It is 7:01
p.m. As chair, I will call this February
24th meeting, the ISS club park board to
order. We'll start with roll call. Like
start the screen, but no one's on the
screen, which is amazing.
Start with the uh Martha Ginser.
>> I'm here.
Jeff renewal excuse
is no longer on the board. Excellent.
Marley Waxi here,
>> James Pushi, excuse
>> Diana Ren
and Hammond,
>> Tim Mley,
>> Chris Co.
David uh present and Brian also
>> here
and here's
a good
>> um we have no voting tonight correct
forum
um has everybody had the chance to
review the minutes from the last
meeting.
Anybody have any corrections or edits?
There are no corrections on behalf of
the board. The minutes are approved.
>> Public comment. I don't think we have
anybody in building. I do know we have
some email submitts.
>> We did. And we don't have anyone online
e uh um either. Uh yes, two written
submittals uh came in. I forwarded one
from a neighbor of Timberlake Park. Um
had some comments about the our park
rules conversation. Um mostly pertaining
to um interest in um off leash dogs and
enforcement of off leash dogs as well as
campfires, prohibition of campfires. Um
Connie Marsh also provided public
comment um suggesting some work around
special events um and also um some other
comments. So we will like we've done in
the past with written comments we'll add
those to the minutes uh for the meeting
for the record.
>> We will now begin our regular business
of the meeting. We will have a little
bit of switch up in our order. It's
listed under regular business. Um, and
so we will pivot to bullet point B and
we will start with the ISQA climate
action plan presented by Stacy V
McKinsky.
>> I see.
>> There's
Why don't we You're quick.
>> Yeah.
>> Like the wolf and picture.
So, we just kicked it off with Stacy
going climate action plan. Do you mind
if we do that first and then Okay.
>> I haven't even opened the presentation
yet. Are you sure?
>> Yeah.
>> Okay.
>> AC, you're able to share. Yes.
>> Well, thank you again for making time on
the agenda tonight. um as a reminder as
back in the fall, I'll summarize a bit
what we discussed last fall about the
final date. Um but tonight we are
um tonight we're here really just to
talk through an update on the IAP
progress and then um speak some more uh
in some more detail around the proposed
revisions to the natural system targets
and actions.
Uh tonight we're looking for your
feedback particularly on the revised
natural systems target and then on the
revised action concepts for including
the time action plan update.
So just as a reminder um especially if
you weren't here in the meeting last
fall uh the climate action plan is
really the foundation for the city's
climate work. It was adopted by council
in December 2021 following a pretty
extensive engagement with community
members and different interest group in
order to develop shared priorities. For
our five-year update, we're really
focused on revising actions that were
either really specific. They talked
about a particular campaign or project
or program that's either been completed
or maybe was too specific and we want to
broaden it. Um and then we're also
looking at some of the targets that um
needed revising or weren't well
connected to the action.
Um so again tonight uh we are really
interested in your feedback on the
natural systems target which is one of
the few targets that we're touching in
the climate.
A reminder, what we're trying to achieve
with the natural system section of the
plan is it's really focused on
increasing tree canopy to 55% uh over
the next nine years. Um and doing that
by maintaining and expanding tree canopy
and then the this section of the plan
also does conserve on water resources. I
talk about conserving water resources.
We don't currently have a specific
target associated with that. I'll in a
moment Our
progress to date for updating the
climate action plan involved working
with the committees which we talked
about last fall and several several
members of the park board participated
in that process. The input from the
committees was then brought back to the
boards and commissions for review. Your
feedback was taken to the environmental
board. Um they further worked the
actions and the plan. Um, and now we're
coming back to you all for input. One
other step that we had that's a bit less
uh relevant for this group is we did
meet with our planning, development, and
environmental council committee a few
weeks ago. They've asked us to come back
with some big bold policies that'll
really move the needle on reducing
climate emissions. Most of those are
going to end up in the transportation,
buildings, and energy area. a less
impactful discussion this evening.
So, reminder of the feedback you all
provided this fall. Um, you all talked
about having the target uh consider
wildfire risk. We don't want to expand
our tree canopy so much that it puts us
at higher risk for wildfire. There was a
lot of discussion around concern around
invasives and especially how invasive
species impact tree canopy.
um interest in focusing more on water
conservation
um which we are looking at including we
won't necessarily talk about that today
community gardens again we are looking
at including some actions around
expanding community gardens but speak to
those much today
um the group is also interested in
looking at drought tolerant landscaping
policies um we have been talking with
our planning department and those are
actually incorporated into our code. Um,
so we won't speak much to those today.
And then there was a lot of interest in
habitat
that
great. So any questions on that
background before we jump into
proposed revisions and discussion around
all right so the first one which is
likely to be the bulk of our discussion
tonight is around whether or not we
should revise the target for our natural
system section of the climate plan. Um,
again, that target currently reads 55%
tree canopy by 2035.
Um, currently we're at just a little
over 51% of our tree canopy, although
that last study was done before the bomb
site loan, but I think Dan doesn't
anticipate actually surprisingly major
impacts from that. Um, we do know that
going from our current tree canopy cover
to 55%
would require around 300 additional
acres of tree canopy.
We recognize that having ambitious
stretch targets is good, but we also
want targets that are achievable or have
a chance of being um achieved.
Um, one of the biggest jumps previously
in our tree canopy back in the mid 2010s
was um after Talis and Highland um the
Highlands uh developments once those
trees came to maturity we saw a big jump
in our tree canopy. So if you can
imagine those areas of developments and
the trees that are reaching maturity,
that's about what we would need to see
across the rest of the city to meet this
target.
Um so we've discussed several options
with the environmental board. They were
very mixed in their feedback. Um so I'm
really interested in your all's input
today. Um one option we discussed was
let's keep that target. It is very
ambitious. it's going to be very
challenging to achieve, but it's good to
challenge ourselves. Um, we also talked
about an alternative that would be a no
net loss tree canopy. So, that
recognizes that we want to at least stay
where we are. There may be some really
important environmental projects where
we have to take out some trees like a
stream restoration project, but
ultimately we want to keep our canopy um
at the same level across the city.
So those are um kind of one option is
either to keep the tree canopy target as
it is or possibly replace that current
target.
The board also talked about adding in
additional targets. Um, one would be
around a tree equity score that looks at
our tree distribution. So making sure
that we have improved distribution of
trees across the neighborhoods um so
that neighborhoods that experience more
open heat island effects um or don't
experience the many benefits of trees um
that we're really focusing our our
efforts in improving canopy in those
areas. The other target that the
environmental board was interested in
was actually adding a new target to get
to all the other actions in this area.
Um something either around riparian
habitat or conservation.
So I wanted to pause here and get some
feedback. Again the environmental board
was really split on whether we keep the
55% or transition to the no net props.
So curious on our board input on that as
well as the potential for adding
additional targets.
>> What are the actual
achieve?
>> Yeah, great question. So the one right
now that we have in place is our entry
code which is really at protecting and
tree canopy. Um but a lot of the other
actions focus around incentives.
We did a tree giveaway program uh this
year. There could be other incentives
especially on creative property for
retaining trees. Um so that would be
part of our challenge is coming up with
a mix of policy programs and incentives
acquisitions
on
what the underlying motivation
target.
>> Yeah. Um I think in terms of the in why
we want to increase tree canopy
essentially. Yeah. So I think part of
that just comes from all the benefits
that trees provide everything from
habitat to the cooling um in terms of
addressing urban heat island um to the
clean air. So um originally how that 55%
was set looking back um at the content
when the plan was developed is I think
because we had seen a 4% around a 4%
increase back in the early 2010s. Um
there was interest in seeing another an
increase
during the um 15 or so year that this
was set for.
>> Yeah.
>> So it really was it was at the time it
was set it was aspirational.
>> Yes. Aspirational not based on any
planned projects or acquisitions
as far as standard I can tell.
um cities around us know what their like
where do we sit as far as
>> they're lower I know in urban forest
management plan others may have some
comparison but we're definitely one of
the most well treated cities
especially across the east side I can't
necessarily speak to north area
>> yeah it's a great question Marlene I
don't the most recent tree canopy study
that was done. Uh that was one of the
benchmarks. Um I can try and find it. Um
either send it to you all, but it just
it was a good comparison of Puget Sound
Cities and where we stand. And Stacy's
correct. We're we're very high on the
list when you look at percentage of
canopy cover.
Um I think part of our board wants to
retain a very ambitious target and feels
like we should be striving to increase
our treat.
Um I think other members of the board be
because of all the the benefits um
carbon sequestration didn't mention
other members of the board um and some
that work in habitat restoration field
recognize that some environmental
projects habitat restoration projects
we're going to need there's going to be
some tradeoffs we may need to use some
trees in order to do some really great
projects
community. Um, but we can balance that
out by planting trees.
So, I think um, and just recognizing
the amount of acreage that's needed to
increase the canopy and
having a plan for that
very likely.
You mentioned the first major event was
that we really projects having these
more trees. Um
so for us to make these other these next
jumps without residential changes
without larger social projects um
fruiting more mature trees uh would the
city like parks be able to help increase
right? Is there something we can do in
the parks department to to intrigue or
to grow more trees? I guess to increase
canopy.
>> Um it's my first question. Basically,
how much impact can we have in the
public sector?
>> Um and also from a safety standpoint,
right? We talk about tree code. I think
after the bomb, we're all really aware
that um right trees can be really
damaging to our structures um both
public and private. Uh so one of the
concerns is if we mess with the code too
much to make it really hard to remove
trees that you know are a risk to to
home or structure structures. How much
of a concern is that? Um, and then on
the flip side of that, because they have
such great tree coverage, um, I think
landslides and things like that, we have
so much critical slope here, right? Um,
we have some of the most stable
slopes of of our neighbors. Um, so I'd
be interested to know about balancing
that again that impacts us on a public
level and that's safety.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. No, great questions, Hannah, that
really I think speak to trade-offs,
right? And this becomes a really big
trade-offs conversation in terms of the
role the public property can play and
and should play in canopy, not only
increasing the canopy, but sustaining
the canopy and um ensuring the canopy
stays healthy. Um yes we through green
isqua and through our urban forest
program through the urban forest plan
that right came before you all um tree
succession planting replanting trees is
going to be it's a constant it's it's a
constant goal um I think until we get
into that routine and see the results of
that which is often 10 years later um I
I think we're expecting when we start
looking at percentage change. A lot of
what we're doing is sustaining
um that canopy cover. There might be an
increment increase, but it's really more
about health of the canopy cover. Um and
you're absolutely right. You know, when
you look at our forested slopes, um
those trees are and the and the roots
are doing a lot for stabilizing u slope
and um dealing with water. you know, one
one Doug fur tree um don't know the
stat, but it's an amazing amount of
water that one Doug fur um absorbs. So,
um I think it's more about sustaining
than growing. Um if you were to again
look at it might be worth um sharing
with you all the the most recent tree
canopy um study that was done a couple
years ago. A lot of the area the
potential area is in central Isiqua.
That's probably where our our biggest
tree desert is when when you think of,
you know, north of Tibets Valley Park, a
lot of those, you know, storage
facilities and the top pot donut and
right a lot of big lots that don't have
a lot of trees. That's so a lot of the
potential Stacy was mentioning 300
acres. It's currently privately owned.
Um and um but as as central Isqua
redevelops there is potential even in
just street trees um probably you know
adding to canopy um but again I don't
know that that's going to be a 4%. So
trying to be realistic I think is really
what Stacy's question is.
I'll just say that I'm personally not in
favor
overly ambitious targets in this
respect. Um, first of all, I don't
necessarily think that these are a
perfect proxy for environmental
things like wildlife habitat. All that
kind of depend on what species are. um
whether there's continuous travel
workers for wildlife or whether it's
just you know one tree here or there
which doesn't necessarily
provide
habitat
um but then the other thing is we're
talking on a hyper scale within
and what I see happening when we kind of
come out uh and look at our neighbors is
that if it's increasingly difficult to
develop it's here in developers go to
like Maple Valley and they're taking
down you know just acres and acres of
trees and so from that perspective
um you're creating these externalities
by maintaining a stricter standard here
>> like I like Diana
she's singing from my playbook over
Chris,
>> I don't know if anybody would have has
had the time yet, but you know, the
question that came up in my mind
immediately is so you said in the 2010s
we saw an increase of 4% which got us
from something to something else. How
much of that is just all the trees
growing a little bit
>> and then less the few that these get
taken down or whatever planted. But you
know how much of that getting to 55
would be achieved just by natural growth
of what we have. Um, you know, it's
almost like a project for a summer
intern or something to spend a lot of
time digitizing some aerial photos and
figuring out what what actually happens
because you might be able to get close
to that without trying too hard and then
the other part becomes more achievable
or something that actually happened by
active actions.
>> Yeah, that's an excellent question. I
believe there's another tree canopy
study that's going to be done in the
next year or so. Um, and that may give
us an idea of where we are and I I'll
talk to Dan whether that shows a mature
and trees so that we could get an idea.
Some of what I think I'm hearing um in
this conversation, Stacey, and some of
what certainly Dan and I have talked a
lot about is I as this goes back to the
Environ board, I I think
quantity isn't the only metric.
Um so, you know, I I'm I'd rather have a
realistic quantity, but then also a
metric that talks about canopy health.
So whether it's 51%
but but getting healthier um is also a
really really important metric. So it's
not just about how much, it's how well.
>> I like what they're about this equity as
well. And so I think to your point on
quality, it's like where are the places
where we should be focusing our effort?
We should do that.
>> So I think that's really great.
Yeah, that's what I was going to speak
to a bit match as we or further as we
know that there's areas around the city
that really lack that tree canopy and so
having at least from public side focus
our efforts in those areas throughways
programs making sure that people have
access to those benefits.
>> I think I discussion
>> I agree with a lot of that. I mean I
don't know enough about this
field to provide any real.
It's like one of those things is like
you're trying to strive
from 51 to 55 is the the cost to get
there like mountains exponentially where
it's like when I look around and as
discussed and we saw the survey from
last time is how we how we rate compared
to our neighbors is we're already I feel
in a really good spot and so like the m
the maintenance of that and the
continuing to to work on that but maybe
not have that lofty goal of like pushing
even though it does have all those
additional benefits. I think kind of
where my brain kind of falls into is we
have this beautiful thing already. Let's
secure it and make it better, but not
necessarily need to push to make it just
a bigger number.
>> Great. Well, I will take this feedback
to the environmental board and then I
anticipate we'll end up we the
environmental board will provide a
recommendation to council. We may show
different options um there, but we'll
definitely provide
questions
target forward.
Um so next
all right um I'm gonna walk through five
actions um to get your feedback. These
are follow-up conversations from the
fall.
Um and I'll go one at a time just so we
can focus in on each one. Um so the
first one uh the current action in our
plan talks about implementing um the
park plan and so what we are proposing
is to adjust that action to include the
updated name of the park plan and then
to add in the urban forest management
plan that was not adopted prior to the
um and then the other piece of this
action is instead of calling out very
specific actions in the park planner
forest management plan to speak
generally that the IAP is focused on the
actions in those other plans that help
us meet the climate.
So a fairly minor revision here really
just to encompass
that pretty sums up what we talked about
last time pretty well.
>> And I'll just note these are the longer
descriptions I provided for you. We'll
have a a short action name for each of
these.
>> And just a time check, Stacy, we're
going to try and wrap this up like
>> five minutes.
>> Y
>> yeah, great.
>> Um okay. And then the next one, um this
is focused in on uh increasing
uh trees in the private area with
private land owners. Um I'll just note
here that uh the language around
sequestration was flagged and so we'll
providing more general terms uh for what
that actually mean which is absorbing
carbon taking in carbon um just so it's
to the um but this this action is really
not changing from the current action. Um
the one idea that did come up was to
include some language around that
distribution and looking at tree equity
um to align with a new target.
Any concerns questions here?
>> We can do that. Yeah, the current action
focuses on trees, but absolutely
>> Yes. Do you have any recommendations on
>> Yeah.
Yeah. I'll I'll talk with Dan.
Right. Uh the third one is a brand new
action that looks at invasive
species and addressing invasive species
that impact our forest health. Uh there
was a lot of interest in focusing on
private. So that's reflected in the
section.
questions, concerns about the language
here.
>> And I think all of these that are
private property related are are
volunteer in nature, not not mandates.
>> Yeah.
>> Yes.
>> Yep. So, uh the previous one would be
programs like our tree giveaway program.
Uh this one, yeah, a voluntary program
where we offer education outreach
services to support our department.
Um the next one is also new. Uh for a
little bit of background here, we were
considering developing a wildlife and
habitat resilience section of our
community resilience focus area in the
plan. Uh we felt like this action better
aligned with the natural system section.
Soing including it there. This is around
enhancements for riparian protection,
flood plane, uh looking at strategic
acquisitions,
um and then also supporting the
resilience of wildlife. Um it's a little
different than the rest of the climate
action plan, but it's being proposed
because this was such a big area focus
with the comprehensive plan update and
currently the IAP nor other CD plants
really address topic. Um so essentially
this is around habitat resilience um in
order to improve the ability to respond
to the changes.
I don't know if it feels like action
like supporting like it's just the other
ones are a little stronger. Yeah.
>> So I don't know if you guys answer, but
I you guys are looking at that one. Like
is there a call to action there?
>> Right. What's the program?
>> Yeah.
>> The other ones just seem a little bit
more.
>> Yeah.
>> And the nexus between I mean protection
of wildlife absolutely important, but
what's the nexus with climate?
>> And that's Yes. So what we've spoken
about is trying to build that resilience
for a changing climate because there's a
real strong interest to see this
incorporated into the climate action
plan um for better alignment with the
comp plan. But yes, we will work on some
boarding here and figuring out what that
call action
we are
do these quick. Um, so then the last one
is a revision to a current plan or
excuse me a current action. We wanted to
bring it before you because it is so
related to many
programs like green is um and so wanted
to make sure that you all were able to
provide feedback. Um the current
language in the IAP is really focused on
a specific climate outreach campaign and
what we're recommending is broadening
that to um include additional public
engagement activities that really focus
on education and climate action. Um, we
wanted to provide some flexibility so
that staff can uh really implement the
the best programs, outreach, um, and
education opportunities. So this could
be everything from Dan leading a hike
with or leading a greenness event and
speaking about how this supports our
climate action in the city or hike being
led by a community partner where they
connect it back
uh uh climate work. So um really
provides kind of a lot of opportunity
to reach the public
question any feedback on this.
This was rapid feedback session. So um
you do have a memo with additional
details uh or with the details on all
these actions. Um so please feel free to
reach out to our team or the park team
and we can additional feedback.
Um what we will be doing next is
bringing this input to the environmental
board as we work on further revisions to
the climate action plan that will be um
uh taken to the PD committee and then
eventually put through the council
process.
The last item I was going to mention um
is that our Pickering Barn solar
installation is currently scheduled.
This project's been in the works for a
very long time. Um, so we're looking at
scheduling a ribbon cutting ceremony
likely in early April. So we'll extend
an invite to
have you all at that event
>> completed just before farmers market and
we'll have some solar solar panels and a
great demonstration site as we head into
farmers market. So Stacy, thanks. Really
appreciate it.
>> Thanks for the discussion as well around
tree canopy. Um, important one there.
>> Thank you, Mayor.
>> All right. Next item, Mr. Chair.
>> So, want to have a chance to welcome uh
introduce uh Mayor Mullet. I don't know,
Mayor, if you want to have
>> I would love if people Yeah. people
could say how long they've been on the
park board for and then how long they've
had a connection is awa for would be
great.
>> So, I don't know.
>> Katie, do you want to kick off?
Yes, you start.
>> Oh, Nick, sorry.
>> Um, since 2020,
>> two or three
>> time goes fast. You're having fun.
>> Okay.
19.
It got in 2016. So,
>> okay. Where'd you come from?
>> Minnesota.
>> Oh, wow.
>> Twin Cities.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah. May of last year.
>> Yeah. Got it.
>> Hi, I'm Hannah. I also started May of
last year. Um, you moved to Izzy in
2020.
>> Okay. Co move.
>> Yeah.
>> From where?
>> Awesome.
>> Okay. Seattle to here. Okay.
>> Martha,
two years.
And um, so far, I think I beat everybody
so far, but we beat um, we joined, we've
been in this class since 1990.
>> Oh, wow. Yes. You're ahead right now.
>> Yes.
You got me beat. I'm 06. So
>> my name is Chris. I've been on the park
for nine years, I think. Glad I asked.
>> And we moved here in 2000.
>> Okay.
>> So 2016.
>> Where'd you come from?
>> Uh Seattle and before that California.
>> Okay. Got it. Got it.
>> Cool.
>> Uh David Lou been on the board for four
years now. Um moved family moved here
2017. So,
>> okay. Where from?
>> Um, from San Francisco, actually.
>> Oh, really? Be here. Okay.
>> Ryan Olsson. Um, I think I've been on
the board for four years, give or take.
>> Um, been in Isqua for eight. Prior to
that, uh, Seattle,
Bellingham.
>> Okay. Bellingham. My daughter is a
Western grad.
>> Yeah.
>> One more. Nick, our youth, our youth
representative.
>> Yeah. My name's Nick Wilson. I'm senior
at Gibson High School.
>> Oh,
>> yeah. And this is um about my second
meeting.
>> All right.
>> You get that award?
>> Lived here. Yeah. My whole life
18 years.
>> Well, I appreciate you guys taking some
time. I just wanted to share. I think
I started this role on January 1st. sat
down with the finance director the first
week you start looking at your bonds
that are outstanding and when they
expire and it kind of jumped out at me
that there is a park bond expiring this
year. So I think the way I think about
these things is if you let it expire and
you don't renew it when you go to renew
it the next year now you're raising
people's taxes. So I think there's an
argument to be made to say you have to
actually make sure you ask for the bond
renewal before it expires. So it expires
this year. So that means November of
this year will be our last chance to ask
squad voters do they want to renew this
park bond. And to be honest to put
things in perspective, the King County
parks levy, if you add up what is squad
people pay, it's roughly $4.5 million.
This park bond is a year. This park bond
is $670,000 a year. So it's a drop in
the bucket if you look at a property tax
bill. You're not talking about big
numbers that are really noticeable to
people. And so then I think the proposal
was well let's go ask people to renew
the parks bond and then I worked with
our finance director and our bond
department that would free up roughly 9
or 10 million we can make in park
investments uh right now. And then we
then did this long kind of finance dive
of you know as people pay park
mitigation payments for new projects
everything else we started adding up
what that money came to and we got two
and a half or $3 million. And so now
we're kind of like, oh, there's like 12
or $13 million of investments we can
make. I think going into this current
summer, most communities are struggling
financially. So a lot of the grants that
are out there, you need a match. And so
I think we could be in a very
advantageous place this upcoming summer
to go after a lot of matches if we
decide to move forward on kind of doing
this park bond renewal. And uh and at
the same time, I think I look at the
cost of these projects going forward.
They're not getting any cheaper. And I
think our community is expensive. I'll
be honest. Like the average home here is
a seven figure number. I think the way
people feel like they're getting value
for being in isqua is to have a very
robust parks, trails, and open space
network. I mean, this is literally
probably one of the most beautiful
places in the entire world. I think
people live here because they enjoy the
outdoors. So I think everything we do to
invest in making it easier for people to
enjoy the outdoors is an advantage I
think for the square residents. And so
I'm also open to not only doing the park
bond renewal, not only you know figuring
out the best way to spend the impact fee
money we've been collecting, going after
grants, but then if there's missing
money, I'm also open to doing just a
councilmatic kind of debt issue to
figure out, you know, as we get better
numbers. And so we have a list of
projects based on stuff you guys have
come up with. So this was basically I
think projects we went through a list
that you guys have kind of itemized. I
think uh one of those projects was and
we're going to pass this out. Why don't
we just pass it out?
>> Yes. Uh,
and I think this is I mean it's the
start of the discussion, but we also
there's a clock ticking because we got
to if we want to renew our park bond, we
can't just in my opinion, you can't just
ask voters for to pay taxes without
telling them what they're going to get
in return. And so I think our challenge
is we want to have a voter guide
statement in November that kind of
spells out, hey, these are the things
you might get or this is what we hope to
get if we actually move forward with
this. And and so I think is everyone
does everyone have the list now? Okay.
So the first one you guys may or may I'm
assuming are probably familiar with Yuck
House at Confluence Park. I think his
school obviously has a shortage of
meeting space uh kind of sitting there.
it's not going to ever fix itself. So I
think the thought is I mean we got that
when I was on the council. So I was on
the council 09 to13 that's when we
acquired the confluence parks you know
property and when we got it way back
then the idea was we're going to
refurbish this thing and now it sat for
the last 15 years. Uh so that's one of
them. I think the the Ramos trail head
paving, I think that access to Tiger
Mountain because it's literally right
off the freeway is extremely popular and
it's also like when I was in the state
senate, I don't know if people ever hike
at High Point off exit 20, but I don't
remember that road used to be like like
that thing was just moon craters like
you and so unless you had a four-wheel
drive car like if you try to go with
that thing in a Prius like you were
going to screw up your transmission. We
paved that and it made a huge difference
and giving people access who didn't have
four-wheel drive vehicles to enjoy that
trail head. I think we have the similar
challenge with this, you know, right
there off Sunset. It's a bad parking
lot. It sucks. And and plus there's kind
of a shortage of bathroom facilities. So
I think the thought is pave it, put in a
bathroom and you really kind of
substantially change I think how people
can utilize that access on the Tiger
Mountain which I think would be a huge
win for the community. I think you guys
have acquired some really good
properties uh you know between Bergsma
and Kolkari and I think the thought is
the easier you make it to access trail
networks in those properties it's a
giant win for the community and so I
think that's where the thought for those
projects comes from. I think you'll
start to see a theme here because we're
having geographic diversity but also
park use diversity because now you're
kind of shifting from some of the open
space public meetings trail access to
the next one really goes back to the
work you guys have been doing for the
shared use agreement with the Isqua
school district. I think I will say
campaigning last year, I think what
people really hate is when governments
create unnecessary silos and it's like
you have the city of Isqua, then you
have the Isqua school district, Isqua
school district. It's very territorial
over all their stuff. And so I think our
big goal is how do we break down kind of
that false barrier because at the end of
the day it's all this taxpayer money and
it'd be nice if everyone was kind of
being more open with their facilities to
help each other out and I think we have
a chance to do a couple pilot projects
in that space. I think uh the two ones
that really jump out is is turfing Esqua
Valley Elementary because that, you
know, grassy field is a swamp at recess.
It sucks for kids and and so but that is
also if you did turf it, I mean that
would be great field space. We don't
have to buy anything, right? We're not
making a land acquisition. We're just
taking land that's publicly owned, just
not by us. And yeah, benefits kids at
recess. We get it evenings, we get it
weekends, we get it all summer. And I
think there's a win for the community.
You also have a similar sand lot at
Grand Ridge Elementary behind that which
is right next to kind of our whole
Central Park ecosystem. Once again,
that's where all my kids went. I mean,
that's a crappy in the winter. I mean,
that thing is just not a usable. It's
not a fun place for kids to go out at
recess. So, I think if you were able to
turp that one as well, especially with
proximity to to Central Park and all the
other things, once again, you're opening
up cool opportunities and I think it's
really sending a message to the school
district. It's time for us to do as much
cooperation as possible across all our
facilities, not just park facilities. We
want to use the auditorium of the high
school for more community events as
well. Uh beyond that, you see some other
ideas. I I think memorial field is a
really interesting one. I mean that is
also and some of these have POS
challenges, right? And I think you could
kill two birds with one stone of you
know where the technology is there where
you could turf a field without tires.
We're talking court methods now. also
much better for the environment. At the
same time, you kind of create this
barrier where the PAS is basically being
pushed down beneath. And I mean, this is
the forever chemical that just
unfortunately is present in this squad
because of the way we cleaned all our
fire equipment back in the day. And uh
but there is a chance with Memorial
Field where I think you could turf it
and solve the PAS issues at the same
time. That also feeds into the Dodd
Field which is owned by the school
district where the Little League stuff
happens that has really high PAS levels.
And so I think there's some potential
not only better public use wins but at
the same time some environmental health
wins as well. Uh and then the final
couple which is ironic cuz I am a tennis
player but
I will say side note when we made state
we made pickle ball the state sport of
Washington at Bass Senate 48 to1. I was
the only person who said someone has to
stand up for the tennis community. But
that being said I play pickle ball all
the time. So, it's a it's a fun sport
and uh and I do think it gets a lot of
usage and so we don't at this point have
any dedicated pickle ball courts.
Obviously, we're just doing the tennis
courts which works great, but I think
there is an opportunity here. And then
Tibbitz Valley, I mean, this is I think
there's a lot of cool stuff happening
potentially at Tibbitz. Uh I think when
you doorbell the Talis neighborhood,
their main complaint is Highland's got
all the parks. Talis just got a bunch of
homes and got short changed. We can't
fix that now. It's literally that ship
is sailed. The only thing you can fix is
how do you make Tibets as robust as
possible? It's literally the closest
park to them. At the same time, you
know, I just came from the Sisqua light
rail meeting. We're trying to get light
rail to end right in the middle between
Costco and Target there in the middle of
I90. That's where we want all our future
development to happen. The closest park
for those people is going to end up
being Tibets, I think. And so, we need
to make some huge upgrades and
investments, I think, at Tibbitz. Uh,
this starts with the idea of, you know,
an all-inclusive playground. I think at
the same time,
Lakeside is doing homes up in the
Highlands, and I think we're in
negotiations with them about, you know,
what sort of mitigation payment we can
get for the density they want to put in
up there to make, you know, I don't
know, we want to make a run at the Kelly
Ranch. I mean, we really do. I think the
time is now to try to acquire that
property and and really enhance. It's 35
acres connects obviously contiguous to
Tibbitz and I think there is a you know
this park bond investment be the first I
think of saying hey Tibbitz needs some
love it needs some investment you know
based on the talis and the future growth
that we see coming this is a place and
uh but that's the rough idea and I think
the the goal is you know I know there's
one item on here where we just don't
know with cost yet I was saying to Jeff
I wish Costco sold to feels because I
want like a volume discount but uh the
but that's the premise
so you guys are seeing it first uh
>> and I think the thought is to start this
process and I think that this isn't like
we're open to ideas I mean this is we're
just throwing out a you know something
that we think is spread geographically
throughout isqua but at the same time
also has people who want athletic fields
people who want playgrounds people who
want pickle all people want trail
access. You know, I think the Confluence
project's very unique. Uh I think
everything's we're trying to find a mix.
So I think what So we're open to ideas
if there's something on here that we're
not thinking of. Like I'm not saying
this is an exhaustive list, but we also
are trying to the big change I think for
how we're approaching things this year
is try to live in fiscal reality. Uh,
and I really like what you you guys were
saying on the tree canopy goals. Like
having goals that aren't realistic isn't
really the best use of our finite
resources. I think we have to have
realistic goals. The same thing comes to
finances. Like we could come up, we
could sit here and come up with $50
million of amazing park projects, but
that is outside of what we can actually
afford to do. And so I think you're
seeing kind of in this range of what we
think we can do between the park bond
renewal our current impact fee dollars
and what I think we can actually support
just through a councilmatic debt issue.
Uh and and so but that being said if we
find really cool stuff that we think is
missing I could always try to figure out
you know where the stretch is I guess
but I'm curious for feedback.
>> Yeah.
Um, EP house. I know we always talk
about the EF house wanted to visit. The
thing that jumped out at me on this one
was $2 to3 million feels like a lot.
>> Yeah, I agree. Willie, THAT'S WHAT I
SAID TO JEFF. I'M LIKE, WHAT THE HELL
HAPPENED? HIS FIRST NUMBER WAS a
million.
>> Like taxpayer projects and bank feels
high. Not saying we shouldn't do
something to the house, but like that
felt aggressive to me. um on the
athletic field. Something I want to call
out is we talk a lot about um equity of
turf. Um and then a big component
obviously tips everyone I'm glad to hear
that it doesn't come out on this page.
So I think like how we strengthen that
that's part of what we want to do with
this I think would help with the talis
and squawk problem.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Um I think the same thing when I think
about this valley elementary that's that
huge flat. That's awesome. Like that
would be amazing. Clark has the same
problem.
>> Clark is Clark's candidate too. It's
right there.
>> But I think like I think with the
Highlands, I love the Highlands, they
get a lot of turf and they have a lot of
all the time use that they can walk to.
That does not happen in the rest of the
spot. So I think it's important at least
for me to say how are we making sure
that this is Canadian.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Enough across.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Otherwise, I like all the things that
we're talking about.
>> Yeah. And if I could if I could just add
a couple great overview, mayor, thank
you. Th this I these are familiar
projects and that as as for the last
seven weeks as we've been sort of
exploring this and thinking boy this is
a really strategic moment to to um ask
is voters and figure out how to leverage
a bond renewal with some of these other
revenues. what can we get done and
realizing I think as the mayor said um
of the projects that have already been
prioritized in the park system plan and
all the public engagement we've done
what are those small to medium size that
give us um the diversity in in a mix um
the cost estimates please don't nobody
get married to them or went into them
they're super super super super rough so
um I think the idea with conflict uence
if you recall from those discussions is
not just renovation of the house but
it's really reimagining that whole
northeast corner of Confluence Park that
just feels
it feels unfinished right and so there
would need to be a lot of in the next
couple of months um as Robin and I have
been beginning to to to think about this
and squeezing this into our work plan
there's going to be a lot of defining
should we be moving forward on this and
cost estimating that gets us drill down
a lot more specific. Um
>> yeah,
not your numbers. I just say we're going
to split out you know 20 million like
what's the
>> Yeah. Yeah. No you
>> thanks that was just my
>> it's really good Marlene if I could have
one thought TVP you're right is is that
there's still a need to revision Tibbitz
Valley Park and
that is going to be such a big lift
um
>> we weren't sure where to begin on it
like we don't want to make small
investments that then screw up a big
investment.
Every time we start talking about tiles,
everyone's like, "It's too big. You
don't know what to do with it."
>> But I do think we are. So, well, I mean,
since this is We're trying to be really
creative. I think if if we can make the
Kelly Ranch deal happen, I think there
is a portion of property there where you
could actually put homes. Uh they don't
they don't have access to that portion
right now because we had to give them
access. So I think the question is could
we do all 35 acres but the part where we
could give ourselves access now we
create a valuable residential lot and if
we were to sell that we could reinvest
all those funds back into Tibbitz solely
and I think it's uh but there's a lot of
dominoes have to fall first the Kelly
Ranch folks have to agree to sell a
sedan property and so uh
>> it's the one with all the little boats
30 30 plus acres just south of Timbitz
Valley Park.
>> So it's the one it's uh but people have
been talking about buying the Kelly
Ranch since I was on the council. So
this has been out here forever. But I
think the point now is we're trying to
just
at some point you just have to make a
run at these things. And so I think the
strategy we're saying is Jeff's going to
them saying we got a new mayor like I
want to pitch him on this. what's the
cheapest you guys would sell your
property for? I mean, I think that's our
strategy and then uh and then we just go
after it. But I think I agree Tibets
needs a a larger investment and like I
say, I think if if this does end up
going through, I think I'm not I am not
ruling out using councilmatic debt to
make investments that I I think will not
get cheaper down the road. like waiting
isn't actually saving the taxpayers
money because you can literally borrow
money at a lower interest rate and the
cost of these projects are going up from
year to year. So there is a lot to be
said of of just saying hey
needs it now and and I think uh pay as
you go doesn't work for the size of that
project. You're going to have to look at
bonding I think. But but that being said
it's you know one advantage we have as a
city right now we have a $68 million
general fund. We have 1.7 million of
debt service. That is we're in a good
spot. Like we I didn't come in as mayor
like my biggest positive surprise was oh
wow like a city of our general fund side
could easily have $4 million debt
service. I think so I think we have some
flexibility to look at. We just got to
make sure we're being really strategic
about those investments. I think
>> um how much of the 16 to 20 would be the
replacement bond?
>> Half of it.
>> Yep. So then the other half would be
councilmatic and matching grants and the
$3 million park fees that developers
have been paying. So yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> And then the other part too is the two
things people ask me about all the time
are tibbits and the dog park tibbits.
Just reporting what I hear.
>> So well that's good feedback. I mean
what is dog park option there?
uh dog park area was proposed um on the
sort of upper part of the park up on
just off of 12 um
>> those town homes
just below the town homes
>> below the town homes on on on
property. Yeah, Tibbitz Valley Park
property um for some critical areas.
There's also just per our development
code since there's an adopted master
plan for the park. there's a rather
expensive bill that would need to be
paid to revise the master plan. Um,
>> oh,
>> so I mean there's there's
>> there were a number of things that
needed to be sort of thought through of,
hey, let's let's get a master plan for
the whole park. Let's let's reinvision
the whole park. um let's get a dog park
over um let's get a first dog park over
by the community center and realize
again with the size and scale and mayor
you may not have heard this but you know
a lot of the dog park discussion we had
for the last couple of years has been
hey Isiqua is not a town that's going to
create a one 5 to 10 acre dog park our
our dog park strategy needs to be smart
with our land realities and we need to
look at dispersed you know one one acre
dog parks in multiple parts of town.
>> I have three dogs. I will say problem
with three dogs is when you walk three
dogs, everyone assumes you work for
Rover. So I will warn you, don't get a
third dog. Unless you want people to ask
you to be their professional dog walker.
>> Nicholas free advice.
Stop it. Two dogs.
>> I think it would be good. Also, I mean
ambitious plan. You can't come to a park
board and say we're going to do all
this. We're all going to love it. Right.
I think the diversity of the program is
great. The one thing that we should
focus on is specifically with the
athletic fields, maybe putting those
more in the front of the five or six
year plan, whatever we build out,
because they could be more revenue
generating, you know, similar to Central
Park. So, it actually starts to pay back
more. Yeah.
>> And fund even additional projects down
the line. Right. So,
>> you're right. There's going to need to
be a sequencing. This is a a $20 million
of work with five or six projects is a
sixy year. It's a five or six year
endeavor. So, you're right. How we
>> That's hopefully quicker.
>> A little quicker than that, but Okay.
>> But yeah, that's a good Yeah. Uh well,
and I I will say that it's uh my take
away from my Senate time is it's
sometimes it's you kind of list the
projects and then you go you sequence as
because sometimes if you put the
sequence on the voter guide statement
sometimes then everyone just complains
about the sequence and the thing they
want is at the tail end of it. So
sometimes the trick is you just got to
say here's what we're going to do if you
support this and uh and then we have to
then prioritize on the back end because
I agree with what you're saying though
what you're saying makes a lot of sense.
>> Question. So is there a way you could
still move forward without acquiring the
Cali property?
>> Yes.
>> Yes. 100%.
>> With Tibis Valley Park.
>> Yes. 100%.
>> Yes.
>> That's just that would be like the dream
scenario. And so I think we're going to
make a run at it. I think uh either
they're going to come back to us in the
number that is basically telling us to
pound sand or they're going to come back
with a number that actually maybe we
just buy it and this whole thing's
finally, you know, we spike the football
and just declare a success. I don't
know. We're going to find out though uh
one way or the other. I think we got to
force the question with them and see how
it goes.
But if they say if they're open to it,
if it's a reasonable response from them
in this first quarter, like we're going
to make a run at it.
>> We find really creative ways to purchase
property.
>> I mean, right now the plan for the
Lakeside development is to buy 400 TDR
units. If they buy 400 TDR units, that
money will go somewhere else that has
nothing to do with this. And they'll
write a big giant check, you know, for5
to$10 million. we won't really see much
of it at all. So, our proposal is we're
going to redo that agreement, just have
them make a park mitigation payment
directly to us that we could use to
acquire open space and and that would
qualify like is kind of our back of the
napkin thinking of of how we would go
about it. So, first step is figuring out
if they're interested from the Kelly
Rando site. But I think our plan is to
to redo the lakeside development
agreement to try to just have them
basically instead of having to buy TDRs
to get the housing units they want on
that on that parcel, they would just
make a payment to us that we could then
reinvest in the community.
>> But again, different
>> lot of dominoes to fall
>> different than completely different than
this.
>> This is all clean. that thing is
complicated. We don't want to put
anything complicated in front of the
voters. I think it's just like you vote
yes, we're going to build these like and
that's our message and uh yeah,
other general thoughts
much more discussion ahead. I think
Mayor, some of what I know we've talked
about is um there'll be a further
conversation in April with city council.
um would love to come back and our spend
have some dedicated time at our March
park board meeting talking about this a
little further as
>> this was probably the April 6 council
meeting. It's facilities and this park
bond. So, and uh facilities is a whole
different animal. We got to figure out
how to redo the police station and move
the people that are currently in the
police station that aren't police
officers, i.e. me
somewhere else in the city. So it's uh
yeah, so that's a whole different but of
that meeting at the council on April 6
like facilities and this park bond are
the big things and I presented this to
the council at our retreat on January
31st. That was so the council sort of
got hey this is I think we got to renew
this park bond and and if we're going to
renew it, we better come up with a list
of things that is squab voters are going
to get if they vote yes and and that's
what our goal is to come up with a good
list uh for that.
>> Yeah. So, prior to that April 6th
meeting, it will be our March 23rd
meeting. We'd love to keep furthering
this conversation to get Rob and I.
We'll keep doing some work.
>> Marlin, keep getting the lower the
numbers. Like, the lower the numbers are
on this, the better. I like the way
you're thinking.
>> Bring your bring your coupon bring
coupons.
>> And the only thing I will say too, it's
great to see expanded pickle ball at
Central Park and other location.
>> Tibbitz.
>> That'd be Tibbitz. Yes,
>> I agree.
>> So, we got to figure out where you can
do because the problem with where the
tennis courts are at Tibbitz, you can't
do anything without you're too close.
>> So, we have a lot of grandfather in
stuff right now. So, it just would have
to be in a different location because
the tennis location is way too close to
the creek. It's now so it's a But you're
right.
Mhm.
>> But you could add somewhere else
>> or if we or if we do, what does that do
to other future plans for the park or or
the needs for turf fields or
>> I agree pickle ball like we started out
like I mean obviously we've been doing
this for a while but pickle bar pickle
ball at Tibbitz was on the original list
and then things that we realized were
going to create a lot of other side
headaches. We're like, "Oh crap." Like,
but if we could put it somewhere else at
Tibbitz, uh,
>> yeah,
>> that like having a nice playground,
>> community parks sized playground. Yeah.
>> We originally that was just that was
originally like open-ended of anywhere
in the city. And that's when I think we
realized we've got to have something
that is really connected to Tibbitz
specifically. And uh but our hope is and
my you know my goal is in this first
term as mayor is Tibet Valley is going
to see love. I mean I got in the Senate
and I felt like Lake Samage State Park
was dying on the vine and I went to
Olympia and just fought for that part
year in year out and it is completely
transformed I think now in a very
positive way. So park investments
transform communities in a very very
positive direction. So to me like
Tibbitz is the new lakes state park. I
want to see it transformed. So
>> and again we we've said it right and I
so appreciate that mayor. It it is it
needs to be repositioned and ready to
perform for the neighborhood that is
going to be growing around it.
>> Yeah.
>> Um so not you know current residents but
just what that neighborhood's going to
be that that park needs.
>> If you want people to buy homes it's
like where the Hobby Lobby is right now.
You better have them with something they
can walk to that isn't
>> just I mean I like top pot but you can
eat something more than top
>> I do like the gas lamp too. It's a I
know. Don't get rid of those two.
>> I should like the Fortunado chocolate.
The Fortunado chocolate's hiding back in
there too. It's like there's a lot of
good little hidden gems in that part of
his squad. Uh okay. I got to run. Uh
>> mayor, thank you.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> We'll be in touch. Thanks everyone.
>> Keep the keep the conversation going.
on the the little bit there just on the
record for my two cents. But um after
learning in one of our most recent
meetings from the school board or school
district that elementary schools fields
are open, they're the only ones that are
actually open to the public out outside
of ours is I I do think I do like the
idea of putting turf in multi-use areas
in those particular someone that when
it's raining, the only place I can go or
has rained within the last 72 hours, the
only place I can go hit a baseball with
my kids field
if you were to to even takeick off a
couple more of these and some of them
look pretty terrible is it's a lot more
space just for people to just walk there
and play and not get soaked in mud.
>> And as you recall when we really talk
about our athletic field um needs and
our priorities in town um back to the
park system plan, right? We said, "Hey,
let's take care of our fields. Let's
let's add multi-use synthetic in our own
system. let's partner with the school
district and find ways to create
community sports fields. And so this
meshes right with that. And as we've
talked with the district and just the
concept to remind you um and why the the
elementary school fields really hold so
much potential is um the the operational
premise is the the residents through the
city make the investment, the city
becomes the scheduler and the city
becomes the maintainer. So during the
school year and during the school day,
the students have a fantastic improved
recess facility. But when school's not
in session or in the afternoons and
evenings, the city is scheduling that
for multiuse, multiport
um open to the public uh use. It really
becomes that win-win. So um the district
seems very interested in that. And um if
there is, you know, as we continue this
idea and if it percolates that this is
the strategic moment to do a park bond
renewal, um those are some really strong
candidate projects. So, um lots to be
done. Um I can I'll tell you right now
the road map is fast to think if there's
a something going to voters in November,
there's a council decision that would
need to be made in August to put
something on the ballot. Um that that's
that's a lot of work. Thankfully, if I
can just add one more comment, we're not
starting from scratch. Again, I want to
reiterate, I think it's important as you
start talking to your neighbors and your
spheres of influence about this idea,
please do. This isn't this isn't set in
stone. Please see that word example
projects. This is meant to just be, hey,
here's a here's a potential menu of what
could be done. Um but um I think the
important thing is that um
I lost my train of thought. Um
>> not set in stone.
>> Well, yeah.
>> Not starting from scratch.
>> Why don't we let D will come for me? No,
it'll it'll come back.
>> Yeah.
>> Um so this
>> Yes. Uh so I know this Kari property is
like just big
land.
>> Um but there is a trail head relatively
close to it already. Um
>> which one?
>> Oh, on the other side.
>> Yeah, slightly to the other side. I mean
>> it's on the north. So I was going to
mention there's nothing on the east.
there is city property that backs up um
the statement but I was wondering if
there's anything that
>> Yeah.
Yes. So the the Squawk Mountain corridor
is both of those Diana. So, so if I
could pull up a map and maybe I'll we'll
have some maps to sort of talk about
these budgets, but but Kil Kilkari 3 is
17 acres that meshes with the 20 acres
that we bought a couple years ago, which
was the way property. So, it creates a
37 acre corridor that goes right to
Squawk Mountain State Park. So, they're
both they're both on the east side of of
Squawk Mountain. So they're one in the
same corridor.
>> Okay.
>> Squawk Valley Park. No, Squawk Valley
Park is is
um across Isiqua Creek. So this wouldn't
this wouldn't involve Squawk Valley
Park. This is off of Sunrise. This is
this is Mine Minehill Trail.
There's long there's long range plans.
Um
any any trail head on that side of the
mountain would involve the need for a
pedestrian bridge across Isiqua Creek.
Um um you'll note in the in the park
system plan and this is going to come up
um we have some community members that
are not really excited about the idea
but you might recall in the in the park
system plan um under Squawk Valley Park
um that parking lot there is really
underutilized. And so one of the
concepts that uh we talked with the
community about and and was in the in
the park system plan is what if there
was a pedestrian bridge there at Squawk
Valley Park that
basically allowed that parking lot to
become a trail head.
>> Oh right, right.
So,
>> so again, I'm I'm I'm
not going to get into a lot of the
conversations we have in terms of
acquisitions because those are really
hard public conversations to have. Um
but yes, aware aware of all of that and
that's certainly part of the strategy I
think as we look at what might be a
candidate for a small to medium-sized
project that would fit in a diverse um
park bond renewal. Um that has a trail
head on the east side of Squawk has so
many so much more community work that
needs to be done. It's not ready. It's
not it's not fully baked whereas the
Kcari way parcels are are begging to be
a new trail corridor and just like
Bergsbay is. So the other idea is Cougar
Mountain, right? We purchased Bergsba,
but actually let's develop the trails.
Let's let's let the the um um um our our
parking garage here with Sound Transit
become a trail head um as people can get
up into into Cougar Mountain. So, that's
the other trail corridor that could be
an opportunity with this with this
project.
So,
lots of need, lots of ideas. Um I love
the idea of 16 to $18 million. it
doesn't go far. What our our needs in
our park system are probably far greater
than that. Um um I think to echo what
the mayor said, I think this is an
opportunity to try and present a package
that's pragmatic and practical um
demonstrates
taking care of what we got and and sort
of improving um the function and
capacity.
Yeah.
So every discussion absolutely
robust discussions tonight and with
that.
>> Yeah,
>> we're good.
>> We're good.
>> We'll move on to our bullet point C
here. Park rules and regulations
presented by Dale Mark.
>> You saved the best for last.
>> The most exciting on the list, rules and
rags. Yeah.
>> Jeeoff, do you want to say a few words
before I jump in?
>> Yeah. No, thank you, Dale. Um, so I had
the chance I know at our at our last
meeting, I think I mentioned that the
following night I was presenting to the
city council services, safety, and parks
committee, kicking off the this
discussion and saying, "Hey, we're going
to come back." Um, thank you, Dale. Mark
Crimp who's with the exe uh
administration office, the city
administration office is going to be
helping us uh in this in this work which
is uh uh really really exciting. Um I I
I would introduce this by saying um city
council was very encouraged and and
appreciated hearing that uh we're ready
to to take this on. And what this is is
um park rules are really really
important um and and having a more
thorough um all-inclusive
list of park rules within the city code
um is a really really good important
management practice uh because it it
helps us as the stewards and the
managers of those parks uh to make sure
those parks are welcoming and they're
safe. Um and and those that are using
the park understand what you can and
can't do uh within within the parks. Um
one of the public comments you'll see I
I want to touch on that. Um this this
endeavor this work we're doing is really
focused on park rules. There's already a
lot of
regulatory language within the city code
that talk about parks and what we can
and can't do and how we need to develop.
Um, if you the the development code
speaks um at at at length in terms of
what we can or can't do as we develop or
do capital projects within our within
our park system. We're not trying to
update that. We're really the the the
scope of this work is um we have a very
small sample of park rules that are in
our city code that were put in in 1985
and a couple more put in in the '9s. um
um they're very deficient. Um there's a
lot of current practices and and current
things. Um the use of drones, um ebikes
and e- scooters. Um there's so many new
uses uh within our park system that our
our city code is silent about right now
and and we think it's time to to change
that. So Dale, thank you.
>> Great. Yeah, excited to be here with you
all tonight. So, my name's been thrown
around a few times now. Dale Murky
Crimp. I work in the mayor's office. Um,
on all sorts of things. It kind of
depends on the month. Uh, I'm currently
finishing up a stint over managing our
municipal fleet. Um, which is not I was
was mentioned this morning as the first
time my father has been truly proud of
work that I've done. the idea that I was
there supporting the mechanics with all
of our our vehicles. Um, rules and
regulations and city code is a place
where I'm much more comfortable. So, I'm
excited to be with you all tonight to
talk a bit about this project and and
the purpose of our next 30 minutes is
twofold. One is to get your feedback on
the overarching plan which is to update
and consolidate park rules and
regulations from all the little place
they places they are in our current
municipal code into a single chapter and
then also to gather your initial
thoughts on key rules or topic areas.
This will be the first of multiple uh
visits to this board about this project.
Uh, so if you leave at the end of this
evening being like, gosh, I forgot. I
wish I we I had said we need to make
sure we've got drones at the top of the
list to use an example. We will have
more opportunities for that. Um, I
recognize the hour of the day. Um, and
so maybe some of those topics and and
opinions might come back at an earlier
hour for each of you.
Three questions tonight. These are long
and wordy and I'm going to shorten them
a little bit. Do you agree with the
general direction? So, do you agree with
the idea that we should consolidate and
update and clarify park rules in a
single chapter?
Second question is what topic areas do
you think are going to be the most high
interest and where do you already maybe
have some emerging policy perspectives?
And then the last is as we endeavor on
broader public engagement, do you have
any opinions at this stage in the game
about how we might pursue broader
community input on these park rules and
regulations?
We're going to start with this first
question, which is do you agree um with
the general direction we're proposing,
which is to consolidate, update, and
clarify park rules in a single chapter.
I'm already seeing nods, but I will
briefly give you a little bit um from
the staff report and then I'll pause to
get thoughts.
So, a little bit of background on this.
Um and Jeff actually went through much
of this, so I'll kind of skim quickly.
Um, right now our park rules, the ones
that exist, are sprinkled throughout a
number of different chapters in the
Isquaman municipal code, which means
that if you're a user of our park system
and you want to know a rule, it's hard
to find the answer to can you do this or
not do this? Um, how can I apply for a
permit to you a park at a for a special
event? That information doesn't live in
one single place. It lives dotted
throughout.
hasn't been updated in a long time, in
some cases before I was born. Um,
whenever something is older than me, I
wonder if it maybe needs to be updated.
And we're also, as you saw in the
materials, there are places where our
park rules are just not complete. Not
only are they not complete for some of
the current and emerging uses we're
seeing in our parks, trails, and open
space, um, but may not even be complete
by stuff that is already happening in
those spaces.
I just touched on the next one. And then
also the current way that our our park
rules and regulations are written make
it really difficult to address and um
enforce any sort of issues in parks. Who
who who are the enforcers and what
process by which um can they determine
what needs to be enforced and how? So,
we've got an opportunity
which is to provide a more complete set
of rules in a centralized singular place
that will support our parks in remaining
safe, welcoming, clean, um, and also
help in outline how emergent issues will
be dealt with, sort of providing a
framework, so to speak, um, for things
that we may not be able to anticipate,
but we can put a framework in place for
how we would anticipate them as they
come up. Um and also an opportunity at
this point to think about uh how
responsibility is shared between the
number of different uh city departments
and divisions that do have a stake in
our parks, trails, and open spaces. And
of course the opportunity as always to
engage with you all and our broader
community as we develop these rules and
this framework.
I shared as part of the staff um
materials for this evening. One of the
attachments was uh the newly adopted uh
city of Redmond chapter on parks. Also
hot off the press I would say probably
in like maybe a month. The city of
Kirkland will also have a new
consolidated updated uh rules and
regulations chapter in their code. we
happen to know the person working on
that project and so we can also look at
what they've been working on too in a
future meeting. But you'll notice
they've just done this work and so it's
really nice to have a neighbor that's
recently gone through a similar process
because we're able to learn about you
know how might you have gone about
updating this and what might we want to
take from that process that we would
find valuable for ourselves.
>> So trademarking in the public sector
>> absolutely not there's a lot of
borrowing and a lot of stealing
especially when it comes to code. So
Redmond just recently went through this
process of consolidating into a single
park rules chapter. You'll notice
there's a there was a dedicated
definition section. Um I found that to
be very helpful. Um they also outlined a
rulemaking section. Um and an
enforcement methods section which I
thought was really elucidating in a way
that I had not seen in other code as I
looked at other neighboring
jurisdictions.
probably what everyone noticed as you
look through it were the specific um you
don't want to call them the whole thing
is a chapter but the specific sub uh
headings on on particular behaviors. Um
so really clearly walking through
fireworks, weapons, tobacco, controlled
substances, naming those pretty
explicitly and then having um rules and
regulations under each of those known
behaviors. And then also they did and we
can talk about whether we would want to
they uh integrated the permitting
process for special use permits into
this chapter as well which is a little
different than a lot of other um
jurisdictions.
>> So that would be special events
community groups that want Yeah.
>> need space for special event. Yep.
>> Yep. So a very high level comparison.
And you saw a more in-depth analysis in
attachment B in the staff report for
tonight. But um as Jeff mentioned, we
are really strong and we're not touching
our commitment to open space acquisition
and development and our clarity around
funding and design around parks and open
space. We kill it at that. That is like
a place that we shine and that other
jurisdictions look at our code to
understand how to do that. Redmond is is
in my humble opinion as a non non-p
parks personal a parks lover but not a
not an experienced park code person
they're kind of winning at at what we're
trying to talk about tonight which is
rules and rags on behaviors activities
and how to enforce that. So, it just
feels like there is clear governance.
There's clear public facing park rules.
It's also worth a look. I did not
reference this in my materials. They
have a really clear web page also where
they don't just have the chapter, but
they actually have it written out in a
much clearer way that accompanies their
update. Um, it treats perks as a sort of
system
rather than a singular place. um and it
treats it as something within but of its
own entity that is not simply the city.
They've got a stronger trail protection
position in their uh rules. We really
don't touch on our trails currently at
all um in what we have written.
>> A lot missing.
>> Yes. And then a lot of future proofing.
So really a way to think about a
framework for addressing emergent issues
as they come up which our code doesn't
currently have.
So, I guess my my I'll go back to my
initial question. You know, we're
proposing moving to a model like Redmond
has for its rules and regulations. So,
moving to a consolidated, updated,
clarified park rules and regulations
chapter within the Isqua Municipal Code.
And my first question of the night is,
does the board agree that that's the
right direction? Um, or do you believe
we should stay status quo?
It's a lot of hot air for me for an
absolutely but I'll make the next part a
little bit faster. Okay, this is the fun
part I think personally which is this
next question is what topic areas do you
believe are going to be the most high
interest for the community and do you
have emerging policy perspectives on
some of the positions that you think the
city might take on some of these topics?
I'm going to reiterate this is a first
conversation about this. So, we're going
to come back to this list and talk about
policy positions. When we come back, we
will likely have a proposed position
that that we'll then want feedback on,
but wanted to seek your input here at
the outset.
So, some types of rules to consider. Um,
I've got I think two slides on this and
so I'll walk through these and I'll kind
of say, okay, what these are some of the
things that we're already thinking we
definitely want in here. My initial
question is which of these do you think
are going to be of the most
contentious interest to the community
and or do you already have some opinions
about the policy position on any of
these uh these topics here and then
we'll go to the second slide.
I already know one but I you know
>> fireworks firearms and
>> thoughts Martha. Well, I think
I think your safety you would feel safe.
You saw
where you join in with your family or
>> might
filters camp.
how we help find appropriate locations
for um you know some of our unhomed
populations, but also just people coming
through or maybe really appreciating our
open spaces,
you want that to be appropriate.
>> Yeah.
as you all think about trail use and I
think as you see the the the
work developing trail use also includes
um
could include speed and how how do we
understand there's such a diversity of
use on our trails? Do we consider um
identifying a a speed limit? Because
often some of the biggest conflicts on
trails is conflicts of speed. Um,
so that will be that that will be a
conversation that I think we'll we'll
want to, you know, dive into in earnest
and really think through the the pros
and cons of certain approaches.
>> I think the animals and pets y
>> it's going to be du and really it's
bigger thing is where demand is out is
outstripping available resources. Yeah.
You got thousands of pet owners
looking for places to go and we're going
to have one in a month.
>> But uh you know there's
drive by Tibbit.
>> Absolutely.
>> When you see, you know, people need a
place and that's where they go.
>> Yeah.
>> Yep. That was the one
that was the one I was like that's gonna
Yep.
>> Yep.
always
>> other thoughts on this set and then I'll
go to the next slide and then I've got
like a what are we missing? That's my
question.
>> Okay, what about this slide? We've got
amplified music, park hour, well park
hours, interference with parker trail
use, damage to wildlife property,
building fires, dumping, solicitation,
tobacco, alcohol, other controlled
substances.
any of these that you think will be of
particular community will there will be
a lot of opinion or that you already
have an emerging policy position you'd
like us to think about
>> being fired you know along 900 you still
have um people burning trash maybe
>> um
that
yep
in an emerging conversation that we're
going to have. So now a lot of our
neighboring cities have become tobaccof
free parks.
>> We haven't had that conversation yet as
a community, but this will be the
opportunity for us to to consider that.
Do we want to join our
many neighboring cities? Um
tobacco tobaccof free park position.
Are there any behaviors or topics
missing currently that from your
perspective? I know we think that there
might be a few in my deeper read of
Redmond's um and actually my pre-eread
of Kirkland's I have some other ideas
but from your all's perspective
on these two slides any behaviors or
topics that were that are missing our
consideration.
Absolutely.
There we go.
and they framed it as contentious or
what most the committee will have the
most say on but I just feel like they're
all good rules to consider both pages
>> they're all good things to consider
>> so
I know some will be less
>> the only one is animals and pets maybe
just like you know Tibet park is
basically dog park
>> so I don't know how
going.
>> What's that?
>> What's wrong with that?
>> I mean, that's good.
>> Yeah.
>> Yep.
>> You know, you take a look at Ranger
Alex's data and I thought he spent he
was spending a lot of time talking to
people at Tibbitz.
>> So, how long has Redmond had their um
new rules?
They they did this uh just before the
pandemic.
>> Yeah.
>> I want to say 2018 or 2019.
>> So they've had it for a while now.
>> So any um lessons learned, any feedback,
anything that they might, you know,
>> report after consolidating their rules.
>> Yeah, I think worth worth more
conversation with them. The anecdotal
conversations I've had with their
director, uh it's been very very
positive.
Um,
>> so we wish we did this or wish we didn't
do that.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Nothing. I think they've
made a few modifications between now and
2018, but that's expected,
>> right? I think that's another I think as
we do this and I think it's part of the
forward thinking that Dale mentioned is
we want to create a um a standard a
cadence that says we probably shouldn't
we should be touching this every couple
years not waiting every 20 years
>> to
that'll be I think is a great question
for us and something we can dive a
little deeper into in terms of if if
that's a if Again, that's a template
that we want to sort of build our frame
our rules around. Um certainly asking
them what what's worked well, what would
you do do different? Um if anything Yep.
>> I know in talking to Kirkland um as
they're working on theirs right now, one
of the things that came up that they've
really that they learned from Redmond
that they wanted to have was this idea
of a framework for decision- making.
rather than moving away from language
that really is like very very specific,
there's more um assignment of like
decision-making and ownership. So
there's a process for anything. So any
exception that comes up rather than just
saying this can never happen, there's a
process for getting things approved or
things exempted which didn't exist in
their code previously. It doesn't exist
in ours right now.
I
>> think vandalism and graffiti is that
covered in their something
>> probably worth but worth
>> yeah it's in there's a damage I think
it's yeah the bullet yeah pertaining to
to damage would certainly fall under
that
>> also under damage would be encroachment
>> right where we have a maybe an ambitious
neighbor to one of our pieces of open
space that stretches their friend their
their backyard fence and creates a
little bit more backyard onto onto
public land. We'll we'll want some
rules. They're really clear about what
happens in those cases because there are
there are a number of people that do
that.
>> Again, trying to be the best steward we
can, the best manager of of your your
all public land, right? 40,000 people
who own all this public land. You want
rules and regulations that are clear um
to manage it well.
>> Yeah. You look like you have a
>> No, I think it falls under damage. We
think a lot about trees recently. We're
dealing with trees at
>> Yeah.
>> Um so damage goes both ways, right? Like
if our if the park tree falls on
residential or vice versa,
>> that's covered.
>> Yeah. and not necessarily in park rules,
but it's it's covered in terms of risk
and other areas of the city code. Um
>> yeah. Yeah. And we've had a lot of
practice in that the last couple of
years with
>> bomb cyclone and other and other cases
where um
>> yeah, trees trees fall multiple ways,
right? They fall from our public
property onto private property. They
fall from private property onto our
public property, etc.
Yeah, I really think about this as is
different from that in that it's like
the who are the actors, the people are
the actors here.
>> Okay.
>> Y got it.
>> Not mother nature.
>> Got it.
>> Acts of God, right?
>> Yeah. She she supersedes this chapter of
our code, unfortunately.
>> Okay. You're not going to make rules for
her.
>> Yeah.
cities that have tried have not been
successful.
>> No.
>> Is there anything that
would be covered in this or maybe is
somewhere else in somewhere in the city
say that pertains to engaging in water
on property. So if there's a stream or a
creek going through the park, how the
person can engage with that or not or is
they
>> Yes. So that the idea is swimming swim
through there. You saw one of the
bullets about swimming is we need to be
really clear where you can engage with
water and where you can't. And Isqua
Creek is not a
>> beach that is not a swimming pool.
>> Is that what you're thinking of? You
could
>> Yeah.
It just through like Bernstein and on
the other side of Bern
people fishing. I know it's kind of
fishing people fishing.
>> Okay. If you if you go to bed tonight
and your head lays down on your pillow
and think of something,
>> email me. Um, the last thing I want to
brooach the topic of, but again, you'll
notice on my my bullet point in the
presentation, very limited thoughts so
far. Um, what if any thoughts do you
have about our overarching approach to
broader input outside of the bo the
board? We know that we want to have a
survey. Um, we want to have it
accessible at all of our key park,
trail, recreation locations via QR code.
Um, you know, this is happening
The current timeline, which I'm sure you
saw on the last slide, is is to bring
these rules back um to the the services,
safety, and parks committee in June,
July. So, you know, where I like to
think about doing a lot of my surveying
during the summer is at the farmers
market, but we're on a timeline to try
to do some of of good, if not almost all
of this prior to that. And so I wanted
to solicit thoughts or ideas about
additional ways to engage in public
outreach around this code um code update
process or thoughts specifically on how
we might um
market's not the word I want share the
survey broadly with
well our meeting today and I think
I know invited the mayor to our meeting
>> that's one place and I know it's not
everybody it's just a small amount of
you know cluster of homes if you will in
a neighborhood that's certainly
>> we live very close to you the woods
>> yeah I mean broadly ho yeah that's a
great idea
>> yep
>> I think next door lot the neighbors have
that app
>> and are we considering like you know you
do the word on a street is there places
you could put um that at some of the
detail
>> yeah so this idea of the QR code much
like we've done with some recent surveys
we've done the last couple years if you
recall is getting some signs and putting
those all on your trail and trail heads
and multiple parks and giving people a
chance to just open up the hey come, you
know, take a look at our draft park
rules and regulations and give us your
thoughts.
>> Yeah.
>> Yes.
>> That's what we want to hear from, right?
is is those that are using the parks and
does this did you know
>> does what we're creating resonate
>> y
>> does this help make this a safer
welcoming park system
>> I think those types of feedbacks too as
you get there regardless of the trails
that are
you talk about speed a little bit trails
that are a heavy bike a heavy person
walking trail
>> as if one of those survey questions in
there has to do with that type of stuff
it's
Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Yep.
Recently there was an ebike ordinance
that was approved and so part of this
work is going to be making sure our
rules and regulations
um are complimentary to that new ebike
ordinance and and um
and not just speak to it but um you know
elaborate on and and again this idea of
future thinking. Um,
we shouldn't be just thinking about
ebikes because there's e- scooters and
there's e uniballs and there's e
whatever the next I don't even know what
those are called but I think you know
what I'm talking about
>> there there will be another five year
two years from now a year from now
there'll be the next
e personal vehicle right so let let's um
let's think broadly um and again not
rewrite the ebike ordinance that was
just done, but how are we complementing
it and think addressing a a broader set
of e vehicles?
>> Yeah. Are we going to let those
autonomous food delivery robots be on
our trails?
>> You know, that's a, you know, we can
create a framework for making those
decisions
>> in the future.
>> So, a little bit about where this is
headed, though I feel like I've
referenced this throughout, but always
good to look at. Um, I'll be back. Jeff
will be back. Jeff is here all the time,
but I'll be back. Um, the goal
>> stuck with me.
>> Yeah, they're stuck with you. Um, the
goal is to come back with some draft
language. Um, and then in April to get
public input via the survey. Um, we'll
make sure to bring a draft of that
survey to this group to take a look at
before it goes live. So, I'll be here in
March. Um the goal is to have in May a
draft updated park rules chapter for you
all to uh finalize your recommendation
on so that it can then go to the city
council in in June back to the committee
and then hopefully in July to the full
council. Um and so that's the high level
direction we're headed. Any
lingering thoughts?
It was a delight. I'll see you all next
month.
>> You know, big big thank you, you know,
for for helping in this effort. Um,
you'll be a great a great partner in
this work. Um, like I said, it was a
very engaging conversation with council
to kick off and thank you all. This is
be some really really important work um
that you all are going to do and
will have some lasting lasting benefit.
>> Thanks.
>> Excellent. Thank you. Thank you again.
Um
we can move on to our next scheduled
business here which is reports.
Maybe since it's your Nick your second
meeting with us, is there anything that
you'd like to bring up in this meeting?
Um yeah, I mean I could just briefly uh
the work I've been doing with uh Robin
which is making the trail standards um
or in most of the trails that we for
this booklet that we're uh compiling um
is that
uh I started or me and Robin kind of
split touring some of the parks. Um, so
just last week I went to K once and took
some pictures um just to kind of so then
in the booklet we can kind of have
examples of existing trails
that all match in standards. Um, yeah,
that's kind of neat work that we have
been doing recently.
>> Thank you.
Do you have anything you'd like to
report for? Uh,
>> couple things. First, and I'm gonna I'm
gonna pass the ball to Robin. Dog park
update. Robin, do you want to give
>> update? Yeah, it's coming along really
well. We have um some rough weather
coming in. All the forms are ready to
pour concrete. We just decided to hold
off one more week. Uh, next week looks a
lot better, but then the plaza areas
will be set. They're working on fence
line and the post right now. So, it's
coming together. Hopefully, next week
after concrete, then they're going to be
shooting in all the fiber, all the
mulch.
>> So, then Yeah. And then planting. So,
>> all the utilities are done.
>> All the utilities are done. Everything's
passed so far. So, it's looking really
good. We placed uh did shelter locations
today. So, those are set. They can take
footing for those tomorrow. So, we're
getting excited. If the weather would
just cooperate,
we'd be flying. So,
>> Dana, I know you've visited multiple
times as that's a regular route, but if
you're down on the Rainer Trail, please
walk by and and take a look. It's it's
really starting to take shape, and I I
think some of the feedback we're hearing
is wow, it's it's a bigger off leash
area than people could sort of visually
think. So, um lot of excitement. Robin,
great work.
And I have one other update. Thanks,
Ryan. Um, our department operations
specialist position, um, I've had a
fantastic interview process, a really,
really impressive pool of candidates.
Um, a couple weeks ago, thanks again,
Stacy. Couple weeks ago, um, made an
offer. Uh, that offer was accepted. Um
Laura Hos will be starting uh next
Monday, March the 2nd. Uh really really
excited. So for our March meeting, uh
Laura will be here uh to meet all of you
and and start to get an idea of what
Park Board's all about. So be extra
nice. No, just just kidding.
>> Great. Um
Laura comes from the University of
Washington uh in the School of Public
Health. Uh support of the dean's office.
Uh did a lot of um oversight of
marketing and communications that came
out. So it brings just a a great I think
set of skills, a real excitement uh to
get into local government and so I um
really excited.
>> Thank you.
Um chairperson report I do not have much
data. I know there's some good uh bare
root uh plant potting events coming up.
If you're interested in uh uh those,
check out the squall website. But if you
want to help ball up some plants into
some pots so we can grow them into
further canopy
to increase our canopy, um check those
out. Um otherwise, it's as we come into
spring, I just encourage everybody to
get out and start enjoying more of the
open spaces and trails more. um as this
the days get longer it's been excellent
to see. So
>> do you want to add anything?
>> Is there any other business anyone would
like to uh flag? No. Okay.
>> So one more item, Ryan. Um again on your
agenda each month we have the sort of
working document of the parkboard work
plan. U I think as we bring back uh this
park bond renewal idea and have further
conversation about that. Um Rob and I
are also sort of looking at our work
plan and boy if that um really really
important effort um is added to our work
plan, you know, what um what needs to
give or what needs to adjust a little
bit to make sure that that that work um
is really given being given the time and
attention that it needs. So uh we'll
have a little bit more understanding as
we come to the March meeting for all of
you. But um again, thank you for just
your initial conversations with the
mayor. As you can tell, the mayor is
really excited. So, look forward to
furthering that conversation with all of
you. And please, um I said it before, um
between now and the March meeting, you
are free to talk to your neighbors, talk
to your groups, um your little league
groups or your uh whatever recreation
groups that you're part of, your trail
groups, etc. uh because I think it's
going to be really important to get a
pulse of the community. Is this is this
a renewal that the community would be
interested in?
>> So, thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> Um our next meeting is March 23rd.
So, just throw that on your calendars
and radars.
And that says no further business. This
meeting is a jerk.