are no other questions I'm gonna make a
motion
I would move to discharge agenda Bell
7471 from consideration by the Human
Services Commission and council services
and Safety Committee and indefinitely
postponed agenda bill 7471 I thank you
Peter just questions or additional
discussion hola
so I don't really try to keep my
comments short but I hope Council will
indulge me because I'm gonna speak a
little bit longer than I normally do
because this is I consider an extremely
important topic that we're looking at
today I believe the original 7471 bill
is unnecessary the County Council in
addressing chell sites basically said
that a city would need to affirmative ly
it would need to affirm that they wanted
a child site to be considered for a
child site so doing nothing would mean
that we would not have to consider a
Chell site so so that's 7471 I don't
believe there's a bill in front of us
tonight and my comments are going to be
on 74 71 and 74 89 together because it's
it's hard to talk at a high level about
them without talking about both of them
so we don't have a bill in front of us
in this process that would allow shell
sites 7471 would have said no to Chell
sites and I believe 74 eighty-nine the
moratorium is if you look at it a
moratorium towards an eventual decision
around not around I don't say outlined
but prohibiting shell sites that's how I
read section 3 of 74 89 of the actual
ordinance so when we were considering
first of all I believe this is not about
individual rights this is about public
safety so there is nobody who is coming
before this council who is saying we
want shell sites because we want to be
able to shoot heroin people are coming
before there are there are people who
have come before this council respected
people leaders in our community who have
said that they believe that shale sites
would potentially save lives I don't
know if that's the case or not but I
believe that what we have in front of us
is a fundamental level we have a
situation where the vast majority of
people in the city have made it clear
that they're very against Chelsey's and
then there is a minority who believe
that shale sites could save lives and I
think that in that situation one has to
be extraordinarily careful about
adjudicating something like this and so
I personally am skeptical and I have
said this to the advocates of shale
sites I am skeptical that shale sites
would be beneficial to a population I
believe that if you read the
decriminalization data for for instance
Portugal I think what you find is that
you see an increase in hard drug use and
you see a modest decrease in fatalities
associated with those hard drugs that is
an extraordinarily difficult set of
circumstances and so I I have said that
I will need to see a lot of science
before I would be can before I would
consider allowing shale sites
nonetheless I think we have to have the
conversation I think that we all know
people who have been impacted by heroin
use and have lost people and I have a
friend of mine who you know I remember
when her niece was born and recently her
niece came home she was an 18 year old
girl
her dad was waiting up for he kissed her
goodnight she went into her room and
died she had done what's called a
speedball which is where he makes heroin
and cocaine and she just died and let me
tell ya as the parent of a 19 year old
that hits you close to home so again I'm
skeptical but I think we owe it to
understand the science see if in fact it
does see if in fact there is a public
safety benefit too
during gel sites again we don't have any
bill in front of us that would authorize
chell sites I just think we don't want
to I don't think we want to say
absolutely positively no before we have
taken a look at the science because we
owe it to the people in our community
who have told us this is important to
them to do so so that's why I'll be
supporting the motions this evening on
both 74 71 and 74 89 thank you thank you
Toula digital bill thank you and thank
you we've got a lot there and I
appreciate the the intro I also I'm not
a supporter of shale sites in Issaquah
right now I want to make that clear but
we don't know the answer to that
question that's that's also clear but to
me there shouldn't be an issue that
we're discussing up here as was stated
it wasn't an issue that needed to be
come come before the council
it was thing that if we took no action
no action would be taken and it was fine
we don't have to pass ordinances against
things that aren't going to happen so I
guess that process had brought it up to
the public made it a public issue it
does bother me in the way that came
about and and created quite a stir in
the community on both sides of the
argument that that didn't need to happen
so I'm sorry that that did happen and
that some people very stressed out by
that because it is a very complicated
emotional and and social engineering
issue it's not an easy thing to deal
with and I don't pretend to have the
answers but what I want to do is put it
to bed right I wanted to let folks know
that we're not dealing this no one in
that I know anywhere and it was
proposing to to have safe injection
sites there's no talk of doing that and
if we say we were postponed indefinitely
that this is not going to be an option
for us at this point in time I think
that wraps up how it was started
and if if people in the community have
discussions and and bring things up
that's what community conversations are
for and they can bring those things up
as they see fit
and those may come just things later but
who knows right that's not what we're
looking at here so I guess to me it came
as a as an ordinance and we rejected
that basically so without more
information now we're saying we're gonna
postpone it indefinitely so I agree with
that process I do have a problem
stepping again across the line to the
next issue of then declaring a
moratorium against it that is
specifically States direction to design
something that is prohibiting the action
so to me it's the same as the ordinance
it's just taking six months to do it and
so I think that's a very unnecessary
item as well because again we're taking
steps of something that I can't support
because I don't know and and I'd it's
not a discussion and again I don't think
we need to ban things that aren't on the
table to talk about so with that in mind
I'd like to just say that I'm looking at
supporting indefinitely postponing it
but voting against the moratorium
because that is unnecessary
and just Stokes the fire to bring things
back in the community in the discussion
to worry about and it's six months to
deal with again I'd like to put it to
bed tonight the tonight discussion from
the council level stops and ends in the
community knows that our discussion is
ending on it I mean you can do what they
want but our discussion is over with
rather than keep it alive with a
six-month moratorium which keeps it
alive until we have to deal with it
again in six months why would we do that
to ourselves I don't understand that so
I'll be voting against the moratorium
part hopefully and just put it to
postpone indefinitely and let it rest as
it should have been before
it hadn't come up thank you
other questions or discussion seeing
none then all those in favor of
discharging agenda bill 747 one from
consideration by the Human Services
Commission and council services and
Safety Committee and number two
indefinitely persona host pone agenda
bill seven four seven one signify by
saying aye I was opposed that carries
unanimously
moving now to agenda bill seven four
eight nine Bob and would you explain
this and any anything else you would
like so again this was recommended by
the chair of the service and Safety
Committee and agreement with the
administration and council leadership
that this was an appropriate action to
take which is it's moratorium there's a
public hearing scheduled as part of this
moratorium in two weeks it is a
six-month moratorium although we would
anticipate that that we would
incorporate this item within just
prohibited uses in the zoning code and
that would be our recommendation it
likely won't take six months to deal
with I think one of the concerns that we
had was that that initial motion was
done by the King County Council at one
of their committees and and the King
County Council by simple motion could
lift the requirement that they had put
on there that said the cities have to
require them have to have it a positive
or affirmation by their City Council to
incorporate so this very clearly deals
with the issue that they're going to be
strictly prohibited within the cities
with whether the county changes their
mind or keeps their mind as it is this
so we have a public hearing scheduled
for November 6th and this would
essentially give us time for DSD to work
through the issues affiliated with the
zoning there's findings of fact laid out
in the ordinance and then following the
public hearing the council may choose to
amend those findings of fact based on
the
testimony provided at the public hearing
at that time but at this at this point
the findings of facts of counsel doubt
the ordinance would be sufficient to
proceed with moratorium that clean up
the zoning code so I've got a question
for Bill you said you're gonna vote
against it because you wanted to go
farther and I didn't know if you were
there was any interest in proposing a
motion I would go further than the
moratorium No
well I moved to adopt ordinance number
28 11 providing for a moratorium and
interim official control prohibiting the
location of community health engagement
locations safe injection sites in all
zoning districts of the city and set the
required public hearing for the council
meeting of November 6th 2017 okay
moved and seconded discussion mr. mayor
I think what is not particularly
transparent to the public when they look
at our packet is that we've received an
enormous amount of correspondence on
this and I think councilmember Mart
summed it up very nicely very accurately
the community is definitely torn on this
issue there is a majority that is saying
do something and do something tonight
and there is a very concerned and vocal
and supportive minority voice saying
that this could be a tool in the toolbox
that could help with the opioid crisis I
do agree with council member Ramos that
we're not talking about opening a shell
sign in Issaquah and that there are a
lot of unknowns he also received a
letter today from the ACLU and I just
wanted to talk to part of it the last
second last paragraph from the end says
that passing an unnecessary moratorium
and limiting input from the Human
Services Commission seems
counterproductive it also adds to the
overwhelming amount of stigma
individuals and their loved ones
struggling with substance use disorder
already face in effect it says that even
though there is no way for a shell to
open in Issaquah absent an affirmative
voice just to be safe we want to go on
the record opposing them anyway and I
have a lot of heartburn with that
statement for a couple of reasons one is
I think the first bill that was here
tonight that we approve continues the
community conversation at the community
level with the Human Services Commission
and I think that is the appropriate
place for it to be we're not the final
voice in this it is the community so the
fact that we got through the first bill
is great the second part that says that
a moratorium
actually is a negative phone I don't
agree with that we don't know how
something is going to function we don't
have code and regulations we do put a
moratorium in place and I have never
felt that any of the moratorium votes
that we cast was negative to the issue
for example medical marijuana but in a
moratorium till you figure out the rules
counsel was actually in support of
medical marijuana
they passed a moratorium to get ready
retail marijuana same thing issues with
the central let's go up plan I didn't
hear anybody put up their hand and say I
hate the plan let's go back to the
beginning what they said was the rules
aren't working let's fix the rules I
actually believe the reason the council
did the moratorium was because they
wanted to put the effort back in to
making the central square plan rules and
regulations work if anything it was a
sensible pause to say we don't know what
we're dealing with here so let's take a
break let's take a moratorium and so for
me personally I find this entire issue
extremely upsetting whether you're
reading the letters listening to the
testimony somebody whose child has died
somebody's family is affected somebody
who's concerned that he's tasting street
from Vancouver's coming to Aqua it all
makes sense
so let's have the community conversation
and let's make sure that the council
takes the break if they need the break
to hear out the community conversation
because we don't have any rules or
regulations I'm in favor of either a ban
or a moratorium whatever the council
decides tonight I think we do owe the
community a vote and I understand why
they're asking for it now I think we
need to follow through and do something
but for me it's not a vote against it's
just saying we don't know enough we're
not ready this is what we do when we're
not ready and we don't know and so let's
let's see what happens with the county
let's see what happens with our
community but for tonight I am in
supportive either moratorium or a ban so
if council member Ramos is more
comfortable with a ban
I would support that as well I'll wait
to see what language you come up with
but I you know what we need to step up
and say something tonight
so I agree with almost all the comments
that I've heard and totally I agree with
you about the science science is one
thing and if the science were to fall on
the side of this being something that
would be considered I still would not
would not want or support given the idea
of a tell side in Issaquah unless the
entire region everybody in the region
all the cities all the jurisdictions
took their fair share this is a it's
it's not just in a regional issue here
it's a huge issue everywhere
but locally this is a regional issue
this - Chelle site pilot project I don't
understand but this is an issue that
every community is dealing with and it
just makes no sense and I would never
support chello sites unless this way
everybody in the region was what was
participating though I an I agree with
Mary Lou I would support a ban but if
the rest of the council feels more
comfortable with a moratorium I would do
that as well it's I think what our
community is crying out for the vast
majority of the people is certainty and
it's it's not certain right now what
this council might do because we've sent
mixed signals
riah so this has been a really difficult
issue to think about we've received so
much feedback from from the public which
I really appreciate just on just on both
sides and I too agree with just about
everything that everyone's talked about
tonight one thing I think that the
original bill and talking about a ban
was unnecessary based based on the
language but where were where we're at
right
and now we've been talking about this
and getting all sorts of feedback from
the public so it also does feel it makes
it tough to carry this out for a long
period of time I'm I'm not in support of
having a shell site in Issaquah and I
and I would in in hearing council
president goods mint Goodman State
statements regarding if this became
something where the whole entire region
had to adopt that then we could we could
get more information at that time but
it's not something that I would be in
support of and I would either vote for a
moratorium or a ban
the language in this ordinance actually
directs the development services to
update our code including the central
Issaquah development and design
standards to ensure that shells are
prohibited the purpose of this bourret
aureum is to get things in place to
assure they're prohibited so this is
this moratorium is isn't about getting
it right like we did with recreational
marijuana or medical marijuana like
we're what zones within the city what's
what's the distance between potential
sites what's the distance between a
facility and say a park or a gathering
place that those other moratoriums were
about making adjustments so we could we
had the we had the legislative pieces in
place to make sure something unfolded in
a way that we wanted to do it that's not
what this does this is this is just a
moratorium to make sure nothing slips in
and I and so that we can officially
informally prohibit in in the city of
Issaquah is that everybody's common
understanding I heard some comments
tonight that suggested that there was
the more the concept of a moratorium was
different it was that we were going to
try to shape it correctly but this is
just about this is just about
establishing the prohibition and that's
what the first agenda bill that we
originally considered a number of weeks
back and and we just pulled back from
the Human Services Commission that's
what 7471 did had prohibited and and
the reason that but I just heard tonight
also that that action we just took
doesn't stop the Human Services
Commission from having a conversation
but but in effect we with this
moratorium the way this is written we
are completely taking it off the table
it says it says develop a way to
prohibit shells and and you know the
fact of the matter is actually what the
county said we should be clear that the
council has to pass some type of
resolution saying that we would that
they are interested in hosting one to
get access to county funds that's the
purpose for their ask so and I mean that
I think that's a technicality but I
think it's very very important it's not
just about whether or not you want one
it's it's actually very specifically to
have access to their funds you know I
think that the the other thing other
things that the task force that
originally read recommended this was
just one of many recommendations there's
many recommendations that deal with
education programs prevention programs
treatment programs and and when this
first came to us and I and I'm the one
who recommended we send it to the
Commission was you know the the you know
if we cut this conversation off and and
don't and make a policy decision without
the conversation then that that would be
a mistake because if we care about
making a difference in people's lives
we'll have a conversation about
education and prevention and and a
treatment making a big difference and
that the the the task force was very
clear about this and yet yeah
HL or safe injection site maybe another
tool to help help people and help save
lives but they also had quite a bit of
emphasis that was just one of the things
among a spectrum of things and that's
still my hope within the city physically
I think this community does a very good
job at having conversations about very
sensitive issues and I think it's a very
good policy and it's a very good idea
that when we have the time to have a
conversation because we're not faced
with any action anytime soon we're not
considering it nobody's considering it
that's let's take that time let's give
that conversation the time it should
have give the community the time to have
that conversation and and if through
this process more people realize oh my
gosh the Yoda program as part of the is
across schools foundation is about
teaching kids in way about certain
aspects of life that will help them
resist in the future wow I didn't know
about that I know about that now and I
want to get involved or I want to
support that
that would be a very good step if in
this conversation about the availability
of treatment and how difficult getting
that treatment is and what it means on
families here on the Eastside then and
and people step up and say my gosh
treatment is I understand it better and
it can work I understand what we're
where the science already is where it
works and people step up and say I'm
gonna I'm gonna somehow so I'm gonna
find a way to support that better then
that conversation will be worth it and
and the idea and and I have spoken to
quite a few people and I want to say
something else that I think I want to
repeat as heard that you know it is
really unfortunate it is it is tough
this is really engendered a lot of
emotion and I get it I spoke to a
gentleman a couple days ago who's 17
years into his recovery and and he felt
very very strongly
about this topic and in and boy the
emotions are pretty real we have
definitely hit a nerve and for good
reason I mean this is a this is a deadly
this is dangerous
and but the commune but society isn't
really very good yet at helping
ourselves or managing it and it was very
important to me that to make a
difference in people's lives both now
and in the future is that that that this
our community Issaquah regardless of
what happens here because this again
this is us the regarding a Chell that's
just one thing that I don't there I've
seen research that it does and that it
doesn't work I've seen some of that
foreign research that really didn't talk
at all about what the rest of the
community was doing about education
prevention and treatment and as our task
force was very comprehensive in doing
and it's and and but for me I also agree
that you know what this is the community
absolutely has to want this and and and
and it I think if one ever happens
anywhere and say it happens in Seattle
it has to be really clear that this
works it makes a difference and then
maybe the question of another facility
somewhere else in the county would come
up I think that's very many years in
into the future and so I and so to
summarize I think this action for this
moratorium which is really getting to a
place that we don't we prohibit
forevermore in our code will will end
the conversation and because because
we've ended it we've ended any chance
for this and at the same time we will be
missing the opportunity to really make a
difference in people's lives the
conversations about training about
education and about prevention will end
and that is what and and those are also
going to save people's lives and that's
what the task force was trying to
chief we would be ending the
conversation with the way that this is
currently structured and and and that's
very unfortunate that is not what we
want to do Stacey oh well I was I was
just gonna say that the agenda bill also
would establish a public hearing and so
after that public hearing the that
direction may be amended so it doesn't
necessarily stop the conversation so so
to continue --mess to me the
conversation shouldn't miss started
hearing his iguana and doesn't need to
you mentioned I'm gonna make some
comments on some things I've heard that
the county could change their direction
and direct someone to have a child site
I just I could never imagine King County
coming to a call and say you have to put
a safe injection site in your town I
just can't imagine that ever happened as
a direction it's not gonna happen and
it's I think Paul mentioned if anything
it would start somewhere else and it'd
be years into the future before it would
be considered for us so I you know and
if if the county did change something
guess what we can enact anything real
quick one with one council meeting we
could enact something and deal with it
at that time because then it's an issue
then it's an issue if they say they want
to do something in our town absolutely
there's another thing I mentioned that
the council was sending mixed signals
and I don't think this council is
sending you mixed signals at all I'm
gonna I'm gonna step on this one a
little bit because the council didn't
bring this up we did not desire to bring
this up and bring it as an issue before
the council and we had them when it did
come to us it came to me totally unknown
in an agenda first time I saw it
and
and how the council reacted was we don't
know we don't know what this is and we
need to have a community conversation
before that because we don't know and
that's what happened with the last one
so I think the council has been pretty
clear on we don't really know and we
should talk about it if we're going to
do something I think that part's been
clear talk about a moratorium and I've
seen more terms that were mentioned or
always used to fix something you're
going to implement now you stopped
something because you don't have the
rules in place you know you want to do
something but you got to get tracked
together first this again is not that
for me this is trying to take this from
you know what was a banned to a more
torn to put in six months to try to make
it a little more palatable that it's but
to me this is doing the exact thing as
7471 did with a six month timeline
because it's saying we're prohibiting it
we're just do six months to do it but
the unfortunate part is it takes away
the community conversation because with
the previous one we said well let's have
a community conversation with human
services and all and and so forth and
that is what should happen if if the
community wants to do that and so when
you put the moratorium in and then you
take away the direction have a community
conversation now that's a mixed signal
and that I don't I just can't go along
with that whatsoever if you're going to
do something say you're going to do it
and say we're not you know directing
anybody to educate us a little bit on
this it's a long ways from making
something happen so again for for all
those reasons I think we should not take
an action here and let what action
started and stop and with what it is
versus making a legislation that
actually bans or temporary ban or a plan
to ban without further discussion a
couple of questions for Bob first and
then a comment so if I heard you during
your presentation
Human Services Commission which is
separate from Council which is a
citizen's Commission that's their own
agenda so whether or not we ask them to
look at something they can choose to
look at something and they have
expressed a desire to discuss this issue
with their community a conversation will
happen regardless of what we do tonight
yes that's absolutely accurate okay so
these two bills that we're talking about
do not shut down community conversation
with Human Services the other thing that
I'm hearing that I'm confused about is
that I realize that we get to sit here
for four years and then we go back to
the public and they decide to forget to
resume in our position in our chair or
not so when we if we were to if this is
a ban or a moratorium or however it
works out and the community in the
larger region as a whole
spends more time talking about this
could not the next city and council
actually change the code again to say
this is a viable option based on new
research you know working with the
county so this is not a done deal this
is what this council thinks could be
done at this period of time yes that's
true and I think the nice thing about
the approach that you mentioned is that
we would at least have an opportunity to
think about where in the if the council
at that time decided yes it would be
appropriate we would at least have an
opportunity to think about where it
should go
what zoning area it should be included
in right now if a private vendor came in
sided open one of these we don't have
any prohibition on where it could go and
could go pretty much anywhere because
it's not prohibited by the zoning code
Thanks so I guess after this discussion
and Bob's answers and I appreciate that
everybody is all over the place on this
just thank you here in the community I I
am still strongly in support of a
moratorium at least this evening and I
agreed with council president statement
earlier where yes the ordinance that
we're looking at definitely walks down
the path of we should have a more we
should put a moratorium in place we
should have a public
and it looks like the intention right
now is to go to a band I get that we're
the council and this is going to come in
a public hearing and you're going to
hear from lots of people again and so we
have been nimble enough in our
decision-making our deliberations to
change our mind so I don't feel like
this has tied our hands in any way if we
vote on this tonight I feel what it does
do is give the community some certainty
that we recognize this is complex
situation with not a lot of information
right now a lot of emotion and people on
all sides of the issue so I I'm
supportive of the ordinance in front of
us the outcome will be what the outcome
will be in six months so long term I'm
inclined to prohibit chell sites but I'm
not ready to do it tonight and one of
the reasons why I'm not ready to do it
tonight is that we have had some
residents not a majority but we have had
some residents and health care
professionals tell us that gel sites can
save lives and which is why the six of
us who are here tonight made the
decision that we did before to send it
to human services and services and
safety tonight doesn't decide chels if
we move forward with this bill I will
point out section 3 of the ordinance
which says the permanent regulations
shall be developed and presented to the
Planning Policy Commission for
recommendation and to the City Council
for action before expiration of the
Motoko moratorium and interim control
adopted by the ordinance so more than
just the November 6th public hearing
there would be a further touch point
from this council going forward to do
whatever this council decided to do what
this does is a pause just like when we
did a moratorium on medical marijuana it
wasn't clear that this council in its
heart of hearts wanted to do medical
marijuana we had questions when we did a
pause on recreational marijuana we had
lots of questions and we probably
defaulted to a no until we had those
questions answered so we got those
question answers that's what a
moratorium is it's a pause and so in
addition to the information that's
directed in this bill we
discussed tonight that there's potential
County and initiative action that could
further clarify the legal standing or
the environment for shale sites it may
well be that the county would come back
you know County could give back and say
you know what we just want to do one in
Seattle we don't know who knows they'll
do whatever they're gonna do the point
is I believe to take this time and
reevaluate this again the default if we
do nothing is we don't get chel sites
we're not on a path to get chel sites
I'm just not ready to say no tonight so
I'm gonna I'm gonna vote from my own
motion surprise surprise and if somehow
it were to fail and we were to consider
a band tonight I would a permanent ban I
would not be supporting that permanent
ban I'm just not ready
Thanks hey let's Mariah and then begin
to summarize we spent a lot of time on
this and it's an important topic so Ryan
so the more I think about this I would
agree that the moratorium does give us
time to pause and I think that that's
that's problem maybe become the key
issue for me when we're when we're
talking about not getting more
information that this gives us the
opportunity to hear more information
from the public and I think that that's
really important that both sides of this
issue are incredibly important and we've
heard a lot of people come forward and
talk about how they don't want to see
shale sites and a lot of people and some
people come forward that that have just
had some heartbreaking stories and I
want to make sure that we have a really
good opportunity to look at all of this
[Music]
so so I would say that I think the
moratorium is the best way to go so we
can take a pause we get more information
and then and then we can go forward from
there
are you a Stasi
couple things yes so the mixed signals
bill I can I can respond to that when
I'm responding to dozens and dozens and
dozens and dozens of emails from people
concerned that the City Council is
considering shell sites those are mixed
signals whether they're intentional or
not people were very very very very
concerned dozens and dozens and dozens
of people and you know as well as I do
when we get that many meme emails people
are really really concerned and so I had
to clarify to all of those people that
we are not considering shell sites and
we had to click the city clarify it on
its website and then I clarified it in
one of our regular meetings after that
that's the mixed signals it wasn't that
we did anything intentional or we're
flip-flopping back and forth that's what
I mean by mixing nose so the this isn't
something that I can support being in
our tool box right now the vast majority
of the comments that we've had from the
community is no and I don't think that
the community wants these the vast
majority of the community wants these I
am up here to represent the community
and I could not support this being in
our toolbox until the regional were the
region's I'm stood up and took
responsible
responsibility like I said before so I I
I am going to pose the Merrick
moratorium because I would support a ban
and if it fails I'm going to propose a
ban
varalu
hmm just from a process point of view
and thinking about what councilmember
Goodman just said and yet that we only
have six council members tonight that
are sitting not sure if I'm following
your logic here I'm thinking the vote we
had recently where we ended up having a
tie vote and then having another motion
come on the table and having it fail and
then not knowing where to go from then
and so I'm I'm a little concerned that
I'm a little concerned that you would
actually vote against a motion for a
moratorium in favor of a ban I'm just
concerned about that I just thought I
just wanted to say I'm not sure we're
gonna get to a good place tonight
finish your business
I was just gonna weigh in here and tell
you that the moratorium is in effect a
bad you know it's in order to do any
regulation on without going through your
Planning Commission in order to adopt a
regulation which is a land use control
which is in effect a ban of this as a
land-use the only way you can really do
that without going to your Planning
Commission is by enacting it as an
interim control or an interim regulation
and that's what this is it then allows
you to go through the Planning
Commission afterwards and in effect
decide whether you want to make this
regulation of permanent regulation as it
currently stands does prohibit these
facilities within the city of Issaquah
in all zoning districts so it's a zoning
regulation so it is an effective ban and
then you're given six months to hold a
public hearing and then decide whether
you want to make that the permanent
regulation or whether you want to do
something else so I'm not sure that if
you decide if you decide you don't want
to do a moratorium and you want to do a
ban I don't think there's really a
difference procedurally as to what
you're doing
at the present time there I think there
is I mean a ban is a ban a moratorium as
a temporary ban well and what I'm saying
is that you cannot enact a permanent
regulation tonight that what you need to
do because yes you need to you need to
in order to enact permanent amendments
to your zoning code you need to go
through your Planning Commission and
follow the ordinary process the way to
not do that and to put a regulation in
effect immediately is by doing the type
of ordinance that you have in front of
you
and then you hold a public hearing
afterwards on this regulation in order
to determine whether this regulation
remains in effect while you go through
the Planning Commission process so what
was the one that we considered on
September 5th in was just a policy
statement what you had before you on
September 5th as as I understand it was
a resolution okay
and the resolution that was put before
you was essentially because the King
County Council in its budget its
supplemental budget ordinance and in its
discussions in the supplemental budget
hoardes said that County funds would not
be spent on a shell within a local
jurisdiction unless the council
affirmative ly wanted it now some
jurisdictions have taken the position
that if we don't affirmatively want it
and take affirmative action to request
the county to have it here then there
won't be one because there won't be
County funds spent under that budget
ordinance the resolution that was before
you was more of an a an idea to make
that a positive statement I guess if
we're saying positive rather than saying
we're just going to wait and because we
didn't say anything the county won't put
one here it was a statement of we
opposed putting one here but again that
was a policy statement and it's a
resolution it's not a permanent
amendment to your code the only way to
amend your code and have that kind of
ban in effect is through this process
let's sort of wrap things up Paul well
thank you Fred
and I said it before I just there seems
to be different understandings of what
this is intending to do this so this is
this is about everything that Jim just
said and so and we would come out of
this the way this is written right now
and and our code would prohibit anywhere
within the city having a HL that's
that's what the intent that's here and
and to get and it says go through the
planning policy commission to do that
and and so this is this is more formal
than we were considering last time which
was a policy statement this is actually
enacting it in code and I still believe
that if with this being a very
definitive it's actually stronger than
what any other other jurisdictions have
done who have done at least I think
they've done policy statements I could
be wrong
I'm sorry sorry so that information from
David Fujimoto that they've done bans
moratorium soon so and so I you know I
okay we've got a lot on our plate it's
unfortunate and I'm not sure what's
magical about November 6 for a or public
hearing we are in budget season as well
and other and other activities and this
also note that this has just it says go
through planning policy so I was gonna
propose maybe also adding it that it
goes through Human Services Commission
because its land use but it's actually
Human Services as well so that's more of
an open comment and a direction anyone
else before we act
no I just want to clarify it just before
we go to vote once again I will be
voting no on this but I'm not supporting
shell sites or save injection sites in
any way shape or form in Issaquah it's
the process and and what we're doing and
how it's come about to us that that is
not working for me and I don't think we
need to take in this action to not have
channel sites here and I want to in the
conversation from us versus continuing
the conversation keeping that stirred up
in the community what we don't need to
be doing that from the council
perspective thank you they see that you
have I'll support it because it gets I
think I've made it pretty clear how I
feel and so I will be looking at the end
of this process but they're not allowed
Moriah briefly this is effectively a ban
but also giving the opportunity for
public feedback so I'll be supporting
the moratorium but I do want to say that
I believe that this whole entire process
has been incredibly confusing it really
does come down to a process issue for me
and I think that if we would have had an
opportunity to talk about this before it
came forward as a ban we probably would
be in a different place this evening
thank you had two or three times to
speak so please this might actually say
a little bit about the administration
because I think what I'm hearing about
process is that this was originated with
the administration and I think the
intention was very good I think what you
were trying to do was respond to a
community concern in a very quick manner
somehow it seems like the steps got out
of order but I think you were well
intentioned so process or no process I'm
in support of the motion tonight all
those in favor of adopting ordinance
number 281 one providing for a
moratorium and interim official control
prohibiting the location of community
help engagement locations comma safe
injection sites the all just owning
districts of the city
and set the required public hearing for
the council meeting of November 6 2017
signify by saying aye aye
I was opposed nay the boat carries five
there's six of us tonight five to one
with bill voting in the negative moving
now to our last item under regular
business agenda bill you've moved up
there just the right time didn't you
71 to 2017 regional agenda for the
presentation Thank You Council remember
this has originally came to the council
on March 13 and they reviewed that draft
at the work session and so now it's been
routed through all the committees and
those committee adjustments and
recommendations have been modified and
now it's coming back to Council for its
final review at this point our
recommendation is given the fact that
it's mid-october and we'll be starting
2018 regional agenda that and actually
if you probably saw in your packets that
on the status updates we actually got
quite a few of these items already
finished for this year that that this
that council simply receive the report
this evening and that we work towards
the 2018 regional agenda and we start
that process you know administrative
leave we'll start that process now and
then we'll have it in front of council I
think in January for there first so we
can kind of get it done at the at least
within the first quarter of the year as
we lay out kind of the work plan for the
upcoming year so I have it here in case
anyone wants to go through any of the
items on the regional agenda but I was
not planning on locking us through all
the committee adjustments because if
council simply receives a report then I
think it'll be done for this year and
then we can move forward to the 2018
regional
are that questions above all right yeah
I think there's a little bit more to the
read sieve it and and you speak a little
it's not just that it's late in the year
can you speak a little bit more about I
mean we had a conversation about what
you thought would be beneficial in that
we revisit regional agenda and what
we're trying to accomplish with it so
that the council would potentially be on
the same page because different elements
of the regional agenda were went to
different committees and those
committees had very different
conversations and even at land and shore
and you and I talked about this even at
Landon Shore when Paul and I were
talking and debating back and forth
about the regional agenda and there was
some confusion about whether we should
be recognizing compliments
accomplishments we want to achieve in
the region or what we want to accomplish
in Issaquah and so I think there's
confusion about what we're trying to
accomplish with this Paul and I you know
worked on this initially together a
couple of years ago and the regional
agenda was Paul's idea and so I but I
think over time there may be differences
of a opinion about what the regional
agenda supposed to accomplish and maybe
our initial opinions have changed but I
also think we have new council members
and I don't think it's clear to
everybody what we're trying to
accomplish so my understanding was that
you also thought it was an opportunity
for the council to review this again
about what we're trying to accomplish
with a regional agenda so I think that
was a great summary conversation and
that is true so you know couple things
one is what is what is it that we want
to accomplish as a city that's the
ultimate goal and then we do that for
the legislative agenda what do we want
to get out of Olympia
c'mere same for the regional agenda what
is it that we want to do with our
partners other regional entities the
county in trying to accomplish that but
the at the end of the day the focus is
you know what's best for Issaquah what's
the outcome that we want for our
community the second piece of this is as
it's kind of worked its way through the
process there ended up being variances
between the various committees and so
trying it was a challenge to try and get
it back into the format that originally
I presented and so so I think there's
that opportunity in January for that
conversation with the council to talk
about a common you know what we want to
accomplish with the regional agenda what
the outcome what the outcomes are and
the objective of it and then even
thinking about review we may want to
just kind of keep it at the work
sessions maybe it's a couple work
sessions because just I think going
through that committee process we ended
up with a lot of variances that I I
don't think we're intentional it just
kind of just happens when you go through
a kind of a process like that additional
kapal a couple things about the document
itself and then some comments actually
even in the updated one we should spell
out what why were eight okay just an
active and that's there and then in the
overview of the goals on that same page
which is a page to the it has just the
goals for each of the areas it doesn't
reflect actually the goals that are on
the tables down below so that still has
the original set of goals but if you
were to go to the overview on page 2 so
those still yes the original version and
a number of those were updated so that
that's just there that's just some
housekeeping I think so as far as the
process so you know um we have a lot of
big complex important things we're
responsible for and I'm not surprised
that when you when you talk when you
when you try to tackle something as big
as transportation or any one of those
public safety go on down the list
that that defining at a granular level
objectives and goals to achieve a
certain outcome we've never done that
before
we've never done that and and so the end
and you know things run really fast when
you've got seven people all on the same
page but that's not the way this
government form of government works
there's always diverse sets of opinions
and it takes longer you know to to get
that out to talk it through and then
come to an agreement what's what's what
is on a piece of paper it's and so I'm
not I'm not I'm disappointed that we
didn't get it done sooner and be able to
consider it formally adopt it but I but
I'm at the same time I think a lot of
really good work has been accomplished
by every one of the committees and
everybody who worked on it it's better
than it was before and and there's
probably not full agreement on every one
of the issues every one of the
objectives and the actions as well so by
definition this is gonna be a living
document and and and that's okay but I
think when it comes to action probably
the the timing element of this to maybe
take it up again the first quarter next
year is is and I don't know the whole
calendar year cycle I mean a lot of
these span many many years but we are
also serving on regional boards and
committees and other special task force
and and their work plans are yearly so
what we want to do is inform our own
participation of that to align with
those work plans and make sure that's
very very clear and so I like the idea
that we should challenge ourselves to
complete this as soon as possible after
the first of the year and I think we
have a I don't think it's going to take
as long because we have an amazing body
of work that wasn't here before
and so a lot of development and creative
thought went into what what's we're
we're looking at this evening so it's
good it's it's better than it was
receiving it means I'm not sure what but
because we're not going to make any more
appointments that's coming in front of
us and those work plans for these
regional boards and commissions will
take effect early next year and that's
when we need to get this implemented
Mary Lou thanks he did put the council
committees and the administration and
Maya in particular put a lot of work
into this I I agree with the council
president Goodman's assessment that it
seems like we are seven different
legislators up here and this is a hard
thing to get your head around and there
ends up being a lot of wordsmithing
but this is very far it's moved in a
direction very different than my
expectations and it would be interesting
actually in our January mean to settle
on expectations
just like the legislative agenda that
you put together with our lobbyist and
the mayor to me that's kind of our
walking papers so that when we agree on
that in January whoever goes to Olympia
whoever goes to Sound Transit whoever
goes anywhere has a common unified city
message so while we're individually
elected we're going to be the most
effective when when you unified in the
region I was from a format point of view
hoping that this document would be that
those kinds of walking marching orders
for council has were out in the region
and not at Olympia and that at the end
of the year we'd be able to sit down and
check the boxes and so this is turning
more into a kind of a a document versus
to me a tool in our toolbox and
especially for incoming we've got two
council members the you know two years
into their term we might have two or
three or more council members coming in
that are
I knew and this was to really bring them
up to speed regionally as we do at the
state level and so I'm not sure if we're
gonna end up with this format or a
different format but that's getting our
heads around expectations would be
important and making sure we're all
thinking we're gonna get the same thing
out of it and then actually being able
to come back in December before the year
is over and and go through and rate
ourselves on how we did regionally in
terms of the things we were trying to
achieve frisk WA we've really helped us
inform a January agenda setting session
so that's just my expectations of what I
hope we do next year make a motion any
other questions I wouldn't move to
receive the 2017 regional agenda as
presented second moved and seconded any
additional discussion all those in favor
signify by saying aye I was opposed that
carries unanimously
moving now to go to the order if anyone
has any urgent items under good of the
order I just a quick reminder about what
I talked about earlier so if you could
get a chance to take a look at that for
the Kim County Conservation Board and
all of the grant work that has been done
and you have any feedback let me know
thank you anything else
we will now move to executive session to
discuss potential acquisition of real
estate pending potential litigation and
collective bargaining sessions when we
have reassured after a five-minute break
please be back in your seats at Oh
9:40 or
no that's an women that's a minute it
gave us a minute okay we we are
adjourned
temporarily
you
we are back in regular session coming
out of an executive session at 10:52
thank you I moved to authorize the
administration to sign the settlement
agreement and stipulation has discussed
an executive session subject to minor
non substance of edits as approved by
the city attorney moved in seconded any
discussion all those in favor of
approving the motion signify by saying
aye I was opposed I'd carries
unanimously there any other business to
come before the council this evening we
are adjourned