good evening welcome everyone
I'm calling the October 15th regular
City Council meeting to order on our
agenda this evening
Pledge of Allegiance I'd like to ask
those who'd like to join the council and
myself in the pledge of allegiance to
please stand
[Music]
big crowd in the house tonight that's
gonna be kind of fun under special
business this evening we have one item
it is I do three five seven and it is
the proposed 2019 budget I'll be doing a
presentation this evening council did
receive the budget on Friday so good
evening and welcome City Council members
and members of the community both here
tonight and at home I'm excited this
evening to present to you the 2019
preliminary budget for the city of
Issaquah I've intentionally prepared
this preliminary budget as a maintenance
budget as we await the adoption of our
strategic plan in 2019 it is critical
that we continue to build upon our
commitment to financial stewardship as
we look to align future budget decisions
with community goals over the next five
years and a key piece of that work will
be to directly link budget proposals to
key strategic plan priorities this
year's work on the strategic plan tees
up our city for that important
transition as we plan next year for our
2020 budget in this maintenance budget I
am proposing we hold the line on new
initiatives until the adoption of the
strategic plan it's still present a
reality-based budget there are many
competing and pressing needs that all
cities consider especially one like
Issaquah that is growing urbanizing and
modernizing it is critical we make wise
choices on how to allocate resources we
need to take care of what we have but we
also need to find ways to pay for our
growing needs in my first year as mayor
the budget development process made it
quite clear that we have two top
investment priorities
people and tools simply put our city
delivers services to the community and
the efficiency and the effectiveness of
those services depends on having the
tools and resources to deliver them yet
our staffing levels are still below
where they were prior to the Great
Recession in 2008 nearly ten years ago
even though our community has grown
nearly 40 percent since the
though as population growth has put
further pressure on demand for services
we have fewer staff to meet that demand
in other words we are doing far more
with far less it is unsustainable
without ongoing reductions in our city
service levels in addition to population
growth and increased demand for services
the city has assumed infrastructure from
new development and redevelopment that
infrastructure includes roads utilities
and parks built by developers and turned
over to the city we have assumed the
maintenance and operations that go along
with new developments and we have not
allocated additional resources or
identified increased revenues to cover
these additional ongoing maintenance and
operational expenses we need to invest
appropriately in order to meet these
growing demands before I move into a
deeper dive on the 2019 preliminary
budget I would like to share some
exciting news with you tonight by
looking back on the projects of 2018 and
the impact that they have had on
neighborhood character transportation
community engagement and government
transparency preserving our
neighborhoods is a priority new
development codes for central Issaquah
the Highlands and talus provided more
prescriptive language to guide
development to meet the community and
the neighborhoods expectations these new
codes have provided some muscle to
handle the future development and
redevelopment occurring in town we also
focused on traffic coming in established
neighborhoods to discourage cut through
traffic and speeding because these
driving behaviors negatively impact our
neighborhoods council also supported
enhanced police enforcement to address
the inappropriate driving behaviors to
take back our streets from those that
speed and block intersections our
residents also benefit from expenditures
to improve Central Park and the
community center providing outstanding
opportunities for recreation and
enjoyment of our amazing outdoors and
community facilities we're making
progress on our transportation needs
thanks to an aggressive schedule to
complete a suite of projects
including the under crossing of i-90 and
the Costco development these roadways
and trails in the north side of i-90 are
scheduled to be open by January of 2019
they will provide improved local
mobility options for residents and
businesses southeast 4th will again
connect the north and south sides of the
freeway the completion of the design a
southeast 43rd way intersection
improvements and the design work on two
sections of our longest unimproved
arterial Newport Way are important
investments in the network I'm excited
about the work we did this year to focus
on community engagement and government
transparency I think we can all be proud
of the broadcasting of additional
citizen boarding commission meetings
this year and the fact that our staff
hosted over 30 community meetings so far
in 2018 investment in technology and
staffing approved last year made all of
this possible it was much more work
completed and underway this year but
this short list was meant to provide an
example of the positive impacts of the
council investment in projects and
programs approved this current year I
also want to mention two other current
conditions that impact our future and
these are that first we are still
experiencing a strong local economy in a
region that is growing in second from
our city's own financial perspective we
have a healthy ending fund balance which
can be used to complete projects that
add value and benefit to our community
this position gives us some latitude to
think about how to use one-time
resources to pay for infrastructure
needs but at the same time we must
compel ourselves to look at how to meet
current and future maintenance and
operational demands it would be similar
to having money in a 401k and a savings
account and still needing additional
income to pay a monthly mortgage or to
buy a car that's the position we find
ourselves in today
so now let's look at the financial
realities we're facing
well we are stable and there is no
looming financial crisis we need to
acknowledge our funding limitations and
tackle them head on
we are not meeting the challenge of
funding our capital needs and our
ongoing operating expenses in a nutshell
we have a healthy cash balance account
but we do not have a plan to deal with
our capital and operating funding
shortfalls going forward and into the
future
we see relatively moderate forecasted
revenue growth in 2019 which is not
keeping pace with our growing community
and poses significant challenges for our
community in our city 2019 preliminary
budget does two things
Lance our ongoing expenses around
revenue sources and recognises the
healthy ending fund balance could also
be utilized in part to fund some limited
one-time expenses it also comes with an
era of restraint and a challenge to all
of us to work together in 2019 to
develop strategies to address the gaps
in both operating and capital
expenditures and ongoing revenue sources
in light of that I would like to outline
how our budget adoption process has been
determined and how resources were
identified for the 2019 preliminary
budget recommendations some aspects of
this year's budget process are new first
I submitted a budget and briefed to the
council on community in advance of the
delivery of this preliminary budget
second I plan to focus presentations on
those items of the 2019 preliminary
budget that present material differences
from the 2018 budget including changes
in personnel significant work plan items
and capital projects as well as changes
related to policy or regulatory drivers
we will be working from data produced by
quest Iike the new budget software
approved by council in 2017 ultimately
the software will allow us to run
scenarios report data that is tied to
strategic goals and give everybody
including community members greater
access to budget information this new
tool will help us make better informed
decisions about prioritizing our
investments third in the next few weeks
we will discuss reauthorization of 2018
allocated funds for priority project
work that was planned for completion in
2018 but will carry forward to 2019
and we will update the council on the
impacts that this will have on the
estimated 2018 ending fund balance this
list of reauthorized allocations may not
have been as apparent in previous budget
presentations or I'm proud of the work
our council ad-hoc financial committee
completed this year in looking into our
capital funding constraints their work
will feed into your upcoming budget
deliberations this year is you discuss
funding for those capital projects that
were approved in the adopted capital
improvement plan for 2019 but did not
have identified funding sources such as
the intersection improvements at
southeast 40 Third Way and Central Park
in the highlands preliminary budget
before you tonight does not include the
impacts of fully funding those projects
and as Council deliver deliberates over
those preferred funding scenarios in the
next few weeks we will need to reflect
those expenditures into the tooth out in
the 2019 preliminary budget this will
feel different since we have now moved
to a two-year capital improvement plan
process if the 2019 preliminary budget
is all about the numbers in the past we
have spent a good amount of time
preparing the introductory and
supplementary sections which provided
community profiles and other narrative
pieces adopted by the budget when
published will include most of those
pieces so we can have a commute week so
we can have community context when it's
published with these slight
modifications to the budget deliberation
and adoption process the key elements
will remain familiar to those who have
participated in deliberations in
previous years we will answer questions
from Council members on any budget item
even though we will focus our
presentation on items that are
significant differences from the 2018
budget we will also track proposed
council adjustments to the budget using
the budget deliberation spreadsheet from
previous years that will be familiar to
most of those that have been part of
past budget approvals and with that I
would like to share with you the
highlights of this year's budget first
we are continuing continuing our
technology upgrades
in today's digital age in a region that
leads the evolving digital revolution
most of our residents and businesses
access information through our website
yet we have not had an upgrade since
2012 our community has told us they want
an improved more intuitive online
interface with their government and we
will be investing in those improvements
this upcoming year including a new
online customer response management
system I'm particularly excited about
this project this new tool will enable
our residents and customers to send us
requests online and we'll be able to tie
those requests to mapping and reporting
tools so that the council and community
can view the information online in
addition we will enhance our customer
service practices to be in direct
alignment with this new tool and to help
us deliver the best possible responses
further we need to make it simple and
convenient for our community to engage
and connect business with the city for
example our community expects to be able
to complete transactions with the city
electronically meet those expectations I
proposed implementing self-service tools
in both utility billing and Recreation
program registration in tandem with
these deeper investments and online
services we must also be responsible by
investing in more advanced cyber
security systems to protect data
infrastructure and public funds in an
age of increasing threats website update
online customer billing opportunities
and the investments in cyber security
are three of the many technology
investments the city anticipates
implementing over the next several years
provide the community engagement and
customer customer service the community
expects second and proposing an
investment in staffing resources the
city has not kept pace with the growing
service demands and while there is a
significant list of required new
positions
I'm only proposing those positions this
year they can be funded by the limited
increase in ongoing revenues this was
probably the hardest part of my team's
work this year and they appreciate very
much their cooperation as we work
through the various
scenarios I propose adding five staff
five new staffing positions and
converting six existing staffing
positions these staff resources will
help us take care of our streets and
parks manage our budget track and
analyze our employment costs fill our
vacant positions more quickly through
our analytical and public reporting
capacities and provide greater
environmental protection lastly
following on the good work that has been
completed this year with the approved
space plan allocation for 2018 we must
continue to talk about our future
facility needs while maintaining the
aging facilities we currently occupy we
will continue to work on our city's
facilities inventory and continue the
conversation that has been gun the gun
this year with Council on what the
near-term and long-term facility plan
will look like in the years ahead we
have included expenditures in this
budget to maintain the facilities we
have now recognizing the council to
stock discussion is not yet complete it
should use restraint on the investments
in maintenance next year while
recognizing that due to the age of our
facilities we must invest to maintain
operations and functionality the
facility's discussion will continue
through 2019 and will require council
decisions and direction prior to the
development of the next capital
improvement plan which will be under
development next year the minor facility
improvements proposed in this budget
includes investment in our two city
halls so that we can more efficiently
house our staff improve security and
address code issues these are short-term
improvements that are meant to help us
get by they do not fully satisfy our
needs in these facilities over the
course of the next several months the
council will also be asked to consider
whether longer-term higher cost higher
cost lifecycle improvements should be
made to City Hall Northwest during this
year's budget presentations city staff
will also highlight significant items in
their 2019 work plan in particular they
will highlight which items include
budget allocations as the available new
revenue and our
staffing levels constrain what we can
afford to take on in 2019 we will also
highlight projects that are needed or
desired but lack a resource plan in 2019
the mother work plan items that are in
the preliminary budget include under
transportation develop a transportation
mobility master plan and continue to
work on school-based transportation
demand management work under land-use
update of the Old Town land-use codes in
continuing work with the state parks on
their environmental impact study for
Lake Sammamish state park under
financial sustainability finalize the
strategic plan and its implementation
framework update our mitigation and
impact fees and complete a utility rate
study
mutti in the environment develop a
healthy community strategy progress on
our housing strategy development develop
wayfinding Park signage and branding and
conduct urban forests and green Issaquah
planning any gain facilities develop a
long-term municipal facilities plan and
costing there is much more in the
preliminary budget for you to discuss
and deliberate then the highlights I
mentioned but I wanted to touch on some
of the high notes before moving to a
couple of other items related to this
year's budget first I want to point out
that we are not yet complete with our
ongoing move to better cost allocation
last year council reviewed a first
important step which was creation of the
new IT fund cost allocation is required
under state law and is a best practice
to ensure charges between funds and
departments are justified while this
preliminary budget does not contain any
new cost allocation methodologies this
year we do anticipate that next year we
will conduct a review of our fleet fund
and potentially other areas of operation
to ensure we have appropriate cost
allocation methods second during budget
deliberations we also are we also
prepared to make an important
recommendation regarding another city
program operations of the Senior Center
it is time that we move out of the
interim operations of the Senior Center
those who use that facility most have a
breasts a desire to see some stability
in place and have shared their
satisfaction with how city staff has
been operating their programs since
taking over to accomplish this I
recommend that city council direct staff
to install a long term city run
operational plan for the senior center
this edition will need to be added to
the 2019 primary budget and staff is
prepared to show a new revenue and
expenditure plan that would implement
this important policy decision you
accomplish all of these goals and
prepare us for the future
our 2019 preliminary budget includes a
three point four seven three point four
seven percent increase in revenue and a
less than 1 percent increase in
expenditures over the revised budget for
2018 2019 preliminary budget does not
require any utilization of the general
fund reserves 2018 ended with a none
audited under expenditure of 4.4 million
which returns to our fund balance and is
available for one-time expenses or to
carryover as funding in 2019 for
incomplete and prioritized 2018 projects
currently our estimated ending fund
balance exceeds the maximum range
council established in our financial
management policies our policies enable
City Council to utilize extra fund
balance for certain types of
expenditures I am recommending that the
council discussed during budget
deliberations and throughout 2019 its
priorities for use of the fund balance
in addition to capital and one-time
projects Council could consider
establishing a practice of transferring
a portion of the balance into capital
funds or making start-up funding for new
initiatives such as a neighborhood grant
program these one-time uses of the fund
balances ethics have these one-time uses
of fund balance have historical
precedent in Issaquah and our ways many
cities across the country utilize excess
reserve funds to create added value for
their communities return to fund balance
is the result of a number of factors
which we will discuss in greater deal
with City Council during the upcoming
budget sessions but I will provide a
brief summary for you tonight nearly
half of the amount
is due to personnel cost savings
resulting from vacancies we have much
work to do in reducing the time to fill
vacancies and we'll provide counsel with
more detail during our budget discussion
in the next two months about how we will
improve on this front our ability to
fill positions in an expeditious manner
has a direct and consequential impact on
our ability to complete our work during
the remainder of the year I anticipate
the council will continue with community
and partnership discussions on projects
or proposals that have not yet been
thoroughly scoped or framed up including
transit area and development and open
space acquisitions and may consider
potentially using fund balance reserves
to pay for those at the appropriate time
next year there is just not enough
information or certainty on any of those
opportunities to include them in the
2019 preliminary budget before you
however this does not mean that council
cannot act on them during 2019 we just
need to be mindful that these proposals
are in progress and could come forward
after the approval of this budget we do
have opportunities to invest in we do
have opportunities to invest in these
new and exciting proposals so as you
explore the details of the 2019
preliminary budget and the totals
presented this evening there are a few
items I want to call to your attention
that will tee up the 2020 budget work as
we continue to work to link our budget
process to our community priorities and
to just our financial approach to
include the long term impacts of our
funding traces of our current funding
choices impact of the strategic plan in
2019 we will adopt our first-ever
citywide strategic plan and we will
build a framework that connects the plan
to the 2020 budget and to the capital
improvement plan developing performance
metrics and tools that will help us
monitor and report progress I was not
able to do that linkage this year with
the 2019 preliminary budget and I'm very
much looking forward to this step next
year cost allocation we will continue to
update cost allocation methods to ensure
right size chart chart
are being made in the right places and
that our funding models are sustainable
in the long-term auditing process
improvements in 2019 we will continue
with our budget process improvements as
we begin to use our quest occur budget
tool in new ways allowing council and
the public to have online access to
financial information in time for the
2020 budget discussions developing our
long-term funding strategies for
operations and capital projects in
addition the ad hoc financial committees
work plan items for next year will
include discussion of how to enhance the
city's ability to maintain service
levels and infrastructure when current
revenue sources do not keep pace with
service demands and costs also ad hoc
will need to continue the discussion of
a long term funding strategy for capital
improvements that goes beyond just the
funding of transportation projects and
includes other capital investments in
parks open space community and municipal
facilities community's number-one
priority and lastly because it is a top
community issue next year's
transportation efforts will mark a
significant step forward for our
community we filled the senior
transportation planner position in
September thank you very much for
approving this critically important
position this position is required to
successfully launch the transportation
advisory board and the work on the
mobility master plan we will soon make
our final recruitment for board members
and we have already selected the firm
that will assist us with creating the
plan I say this in my address tonight
because as I have said earlier I have
presented a budget that is restrained in
its use of ending fund balance surpluses
even though the belts is in excess of
our recommended maximum as mayor I am
strongly supportive of expending some of
the balance on one-time expenditures but
our priority needs to be the community's
number-one priority and that is focusing
on traffic and transportation our
community throughout the strategic plan
process and years before have asked us
to deal with these impacts to use local
control to improve the reality on the
ground it's going to be hard and it's
going to require commitment and boldness
and I
know that we could do this together I'd
like to conclude this evening by
reminding counsel that we are in a very
good position to move forward with our
multi-year OVA overhaul of the budgeting
process and efforts to develop a
long-range funding strategy I'm excited
about our future and in many ways that
we will be able to address our
challenges and opportunities as a
growing vibrant diverse and extremely
beautiful community a natural treasure
at the edge of a growing urban community
you've all received my 2019 primary
budget in electronic or hardcopy this
evening and I see many good nights of
intriguing reading there for you to be
sure I am looking forward to your
questions and comments at our first
budget session on October 22nd and I
wanted to thank you for your time and
attention tonight and I'm gonna go a
little off script in case you were not
aware we have a lot of our directors
here tonight in support of the budget
message coming out but I also wanted to
make a special thank you to our finance
team who has been working very hard over
many months to get this done and so if
they would raise their hands so the
council can see who they are we have
with us tonight from finance Ruth riddle
Heidi niggler Christina eller and Kim
Holman
ladies thank you very much thank you for
the applause but it's okay if you don't
clap too because it is our business
meeting but thank you that was that was
very nice the next item on the agenda
this evening is audience comments so
audience members may address the council
at this time and the guidelines for
public participation will be placed up
on the screen if you've signed up to
make public comments tonight will call
upon you first and if you did not sign
up don't worry because before we close
it out I will check in to see if anybody
would like to speak that didn't have a
chance to sign up please keep your
comments to three minutes this evening
we have a lot of folks in the audience
if you're here is part of a group if you
can identify a spokesperson for your
group that would be fabulous and anybody
in our audience this evening that would
like to show support of a speaker's
comments please do so by raising your
hands so council can see the level of
support for the speaker's comments
there's also a public hearing tonight on
a b7 635 vacation of a portion of
Northeast Gilman Boulevard and if you
would like to make comments on that
topic you'll have an opportunity later
in the meeting tisha has anyone signed
up to speak this evening yes Ken Eastman
good evening my name is Ken Osmond
I live at two four seven three Northwest
Stoney Creek Drive I'm a resident of the
city of Issaquah and live on Cougar
Mountain and this evening I'm speaking
on behalf of the save Cougar Mountain
organization so first off I want to
thank a city council for resolution a b7
six six two of August 6th of this year
your resolution and your supportive
comments mean the world to us and all of
the supporters of Save Cougar Mountain
I'd also like to thank Mary Polly and
Parks director Watling for their
continued leadership and ownership of
the project to acquire this property and
save it from development so I'd like to
give an update on Saver cougar Save
Cougar Mountain activities in addition
to your unanimous support via the
resolution of August 6th we've been
working hard with the state and county
representatives as well as several
nonprofits and we're most proud of the
fact that we've got twenty five hundred
and ninety-six signatures on the
petition to save Cougar Mountain and
amount that increases virtually every
day so budget time is here we'd like to
encourage city council to keep the
Bergsma acquisition foremost on your
minds as you work the next budget cycle
please remember your resolution of
August 6th and these supportive words we
recognize that this acquisition may have
its challenges but there is wide support
and help to be had we've got partners at
the state and county level and the
nonprofit
we'll have development fees
for parks flow every time another new
housing unit is built in the city and
there's long term benefit from saving
this property so police consider a long
term debt as an option we ask you to
stay committed and get creative and get
the job done you have a choice the
acquisition of this land has lasting
benefit now and in the future it
reflects the will of the residents of
Issaquah and our expectations of saving
one of the most important features of
our community are Issaquah Alps
so in summary let's get it done and I
thank you for your time and attention
thank you Ken there's a lot of hands of
support going out for Ken and save
Cougar Mountain next on the signup West
Julie Clark
good evening mayor poly and city council
members my name is Julie Clark
I live at 905 bear Ridge Court Northwest
this evening I along with Jerry Potter
and Liz Taylor represent Save Cougar
Mountain our petition currently has one
more than what Ken had shown earlier two
thousand five hundred and ninety-seven
signatures and while there are not close
to 2600 people here in the council
chambers tonight we know that two
thousand five hundred and ninety-seven
signatures there's an amount that is
difficult to comprehend so we thought we
would help you with a visual we have a
scroll which includes the names of these
supporters and it's 84 feet long for
reference the front row of this audience
section seating here is 21 feet wide so
the scroll is four times that length
while Jerry and Liz are presenting our
scroll I would like to share a few of
the comments people have posted on our
petition back in June med a wrote I feel
so sad every time I look at the newly
constructed Apartments on i-90 exit 15
it's making the views so ugly let's not
make this happen to our gorgeous cougar
mountain and let's do our best to
preserve its wild beauty for future
generations
in July Jane wrote not every piece of
pristine land should be developed and
this is one of those areas save it for
our children and our children's children
save Cougar Mountain from unnecessary
destabilization woodland vistas and
recreational areas for urban and
suburban residents provides Sol sorely
needed respite from the stress created
by our high-tech and man-made
environment an Alex wrote I fully
support this petition as a
frequent user of the trail while I
support finding more ways to construct
housing for new residents this area
should be preserved given its unique
nature and placement in August Joyce
shared I have hiked this area many times
in a most always enchanted by the beauty
so close to a major metropolitan area
please preserve this natural asset for
future generations Alyssa said my group
likes hiking on this mountain as much as
we can please keep it preserved we the
safe Cougar Mountain representatives ask
that you please think of the voices of
these two thousand five hundred and
ninety-seven people while you are
working on the city's budget and
consider each person supporting this
initiative thank you
Thank You Julie I just had one question
for you are you leaving that with us or
taking it we were going to take it but
we can submit those it's completely up
to you if you think you have another use
for it and you want to keep it that's
fine we may thank you
and who has signed up next issue janet
Jablonski hands up in the air I'm sorry
yes Janet dubrovsky
good evening my name is Janet durbur
Wolski and I live on to100 3 southeast
155th place Renton Washington I live in
the maple Hills area and I'm here
tonight to speak about the proposed
extensive plan that solid waste has put
forth they have recommended to expand
the existing Cedar Hills landfill we
recently had a town meeting with Reagan
Dunn and mr. Ramos was attend in
attendance there and there were over 200
people there that were in opposition of
the expansion of the landfill for
various reasons and I would the the
apparently that the process is for the
King County Council did a vote on it if
they approve it then it goes to the
cities so I'm here to kind of educate or
let you know that the document that the
the solid waste put out is full of false
no I wouldn't say false and misleading
statements and they're their primary
primary objective was to expand the
landfill they had two other alternatives
that the documents show some
exaggeration of costs and it's just it's
very misleading they cherry pick some
numbers and I would I would really
encourage you if it gets to the point
where the city cities have to vote on it
I encourage you to do your own research
do not take this document at face value
the landfill lies the solid waste you
know I hate to say it but they lie they
have gone to the extent of violating the
settlement agreement a lawsuit
settlement agreement in order to advance
their objective which is to expand the
landfill they have misrepresented to
devote the waste-to-energy idea that
it's
in greenhouse gases then at the landfill
it's totally the opposite all you have
to do is research Europe I'm not
proposing I'm for the waste of energy
and a vote that was taken at this 200
people said about 3/4 fans said they
would be happy to have a waste energy
plant
at the landfill rather than having the
landfill they want it closed and it
needs to be closed because the other
thing that was important that I think
was important for the Issaquah people
there was a there was a report issued on
water on a water issue at the Cedar
Hills landfill and it stated that
because the unlined areas of the
landfill they for 20 years they put
garbage in to unlined pits that the
aquifer under Cedar Hills will be
contaminated by 2058 from that leachate
from those that landfill so again I just
urge you to do your own research
don't don't believe everything Solid
Waste tells you it's rosy pictures okay
Janet thank you want to leave your
comments with the city clerk for the
record or not up to you what I have I
also would like to say that we stop and
they won't be able to hear you you every
time but if you come to the microphone
and just do a website that would be grab
the we have a website called stop
landfill expansion org and it gives a
lot of alternatives it's not advocating
for waste energy but it gives you some
research data that you can look at so
thank you Janet thank you it show next
on the list
no one further has signed up looking to
see if there's anyone in the audience
who would like to address council soon I
see a gentleman in the back if you'd
like to come up state your name and
address for the record
yes good evening honorable council my
name is philip schmidt Patman out of a 1
to 6 to 3 South East 83rd card Court and
Newcastle first of all it's kind of
interesting about almost a little over
30 years ago as an exchange student in
Issaquah high school from Germany you
get to start over and I'm picking up on
on the same topic that Janet just talked
about I was I've been doing this for 20
years now working on solve the solid
waste issue here in in King County and I
was sat on the salt waste of Weiser
board for eight years and many of the
comments were just blown off in the wind
I've seen how the saw waste division who
was I believe what he presented to you
and trying to make the case how they
really don't care about anything else
but landfilling we have had
international experts that have reviewed
the salt waste management plan the
feedback was basically that everything
everything is landfill based here and
really in the rest of the world the
opposite is the case so we urge you to
actually Jenin said it kind of nicely I
would be more direct saying to basically
refuse that solid waste plan do not
approve it there's so much more to be
said and I have something here I don't
gonna read all of it I just want to give
you a couple of ideas I leave something
here with the clerk to so you can review
that there's a lot more information if
you like get back to me on this one so I
mean on the educational curve I think a
lot of stuff is needed that hasn't taken
place for just a consideration the coal
country of Germany landfills right now
about 200,000 tons all pre treated for
over eighty million people in Kane
County we land four five times that much
for two million people yet they have the
most like elaborate developed recycling
system anywhere in the world yes they do
use waste or energy - but it's a very
minimal impact to anything it's it's a
part of an integrated solid waste
management system
and the whole system doesn't cost the
average German citizen anything more
than the average King County residents
it's also not subsidized by any taxes or
anything like that so if we engage in an
integrated system based on recycling
upcycling building a better collection
system and everything else that you can
think about including waste energy which
delivers at least energy reduces
greenhouse gases recovers metals
non-ferrous glass and so on there are a
lot of things to be said about that and
I just leave a statement here that we
did and we left it I just adjusted it to
the council here but we left this also
with the King County Council we have
made also request to the King County
Council that they look at I was part of
that study team that did the waster
energy study for King County and we need
to consider or not consider we need to
pursue the 27 recommendations that we
gave which was looking at greenhouse gas
modeling from international model basis
we need to look at it from you know all
the different areas are listed like
recycling and so on so I urge you to
look at that and I'll leave this with
you and I appreciate your time thank you
thank you Phillip if you use my bring it
up for the clerk that would be great
see Brenda Havering good evening Mary
Polly and Council I'm Brenda Devore I
live at 835 well with Boulevard
Southwest and it's a quad and I'm here
representing myself as a resident
tonight but also as the community
engagement and Events Manager of the
chamber and we just came off of our 49th
salmon days so we've recovered we're
excited for the next one coming up it's
going to be our 50th year and we're
already in the planning stages but we
want to come back and to say thank you
so much for your ongoing support so that
we can continue to bring this festival
to our town and we just really thank you
and and being on a planning side this
year I have to say I was completely
blown away by the amount of community it
takes to put this together so thank you
again for supporting that and we look
forward to bring you a really fantastic
event next year thank you
Thank You Brenda anyone else wishing to
address this Eve
yeah actually tisha for you no oh
are you waiting actually if your your
comments are rated to related to the
vacation of the land
you can wait if they're related to any
other agenda item this evening you
should take this opportunity to speak
then I see Steve in line over there too
so I'd like to comment on the agenda
item on the miss quad school district
impact fees that you have this evening
in the outline that is handed out there
are four key points that I want to make
first of all the school district does an
excellent job on education my wife and I
had a son and daughter that went through
the south end schools and couldn't be
happier as as parents but when it comes
to impact fees the district has been
deficient
for at least 20 years and the result of
that deficiency essentially charging
less than they were authorized to charge
every year he has transferred a large
amount of wealth from family and
business taxpayers in the district to
development and building company profits
the city has visto qua has the authority
to end this deficiency now so we're not
in the same position 20 years from now
of not knowing how many tens of millions
or hundreds of millions of dollars have
been lost through this process so I'd
like to elaborate on some of those
points first of all the king county
ordinance doesn't give the school
district the latitude to decide what
parts of the impact fee formula it uses
and doesn't use the ordinance states
that the district shall use the formula
that's provided as an attachment to the
enabling ordinance the in your committee
report you'll see that this across rural
district has used specific parts of the
formula as specified but when it comes
to dividing the unfunded need by two
they're apparently saying that well
that's not a technical requirement we
can deviate from that you know
lessen the costs of housing projects and
keep developers building more in the
district than they might be able to
otherwise some points on that the
ordinance formula is just explicit as
explicit about dividing by 2 as it is on
all other stages of the calculation
nothing and the ordinance gives the qual
school school district the right to
select what parts of the formula they
will use and not use and in terms of
helping develop an industry their job is
education not taking care of developers
and builders and their markets the ISD
has a belief that by discounting the fee
further than it has to be if you want to
take a few seconds and sum up bill that
would be great ok they're wrong in this
assumption that they could impact the
cost or the price of homes if developers
were cost-plus contractors as some
businesses do with government but the
development of building industries are
for-profit corporations they're mandated
by shareholders to maximize profits if
you give them a $10,000 break on an
impact fee or any other aspect of their
cost it doesn't get passed along and
lower price thank you Bill
ok thank you Steve thank you
and there are some hints in support in
the audience I could do any manner Pali
City Council good to be here again
steeper era old town as well for about
10 years so I'll add I think that's Sam
Davis's well done so good job to all
those involved moving quickly since I
only have three minutes item e on the
consent calendar
I'm sorry item D on consent calendar
I like the idea for the levy and public
sources but I disagree with the
designated official I think that should
be the mayor I think that should be the
city council in charge of funds I don't
think that should be the designated
position
so I would like to see that we worked
before it gets approved just before Adam
II a B 764 3
we've gone from a 65% permeable surface
to a 90% permeable surface I don't see
that change that was recommended I don't
think I was in a court we've got the
City Council approved when they brought
forward a removing him from the central
central as well plans so I'd like to see
that revert back
so I guess last issue I just want to
touch briefly on the budget it seemed
like there were two issues that were
brought forward in 2017 one was $100,000
for Old Town calming traffic and
$100,000 proposal for a dog park when I
looked at the figures that turned out
there was three hundred forty thousand
dollars for the Old Town common that was
I think a good thing and the right thing
to do
I kind of see the same thing maybe
happening with the dog park I'm one of
those that I would say I disagree with a
dog park but I don't think it's the
paramount issue we keep finding these
new things to do we need to look at our
budget and say what we're not going to
do this seems like a prime example I
want to be clear though I'm not while
I'm opposed to the dog park I'm thinking
of as an example of how we're doing our
budgeting priorities and setting
priorities and and scoping out we always
find more things to do and we're not
meeting those core competences that I
think is akua's saying that we want to
have so I would like to see that we
worked I know for example I would be one
of those who would say let's get rid of
this central park pad number one but I
know we get into the conversation of
everybody fights what they want we all
come forward we say well I want these
things I want these things that's what
people do become say we want more and we
want you to give us those things so
another example of that I think is the
it's actually item number II the truck
I'm just sorry item I the traffic
calming enforcement a lot of the survey
questions deal with the issues because
the city streets are to wire those to
pass through traffic the issue is just
pretty corn simple people are speeding
they're blaming on other things we
expand our scope to be more than just
what it should be and where it is so I
would like your help in kind of
narrowing the focus to what those things
are and should be with that I'm sure my
three minutes about up so all say no you
probably notice we never set the timer
but yes iPhone says three minutes are up
okay thank you David
thank you David Kepler 255 southeast and
Rose Street and not many people here
remember the era of when they tried to
put the incinerator at above the gravel
pits and we'll see incineration has
improved tremendously since those days
but I'm not sure it's the right thing
but let's get a good discussion on it
just might address a couple of the
partners city is working with the Trust
for Public Land in King County having to
do with the potential acquisition and
Trust for Public Land was involved in
acquisitions in Issaquah in the 70s and
80s and when 1990 when we did the 5-day
mountain to sound marches co-ops trails
Club did we were broke and fortunately
Jim Ellis and others had the vision that
we got something big here let's go with
it
it was Trust for Public Land that came
in with office space and staffing to get
the mountain to sound Greenway going so
they've been a great partner and of
course Margaret's way they were the the
buyer of that property which then and
county bought from them
another great partner is King County
King County from this the whole Basin
Issaquah Basin has been vastly improved
by King County starting at the head of
the base and the Taylor Mountain County
forest which is really a County part but
it's a forest and managed well and then
they've made many acquisitions all
through the corridor right down here to
the west side and east side of squawk
Mountain King County has made major
acquisitions that allow us to go from
Lake Sammamish to squawk Mountain
there's still some gaps
they're working on we're working on but
it's been - there they've led that on
many cases King County did the Newcastle
plan which gave the vision and it got
the people thinking that an urban
village was ok the first one didn't
happen in the Newcastle planning area it
happened up here in Issaquah Highlands
and that was County leadership along
with this city I'm very important to
make that
so we got great partners they've done a
lot for us let's help them out thank you
thank you David and lots of hands up in
the audience would anybody else care to
address Council this evening hi I'm
Mindy person I live at two three eight
four seven southeast 59th Street just
off of old black nugget Road we also own
a property at 235 Northeast Juniper
Street which is it within the intensive
commercial which is a b7 643 which is
item F on the consent calendar was it
gonna speak tonight but I heard a
somebody that was against the 65 or
wanting to go back to the 65% and I just
want to say that I we are so
appreciative all of us that attended
those those Commission meetings of the
Commission and of Keith Niven for
listening to us because we're a small
business and frankly between my husband
and I we owned three small businesses in
Issaquah my husband has the biggest one
he employs 20 people here in in the city
of Issaquah and we put our life savings
into buying that property on juniper I
mean not entire but you know you get
that and if you reduce the use of that
property by 25% that's 25% of our nest
egg that just goes away so we are for
the the proposition is has been put
ahead it put to you to refer to the
Linden Shore committee so I just wanted
to say that thank you
thank you is there anyone else who would
like to address Council this evening
being none a second call anyone wishing
to address council last call for anyone
wishing to Jones council tonight seeing
no hands that ends audience comments
thank you so much for coming tonight
it's we appreciate all the information
that you share with us say save cougar
mountains request for property
acquisition comments on the school
district district impact fee comments on
King County Solid Waste Management Plan
Update
the successful salmon days event from
last weekend and also the last speaker
in support of the new standards so thank
you very much for coming we will move on
to committee and regional reports and
we'll start with councilmember hunt
thank you madam mayor I attended the
Cascade Water Alliance Resource
Management Committee on Thursday October
11th there were two main items for
action that the committee made
recommendations on the first item was
replacement of a barrier near Lake Tapps
tunnel intake this would be a $58,000
cost and would be out of their current
budget and is a barrier that's required
for safety reasons and then also
replacement of a pork lift which we've
forty eight thousand dollars and also it
was a anticipated equipment cost and
then we also had a discussion around
water quality monitoring and this would
be a this would be a water quality
system that would monitor the quality of
water in Lake Tapps and the main
question here is how do we assess and
manage water quality from a recreational
perspective until it is used or until
which time it may be used as a water
supply as it is a reservoir the Cascade
Water Alliance board will meet October
24th at 3:30 at Cascade office in
Bellevue and that concludes my report
Thank You councilmember hunt
councilmember Wray Thank You mayor
Pauley the services and Safety Committee
met on October 9th the Genda included a
presentation from imagine housing
related to issues arising from their
Rose crest property and Talas imagine
housing CEO Villette Nolan provided a
presentation on the underlying
challenges at Rose crest and the steps
in imagined housing has been taking to
improve communications and resident
satisfaction the committee was satisfied
with the steps that imagine housing has
taken this was a presentation that was
requested by full council that services
and safety meet with imagine housing to
talk about the Rose crest situation not
related to our last services and Safety
Committee but tonight agenda bill 76 55
expedited traffic enforcement pilot
project summary report an extension is
on
our consent agenda this was reviewed by
services and safety at our September
18th meeting the committee recommended
that the pilot be extended through the
end of 2018 as the results from the
pilot we're showing promises in terms of
modifying driving behavior in the city
the administration hasn't indicated that
the pilot can be extended using existing
police department budget and that no
additional funding will be required this
agenda bill is on tonight's consent
agenda to extend the pilot through the
end of the year the next meeting of the
services and Safety Committee will be on
numbered November 14th at 6:30 p.m. in
Council Chambers services and Safety
Committee meeting was moved from our
normal Tuesday meeting to Wednesday to
accommodate the City Council budget work
session that is scheduled for November
13 so just know that everyone is a
schedule change the agenda for the
meeting has not yet been sent the East
Side Fire Rescue Board met on October
11th the agenda included the board
approving replacement of their existing
HRA with a voluntary employee
beneficiary Association health reinforce
reimbursement arrangement managed by a
third party administrator the esight
Fire and Rescue Board also adopted the
2019 2020 revenue and expense budget
this budget was aligned to the
presentation presented by East Side Fire
and Rescue Chief Jeff Clark at the arc
the council's October 8th work session
the board also amended administrative
policy zero-zero-zero to budget
management and reserve policy to provide
for a smoothing of increases in annual
contributions to East Side Fire and
Rescue the smoothing approach was
presented by chief Clark at the October
8th work session and finally the site
Fire and Rescue Board amended
administrative policy zero-zero-zero for
minimum staffing to provide for revised
staffing plan for station 81 to make
this an eight car only station this will
permit East Side Fire and Rescue to
provide better response times to other
parts of the service area and this too
was discussed by chief
at the October 8th meeting the next
meeting of East Side Fire and Rescue
Board will be on November 8th that he's
hired Fire and Rescue headquarters and
that concludes my very lengthy report
this evening Thank You councilmember Rey
that's my Ramos thank you
the council Infrastructure Committee
will be meeting this Thursday the 18th
right here in Council Chambers at 6:30
we have three action items on the agenda
a be 76 49 which is amendments to the
water sewer and stormwater recovery
contracts a be 76 47 amendments to the
general assembly charge and regional
supply and treatment charge for water
and a be 76 35 vacation of a portion of
the Northeast Gilman Boulevard which
there'll be a public hearing for this
shortly there was the reaction I was in
of course project updates that concludes
my report
Thank You councilmember winters time
thank you on October 4th GMP be met but
because I was unable to attend I do not
have a report they will meet again on
Thursday November 1st at 10:00 a.m. at
PS SC headquarters in Seattle and I'll
report on both the October and November
meetings at the next opportunity
and the lodging tax advisory committee
has not met since our last council
meeting so I have nothing to report
there either
thank you councilmember Goodman thank
you that is the Quad City Council's
Landon short committee will met on
October 4th and we had three items the
first was we were presented with this
2017 Central Issaquah monitoring report
and dashboard so should you be
interested in reviewing that it's on the
city's website agenda bill 73 26 Old
Town sub area plan the committee would
like to take another look so it's on the
consent agenda tonight to be referred
back to Landon Shore because it was
scheduled to come to full council and
the committee didn't think we were quite
ready yet but for technical reasons that
needs to be referred back if that's if
the committee wants to take another look
also agenda bill 76 61 which is on the
consent agenda tonight Genda bills as he
proposed amendments to central standard
table 4.3 be permitted land uses and
that was recommended to adopt from the
committee
our next meeting is November 1st here in
Council Chambers at 6:30 the agenda has
not yet been set that's my report Thank
You councilmember Goodman deputy council
president batiste thank you madam mayor
no report this evening Thank You council
president Mertz
thank you madam mayor the sound cities
association public issues committee met
on Wednesday October 10th at 7 p.m. in
the Renton City Hall there were a couple
items that I want to draw your attention
to the first is that there was a
conversation about the 2019 SCA
legislative agenda which we've talked
about I would say there was a robust
conversation around people who wanted to
amend the legislative agenda and a
robust counter conversation amongst
people who wanted to leave it as it was
simplicity being a virtue so there's
going to be a further conversation down
the road I think it might be at the
business meeting for SCA but where
people are going to make potential
amendments to it I indicated that our
council thought that the sort of
simplicity of it and the fact that it
have tailed well with their own
legislative agenda was important I don't
know how many amendments would
potentially get much traction but you
know lots of cities had lots of things
they were interested in and as I have
often said a camel is a horse designed
by committee so we'll see where that
goes
a second issue that I have just
forwarded you information on is there
was a presentation on a regional
affordable housing task force draft plan
so I have sent it all on to you for you
to take a look at and what I would like
to do is bring it up again and for good
of the order I will also as soon as the
minutes are available from the SCA pic
meeting I will forward those as well
because I would say that there was also
an extremely robust conversation around
this plan and I will leave it at that
and I will let you take a look at the
gist of that conversation and then like
I said potentially get your thoughts on
this plan or will ask for your thoughts
on this plan at the next for good of the
order at the next regular City Council
meeting
I will mention that SCA appointments are
the end of this month and so mayor poly
has sent out a request from everybody
for their preferences for what they
would like to have names to be submitted
from the city to SCA executive director
Dawson has made it clear that she
expects cities to sort of get their own
house in order collectively instead sort
of one set of recommendations and
requests and that also these you know
people have requests on what they would
like to get hopefully you know hopefully
they'll be able to have those names
submitted we may also as part of the
discussions of dovetailing this to our
regional priorities ask you to consider
additional appointments as things go
forward so we shall see how that goes
this concludes my report Thank You
council president Mertz and that
completes the committee in regional
reports moving on to the mayor's report
there will be an executive session this
evening to discuss items related to
pending litigation per 42.3 0.11 o paren
one print I these items are expected to
have I got the right and potential
property acquisition these items are
expected to last at least 20 minutes no
action is anticipated to follow in open
session mayors month of concern
city staff donated time at local grocers
and also collected our own food
donations in September for the mayor's
month of concern for the hungry this is
a benefit for the Issaquah food and
clothing bank we dropped off 712 pounds
of food more than doubled last year's
record giving us a new donation record
for the city
regionally the food and clothing bank
received twenty three thousand two
hundred ninety two pounds of food and
toiletries that's eleven point six five
tons of goods I also wanted to talk a
little bit about salmon days and
appreciated that Brenda from the chamber
came tonight to tell you is a success we
estimate that approximately a hundred
and thirty thousand festival loving
friends came to and
shir there were 80 entries in the parade
70 local nonprofits had fundraising
activities during the festival our local
Esquire robotics team added new and
exciting activities to the field of fun
we had 34 farmers market farmers market
vendors and 55 food vendors 298 artists
14 wineries in the new wine tasting area
932 paid attendees of the carnival over
at is Sequoia Elementary the score
Valley Elementary and 50 sponsors who
contributed over three hundred thousand
dollars to the event this event takes
477 volunteers over the three days to
run it's quite quite an event to pull
off I want to thank the city's Parks and
Recreation Department police department
and all the city staff along with these
site Fire and Rescue who worked on this
chamber event with all of these amazing
sponsors and volunteers the last item in
the mayor's report today is a little
update on the 62nd Street project cannot
wait for this to I turned this project
on Friday October 5th and was thrilled
to see the progress a few of the
highlights pickering trail from fourth
to Pickering barn is already open to the
public the bridge construction is
completed and they are doing ongoing
finished work on the structure the King
County trail under crossing structure is
built and not only looks really cool but
provides separation of the trail users
from the roundabout and the numerous
utilities in the area have all been
reconstructed and our just waiting final
approval contractor is currently working
6 10 hour days each week to try and get
the road bridge and King County East
Lake Sammamish Trail open by the end of
the year so we can get this critically
important under crossing reopened so
thank you for being patient I also just
wanted to add on a little update on that
Bergsma property since we had so many
members of the public this evening show
up from the SE Cougar Mountain group we
are still partnering with the Trust for
Public Land and exploring the
acquisition options for this parcel
known as Bergsma property it's a very
complex opportunity and it will take
multiple solutions
I had reported earlier in the summer
that there was an option to purchase
agreement that TPL had attained from the
owner and that agreement allowed for an
appraisal of the property to be
initiated while the appraisal work was
underway and now has been underway and
is now nearing completion the city and
the trust for public lands have
continued to identify and explore
numerous rendering opportunities that
would be needed for any acquisition
scenario and specific details of the
work cannot be publicly shared tonight
however we are hopeful that we will be
able to share details of this work
publicly in the coming month or two
should an acquisition be negotiated so
thank you for being patient and
proceeding to the consent calendar the
consent calendar was distributed to
council in advance if authorized the
items on the consent calendar will be
considered together and approved by one
motion of the payables and payroll been
reviewed yes thank you as any council
member desire to remove any item from
the consent calendar and consider it
under regular business yes member hunt I
would like to move down item J a B 766
one proposed amendments to central
standards table 4.3 be permitted land
uses second thank you council president
Mertz so we will put that on our regular
agenda after item a maybe 764 oh so that
will be our new item B under business
oh it says motion made and seconded so
maybe it didn't need to be seconded we
need to okay don't mistake another
you're not there's a lot of confusion
going around okay the next item on our
agenda whoa I move we adopt the consent
yeah
as listed in this evenings publishes a
second it's been moved and seconded to
approve the consent agenda as amended
all in favor say aye
Ares next item now on our agenda is
public hearing a b7 635 vacation of a
portion of North East Gilman Boulevard
we're going to conduct the public
hearing and this has been roof this will
be referred to council infrastructure
like to invite senior engineer John
Martinson to make presentation
thank you madam mayor and city council
good evening everyone I'm John Mortensen
senior transportation engineer in the
Public Works engineering department
tonight I'm here to give you a brief
presentation on agenda bill 76 35
vacation of a portion of North East
Gilman Boulevard before I get into the
details of this agenda bill just in case
anyone doesn't know so right away is a
an easement for the traveling public and
the city code and state law allow a
public agency like the city of Esquire
to vacate right away which extinguishes
that easement for the public
right-of-way when that happens the
right-of-way becomes under their sole
control of the adjacent property owner
owners state law and city code also
allow for an abutting property owner to
petition for a right-of-way vacation and
ask for council approval City Council
could also initiate the right-of-way
vacation process if the council chose to
in order to reduce the public burden if
there is no need for the right-of-way
so specifically about this agenda bill
the right-of-way that it's being
considered to be vacated is shown on the
map in yellow the adjacent property to
the south is owned by Kyle development
and it's shown in blue to the north and
to the east is the right-of-way for
interstate 90 if the City Council
decides to vacate the right-of-way the
city will receive just compensation for
the value of the land now if you feel
like you're having a moment of deja vu
you are and the reason for that is last
spring the City Council considered
vacating this property at the time there
is a lot of public comments about the
future use of
this property and the council decided to
vote one to four after deliberations and
wait till after the park strategic plan
was adopted since that time the 2008
park strategic plan was adopted in last
summer also if you remember from when
this agenda bill was presented last
spring both the city and state will
maintain an easement for the city
underground utilities and Faraj sought
to maintain their retaining wall this is
a picture looking Northwest on Gilman
Boulevard and as I said earlier right
away is an easement for traveling public
and at one time there were multiple
property owners along this section of
Gilman Boulevard right now there's only
one property owner and that's Kyle
development that they've consolidated
all the properties and so this public
right-of-way basically functions like a
private driveway except the city still
has the burden of ongoing maintenance
and liabilities and risks I went out
there last week and just kind of took a
look around the sidewalks really cracked
the it doesn't meet the current ata
standards the driveway slopes are too
steep the mailbox would prevent a
wheelchair from getting by so there's
some maintenance needs and ongoing
liabilities out there with this
right-of-way that we're talking about
here's another picture and this is
looking east onto their property on the
left you can see the retaining wall for
i-90 and as I was standing out there
last week I was observed that it's
really loud with the traffic for my 90
going by
tonight's recommended motion is to refer
to gender bill 76 35 to this Thursdays
counsel Infrastructure Committee for
review and recommendation in that way we
can respond to any comments or questions
that are brought up tonight and bring
the agenda bill back to the full Council
on November 5th for final action the
agenda bill from last spring was agenda
bill 74 85 and that was to vacate a
portion of the same portion of Gillman
Boulevard at the public hearing I began
on March 19th and that Sam Kyle from
Kyle Development gave a presentation he
gave a history of the right-of-way as of
Gilman Boulevard as i-90 was developed
and then on April 2nd there are several
comments about mostly concerning future
use and in the end as I mentioned that
council voted one to four and one to
wait until the strategic plan was
completed so it was more detail about
the the public comments the overall
theme was weight to make sure that we
don't have a future use for that
right-of-way and there are a bunch of
ideas suggested like movies on i-90 a
festival street maybe it could be a
community amenity what about the could
be a trail connecting over to High Point
and some concerns about future rezoning
on July 16th the council adopted the
state are this the parks strategic plan
and it did not identify a future park or
trail in this section of Northeast
Gilman Boulevard talking a little bit
about some of the specific comments that
were brought up a couple of the big
problems is if we convert it to a park
type facility whether it's for movies or
a festival street or anything like that
or linear park that it cuts off the
primary access to this property and
another thing is it's
this is just my personal opinion not a
very pleasant place to be with all the
noise from my 90 whip whizzing by I'd be
really hard to hear a movie and so then
talking specifically about the green
necklace or maybe a trail over de
highpoint trail
well this green necklace plan did not
identify a connection in this area the
same impact is doing a park that if we
put a trail there that we're going to be
cutting off access to the private
property and continuing along the trail
would have to primarily be in washed-out
limited access area and there's a lot of
environmentally sensitive areas as these
fork of Issaquah Creek goes through
there a final comment that I remember
from last spring was potential rezoning
so I talked to the city's long-range
planning manager and she said that there
shouldn't be a change in use out there
and that current uses I'm not going to
read through the table
but those are what the uses of the land
if Kyle development were to redevelop
the property and tonight's
recommendation it's to like I said to
refer it to the council infrastructure
committee and that concludes my
presentation
thank you John councilmember questions
there's no questions I'm going to open
the hearing but I'll look one more time
no questions for John okay so I now open
the public hearing at 8:22 has anyone
signed up to speak this evening no is
there anyone who would like to address
the council during the public hearing
Steve
hello again mayor Polly city council
good to be here again so I would live
off 170 northeast dogwood street which
is not too far from this complex several
thoughts occurred to me on this well I
guess I'm opposed the idea of vacating
the property my reasons are as follows
as the previous speakers said this is a
primary access for that property so it's
a primary ingress egress for cars going
to that business park there were only
two of those and you're cutting off one
of them so that seems like bad traffic
management bad emergency access policy
the other is that complex is at least
zoned or planned to be zoned as part of
the Old Town Hall plan it doesn't seem
to meet the character of that area so
allowing more growth in there I guess
I'd like to see that area moved or not
include the whole town Issaquah plan
area but it's not consistent with the
area and it's not maybe consistent with
the state route 10 going through there
for that reason I guess I have concerns
and reservations about traffic already
being impacted with what's taking place
now so thank you thank you Steve is
there anyone else who would like to
speak at the public hearing
second call anyone liking to speak last
call so we'll close the public hearing
at 8:24 and is there a motion that's
more interesting thank you madam mayor
I'm gonna make a motion and I hope
somebody seconds it so we can have a
conversation and unlike what is
recommended on the board in front of us
I'm going to go back to the motion that
was in the packet back in April 2nd that
was unfolded on and so this wording is
right from the same motion from the
agenda bill back in April second and it
reads I moved to adopt ordinance number
two eight four six through eight four
six vacating a portion of Street right
away adjacent to property located at
three hundred and 371 northeast Gilman
Boulevard
subject to easements and establishing
the compensation to be paid for such
vacation second it's been moved and
seconded council discussion
councilmember winter Sam restart yeah
thank you as was pointed out tonight
I appreciated the presentation from
staff thank you John the there have been
two and now three public hearings on
this and the council I reviewed the
meeting the the comments at those
meetings and the council's meet comments
on ape from April second and I think
they've been fairly summarized here that
those of us that were here those that
spoke against the vacation it was
primarily about we don't know yet there
we have time we don't know if the the
park strategic plan is going to call for
some potential use of this land
councilmember hunt did make another
recommendation about maybe it could be a
linear park or something like that and
and but the majority of the concerns
that were expressed were let's wait to
see if the park strategic plan calls for
something now we know that it does not
and I also do appreciate also staffs
comments tonight I've spent some time
out there as well and when it comes to
parks you know if there's any John can I
ask you to go put your second slide back
up there I like parks is not as much as
the next person I even like linear parks
I always spent quite a bit of time keep
going one more if you go southwest from
the yellow area at the inners and the
southwest intersection between dogwood
and 3rd Avenue it's hard to tell from
this diagram but the the North Fork of
Issaquah Creek kind of cuts at an angle
from Southeast to Northwest across that
property and there is 105 thousand
square feet of land owned by the city of
Issaquah currently it's occupied by
the previous owners and when they vacate
that land that'll be turning over and it
is within our plan to create a permanent
open space to all that land which is
significantly larger than what we're
talking about vacating here I think
that's gonna be great for the city it's
gonna be great for the creek it's gonna
be great for everybody who lives in
proximity it's gonna be great for the
businesses as well so I think that with
that in the pipeline and given the
plenty of opportunity that we've had
already at discussing and considering
this I don't think it was necessary to
spend any more time on the issue and I'd
like the council to consider just
completing this piece of business so we
can get one thing off our list all right
anyone else's comment councilmember
Goodman
councilmember hunt I agree with
councilmember winter Stein's
notion that we could that we should just
approve this tonight I don't see any
reason to refer it to committee it's
been before us before and I don't know
what else we would possibly do at
committee that we there's no more I mean
we have all the information and we've
seen it a couple times I - even though
it wasn't at the last meeting I did
watch it when I returned and so I
support the motion Thank You
councilmember hunt I actually like to
ask a clarifying question if I may
regarding the presentation and it has to
do with if there is more information
that could be considered so under the
rezoning my understanding of this part
of Gillman is that there are some also
on the consent agenda and a different
item there is a item that would consider
rezoning for businesses for this part of
Gilman not for a right-of-way but for
the businesses so with that and anyway
impacts the potential uses if this were
to be vacated I would think it it would
which is why I'm asking
I'm seeing a know being shaking in the
back and it's my understanding that the
use of the land would not change and
from what I've read and I think you guys
know better than I that you guys are
talking about impervious area and that
kind of thing so right now it's zoned
for destination retail the land uses oh
I'm gonna just turn it over to someone
who speaks this language good evening
Keith Niven director of development
services so right now
the property is right away so it
technically doesn't have uses if it's
vacated the zoning would be consistent
with the adjacent property and what
we're talking about is zoning that makes
you southside of central is a clause so
it would it would adopt that zone so
that would be contingent on the the
zoning that is currently being
considered by council for those
properties yes just which has not yet
been finalized yes and I was gonna look
at council member Ramos because his
committee was gonna be recipients if we
can get some comments sure and we talked
about this in getting ready for the
council Infrastructure Committee meeting
and this idea did get surfaced is the
possibility of did we want to just have
the council deal with it directly and I
my thought at the time was we have a
process we like to follow which is after
a public hearing we don't make an
immediate decision if we are not time
constrained and since there were a lot
of questions asked and a lot of
information coming back as count as
chair of that committee I thought we
should go through the regular process
which was would just take it back to
committee and then come back here and do
that so I was respectful of all of the
members on the on the council here in
the process to do that because there's
no rush to this happened at all so that
was my thought process behind my would
continue with the normal process even
though this has been back and forth a
couple times because of questions in the
beginning so the vet tells fellow
committee members
what what the thought was Thank You
council president Mertz
so in general I strive both as a council
member and his council president to
defer or at least to look for leadership
from the liaison person on the bill and
then in parallel to look for leadership
from the chair of the committee to which
the bill will be presented and so the
fact that council member Ramos would
like to see this able to come to
committee is why I will be voting
against the motion that's in there that
the the motion that comes from over
winter Stein has has put forward to
decided this evening thank you other
comments
that's a member hunt I also will not be
supporting the motion because I think
that there that this would be within the
purview of the council Infrastructure
Committee and I think that that is has
been our process so I would support the
original motion but not the current
motion on the table Thank You deputy
council president batise thank you I
will not be supporting the motion if we
don't have a time constraint I would
defer to the head of the Infrastructure
Committee comments any more comments at
- yeah it's kind of a tie gonna go with
council member ray and then back to
council member interesting I think that
we have worked this issue fairly
extensively it's been here before I
don't think that we would find that we
would learn much by spending more time
in committee and bringing it back so I
am inclined to move forward with making
a decision this evening Thank You
councilmember winter saying yeah in in
the case that maybe I've missed
something it was the comment was made
that we got some more information I
don't know what that is so if somebody
could fill me in what additional
information or additional questions that
we still have to address that was my
comment
well actually bill said that you can
both reply will start with councilmember
hunt and
council member Ramos would like to join
in that's fine it's a member had well I
think that it's a question of having a
different situation different context
and I do think that there is in general
the the vacation of a right away would
be something that the Infrastructure
Committee would discuss and I think the
context has changed since we last
discussed it comes my Brumos so again I
was I was looking mainly at the process
and being respectful of that there is
some answers that came definitely for
most of our questions there's another
one brought up as far as director Niven
addressed to we can talk here for about
15 minutes about it or we can go back to
count committee for about 15 minutes to
come back under consent so I'm not it's
it's not a lot a big issue here for me
it's just the process and stick to it if
we unless there's a reason why not to
and that's all that's a member Goodman
oh I wasn't completely clear on the
answer or the response regarding
councilmember hunts question is the if
it goes to if the motion fails and it
gets referred to infrastructure is there
a zoning is it a zoning question okay so
then it would it means that we would
need to have somebody there from
development services to there's a zoning
question with a Gilman Boulevard so I'll
recognize council member Hunt next but I
think what we're trying to get at here
tonight is that what is the outstanding
question that would go back that would
make sense to have the infrastructure
meeting because there's some information
you don't have tonight to make a
decision and now go back to
councilmember hunt because it was her
question about additional information I
think that was that was correct
interpretation of what I did so maybe
I'll stay
been to this party that we're having up
here and I'll ask a question so I I tend
to agree with committee chair
Rommels that we have a process and we
should stick to it however and each time
we send something to committee does take
council resources in some sort of
direction on what information they would
be bringing and if there is an
expectation that there is an unanswered
question or new information to present
they do think it would be appropriate to
go to committee if the committee chair
and those that are here tonight would be
hearing exactly what they heard now I'm
not sure that we necessarily have our
hands tied you do have the option to go
with a motion to approve tonight if the
expectation is there would be nothing
new presented at committee so for
discussion let me address one more thing
yeah and I'm just new to the process I
think I'm I was trying to be respectful
council members to not have to have this
discussion up here tonight it looks like
we're having it anyway so yeah that that
was the whole point to not have to take
the time to do this and do that in the
regular process since we're all talking
about it if you two are just referring
to me because of my decision as chair
I'm okay with this either way if you're
comfortable with it now I'm fine with it
I was just I do not want to sort of the
process and say hey now I'm bringing
here I'm not thinking about the
committee I thought that would have been
not proper you you can take it away I'll
follow your suit here thank you for
explaining that
comments what's the president merits so
I just wanted to be clear that I
understand council member Ramos you now
support the motion that is in front of
us I'll go with majority on this one I'm
fine either way I mean seriously I just
I'm fine either way
all right well you preface your previous
comment as if this is if if other
council members are deferring to you and
I was deferring to you so I'm going to
if you are supportive of this motion
then I am also going to support this
motion as the chair of again I was
respectful of council members time on
the daya's here and not trying to change
the process without their consent if you
have the consent you want to change the
process I'm fine with that if you're
comfortable with the information you
have
with that that's the decision I was
trying to avoid this long conversation
now that we've just had Thank You chair
Ramos deputy council president batiste
I was also deferring to the committee
chair so I will support the motion and
if there are no other comments I have a
clarification that is just going to
drive you all crazy but it was pointed
out to me that the motion that was made
was in reference to maybe the motion is
to adopt the proposed ordinance in the
agenda packet the title and content of
the ordinance differs slightly from the
ordinance before council previously in
April motion that could be considered
this evening would be to adopt ordinance
number two eight four six vacating a
portion of Street right-of-way adjacent
to property located at three hundred and
371 northeast Gilman Boulevard subject
to easements and establishing the
compensation to be paid for such
vacation it shows sorry to giving me the
nod that works yes that's not the exact
title but as long as it's clear that the
intent is to adopt the version of the
ordinance in tonight's council packet
there was a slight technical correction
made so I could hand this dog shaker so
that is those were the exact same words
of my motion and absolutely intent is
the if Ali was citing was the language
of the motion from the previous packet
applying it to tonight and the version
of the ordinance that's in tonight's
packet for clarity so I thank you
so the wording hasn't changed at all
this is the same wording
yeah I think we'll just it does not need
to be exactly what's in the packet now
that that clarification has been made
that that's the intention all right so
which one am i reading back there we go
it's a little show tonight the motion is
moved to adopt ordinance number two
eight four six vacating a portion of
Street right-of-way adjacent to property
located at three hundred and 371
northeast Gilman Boulevard subject to
easements and established
a compensation to be paid for such
vacation all those in favor say aye
all those opposed Hey the motion carries
six in favor and councilmember hunt
opposed thank you okay moving on to
regular business the next item on the
agenda is a b7 six for Oh amending
school impact fees looking for some
direction to the administration this
evening and then it will be referred to
council services and Safety Committee so
before this agenda bill presentation
starts I'd like to clarify that the
purpose of tonight's proposed action is
to provide direction to the
administration based on the
recommendation of the council services
and Safety Committee this will give the
administration a starting point and
allows us to prepare the legislation
needed to make changes to the fees or
the parameters around setting those fees
tonight's action does not obligate
council members to support a particular
fee or approach Council will have all
the usual options to amend and vote on
any proposed legislation when this item
returns to Council for decision so
unless there are any questions I'd like
to invite policy planning manager Trish
Heinonen to make a presentation oh good
Trish ready okay we're just gonna quit
give you a background of why we're here
tonight so that you can all talk amongst
yourselves you're seeing the impact fee
update again tonight just as a
background we've been doing this since
1995 not this particular one although
there are moments all the way up until
2016 we've always gone with what the
district has recommended in their six
year capital plan last year you
expressed some concern that they were
taking a double discount beyond a
discount beyond what King County's
formula sets and so you you let them
know that you had some concerns and you
had some discussions with them and you
ended up adopting the fee as established
in the capital plan of the school
district but
you had expressed that you wanted to
work it out this year and get more
understanding of why the school district
is doing the double discount so fast
forward to this year when the school
board came out with their six year plan
they took a smaller discount than they
did last year and they said it was in
response to you all having a concern
about the second discount you all had
talked with them about that and when we
talked the attorney about if there were
ways that you all could adopt a
different fee than the school district
sets in their capital plan the attorney
says that we have to change our
ordinance to do that and so remember
that because that's going to come up
again and so our agenda bill when it
originally came to you so many months
ago says that that's an option is to
change our code so that you all can have
more flexibility and approving impact
fee for schools in September one
services and safety met with the
district representatives they ended up
with two recommendations coming back to
you all tonight and those two trying to
paraphrase was ends up to be two
ordinances one that would allow you all
to have flexibilities to set the fees
higher or lower should you decide then
stated in the school districts six-year
capital plan the second recommendation
that came out wanted another ordinance
that just wanted the highest fee
possible which would only use the one
discount that is in the King County
formula so that would be the 50% there
would be no other discount allowed
that's the second ordinance and what
that Services Committee wanted to do is
to bring those both to you tonight to
talk about it before you figure it out
what you should direct the
administration to bring you back next
time so are there questions on that
questions
not seeing any questions Trish thank you
nice hang around oh sorry councilmember
Ramos says question so just because we
have another options here I just want to
make sure which ones we're looking at
okay so you know option option one which
is alternate alternate three and option
two which is option two
so just one off I'll see what are we
looking to have both of those done well
that's up to you all if you were to
direct the administration to draft
ordinance one there would be an agenda
bill at the next meeting that would be
just in time so that the Services
Committee would look at both ordinances
if that's what you all direct us to do
tonight or you could just pick one and
services would be able to look at one
ordinance at their meeting so my
question is one is one is very specific
it's it shall be always as formula and
there's no chance to change that no
matter what the school district says no
matter what we would not leave us room
for any kind of compromise sources one
says we have total control on where we
are what we decide to do on that pretty
much right okay just clarifying that
sure councilor ray can I give a little
report out from Sur I was gonna say
there's any general questions and then I
was gonna go right to you to start the
conversation with your yeah and and you
know council members and deputy
president batiste please chime in we had
a really good discussion with Issaquah
School District about impact fuels why
they set them the way they do how they
do funding for all the new construction
and how they're dealing with growth in
the region
we separated this into two questions
because it fundamentally had two quite
distinct parts the first was the IMC is
currently written does not provide City
Council the authority to do
anything other than to accept or reject
the impact fees as per as proposed by
the school district the first question
we wrestled with was should we direct
the administration to modify the imc to
give us the flexibility to either set an
impact fee higher or lower than what was
requested by the school district and we
as a committee I believe grade 3 oh that
that was something we wanted to pursue
we also had then had a very this is
taking president Marx's word robust
discussion around what to set the impact
fee at and listening to the public and
responding to issues around fairness and
current property tax burdens we
discussed whether or not we would like
the administration to draft a second
ordinance that would for this particular
request from the school district set the
impact fee equal to the king county
formula that's not to say that next year
or the following year we would do that
but just in this year so those are the
two things that we've brought forward on
the second question we did not come down
unanimously council member hunted myself
believe that we should set the discount
or the impact fees at the King County
50% discount and no more and deputy
president batiste was more inclined to
go with a number provided by the school
district their statements so if there
are no questions
we're in deliberations so comments
questions would you like to discuss
council member Ramos followed by deputy
counsel so I guess I'm back to to you
councilmember Rea when we first last
talked about this with the school
district they had some very strong
feelings about some
these actions here and I'm not hearing
that they're having strong feelings now
could you give me a little bit more on
their position on this because one of
these locks us into whatever they figure
out it doesn't matter we're gonna go
with with the highest possible number
which is you say we can change it next
year which I guess is true but you put
that into IMC it's and I am seeing if we
don't change it we're gonna do that
forever which means we're not going to
listen to them no matter what they do so
that's that kind of sets up something
that I'm not so sure we want to have
some conversations around question I'm
not sure and please help me but I was
not in the impression that by
establishing the impact fee that's a
change to the Municipal Code yes okay so
we can adopt well we're gonna we're
gonna change the Municipal Code anyway
because we're going to adopt a different
rate than we had last year so we really
going to respond to the change with the
IMC at a rate that is different than
last year because that's what was
requested by the school district and or
something higher than that but it's
going to change and it's gonna be IMC
what you're Monday or the other right so
I guess I had kind of clarify my
question because I had two questions in
there there weren't sure yep okay I'll
come back to your handsome Aramis but
just looking at Trish to see if how it
was explained by councilmember Ray is
actually how the ordinances will work
there's an R because you will have to
change the impact fees unless you want
to keep last year's impact fees and
that's in the same section of IMC three
point six three that the impact fees
also reside okay great cancel my row so
it was your second question in there
there's two questions that one was a
better feeling for how his cross school
district is is I mean talking with us
about this because you know a year ago
this was a robust discussion and I'm not
hearing anything currently about a
robust discussion with ISD so I'm I'm
trying to get a feel for where they are
because once one of these ordinances
sets us up almost always in conflict
with ISD versus
coordinating with him is the way and
you're shaking your head but so I've got
a I've got a list of people who were to
speak tonight so I think what I would do
councilmember almost rather than have
councilmember race speak for the school
district make sure that we have an
opportunity to get that input or UI
tonight or in the future I see you Paul
I've got councillor Batista followed by
Hunt followed by winterside and then I
said Goodman just took her hand up as
well so we are on to councilmember
booties so just to follow up on
councilmember Ray's overview when when
we were talking at services and safety
we we really boiled this down into two
separate areas and I guess I was under
the impression as we were coming forward
we first would be talking about the
ability to to allow the council the
flexibility to set the impact fees
higher or lower and that is something
that I agreed with and voted for I think
that we should have that capability on
council to have that robust discussion
and be able to to make those decisions
as we go forward and without the change
to the ordinance we can't do that I
guess I would I think I was under the
impression we would talk about that
first and then that the the second piece
of that would be sort of the next step
and another discussion as opposed to
everything coming forward right now so I
will speak to I was a dissenting vote on
on the second the second item there and
I just wanted to start by saying I fully
understand the need and the want to have
the the full impact fees and I want to
have a conversation around that but I
did feel that the fees for this year
that having a conversation about it
would offer a slower-moving pathway that
it would allow the schools the school
district to actually adjust to this
I felt uncomfortable at the time and I
really really am still thinking about
this so I just want to be clear on why I
came out on a little bit of a different
pathway than my fellow council members
but that they are how they're dealing
with their capital budget and moving
forward at least when we're looking at
having a good partnership that we would
give them the time to adjust to this and
I will speak a little bit I I feel like
it was a really robust conversation last
year and I didn't I I guess I didn't
hear as much of that this year and and
that really led me down the path way of
saying with number one that we we should
have the capability to to look at both
sides of this and have a and have a good
conversation about it so I hope that
helps a little bit here not go to
council amber hunt next I was just going
to say that I also considered them very
much separate the first one allows us
the flexibility to set the impact fees
higher or lower which would be required
regardless of whether we choose to do
that or not and then the second one
would be making the change and we talked
about them separately in our services
and safety meeting and I think it would
probably I would think that it would
facilitate our conversations to separate
them in this discussion as well thank
you and then council member interesting
yeah I was getting confused by some of
what I heard I wasn't sure we were all
on the same page so let me let me say
what I would I understand this I'm just
gonna repeat what you just said the
first one is very clear we have an
existing IMC that says we're supposed to
do something this is giving us latitude
going forward to whatever we want to do
second one is okay now let's set next
year's fee just next year's fee it
doesn't it does it
not countered - but it would be working
with in the spirit of what we are
allowing us selves to do in number one
so they're not either/or and I thought
maybe there was an understanding
thinking that maybe that's the way that
they were so I just wanted to I wanted
to make that clear so having said that
we actually don't have a motion on the
floor and and you know I would really
I'll do it I wasn't there but I had a
couple more suggestions while there
isn't
we didn't set this up as a CO
presentation tonight the school
administration is here and would come
and provide some comments if the council
thinks that's a good idea tonight
because we're talking about them like
they're not even here that's a
possibility and then allow for questions
and then see if somebody would like to
propose a motion in early okay and I
would like to invite the reps from the
school district to come up thank you for
coming tonight it would be helpful for
you to introduce yourself before you
begin your comments and I believe with
the counsel questions tonight we're
about the differences between how does
the school district feel about the
information that's being presented
tonight because there was a very robust
conversation last year as well thank you
very much I'm Ann Moore current
president of the Issaquah School Board
thank you for having this conversation
around our impact fees the s-cross
school district sets the impact fees
through our capital facilities plan the
capital facilities plan looks at our
facility needs throughout the entire
district which includes space in the
City of Bellevue the city of Renton the
city of Issaquah the city of Sammamish
am I missing Newcastle thank you I
hadn't written down so I wouldn't forget
and King County so we have to take in to
account our student
NEADS across all of those jurisdictions
and we create one capital facility plan
with one set of numbers for impact fees
we adjust the impact fees at a minimum
the 50% discount is the local share
versus the developer share we did do an
additional discount after we had passed
our 2016 bond because the rate of the
impact fees went up significantly after
we had to take into account the land and
the construction of schools that were a
result of the passage of the bond and so
that's where you see the start of the
additional discount and part of that was
simply to avoid massive spikes in the
impact fees because had we not done a
reduction the single-family impact fee
would have gone up by a hundred and
eighty five percent and the multifamily
fee would have gone up by a hundred and
fifty nine percent so over time and
after our discussion with you folks
really looked at could we reduce it and
so what we've done is tried to smooth it
a bit and so although we had the higher
reduction or discount for a couple of
years we reduced the amount we had as
far a discount again had we not done the
additional discount that we did do this
year the single-family fee would have
gone up a hundred and eighteen percent
and the multifamily fee fifty nine
percent and up until our discussion with
all of you the only feedback we've
gotten from cities is reduce the fees
your fees are too high we don't want
your fees right we're going to super
impose upon you and reduce the fees so
never anywhere had we ever seen anyone
that suggested the fees should be higher
and we wanted our fees to be passed by
the cities and again it has happened in
the past that if we come forward with
fees they wouldn't necessarily adopt
them or they would reduce them right so
that's where we were coming from with
the fees the other part I would share
with you is that we go through the
creation of the capital facilities plan
in the April May time is where it
becomes public and goes out before the
board to actually adopt it it usually
comes before the board in two meetings
one where we discuss it and when we
readapt it and that would actually be
the perfect time
for any of you to come and give us
feedback on this plan before we actually
adopt it and send it forward to King
County it's the last cycle is where it
actually comes back to you as cities to
have the ordinance to collect the fees
for us so we would encourage your input
at that time as well and those are the
parts I was trying to hit on as far as
your questions I don't know Steve Steve
Crawford director capital projects risk
loss school district as Ann mentioned we
can we we tried to moderate the amount
of increase it's pretty significant and
school districts impact fees fluctuate
considerably over time as to whether or
not you have a capital program in place
and the bond money to fund those new
projects and when you run to the end of
that bond program and you're not
building anything new you don't have
projects and the costs for the land and
the costs for the building go down and
the impact fee goes way down that
balancing act also relates to the fact
that the home building industry is
opposed to impact fees they're out there
lobbying continuously to moderate things
Snohomish County has allowed the
builders to vest the impact fee at the
time of development application and
gives them a five-year window that that
holds for I can see the opers are going
to rush out in that five year window and
drop when rates drop knowing that
they've got five years and then they
don't have to pay now until building
permit and in some jurisdictions they'd
only have to pay half a building permit
and half when they close on the project
so it's years and years and the actual
funding that's available to the
districts has been delayed further and
further out so that the funding is not
there when you actually need it so it's
it's a balancing act between the rate of
increase the total and trying to
maintain the ability to collect impacts
ease and as Ann mentioned in the past
it's always been reductions again
Snohomish County held North Shore to a
seven thousand dollar limit that they
just increased this year to the full
requested ten thousand dollars we're
number two in King County with the rate
that we suggested
if that a 50% rate will be by far the
number one and King County Council took
up the issue of impact fees being too
high at the last and at last year's the
middle of the rates we all submit we all
go through the King County Schools
technical review committee which ends up
going to King County Council they set up
a committee last year to review impact
fees because federal way impact fee for
multifamily was listed as nineteen
thousand dollars they thought that was
just ridiculous Steve I'm gonna step in
here a little bit cuz we're sort of
turning into a committee meeting a
little bit I I would like you guys to
stay up there for one second
what I'd like to talk with the council
about today is you probably have heard
some new information that might likely
have been passed on to Council at the
committee level the question I'm trying
to get it is the one that council member
Ramos asked specifically which was last
year the school district when they came
to talk to council and committee talked
about not supporting the increase and
then the committee report out to council
this evening said this didn't seem to be
as big of issue this year is it why or
why not and I think that is if I'm
looking for a nod and he's given it I
think that's what councilman Ramos would
like to hear it and I would say it's a
lot of what's deep said it's really up
to you if you want to raise the impact
fees that I guess that is what a city
can do what we're saying is what we
recognize is given the environment of
King County the higher these fees are
the riskier it is that King County takes
action to eliminate or reduce our fees
okay it's not good at your sure can I
ask one more clarifying one yeah I think
what would be great is to stay on the
the topic of what's before us tonight
which is the two motions so I really
what I'm worried about is turning this
discussion onto motions into a
discussion on impact fees and so if it's
germane to the motions that are on the
table and the school district being in a
different position or the same position
as last year yes you can ask a question
that ok so last year the robust
discussion there was a whole lot of
folks from school board and school staff
that came here when we had this
discussion about the amount of the
impact fee so there's a lot of you know
robust discussion as we're referring to
now so now there you're here and I'm
hearing from you is you're okay with
whatever we do versus the message I got
very glad to clear last year was you did
not want us to do anything but what you
recommended and and that was a hard
discussion to have because of our
feelings so I want to clarify is you're
okay with whatever the council decides
that's that's bottom line yes yes
neither option council member almost as
well is to just make sure when this goes
back to committee that the school
district is aware of that question it
has a time to prepare an answer so we're
not putting the head of the school board
answering for her board without having
checked with them so we could note the
question allow them to prepare a
response for infrastructure services so
it could be shared with everyone and if
we're good with that I can let them sit
back down and I can continue with
questions and then I believe
councilmember winter Stein said he's
ready to make a motion
it wasn't I got some questions yep
gotcha councilmember Goodman had her
hand up nope accounts present marks I
want to ask Trish again I'm not sure I
understood there seems like there was a
question about whether and if we were to
go with the district's recommendation
whether there would necessarily I
thought I heard you say something to the
effect that we would need to have an IMC
change any Howard I don't believe that's
the case I believe we don't need an IMC
change if we are going to go with the
district's recommendation it's not as
much a change as we change the numbers
from last year and put in the new
numbers from this year see I'm seeing
the IMC so it's in 3.6 it's in the
school impact fee so I'm going to looked
at 363 and I don't see anything that
changed in 2017 is
there's very there's language that's
basically says that you pass through the
districts that there's a rate schedule
is developed and you pass through that
rate schedule but it's when changes
occur and I don't see any changes in
2017 they're gonna gonna go to the
collar friend we're gonna head over a
city clerk can see the administrator
here to get an answer on does it require
a change to the imc the the eye and see
that school impact fuse it does because
we that's where we adopt we would put
the new fees fees aren't listed in the
items in the items they say they refer
to that the district should develop a
rate schedule and then it says that we
passed through that that rate schedule I
think our legal counsel it says both
section three point six three point one
hundred of subsection a of the IMC says
impact fee shall be imposed upon
development activity in the city as
follows eight thousand seven hundred and
sixty two dollars per single-family
residential unit and three thousand four
hundred and sixty one dollars per Multi
thing getting head nods all around so
it's right in the code I apologize if
indeed it is it's in a session and I
looking for more questions not seeing
anything I might have somebody who would
make motion I'd like to make a motion I
just want one clarification from the
clerk we'll be dealing with these
directions one at a time
let's take them one at a time let's make
a motion and then maybe another motion
rate so I'm gonna move to direct the
administration to draft an agenda bill
and ordinance proposing an amendment to
the aslam usable code to allow the City
Council to have discretion to adopt
school impact fees higher or lower than
proposed by the school district capital
facilities plan
returning to the council at the November
5th 2018 council meeting for referral to
the council services and Safety
Committee is there a second second it's
been moved and seconded discussion
it's my break so this is this is the
first part of this and this says let's
change the IMC to give us the ability to
raise fees or to lower fees in the
future because right now we don't have
that flexibility so it doesn't say we
have to do it doesn't have to say we
have to go up or down but this ordinance
and IMC change would give us that
flexibility which I think would be a
powerful tool to have in the future
Thank You council president Mertz so
unfortunately I'm going to oppose this
motion this is not our money this is we
are collecting it on the behest of the
school district the school district is a
body of publicly elected officials like
ourselves they have to balance the needs
of their constituents against a funding
challenge that is so much harder than
our own because of the Byzantine nature
of state education funding I feel like
this is a very small dollar amount no
one has shown that the difference
between what we would collect and what
they would want to collect would have a
potential impact on anybody we've seen
that the amount that they would want to
collect represents point five half of 1%
of the capital outlay that they normally
do so it's a it's a small amount of
money and I feel like if the situation
were reversed and they were collecting
money on our behest and we had come to
an intelligent decision about why we
wanted to do what we would do I don't
think we would want to have to justify
ourselves to them and so I think that
for that reason I'm gonna oppose this
measure this evening in for
councilmember Goodman councilmember we
understand I'm going to support the
motion just for the very reason that
it's provides flexibility it doesn't it
doesn't require us to do anything but it
provides flexibility and that's the
reason I support it
council member we're interesting I agree
with what Stacy said
and I'm gonna add something a perception
that's been developing in my mind as we
sit here and the fees that we calculate
for parks for police for transportation
I've sat in this room numerous times
over the years and gone through the
process of trying to understand how we
calculate impact fees what are the state
laws governing our the calculation of
impact fees how they can be used and
I've seen enough from the school
district side of things to believe that
they're not they don't have the same set
of rules or constraints upon them for
their impact fees in fact there's
something in our packet tonight which is
really startling to me it was an answer
to one of the questions number three
that the committee got an answer to
about the question of a calculation of
the estimate of receiving five hundred
thousand dollars in on and on and on the
answer goes on the school district is
very conservative in estimating the
amount of impact fees received over a
six year period and here's the key part
for me by law the six-year capital
budget must be based on quote secured
funds unquote like the bond that passed
in 2016
since impact fees are not secured a low
amount was established for the six-year
capital budget that tells me that if I
was budgeting and I had a law that said
I must use secured funds for my capital
budget impact fees are one of these
things well they're available to me but
I cannot plan and a significant part of
my capital requirements based upon those
funds I have to look at these secured
funds so so I'm sure there's more to it
but what's very clear is that impact
fees have a role and are guided by law
for school districts different than what
we have here now I could be wrong and
somebody now hopefully will come forward
and clarify that for me so all of that
is is to say that I think we're having a
lot of conversation but we may
doing it from the wrong basis we're
going from the basis that we understand
as a city and there may be some there
may be different elements actually in
effect for school districts having said
that for all of the from the motion
that's on the table I do agree it gives
us flexibility I do also agree with what
Tola had to say and yet we've been
blessed with some very reasonable
leadership at the school district but
who knows what's gonna happen in a
couple years and they might come back
with something and we might really
disagree and now this law would give us
that capability so I am gonna support
the motion thank you any other comments
before I call for the vote
council member Ramos yes um in our last
discussion a year ago I was kind of
mentioned something similar to council
president is that I didn't want to
direct another entity on how to do their
business and I went along with that last
year my question is which as you present
is that your capital program is you've
come up with a hundred percent of the
cost of the program the school district
has and then they split that out by
shares of new development versus
existing development so the way I feel
is if you don't in County says half goes
to future development have two existing
folks if you change that proportion then
you're asking the existing folks to pay
more than their half their share for
development which is what part that
bothers me that means those of us who
live here I have to continue to pay an
increase part of the share for the
impact of others so if you take less
than that only that 50% discount then
that that bill shifts to us because you
have 100 percent of a budget yet your
your cost is not going down it's still
there someone's gonna pay that cost and
who is and it already splits it now
half-and-half between existing residents
and future residents and I think that's
a fair split and as you look at that
that ability to change that I'm gonna
have to go with that flexibility for us
to look at that more closely because I
don't want to have to explain that to
someone on the street why I just said
you have to pay more than the future
resident for the
impact dad I'd have a hard time
explaining so I'm gonna support this
thank you other comments before we call
for the vote
deputy council president parties so
after going through everything that we
had talked through and in the past years
regarding impact fees I did really
appreciate the robust conversation that
we had at services and as we start to
run through this and and better
understand what as a council we would
like to do but keeping everything in
mind including what council president
marts has talked about and what we've
heard from our partners on the school
board having the flexibility to to be
able to maneuver and make decisions on
on this council I think is important so
for that reason and because of the
flexibility I'll support the motion
additional comments nobody's hand up
I'll read the motion again it is to
direct the administration to draft an
agenda bill and ordinance proposing an
amendment to the Issaquah Municipal Code
to allow the City Council to have
discretion to adopt school impact fees
higher or lower than proposed by the is
request school district capital
facilities plan returning to Council at
the November 5th 2018 council meeting
for referral to the council services and
Safety Committee all those in favor say
aye aye opposed nay
it passed the six to one with council
president Mart's in opposition is there
a second motion there is I'd like to
move to refer agenda bill 7640 to the
November 14 2018 services and Safety
Committee meeting where the draft
ordinance amending imc 3.6 3.1 hundred
Herrin a closed parent to increase the
school impact piece is identified in the
is quest school districts 2018 capital
facilities plan except only applying a
50% discount required by King County
formula returning to the full counter on
December 3rd 2018 for a final action is
there a second member hunt it's been
moved and seconded discussion
provide a little clarity on the 50% so
it's not 50% of the cost of new
construction of school facilities it's
50% of the percentage of the new
construction that is attributable to new
people moving into the district so it's
not we are actually giving a 50%
discount to the developers for these
impact fees and so along the lines of
where council member Ramos was that is
money that has will be generated because
we need to pay for the new schools
because we have growth and so because
the school district has bonding
authority they will be able to collect
that money and it will it'll translate
into increase property taxes for the
estate
residents of Issaquah and so I think it
requires some additional discussion I
think sending it back to services and
safety for further investigation makes
sense and then bring it back for a final
decision on the 3rd December so that we
can make our obligation to final action
on this before the end of the year as a
president Mart's so I will actually
support this going to committee because
having said earlier that I believe that
committee chairs should have generally
speaking latitude on bills and how they
get routed I will support it but I will
be looking for a really compelling
argument about why we believe we know
better about how the district should be
funding its capital projects than the
district does you council president
Mertz is there anyone else who'd like to
make a comment councilmember winter
Stein councilmember Goodman I won't be
supporting this as well and I thought
Chris and bill gave very compelling
arguments why then no discount
beyond 50% but we'll wait to decide that
issue later but I will be supporting
this motion as a member winter Stein
I'll be supporting the motion as well I
did a little bit of math and you know
the difference for a single-family home
between 50 and 60 percent discount is
$3,800 and and I know already that this
is kind of a small percentage of the
overall capital budget there I say all
that because there feels like there's a
lot of symbolism in this move rather
than a practical financial stewardship
of public resources and I hope to avoid
symbolic moves I would much prefer that
we take an action that if it is you know
counter to what the school district has
carefully considered and proffered to us
that we have a very sound basis and it
not just be symbolism thank you
council member Ramos yeah I want to
clarify again for me that these two
motions the one we just pass it one more
talking about here are not decisions the
decision is to send them to committee
for further discussion and then I'm
hoping this work they'll have more
robust discussions and the school
district will be there and very involved
in explaining how they feel how they
work it all out and get that good
discussion going so that it's clear so
when it comes back those questions I all
have in my mind will get answered
because there are a lot like I say I
don't like to tell other people what to
do but at the same time I don't like to
I like to spread the tax burden out
fairly amongst all that are receiving
benefits and explaining that is a good
thing to do so this this one is a little
hard for me because as I say we'll get
the explanation but this one gives no
leeway it doesn't give a flexibility
like the first one did this just says
you shall and without consideration of
anything I don't like shells when we
don't need shells so I would be
supporting this but definitely looking
forward to a lot of good committee work
and answers coming
forward after that epidural president
batiste I'll I'll support the motion as
presented so we can go back to services
and safety and talk about this again I I
had already talked about what some of my
reservations were and I would one of the
questions that that I would like to see
answered is to better understand if this
were to go forward how does that impact
the school district and their capital
budget and and to have some information
about that and be able to go back to
services and talk this through one more
time now that we've gotten a chance to
pass this by full council thank you any
other comments before we go to vote I'll
read the motion again it is to move to
refer a B seven six four zero to the
November 14th 2018 council services and
Safety Committee meeting with a draft
ordinance amending imc 3.6 3.1 hundred
paren a to increase the school impact
fees as identified in his quest school
districts 2018 capital facilities plan
except only applying the 50% discount
required by the King County formula
returning to the full council on
December 3rd 2018 for final action all
those in favor say aye aye opposed that
passes unanimously they would like to
thank school board president and more
and Steve Crawford for coming in tonight
and taking the time to address the
council when there was a question thank
you very much
Thank You Trish thank you next item on
our agenda is under regular business
item B is now a b7 six six one proposed
amendments to central standards table
4.3 be permitted land uses and are we
going to start with council member hunt
first and then how do you guys want to
proceed with this conversation council
member hunt
and I like to make a motion okay I had
moved to refer a B seven six six one
proposed amendments to central standards
Table four point three be permitted land
uses to the November 1st 2018 Council
and in short committee to allow the
administration the opportunity to
address housing density and diversity
concerns with prohibiting duplexes three
flexes and four flexes within the urban
core and mixed use zones of central
Issaquah returning to the full council
on or before December 17th 2018 is there
a second second I can did by
councilmember Goodman um councilman
Brown would you like to start the
discussion yes so I'm proposing to have
a more in-depth discussion about the
residential land uses in the central
Issaquah land use table there were a
number of changes that were proposed
within the agenda bill it did go through
the Planning Policy Commission and they
had a lot of a lot of discussion around
all of the land uses including the
residential land uses I think that in
particular I would like to have more
discussion around that the residential
land uses because in the current chain
in the current draft agenda bill there
are changes particularly regarding the
use of residential land uses other than
multifamily with five or more attached
so primarily that would likely be
apartment buildings and it would allow
the same residential and uses for the
urban core and the mixed use zone I
think that we would benefit from looking
at the intent of the different zones as
stated within the central Issaquah plan
the intent of the mixed use zone is
stated to be different in terms of the
residential density from the urban core
and I don't know that that's reflected
within the current land use within the
agenda bill so I think that warrants for
the discussion the mixed use zone
currently the description is that the
intent of the mixed use district is to
provide mix
use neighborhoods with Class A office
buildings retail uses high quality
medium density residential development
and existing service businesses whereas
the urban core the intent is to provide
a dense vibrant pedestrian friendly
urban environment uses our mixed
residential commercial and office with
active pursuers that provide pedestrian
interest and the mixed use zone is also
a very large stone it's 293 acres
relative to the urban core which is 248
acres and those may be approximate but I
think that we should look at those look
at the differences look at how we want
to meet those intended land zones and
then the intended zoning and then also I
would like to have a discussion and have
the administration prepare information
about how this might line up with our
housing strategy because the housing
strategy one of the considerations
strategy seven from the housing strategy
work plan is to mitigate or offset the
deterrence to condominium construction
and under that there's a policy
consideration the city should take an
interest in its housing having a
composition of both ownership and rental
including in central Issaquah and then
there's also strategy 8 which is
incorporate code provisions to increase
the potential diversity of housing types
built in the city and they go into
detail about how there are there's sort
of a disconnect between the need for
housing that's for one and two-person
households and smaller unit types and
then also just a need for very variable
different housing types and also the
missing middle housing types so I think
we need to look at that and I think we
need to look at how mixed-use would be
different in terms of land use from E
from the urban core so that's why I'm
proposing that this go back to the land
ensure thanks councilmember Goodman as a
chair of lineage sure I fully support
that and this is a perfect case for an
agenda bill that should be referred back
to committee it's a very interesting new
issue that has not been talked about at
all and it's been very thoughtfully Rea
and I think that it's important to have
that work at the committee level so the
committee can be can be briefed on it
and fully discuss it and then it can
come back to Council for a decision
Thank You deputy council president patís
I'll be supporting this this evening and
would just echo what council
councilmember Goodman just spoke to I
think that this is something that is new
and should come before committee and
glad that it was raised by councilmember
hunt council person emergence so I will
also be supporting it and that again the
concept of the committee chair I care
greatly what they think even though as
we already know Stacy's not going to be
there and I get to but I will ask I want
to make sure that when we see this in
committee I sort of want to reiterate
what I've heard earlier in terms of
information that should come before the
committee I think of this in terms of
there's urban core there's mixed use and
sort of cross that with what is the
central Issaquah plan say about these
spaces and also I want to understand
what our growth targets are and sort of
how we see this split and I want to make
sure that whatever we do we do within
the spirit of the central district well
plan and we also do within the spirit of
the growth management great any more
comments I have a question for the
council I think what I heard from Vicki
Vicki and both Tola was explaining the
difference between these different types
of zoning and then looking at in terms
of their zoning for urban core and mixed
juice also doing it in line with growth
targets and lining it up with a housing
strategy I did want to ask one
clarifying question and that is that
when you look at these zoning maps the
zoning designations look more like
blankets where they cover multiple block
areas and the reality is not every block
builds out the same way
I'm a question I guessed Ola is in
talking about growth targets and in
meeting the intent of central square
plan I assumed you would be expecting
staff to come back with some sort of
assumptions about build-out because it's
not a simple blanket theory it's going
to be there's a target that mass transit
supports and a density that mass transit
isn't supported and how would you get
that mix on the valley floor assuming
that you're approving something that's a
blanket however each person may build
out not all the same so I'm assuming
that's the kind of linkage you were
looking for I mean I'm not looking for
and thus you know here's a you know 3d
projection of what those will look like
but it's you know we are on track
towards a certain amount of development
in the valley and this might nudge it
one way or the other and it would make
it still reasonably easy to hit our
targets we think it might make it hard
to hit our targets you know just sort of
a broad level conversation I don't need
a as you say block by block analysis I
just want to understand
I'm also as much as you know I mentioned
the targets it's as much to me about
what this central Issaquah plan says
there was so much public engagement
around the central issue qua plan and we
have learned a lot since we put the
original plan in place and I want to
make sure that this is still that this
is moving forward in line with that plan
okay that helps a lot I was just
picturing your former discussions last
year where Council was talking about
density happening outside of the core
and whether or not that was an intended
or an unintended consequence and
assuming that the transitions at the
edges of central Issaquah are meant to
transition into single-family homes and
whether or not you could still meet the
density is something that councilmember
hunt was proposing was true plate it
thank you any other comments and I will
read the notion refer a b7 661 proposed
amendments to central standards table
4.3 be permitted land uses to the
November 1st 2018 council and ensure
committee to allow the
the opportunity to address housing
density and diversity concerns with
prohibiting duplexes triplexes and for
plexus within the urban core and mixed
use zones of central Issaquah returned
to the full council on or before
December 17 2018 all those in favor say
aye aye
always opposed it carries unanimously
moving on to good of the order do
council members have anything for good
of the order I am going to provide a few
upcoming council meeting items on
October 27th there will be a special
council meeting at 6 p.m. it's a public
hearing on the 2019 budget and it will
be on levee and revenue sources on
October 22nd there is a council work
session at 6:30 p.m. it will be
deliberations for the 2019 preliminary
budget on October 23rd they'll be a
Council of the whole meeting at 6:30
p.m. the agenda items include the washed
I 90 Front Street interchange
justification report update squak tells
community connections King County Solid
Waste Comprehensive Plan on October 29th
will be a council work session at 6:30
p.m.
again deliberations for the 2019
preliminary budget you'll be very busy
this month and on November 5th at the
regular council meeting at 7:00 p.m.
agenda items include a public hearing on
guess what the 2019 preliminary budget
and adoption of the 2019 levy and
revenue sources and anyone interested in
the complete budget schedule can find it
online at is cuihua gov slash 2019
budget executive session I'm actually
going to propose a five-minute break
before we move into executive session so
we'll be recessed for five minutes
you
you
you
well okay we are back on the air and the
next item on our agenda this evening is
the executive session as earlier
announced there will be an executive
session held this evening to discuss
items related to pending and potential
litigation for RCW 42.3 0.11 o paren one
prayer an eye and property acquisition
per RCW 42.3 0.11 o / n 1 / n b these
items are expected to take at least 20
minutes no action is anticipated to
follow an open session we will now Rize
recess into executive session at 9:43
you
we are back in open session at 10:24
p.m. there being no further business the
meeting is adjourned at 10:24 p.m.
you