← Back to City Council Digest

City Council Committee of the Whole Auto captions

Saturday, January 31, 2026

9:00 AM
Topic tracked across meetings:
New Business Request: Public Reporting on Immigration Enforcement Activity Hear Presentation; Direct Administration ID 1993 1/3
CITY COUNCIL RETREAT
a
Welcome & Overview
packet pp.5–6
Staff report:
• High-Performing Councils realize that their power lies in collective action (votes) rather than individual interference (directing staff). Struggling Councils often fail because they try to act as "mini- Mayors," leading to a fragmented city government and a demoralized professional staff. • Good governance attracts high-quality city staff, which leads to better services, increases resident trust, and attracts better candidates to run for Council. Struggling Councils drive away talented staff, which may lead to service degradation, increased resident frustration, and "protest candidates" winning seats; thus, continuing the cycle of friction.
b
Governing Together success sustain it
c
Context Setting one-on-one interviews
a
Priority Setting
e
Wrap-Up & Closing Adjournment 2:00 PM provided as guidance and are approximate. Meeting room is wheelchair accessible. American Disability Act (ADA) accommodations available upon request. Please phone 425-837-3001 at least two business days in advance. Guidelines for Audience Comments Public comments are an important part of the public process. We take them seriously and factor them into the decisions we make. During Audience Comments, members of the public are invited to address the Council regarding matters that are directly related to city programs, projects, services, or events, except: comment will have the opportunity to do so. Please direct comments to the whole Council and not individuals. While this is not a question and answer session, we will contact you to follow up, if needed. When recognized, attendees) or step up to the lectern Relationship to City (e.g. resident, property owner, business owner). respond after your name or phone number is called or if your connection is lost unexpectedly, the meeting will need to proceed. You are encouraged to rejoin the meeting, if able. Written comments can be submitted at any time to [email protected]. Personal attacks, obscene language, derogatory remarks and disruptive behavior such as shouting, booing, clapping, and stomping feet will not be permitted. If a speaker is out of order, the presiding officer will direct the speaker to return to his or her seat or, for virtual attendees, may direct staff to mute their microphone. If a speaker does not comply, the presiding officer may take a recess to restore order. If a disruption to the meeting occurs and order cannot be restored, the presiding officer may proceed to use one of the options provided for in RCW 42.30.050 to ensure orderly continuation of the meeting. Again, public comments, written and verbal, are an important aspect of the public process. The City takes comments seriously, and we thank members of the public for taking the time to address us during our meetings. regarding agenda items, your comments are welcome at [email protected]. City of Issaquah CITY COUNCIL RETREAT b) City of Issaquah – City Council Workshop
Topics: Arts & Culture
0:10 body is realize that that sometimes
0:13 what you hear in council you may have to
0:15 think a little bit more broader
0:17 community actually thinks the certain
0:19 thinner is good and most you know
0:21 majority of
0:24 by the end of the
0:30 technology test here for a moment, but
0:32 the balance you're describing. No, not
0:34 that one. Oh, sorry. We'll get to those
0:39 um the different hats you wear, right?
0:42 And so, you know, there are um different
0:45 roles that you have to perform as an
0:47 elect body. Uh and sometimes you have to
0:49 change them, right? And you have to be
0:51 alert to them. Um you know part of it is
0:53 you know being a representative and and
0:55 yes listening to who may bring a
0:57 representative to your community. Uh
0:58 there's also important role a steward
1:00 right and so you are looking for the
1:03 greater good and making sure that you
1:04 can maintain progress on long-term
1:06 expectations for the better of a
1:08 community uh thinking strategic you
1:11 strategic thinker is another role you
1:13 have to want. Uh and these are are
1:16 different lenses. Kil oversight and just
1:18 the brass tax of being, you know,
1:20 fiscally responsible and and making sure
1:22 that everybody is accountable uh to the
1:26 work that you're doing missing trustee
1:30 >> Okay. Excellent. Thank you. That was
1:33 that was a trick question.
1:37 Well, you can share it. Uh but but the
1:41 important point on your at different
1:43 points in time and with different topics
1:46 and items that come before you, you're
1:48 going to
1:50 all are important. So if you get
1:53 sidelined into one specific lane and
1:55 you're only thinking about, you know,
1:57 I'm an advocate, I'm a rubber stand.
1:58 about the community then you're missing
2:01 out important important trans what it
2:03 means to be a vet.
2:06 >> Yeah. And I'm um on the point of
2:09 transparency, I don't think that always
2:10 means you know doing what the like.
2:14 I think one of the things here also it's
2:16 you know what's pandering is something
2:18 that's but I think it's like you know
2:21 when you make a decision being able to
2:23 explain to me why they came into that
2:24 decision I can experience
2:28 or disagree with public but doing so in
2:31 respectful manner it's
2:35 listen to me
2:36 >> I'd like to
2:42 deputy council person.
2:50 Cinnamic. Cinnamic. Cinnamic. Cinnamic.
2:55 Cynic
3:14 penic.
3:15 Vimic
3:33 >> I'll expand on that. We have had a
3:36 policy over the last couple of years as
3:39 to how council member Shaker
3:42 >> listen question is is that policy
3:45 working
3:49 and if not
3:51 what changes
3:54 >> listen to me
3:56 >> sorry I missed how public brings issues
3:59 >> housing council new business request
4:04 >> listen to me listen to me you unlike for
4:06 one site I mean here I'm just saying how
4:09 we solve that but just like that that if
4:11 we don't do a good job at that and I
4:13 probably a better job at that then the
4:15 outl are essentially the the right side
4:18 of the columns you said try
4:22 als
4:33 >> okay so maybe as far
4:35 Yes, I think you're hearing that not
4:37 everyone's happy about buses.
4:39 >> Yeah.
4:43 >> You want to like today to talk about
4:45 that are specific in Is that better to
4:48 you bring back as a wall?
4:49 >> I I'll cut through.
4:51 >> Okay. Yeah.
4:53 So what's that? So I think what council
4:56 wants is policy that allows them to put
4:59 20 million money instead of
5:07 there are you know probably half dozen
5:09 ways communities do this um you know
5:12 house member good the order can make
5:15 motion some communities motion is good
5:17 enough and then another community makes
5:21 motion and a second get a motion to
5:22 second it some give you a motion and a
5:25 second and a majority vote to the
5:27 council to put it um and then it usually
5:30 comes back at the next meeting or maybe
5:33 two meetings depending on what the
5:35 policy says and gets discussed for next
5:38 steps. So my sense is that's what you
5:40 want. So you just all have to decide how
5:43 much of the body needs to agree or chunk
5:46 of my senses that and I experienced this
5:50 but one person could never do it. It's
5:53 you know in Evston I had writers would
5:55 come with 15 things every meeting and
5:58 they all they had to do was propose that
6:00 they did need a second they didn't need
6:01 vote and then ultimately they came down
6:05 to a vote so that you need majority of
6:07 your colleagues to agree with you that
6:10 so it's probably if not majority maybe
6:14 one or two authors on and then come back
6:17 I think the the caution gorgus is not
6:20 this group but other or somebody else
6:22 comes on the council and says, "Okay,
6:25 I'm going to use this as my own bully
6:26 pulpit." And then drags you all and
6:29 that's what other council members hate
6:31 is when one person can say, "These are
6:33 my priorities and now I'm going to force
6:35 you all to." So, if we can come up with
6:38 something that doesn't do that, that's
6:40 fine. I think from the administration
6:42 standpoint, Mr. correctly wrong. We just
6:45 worry about being inundated because in
6:47 some communities, I'm sure you took
6:49 plenty of examples. Some communities
6:52 everything stops because all the council
6:54 is doing is responding to those group
6:57 items to discuss versus trying to do
7:00 them up front process like this and say,
7:03 "Okay, this these are our priorities.
7:05 We're going to work on them through the
7:06 next three, six, nine months." versus
7:09 every meeting setting new priorities
7:11 because sometimes come on the latest
7:14 >> well I will always mention too is that
7:16 there is an impact on pass the staff too
7:19 when when there are lots of ideas
7:21 generated because if each one even if it
7:23 feels like it's an arguing thing still
7:26 let us need to spend time so your
7:28 intentionality behind you know where
7:31 together you want to move forward for a
7:32 bird or the bopsy sheet
7:34 >> I like the idea of a second or a second
7:37 and a third here's It allows me to lobby
7:39 at night without doubting about proced
7:50 one or two other council members who are
7:52 excited about that. But I think the idea
7:54 the current policy is it's like well
7:57 since I guess you guys kind of want to
7:59 know if the where the will of the body
8:00 is and I can't go figure that out
8:02 without breaking
8:05 >> concerned about it going wrong. I agree
8:07 that would be bad. It does go off. I
8:09 also think that we if if we see that
8:12 happens because presumably the dust will
8:14 step it does happen. Sure. But I'll I'll
8:19 guess
8:21 you think I can
8:22 >> because because then that individual
8:24 says you are stifling me if you council
8:27 member Nichols don't want to talk about
8:28 things I want to talk about. You tried
8:30 to change the policy to stiple me and
8:32 here are 20 of my friends who are now
8:34 going to spend five minutes each. That's
8:36 a book saying how orange or st by so
8:43 >> hopefully you pick something that's
8:44 going to last. I it would be better to
8:46 pick the right number, but uh it's not
8:50 we're not zone out. It's just
8:54 >> and I think there's a few other ways
8:56 that we could approach this. The way we
8:59 had done was council new business
9:01 request process. We do also have maybe
9:05 the process for setting the annual work
9:08 plan and maybe involvement there. The
9:12 mayor has also called individual
9:14 meetings on certain policy areas which
9:17 is going to give us another area input.
9:20 So I think there's a lot of approaches
9:22 that we could take at some point trying
9:25 to figure out what the best process for
9:27 this. we set that into our policies. You
9:31 got it. There's certainly lots of
9:33 different uh dimensions that could be
9:35 explored with this and certainly lots of
9:37 examples that need to go to from other
9:39 communities that have been tested and
9:42 you can decide you know ultimately it
9:44 has to fit here right as manyities are
9:46 but there are plenty of examples and
9:48 yeah just going in eyes of what the the
9:51 choice choices
9:53 uh but you understanding uh that there's
9:56 important value in raising you know
9:59 bringing forward ideas as they come
10:01 forward But also recognizing when you
10:03 have work plan and other things that
10:05 you've decided as a body that you want
10:07 to work on um you want to make sure that
10:09 you don't speak July and have all that
10:12 sense of that's the pain is what can can
10:14 happen if not
10:18 breath good conversation important uh
10:21 sounds like to spend some more time on
10:22 so we'll make sure that that comes back
10:24 to let's see other questions too I don't
10:26 want to get into the specific discussion
10:28 around expectations of each other
10:32 Uh so what values are important to you
10:35 uh in government? What are the things
10:37 that you bring to the digital?
10:40 One thing that I think has always worked
10:42 well for us is and it was surprising.
10:45 Um so being able to we feel like I feel
10:50 like we have had a very responsive
10:54 strength of the leadership to be able to
10:57 say okay this is something that I'm
11:00 going to come out you know and there are
11:02 exceptions obviously if um something
11:05 comes up during meeting but I think that
11:07 ideal
11:09 keeping everybody informed ahead of time
11:11 rather than coming in with a
11:14 in the mix.
11:15 >> Yeah. Well, this is, you know, uh sounds
11:18 like in practice what you've been doing
11:19 and that's certainly what Karen Gren
11:22 expectation for working, you know,
11:24 together, but also with the
11:25 administration, right?
11:27 Uh and documenting these I tell you it's
11:30 when things, you know, it's great when
11:32 things are working really well. It's
11:34 when things start to not work well for
11:35 whatever reason. And you know, go and
11:38 see a company to be able to say this is
11:40 good.
11:42 All right, Mr. What what other values do
11:44 you bring?
11:45 >> Say a lack of ego that this isn't about
11:48 us. This isn't about our essence people.
11:51 This is about you know it's the city
11:53 that we're doing all the sports. We've
11:54 asked you to have arguments and things
11:55 like that. This isn't
11:58 what individual about their pride of
12:01 being at something. This is not about us
12:03 at all. This is
12:06 Yeah. Listen to me. You're opening up
12:09 about, you know, good job. It's about
12:10 the community. I love that. Same idea
12:14 that
12:15 listen to me.
12:16 >> Um I mean pretty basic integrity spect
12:20 um and then I think another is
12:22 preparedness to know how much gets to
12:25 show up having done over and ready to
12:29 know they've
12:34 >> I want to boldly say something kind of
12:36 personal. Um, on the preparedness side
12:38 of things, um, we have swung, maybe it
12:42 was during the co era, we swung from
12:44 having class of in-depth presentations
12:47 from our staff to read the packet and
12:51 get ready to talk about. I think we have
12:53 swung too far and I mean, I'm interested
12:55 to hear what other people think. Um, but
12:57 I think we have swung too far and one of
13:00 the reasons I think we don't get as much
13:02 public engagement as we used to get. I
13:04 mean, there's the fact we don't have
13:05 these claw grass. there's, you know,
13:06 postcoid, all that kind of stuff. I
13:08 think is also that there isn't a lot to
13:10 grab on to or there isn't as much to
13:12 grab on to at council meetings as used
13:14 to be. And I'm not looking for seven 45
13:16 minute meetings. I don't think we had a
13:18 time. Uh, but you know, I I I would
13:22 humbly suggest that I think we've swung
13:24 too far and that we don't provide enough
13:26 insitue uh teeing up of the issues
13:30 before we launch into them. Uh if the
13:32 public comes to a council meeting, I
13:33 think they get a very very very light
13:36 set of presentations from staff and then
13:38 you get council debating.
13:42 >> Listen to me.
13:43 >> Yeah. Why would uh
13:46 >> listen to me?
13:46 >> So would it be the agenda then plus like
13:49 more of an executive summary of staff of
13:52 what or what would be
13:53 >> I think it's five slides or or topic,
13:56 right? that just says here's the issue,
13:59 you know, here's it is it isn't a
14:01 restating of of the you guys do a very
14:03 very good job in case I needed some um
14:06 but it's the here's the issue some some
14:08 pictures right I'm a very visual
14:10 engineer a lot of times we're having
14:12 conversations about land use or uh
14:15 things go about in the city and we don't
14:17 te up pictures anymore like we used to
14:19 when we're talking about issues as an
14:21 example of what I guess and what if the
14:23 bing as long as that does result in a
14:26 reduction pizza or the packet.
14:28 >> Listen to me.
14:29 >> Some of us like, you know, I'm like
14:31 saying pizza. We'll go into it. Uh,
14:33 well, in the old days, you know, we
14:35 still had 500 page packets, but we also
14:37 kind of we also, like I said, I'm just
14:39 talking three to five slides per topic,
14:40 right? That just says here's what the
14:42 issue is. Here's the salient points. I
14:45 mean, you guys always do put a slide up
14:46 that says here's what we're asking,
14:48 right? Here are the questions that we're
14:49 asking today. But the thing before that,
14:52 I think we don't we don't do silo.
14:55 might be easy topic but the for the
14:56 broader perspective current
15:00 I think that doesn't necessarily go to I
15:03 think it's just like you know what is
15:05 people here and like how does this
15:08 further goal I think would be helped
15:09 kind of remind everyone because I think
15:11 we're all a little bit in the weeds and
15:12 I think the reputation honestly they get
15:15 very creepsy at times perhaps at the
15:18 expense of you know like for someone
15:20 especially for me like the big gay I you
15:23 know just coming in
15:24 for every like sonic and then I think
15:28 you know trying to understand what's the
15:30 context you know what's the goal here
15:32 how how everything fits in I guess some
15:33 of that more topic setting and perhaps
15:36 that even makes the presentation need to
15:37 be a bit more high level and you know we
15:40 maybe we actually don't spend as much
15:44 time talking right like you know oh
15:46 here's the schedule of when road is
15:48 going to happen at this we can just look
15:50 at it we don't need to read out every
15:53 single
15:54 Um, so you know, I I think finding that
15:57 right balance of going into detail of
16:00 theation versus of you know how it
16:03 sounds to me like what you're saying is
16:05 we need for that podcast totally
16:08 like context setting make sure
16:10 everyone's on the same
16:15 increase context setting bigger picture
16:17 and in the packet still having the
16:19 detail that
16:22 >> and toward that idea
16:24 I kind of come into my preparation for
16:27 the meeting feeling like if I read the
16:29 packet and the memo and the staff
16:31 information, I don't also have to look
16:34 through the slides to get all of the
16:37 information because I know I'm going to
16:38 get that at the meeting. There have been
16:41 some instances
16:42 where I got information from the slice
16:46 it wasn't in the memo and that is a
16:49 little bit of a dominant system by far
16:52 for the most part.
16:55 >> I mean I will honestly say I don't read
16:57 every 500 page packet from not on a
17:00 Thursday I have a like
17:02 >> this is a chunks of the system.
17:06 Yes. So, so you know, I I start with
17:08 them would be the staff summary and then
17:10 I decide what details I need to dive
17:12 into from there, but I would also I mean
17:15 I think an example of something where we
17:17 did have a good amount of detail and I'm
17:18 struggling to remember if we did that in
17:20 full counsel just committee was on
17:22 bicycle policy or electric bike policy,
17:25 right? And staff put together a decent
17:27 amount of okay, here's a here's a matrix
17:29 of the type of vehicle situation. that
17:32 kind of detail. Um I liked that because
17:34 that is how we used to do it and it felt
17:36 more like that. We did that full
17:37 council, right? And so just because yeah
17:40 like that's the kind of detail I'd like
17:42 to see more of in working issues.
17:47 So what's the difference between the
17:48 presentation of the committee and
17:50 presentation counc
17:52 >> yeah are we okay with having the
17:55 information repeated
17:57 >> and that's because I feed back our view
18:00 that says we've heard it in committee
18:04 then it should be higher loans
18:07 >> purpose of the committee is to dive into
18:10 the the details and so council members
18:12 who serve on the committee don't have
18:14 told me they don't want to hear exactly
18:16 the same presentation again at council
18:20 because that's what it reads. So
18:23 >> believes the context portion
18:27 >> maybe is is the piece that needs to come
18:30 out more than the details. I guess
18:34 >> says your staff some of your staff will
18:37 think your staff wants to give you every
18:39 little nugget. I
18:41 >> and what I try to do is I try to hold
18:44 them back say put the nuggets in the
18:46 staff report the council members don't
18:49 want to get it because this this is a
18:51 time management issue too you know and I
18:54 I think an idea of adding a section to
18:57 everything that's background
19:00 couple slide she can she can do that but
19:03 the the push and pull that back
19:08 you know our up or the detail of the
19:12 committee. That's what the committee is
19:13 for. It's doing the work for the G. The
19:15 council doesn't have to do the word
19:17 section. So if that's the case, we can
19:20 continue to do that. But make sure that
19:22 that contact backs
19:25 both same. Does that make sense? Yeah,
19:29 I'm going to add a point here. As a new
19:31 person that does not have the full
19:32 background in this question to me kind
19:34 of sounds to me like what's the intent
19:38 to these changes in terms of like are we
19:40 trying to make this better for council
19:42 to make the decision or are we trying to
19:43 make the public have more access to this
19:46 information?
19:48 Which which goal are we trying to
19:50 achieve in this? And is is is crucial to
19:54 how this is going to be handled.
19:56 if it's more for the public or it's more
19:58 for us.
19:59 >> Listen to me and try and meet that goal
20:03 on what that side be.
20:05 >> Listen to me.
20:06 >> Well, I mean to use the electric bike
20:08 example, um it is a potentially
20:11 contemptuous issue. So members of the
20:12 community think that it is dumb for us
20:15 to be restricting their use electric
20:17 bikes at any capacity. Right.
20:18 >> Right. So to the extent that we can
20:20 provide publicity the rationale behind
20:23 the decisions that we make I think it's
20:26 valuable for us as a council and
20:27 valuable
20:29 so if you just say
20:32 you know
20:34 you know at committee
20:38 >> I want to pivot back to coming on I was
20:41 right about the my expectation in
20:44 committee is if we have an ordinance
20:45 that committee reviews every plan the
20:47 ordinance itself is
20:49 typically four, six, eight, right? But
20:51 that full council doesn't do ordinance,
20:54 right? We don't we in recent years we
20:56 haven't done as much writing or
20:58 sufficiently previously, but at least on
21:01 ordinance and sash is the the answer to
21:03 your question about detail. Well, PD
21:07 does take line by line.
21:09 >> Yeah. But certainly not at full counsel,
21:11 right? Right. They did. So I think that
21:13 was that's a I think a good example of
21:15 what the committee should operate is
21:17 that then the committee came each time
21:20 there was some peace and kind of
21:22 summarize this concern. I mean I will
21:25 say the discussion of uh the overcast is
21:29 a is an example of where I think there
21:31 was not enough detail and footh
21:39 detail in the uh in the content but I
21:43 think the decisions that we made that
21:45 night
21:47 >> would have been a little bit hard to
21:48 follow by the public um because then
21:50 there wasn't as much tech information as
21:53 it would have been historically.
21:55 So is there at least there are consensus
21:57 to that
22:00 >> golden item. So
22:02 >> but I mean I mean
22:06 >> part of my job as gatekeeper and to try
22:08 to manage I just want to make more to do
22:12 all this. It just adds elapse time and
22:15 it's repeating in some respects what's
22:16 already in the packet. And if again back
22:19 to council member Rod's issue about who
22:21 is the audience of the audience
22:23 community then this makes great sense
22:26 I'm just not convinced that you're all
22:29 there
22:30 is there a role for committees to
22:32 suggest what needs more detailed context
22:35 if the full
22:38 because a default for everything asked
22:41 about you know the form that you forget
22:43 the agenda I can see that be uh the tide
22:48 some and out like informing type public
22:52 um there I think is a role for
22:55 discretion what are
22:58 the barons and crash these signs
23:01 I love that idea because every there's a
23:04 point where these say now it's just
23:05 going on versus going regular business
23:07 you're also saying well you know how
23:09 much
23:11 and so for those things I'm very
23:14 >> what does that okay
23:16 >> well that's that's basically
23:18 So if if that's sort of a guide post we
23:21 could try and again we'll add Tisha
23:26 I'll ask you for any comment if we if we
23:28 add to there's a sort of a format to
23:31 what we requesting the parks to do in
23:33 presentations why here was the requested
23:36 action we asking twice so if we do a
23:39 background context piece
23:42 that makes sense right and that's not
23:48 something at the end that says how
23:51 relationship to curricul that that the
23:55 staff of the committee get so Andrew and
23:59 because we're trusting our committees to
24:00 do that that first line work
24:03 >> and that's why we have the committees if
24:05 not we would do everything everything
24:09 >> by laws of choice so I think the
24:11 committee served that terms great that's
24:14 one area I noticed where We have road
24:16 for improvement. What about the Spanish
24:18 road closure discussion? We always
24:19 needed to have headline slide. said six
24:22 weeks in March and April slows and from
24:25 July to No September that road like we
24:27 had a slide that had every permutation
24:30 poramish road of which ones were narrow
24:33 and it was hard to discern I think for
24:36 people that lived in that community the
24:37 exact which road
24:39 >> which months and our job and I think it
24:43 would be helpful for council to have
24:44 that same summary at Paul's point
24:45 helpful for the community to walk
24:47 anybody who watched that brief preset
24:49 saying I'm interested about how impact
24:51 me we can kind of we can do I think a
24:54 better job of kind of spelling out these
24:56 are the main impacts this is and now
24:58 we're going to give you a little bit
24:59 broader you know sense of what's
25:02 happening but the main thing if you're
25:04 just going to watch 30 seconds of this
25:05 is your world's going to be closed for
25:07 six weeks coming up in a couple months
25:09 and it's going to close by
25:11 all just
25:15 >> all right so so using the committees to
25:17 help inform the level of detail but
25:20 really around uh helping to set context
25:22 for those important need perhaps more
25:25 complex issues or topics that come
25:27 before but what I also heard was
25:29 obviously the community is part of the
25:30 audience but also within the body to
25:33 frame it and that helped to address the
25:35 question of oh why right you have the
25:38 impact u of the decision I'm forward so
25:42 just kind of zooming it up to make sure
25:43 that that's crystal clear audio so I'm
25:46 hearing that so okay Great. Um, all
25:50 right. Well, let's let's look at that
25:52 last question there and then I want to
25:54 >> kind
25:56 of um just an observation that I have
25:59 from uh other boards. Um, so I had
26:03 limited time on our council though I've
26:05 been to years. It's about two months
26:08 total. So much of that that is from
26:11 perspective of working on both startup
26:13 boards as well as government boards. Um
26:16 an observation that I have is that the
26:18 uh the
26:20 >> the startups that boards which um that
26:24 are most successful are those where the
26:25 boards can can
26:29 um and openly criticize and provide help
26:34 in a way where you're on the same page
26:37 guess assistance. Um but that's that's a
26:41 key function of those bodies. it's to
26:45 >> be a rubber stamp. Um, and the ones I'm
26:47 still on have done that effectively. The
26:49 ones I've not when it was effectively
26:51 rubber staff for CEO and customer, uh,
26:53 they don't exist. Uh, alternatively, the
26:56 I'm on a federal board right now that is
26:58 effectively a rubber stamp for the
27:01 federal lead of that. Uh, it exists
27:04 indefinitely because there's no
27:05 selective pressure. Uh so we in
27:09 government I think we have this um like
27:11 we we can't fall in traps where we
27:13 aren't able to where boards cannot
27:14 necessarily get feedback there's not
27:17 necessarily a good quick sight per turn
27:21 uh to tell you if you're doing good if
27:23 you have questions but all so often so
27:26 uh from a good government's goal in
27:29 general that I like to see it's a
27:30 culture where that's accepted and
27:33 embraced and be helpful u and where a
27:35 rubber stack is not is practically not
27:38 even desired forming better policy
27:40 differing discussion and debate
27:42 discussion
27:45 >> where it's like you know the the
27:47 conflicting discussion between the
27:49 result of that is something that's
27:50 matter what a
27:54 >> well I think an underlying principle
27:56 that is so important to make that
27:58 something that that doesn't go south in
28:01 terms of relationships and all that is
28:03 really clear understanding of a your
28:06 Why? Uh and so we get in touch immediate
28:08 that you're you're here for the
28:10 community. That's why and that uh and
28:13 then hugging each right and so bringing
28:16 new perspectives, new ideas, you know,
28:18 different opinions to the table and be
28:20 healthy in a respectful manner. And so
28:23 being the how is one that can be able to
28:27 facilitate robust conversation and
28:30 responsive sharing. Well, I think the
28:34 job like if I use my state investment
28:36 board for example and board a lot of
28:38 time like we're rubber stamping staff
28:41 but then I have to explain to people
28:43 we've done it recently. We've told them
28:44 we want this percentage of real estate,
28:46 this percentage of fixed income, this
28:47 percentage of equities and then they
28:49 come back with their best proposal. So
28:51 it looks like we're rubber stamping them
28:52 but we're just telling them what we as a
28:55 board have decided we want the mix to
28:57 look like. And so sometimes I think when
29:01 you have the high functioning
29:02 organizations I think you guys are
29:05 giving us really good direction but in
29:07 terms of you know the priorities and
29:09 that's what I hope we walk out of here
29:10 kind of today with and and then I think
29:13 it's our job to come back and say hey
29:16 based on what we heard here's the best
29:18 ways we think we can kind of achieve
29:20 some of those goals and so that is sort
29:22 of the challenge and I think on
29:25 committees that I chaired I think it was
29:28 always useful in trying to get consensus
29:31 to better public policy. And so I think
29:33 our hope is I think the administration
29:36 as we have challenging issues. I would
29:38 rather push it back a month to figure
29:40 out how to address as many of the
29:42 concerns from council as possible and
29:44 try to bring it forward when we think we
29:48 have I think just better public policy
29:50 if everyone feels like they have some
29:53 issues. So I think our challenge is put
29:55 the ideas out there. You guys get the
29:57 feedback, try to see how we can address
29:59 that. I would much rather take a month
30:01 or two longer to have a 70 vote and to
30:04 rush something just because you got four
30:06 votes and you're like, "Okay, we're
30:07 going to run it." And I I think from my
30:09 perspective is we try to reach out and
30:13 and I don't want if we aren't successful
30:15 in doing that, I don't want people to
30:17 feel like the council's rubber stamping
30:19 what we're proposing. I just want people
30:21 to realize there's a lot of work that's
30:23 happened to make that proposal something
30:25 the entire council couldn't support and
30:27 my thing is idles
30:31 >> I hide the method value
30:36 >> so uh I'm an engineer uh we use metrics
30:39 correct fact we have metrics
30:43 uh our use of that uh is spot right and
30:47 coming back to the what do we present at
30:49 caps meetings, right? Often times the
30:52 sort of uh statute required metrics are
30:56 buried on page 34 stat and they should
30:59 be top of line, right? Um I'm not sure
31:02 we have, you know, you're going to hear
31:03 later about things that are priorities.
31:05 I'm not sure any of those priorities
31:06 have good metrics like and some metrics
31:09 are expensive. Like you can have a
31:11 metric that says what fraction of your
31:13 top 50 intersections have a C or better,
31:16 right? And that's a mobility metric.
31:18 It's expensive to go get every top. We
31:20 have to go get a thr I know $50,000 or
31:23 something like that, but we don't use
31:25 any of that, right? And if the public
31:27 said to me right now like on public
31:29 safety, how are we doing? Um I don't
31:32 have metrics right now and I feel that
31:34 we consistently topline when we're
31:36 discussing public safety. And so I I
31:39 don't know exactly how you solve that
31:41 problem, but I I think it's a persistent
31:43 and it's related back to what you
31:45 present.
31:46 at what you want to use and see.
31:50 Listen to Well, I was going to say I
31:52 mean on the data and effectiveness I
31:55 think I mean I actually brought that in
31:57 the what do you want to stream out
31:58 course like just based on data and being
32:01 resources so we're very much there but I
32:04 think with the data I think that's kind
32:05 of a bigger discussion on like how we
32:07 use the data that we do have right it's
32:08 like we have the dashboard we have one
32:10 presentation per year where we go
32:11 through everything and then it's not
32:13 clear to me how that actually translates
32:15 into our agenda right so like when we're
32:16 setting priorities is that when we
32:18 should be looking through the agenda
32:19 through the data that we collect and
32:21 that's the cadence or is it like you
32:24 know with this policy we actually say
32:26 this policy is intended to have this
32:28 effect and then we actually have a
32:30 cadence we reviewed does this policy do
32:32 what we thought it was going to do I
32:34 actually don't think that's a thing that
32:36 typically happens in
32:39 I think there's some and
32:41 that takes a lot of resources so I know
32:43 the state of California theft you know
32:45 on housing they're like okay you know
32:46 we'll pass this policy and then we'll go
32:48 back a year later and see if it thought
32:49 it would and it doesn't then say we
32:51 should do the few things but I don't
32:53 think we really have that as like small
32:56 thing and I also know you know doing
32:59 that stuff does take a lot of resources
33:01 so I don't want to you know then it's
33:03 like your effectiveness goes down and
33:04 spending all your time generating your
33:05 progress not you know like I just need
33:07 to things but I think it's it's
33:09 definitely an area that I think we still
33:11 have to cross that because I think we're
33:13 doing a decent job of what we have with
33:16 dashboard you know I personally have
33:19 I some of the metrics that we put should
33:21 be different. I actually never got a
33:23 good answer to like are you know how
33:25 would we change some of the metrics that
33:28 we select to be more informative to what
33:30 we're doing. Um but I don't think issue.
33:33 Yeah. Anyway,
33:34 >> well
33:36 at least
33:37 >> three years Dale, four years, three
33:40 years. Every spring we come to the
33:43 council at a meeting like this. We
33:44 present the data you say is this giving
33:47 you the information you want? How does
33:49 it inform budget? And I think what's the
33:52 date of this next meeting this very I
33:55 believe May if we have a meeting already
33:59 which we'll do is share the data that we
34:02 like we'll get confirmation from you
34:05 it's meaningful uh then that will help
34:08 that's the first step of informing the
34:10 2728 budget process
34:12 >> so I mean as we get closer to that maybe
34:15 we talk about how to make that as
34:17 meaningful as possible. Yeah, but we
34:19 >> I think it's kind of like the council
34:21 new business request process. Sure, we
34:23 have a way that we've been doing it, but
34:25 I'm not sure it's been effective toward
34:27 our goals. And so the idea of like do we
34:31 rather than having it in one meeting and
34:34 talking about that, do we bring it into
34:39 different sets of policy discussions,
34:41 but then also have a cycle back for have
34:44 they been effective? And so I think
34:46 there's maybe a conversation about how
34:48 are we using this and is
34:50 >> it
34:53 today when we talk about uh priorities
34:56 and we want to talk about what does that
34:58 look like? What does success look like?
34:59 you know, that starts to point you in a
35:01 direction and how do you measure and
35:03 quantify success using that conversation
35:05 and then looking into May it sounds like
35:08 at the data that you have available you
35:10 know to be able to look through that
35:11 lens and what else might you need to
35:14 know or what different bits of you might
35:16 be helpful
35:18 >> I was going to say but it's not just
35:19 about reviewing the whole dashboard once
35:21 I to counsel Bart's earlier point about
35:24 you know setting the context I think for
35:25 every policy decision right it should
35:27 tie back to you know Oh, here is the
35:30 item that's ambient to address. The
35:32 problem is, you know, we have this data
35:33 point that says X and and sometimes
35:35 things come up that aren't necessarily
35:37 in the data, right? Like the E mode is
35:39 like that's not the thing data on, but
35:41 it's something we heard a lot of. So, I
35:43 think that have being able to, you know,
35:45 in every policy decision saying, hey,
35:47 here's items like the data that leads us
35:50 to that is an issue that needs to be
35:52 addressed
35:54 like setting both, you know, for council
35:56 lines.
35:58 I think that's the question of how do
35:59 you use the air, right? So, you know,
36:02 the the cadence as you mentioned, but
36:04 also the the opportunities for engaging
36:07 with the air. I I think this one's
36:09 really important. So, you can control
36:12 the temperature in your house by a valve
36:15 on your furnace, right? Adjusting how
36:17 much uh gas or electricity is going into
36:20 your furnace. Or you can have a
36:22 thermostat that measures the temperature
36:24 and automatically calibrates that uh
36:27 signal based on the actual temperature.
36:29 Right? The first thing is called running
36:30 open loop and the second thing is called
36:32 running closed loop. Right? We don't run
36:34 closed loop on our policy in March. We
36:37 don't say all right here's the policies
36:39 we did last year which ones worse than
36:42 here's the data. Now I don't know if you
36:43 can do that with everything but um we
36:46 need to do it on some things and the
36:48 things that we prioritize here today we
36:50 need to do it on well and I think that
36:52 you're I think the effectiveness things
36:54 important but so like if land use gets
36:57 changed in the valley floor like there
37:00 should be a change in amount of building
37:02 permits that are applied for by the end
37:04 of 2027 there's not clearly everything
37:07 we did didn't work out to the point what
37:10 the goal was and so I Those are I think
37:14 there are very specific examples of
37:17 things where we can I think it's a
37:18 fairly good idea to say we do the policy
37:21 we're going to measure it at the end of
37:23 27 and we're going to say this is how
37:25 many permits are in the pipeline and if
37:28 it having gone up then find out like
37:31 what did we get wrong sort of
37:33 >> well and starting with one of the rooms
37:35 in council is the place to start you
37:37 know and you you can look at you know
37:39 you can have a desire for data in all
37:41 directions But starting there, make sure
37:43 you have the right ventric.
37:47 All right. Well, in the interest of
37:48 keeping us moving, um the question that
37:50 was at the bottom there and uh run to a
37:53 little bit was what do you want this
37:55 council to be known for? What do you
37:57 want to be known for? uh when you look
37:59 back or you know in the voices in that
38:01 community um
38:03 >> ungrerive
38:05 yeah
38:07 >> proous
38:10 it doesn't mean you don't
38:13 still have strategic plans and things
38:15 like that but at the end of the day the
38:16 strategic plan is just a plan like I
38:19 think you have to really I would love to
38:22 see this council be known for the
38:25 effectiveness
38:26 I guess having that sort of sense of
38:28 urgency see like which is hard to find
38:30 anything
38:31 that says every secret and actual
38:35 outcomes
38:36 >> subtype
38:39 say I'm trying to how to say this but
38:41 like accessible like as I feel like
38:44 there's a lot of distrust of government
38:46 as a whole and I would love to
38:49 government that people feel like oh well
38:51 yeah the over there are crazy but here
38:54 our government helps our government is
38:56 good for us our government successful
38:58 and pretty
39:01 yes
39:05 connection to our community then they go
39:06 with me crazy but here it's done right
39:09 it's like homemates I can feel say
39:12 >> yeah and even do that not only by being
39:14 accessible if I'm being affected y
39:17 >> because if you are somebody who listens
39:20 and you know hears everything and they
39:22 can get in touch with you if you don't
39:24 do then your
39:28 undstead
39:32 on Paul's point. I think I'd like our
39:35 council to be known uh in this sense
39:37 that every person that lives here
39:39 regardless of race, gender, association,
39:42 status, can point to one or two things
39:46 that the council did that helped make
39:47 their life better the past year. Um you
39:50 know, whether that's a a new crosswalk
39:52 or south board. Um, you know, you you
39:54 funded some additional money for seven
39:57 days to help make the festival better.
39:59 Everyone should be able to point to the
40:00 one or two things made your life better.
40:02 We did it to make that happen.
40:07 >> Second
40:12 tangible results too. Something that's
40:14 just some things for people to be aware
40:16 of that I think we do going like the
40:18 social media aspect like that is that
40:20 know presuming that we are effective and
40:22 we get things done is how we get that
40:24 out to the community because it's good
40:26 government is often invisible people
40:27 don't realize things are working like
40:30 what went into things working if it's
40:31 working and so how we translate that and
40:34 and broadcast that to the community like
40:37 in all the audience that that's auto
40:39 scroll It's not funny.
40:44 >> Well, I would say it is actually also,
40:47 you know, everyone's problem, right?
40:48 like seeing how there's some, you know,
40:51 local electric officials in the country
40:53 who are amazing at social media, you
40:55 know, like I saw a video of how the dump
40:58 trucks in New York are being repurposed
41:00 at snowplow and they're out there like
41:02 explaining all that and that's you see
41:04 that and you're like, oh, our city
41:06 government is like being creative and
41:08 doing things to make our lives better so
41:09 that you know there are snows
41:11 everywhere. I think to the extent that
41:13 we can kind of communicate more of that
41:15 because honestly a lot of people are
41:16 sciented
41:19 use of social media to you know help
41:22 them read things that we're doing
41:23 storytelling. Yeah. And storytelling I
41:25 think is important because also you know
41:27 with social media obviously we don't
41:29 want to be out there like our
41:30 constituents but you know some of the
41:32 good things like showing that on social
41:34 media and make and people will see it
41:36 and oh that's great you know city
41:39 government doing all kinds of great
41:40 things. I think that is honestly like
41:42 people aren't most people aren't going
41:45 to know most of the things that would be
41:47 right like you're the average focus
41:49 you're not going to hear about Chase
41:54 what have you. I think most people know
41:57 it's like oh they want to see anything
42:02 like oh yeah we saw a new park all those
42:05 types
42:07 >> yeah
42:09 help me connect the dots right between
42:11 the work that you're all reing how the
42:13 city is doing with the lives of your
42:16 community helping them to see the
42:18 relationship between
42:19 >> I on that on that point I I I think the
42:22 city had some treat
42:27 not working.
42:30 >> Sorry, Pete.
42:33 >> Um,
42:35 >> we're still glad it's working.
42:38 >> I I think the city has done a good job.
42:40 There's always room to improve, but uh
42:42 communicating the the that kind of happy
42:45 fun stuff that the city does um that
42:48 getated well. Um I'm on things that are
42:51 more contentious. I think those are
42:53 harder. Um and this is where you don't
42:55 want individual council members again
42:56 arguing with public because when does
42:58 that go well? Um but you know that's
43:02 that would be a good aspirational goal
43:04 to figure out how the city or someone
43:07 I'm not sure who that is exactly um is
43:09 able to when we have contentionous
43:11 discussions that get out there most
43:13 people are I mean we you know we can
43:18 either completely seed all public the
43:20 public forums next door um or we can try
43:23 to find some way to constructively
43:28 have someone or some entity trying to
43:31 engage and contentious things as well.
43:36 >> Yeah, that's a good I mean I would say
43:37 obviously we got a lot of negative stuff
43:40 on having the immigration gaining air
43:43 last weekend. Uh I don't know. I find it
43:46 hard to figure out cuz sometimes I feel
43:47 like engaging with some of the people
43:51 upset about that. I don't know where
43:52 you're going to end up. I mean it's just
43:54 hard. I mean it's uh listen to me. I I
43:58 don't know. It's really tough cuz I
43:59 think social media has many great things
44:01 about it. But I found during my time in
44:03 the Senate, the people who are most
44:04 upset, I just said, "Get their number.
44:07 I'll call them. I drive home tonight."
44:08 Because I found I could not do anything
44:10 with them by email or text, I had to
44:13 actually have a human to human
44:15 conversation so they felt like they were
44:17 heard and listened to. And I just I
44:19 think for some of the people that are
44:20 upset with Wilson's doing, I think I
44:24 don't know. I don't know if we can solve
44:25 those concerns via social media. I do
44:27 think direct outreach I mean we're a
44:29 community of 42,000 people is not so
44:32 overwhelming. I think and there's not
44:33 that many people normally that are super
44:35 pissed off. I think
44:37 >> um
44:37 >> if we discover they're upset by social
44:39 media I think my default I'm just
44:42 speaking I guess off the cuff. I mean, I
44:44 haven't thought about this, but is I
44:46 would feel comfortable just to reach out
44:47 to them saying, "Hey, I'm willing to
44:48 talk to you directly." Or if anyone on
44:50 the council wants to, I think we'll have
44:52 more traction in our community. And that
44:54 means if they're bombarding us from
44:55 somewhere else in the country or
44:56 somewhere else in the state, like, "No,
44:58 I'm not engaging in that." But if
44:59 they're an Isqua Yeah.
45:00 >> business or resident or anything, I
45:03 would rather have try to get through
45:05 conflict with direct human interaction
45:07 rather than
45:08 >> social media. Response to that. So um
45:11 first of all I recognize it's very easy
45:13 for me to say this is an aspirational
45:14 goal and not suggest any mechanism to do
45:16 so. Um
45:19 just I I think you're pro for a city
45:21 like is I think you're right about the
45:22 the the most vocal. I think what would
45:24 be interesting and useful to focus on
45:26 would be one level down where they're
45:28 not the most vocal, they're not the most
45:30 angry. It's not the people that are
45:32 showing up with pitchforks. It's they're
45:34 upset. um and they're one level of
45:37 engagement down where they're not
45:38 necessarily getting going to get the
45:39 personal outreach because they're not
45:41 being loud enough, but it's a it's
45:43 that's actually going to be a lot more
45:44 people. Um so finding that figuring out
45:46 how to engage with them would be useful
45:48 if possible. You know,
45:50 >> it's almost a universal truth and
45:52 figuring out how to reach people that
45:53 are not actively engaged in the positive
45:56 or the negative. And so it's a good
45:58 >> great focus. I I I I think it becomes
46:01 how do you get people there Monday night
46:03 at 7 p.m. or or or equivalent because I
46:07 think social media is designed to bring
46:10 about discord and uh and unhappiness. I
46:13 think we're all living in a giant
46:15 episode of MTV uh was the old show.
46:18 >> Real world. Yeah, we're all living and
46:20 and the producers have decided to make
46:22 it as unpleasant and and fracturous as
46:25 possible like big causes.
46:28 That was that big brother.
46:30 >> Big brother.
46:31 >> Yeah.
46:33 >> Yeah.
46:34 >> The last one I watched was Real World
46:36 like 30 years ago. So I don't know any
46:37 of those other ones you're talking
46:38 about. But um but you know it it's
46:40 really designed to to to to bring out
46:43 discordant people acting horribly and in
46:46 ways that they would be embarrassed to
46:47 say. They say things that they would be
46:49 embarrassed to say in front of their
46:50 parents or grandparents. And so I don't
46:52 find those forums um generally
46:56 conducive. I don't generally come away
46:58 from those forums with a better idea of
47:00 how to do governance. Um, but how do you
47:02 get people like that? That that thing
47:05 Mondays at 7 p.m. is a big deal, right?
47:07 I was on council when that kid was
47:09 killed on Newport and we spent six
47:11 months hearing from the community about
47:13 how we killed that kid and my job was to
47:16 sit there and listen and take it. Right.
47:20 And so, um, I don't I'm not saying
47:23 everybody needs to physically come in at
47:24 7 p.m. on Monday nights, but that thing
47:26 where people can come to the council is
47:28 to me the closest thing that I would
47:30 call sacred. Like, we have to be there.
47:32 We have to do it. We have to hear
47:34 people. We have to listen to people. We
47:36 don't necessarily have to do what they
47:37 want us to do. But I just get really
47:39 nervous about social media because it is
47:41 such a in, you know, it is a feature
47:44 that it causes everybody to be angry
47:46 every single time they go on it. And I
47:48 know people who don't engage in it. In
47:49 the same way that there's an equity
47:51 issue because there's people who don't
47:52 access have access to computers, there's
47:54 people who have decided they're not
47:55 going to do social media because life is
47:57 too short. So, how do you get people
47:59 involved in the structured conversations
48:01 where all eight of us elected officials
48:03 hear them at the same time? Well, so I
48:05 think we could probably talk about
48:06 social media and the the highs and lows
48:09 associated with that for the rest of our
48:11 time together because there are so many
48:13 important and significant touch points
48:16 and influences of that world. Um, but if
48:19 we're comfortable, I think that the the
48:22 important message here is continue to
48:25 pursue transparency and find ways to
48:27 engage, you know, at your council
48:29 meetings via social media,
48:31 but also perhaps other ways that
48:33 >> Jen mentioned you could do the copy
48:35 things, right? That could be something
48:36 that you guys could do on your own or
48:38 you could have a more structured thing
48:40 where everyone does.
48:42 >> Maybe that's a good bike rack thing too.
48:45 You know, the council's done different
48:47 things like that over the past several
48:49 years. This council needs to decide what
48:52 you want to do.
48:53 >> Yeah. What our public engagement looks
48:54 like because we have tried multiple
48:56 things. I think the ultimate challenge
48:59 that we have is the council meetings
49:02 like I think it's like we're presenting
49:05 information you as a governing body are
49:06 voting on those things like it's not a
49:08 dialogue of us arguing and stuff back
49:11 and forth we want to hear from the
49:12 community but it's been very clear this
49:14 is not the place for us to have a back
49:16 and forth argument but then the question
49:18 becomes where is that place is it online
49:20 is it in person like because if you
49:22 don't create it
49:24 >> it will happen
49:24 >> maybe bad things happen and so I don't
49:26 know the answer to that. But at this
49:28 point, I will admit that I think back
49:30 criticism of our process is valid. There
49:33 is no forum for us to kind of have this
49:36 back and forth. And I don't know how you
49:39 fix that, but it's worth doodling on.
49:41 >> Yeah, everybody has different
49:43 strategies.
49:44 >> The council meetings, I really want them
49:45 to be like, we're doing business like
49:48 we're going to present information. The
49:49 council is going to vote on the
49:50 information and then things will become
49:52 law or not become law. And that's the
49:54 reality of it. Well, the other piece to
49:57 those is the committee of the whole. You
49:59 all have to decide what that looks like.
50:01 I think in part committee of the whole
50:03 was an opportunity for people to call
50:06 issues. Um, so you all need to figure
50:09 out how best to use the committee of the
50:11 whole chief. I will say that on services
50:14 and safety, I always let a certain
50:17 amount of back and forth with the public
50:18 occurring, right? if if Connie or Steve
50:22 or anybody else wanted to come in and
50:24 ask a question, I would usually reframe
50:25 that question back to staff if it was a
50:27 if it was a good question. And so there
50:29 was some of that back and forth, but
50:30 we've never done it at committee as a
50:32 whole. We've allowed we've allowed
50:34 input, but the same way we allow input
50:36 at at regular meetings. It's also about
50:39 engaging the other 38,000 people on the
50:42 right. We don't have the time to look at
50:45 that.
50:46 >> Okay, great conversation. All right. So,
50:48 I want to just I I want to make sure
50:50 anybody who has additional comments
50:51 around what you want to be known for if
50:53 we can capture those. Uh yeah, good.
50:56 >> Stewardship. So, we write laws and we
50:58 write checks, which is a nice way of
51:00 saying we take people's money and we
51:01 take their freedom. Um so, the question
51:03 is, you know, that is you know that is a
51:08 big important job and I always feel like
51:11 people like taxes. Nobody likes nobody
51:14 loves paying taxes. People pay taxes.
51:16 They are enthusiastic to pay taxes on
51:18 the things they care about and they are
51:19 unenthusiastic pay taxes they're not
51:22 enthusiastic about. So that stewardship
51:24 is if a if somebody comes up to me and
51:26 says, "Council member Martz, you voted
51:29 for a tax thing. Shame on you." Right?
51:32 You supported the school district's uh
51:34 levy. Shame on you. Right? You as a
51:37 stewardship means that you can look them
51:39 in the eye and say, "Yes, I did and
51:41 here's why." And the subtext on that is,
51:44 and if you want to vote me out next
51:46 time, vote me out. Right? My hope is
51:48 that people take a look at the sum of
51:50 your work over the course of your term
51:52 if you choose to run again and and
51:54 decide how they think you did because
51:55 you made some tough decisions. But that
51:57 stewardship is is the thing. And how do
51:59 we and some of that comes back to
52:00 metrics and some of some of that comes
52:02 back to how do you engage the public,
52:04 right? But we have to be able to people
52:06 need to be able to come up to us in the
52:07 grocery store or at church or at the
52:09 park and say, "I think you made a bad
52:12 decision." And we have to be able to
52:13 say,
52:14 >> "Here's Yeah, here here's why I made
52:16 that decision."
52:20 Is that slide still
52:22 the rules? One
52:23 >> rules. Yeah, it should be next if it
52:24 updated. It's
52:25 >> there are two rules. Yeah. So this was
52:26 the one we were trying to find earlier
52:28 and I don't want to go down a big path
52:29 because I'm conscientious of the time
52:31 dear but you touched on a lot of these
52:33 things and I think your comments I think
52:35 bring us back to uh that stewardship
52:37 trustee steward right and so again these
52:39 are the different hats that you wear
52:42 collectively all of them right and so
52:44 there are times when you're leaning
52:46 perhaps in one or the other direction uh
52:48 but to be aware that you're you're
52:50 setting strategic direction right as a
52:52 governing body you are the trustee you
52:54 are the stewards for the longer horizon
52:57 to to look at where the city has been,
53:00 where it is going, and to be able to
53:02 make sure that there's that throughput
53:04 there. Um, representative, of course,
53:06 you know, representing the voices of
53:08 your constituents of residents of the
53:09 community. How you do that, you know,
53:12 matters. Um, being a community builder,
53:14 you're also bringing people together.
53:16 That's part of part of the rolling up
53:18 decision maker. Sometimes that's not
53:20 easy. Sometimes that's hard. Having good
53:22 information and data as we've been
53:24 talking about obviously is an asset to
53:28 be well and general oversight. So these
53:31 are the the six roles that you you need
53:33 to harp to and keep in you and think
53:35 about how they show up in a college and
53:40 typically you'll have you know certain
53:42 members of the body that might lean
53:44 towards you know be really focused on
53:46 stewardships
53:48 uh and that's like really you know I got
53:50 to make sure we stay the course and we
53:52 moving forward others might be really
53:54 focused on building community bringing
53:55 people together that's great um but
53:57 understanding the different roles that
53:59 you're performing can
54:02 provide some additional information in
54:04 our report on this if that's helpful
54:05 too. Um, yeah, lots of lots of
54:08 information, lots of the directions we
54:09 can go, but I thought it might be
54:10 helpful to just drink.
54:13 Okay, so I am looking at the time
54:15 because I want to make sure we have
54:16 adequate time for our priority
54:18 conversation. And the next slide we had
54:20 was we've talked about a bunch of this.
54:23 I think we've touched on it in a lot of
54:25 ways, but I want to ask the question in
54:26 an intentional way around kind of
54:30 expectations of each other, interactions
54:32 with the the mayor administration. And
54:34 so um we've talked about some of the the
54:38 norms, some of uh information flow,
54:40 transparency, uh these sorts of things
54:43 and we've captured that. But is there
54:45 each of the let's ask the question if
54:47 there's anything we haven't touched on
54:48 already. So what type of relationship do
54:51 you hope to have within council with
54:53 your colleagues? You know, this is part
54:55 of the how do you show up for each
54:56 other? You know, earlier was mentioned
54:59 and this I think probably goes both ways
55:00 around no surprises, right? and you get
55:03 attention, having difficult
55:04 conversations, bringing information into
55:06 the room. These were some of the themes
55:07 I think I touched on there. Is there
55:09 anything additional that you were
55:12 thinking of ahead of our meeting uh that
55:14 we want to bring into the room? So,
55:16 first of all, the the relationship among
55:23 >> politics is seen as a competitive sport
55:25 where you're battling inside the arena
55:27 as gladiators. I would hope that uh when
55:31 we're asking questions of you know if I
55:35 asked Paul about his position on you
55:38 know crosswalks or whatever it is he
55:40 would see it as an opportunity to learn
55:42 and gain understanding between the two
55:44 of us and not as a challenge to him. I'm
55:47 just trying to find the best policy that
55:48 we can going forward and understand
55:50 where he's coming from and try to learn
55:52 from what he might be bringing to the
55:54 conversation and I would hope that we
55:56 could bring that collegiality to our
55:58 relationships with
56:00 >> that's that's a a spirit of curiosity,
56:02 right? And that you're like I tell me
56:04 more
56:07 >> uh assuming good intentions.
56:10 Yeah, I think that that's that's a
56:12 really important foundational
56:15 perspective and that allows you to have
56:16 difficult conversations if you're, you
56:18 know, really authentically showing up
56:20 knowing that people want what's best for
56:22 the community. Yeah,
56:23 >> that was like a Senate rule. Don't
56:24 impugn the motives of others because it
56:27 just
56:28 >> nothing good can happen in public
56:31 discourse if you're impuging the motives
56:34 of others because I can definitely say
56:36 having interacted with all set members
56:38 of the council like everyone's here for
56:40 the right reasons. Everybody's here for
56:41 the right reasons. I think my hope is I
56:44 feel like I've gotten to know everyone
56:47 but my hope is that the people on the
56:48 council that don't know other people on
56:50 the council as well, sorry Paul, you're
56:51 new. But uh it just try to do outreach
56:55 so for the people that you're not as
56:56 connected with because I think it will
56:58 benefit the community of Isakqua.
57:00 >> Yeah.
57:00 >> For that outreach to occur.
57:02 >> Yeah. Stay curious. I think just stay
57:05 curious and get to work. Good job.
57:07 That's other
57:08 >> I mean the the acid test will be when we
57:10 have a 4-3 or a 52 vote on something and
57:13 people feel absolutely passionately and
57:15 and if you're on the losing side of that
57:17 you there will come a day where you will
57:19 feel like I want to quit like I'm so mad
57:22 about this issue. I feel so passionately
57:24 about it. I wonder if I should quit. In
57:26 17 years I have felt that a few times
57:29 and soldiered on. Um my exemplar in all
57:33 this and forgive me several of you have
57:35 heard this before is we had a debate one
57:38 evening and uh council member Ray chose
57:40 to mention um you know how this current
57:43 topic related to another decision that
57:45 we made previously and how that was a
57:46 bad decision. Well, you can't do that in
57:48 Robert's rules. You can't re uh judicate
57:51 rejudicate a a resolved issue. And I
57:54 point of ordered it and I said point of
57:56 order that's a that's a settled issue.
57:58 And Chris said you're right. I'm sorry.
58:02 Then moves on. And that was the finest
58:04 moment of collegiality I've ever
58:05 experienced in 17 years on council. So,
58:08 we will have moments like that. So,
58:09 we're just going to have to figure it
58:10 out. And my hope is that when those
58:12 moments arrive, the the eight of us and
58:14 the staff that support us have the
58:16 rapport that we can
58:19 settle the butterflies,
58:21 hurt ourselves, and move on.
58:25 >> And then when we do have those four
58:26 three votes, not undermine
58:29 that. and take it and accept that that
58:34 is the will of the body and that's how
58:35 we move forward.
58:37 >> Yep.
58:38 >> And trust that there will be other days
58:39 and other close votes that will go your
58:42 way on things you care about.
58:43 >> Exactly. To today I just have to go with
58:46 the body understand the will of the
58:48 majority. But you're right. Yeah. It's
58:50 what what happens when you don't get the
58:53 policy that you had hoped for, but also
58:56 what happens when you do like and how if
58:58 if you are in the four to the four, how
59:00 do you how do you approach that also is
59:02 equally important. Uh
59:04 >> yeah, don't run down the sideline
59:06 taunting those players.
59:08 >> No Rick Wallen.
59:09 >> Exactly.
59:11 Well, I really liked how Russell started
59:14 out the idea of, you know, politics is
59:17 often about what can I get from you and,
59:20 you know, one up everything. And so,
59:23 similarly, I like to think of learning
59:27 from my colleagues as a an abundance
59:31 mindset rather than scarcity. oftentimes
59:34 when you're sitting there trying to make
59:36 votes in, you know, a just policy, it
59:39 feels like, oh, it's only a few things
59:41 and so that real scarcity mindset, but
59:45 the idea that, oh, okay, I can come away
59:47 with something and it creates more
59:49 nuance and we can grow the pie with the
59:52 abundance of working together because
59:55 we're all coming from different
59:56 perspectives that can ultimately make
59:58 things better as a whole.
1:00:00 >> Yeah. Which is great. I mean, yeah. When
1:00:02 you have bringing and be able to take
1:00:03 advantage of all of the experience,
1:00:06 lived experience
1:00:07 >> and and part of it is is focusing on the
1:00:09 big picture. I'll tell you of a time
1:00:10 early in um being on the council. Mark
1:00:13 and I were both proponents of a bill
1:00:15 that um the the plastic bag
1:00:18 >> and uh we had a council member that we
1:00:21 were with whose support we wanted and
1:00:23 they had been supportive of
1:00:24 environmental policies previously and
1:00:26 they had really gone out on a limb and
1:00:28 we got together with them and they just
1:00:30 said I need these three things
1:00:33 >> I'm not going to support it and you know
1:00:35 we sort of hammered through and he said
1:00:36 well I can give you these two but like
1:00:38 this third thing is going to be really
1:00:39 impossible and they were just like I'm
1:00:40 not support I'm not supporting it. I'm
1:00:41 like, but you know, it's a good policy
1:00:43 and you know that the city would be
1:00:45 better off with it than without it. And
1:00:47 they were just like, no. So that got it
1:00:48 get, you know, that got too
1:00:50 transactional and too far away from like
1:00:52 where is the city today? Where could the
1:00:54 city be tomorrow? And I proudly every
1:00:57 time I'm at the grocery store and I and
1:00:59 you know, if a if a if a clerk mentions
1:01:02 about, oh, you got to do this bag thing,
1:01:04 I'm like, I supported it. I support it
1:01:05 today. It was the right decision that it
1:01:07 was the right decision now. So So
1:01:09 there's some of that in there, too,
1:01:10 right? staying focused on like how do we
1:01:12 make the city better and you know there
1:01:14 is some of that if you support this I'll
1:01:16 support this but we don't do you know we
1:01:18 we don't if the public thinks that
1:01:20 there's a lot of smoky backroom politics
1:01:23 there just isn't
1:01:25 so so keeping keeping a focus on where's
1:01:27 the city today where could the city be
1:01:29 tomorrow solves a lot of that
1:01:30 >> less transactional bartering more
1:01:33 developing better policy together
1:01:35 >> my goal is not to have when I had
1:01:37 committees I chair that had unanimous
1:01:39 votes out committee on everything for
1:01:41 the entire session. So it like my goal
1:01:44 is to do what Tola just said and you go
1:01:48 out and you find out what it is that
1:01:49 people need to have changed or added to
1:01:51 the policy. I would rather have a policy
1:01:53 with broader support and work harder to
1:01:55 get it. I'm not saying it's it's harder
1:01:58 to get th that broader support, but I
1:01:59 think my I view my role in this process
1:02:03 is to get as much consensus from the
1:02:05 council as possible on everything that
1:02:07 comes in front of a committee agenda or
1:02:10 council agenda. I'm committed to doing
1:02:14 that. I mean, I do not
1:02:16 I've seen too many split votes where it
1:02:19 just ends up not being public policy
1:02:21 with the most buying. And so my goal is
1:02:23 to try to
1:02:25 >> do more work to build more amongst this
1:02:27 group.
1:02:29 >> But com I'm on accept the will of the
1:02:31 body. Um
1:02:33 um so some of us have jobs where we're
1:02:36 council members and then we're lobbying
1:02:40 for policy somewhere else. Um so I'll
1:02:43 just say that last Thursday.
1:02:47 So last Thursday I had a meeting with
1:02:50 Ken, our representative, and I was
1:02:53 talking about things for my job with my
1:02:56 job hat on and they didn't conflict with
1:02:59 anything that we have decided here, but
1:03:01 I could see a situation where that may
1:03:03 happen. And so don't I'm just saying
1:03:06 don't impugn as as was said before,
1:03:09 don't impugn negative motives on the
1:03:11 part of the person. Please ask what hat
1:03:13 I was wearing when I'm saying those
1:03:15 things or I need to ask what hat Tolen
1:03:17 might be wearing if for you know cloud
1:03:20 computing or science or whatever you
1:03:23 might be doing as opposed to imputing
1:03:24 motives and just throw that out there
1:03:26 for people to just keep in mind when
1:03:32 >> all right the second question which is
1:03:34 kind of in response maybe are there
1:03:36 things that are in that relationship
1:03:39 interaction with the mayor and
1:03:41 administration
1:03:42 You're one phone call away
1:03:44 >> which is great
1:03:45 >> have a conversation to ask
1:03:49 >> how and what's the long range
1:03:51 application for what we're thinking
1:03:53 about doing appreciate that
1:03:56 >> I have one on the so on the high
1:03:58 performing council side of things uh
1:04:00 information equity uh I don't have
1:04:02 anything that I'm specifically saying
1:04:04 but this is a a thing that I think can
1:04:06 help organizations much better is if we
1:04:08 if we are serious about that if there's
1:04:10 something that you think is important
1:04:12 that we all know about it. Um or none of
1:04:14 us knows about it. Um and there's
1:04:16 discretion that will be required. I
1:04:17 understand that sometimes it should be
1:04:18 done some but if it's if it's one it
1:04:20 should probably be called.
1:04:22 >> Yeah.
1:04:23 >> Fair.
1:04:24 >> I think does a great job of that. That's
1:04:26 exactly what I was going to say is
1:04:27 coming into this, I feel like Wall-E has
1:04:30 done a really good job doing the
1:04:32 outreach to each of us to make sure that
1:04:34 we at least have access to the
1:04:36 information or in some cases chasing us
1:04:39 down if he really feels like we need to
1:04:42 have the information. Um,
1:04:44 >> I'm talking to you at the Cancun
1:04:46 airport.
1:04:46 >> I know.
1:04:49 >> Yeah, that it was a good example of
1:04:51 things. Um, so I I I love that you are
1:04:55 accessible to us and that you feel like
1:04:58 you want to hear from us. It does leave
1:05:01 a little question about
1:05:03 what information do some council members
1:05:05 have that others don't and how how are
1:05:09 we developing that relationship
1:05:11 cohesively along or across everybody?
1:05:14 And so just something yeah
1:05:16 >> we'll have to kind of think about and
1:05:18 figure out how we negotiate everything.
1:05:20 people know I trying to be a fairly open
1:05:23 book and I think I don't know what you
1:05:25 and been doing after the weekly meetings
1:05:28 in terms of sharing
1:05:29 >> well we've only had one
1:05:32 I know but yeah but uh it's a yeah I
1:05:36 mean it does raise a question which is
1:05:38 you know um how do we uh populate
1:05:42 information from the leadership
1:05:45 >> and how do we do it in an OPMA compliant
1:05:47 way and we haven't really completely
1:05:49 figured that out we have some ideas on
1:05:50 that meeting, right?
1:05:52 >> Well, I mean, and all of public
1:05:55 meetings, you know,
1:05:56 >> probably the biggest key to failure for
1:06:00 a council, check me on this now, is when
1:06:04 what one knows, they all know. If you
1:06:06 don't do that, that is probably the
1:06:08 single greatest
1:06:10 >> undermining. You agree? I mean,
1:06:14 >> so you may not realize it, but
1:06:18 >> religious about it. absolutely
1:06:20 positively religious. I am learning that
1:06:22 because he talks so much with each of
1:06:24 you individually, I have to catch up.
1:06:27 >> Sometimes if he shift piece information
1:06:30 with one of you, then I make a point
1:06:32 when I see you next to share it with all
1:06:35 maybe just transactional not. But if
1:06:37 it's anything of any consequence, you
1:06:40 know, you have my
1:06:42 obligation that you're going to hear it.
1:06:45 So that and the staff that's here too I
1:06:48 think knows that that we live by that it
1:06:51 is a if it's not be very top
1:06:56 it's up there. So don't ever think that
1:06:59 that that there's things going on that
1:07:01 you don't know. Um and the reason I
1:07:04 communicate so much with all of you is
1:07:06 just just to make sure nothing slipped
1:07:08 through crack because occasionally
1:07:10 something will slip through a crack. you
1:07:12 haven't seen an email because you're
1:07:14 busy living your life.
1:07:16 >> Oh no.
1:07:17 >> But that know that that's a top top list
1:07:21 thing because because if you don't do
1:07:22 it, it's the shest way to failure.
1:07:25 >> 100%.
1:07:25 >> Do do you do that with the Wednesday
1:07:27 meetings too? Because I have felt like
1:07:29 ever since we stopped having the roundro
1:07:31 and third council member those
1:07:33 leadership meet and again we've had one
1:07:36 staff meeting since I've been back
1:07:37 >> and you're just trying to bring that
1:07:38 back. So
1:07:39 >> that has felt like a
1:07:41 >> that has felt like a black box to me.
1:07:42 Like I felt like I didn't know at all
1:07:44 what was going on in those meetings
1:07:46 >> and I'll look to folks that were there
1:07:49 too. Not every meeting has things that
1:07:51 are worth sharing because they're really
1:07:54 transactional.
1:07:55 >> Sure.
1:07:55 >> So, you know, we try to we've tried in
1:07:58 the last few years to use these settings
1:08:00 for all the big talks. And so the
1:08:03 council leadership meetings are really
1:08:05 bit more of okay how are we gonna
1:08:08 schedule it out because you know you do
1:08:11 all compliant the meetings get long
1:08:13 sometimes and so we spend
1:08:17 >> those of your colleagues
1:08:20 every
1:08:22 one of my mayor goals. Sure. So I I
1:08:24 don't think that there's been
1:08:27 >> what's happened in leadership has not
1:08:28 been anything magical. Um, and so I
1:08:32 share, you know, cadence and direction.
1:08:38 >> And there have been some times during
1:08:40 leadership where I'd be like, "Hey, this
1:08:41 sounds like an issue that council needs
1:08:44 to know about it. Wall-E, will you be,
1:08:47 you know, our conduit and you've done
1:08:48 outreach,
1:08:49 >> but it's
1:08:51 >> once every couple months?" Exactly.
1:08:52 >> I can see to Lindsay's point, I can
1:08:55 already see like a flaw just from this
1:08:56 first month where I discovered there's a
1:08:59 park levy that is going to expire at the
1:09:00 end of the year. I think it makes sense
1:09:02 to renew it. I So, I've worked with Jeff
1:09:05 on what that would look like, but I
1:09:06 realize I haven't literally sent that
1:09:09 out. I I think I've had random one-off
1:09:11 meetings with people where I mentioned
1:09:12 that because I'm trying to be open and
1:09:14 transparent, but to your point, I
1:09:15 probably haven't sent out that. Yeah.
1:09:18 everybody.
1:09:18 >> And how does something like that become
1:09:21 okay, you've discovered something, you
1:09:24 think it's important, you're starting to
1:09:25 work with staff. When does council come
1:09:28 into that conversation? Does it happen
1:09:30 through the annual work plan? Like,
1:09:33 >> well, it happens in the next hour.
1:09:35 >> Yeah.
1:09:37 >> Yeah.
1:09:38 >> But what about things that come up, you
1:09:40 know, next month and then we don't have
1:09:42 another retreat to surface those things?
1:09:44 >> And that's what I think this is valid. I
1:09:46 think I have to Mr. For Wally's point,
1:09:48 I'm doing every meeting that's asked of
1:09:50 me. I'm doing like as quick as people
1:09:51 can have the meeting happen. And so I'm
1:09:54 happy to
1:09:55 >> I'm happy to do summaries, I guess,
1:09:57 after those meetings. I'm Hey, this is I
1:10:00 >> Well, I I also think that it's somewhat
1:10:02 on council president Michelle and I I
1:10:04 think we've been trying to have a
1:10:06 conversation about how do we have
1:10:08 regular engagement with the other five
1:10:10 council members that do not attend that
1:10:11 meeting in an OPMA compliant way, right?
1:10:14 And I think there's room for us. There's
1:10:16 no OPMA violation of them just sending
1:10:18 out a summary email from that or we
1:10:20 could even create the summary email to
1:10:22 share
1:10:22 >> mutually that goes through.
1:10:24 >> Yeah.
1:10:25 >> And so I think that would be a to me a
1:10:27 great idea.
1:10:29 >> But there was a time where council
1:10:31 leadership had regularly scheduled
1:10:33 meetings. The two the the council
1:10:35 president and deputy president regularly
1:10:36 met with the other five council members.
1:10:38 Right? I'm not necessarily suggesting
1:10:40 that's what we should be doing, but but
1:10:42 there's I'm just saying that there's
1:10:43 room. You know, I'm not just saying you
1:10:45 people need to do this or you people
1:10:46 need to do that. Um, council president
1:10:49 and I
1:10:51 >> we have to remember open poke means that
1:10:53 you can be in the same room together.
1:10:54 You just cannot be discussing things
1:10:56 that are going to be like
1:10:57 >> Yeah. your mission to the
1:11:00 >> Well, I think then this is a good
1:11:01 conversation. I think that uh making
1:11:04 sure awareness and shared information is
1:11:07 important. It's also an art like you're
1:11:09 really always working on it to make sure
1:11:11 and find ways to peel it for timing
1:11:14 sometimes factors in like there are lots
1:11:15 of things to keep in view. Um but the
1:11:18 commitment to making sure that you all
1:11:20 have the information that you need to
1:11:23 stay a breast of emerging issues or you
1:11:25 know questions that are emerging um is
1:11:28 important and you know you the
1:11:30 commitment to doing that and test
1:11:32 driving different ways can be
1:11:35 >> just to close. Oh go ahead. Uh, I was
1:11:37 just going to say I do think there is
1:11:39 still some of that question of you're
1:11:41 going to have to negotiate for yourself
1:11:44 when something like a parts levy comes
1:11:46 up and you're like, "Oh, I want to move
1:11:49 on that." How much do you have the
1:11:51 ability to just do it?
1:11:54 >> No, I don't think I have. I It's all
1:11:55 comes from the council. I think it's
1:11:57 just a question of
1:11:58 >> like I think right now it's like, "Hey,
1:11:59 Jeff, what could we do? what does the
1:12:02 what does your guys's kind of parks
1:12:03 board universe look like of projects and
1:12:06 then how do we share that with the
1:12:08 council and so I think we're working on
1:12:10 that to Wally's point I think the
1:12:11 thought was we could discuss it while
1:12:13 we're here but I just I think to close
1:12:15 because I think I made the comment about
1:12:16 trying to be unanimous on the votes but
1:12:19 I will also say like in the 22 session
1:12:21 we had a bill around state workers man
1:12:23 collectively bargain it was we had 28
1:12:25 votes for the bill so it was a 2821 vote
1:12:27 like we did not need any Republican
1:12:29 votes and I intentionally delayed paid
1:12:31 the vote for a week to let all the
1:12:33 Republicans, even though they were not,
1:12:34 they were very clear they're not voting
1:12:36 for the bill. I said, "You're going to
1:12:37 be impacted cuz your staff falls under
1:12:39 this. I want to know what your feedback
1:12:41 is." And we put the feedback in the bill
1:12:43 and they voted against it, but it ended
1:12:45 up being better public policy. So, I
1:12:46 think people on this council should know
1:12:48 even if you're against something, it
1:12:50 does not preclude your input being
1:12:53 factored in. And just because we take
1:12:54 that input doesn't mean you have to
1:12:56 switch your vote. I think it is
1:12:59 something that I think just generates
1:13:01 better public policy and so and to
1:13:04 Tola's point I think on the bag issue I
1:13:07 think it was better in the end just even
1:13:10 if it was small changes and it didn't
1:13:12 change the vote like at least I think
1:13:14 people feel like they're being listened
1:13:16 to and heard and that's my goal for this
1:13:17 council is every member to feel like
1:13:19 they're being listened to and heard from
1:13:21 the administration and even if it
1:13:22 doesn't change their vote it doesn't
1:13:24 mean their input's being disregarded and
1:13:26 I'm committed to doing that. I think
1:13:29 it's create the best way to create broad
1:13:31 supported public policy
1:13:33 >> also services blind spots you might have
1:13:35 otherwise uh right
1:13:40 >> all right
1:13:41 >> you sure
1:13:41 >> I think we should take a break uh we
1:13:44 good with that is there I don't want to
1:13:46 leave anything hanging if you are like
1:13:47 but I just wanted to say the one thing
1:13:50 all right let's take a break uh it's
1:13:52 quarter after 11 now let's
1:13:54 >> that's 12 well no 11 you're right
1:13:56 >> not 12 or now you're gonna tight like we
1:13:59 have socks to do. Uh so we take a we're
1:14:01 going to take a short break stretch um
1:14:04 get your circulation going. When we come
1:14:06 back we're going to start talking about
1:14:07 priorities and so I want to make sure
1:14:09 the time to really talk about what these
1:14:10 mean for you. So we come back at the
1:14:13 bottom of the hour 11:30
1:14:19 give you some what relatively clear day
1:14:22 on Saturday the rest of the day. So
1:14:24 before we have lunch, I want I'm going
1:14:26 to share with you the priority themes
1:14:28 that I've heard in our conversation so
1:14:30 we can get them into the room. Uh and
1:14:32 really want to start off there kind of,
1:14:35 you know, have I missed anything? I'll
1:14:36 I'll share context and have some
1:14:38 conversation on those just to make sure
1:14:40 that we're sort of naming what I call
1:14:42 big rocks, right? Where the big things.
1:14:44 Um we'll have the mayor also share kind
1:14:47 of his priorities that how that fits in
1:14:49 with the council priorities just for
1:14:51 full openness. you spot there. That's
1:14:53 your heads up. Um and so we'll we'll
1:14:57 have that conversation kind of get them
1:15:00 uh roughly defined around what we're
1:15:02 talking about. Then after lunch, we want
1:15:05 to talk specifically about the big
1:15:06 important priorities, the things that
1:15:08 are, you know, most important to you all
1:15:10 for the next year. What does success
1:15:11 look like? What does that mean? You
1:15:13 know, what what what translates into a
1:15:15 work life? What are the things you want
1:15:16 to actionize? Actionize. Is that a word?
1:15:20 not the kids not my mom did um for the
1:15:23 next year. And so I think if we can sort
1:15:25 of frame the conversation and get get
1:15:27 agreement on one of the the big rocks
1:15:29 maybe even without the conversation
1:15:31 behind them before lunch then we'll come
1:15:33 back and so I'm trying to keep our
1:15:35 pacing kind of flowing and that's the
1:15:38 >> So just to make sure I understood you
1:15:40 want to go through what the big topics
1:15:41 are but not dive deep on individual ones
1:15:43 and we'll come back to the big topics.
1:15:45 >> Exactly. That's right. Yeah. So, I
1:15:46 definitely want to have the conversation
1:15:47 on the on the big ones, but I want to
1:15:49 make sure that we're talking about the
1:15:51 right things. Uh, and so that's why I
1:15:53 want to frame it up first. So, um,
1:15:56 >> yes,
1:15:57 >> that's my that's my So, we will come
1:15:58 back. So, I guess the temptation will be
1:16:01 want to want to go deep into the the
1:16:03 early topics and I'm just saying let's
1:16:05 let's keep it up here first and then
1:16:06 we'll go through each.
1:16:07 >> Okay.
1:16:08 >> Okay. All right. So, there we go.
1:16:11 Strategic alignment, council priorities.
1:16:12 That's what we're shifting gears. So,
1:16:14 you know, and you'll be successful
1:16:16 because of all the things we talked
1:16:17 about already today, right? That's
1:16:18 that's the next. All right. So, here are
1:16:22 the themes. And so, shared priorities.
1:16:25 So, this where multiple people brought
1:16:26 them up. Let me hear me here. Let me
1:16:29 share a little bit about what I heard
1:16:31 and and what this means just to provide
1:16:33 some context to that. So, housing
1:16:36 affordability and don't get one to the
1:16:39 wording. We'll talk about that. I think
1:16:41 everybody mentioned that in some shape
1:16:43 or gosh and this is something that's
1:16:44 really important to a lot of lot of you
1:16:45 on council. Uh and this looks in
1:16:48 different ways. You know, this uh is um
1:16:51 looking at land use code. This is
1:16:53 looking at the um time it takes to get
1:16:56 through the permit process. There's a
1:16:57 lot of dimensions to this, but the focus
1:17:00 is how do we increase housing stock and
1:17:03 address housing affordability
1:17:06 all all levels. And so that's that's
1:17:08 stuck plenty
1:17:10 definitely had the most energy I would
1:17:12 say conversations I had. Uh the next
1:17:14 one, transportation mobility. Um I've
1:17:17 heard this as important and critical but
1:17:20 also a longer term th uh that there's a
1:17:23 acknowledgement and a concern around
1:17:25 traffic um and footprint that happens
1:17:29 every day uh particip uh and there are
1:17:32 some great opportunities on the horizon
1:17:34 with light rail and other things that's
1:17:35 a longer play. What I would say then
1:17:38 between those two the intersection is
1:17:41 around transit oriented development and
1:17:43 so touches a little bit on both the
1:17:46 housing affordability focus and also
1:17:49 transportation mobility. So it sort of I
1:17:52 think touches in both of those areas. Uh
1:17:54 I heard from some the importance of the
1:17:56 budget keeping an eye on that um can
1:18:00 being those fiscal stewards and and
1:18:01 recognizing that we're we there may be
1:18:04 some uncertainty on the horizon. So
1:18:05 being alert to the budget, not losing
1:18:07 sight of that. Uh public facilities.
1:18:10 This one um was specifically around city
1:18:13 hall and the police station. I'd heard
1:18:14 about uh but infrastructural projects
1:18:16 generally might fall into that
1:18:18 conversation. I don't want to be
1:18:19 limiting, but I heard it more around
1:18:21 public facilities and and hotspe
1:18:24 uh and then the last two, parks and open
1:18:26 space, public safety as well as
1:18:28 emergency management. Uh I heard we do
1:18:31 this really well. We're really good at
1:18:33 these things. you don't want to lose
1:18:34 that. And so I didn't hear those as we
1:18:38 need to do something dramatically
1:18:39 different, but we don't want to let the
1:18:41 fall down. Like we want to keep a focus
1:18:43 on those because they matter and they
1:18:45 contribute to quality of life uh in our
1:18:48 community. So um those were the the
1:18:50 themes that stood out to me. Now there
1:18:52 may be things that I have either
1:18:54 misrepresented or they are in addition
1:18:56 to that. And so I this is where I wanted
1:18:57 to start. So, uh, what's missing or or
1:19:01 or framing that would be helpful to the
1:19:03 conversation
1:19:04 >> comments?
1:19:06 I I I will ask my fellow council members
1:19:09 and and mayor um jobs. Do we care about
1:19:13 jobs? Because one of the things, the
1:19:15 reason that 6,000 cars a day leave in
1:19:18 the morning is because all the jobs are
1:19:20 in every job I've ever had when I've
1:19:21 lived in this in 20 plus years living
1:19:24 here has been in Bathl
1:19:26 and they've never been in and I've been
1:19:30 so does I feel like jobs also relates to
1:19:33 these but if other people if I'm the
1:19:35 only one that's fine.
1:19:37 Um I would say I think the whole like
1:19:41 figuring out economic development is a
1:19:44 big challenge because I think in terms
1:19:46 of jobs right like now that we're moving
1:19:48 more toward just like society there's
1:19:50 more of like hybrid stuff we also don't
1:19:52 like for like regional mobility honestly
1:19:55 most people that live in Isqua aren't
1:19:57 going to work in Isqua or if they work
1:19:59 in Isqua now maybe they'll take a
1:20:00 different job somewhere else and it's
1:20:02 not realistic to really expect that you
1:20:05 know a new employer in Isqua is going to
1:20:06 only be for
1:20:07 folks. We've tried that you know with
1:20:09 like I mean with Highlands and Talis
1:20:12 there's this whole concept like oh there
1:20:13 will be a Microsoft here and those all
1:20:15 kind of fell through. So I think you
1:20:17 know bringing in new major employers I
1:20:20 think is good for like the tax base and
1:20:21 those types of things. Um, I think also
1:20:24 on business, I know there's like I I
1:20:27 think economic development is something
1:20:28 that just broadly, you know, I think one
1:20:31 thing that's probably missing in here is
1:20:33 like small business and how do we
1:20:34 support that, right? Like we've talked
1:20:35 we talk a lot about permitting for
1:20:36 housing, but to me the bigger issue that
1:20:39 people see and like my friends complain
1:20:40 about is, oh my god, it takes so long
1:20:42 for all these small businesses to open.
1:20:43 Like what's what's wrong with the city's
1:20:44 permitting process? And so I think
1:20:46 that's something that, you know, could
1:20:49 >> Yeah,
1:20:50 >> I I would definitely I I
1:20:52 In principle, if somebody was able to
1:20:54 figure out a way to bring in a large
1:20:56 employer that would have a good benefit
1:20:57 to the community, I think that would be
1:20:58 great. Not sure it's not my personal
1:21:01 priority. Uh, but I will say that I
1:21:04 think it could it could dubtail very
1:21:06 nicely with housing affordability as a
1:21:08 topic as just like Kelly said and on the
1:21:10 permitting side of things and making
1:21:12 sure that the same in the same way as we
1:21:14 want to make sure we don't have things
1:21:16 that we know are counterproductive from
1:21:18 a housing affordability side standpoint
1:21:20 on this on the peritting side of things
1:21:21 that we don't have things that are
1:21:22 counterproductive from an economic
1:21:24 development perspective on the
1:21:25 permitting side of things and they could
1:21:26 many of those things could go hand in
1:21:28 hand and I think that's where we might
1:21:29 be able to defined agreement on things
1:21:32 that are dos related.
1:21:34 It almost seems like the connect not not
1:21:37 to have to cluster them but yeah that
1:21:39 whole idea sort of inqua economic
1:21:42 vitality meaning jobs housing you know
1:21:45 mobility like these pieces all fit
1:21:47 together and land use choices permitting
1:21:50 process they all sort of contribute in
1:21:52 that so maybe that's narr
1:21:58 >> well I think I will add just on the
1:22:00 economic development side I think I have
1:22:02 a very clear idea
1:22:04 what the role of our emergency
1:22:07 management team is and what the goal and
1:22:13 the point of our parks team and our
1:22:16 public facilities team. I think there
1:22:19 are many ways that you can use an
1:22:22 economic development staff and I don't
1:22:26 think we've necessarily been very clear
1:22:29 about what that is because it could be
1:22:31 focused on bring in the big businesses.
1:22:35 It could be entirely focused on support
1:22:38 our small businesses. you know, there
1:22:41 there's a lot of aspects there and I
1:22:43 think at some point we should
1:22:47 decide what that is and what we want to
1:22:51 get out of that. Um, I'm not sure I
1:22:54 would say it's necessarily my priority
1:22:56 for 2026.
1:22:59 Um, but I think it's it's an open
1:23:01 question out there.
1:23:03 >> All right. Thank you. You've answered my
1:23:04 question.
1:23:05 >> I would agree with To though that it's a
1:23:06 it should be a priority. I mean, you
1:23:08 look at all the people that have been
1:23:09 laid off, Amazon and Microsoft, and we'd
1:23:13 like them to stay in the community. We'd
1:23:15 like them to be here, but we need to
1:23:16 create opportunities for them to stay
1:23:18 here. Otherwise, they'll be moving away.
1:23:20 I think there's an opportunity as well
1:23:22 with uh the Seattle head tax. Um, you
1:23:26 know, that
1:23:28 policy choice by Seattle resulted in
1:23:30 many jobs going to Belleview and many
1:23:33 jobs going to Redmond, right?
1:23:36 um if the head tax gets passed on a
1:23:39 state level, right? What are we going to
1:23:42 do here in town to keep the jobs here so
1:23:46 they do not leave? Just the jobs that we
1:23:48 have so they do not leave. What can we
1:23:51 do from a policy point of view to make
1:23:55 the tax impact something that doesn't
1:23:59 result in jobs leaving our city? And I
1:24:02 don't know how the legislature is going
1:24:03 to go on that, but if I were a betting
1:24:06 person, I'd say they're going to pass a
1:24:07 head tax because $1.3 billion is too big
1:24:10 of a hole for them to do other things.
1:24:13 No one was talking about when I was down
1:24:15 in Olympia, no one was talking about
1:24:16 cutting any programs.
1:24:18 No one's talking about doing anything
1:24:20 that's fiscally responsible.
1:24:22 So, you know, I think that the tax is
1:24:24 coming. How do we want to be prepared to
1:24:28 take advantage of it? I think is is an
1:24:31 opportunity discussion we need to have.
1:24:35 >> Well, that's thank you. Good point. So,
1:24:37 so the focus on on jobs and and
1:24:40 forecasting, you know, potential
1:24:42 contributing factors as to where people
1:24:44 are going to be, what they're going to
1:24:45 do is important and the housing
1:24:47 affordability perhaps is a part of that
1:24:49 equation too, right? For people to be
1:24:51 able to save.
1:24:52 >> I guess from my perspective, if we're
1:24:54 really talking about attracting big
1:24:55 business, I think that goes into the
1:24:57 kind of fiscal sustainability bucket,
1:24:58 right? like we have every local
1:25:00 government is facing a structural
1:25:02 deficit. So how can we attract more you
1:25:04 know jobs, more development, more
1:25:06 investment in our city so that we
1:25:08 actually have you know the ability to
1:25:10 have the revenues to do all the things
1:25:13 that people in our community expect you
1:25:15 know police, fire, parks and open space
1:25:19 all the other great things that we do.
1:25:20 We need to make sure that know we're
1:25:22 continually
1:25:24 making sure we have the economic
1:25:26 activity in our city that's growing.
1:25:28 Otherwise, if that's not happening, then
1:25:30 the only way you can get more revenue is
1:25:31 by increasing taxes on people that are
1:25:33 already here, which have the effect of,
1:25:34 you know, potentially driving folks out.
1:25:36 And that's probably the opposite of what
1:25:38 we want. And so, I think, you know, I
1:25:40 think the attracting business and stuff,
1:25:44 I think should fall under the fiscal
1:25:46 sustainability category of, you know,
1:25:48 how do we be fiscally sustainable at the
1:25:50 water?
1:25:51 >> That's where I was going to go with
1:25:53 things. When I talk about our problems
1:25:55 with the budget, uh the terminology
1:25:59 fiscal sustainability to me um suggests
1:26:02 a scarcity mindset and suggests that the
1:26:06 only way that we can be sustainable is
1:26:08 through cuts and cuts and cuts. And I
1:26:12 think we haven't yet approached the idea
1:26:17 of growing the pie and what that would
1:26:20 look like for us if you know is there a
1:26:23 benefit to
1:26:25 streamlining permitting and economic
1:26:28 development and bringing in jobs of
1:26:31 growing our revenue streams and how
1:26:34 would we go about doing that? Is that
1:26:36 something that we would want to pursue
1:26:38 to address some of our budget issues
1:26:41 given the limitations that we have from
1:26:44 the state level? And so I would be
1:26:47 interested in having that conversation
1:26:50 when it comes to budget, not just a how
1:26:54 can we make sure we are cutting to stay
1:26:56 within
1:26:58 what we currently have.
1:27:00 >> But it's interesting too people people
1:27:02 respond to words in different ways. So I
1:27:03 appreciate you bringing that up because
1:27:05 you know sustainability could be defined
1:27:07 in so many ways but if it means
1:27:09 something specific that it's induction
1:27:12 then you know that's important to get in
1:27:15 >> I mean one way to think about this issue
1:27:18 is we have not had a jobs focused
1:27:20 development agreement in at least a
1:27:22 decade
1:27:23 >> right we've had a lot of housing related
1:27:24 development agreements we've had some
1:27:27 some development agreements that have
1:27:28 retail aspects to them but I mean Costco
1:27:31 was the last jobs related agreement
1:27:33 Right.
1:27:34 And you can argue I guess the rally one
1:27:37 is also some jobs related but it's it's
1:27:39 been a long time right and if we talk
1:27:41 about strategic relationships uh with
1:27:44 potential companies to come here to help
1:27:46 because every job every uh living wage
1:27:49 job that we provide is one less car on
1:27:51 freeway every morning or or one less
1:27:53 seat on a bus. You think
1:27:58 >> I think in the transport there's a
1:27:59 connection I think like when
1:28:01 >> light rail committed to Belleview the
1:28:03 spring district I mean kind of blew up
1:28:06 with people I think are willing to make
1:28:08 it their their global headquarters if
1:28:11 they know so I think there is a
1:28:13 connection the transportation piece of
1:28:14 light rail coming to Isiqua and Deputy
1:28:17 President Mart's goal of having more
1:28:19 jobs in Isqua because I do think there's
1:28:20 a if we can pull off if we can pull the
1:28:23 rabbit out of the hat on Sound Transit
1:28:25 that I think we open the floodgates to
1:28:28 the kind of investments you want to see
1:28:29 of large employers
1:28:32 >> that are willing to locate here because
1:28:34 like your example is they could live on
1:28:36 Lake Samish have a fiveminute drive in
1:28:38 work their employees could be commuting
1:28:39 from anywhere on the network like
1:28:41 there's a lot of really cool
1:28:42 opportunities I think
1:28:46 >> so I I think if it's added on the list
1:28:49 >> helpful not and and the other the only
1:28:52 other one and I don't know it's I mean I
1:28:54 can give examples later uh cuz
1:28:57 a list that we came out with I think for
1:28:59 the administration side the only one
1:29:00 that's not on there is this customer
1:29:01 service mentality of city staff and it's
1:29:04 something I just want to throw out as as
1:29:07 something because it would kind of
1:29:09 overlap kind of the administration goals
1:29:12 like I'll give like a really
1:29:14 like somebody complained that utility
1:29:16 bills there used to be a number on the
1:29:18 top of the bar graph saying this is how
1:29:20 many CCFs you use and then we switch
1:29:22 vendors that went away and when they
1:29:24 complained about it. Our first response
1:29:26 was you switch vendors. Sorry. And then
1:29:29 the second response was let us ask the
1:29:31 new vendor if they can put the little
1:29:33 number on the top of the bar graph. And
1:29:34 so I think our goal I think is just
1:29:36 having our first response be that second
1:29:38 response. Like we're really trying to
1:29:40 make our first response of every time
1:29:43 gets a Cclick fix or whatever it is. Our
1:29:45 first response we want to be let us see
1:29:47 what we can do. and we're trying to
1:29:49 avoid and kind of retrain staff into
1:29:51 saying we can't do that and just say let
1:29:54 us look into this and we'll get back to
1:29:56 you with potential solutions. And I
1:29:58 think because I do think that is a free
1:30:01 improvement because we're not talking
1:30:03 about hiring a new staff or creating a
1:30:04 new agency. We're just talking about
1:30:06 changing the culture of as we get
1:30:09 feedback from our residents of how we
1:30:11 respond to that feedback.
1:30:14 >> There we go. I would love if that was
1:30:16 people are open to putting that on
1:30:17 there.
1:30:20 >> There know that that's council's
1:30:23 priority as so much as that is an
1:30:27 effective use of government and
1:30:28 directing staff.
1:30:30 >> Well, it can tie into housing
1:30:32 affordability or any of the other job
1:30:33 stuff if we're if we're talking about
1:30:36 >> customer service being one of the things
1:30:37 that no customer likes in any situation
1:30:39 is having to wait. Um, so I I see a tie
1:30:43 in there that's obviously aligned with
1:30:44 priorities.
1:30:46 >> Is that it?
1:30:48 >> Just on the the details on fiscal
1:30:50 sustainability. Another thing I'd like
1:30:51 us to discuss um is what our revenue
1:30:54 tools are. Um we I know we've had we've
1:30:58 have lobbying efforts uh and our
1:31:00 legislative priorities on things that
1:31:02 can be done to affect to help with the
1:31:04 structural deficit, but I mean most with
1:31:06 the state where it is at the moment
1:31:08 they're in the middle of cutting 8
1:31:11 billion themselves uh and otherwise
1:31:13 trying to plug holes, I don't see it as
1:31:15 being a priority. It doesn't seem like
1:31:16 it's one of the priorities at the
1:31:17 moment. Um so I think we may have to
1:31:19 take this into our own hands and see
1:31:20 what those tools are. We have levies
1:31:22 that are under consideration. What do
1:31:24 those look like? and uh should we should
1:31:27 we try to utilize those and see what the
1:31:29 people are are open to paying for um and
1:31:33 not losing the things that they've come
1:31:35 to take for granted that his squad
1:31:36 provides in the future some point these
1:31:39 curves cross and we won't be able to
1:31:40 anymore if we don't do something
1:31:41 different or the cavalry doesn't come in
1:31:46 >> a little caliber
1:31:48 >> okay so um this is great so a couple
1:31:51 things so first of all on the economic
1:31:53 development the jobs. So, it sounds like
1:31:56 uh along with you know kind of the
1:31:57 opportunities that are on the horizon
1:31:59 relative to uh the transportation
1:32:02 mobility and opportunities there's
1:32:03 there's a long play there, right? And so
1:32:05 keeping it in view and the opportunities
1:32:08 that uh may arise as a result and so uh
1:32:12 you know some of these aren't going to
1:32:13 have you know tactical this year. we
1:32:15 need to f you know do these things and
1:32:17 others are like let's let's keep an eye
1:32:19 on this and keep focused and be
1:32:20 opportunistic when we can right for
1:32:23 perhaps you know bringing in additional
1:32:25 business and and pursuing other things
1:32:28 um for the um financial sustainability
1:32:31 components of having some conversation
1:32:33 around the full array of how do we make
1:32:37 sure that we are are truly we'll call it
1:32:39 responsible in how you're moving forward
1:32:41 right and then the only other thing I
1:32:43 wanted to bring into the room that I
1:32:44 heard earlier here today that may or may
1:32:47 not land on here. It may be more of um
1:32:50 you know a how uh but that that focus
1:32:53 and the interest around engagement
1:32:56 um and connecting with the community and
1:32:58 I think it touches a little bit on how
1:32:59 with the customer service pieces you're
1:33:01 describing, but it sounds like something
1:33:03 also that it's not a it's not a a dollar
1:33:05 thing, but it sounds like there's some
1:33:07 agreement that that's important. And so
1:33:09 I just bring it back to you as something
1:33:11 that I heard this morning. I I just want
1:33:13 to say I I don't think the jobs thing is
1:33:14 a long-term thing. I think it's a
1:33:15 near-term thing. Okay.
1:33:16 >> I want to put Mayor Mullet in front of
1:33:18 CEOs tomorrow.
1:33:20 >> Like we have been losing jobs here. Uh
1:33:22 we lost Marketing Masters is an example
1:33:24 of an aerospace firm uh that was based
1:33:26 here. Uh they had a they rented a
1:33:28 property rallies. They're a world leader
1:33:30 in um mounting hardware for aerospace.
1:33:34 They're gone. Um we need to we need more
1:33:37 jobs. We can't be a better community.
1:33:39 >> Okay. I guess the one maybe that thank
1:33:42 you for clarifying that and you actually
1:33:43 your headline even spoke to that but I'm
1:33:45 just sure we're gonna do that. So thank
1:33:47 you for for calling that out. Um in
1:33:50 terms of revenue on the back end how
1:33:53 that economic development investments
1:33:55 can come back and help to build the pie
1:33:57 and you know sometimes that does take
1:33:59 time. So
1:34:00 >> yeah but very important clarification.
1:34:02 Thank you for that. I think on the um
1:34:05 kind of communication and process and
1:34:09 all of that standpoint, I think this is
1:34:11 one where I'd like clarification from
1:34:14 you, Mark, is you're going to do things
1:34:17 differently than our previous mayor did.
1:34:20 And so figuring out how do you want to
1:34:26 message out and have the community
1:34:28 conversation around what our needs are
1:34:30 for transportation, what our needs are
1:34:33 for housing. And I think, you know,
1:34:36 you've already done a great job of
1:34:37 laying out those two meetings for us to
1:34:39 discuss those and further, but then the
1:34:42 next step of how do we take that to the
1:34:44 public is going to be a really good
1:34:47 thing for us to think about and figure
1:34:50 So there we kind of pocket that one in
1:34:53 that administration
1:34:55 >> side. All right. Anything else that's
1:34:59 fundamentally missing from so jobs
1:35:01 economic development generally? I heard
1:35:03 some clarifying comments relative to the
1:35:06 south.
1:35:09 >> Does it resonate?
1:35:10 >> That's right.
1:35:13 >> Excellent. I had this is
1:35:17 anything else?
1:35:19 Sorry, that's a little much at this
1:35:21 point. Go back and change it at this
1:35:23 point. Z
1:35:27 >> I mean I think I'll try to quickly share
1:35:30 I think kind of off the list of five. I
1:35:34 mean transportation's
1:35:36 the first one we have, you know, to
1:35:38 council member Nichols point, we have a
1:35:40 $2.2 million revenue stream coming in
1:35:42 from the point one on transportation.
1:35:45 The thing I look at is we have to do the
1:35:47 trail from the South Lake Mamish
1:35:48 neighborhoods in that's going to involve
1:35:50 bonding, but that cannot start till
1:35:52 after all the Culbert work we heard
1:35:54 about at the last council meeting is is
1:35:56 wrapping up. So that is the summer of
1:35:58 28. So I think the question is how do
1:36:00 you utilize that to start projects
1:36:02 between now and the summer of 28 where
1:36:04 you can move the needle? I think the
1:36:06 sense and Andrea and I have been working
1:36:09 on this with Emily and you know John
1:36:12 Martin is our current list of projects
1:36:15 is all like mega projects like $700
1:36:17 million. We don't we're talking about
1:36:19 what kind of improvements can you make
1:36:21 by doing $10 to $20 million of
1:36:22 transformation investments outside of
1:36:24 the lakes trail. I think it's really a
1:36:26 little bit of everything. I think you
1:36:28 have crosswalks you could put in in a
1:36:30 couple places. I think you have, you
1:36:33 know, a trail section along Newport that
1:36:35 we think we could be eligible for a PSRC
1:36:37 grant to improve and and upgrade that.
1:36:40 You know, part of it's already moving
1:36:41 forward. There's a second leg that we
1:36:43 think we could try to apply for. I think
1:36:45 intelligent transportation system
1:36:47 investments in terms of how our lights
1:36:49 line up. I think there is like a couple
1:36:51 million dollar project you can do it
1:36:52 front and sunset but at the end of the
1:36:54 day I think it's not just going to be
1:36:56 like here's one project you're going to
1:36:58 do that's going to solve this cause
1:36:59 transportation problems I think it's
1:37:01 going to be like here's investments in
1:37:04 intelligent transportation system
1:37:06 improvements of how the lights
1:37:07 coordinate with each other in certain
1:37:08 areas and it's hard to do that in SR900
1:37:11 because of the work on SR900 we cannot
1:37:13 restripe because we don't have the space
1:37:15 but we could lengthen the right turn
1:37:17 lane into that community into Talis to
1:37:20 kind of make it a little easier for them
1:37:21 to get out of the misery of that. And so
1:37:23 I think my guess is on the 9th that's
1:37:26 sort of roughly what you would hear. I
1:37:28 think in the park space I think you know
1:37:32 Jeff in the parks group is kind of
1:37:34 putting together a rough kind of
1:37:35 potential list if you were to do not
1:37:38 only so renewing the parks levy you
1:37:40 basically can bond for $9.5 million and
1:37:43 that's our current revenue stream that
1:37:45 expires the end of the year if the city
1:37:47 were to renew. Uh we also have two and a
1:37:49 half to $3 million of mitigation money
1:37:51 that's been dedicated to park
1:37:53 improvements that's also sitting there.
1:37:56 And I think uh on top of that we have
1:37:59 other things we could kind of invest if
1:38:01 that was the choice of the council. And
1:38:03 and I think once again it's a little of
1:38:05 everything. It's like I think the Ramos
1:38:07 trail head it would be nice if that was
1:38:08 paid and it had a bathroom so people
1:38:09 could access it. I think we have ability
1:38:12 to do trails on both Bergsma and Squawk
1:38:14 now that we can invest in. I think you
1:38:17 have a lot of we're having this big push
1:38:20 for the school district cooperation of a
1:38:21 shared use agreement. Part of that push
1:38:23 could be about us investing in
1:38:25 improvements on school district property
1:38:26 like IV having turf dod having turf the
1:38:31 sand lot behind Grand Ridge could be
1:38:33 better utilized you know to connect in
1:38:35 with those. So I think the vision on
1:38:37 parks is kind of coming back to this
1:38:39 group with kind of here's a variety of
1:38:42 projects you know the e house at
1:38:44 confluence with I think there is looking
1:38:46 at could you make upgrades there and so
1:38:49 that I think will be the parks piece I
1:38:51 think the housing piece
1:38:54 it's very I don't know it's a challenge
1:38:56 to get things moving on the on the floor
1:38:59 of you know central Isiqua I think it's
1:39:01 been a challenge to understand the
1:39:02 mitigation fees involved of you know
1:39:04 there's a daycare on locust street where
1:39:06 our impact fees for transportation were
1:39:08 half a million dollars. There is a
1:39:10 coffee shop idea, you know, as you enter
1:39:13 that lakeside property, you know, at the
1:39:15 base there of their there's half a
1:39:17 million dollars like the salon Newport.
1:39:19 Once again, you just have really large
1:39:20 impact fees that are basically making it
1:39:22 impossible for some of these businesses
1:39:24 to open up in our community right now.
1:39:26 So, I think we have to revisit what that
1:39:28 looks like. I think that uh look you
1:39:31 have to decide if on the infill I think
1:39:34 around you know Gilwin Boulevard where
1:39:36 there's already concrete do we want to
1:39:38 make it easier people to redevelop where
1:39:40 there's already concrete or do we want
1:39:42 to make it harder to develop there in
1:39:43 which case they're going to be pushed to
1:39:45 places that currently have trees. I
1:39:46 think our goal is to try to have
1:39:48 redevelopment of places we've already
1:39:49 paid, but I don't think our current code
1:39:51 makes it easy to redevelop on places
1:39:53 we've already paid. And so that's a
1:39:55 challenge. I think with public safety,
1:39:58 another to Kevin Nichols, Council Member
1:40:00 Nichols point, we have 2.2 million that
1:40:02 started coming in as of January 1st.
1:40:05 Granted, we have to get certified by the
1:40:06 CJTC to be able to actually, you know,
1:40:09 spend this money. And so that's our
1:40:10 challenge as administration is to
1:40:12 actually get that certification process
1:40:14 to the finish line. But I think that
1:40:16 creates the ability for us to bond and
1:40:18 provide improvements for, you know, our
1:40:21 police station. We can't move our police
1:40:22 station as dispatch has a jail. It has
1:40:25 to stay there. So I think our goal is to
1:40:26 find a place we can move the people
1:40:28 above the police station somewhere else.
1:40:31 And the meeting with King County
1:40:32 Executive Germay on Monday is going to
1:40:34 be around King County Courthouse as kind
1:40:37 of plan A of where we could potentially
1:40:39 maybe buy it from the county so we could
1:40:41 move some of the people above the police
1:40:43 station over to that area. And so I
1:40:46 think that uh you know public safety and
1:40:49 the building and the public facilities
1:40:50 are kind of overlapping. I think the
1:40:52 goal is want to show the community like
1:40:55 this new public safety is being
1:40:57 dedicated to improving public safety. I
1:40:59 think the the challenge you constantly
1:41:00 have in Olympia is people you say you're
1:41:02 you're going to do it for one thing and
1:41:04 then you supply it and you move the
1:41:05 money elsewhere. So I think our goal as
1:41:07 an organization is to try to figure out
1:41:08 how we can show the community that this
1:41:10 money is staying in noticeable
1:41:12 improvements to public safety and and if
1:41:14 you want a nugget like this is you know
1:41:17 it used to be you called 911 escort you
1:41:19 went by King County King County wasn't
1:41:21 great so it might take you six or seven
1:41:23 seconds before somebody picked up that
1:41:25 can help you because they had to
1:41:26 transfer to us. Now, if you call 911 in
1:41:29 the Isqua city limits, you're at our
1:41:30 dispatch center. Our response times went
1:41:32 from six seconds to two and a half
1:41:34 seconds. Like, we have some of the
1:41:35 quickest 911 response times in the
1:41:37 country because they're going directly
1:41:38 to our dispatch. There is no middleman
1:41:40 anymore.
1:41:42 >> There's a positive story and I think we
1:41:43 heard this I think from council member
1:41:45 Nichols. How do we share some of or
1:41:46 somebody was saying share the positive
1:41:48 stories we have? And so, I think that's
1:41:50 our challenge from our communications
1:41:51 department because in public safety, we
1:41:53 have a really recent positive story and
1:41:55 the customer service example. I think I
1:41:57 already gave it's not starting a new
1:41:59 department or anything like that. It's
1:42:00 really just changing how we interact
1:42:02 when people give us feedback whether
1:42:04 they're a resident or a business owner
1:42:06 in the community. How do we kind of get
1:42:08 everyone in the even though we are the
1:42:12 definition of a monopoly? You can't do
1:42:13 anything. If you need a building permit,
1:42:15 you can't get anywhere from us. Like you
1:42:17 have no choice. But how do we make that
1:42:19 process in a way where people feel like
1:42:22 we're acting like a small business
1:42:24 that's competing for, you know, a
1:42:26 five-star review based on their service
1:42:28 interaction with our city? And that's
1:42:29 kind of our goal to to lay out. And I
1:42:31 think from the administration side, I
1:42:34 said, I think a lot of our goals are
1:42:35 overlapping with the council priorities.
1:42:39 And I think it's my job to figure out
1:42:41 the finances of how to make these
1:42:42 investments. And that's my background is
1:42:45 in that finance space. And that's what
1:42:47 I'm committed to figuring out. And I
1:42:49 think it involves bonding some of the
1:42:51 new revenue streams that have come
1:42:52 online for our community. And and it's
1:42:55 not getting cheaper to build anything.
1:42:56 So I chair the state construction budget
1:42:58 in the Senate. People said you're
1:43:00 wasting money on these things. And I'm
1:43:01 like, if we have to build it, say
1:43:04 waiting to build it later is not saving
1:43:06 us any money. Trust me. It's like the
1:43:09 cost of construction is higher than the
1:43:10 interest rate to borrow money right now.
1:43:12 I think I'm definitely going to be
1:43:14 advocating for utilizing I think some
1:43:17 bonding capacity to make some of these
1:43:19 investments now because there's not
1:43:21 going to be this magic pot of money
1:43:22 that's going to fall out of the sky. As
1:43:24 council member Nichols said, the state's
1:43:25 not going to send us $50 million to
1:43:27 invest in our community. Like we're
1:43:28 going to have to figure out how to
1:43:30 create our own opportunities to make
1:43:31 these investments.
1:43:33 >> There we go.
1:43:34 >> Um on this, you know, the smaller public
1:43:37 works and transportation projects. Yeah.
1:43:38 I'm curious, you know, there's been
1:43:40 this, you know, the boardwalk on SR900
1:43:43 that's been busted for nine months now.
1:43:46 >> Um maybe Ted um and under the previous
1:43:50 administration there is kind of this
1:43:51 approach like you know that's in wash
1:43:53 right away. It's their job to fix it. Is
1:43:54 that going to be the approach that we're
1:43:56 going to continue to take because right
1:43:57 now wash is very preoccupied with fixing
1:44:00 you know all the highways in the state
1:44:02 and understandably that needs to be
1:44:03 where their focus is and you know
1:44:06 doorbelling in Talis people complain
1:44:08 that people complain about that you know
1:44:10 they're like oh you know now I can't
1:44:12 like and for me living in Talis to be
1:44:14 able to get onto the east like Samville
1:44:16 now I have to do this weird detour going
1:44:18 on these sketchy
1:44:19 >> bike lanes 100% I think that I mean I
1:44:21 think being with Ryan original rep on
1:44:23 wash Uh,
1:44:24 >> okay.
1:44:25 >> It's very clear they're going to
1:44:26 cooperate with us if we want to make
1:44:27 investments to improve things along
1:44:29 there. But I agree like wait for the
1:44:31 state to fix some of these things. We
1:44:33 could be waiting a really long time. So
1:44:34 I think and to me that's like the ideal
1:44:37 example of something we want to be
1:44:38 looking at is you know it's not a $120
1:44:42 million mega project. I mean Newport I
1:44:45 mean the last quote I got was like 70
1:44:48 million. I mean for for Newport to
1:44:51 Sunset I mean Maple to
1:44:52 >> Sorry. It's just a side road over here
1:44:55 like that to put roundabout. I mean it's
1:44:57 this road right here
1:45:00 >> in that direction.
1:45:00 >> In that direction. Yeah.
1:45:02 >> Got to guess. Thank you.
1:45:03 >> I mean they're mindboggling numbers. And
1:45:05 so I think part of my hope is just
1:45:09 everything we kind of go down. I think
1:45:11 we're trying to go down by the starting
1:45:13 point being what can we actually afford
1:45:15 to do and then we're going to build a
1:45:16 list of projects based on what we think
1:45:18 we can afford to do. And that's in
1:45:20 parks. It's in transportation. It's for
1:45:22 city facilities. It's where everything
1:45:24 we're going to do is going to start from
1:45:25 that starting point of what's a
1:45:28 realistic amount of money that I think
1:45:29 we can get access to. And then we're
1:45:32 going to try to find projects that fit
1:45:34 in that list. And they're not going to
1:45:35 be these big giant projects. They're
1:45:37 going to be smaller projects. And I
1:45:38 think like your one would fall in that
1:45:41 list of something.
1:45:42 >> I mean that's like $10,000 maybe, you
1:45:44 know.
1:45:45 >> Yeah. Sherry's born that. But it's like
1:45:47 10 ft.
1:45:48 >> Yeah.
1:45:49 >> Yeah. but also noticeable and impact. I
1:45:52 think you got the dots, right? For the
1:45:53 community to be like, okay, I see my my
1:45:56 government working for me, right? Those
1:45:58 are the tangible.
1:45:59 >> And I think to go back to like what's a
1:46:01 successful outcome for 2026, you got to
1:46:04 have a long-term vision. That's
1:46:05 important, but at the same time, you can
1:46:07 walk and chew up like you have to do
1:46:08 stuff that is noticeable improvements to
1:46:11 our community that happen in the next 12
1:46:13 to 18 months. And I think fixing stuff
1:46:15 like that would fall on that list. And
1:46:17 and that's what I think you can do both.
1:46:20 Like they're not mutually exclusive. So
1:46:22 you have a long-term vision. You make
1:46:23 short-term progress in these little bits
1:46:25 and pieces throughout our city in
1:46:27 different areas from transportation to
1:46:30 parks to facilities to public safety.
1:46:32 And that's that to me is the successful
1:46:35 outcome this whole process we're having
1:46:37 today if we kind of win in that space.
1:46:39 >> Excellent.
1:46:41 >> Yes. Oh, well, just I wanted to say that
1:46:42 I I I respect this mindset and like it
1:46:45 and it's part of why I came here is that
1:46:46 I very much feel that in this point in
1:46:48 time we are on our own and cannot rely
1:46:52 on a lot of outside resources. And so
1:46:54 what can we accomplish here on our own
1:46:56 to help this community is kind of the
1:46:59 mindset we have to have in order to do
1:47:01 anything. So I like that as a mindset.
1:47:03 Okay, what do we actually have access
1:47:04 to? What jobs? what you know they're the
1:47:06 small ones can we actually do is I think
1:47:09 the right mindset to have going forward
1:47:11 >> it also keeps you empowered and
1:47:13 motivated right so you don't feel like
1:47:14 you're at the wills of those that are
1:47:17 outside of your community
1:47:19 >> and I think a unique opportunity we have
1:47:20 is if we as a city governance structure
1:47:24 here commit in this parks and
1:47:27 transportation space to making these
1:47:28 investments to council member's point
1:47:30 everyone else is broke so when you go
1:47:32 out for grants this summer whether it's
1:47:33 in parks or transportation very few
1:47:35 other places are going to have money to
1:47:37 bring to that grant process if we kind
1:47:39 of say hey we're committed to doing this
1:47:41 and like I said the parks levy would
1:47:43 have to go to the voters other things
1:47:44 could be councilmatic like we're looking
1:47:47 really good I think this summer to kind
1:47:49 of have staff unleashed on grant writing
1:47:51 opportunities for all these different
1:47:53 projects because other jurisdictions are
1:47:55 going to say we don't have any money to
1:47:57 do it and they're going to ask the grant
1:47:59 they're applying for to pay 100% of it
1:48:01 and we're not we're going to be asking
1:48:03 for sheer participation so I actually
1:48:05 think if we can commit to this sort of
1:48:07 path, I think we actually have the
1:48:09 chance to fare very well in some of the
1:48:12 grant process applications this summer,
1:48:14 but they happen this summer. So this is
1:48:16 why goes back to the sense of urgency
1:48:18 like we've got to come up with a I think
1:48:20 a commitment in the first you know
1:48:23 four to six months of this year that hey
1:48:26 we're willing to go down this path of
1:48:28 trying to make some investments now and
1:48:31 I think it will open up a lot of grant
1:48:33 dollars that because no one else has any
1:48:36 money to to put on the table right now.
1:48:39 So um our current deferred
1:48:42 infrastructure 350 million 450 like that
1:48:46 >> it's more than 50 million.
1:48:48 >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean that's just I mean
1:48:49 the fundamental challenge is like where
1:48:51 do you even start? How do you parse it?
1:48:53 We did have a a public uh ad hoc
1:48:56 committee right that looked at uh uh
1:49:00 earlier on at infrastructure and the
1:49:02 mechanisms to pay for infrastructure and
1:49:04 and just you got to parse it at some
1:49:05 point. You got to say what's in that
1:49:07 first 30 million, what's in the next 50
1:49:09 million, what's in the next 220.
1:49:12 >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
1:49:13 >> But I think the street I did a whole
1:49:15 tour. I just drove around, you know,
1:49:17 with Bennett looking at different street
1:49:20 overlay throughout the city of Islam and
1:49:21 the challenges we have ahead. And I
1:49:23 think it is my job is to find the money
1:49:27 in the budget so we can make sure we're
1:49:29 making consistent infrastructure
1:49:30 investments that people can rely on. it
1:49:32 isn't at the whims of oh there's enough
1:49:34 money in our budget to do it this year.
1:49:36 I think our challenge is to try to
1:49:38 figure out a way to make sure those
1:49:40 investments consistent and reliable
1:49:42 because if you don't prioritize them,
1:49:44 you will fall behind. And I think that
1:49:46 being said, I think our
1:49:49 other cities are in worse shape than us,
1:49:51 I think. But doesn't change the fact
1:49:53 that we have to have budgets. The
1:49:55 budgets you're going to see presented
1:49:56 from us are going to prioritize like
1:49:59 street overlay, making sure it's
1:50:00 happening. And so those are the budgets
1:50:02 that you will see I think coming this
1:50:03 administration as a starting point. So
1:50:07 >> I want to double down on what to said.
1:50:11 There is a huge amount of deferred
1:50:15 maintenance and this building that we're
1:50:18 in is one really good example of that.
1:50:23 I want to make sure that we recognize
1:50:27 all of the things that are already on
1:50:29 the CIP that are needs
1:50:31 before we're starting to add a whole
1:50:34 bunch new to that and also that we're
1:50:36 looking at what our maintenance
1:50:39 schedules are. Whether or not we're
1:50:41 investing enough in our fleet system so
1:50:44 that we can keep that up to date.
1:50:47 whether or not we are, you know, what
1:50:50 our pavement and um overlay schedule is
1:50:54 on that, what we are looking at as far
1:50:59 >> things that have roofs that are leaking
1:51:03 and things like that. Um the school
1:51:06 district
1:51:08 there
1:51:09 >> because of the way that they do funding
1:51:12 always kind of consistently has money
1:51:14 for building maintenance. And one of the
1:51:18 things that I'm always super impressed
1:51:21 with Isiqua on is we can stretch a
1:51:24 dollar. We can make something work. We
1:51:26 can have all of the boxes piled up in
1:51:29 the police station rather than going and
1:51:32 getting storage and things like that,
1:51:34 but when we push that
1:51:39 so many years, it becomes a bigger and
1:51:42 bigger and bigger problem. Um, so
1:51:45 recognizing
1:51:46 some of our
1:51:48 >> there we go
1:51:49 >> long overdue needs before we necessarily
1:51:54 dream big about new things I think is
1:51:57 something that I'm very interested in
1:51:59 making sure that we have a full
1:52:02 understanding of what those are.
1:52:04 >> Yeah. And the other thing is that local
1:52:06 I mean just from an accounting
1:52:07 perspective right local governments and
1:52:09 all governments actually operate on
1:52:10 acrruel accounting rather than generally
1:52:12 accepted accounting principles. So if
1:52:13 you actually like I I think in we treat
1:52:16 infrastructure as assets when really
1:52:18 they are liabilities because that you
1:52:19 have to pay for it to go there. So it
1:52:21 would actually be really interesting for
1:52:23 us to kind of like actually take stock
1:52:24 of what the total liability is and how
1:52:27 that compares to you know all the
1:52:28 revenues that we have so that we
1:52:30 understand you know okay we're doing all
1:52:32 these new things now there's some
1:52:33 maintenance obligation in the future
1:52:34 what do we have to do to make sure that
1:52:35 we can continue paying for that right I
1:52:37 think with you know this came up in the
1:52:40 utility rates conversation right we have
1:52:42 to keep maintaining the system we have
1:52:43 that is completely non-negotiable we
1:52:45 cannot have a dysfunction sewer system
1:52:47 but then how do we make sure that you
1:52:50 know we have the money to pay for things
1:52:52 20 years down the line if we're making
1:52:53 new investments, they're going to have
1:52:55 to be maintained. You know, just like
1:52:56 having a full understanding of that so
1:52:57 that we're not doing things now that we
1:53:00 can you be like, "Yay, we're doing all
1:53:01 these great things." And then 20 years
1:53:02 down the line like, "Oh, now we're
1:53:04 totally screwed." Um, but I think part
1:53:06 of that also is, you know, getting more
1:53:08 economic value out of our existing
1:53:09 infrastructure. You know, doing like
1:53:12 redevelopment, all the roads, you know,
1:53:14 it's like the same roads, we're going to
1:53:16 have to repave them anyway. if you can
1:53:17 have more economic activity in that same
1:53:19 area that helps with our long-term
1:53:21 fiscal sustainability. So, you know, I'd
1:53:23 be interested in seeing like what types
1:53:24 of analysis we could do on that um as
1:53:26 we're thinking about what new
1:53:27 investments we're making, how
1:53:29 >> yeah, how the parts and pieces fit
1:53:31 together briefly on Do you want to move
1:53:36 >> on on this on what we can learn from or
1:53:39 avoid from avoid from what we see and
1:53:41 how schools operate and are funded? um
1:53:45 that that they that they have these
1:53:48 ongoing what are basically operations
1:53:50 levies I think is interesting and that
1:53:52 schools in Washington several decades
1:53:56 before most cities hit this had what
1:53:58 their own structural budget crisis where
1:54:00 we have basic education that's funded at
1:54:02 Temple u and if you want to go from kind
1:54:04 of like a sea level of quality to an A
1:54:06 level of quality individual
1:54:07 jurisdictions have to decide to do that
1:54:09 on their own um unless something changes
1:54:12 at the state level From our structural
1:54:14 deficit perspective, I think cities will
1:54:17 more and more have to take that path
1:54:19 themselves if they want to where we will
1:54:21 have what can be based essentially basic
1:54:23 city services um preservation of life
1:54:26 and those sorts of things taking
1:54:28 priority. And then if we want to have
1:54:30 the nice to have haves that people
1:54:31 actually make you want to move to a city
1:54:33 like arts programs all those sorts of
1:54:34 things we're probably going to have to
1:54:36 take those of a general fund and look in
1:54:39 other ways of raising revenue on that at
1:54:41 some point. Um, I don't know if this is
1:54:42 the point, but it's something that I
1:54:44 think most cities are going to have to
1:54:47 accept or allow services to continually
1:54:50 cut until people can realize that. And
1:54:52 it'll be a slow boiling of that fraud.
1:54:55 It'll be hard for a lot of people to
1:54:56 notice until they don't have the music
1:54:59 on streets anymore and these things just
1:55:01 start disappearing that people notice,
1:55:02 but they're going to be cut because
1:55:04 there's going to be money because we
1:55:05 have to pay for the the basics of
1:55:06 government first.
1:55:11 So I I just want to come back to the
1:55:12 conversation about deferred uh
1:55:16 infrastructure and deferred uh that
1:55:19 topic.
1:55:20 >> Part of the challenge is going to be how
1:55:23 do you bring the public along? You you
1:55:25 cross that with the stewardship
1:55:26 conversation, right?
1:55:28 >> Um we had last time we checked when we
1:55:30 said how much would we need to spend to
1:55:32 be completely ADA compliant in this
1:55:34 city. Last time we asked it was
1:55:36 something like 70 million and that was
1:55:38 quite a while ago. So if you went to the
1:55:40 public and you said we'd like a $70
1:55:42 million bond to put sidewalks in
1:55:44 everywhere, you would have a very heavy
1:55:45 lift versus we would like uh here's a
1:55:48 here's a recreation package, right?
1:55:50 That's a pool and three more soccer
1:55:52 fields, maybe a maybe a uh cricket
1:55:56 pitch, like that kind of stuff. The
1:55:58 public would, you know, beat a path to
1:55:59 your door. Um, and they're and they're
1:56:01 they're going to say, "You want $70
1:56:02 million for your for your uh ramps on
1:56:05 your sidewalks?" And this came up the
1:56:07 last time we tried to do a bond in the
1:56:09 city, right? We did a camel bond, right?
1:56:12 A camel is a horse designed by
1:56:13 committee, right? And so we put together
1:56:16 like five things. Camels think they're
1:56:18 quite
1:56:19 >> Yeah, I'm Camels are wonderful. But like
1:56:22 we we we put together like five things
1:56:24 and we said, "Well, you know, this thing
1:56:26 appeals to this group and this thing
1:56:27 appeals to this." But it didn't really,
1:56:29 right? like it included sidewalks on
1:56:30 sunset, right? Which if you live in in
1:56:33 the Highlands, great. Um, but it wasn't
1:56:36 something that the public said they want
1:56:37 to spend like $25 million on, right? So,
1:56:40 so that's just part of this conversation
1:56:42 is we talk about the $300 million worth
1:56:44 of deferred infrastructure we have,
1:56:45 right? We have to talk about we can only
1:56:47 go get the money that we can go get,
1:56:48 right? We can we can hose ourselves
1:56:51 financially and do it all councsatic,
1:56:52 but we know we're not going to do that,
1:56:54 right? So, it's it's what can we bring
1:56:56 the public along for
1:56:58 >> and and we don't really know. We just
1:57:00 know what doesn't work, which is the
1:57:01 last part we
1:57:02 >> Yeah.
1:57:03 >> But as as a conversation and as a
1:57:05 priority, it's to be able to say this is
1:57:08 important for stewardship for long-term
1:57:10 and for the um not to use the word
1:57:13 sustainability too much, but you know,
1:57:15 the the health and sustainability of the
1:57:16 community that you're not paying more
1:57:19 down the road because you are
1:57:21 shortsight, right? And so as a priority,
1:57:25 you'll have a percent.
1:57:26 >> And then the feds do say you have to
1:57:28 make progress on that $70 million
1:57:31 deferred ADA, but it's like you can
1:57:32 spend $4 a year,
1:57:34 >> right? Well,
1:57:35 >> but if you do some street overlay, I
1:57:37 learned my tour triggers it. No, some if
1:57:40 you have the worst. No, you have to do
1:57:42 the concrete sidewalk for
1:57:44 >> like there's lower level, you know,
1:57:47 overlay like slurry seals,
1:57:50 >> but other things. Yes, you 100% you
1:57:52 trigger it, but then that's a choice
1:57:55 like you say, but I think it's going to
1:57:56 probably those upgrades will happen as
1:57:59 you continually do kind of your street
1:58:01 pavement management program. You're
1:58:03 naturally going to trigger some of those
1:58:04 because some of these things are just
1:58:06 buying you an extra five or 10 years.
1:58:08 Eventually, you're going to do the
1:58:08 overlay. Once you do the overlay, you
1:58:10 got to do the side.
1:58:13 So, it'll happen. It's just not going to
1:58:14 probably happen overnight.
1:58:16 >> And I just want to be really clear. I am
1:58:18 in no way like I'm all for making our
1:58:21 city more uh accessible for our folks
1:58:23 with disabilities. It's just we don't
1:58:25 have $70 million and don't know how
1:58:26 we're going to find it.
1:58:27 >> Well, infrastructure investment,
1:58:29 deferred maintenance or new either way.
1:58:32 I mean, that's that's a conversation
1:58:34 around, you know, what are you able to
1:58:36 do now? What are the resources you have?
1:58:37 And so, you know, having the plan in
1:58:40 place is step one. You know, how are you
1:58:42 going to tackle this? Uh what are the
1:58:44 resources you have available currently?
1:58:45 And what do you need to go find? So
1:58:48 yeah, name but naming it as something
1:58:50 that you don't want to lose sight of can
1:58:52 be really helpful to keep in
1:58:55 like yeah I think to council member
1:58:57 Walsh's fear like we're not going to
1:58:58 fund investments in intelligent
1:59:00 transportation it stuff by rating the
1:59:02 overlay fund is 100% not going to be how
1:59:05 it's funed the overlay fund will be like
1:59:08 >> priority and
1:59:09 >> Barb is just absolutely here in this
1:59:12 moment
1:59:15 >> it was something she was interested in I
1:59:17 Yeah,
1:59:18 >> I'm just saying it will come from us
1:59:20 finding Yeah. from being creative of of
1:59:23 finding ways
1:59:24 >> to enhance the other transportation
1:59:25 infrastructure but maintain the
1:59:27 investments we need to make to maintain
1:59:29 our critical infrastructure.
1:59:31 >> Okay. So, uh, I want to make a break for
1:59:34 lunch, but what I want what I want to
1:59:35 just check with what I what I'm hearing
1:59:37 and tell me if I if you need to sort of
1:59:39 think differently is that including
1:59:41 infrastructure investment and kind of
1:59:43 the the focus on that. The conversation
1:59:45 here I think is pretty clear around how
1:59:48 you want to tackle that. Uh, and I
1:59:50 wanted just to confirm and so that
1:59:52 public facilities, parks and open space,
1:59:54 public safety generally, the mayor laid
1:59:56 out kind of hopes, expectations and were
1:59:58 pretty clear. uh does that feel
2:00:00 comfortable and that we kind of lay that
2:00:03 out in terms of I'm trying to prioritize
2:00:05 what we want to converting
2:00:10 uh housing economic development maybe
2:00:12 transportation mobility although it
2:00:14 sounds like you know that's also a
2:00:15 longer term play but you know the trails
2:00:17 pieces there are other pieces to that uh
2:00:19 and then fiscal sustainability
2:00:21 responsibility sorry
2:00:24 seem like the areas that we really want
2:00:26 to have some conversation around today
2:00:28 but I want to confirm that uh or do you
2:00:31 want to talk about all
2:00:32 >> you mentioned at the beginning that uh
2:00:34 transportation oriented development
2:00:37 intersection of transportation mobility
2:00:39 and fiscal sustainability it deserves
2:00:40 its own lighting.
2:00:41 >> Okay.
2:00:45 >> And some of these may find overlaps
2:00:47 beyond this uh and we'll listen
2:00:49 carefully to the conversation and try to
2:00:51 you know encapsulate the conversation in
2:00:53 in a form that
2:00:55 >> council priorities.
2:00:57 So we'll add that one too. So we'll have
2:00:59 those. So I have housing, TOD, economic
2:01:02 development, transportation, mobility,
2:01:04 and then responsibility kind of big
2:01:07 areas of conversation around what do we
2:01:09 what do you want that to look like in
2:01:11 the next 12 to 18 months? Does that feel
2:01:14 comfortable? And does that feel like
2:01:16 we're missing something important?
2:01:18 >> There you prioritize what gets talked
2:01:22 about first because I'm just also
2:01:23 concerned we're going to run out of
2:01:24 time.
2:01:26 Yeah, I give you that. Oh, I want to
2:01:28 start. Yes, that we only have so
2:01:30 >> your humble city administrator would say
2:01:32 the number one thing for all of you is
2:01:35 the housing build things faster. So, I
2:01:38 would recommend you start there.
2:01:42 >> Well, I think that that
2:01:43 >> is reasonable. I mean, they're all
2:01:45 important, but if you don't leave here
2:01:47 today with a clear understanding on
2:01:49 where you're going, then that's a missed
2:01:51 opportunity. The rest are all really
2:01:54 important. How does that overlay with
2:01:55 the fact that we've got two sessions,
2:01:57 one on transportation, one on housing
2:02:00 kind of coming up? Are we double dipping
2:02:03 into those ideas?
2:02:05 >> I think the March housing discussion
2:02:06 will be influenced by today's housing
2:02:08 discussion. So, I think this is
2:02:10 >> we want to be able to come back and
2:02:11 March and operationalize everything you
2:02:13 decide today.
2:02:15 >> SW
2:02:16 >> because it's because it's the most
2:02:18 important. I mean, and I think the
2:02:19 mayor's already outlined the
2:02:20 transportation piece. You've kind of
2:02:22 given us the bit, you know, you want
2:02:24 smaller things, the mayor wants smaller
2:02:25 things. Sound transit, light rail, big
2:02:28 really important thing. Uh, that's how
2:02:31 we've been tracking because that meeting
2:02:32 is only 10 days from now. But we really
2:02:35 need you to say and agree to what the
2:02:39 barriers on permitting, real, perceived,
2:02:42 whatever they are, the uh the the
2:02:46 whiteboard stuff. How are you guys deal
2:02:48 with all that? Talk about all that today
2:02:51 because we got to then spend the next
2:02:52 month getting ready for you to make
2:02:54 decisions and then the rest collect. I
2:02:57 don't want to deemphasize any of the
2:02:59 rest, but
2:03:00 >> well, I think we've already sort of
2:03:01 touched on some of the expectations that
2:03:03 helps council and those others, but I
2:03:05 but I think that tell me if you guys see
2:03:09 in a different way conversation around
2:03:10 housing, economic development and to
2:03:13 touch on a lot of those things you just
2:03:14 described in terms of urgency and what
2:03:16 that looks like a little bit and so with
2:03:18 some nuance perhaps in different
2:03:19 directions. Uh so if we start with those
2:03:21 three um does that make sense to
2:03:24 everybody? Sir Street,
2:03:26 >> housing, economic development, TD. Okay.
2:03:30 >> Yes.
2:03:30 >> So, Council President D. Michelle was
2:03:33 also really perplexed in talking to all
2:03:34 of you because you all talked about
2:03:35 emergency management
2:03:38 and so she wasn't quite sure what piece
2:03:41 of that you were still concerned about.
2:03:45 it's some point place today to double
2:03:47 back to that because that was kind of
2:03:50 her takeaway from her conversations with
2:03:52 all of you that that kind of all popped
2:03:54 up. Now maybe it was because we had just
2:03:56 gotten through the range she did it
2:03:59 those conversations I think in December
2:04:01 but I'll put that out there.
2:04:02 >> Well and the conversation what I had
2:04:04 heard was uh that uh the community is at
2:04:10 risk for emergency. We do it well. We
2:04:12 want to continue to do that, but that
2:04:14 there are risks of fire. There are risks
2:04:16 of other, you know, natural disasters to
2:04:19 >> So maybe if we get time, we could double
2:04:22 that.
2:04:23 >> I say as being someone who just going
2:04:24 through meeting staff, Jared seems like
2:04:26 kind of the best emergency managing
2:04:29 person you could buy. I mean, he seems
2:04:31 >> I guess that's what I would say is I
2:04:32 feel like we're doing it really well and
2:04:34 Jared is doing it really well. I would
2:04:36 want to know what's the next part of
2:04:38 that that we could do well. Is it more
2:04:41 staff? Is it we need to invest in, you
2:04:45 know, backup batteries? You know, what
2:04:48 what is the next thing that we need to
2:04:50 anticipate in that area so that we
2:04:53 aren't going to end up behind?
2:04:55 >> There we go.
2:04:56 >> Um, on parks and open space, I'm very
2:04:58 intrigued by the concept of Mayor
2:05:00 Mullet's parks levy renewal. We know
2:05:02 that people in this community like
2:05:03 parks, people in this community will
2:05:04 vote for parks levy. And so I think it
2:05:06 would be good for us to have a pro
2:05:09 probably not today, but like it should
2:05:11 definitely maybe another special meeting
2:05:13 about like what that would look like.
2:05:14 >> Yeah, I think we're thinking there's
2:05:18 facilities.
2:05:19 >> Okay.
2:05:20 >> Large on parks in this is a
2:05:22 consideration for the same levy. If we
2:05:24 can also think of what arts could look
2:05:26 like then that as well.
2:05:28 >> That's it.
2:05:28 >> Arts funny
2:05:30 >> again. Barb is here.
2:05:33 >> Arts and hearts.
2:05:34 >> This is being channeled. I want Martin.
2:05:38 >> Okay.
2:05:40 >> Yeah. I I just want to touch on um what
2:05:43 city administrator Baboot said. Um some
2:05:46 of Barb's concern was not about if we
2:05:48 have a wildfire or if we have an
2:05:51 earthquake, right? It's about if we have
2:05:54 uh a really awful uh ice,
2:05:58 >> right? and or even just any in the you
2:06:02 know coming back to this evolving state
2:06:05 and federal environment right um you can
2:06:08 envision any number of calamitous uh
2:06:10 events occurring in the next 12 months
2:06:12 doesn't necessarily have to involve ICE
2:06:14 um just take a look at any federal court
2:06:17 docket that's occurring right now that
2:06:19 has to do with states and their
2:06:20 relationship to federal government the
2:06:22 eight of us all want to go help in the
2:06:25 in the event that that happens right so
2:06:26 one of Barb's concerns was about um
2:06:29 Council President D. Michelle's concerns
2:06:31 was about how do we make sure that we're
2:06:33 all singing off the same himnel when
2:06:35 those things occur and that we're not
2:06:37 going off in eight different directions,
2:06:38 right? Because because we're all
2:06:40 motivated by empathy and we all want to
2:06:42 respond to the pain that we see in our
2:06:44 community. But I think she had some
2:06:46 concerns around the ice thing, right?
2:06:48 and about how we all how how can we
2:06:51 respond in those kind of kind of events
2:06:53 in in a way that we're all pulling in
2:06:54 the same direction even if we're not all
2:06:56 exactly on the on the same page. So that
2:06:58 that was part
2:06:59 >> of that comes from leadership from the
2:07:01 top and being able to express that out
2:07:04 and then you know maybe we are less
2:07:07 fractured but
2:07:08 >> sure I'm just saying that that was the
2:07:09 thing that she wanted us to to consider
2:07:12 talking about here today. So, can can
2:07:14 you all agree? So, the breaking news
2:07:17 piece, the administration can't there's
2:07:20 something happening. This is what we
2:07:22 know.
2:07:24 We're good at that. Um, if you are
2:07:27 concerned about
2:07:29 a city response, if the council will go
2:07:32 to council leadership with that
2:07:35 >> and then the mayor can deal with council
2:07:37 leadership to sort through that, uh,
2:07:40 that would be really helpful. um because
2:07:43 there's too many permutations to what
2:07:46 might happen. But if you're concerned
2:07:48 that we're not doing something or you go
2:07:51 to council leadership and then the mayor
2:07:52 can talk to council leadership and then
2:07:54 we'll push out
2:07:56 >> whatever the next steps might be. Does
2:07:58 that make sense? So I think the breaking
2:08:00 news stuff we're we've got that we know
2:08:04 at the first ICE thing we didn't think
2:08:06 was as big a deal to all of you as it
2:08:08 was. we we know better and so we will
2:08:11 share what we hear that's happening or
2:08:13 anything. So to that makes sense.
2:08:17 >> I mean we're talking about so just so
2:08:19 everybody knows I'm I am talking this is
2:08:21 this is an issue I'm certainly concerned
2:08:23 about and um I've been trying to talk
2:08:25 with some members in the community to
2:08:26 find out where there are disconnects
2:08:27 between what we think we're doing and
2:08:28 what we're actually doing. Um I think
2:08:31 we're good at sharing what we know. I'm
2:08:34 not sure that we're always good at
2:08:35 finding what is actually happening and I
2:08:38 don't know if we want to I don't have
2:08:39 time to dig into this today, but that is
2:08:42 um that's certainly where I was coming
2:08:45 to Barb on this side of the
2:08:47 conversation.
2:08:50 >> That may need to be it.
2:08:51 >> Yeah, maybe this is another bike rack.
2:08:53 >> Yeah, I I think it is, but you you're
2:08:55 bringing it up as a topic we might want
2:08:57 to talk about. I'm not I don't know that
2:08:58 this is the right time to uh but that
2:09:01 that's where my concerns with public
2:09:02 safety and emergency management are uh
2:09:04 in terms of
2:09:06 >> making sure that our policies are
2:09:09 clearer than they currently are and uh
2:09:11 that those are debated essentially. So
2:09:14 what we do
2:09:15 >> well in some of the stuff like somebody
2:09:16 in the thing last here last week ago
2:09:19 today said it'd be nice if our website
2:09:20 had stuff in like Spanish and other
2:09:22 languages around know your rights and
2:09:24 stuff I think.
2:09:27 >> Yeah.
2:09:27 >> But but I but but I think Nichols's
2:09:32 >> the world is different. The li lines are
2:09:35 different and how are we reacting to
2:09:37 those different lines?
2:09:38 >> Yeah. And can we have those discussions
2:09:39 in advance of them happening instead of
2:09:41 having to always
2:09:42 understandably uh react?
2:09:46 >> Sure.
2:09:47 >> Well, getting in alignment so you have a
2:09:49 shared set of expectations.
2:09:51 >> Yeah. I mean that's I I don't know what
2:09:53 that's good enough. I don't know how
2:09:55 else to do that.
2:09:56 >> I know it's quick bullet but that will
2:09:58 ping your
2:10:00 work if people want
2:10:04 >> management response policies. pizza we
2:10:07 were going to work over lunch or not.
2:10:09 >> Yeah.
2:10:09 >> Well, I think break and then come back
2:10:11 and and keep going.
2:10:12 >> Well, let's just I think we come back
2:10:14 and have that discussion other time.
2:10:16 >> We could do that maybe over lunch
2:10:17 because
2:10:19 there
2:10:26 got them. Uh but I want to check it. How
2:10:30 are we how are we feel? Are we doing
2:10:32 okay?
2:10:33 >> Russell's very happy with the food.
2:10:36 It does help that we know what's the
2:10:38 astrophy. We're going to go quickly
2:10:40 before that sets in. Okay. So, we only
2:10:43 have I mean an hour to 15 minutes. So,
2:10:46 we'll have to be relatively intentional
2:10:47 about this conversation. So, I want to
2:10:49 make sure that we're on the same page
2:10:50 with what we want to cover. So we've had
2:10:52 a number of topics that still have some
2:10:55 like let's get some clarity around what
2:10:56 we mean by that that and we can
2:10:58 acknowledge that there may be some inter
2:11:01 that's uh but so housing affordability
2:11:04 or housing housing generally I would say
2:11:08 you know economic development
2:11:11 t you know the opportunities with that
2:11:14 transportation mobility again all of
2:11:16 this maybe you know have opportunities
2:11:18 connected to them and that potentially
2:11:20 you know setting on fiscal
2:11:22 responsibility for eliminates what are
2:11:24 revenue of lovers. I put that in italics
2:11:27 because you we may or might not have
2:11:29 time to get to all to all of these and
2:11:31 so does that feel comfortable in terms
2:11:34 of trying to work through the music and
2:11:36 I put one question there but the bigger
2:11:38 question starts off with when we say
2:11:41 housing is a priority what does that
2:11:42 mean to you right and so
2:11:47 question that's kind of where we're
2:11:48 going to so yes
2:11:50 >> I think the first thing on housing
2:11:52 affordability we need to distinguish
2:11:54 whether we're talking about affordable
2:11:57 housing, the kind that Arch does, 6030,
2:12:00 6080 for the AMI, or we're talking about
2:12:04 bringing housing to Isqua that is
2:12:06 affordable for people that are earning
2:12:09 workable wages in town, the 80 AMI and
2:12:13 100 AMI and above. Um, they're two
2:12:16 different categories and we need to be
2:12:18 intentional about in our discussion.
2:12:20 >> Two different ways to solve the problem.
2:12:22 >> Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah.
2:12:24 I would start with both our commitments
2:12:26 and our plans, right? We have
2:12:28 commitments to PSRC. Um, and we have a
2:12:32 plan in the form of central Isqua plan
2:12:35 >> and uh
2:12:38 the words on the
2:12:38 >> Oh, sure. Sorry. Um, isn't it PSRC?
2:12:41 >> Yeah.
2:12:43 >> Puget Sound Resource Council
2:12:45 >> regional. Yeah,
2:12:46 >> regional council. We have what 2050
2:12:48 goals at the current set.
2:12:50 >> That's right. Um, in addition, we have a
2:12:53 central Isqua plan, right?
2:12:54 >> Um, that calls for development on the
2:12:56 valley floor.
2:12:58 >> um,
2:12:58 >> and plan
2:13:00 >> and our top. There you go.
2:13:02 >> So, I I would start there, right?
2:13:04 >> Great. Okay.
2:13:04 >> And, you know, how are we doing? How are
2:13:07 we not doing? We There was a precoid
2:13:10 trajectory and there's a postcoid
2:13:11 trajectory and they're very different.
2:13:14 >> Okay. And so, so the commitment first of
2:13:16 all to those plans and the goals that
2:13:19 are laid out and then it means
2:13:21 I'm not gonna have time to discuss all
2:13:22 of those, but just to I'm assuming that
2:13:25 everybody is
2:13:26 >> you'll get you'll get up to speed.
2:13:30 >> Reasonably aware uh of the context
2:13:33 within them. Is that is that a fair
2:13:35 assumption that you're committed to
2:13:37 keeping focus on those long-term plans?
2:13:39 Well, I think to me success is you have
2:13:44 things we know that you know to council
2:13:47 Nichols and Jen's point that make it
2:13:49 difficult to navigate our process in a
2:13:51 timely fashion. But I think for Walsh I
2:13:54 like the term kind of natural
2:13:55 affordability which is just more could
2:13:58 be rental units in the 300 400 foot
2:14:01 range. It could be more home ownership
2:14:02 opportunities of the 700 to,200 foot
2:14:05 range. So I think to council member
2:14:07 Joe's point, we're going to pursue
2:14:09 affordable housing things like the
2:14:10 transit orient development project. Now
2:14:12 any chance they come up, we will go
2:14:14 after those. If there's public subsidy
2:14:15 dollars that we can have, we will get
2:14:18 them. I think our question is knowing
2:14:21 those public se, you know, the public
2:14:23 subsidy dollars are very finite and we
2:14:25 can't control whether we what's
2:14:27 available. What we can control is how do
2:14:30 we create an environment to get what we
2:14:32 would refer to as natural affordable
2:14:34 units based on basically being smaller
2:14:37 than what's currently in our community
2:14:39 and what kind of changes do we have to
2:14:41 make to attract people to invest in
2:14:44 building those homes.
2:14:46 But I don't have the answer to that. But
2:14:48 I think to me if we come out of this
2:14:50 discussion with some ideas on that front
2:14:53 it makes it a lot easier to come back to
2:14:55 market.
2:14:57 So because I'm going to say something
2:14:58 that's going to make Wally mad. Uh I
2:15:00 think we are past time that we need to
2:15:04 hire a full-time specialist on this
2:15:06 subject. I think that we have these
2:15:08 conversations and we say but we don't
2:15:09 know how to do it right. Both and did
2:15:12 this but we don't know how they did it.
2:15:14 You know I don't think it's hiring more
2:15:16 consultants. I think that this has been
2:15:17 a problem. I ran on this in 2009 and I
2:15:21 ran on it in 2013, 2017, 2021 and now
2:15:25 again in 2025 and it's you know there
2:15:29 are we've had bright spots along the way
2:15:31 but it is not the trajectory that we
2:15:33 want. So I think in the same way that we
2:15:35 invest in uh economic development and we
2:15:39 invest in you know certain other areas I
2:15:42 think it's time to have somebody on
2:15:43 staff who can just quickly do it right
2:15:46 who can be sitting here and saying well
2:15:47 here's why we don't have what Boston has
2:15:49 right and here's how we could get what
2:15:50 both has and we don't have that
2:15:52 expertise
2:15:54 to cl just clarifying uh question that's
2:15:57 all you're taking
2:15:59 you said I ran on this in 2009 housing
2:16:02 generally workforce housing
2:16:04 >> every every four years I have said
2:16:06 workforce housing in living wage shops
2:16:08 >> right
2:16:09 >> and the public has seen fit to realize
2:16:12 >> so but every but it never it never goes
2:16:16 >> ever persist
2:16:18 yeah I just want to clarify too because
2:16:20 it's sure sure work workforce housing
2:16:23 right housing for uh what we now like to
2:16:26 call the miss we didn't at the time we
2:16:28 didn't call it that Arthur Sullivan told
2:16:30 me we didn't have any problems for like
2:16:32 five and I said, "Yeah, we do."
2:16:34 >> Well, kind of a term these days. Yeah.
2:16:36 >> So, I think toward that idea, rather
2:16:38 than jumping necessarily to we need a
2:16:40 new staff member, starting with the we
2:16:44 need to the the problem you've defined
2:16:47 then is both and Woodenville have been
2:16:50 able to create a certain type of housing
2:16:54 that hasn't happened here. And so maybe
2:16:56 starting with what do we think the
2:16:58 problem is?
2:16:59 >> Is the problem? And I would say we have
2:17:03 a housing shortage that does not enable
2:17:06 the workers who live here to be able to
2:17:10 afford housing. And some of the ways we
2:17:13 will inevitably need to
2:17:18 work on to create more of that naturally
2:17:21 affordable housing is size. Some of it
2:17:24 is barriers that we have put into our
2:17:26 code that have put too many requirements
2:17:30 on that make it too expensive or
2:17:32 difficult to build. And so I would pause
2:17:36 it. I think and I'm again I'm jumping
2:17:40 right to what I said don't jump to a
2:17:42 solution but I feel like we need to have
2:17:46 a home builder round table that the
2:17:49 experts who have tried to build on our
2:17:53 code and have run into barriers
2:17:56 what are the things that they've
2:17:58 identified because they might have
2:17:59 things in like storm water codes that
2:18:02 they're like yeah you've been off for 10
2:18:06 years and I've never considered building
2:18:08 an Isqua since then because of these
2:18:10 problems.
2:18:10 >> Well, now I'm going to say something to
2:18:12 make Russell mad because I mean an equal
2:18:13 opportunity
2:18:15 couple makers.
2:18:16 >> Yeah.
2:18:16 >> Terrific. Thank you.
2:18:17 >> Um I I I want a a neutral third party,
2:18:21 right? Um part of the challenge to me is
2:18:24 if I'm an investor and I can go invest a
2:18:26 certain amount of money in both, I can
2:18:28 invest a certain amount in Isiqua and I
2:18:30 can make $10.20 20 cents in both brothel
2:18:33 and $1010 at N isqua and I'm going to go
2:18:35 invest in both not in Isiqua but that
2:18:38 doesn't mean there's a problem with code
2:18:40 or any of that kind of stuff right so I
2:18:42 I would like a third party whose answer
2:18:45 isn't you have to help me make it pencil
2:18:47 out but can actually say here's you know
2:18:49 that can compare our policies to other
2:18:52 municipalities I picked Bon Woodenville
2:18:54 because they're comparable to our size
2:18:55 and if we had what they had we probably
2:18:58 would be meeting our central ISQA and
2:19:01 and we'd have we'd be a lot further
2:19:02 along towards our PSRC goals than we are
2:19:04 currently
2:19:04 >> because they have huge five over one or
2:19:08 four over one um developments in both of
2:19:10 their downtowns, right? So, I I I don't
2:19:13 think it's a bad idea to ask developers,
2:19:15 but whenever they come see us, they're
2:19:16 always like, "You just have to give us
2:19:18 more money and then we can do what you
2:19:19 want." like, yeah, I don't know if
2:19:21 that's the
2:19:22 >> to council member Walsh's point that
2:19:23 like King County Housing Authority could
2:19:24 be one of the people that's at that
2:19:26 table because they've just gone through
2:19:27 our code and so they don't have to all
2:19:29 just be on the private side. I think we
2:19:32 could invite nonprofit
2:19:34 >> Yeah. affordable housing.
2:19:37 >> We can do we can do both. I think we can
2:19:39 do is try to invest in our own internal
2:19:41 expertise and try to listen to those who
2:19:45 have at least knowledgeably tried to
2:19:47 invest in the area and understand why
2:19:50 why they didn't
2:19:54 and I think
2:19:58 >> I want to try to give our I think I
2:20:00 would like to give our current staff the
2:20:02 ability to have clear guidance from this
2:20:04 group and see how that works out because
2:20:07 I have faith
2:20:10 >> between
2:20:10 >> many and Kristen like I have faith they
2:20:12 just need the right guidance I mean and
2:20:14 so this is the part of the challenge I
2:20:18 think is
2:20:20 it's it comes out of what this
2:20:21 discussion looks like and I think the
2:20:23 thing hoping for is to kind of hear from
2:20:26 everybody what are the ideas like what
2:20:28 ideas are out there and I mean I think
2:20:32 like self-certification I think is
2:20:35 really interesting to talk about saying,
2:20:37 "Hey, we're going to we can do
2:20:38 self-certification on ADUs. We do
2:20:41 self-certification in general for
2:20:43 projects. If they hire a professional
2:20:44 engineer and they say this is sound,
2:20:47 like do we have to pay somebody
2:20:49 separate?" Because then that goes into
2:20:52 the billing, it also slows down the
2:20:53 timeline. Like all these things I think
2:20:55 there's a lot of ideas and I think we've
2:20:57 heard, but we haven't all been in a room
2:20:59 to have all the ideas put on a board.
2:21:01 And so to all's point, we don't have a
2:21:04 lot of time left. So I think if people
2:21:06 have ideas,
2:21:07 >> I would like to just have them so we can
2:21:09 kind of go through we can then ask staff
2:21:11 who's in this weeds of how these things
2:21:15 work to say well okay some of these are
2:21:17 easier than others but we don't even
2:21:19 know what the universe of options is
2:21:20 right now. So I think we need to leave
2:21:23 today with a universe of options. So the
2:21:25 developer round table is scheduled for
2:21:26 February 26th.
2:21:30 >> I'm like he's on a board now.
2:21:32 >> Agree.
2:21:33 >> My idea is hire an expert.
2:21:36 >> Uh well just to be clear so this is
2:21:38 around is this are we talking about
2:21:40 workforce housing specifically or are we
2:21:42 talking about housing generally and the
2:21:43 opportunities available? Guess that
2:21:45 >> it's all the above.
2:21:46 >> Okay. I just want just wanted to make
2:21:48 sure because we had the conversation
2:21:49 around what is that? So our housing did
2:21:52 you have comment? Um, yeah, I was going
2:21:54 to comment, you know, on the home
2:21:55 builder route came out. I think King
2:21:56 County Housing Authority, other, you
2:21:57 know, um, nonprofit affordable housing
2:22:00 builders are very, I mean, I went to the
2:22:01 King County affordable housing symposium
2:22:03 in Redmond on Thursday and they're very
2:22:04 interested in participating. Um, I think
2:22:07 also just generally,
2:22:10 you know, to your point about we want to
2:22:12 have smaller um, home ownership options.
2:22:14 It's been interesting to see like what
2:22:17 things in new construction is selling
2:22:19 for compared to I have some friends in
2:22:21 Seattle that are buying new construction
2:22:22 town homes in Seattle. This town home in
2:22:24 Seattle, she's like, "Oh, I'm overpaying
2:22:26 it." So, expensive. It's like $900,000.
2:22:28 And for me living in Isqua, I'm like,
2:22:30 "That is like 30% less than what the
2:22:33 equivalent home itself is." And so I
2:22:35 think there I mean they have the same
2:22:38 labor costs, materials costs, all sorts
2:22:40 of other things. So I really want to
2:22:42 understand like what in our code is
2:22:43 making things that much more expensive
2:22:45 than in Seattle. It could also be that
2:22:47 permitting is an a aspect of it. Um so I
2:22:50 would want to you know and I think we've
2:22:52 made progress on but I would like to see
2:22:55 how we compare to some of the other
2:22:56 cities especially the ones that are
2:22:57 doing really well. Um and some of the
2:23:00 other processes you know like what are
2:23:02 what are some of the best practices? Um
2:23:04 I um the self-certification for ADUs
2:23:07 where it's like you know the
2:23:08 professional engineer architect can sign
2:23:09 off on it themselves that's great. Um I
2:23:12 think also for other buildings is that
2:23:14 could there be something where you know
2:23:15 the builder can they can choose from a
2:23:18 preferred list of people to check their
2:23:21 work and they actually just contract
2:23:22 them directly without having to have a
2:23:24 city be the middleman to check their
2:23:26 work. Like that seems like something we
2:23:28 could do. So just finding ways to make
2:23:30 the process smoother without sacrificing
2:23:32 quality, right? because I think with ads
2:23:34 it's so small it you know it's not
2:23:36 really going to collapse but for like
2:23:38 things you really do want to have
2:23:39 someone else check their work but if
2:23:41 they can do that directly and like my
2:23:43 firm you know sometimes we do that on
2:23:45 like energy related stuff um but just
2:23:47 making it easier um streamlining stuff
2:23:53 >> I like to see a comparison between
2:23:55 multiple cities so at least at a high
2:23:57 level um if we have cities that we think
2:24:00 are doing a better job than we are in
2:24:01 whatever way that may be Um, can we try
2:24:04 to identify the
2:24:07 >> there we go
2:24:07 >> some salient points of their code that
2:24:10 are noticeable differences than ours
2:24:12 that may or may not be causing some of
2:24:14 the things that we've observed. If
2:24:16 they're actually causing them or not is
2:24:17 it is a level below that. First
2:24:19 understanding what some of the
2:24:20 differences are would be a very useful
2:24:22 first step.
2:24:24 >> Yeah. So there's tons of items in there.
2:24:27 It could be, you know, parking.
2:24:30 >> Yeah. Exactly.
2:24:31 >> Get them up.
2:24:31 >> Getting them. Yeah. So, parking
2:24:34 requirements, self-certification,
2:24:36 you know, types of housing, whether or
2:24:39 not we um effectively have a review
2:24:43 process and everything for different
2:24:46 town homes versus five ones. There's the
2:24:49 difference between structured parking
2:24:50 and not
2:24:52 um there's
2:24:54 >> FN. Yeah.
2:24:56 >> Um
2:24:59 floor area ratio F
2:25:02 There we go.
2:25:02 >> Architectural standards.
2:25:04 >> Yeah, there we go.
2:25:06 >> Open space, private outdoor amenity
2:25:08 space requirements.
2:25:11 >> think right now you have to have a
2:25:12 balcony.
2:25:14 >> Yeah.
2:25:16 >> Mandating underground utilities is very
2:25:18 expensive.
2:25:20 >> We need to take a look at our tree code
2:25:22 >> balancing retention versus
2:25:25 >> infill and remodels.
2:25:28 We need to take a look at road west for
2:25:30 developments. Can they be uh less than
2:25:33 full standard roads that go into some
2:25:36 developments because they're not
2:25:38 traveled all the time?
2:25:40 Are fees excessive for the ones that we
2:25:44 control? Transportation parks and we
2:25:46 compare them to other cities.
2:25:48 >> You said RFP
2:25:49 >> fees fees like impact fees.
2:25:52 >> Impact fees. Okay, I got you. I miss
2:25:54 her. Y Thank you.
2:25:56 >> Are there excessive frontage
2:25:57 requirements that we have?
2:25:59 >> There we go. on the way
2:26:02 >> is there inconsistent
2:26:04 >> water utility
2:26:06 uh hookup fees and requirements come to
2:26:11 mind.
2:26:12 >> Okay. So looking
2:26:13 >> review that on there.
2:26:15 >> Yeah. Selfcertification.
2:26:17 >> Um also inclusionary zoning whether or
2:26:20 not requiring
2:26:22 >> Yeah. home builders to build affordable
2:26:25 housing at 80% is actually reducing the
2:26:29 number of units or whether or not
2:26:31 they're willing to uh
2:26:33 >> There we go. There you go. There we go.
2:26:35 >> Okay. So, some some deep analysis in
2:26:38 terms of the barriers that could be
2:26:40 getting in the way of developers,
2:26:42 investors wanting to uh build in a part
2:26:47 >> I don't think they're saying deep
2:26:49 analysis. They're saying right I mean
2:26:51 like you you don't want to plan this for
2:26:54 the next two years we're going to study
2:26:55 this come back to you how about an array
2:26:59 array of
2:27:01 areas of interest I guess
2:27:05 >> so there's so there's a thing we haven't
2:27:07 touched on yet and I don't it's not a
2:27:08 list of of item like it's a more
2:27:10 fundamental question which is do we want
2:27:13 to create market rate housing in the
2:27:15 hopes that that impacts workforce
2:27:17 housing because there is a there is a
2:27:19 spread of opinions on that in this
2:27:20 council.
2:27:21 >> Okay.
2:27:21 >> So, more fundamental if somebody comes
2:27:23 back with a here's a solution for how to
2:27:25 get more market rate housing built in
2:27:27 the next two or three years.
2:27:29 >> I don't think you'll have seven council
2:27:31 members that I'll say huzzah.
2:27:34 >> That's why I referenced I think council
2:27:36 member Walsh's natural affordability. I
2:27:39 think the challenge is I think Tesla
2:27:41 Deputy President Mart doesn't want us to
2:27:43 do all this just have a bunch of $2
2:27:45 million condos or you know one and a
2:27:48 half million dollar town homes get built
2:27:50 >> because that is they selling as we
2:27:53 already have those. I think our
2:27:55 challenge is how does our code
2:27:57 incentivize
2:27:59 rentals in the really kind of micro
2:28:00 space and ownership like is ownership in
2:28:04 the 700 to,200 foot space is not going
2:28:07 to be selling in I don't think for seven
2:28:09 figures. I just don't think it is. And
2:28:11 so I think you're going to create
2:28:13 natural
2:28:14 affordability which I think and I think
2:28:17 it's a big difference between building
2:28:18 80 to 120% AMI. I think the numbers are
2:28:22 very clear that improves life for
2:28:24 everybody.
2:28:26 >> Building something in the two to3
2:28:28 million dollar range. Yeah, I think it's
2:28:30 much harder to argue whether or not how
2:28:32 much that's trickling down to benefit
2:28:34 kind of everyone trying to live in our
2:28:37 community. But I do think 80 to 120% AMI
2:28:41 units benefit
2:28:43 >> and that's I would say in many cases
2:28:46 most of what is being built. The other
2:28:49 part of that is we're in a situation
2:28:52 where we have a cruel musical chairs
2:28:56 type thing. There are not enough homes
2:28:59 going around and so the people who are
2:29:03 workforce housing are not getting
2:29:05 options. Whereas if there is a situation
2:29:08 where more homes are built, even if they
2:29:13 are luxury, it opens up spots. And I
2:29:17 heard this directly from the rallies
2:29:19 that when Atlas was built, they could
2:29:22 not raise their rents for a year. They
2:29:24 had to offer two months of free rent.
2:29:26 And so the older homes that people are
2:29:29 moving from to the new luxury housing
2:29:33 opens up spots for people who have a lot
2:29:36 of heavy meat in our community. Yeah,
2:29:38 >> I'd like to see us doing both. There is
2:29:42 it is a pretty overwhelming body of
2:29:44 evidence that creating housing at almost
2:29:46 any level reduces housing costs at all
2:29:49 levels. Um I'm I'm unaware of any
2:29:53 convincing
2:29:55 >> we we there is disagreement in the room
2:29:58 on that statement. We're not going to
2:29:59 solve it this afternoon. I just wanted
2:30:01 to that there is disagreement on that
2:30:03 statement. That's fine. But there like
2:30:05 >> there we go. We should have some process
2:30:07 to be able to discuss that
2:30:10 characterizing it as a subtle subject is
2:30:13 overstating
2:30:14 >> the law supply and demand.
2:30:16 >> Okay.
2:30:16 >> I was just saying you that you and I
2:30:19 have discussed the fact that there are
2:30:20 there are I can go find studies that say
2:30:23 that it doesn't that market rate doesn't
2:30:24 help uh workforce and you have studies
2:30:26 that say that it does and we can put our
2:30:29 competing studies on. We're not going to
2:30:30 solve it today. I'm just saying that it
2:30:33 is a it is a subject that will impact
2:30:35 how this council responds to housing
2:30:37 policy down the road and we should spend
2:30:38 some time figuring it out. That's all
2:30:40 I'm saying.
2:30:40 >> But I think we're talking about creating
2:30:42 the environment,
2:30:44 >> how we want to set the table for housing
2:30:46 to come in or not.
2:30:47 >> Two more that are controversial that we
2:30:50 haven't put up yet are our setback
2:30:53 requirements
2:30:54 >> and our um wetland and um stream buffer
2:30:59 requirements. We all like our streams
2:31:01 and wetlands and the way they are, but
2:31:04 if you talk to some of the people that
2:31:06 want to build projects in there, that
2:31:07 has been a deterrent to building a
2:31:09 project. I'm not saying it needs to be
2:31:12 changed, but it's just a factor that's
2:31:13 there.
2:31:14 >> I mean, what I'm hearing and I I there
2:31:17 are different paths to get to
2:31:20 the portability, right? And so that's
2:31:22 fine, but I think that there is
2:31:23 agreement that we should pull up the
2:31:25 hood and be like, what are the things
2:31:27 that are potential barriers to housing,
2:31:31 right?
2:31:32 >> But there are just things to talk about
2:31:34 as a community before we get an
2:31:36 ordinance in front of us for
2:31:37 consideration. If the mayor likes to get
2:31:38 to seven, there are things that we need
2:31:40 to have conversation.
2:31:42 >> And I think that's a principle that we
2:31:43 really landed on earlier this morning,
2:31:45 the importance of making sure to hear
2:31:47 different perspectives. But I think that
2:31:49 for today what we want to do is help to
2:31:52 shape the the focus which is increasing
2:31:55 housing affordability capacity
2:31:58 right um for lots of these things uh the
2:32:02 the work plan and the details must
2:32:05 follow and so today we want to make sure
2:32:07 that we're having a conversation around
2:32:09 what does that mean to you
2:32:12 >> the one I would add is just the infill
2:32:15 requirements because I think that's
2:32:16 where we're real outlier I think some of
2:32:20 the other communities in terms of if
2:32:22 you're building on a lot that's hard to
2:32:24 like what do we expect someone to do if
2:32:27 they're if they buy a lot
2:32:30 here is currently asphalt
2:32:34 >> like what do we expect them to do and
2:32:36 right now the expectations from the city
2:32:37 are for them to put in all the current
2:32:40 code standards so that means if the
2:32:42 asphalt currently goes up to 50 ft of
2:32:44 the stream they got to pull out 100 ft
2:32:45 of asphalt which means what they have
2:32:48 left to put homes on is substantially
2:32:51 smaller. And so it provides a giant
2:32:53 disincentive for people to invest in
2:32:55 building in our community in that area
2:32:56 where we want them to build because this
2:32:58 I think is we also I think have to be
2:33:00 intentional that like Talis is more or
2:33:05 less built out and there's one last
2:33:07 project obviously going in. The
2:33:08 Highlands already has 2,000 homes under
2:33:11 basically permit that are going to be
2:33:13 built in the next four to six years.
2:33:16 Squawk is I mean these other communities
2:33:18 are pretty well established. We're
2:33:20 really focused on this area north and
2:33:21 south of I90 along this corridor which
2:33:24 is currently all paved and and our
2:33:26 question is can we get homes this parcel
2:33:30 and what in our code stands out from
2:33:33 author wooden bill? I would say a big
2:33:36 thing that does stand out is that
2:33:37 requirement that you are supposed to rip
2:33:39 up asphalt and put in a stream buffer
2:33:42 that does not currently exist. I think
2:33:43 is a challenge to get people to invest
2:33:45 here and but that is a community
2:33:49 discussion. I mean it's it's not there
2:33:51 accidentally. It was put there because
2:33:53 people had strong feelings that but I I
2:33:56 think we now in hindsight have three or
2:33:58 four years of lived experience. That
2:34:01 requirement means Gilman Boulevard will
2:34:04 look the same 30 years from now as it
2:34:05 does today. I think is the reality of
2:34:08 it. Uh yeah, if we look at our map of
2:34:11 the regional growth center within the
2:34:12 central lqua area, um I I believe this
2:34:15 is true that there's not a single house
2:34:17 or a single unit of housing that's been
2:34:18 built in our regional growth center
2:34:20 which is a subset of central um transit
2:34:23 development that will be right at the
2:34:25 border of that and just inside but
2:34:26 otherwise I think the answer is zero for
2:34:28 how many houses homes we've built in
2:34:30 that area. Anybody is can correct me
2:34:32 this is just me playing with maps but I
2:34:33 think this is true.
2:34:34 >> Yep. And that's a threat to our regional
2:34:36 growth centeration.
2:34:38 Yeah,
2:34:38 >> which we're reapplying for next month.
2:34:40 So staff has done that
2:34:42 >> so that it comes to you know I'm on that
2:34:45 board as an alternate for PSRC but uh we
2:34:48 do want to get that.
2:34:51 >> Yeah I think one of the other things
2:34:52 that I would want to explore is you know
2:34:55 I think Kevin mentioned floor area
2:34:57 ratios. I think right now we have very
2:34:59 restrictive rules on like the number of
2:35:01 units per acre which is a huge
2:35:02 disincentive against building smaller
2:35:04 units because the incentive to do that
2:35:05 is that you could put more units into
2:35:06 the same space but then then you know
2:35:10 you're capped at a certain number. It's
2:35:11 like, "Oh, well then we're all going to
2:35:12 build like a thousand square foot, you
2:35:13 know, three-bedroom apartments." And
2:35:15 it's like, is there a way that we, you
2:35:17 know, we can relax that in some cases or
2:35:21 even just say like you can build the
2:35:23 out, you know, we can have rules on what
2:35:25 the outside looks like. For example,
2:35:26 like in Oldtown, I understand why there
2:35:28 are architectural standards, but why do
2:35:29 we care how many units are on the
2:35:31 inside, right? For example, I have
2:35:34 friends who, you know, five of them will
2:35:36 rent a single family home together and
2:35:39 and that's totally fine, but that is no
2:35:42 different than it being looking like a
2:35:43 single family home on the outside, but
2:35:44 then having, you know, five micro
2:35:46 studios on the inside with a shared
2:35:48 kitchen. So like you know just like any
2:35:51 those opportunities because when we look
2:35:52 at things for population growth and
2:35:54 housing growth the average the average
2:35:57 household size is decreasing and that's
2:35:59 actually driving a significant amount of
2:36:01 growth in the number of homes needed
2:36:03 because there's going to be you know
2:36:05 it's like right now the average
2:36:06 household size I actually don't know the
2:36:07 numbers but basically so you know people
2:36:10 >> drawing it out.
2:36:10 >> Yeah people people are going to need to
2:36:13 downsize and how can we enable more of
2:36:15 that while also you know for example
2:36:17 maybe
2:36:18 My parents, for example, live in a five-
2:36:20 bedroomedroom single family home, you
2:36:22 know, could there be a world in which
2:36:24 that could be split up into a few
2:36:26 housing units or or or is that not
2:36:29 legal? Um because then it would be four
2:36:32 units and it's you know those types of
2:36:34 things. So kind of exploring how we
2:36:35 could use that to also get more homes
2:36:38 but in a similar footprint that already
2:36:39 exists.
2:36:41 >> Two bar items for the list. Um
2:36:43 transparency requirements. We have a
2:36:46 requirement for certain amount of window
2:36:48 um space and stepbacks which are
2:36:52 different from setbacks.
2:36:55 >> Step back,
2:36:57 >> sod modulation.
2:36:59 >> So, so okay.
2:37:00 >> So, to council member Jang's point about
2:37:02 related to ADUs, we did a turn on ADUs
2:37:05 like five or six years ago, right? It
2:37:07 would it seems like it would be
2:37:09 >> valuable to understand how that has or
2:37:11 hasn't, right? We we loosened up the ADU
2:37:14 language considerably like we made a big
2:37:17 turn and spent a lot of time on it and I
2:37:19 don't know if we I don't I don't think
2:37:21 we've had a lot of ADUs built since
2:37:23 then. So there's a there's a question on
2:37:25 again last time did yeah I looked at the
2:37:28 number it's quite low like 20
2:37:31 >> impervious surface
2:37:33 sorry PD I'll just email it. Yeah.
2:37:38 >> What do you mean exactly by that? uh in
2:37:40 Oldtown area 50% of the land needs to be
2:37:44 permeable to water for the aquafer and
2:37:48 so it means that 50% of the land can't
2:37:50 have homes built on it. So that's
2:37:53 something to think through figure out
2:37:55 what what that is affecting and in an
2:37:58 area that has high impervious surface
2:38:01 requirements so that our wa water
2:38:03 aquifer can be recharged maybe we need
2:38:06 to increase heights or you know
2:38:09 Yeah. Okay.
2:38:10 >> Give me one more. Um, how quickly we are
2:38:12 compliant with new state mandates versus
2:38:15 peer cities and other cities overall.
2:38:17 Um, for example, some of the things from
2:38:19 last year, I think we've got like three
2:38:21 years to comply with them. Um,
2:38:24 how are other cities doing? Um, is are
2:38:27 we choosing the right speed that
2:38:30 >> we've been early on compliance mostly?
2:38:33 >> Well, I think that was good.
2:38:35 >> I mean, 5290 we were pretty early. Um,
2:38:38 and so with middle housing, I think we
2:38:40 were a little late, but we were kind of
2:38:42 right in the middle of where the general
2:38:44 finished
2:38:45 >> Miguel doesn't want to get operational
2:38:47 next step.
2:38:49 >> What you do?
2:38:50 >> Ju just procedural next steps.
2:38:53 >> Okay. Well, yeah, let me just show let
2:38:55 me summarize and then I'll I'll let you
2:38:56 jump in there. Uh, because I think that
2:38:59 some of these these topics too, we're
2:39:00 starting to think about how do you
2:39:02 quantify our impacting success, which I
2:39:05 think is also good about. We talked
2:39:07 about metrics earlier and so looking at
2:39:09 some of those you know rates of return
2:39:11 and how it's impacting good things to
2:39:13 keep in new. So let me just summarize at
2:39:16 the high not the detail level the high
2:39:18 level of what I heard in terms of um
2:39:21 areas of action. We'll call them that.
2:39:23 Uh so first of all lifting up the hood
2:39:25 and looking at all the requirements what
2:39:26 are barriers that could be potentially
2:39:28 getting in the way of development. And
2:39:30 so it's a long list and Julie's got a
2:39:32 whole long list of there that you
2:39:34 captured. So that's that's one. Uh from
2:39:37 there then looking at how to streamline
2:39:39 the process and that might be you know
2:39:41 directly related to some of the things
2:39:42 you uncover in that analysis. Um we
2:39:45 talked about you know bringing people
2:39:47 together in the development round table
2:39:49 and so you have an opportunity to hear
2:39:51 and listen and learn uh from others that
2:39:53 might be potentially inform the
2:39:55 direction you have strategic capacity
2:39:58 staffing capacity. Um, so those were the
2:40:02 the four kind of actionable things I
2:40:04 heard and then it's kind of evaluating
2:40:06 progress ADUs policy success looking at
2:40:10 turnaround times for state mandates. So
2:40:13 kind of lots of things to potentially
2:40:15 drive the conversation to the next
2:40:17 level. Does that feel like a decent
2:40:20 recap? Then I'll let
2:40:24 >> Well,
2:40:26 you all want more than that, I think. So
2:40:29 you know we'll come back on March 9th.
2:40:31 Minnie
2:40:32 Minnie
2:40:35 uh with an outline of a plan through the
2:40:37 balance of the calendar. So we will look
2:40:40 to see what we can commit to do. Some of
2:40:43 this we're going to have to spend some
2:40:45 time on. Um so we'll prioritize things
2:40:47 that we think we can do. Many what uh
2:40:51 three months, six months, nine months
2:40:54 kind of time frame. will look at um
2:40:57 resource issues because we only have one
2:41:00 principal planner that does this sort of
2:41:02 work. Um we have some money already
2:41:04 allocated for $250,000.
2:41:08 >> Yes.
2:41:08 >> Which people are kind of waiting for
2:41:10 today to hear your thoughts before we
2:41:13 program that out. So we'll come on the
2:41:14 night with some specific recommendations
2:41:17 and how how things have. Uh we'll have
2:41:19 done the round table.
2:41:22 Alexis, raise your hand. Alexis, she's
2:41:25 your housing person. Her job is do all
2:41:28 the banks act.
2:41:30 >> Um and so that we'll talk more about how
2:41:33 that will work. Uh and we'll also talk
2:41:35 about funding um funding for housing. We
2:41:39 have affordable housing money um which I
2:41:42 have not programmed out from the IHIP.
2:41:44 Uh so we'll talk a little bit more about
2:41:46 that, but that would construct basically
2:41:48 a work plan. I think we're we're
2:41:50 probably not going to have a city-wide
2:41:51 work plan of stuff, but we're probably
2:41:53 going to have subject specific work
2:41:55 plans. So, that would be the plan to do
2:41:57 a work plan that would take us through
2:42:00 the end of 26.
2:42:03 Does that make what you're hoping to
2:42:05 hear or are you hoping to hear something
2:42:07 different?
2:42:08 >> There we go. There we go.
2:42:11 >> There we go.
2:42:11 >> You're hoping to hear
2:42:14 something different. Yeah, I think I
2:42:15 think that sounds great
2:42:17 >> because we can't re-calibrate. We can't
2:42:20 every three months decide that we're
2:42:21 going to reinvent this wheel. Uh we
2:42:23 could reinvent reinvent it now for the
2:42:26 current calendar year, but when we come
2:42:28 to you in March, we're going to say this
2:42:30 is the plan and we're going to commit to
2:42:33 go uh with what's on this plan through
2:42:35 the end of the calendar year. Um and we
2:42:38 want you to feel okay about that.
2:42:41 >> Yeah. I think the other thing that I
2:42:43 would like for us to all come to
2:42:44 agreement on is what are the metrics
2:42:46 that we're going to use to evaluate our
2:42:47 success. Okay. I think a key one is
2:42:49 probably number of you know homes
2:42:53 permitted in central Isiqua, number of
2:42:54 homes built in central Isiqua um
2:42:57 affordability of those units. And I
2:42:59 think one of the things, and maybe this
2:43:02 is getting a little off track, but like
2:43:03 to the extent that we're able to track
2:43:05 the affordability level of non um
2:43:07 covenant restricted homes, I think
2:43:09 that's also something that would be very
2:43:11 useful for us to know because right now,
2:43:12 you know, on affordability, we're just
2:43:14 like, oh, we have this number of income
2:43:16 restricted units. But then that doesn't
2:43:18 say anything about what is, you know,
2:43:19 the affordability of other homes in the
2:43:22 area. You know, I would to the extent I
2:43:25 know this is probably something that's
2:43:26 really really difficult to get data on,
2:43:27 but to the extent that we're able to do
2:43:29 it, it'll help a lot with our
2:43:30 >> So, another piece, Dale, would be
2:43:33 working with the planning staff. We
2:43:36 already have some of those metrics in
2:43:37 place, so we just have to look at what
2:43:39 we have, what we would need to add.
2:43:41 >> Yeah. And the size of new homes built
2:43:44 for both rental and ownership, um, I
2:43:47 think would be another metric.
2:43:49 >> Right. So, we'll come and we'll help. So
2:43:52 is a part of what's coming back then is
2:43:54 the data that's available then you can
2:43:56 track and respond on Molly or along with
2:43:59 the work plan or no
2:44:00 >> I mean we'll we'll come up with some
2:44:01 data points that we think we can some of
2:44:04 the last ones that council member Jane
2:44:05 referred to harder to get um but we can
2:44:08 find out if they're just harder or um
2:44:11 and so we can speak to that but the hope
2:44:13 would be that we bring this to you we
2:44:15 get your feedback and then we go
2:44:18 >> and I think another thing not to
2:44:20 complicate it But you have current
2:44:24 residents applying to remodel like a
2:44:25 kitchen or whatever. I think we got to
2:44:27 look at how much of our permit staff
2:44:30 time is being taken up by those things.
2:44:33 Like what on that list of things could
2:44:37 >> possibly visit to say what how involved
2:44:41 do we want to be in some of these?
2:44:44 >> Yes. And uh and because I think if you
2:44:48 look at the whatever we do here, we have
2:44:50 to make progress to the current
2:44:52 residents of how they interact with the
2:44:53 perfect apartment to do stuff any sort
2:44:56 of addition to their house no matter
2:44:57 what it is, bathroom, kitchen, any any
2:45:00 structure. I think we've heard from
2:45:02 people that that process they wish was
2:45:04 quicker. So I think it's kind of like a
2:45:06 parallel track. And I think our
2:45:08 fundamental challenge kind of talking to
2:45:10 mayors from around the country this past
2:45:13 week is the common refrain from most
2:45:16 cities is we haven't revisited this in
2:45:18 20 years. So we got to go in and fix it.
2:45:21 We are an outlier in the fact that we
2:45:22 literally just revisited this in 22 and
2:45:25 23, but the changes we made didn't lead
2:45:29 to any permits
2:45:31 anyone applying to build here. So we we
2:45:34 made a lot of changes in very recent
2:45:37 history compared to other cities that
2:45:39 are going through the process we're
2:45:40 talking about today. So I think to
2:45:42 Wallally's point, we have to figure out
2:45:45 like it's not fair to staff to just
2:45:48 flip-flop every five years. Like I think
2:45:51 we have to really say, hey, this our
2:45:54 goal is if if the goal is to get how
2:45:57 many homes are actually physically
2:45:59 didn't get built in this, you know,
2:46:01 section of Isqua we're talking about
2:46:03 north and south of I90, like what does
2:46:05 that look like? And and I think that's
2:46:07 how you judge success. And
2:46:10 >> and I think the staff's general feeling
2:46:13 is that despite the macroeconomic
2:46:17 stuff that's happening everywhere is
2:46:18 that the environmental restrictions in
2:46:20 Isiqua deter blowing. And so the
2:46:24 council's prepared to, you know, pull
2:46:27 some of those back that should have a
2:46:29 real impact. But we'll be we'll speak
2:46:30 more to that. And I think that's what
2:46:33 we'll we'll speak more to that. Some of
2:46:35 the price categories can fit into the
2:46:37 1220 legislation and that's an easy way
2:46:41 to have apples to apples in the
2:46:43 comparison.
2:46:44 >> Yep. And time toing.
2:46:47 >> Yep.
2:46:48 >> Okay.
2:46:48 >> One other quick thing. Um is there a
2:46:51 role to leverage our relationship with
2:46:52 Arch in this like when I think about
2:46:54 Metro Monday night council meeting.
2:46:58 >> uh a regional coalition for housing,
2:47:00 >> the east they're the uh multi-ity
2:47:03 organization based out of Belleview uh
2:47:05 that we are members of and they
2:47:07 contribute money to every year both
2:47:08 operationally and towards projects.
2:47:10 >> So you contribute money the housing may
2:47:12 or may not be built in your city. They
2:47:14 their point is everyone puts money in a
2:47:16 pot and they build it where it makes the
2:47:17 most sense. So you could be donating
2:47:19 money that gets built outside of your
2:47:21 community but for the region.
2:47:23 >> Yeah. For the regional greater good.
2:47:24 >> The regional greater good. That is all
2:47:25 premise of that organization.
2:47:27 >> And you'll hear Monday night from them
2:47:30 that who worked for Alexis. Did you
2:47:33 Well, I saw this.
2:47:35 >> But so you're going to hear, you know,
2:47:37 we use their staff second only to
2:47:39 Belleview to make affordable housing.
2:47:44 >> Great to hear. So you will hear a little
2:47:45 bit of that. It's a big presentation.
2:47:47 The packets already out, right? So then
2:47:49 there's there's a pretty substantial
2:47:51 presentation.
2:47:52 >> All right. And she look great again. Um,
2:47:55 okay. Do you feel comfortable with where
2:47:58 we are in terms of next steps? And I
2:48:00 mean, quite clearly a priority, right?
2:48:02 We can name this as a priority for the
2:48:04 next year, uh, 2026. Okay. Can we move
2:48:08 to the next one? I'm just see how many
2:48:10 we can get through.
2:48:11 >> I just want to point out we did the hard
2:48:12 one first.
2:48:16 >> Likely, right? All right. Uh, so can we
2:48:19 just go the order we have here? Talk
2:48:20 about economic development next. Okay.
2:48:23 So we're talking about a we added that
2:48:26 question what is the problem we're
2:48:27 trying to solve just to provide some
2:48:29 definition to it and then you know
2:48:30 what's the area for the next 12 months
2:48:34 >> I think this one is the one where is the
2:48:36 biggest uh just like lack of consensus
2:48:39 on what the problem is that we're trying
2:48:41 to solve. You know I've read our
2:48:42 economic development action plan and to
2:48:43 me honestly it doesn't seem like it
2:48:45 addresses economic development. like we
2:48:47 want more businesses in the arts or
2:48:49 outdoor recreation when you know I I
2:48:51 think most of us would think of economic
2:48:52 development as attracting large
2:48:54 businesses with you know office jobs and
2:48:57 those types of things. Um, so I think
2:49:00 honestly like and I don't know
2:49:03 necessarily how much time we want to
2:49:04 spend like coming up with the whole
2:49:06 plan, but like if we do agree that
2:49:07 attracting jobs is a priority, then I
2:49:11 think it then the question is what can
2:49:12 we do to do that? And so then the
2:49:15 question is like what competitive
2:49:16 advantages do we have over the orman?
2:49:20 And I would say the one that advantage
2:49:22 that we do have is that we have
2:49:23 proximity to Costco. And I was thinking
2:49:25 of this because when we sold off City
2:49:26 Hall Northwest, it was to a toy company
2:49:29 that is a major supplier to Costco. So
2:49:31 potentially one of the strategies we
2:49:32 could do, it's like, you know, hey, who
2:49:34 are the major suppliers to Costco? Could
2:49:36 we meet with them and advertise to them,
2:49:38 hey, you come to Isiqua, we're great.
2:49:39 And then you can be super close to
2:49:41 Costco HQ and that could help because,
2:49:43 you know, just like going out and having
2:49:45 Mayor Mullet talk to random CEOs may not
2:49:47 necessarily be as effective as like, oh,
2:49:49 you know, we have Costco as kind of like
2:49:50 the anchor. They're going to be here for
2:49:52 the long term. they just built their
2:49:53 super beautiful fancy new office, you
2:49:55 know, how can we kind of build the
2:49:56 ecosystem around them? So,
2:49:58 >> there's a correlary to that involving
2:50:00 Swedish and the medical facilities
2:50:02 around Swedish. Same concept.
2:50:05 >> Well, and quite honestly, we probably
2:50:07 need to add Swedish to our list because
2:50:09 we don't want them to close that
2:50:11 hospital.
2:50:12 >> No, we don't. So
2:50:14 >> did not know that was a that Lexus we
2:50:19 >> know
2:50:20 >> hospital
2:50:21 >> it's a full service we have a major they
2:50:23 have 175
2:50:25 Swedish as
2:50:27 >> all right so please keep in mind
2:50:30 >> there we go
2:50:31 >> please keep in mind we we give hundreds
2:50:34 of thousands of dollars to visit Isqua
2:50:36 each year to be our economic development
2:50:39 tourist arm out there so is maybe it's
2:50:42 too which is that about the right
2:50:44 amount.
2:50:44 >> What did we give them?
2:50:45 >> Not that much.
2:50:48 >> It's
2:50:49 >> $120,000. Yeah. To them. So, they're the
2:50:52 ones that are out there um trying to get
2:50:54 the business for us to fill our hotels,
2:50:58 have people come here to dine,
2:51:00 recreational activities, um and they
2:51:03 work with Eltech and um so they're a
2:51:06 significant arm. We need to figure out
2:51:07 how to coordinate with them with
2:51:09 whatever we decide uh we want to do
2:51:11 because they have been following our
2:51:13 leads so far as you know as as kind of
2:51:17 incongrous as it might be from time to
2:51:19 time. They've been following what we've
2:51:20 been telling them to kind of do at this
2:51:22 point.
2:51:22 >> They're slightly I mean they're
2:51:24 definitely trying to get heads and beds
2:51:25 and and stuff like that. This is I think
2:51:28 >> yeah to a little more focused on I mean
2:51:30 it's weird because you have the old
2:51:32 Microsoft campus at South End of the
2:51:33 Lake which was three giant buildings.
2:51:35 They're trying to build in free
2:51:37 employers too.
2:51:38 >> Very affordable in terms of price point.
2:51:41 Like I don't know are to your point is
2:51:45 there a way we could market like that
2:51:47 campus and those opportunities to find
2:51:50 out if there is a business that would be
2:51:52 interesting to them but I don't know how
2:51:55 uh it'd be awesome if it worked out. I
2:51:57 just don't know what we could bring to
2:51:59 the table aside from the fact that we're
2:52:01 an amazing community.
2:52:02 >> I mean just connecting supplier with
2:52:04 demand, right? I mean, we this came
2:52:07 about originally um when Mariah Batis
2:52:10 and I were the council leadership. We
2:52:12 were both working at companies that were
2:52:14 relocating. Both of the companies, the
2:52:17 companies she worked for and the company
2:52:18 I worked for were both based in
2:52:20 Belleview. It was clearly going to be a
2:52:22 CEO followup. We were going to be
2:52:23 wherever the CEO wanted us to be. And
2:52:26 both of us had companies that couldn't
2:52:28 find something in Isiquad workforce. And
2:52:31 so this idea of figuring out supply and
2:52:33 demand, putting them together, you know,
2:52:35 I had a situation where we needed like
2:52:38 120,000 square feet of industrial and
2:52:40 maybe 30,000 square feet of of general
2:52:44 uh commercial. We just couldn't do it.
2:52:46 It didn't exist in Isiqua and it
2:52:48 couldn't be built in the time frame we
2:52:49 needed. So we just have to figure out
2:52:52 where companies are out there looking.
2:52:54 If we could get 5% of Belleview's
2:52:57 squeeze, right, we would be amazing.
2:52:59 like it would be transformative if we
2:53:01 could get 5% of of what Bel used to be.
2:53:04 >> I think that uh supply is really
2:53:07 important. I mean we couldn't find a
2:53:09 place for us as a city. So we know there
2:53:12 is a squeeze out there
2:53:15 and so yeah but I think we need to have
2:53:19 that conversation around economic
2:53:21 development. What's the problem we're
2:53:22 trying to solve?
2:53:25 that clarity and then figure out what is
2:53:29 the barrier to that goal. So, so
2:53:33 question because I'm hearing when we
2:53:35 talked when this first came up, it
2:53:36 sounds like the focus initially anyway
2:53:38 is on attracting uh and supporting
2:53:42 facilitating companies new jobs like
2:53:44 bringing people and whether it's uh
2:53:48 companies that relate to existing people
2:53:51 but it's it's really about the larger
2:53:53 companies and bringing them attracting
2:53:55 them versus what we heard earlier which
2:53:57 could be also supporting small business
2:53:59 or like these are different directions.
2:54:00 >> I wouldn't say it that way. I would say
2:54:02 it in terms of uh living wage jobs like
2:54:05 we we you know you can do business
2:54:07 incubators right in business incubators
2:54:10 don't have to be huge um but they but
2:54:12 they bring living wage jobs you know I
2:54:15 would like to bring jobs that that the
2:54:17 people who live in our housing here
2:54:20 would find s you know people who live
2:54:22 here could work here it doesn't have to
2:54:24 be everybody I you know it doesn't we
2:54:26 could still have people living in town
2:54:28 but to have more jobs beyond Costco
2:54:31 white shops.
2:54:32 >> I think I think of economic development
2:54:35 where you have to like I think our kind
2:54:37 of asset we have to make sure it doesn't
2:54:40 go away is historic is aqua has been
2:54:42 there for 100 years but I think as a
2:54:44 small business restaurant owner if you
2:54:46 don't have foot traffic those businesses
2:54:47 are all at risk. So I think part of our
2:54:50 economic development strategy from the
2:54:51 administration is this idea of closing
2:54:53 Front Street for 10 weekends in the
2:54:55 summer. I think we're looking at doing a
2:54:57 shared parking program where we might
2:54:59 incentivize people financially to put
2:55:00 their parking spaces if they're along
2:55:02 that corridor into a shared parking pool
2:55:05 that people can use on the evenings and
2:55:07 weekends. Like we're looking at ways to
2:55:09 draw foot traffic because from economic
2:55:12 development perspective, you need more
2:55:15 foot traffic on historic Front Street if
2:55:16 you want it to be th vibrant and
2:55:18 thriving 20 years from now. I think if
2:55:22 we get everything right and my hope is
2:55:24 that area on Gilman north and south of
2:55:26 I90 looks substantially different 15
2:55:29 years from now but historic Front Street
2:55:31 still sort of has the same charm and
2:55:32 eclectic feel. But to keep that charm
2:55:36 and eclectic feel, it's not going to
2:55:37 happen organically. I think we have to
2:55:38 do things that draw people to that part
2:55:40 of our town. And then we have the
2:55:42 ability with light rail and the land use
2:55:46 decisions we make to think create its
2:55:48 own completely different kind of vibrant
2:55:50 walkable village feel in an area right
2:55:53 now that looks very similar when I came
2:55:55 out to this quad when I was a kid. I
2:55:57 mean going in the 70s and 80s look very
2:56:00 similar how G looks now. I mean it just
2:56:04 it was that's when it was built. It's
2:56:06 very large strip mall with giant sea of
2:56:09 parking and that's just what's there I
2:56:12 think. So economic development in my
2:56:14 mind though we have to keep in mind that
2:56:16 historic front street corridor as part
2:56:19 of our vision.
2:56:22 >> So two years ago the city council
2:56:23 adopted an economic development action
2:56:26 which is supposed to be a three-year
2:56:27 plan from 24 to 27. So are you saying
2:56:31 you want to redo this plan? You want to
2:56:34 revisit the plan? you want to look at
2:56:37 the component parts of it. Uh because
2:56:39 that because the plan was basically
2:56:42 let's look at what our strengths are for
2:56:44 smaller businesses. So that's where you
2:56:45 get the outdoor recreation, the creative
2:56:47 economy and the homebased businesses.
2:56:49 Now the world's bigger place two years
2:56:52 out um is the focus again to start over.
2:56:57 is the focus to you know have this
2:56:59 document in front of you hear where
2:57:01 we're at uh get some feedback for some
2:57:03 of the discussion here and then decide
2:57:06 what would you like the next step to be
2:57:08 >> there
2:57:11 how are we doing on that plan that start
2:57:14 >> I think that's a good starting point uh
2:57:17 I think also just having the
2:57:20 conversation around what problems are we
2:57:22 trying to solve and did that plan
2:57:24 address that or did it I think
2:57:27 >> yeah right or was it focused on a
2:57:31 different set of like
2:57:34 >> there could businesses be um
2:57:41 >> so the the why of why we want to bring
2:57:45 >> the why of city economic development
2:57:48 >> there's a difference between saying you
2:57:50 know we want to
2:57:54 >> take advantage of the idea that We have
2:57:57 green space near us and outdoor
2:57:59 recreation businesses and all of that.
2:58:01 That's that's different from the concept
2:58:07 >> looking for living wage jobs and
2:58:11 you know it's a different approach to a
2:58:13 problem
2:58:14 >> and and and it may be that this sitting
2:58:16 council just has a different view and
2:58:18 that's perfectly reasonable. I'm just
2:58:20 trying to operationalize how we get from
2:58:23 an adopted plan that was in theory
2:58:25 supposed to go one more year um to
2:58:28 >> really two more years, right? It goes
2:58:29 through 27 or is it end?
2:58:31 >> Yeah. No. Well, two more years. So, if
2:58:33 it's working or if it's not working.
2:58:36 >> Well, no, but I I think that the the the
2:58:38 the goalposts are changing. So, I think
2:58:42 if the expert this this worked in 24 for
2:58:44 the council, it doesn't seem to be
2:58:46 working in 26 for the council.
2:58:47 >> We had a hope when we passed it. that
2:58:49 doesn't mean that it's working, right? I
2:58:52 I mean, if you tell me here's the vision
2:58:54 that you had two years ago, you did this
2:58:56 thing and we're and we're and we're
2:58:57 executing to it and it's going great,
2:58:59 then I'm less likely to want to fiddle
2:59:00 with it. But if you if you
2:59:02 >> Why don't you start So why don't we
2:59:04 start there and we'll we'll we'll give
2:59:07 you an update on where we're at. We'll
2:59:09 address some of these other issues, you
2:59:11 know, the corporate headquarters stuff,
2:59:13 all of that we can we can address. And I
2:59:16 will turn to talk about retention too
2:59:18 because REI is here now but they may
2:59:21 leave like we may have to
2:59:24 and Swedish is in deep trouble and
2:59:26 unless we're able to help them in some
2:59:28 way they may just close that hospital
2:59:30 because it might be cheaper for them
2:59:31 just to shut it than it is to continue
2:59:33 to operate and what does that do to us
2:59:36 as a community. So, um, we can, you
2:59:39 know, we've got committee the hole in
2:59:41 February and March filled. Do you want
2:59:44 to do a special something or you want to
2:59:46 wait till April?
2:59:48 >> There we go.
2:59:48 >> Also getting to the point we're going to
2:59:49 start talking about budget.
2:59:51 >> There we go.
2:59:52 >> In May.
2:59:54 >> There we go.
2:59:55 >> A special meeting to talk about.
2:59:57 >> I would defer to council leadership and
3:00:03 >> you've been waiting all day to see it.
3:00:05 that also facilities in part. So
3:00:12 >> let's let's agree for today that the
3:00:15 starting point this conversation is to
3:00:16 put fresh eyes on the economic economic
3:00:18 development strategy. What's working?
3:00:20 What's missing? And just that need a
3:00:22 refresh. That's
3:00:22 >> I would suggest it could be a time
3:00:24 because I think we have a May retreat
3:00:25 the second weekend in May. Maybe.
3:00:28 >> Sure. We and we maybe we
3:00:29 >> and I think that we could come back at
3:00:32 that one with more information on the
3:00:34 current economic development plan and
3:00:35 what's working.
3:00:36 >> Okay.
3:00:37 >> All right. We're going to move to the
3:00:39 next one. That's that gives us some
3:00:40 momentum. Right. That
3:00:42 >> great. All right. Tood was our next
3:00:45 topic.
3:00:47 >> I think everything that we're doing in
3:00:49 the first topic is going to enable
3:00:51 transit oriented development
3:00:53 >> connected. Yeah. I mean
3:00:54 >> I'm talking specifically about to doc.
3:00:58 Oh, this one project.
3:00:59 >> That's what I'm talking about for the
3:01:02 next 12 months is I want us to finally
3:01:05 >> change. They because we met with Avalon
3:01:08 Bay. Did they commit last week? We
3:01:10 already see
3:01:11 >> they they haven't signed contract yet,
3:01:13 but let's see. The project's in for
3:01:15 permit. They expect to break ground this
3:01:17 year in June or July. So AW Bay's
3:01:20 request when Andrew and I met with them
3:01:22 on Monday was their fear is that we said
3:01:25 these two projects have to go together.
3:01:28 They're a little worried about investing
3:01:29 tens of millions of dollars and then the
3:01:31 King County Housing Authority side
3:01:33 >> drives the street.
3:01:34 >> So they're just saying I think well
3:01:37 that's
3:01:37 >> goes away.
3:01:39 >> Well,
3:01:40 we I think wanted the timing to be
3:01:44 concurrent because our fear was the
3:01:45 private side might come a lot later,
3:01:47 >> right? and the private side, even though
3:01:49 they haven't done anything yet, they're
3:01:51 saying we're going to move fast and our
3:01:53 fear is we don't want to be at the whims
3:01:55 if King County affordable housing money
3:01:58 decides like if they have their own
3:02:01 issues. So I think both so I think their
3:02:04 question to us right Andrea was are we
3:02:06 willing to provide some flexibility like
3:02:08 they get to once they decide to move
3:02:10 forward they're moving forward they
3:02:12 don't want to be told you can't open
3:02:14 your doors because King County Housing
3:02:15 Authority decided to screw around for an
3:02:17 extra year or two. So that's their ask
3:02:22 >> we are working with them and KCHA on how
3:02:24 to make sure that the city still gets
3:02:26 the things that we've wanted out of this
3:02:27 project. the city put a lot of time,
3:02:30 money, investment in this project. We
3:02:32 want to make sure that
3:02:33 >> we think their ask is not necessary. We
3:02:35 think King County Housing Authority is
3:02:37 going full steam ahead and we think
3:02:40 >> so they're they're worried about
3:02:41 something we don't think it's going to
3:02:42 happen, but they they're lawyers
3:02:43 involved. So,
3:02:47 >> do they want to pass a certain point
3:02:49 like if their permits best then they're
3:02:51 allowed to go through no matter what or
3:02:52 what are they asking? They didn't
3:02:55 proposed a specific solution other than
3:02:57 KCHA's willing to put up a bond to try
3:02:59 to help guarantee their project will get
3:03:01 built. So, we're working through we want
3:03:03 to minimize risk to the city. Um, we
3:03:05 want to make sure these projects get
3:03:06 built. We're going to find solutions.
3:03:08 >> All right. Thank you. This is going to
3:03:09 happen.
3:03:10 >> Yeah.
3:03:10 >> I know you've heard that forever.
3:03:14 >> Smallest of the hurdles we've
3:03:15 encountered. I will say that.
3:03:17 >> All right. If if we're on if we're on a
3:03:19 good glide path, we don't have to talk
3:03:21 more about it.
3:03:22 >> Eight years. Okay.
3:03:24 >> And we they talked about, do we need to
3:03:26 have, you know, basically a terrace
3:03:30 patio for every single unit or can it be
3:03:32 half the units? They were like, so
3:03:34 they're asking things that were not
3:03:35 crazy. They were just reasonable ask, I
3:03:37 think. And I will say one takeaway I had
3:03:39 from that conversation was what I think
3:03:41 we're missing in the valley floor is
3:03:43 more rooftop outdoor space. So I think
3:03:45 it'd be really interesting for us to
3:03:46 have a conversation as a council I think
3:03:49 around can outdoor space be a communal
3:03:53 rooftop deck where you can go up and you
3:03:55 can look at this Alps you can look
3:03:56 towards like Sam you can look but not
3:03:59 have this requirement that every single
3:04:00 unit has to have a balcony which is our
3:04:03 current requirement. Uh there's very few
3:04:05 rooftop spaces. Like I go to what well
3:04:08 that place is now closed, the beastro or
3:04:11 whatever on the islands, but I look at
3:04:13 every time I go there, I'm like if there
3:04:15 was a place up there to eat, I think it
3:04:16 would be like hugely popular on that
3:04:18 roof because you'd be looking westward
3:04:19 towards the Olympics in Seattle. We just
3:04:21 for some reason our city you've never
3:04:23 done it. Like it just hasn't happened.
3:04:26 It's like a missed opportunity. I think
3:04:29 >> I think it's going forward. We will and
3:04:31 I think we're being very collaborative.
3:04:33 there's no part of our conversations
3:04:35 with anyone involved in the activity
3:04:37 project like we're trying to get to yes
3:04:38 with every group we talk to
3:04:40 >> to Tula's point of this this individual
3:04:43 building being a a council priority
3:04:45 though um I think that's probably true
3:04:47 and if we want to make that that most of
3:04:49 this will be on the administration to to
3:04:51 work out the nuts and bolts but if we
3:04:54 want to make it a council priority
3:04:55 >> we could say that
3:04:57 >> if anything comes up that needs to be
3:04:59 you know it needs in any way to have
3:05:01 council involvement that takes
3:05:03 precedence something. Yeah, let's do it
3:05:05 the way that we can be.
3:05:06 >> It's great.
3:05:06 >> And keep us updated as things go through
3:05:09 because we're eager.
3:05:12 >> There we go.
3:05:13 >> Right now,
3:05:13 >> years, eight years.
3:05:14 >> 95% Avalon Bay will be the private side
3:05:18 partner and uh is my guess. They had a
3:05:22 place in the islands originally. they
3:05:23 sold. I think that's the one 15th
3:05:25 they're
3:05:26 >> right and then
3:05:27 >> but so they're familiar with our
3:05:29 community and and I think if this
3:05:32 process goes well I think their
3:05:34 indication is are open to looking at
3:05:35 other investments on the valley floor
3:05:38 and so but they want to see this go
3:05:40 >> yeah and I to be a even a little bit
3:05:42 more specific I think the sorts of
3:05:44 things that could come up is do they
3:05:45 need some sort of deviation and would we
3:05:47 be willing to put that on our agenda
3:05:50 >> right happy about putting that on our
3:05:51 agenda very quickly the sort sorts of
3:05:53 things. I think that's how we can yeah
3:05:55 action make this actionable to have this
3:05:57 priority for council
3:05:59 >> and I would say I think if if there was
3:06:00 a deviation of saying half the units
3:06:03 have to have outdoor terrorists I think
3:06:05 the question is I think they're going to
3:06:07 go forward I think the deviations would
3:06:09 be to incentivize kind of a show of hey
3:06:12 we're going to be a partner if you
3:06:13 decide to invest in building more homes
3:06:14 in Isqua like and so I think that would
3:06:17 be the purpose of because they're making
3:06:19 it clear like they're willing to go
3:06:21 forward so Anything we do is kind of
3:06:24 icing on the cake I think at my
3:06:26 >> be value in naming point right don't
3:06:30 guess council that's a priority for
3:06:31 council is that is that a kind of
3:06:34 priority just second okay
3:06:37 >> great
3:06:38 >> all right
3:06:40 okay so
3:06:44 >> balls
3:06:45 wanted to stop the meeting and get up
3:06:48 >> my elder
3:06:49 I'm back.
3:06:53 >> What else do we need to talk about
3:06:54 related to transportation and mobility?
3:06:56 So, we heard about, you know, some of
3:06:57 the MCOMei pieces with trails and other
3:06:59 elements and their comments there. Are
3:07:01 there other things that are critical
3:07:03 path? Oh,
3:07:04 >> no.
3:07:05 >> It's not lights.
3:07:07 >> Maybe.
3:07:08 Yeah, it's the fan that
3:07:10 >> the
3:07:13 Do we need to talk about Metrolex
3:07:14 alternatives? Well, should we do a a
3:07:16 braid list like we did for housing?
3:07:19 Sure.
3:07:20 >> For interest of time, Andrea, can you
3:07:24 rattle off what we're going to talk
3:07:25 about on
3:07:28 >> I would love to. Uh so, uh we have a
3:07:32 couple of presentations lined up. One is
3:07:35 on PMP, pavement management program,
3:07:38 which um we are doing the pavement
3:07:41 condition index so we can go over the
3:07:43 latest data on how our streets are
3:07:44 doing. We're also going to be talking
3:07:47 about some pavement treatment techniques
3:07:49 the city's been piloting for the past
3:07:51 few years. There's been some feedback
3:07:53 from the community that um they don't uh
3:07:56 like the pavement uh treatments. There
3:07:59 has also been some positive feedback,
3:08:02 but um so we're going to go over those.
3:08:04 And then the policy question for that
3:08:06 item is whether or not we should change
3:08:09 our techniques or we should keep moving
3:08:11 forward with the techniques we're
3:08:12 piloting and setting a community
3:08:14 standard for those pavement techniques
3:08:16 and treatment techniques. The second
3:08:18 item is going to be on metrlex. We had
3:08:21 promised council that we come back and
3:08:23 talk about um we uh success measures and
3:08:28 what our goals with the project um or
3:08:30 with that program. We're also going to
3:08:32 be uh talking providing a little bit of
3:08:35 information about some possible
3:08:37 alternatives and asking council whether
3:08:39 we should investigate those um more
3:08:43 fully and then uh the third
3:08:46 >> I will say in that space just to share
3:08:48 kind of what we've learned is circuit is
3:08:50 the one that does the bell hop circuit's
3:08:51 going to revenue they're they have via
3:08:56 currently is the back end of metrlex
3:08:57 made it very clear to us they they were
3:09:00 like at the conference the mayor is like
3:09:01 trying to get everyone to sign up, but
3:09:03 they're they're not going to violate
3:09:04 what they have with King County. So, if
3:09:06 we want to do anything with VIA, it's
3:09:08 through King County. They will not
3:09:10 >> risk the King County contract by doing
3:09:12 something separate with us. So, there is
3:09:14 no ability to remove the middleman if we
3:09:17 want to use VIA and they're basically
3:09:18 circum are the two big ones. And then
3:09:20 the third outlier is Uber uh you know,
3:09:24 we're talking to Uber about just doing
3:09:26 straight up Uber vouchers. So those are
3:09:28 basically so I would I would have said
3:09:30 it's three options really. It's status
3:09:32 quo versus circuit or Uber vouchers is
3:09:35 probably going to be the lay of the
3:09:37 land. I mean
3:09:39 >> so all of these entities I spoke with
3:09:41 personally over the past month and they
3:09:43 were supposed to give me proposals and
3:09:45 they have not yet. They were supposed to
3:09:47 give me proposals last week and this
3:09:48 week they promised them again and I
3:09:50 don't have. So if I'm going to I'm going
3:09:52 to bring as much information as I can
3:09:54 bring for the February 9th meeting. Um,
3:09:57 but otherwise we may have to keep the
3:09:58 conversation general because I I only
3:10:01 have so much information. Um, and then
3:10:03 the third conversation is on the
3:10:04 transportation benefit district sales
3:10:06 tax. Again, last fall we told council we
3:10:09 would come back and talk about that
3:10:11 funding and um what council's priorities
3:10:14 are for that funding. That conversation
3:10:17 is going to help inform us shape the
3:10:19 transportation improvement plan which we
3:10:22 update on an annual basis and coming
3:10:24 back to council for uh adoption in June.
3:10:27 So having a conversation about how you
3:10:29 want to use those funds is then going to
3:10:30 be reflective and we'll see you get you
3:10:33 see later. Um so that's uh that's the
3:10:36 general those are the three topics.
3:10:38 We're also going to be providing an
3:10:39 update on light rail and the city's
3:10:41 efforts on light rail uh which are
3:10:44 really heating up. That's true.
3:10:47 >> Well, and I think the last piece is
3:10:48 really the mayor has asked us to look
3:10:50 for small impact high small projects
3:10:53 high impact
3:10:55 >> that we can do this year. Yep.
3:10:57 >> So, we are going to
3:10:59 >> Yeah. 2627 type projects like projects
3:11:02 need to do before we do the big trail
3:11:04 connection coming in from South Lakes
3:11:06 >> and we'll be talking about that in
3:11:07 context of the transportation b district
3:11:10 sales sites and tip upkeep. That's been
3:11:13 a major question of the mayor's ears. I
3:11:15 want to do something now, not just talk
3:11:18 about it for three years.
3:11:22 >> I know the little wooden thing.
3:11:27 >> The quality of life issue.
3:11:29 >> Yeah. The the survival rate of your
3:11:32 talis based council members is
3:11:33 >> at risk.
3:11:36 Not we still going to get to go get a
3:11:38 ton for Christmas.
3:11:41 So that's the outline of what we're
3:11:42 planning for transportation. Um, you
3:11:46 know, we'll we'll continue moving
3:11:47 forward, but the tip process is soon,
3:11:51 right?
3:11:52 >> Yeah. We It goes by state law. It has to
3:11:55 be adopted by July 1st. And so we take
3:11:57 it to TAB and a few other advisory
3:11:59 boards and then it goes to M&I and then
3:12:02 it goes to council for adoption. So
3:12:04 we're working on it now based on Mayor
3:12:05 Mullet's priorities that he has provided
3:12:08 those small simple capital projects that
3:12:10 can have a small impact which adds up
3:12:12 over time.
3:12:14 >> There we go. There we go.
3:12:15 >> Yeah. So doing a few more brains things
3:12:18 not for this meeting but as a topic.
3:12:20 >> Um so metro
3:12:23 um as one topic. Uh like
3:12:29 >> has asked Beluchi is asking us for a
3:12:31 venue to talk about the metro levy
3:12:34 because I think it sounds like I saw you
3:12:35 guys advised them not to go on the metro
3:12:39 levy. Are they
3:12:40 >> focus on transportation specifically? Is
3:12:43 >> Metro King County metros or the buses?
3:12:46 >> Okay.
3:12:46 >> Yeah.
3:12:48 >> Yes. on that. I think one of the things
3:12:51 that we on East Side Transportation
3:12:52 Partnership want to do. I think with
3:12:54 with Metrolex, the big issue that has
3:12:57 been brought up repeatedly is just the
3:12:58 high cost per rider and there really is
3:13:00 no way to bring it down significantly if
3:13:02 you're having on demand stuff. So, with
3:13:05 the King County Metro ballot measure, if
3:13:07 we're able to get some, you know,
3:13:08 priority intracity routes in there, that
3:13:12 could potentially replace, you know,
3:13:13 some of like a large amount of trips
3:13:15 that are made with metroplex, then
3:13:16 potentially that could be deprecated and
3:13:18 we could get all this new funding from
3:13:20 King County to run local buses. Um, so
3:13:23 that's something that we're going to be
3:13:24 working on through East Side
3:13:25 Transportation Partnership and seeing to
3:13:27 what extent we can get some of our PEP
3:13:29 projects in there. Um I think that with
3:13:32 administration in some this direct way
3:13:35 could make it a heck of a lot more
3:13:37 likely
3:13:40 challenge
3:13:42 >> there
3:13:43 >> like if I look at the parks levy like if
3:13:45 you add up what we as is qu pay for the
3:13:48 parks le I think it's 4.4 million we get
3:13:49 $500,000 back but then perspective 4.4 a
3:13:52 million like like 10 million pays for
3:13:54 epher. So like basically we're paying in
3:13:56 so I think we have to
3:13:59 I I think and I'm meeting with KMA on
3:14:01 Monday but I think the I think we have
3:14:04 to be really strategic as a city and
3:14:06 supporting stuff that King County is
3:14:08 doing because basically the stuff they
3:14:11 fund ends up benefiting Seattle 10 times
3:14:13 more than it benefits us. We're funding
3:14:15 all the improvements that are happening
3:14:16 in Seattle. So we have to and the parks
3:14:19 levy is the poster child of that. Like
3:14:22 we could be doing a crapload of stuff
3:14:24 that that 4.4 million our residents are
3:14:26 paying for parks was just half of it was
3:14:29 coming back to us. I mean so this is our
3:14:31 and I'm I come into the King County
3:14:34 Metro levy conversation of just a fear
3:14:36 that once again they're going to use our
3:14:39 residents to subsidize transit service
3:14:41 in Seattle.
3:14:42 >> Yeah, I understand that. I've also if
3:14:44 it's going to happen anyway, the more we
3:14:47 can push ourselves into it, the better
3:14:48 off we might be have to get something
3:14:50 out of this thing.
3:14:50 >> Yeah.
3:14:51 >> That's what we're trying to work on
3:14:53 with, you know, just a transportation
3:14:55 partnership. Because I think if it's
3:14:56 like all the east side cities, you know,
3:14:59 we're like, "Hey, if you don't put our
3:15:00 stuff in there, we will not just not it
3:15:03 but possibly even it."
3:15:04 >> Yes. And
3:15:05 >> I think that's the message you want to
3:15:06 continue to send is this is not a time
3:15:09 to play nice. This is the time to demand
3:15:12 that our taxpayers get a return on
3:15:13 investment because we haven't been with
3:15:16 K County
3:15:17 >> want to be a donor
3:15:19 >> much less SD3.
3:15:21 >> Well, yeah. This is I mean and it's like
3:15:24 we all love transit. So, we don't want
3:15:25 to be viewed as being out transit, but
3:15:27 at some point we can't just keep having
3:15:29 our residents pay for investments that
3:15:31 we just want our fair share. That's all
3:15:32 we're asking for, I think, is our fair
3:15:34 share. If you're going to ask us to pay
3:15:36 and support it, like just give us our
3:15:38 fair.
3:15:40 And then just from a council priority
3:15:42 perspective, coordination on that
3:15:44 would be wise.
3:15:48 >> Yeah, I think on the small projects
3:15:50 front, I mean, I'm curious how you think
3:15:52 about like street safety improvements.
3:15:54 You know, I saw that email from that guy
3:15:55 about like, hey, I'm concerned about
3:15:57 speeding here. Can you put in a speed
3:15:58 bump? And the answer is we can't even
3:16:00 begin to consider it until 2028. And I
3:16:03 have, you know, Fred who is concerned
3:16:06 about, you know, cars speeding down her
3:16:08 street to drop kids off at daycare. And
3:16:11 she also, that's the same response that
3:16:12 she gets about like putting it in speed
3:16:14 bump, which is not something that's
3:16:15 expensive. So I think that's something
3:16:17 where we can explore explore like is
3:16:19 there a way to get those done, you know,
3:16:21 do the analysis faster, pour concrete
3:16:23 faster, do something temporary, see how
3:16:26 it works, and then evaluate whether
3:16:27 permanently like those types of quality.
3:16:29 This goes to the core of how to open the
3:16:32 whole meeting in your example, right? Is
3:16:34 that the initial investigation on that
3:16:36 was the speeds were not as high. So it
3:16:39 seemed like a little bit more of an So
3:16:41 then you ran the risk I think of a speed
3:16:43 bump then having 10 come out and say I
3:16:46 can't believe you put speed bumps in on
3:16:48 25th like that was not like and so this
3:16:51 is the balancing act like to me like the
3:16:54 middle ground which we haven't I think
3:16:55 deserves a lot more you know looking at
3:16:59 is the little signs that just flash and
3:17:00 tell you when you're going too fast
3:17:02 because that is not a speed bump and
3:17:04 it's not a ticket it's just and and I
3:17:06 will say just anecdotally when I get
3:17:09 flashed saying slow down because you're
3:17:11 going 10 over. I usually do slow down
3:17:13 because I'm like, "Oh I realized I
3:17:14 was going that fast." So those things do
3:17:17 work and they're in a they're kind of a
3:17:18 middle ground way that you can slow down
3:17:20 speeds without making physical changes
3:17:23 that might piss off the other 75% of the
3:17:26 people that don't want to have to drive
3:17:28 over speed bumps every single time they
3:17:30 come in or out of their neighborhood,
3:17:31 which sometimes is eight or 10 times a
3:17:32 day. So that's
3:17:33 >> I think that's a good potential
3:17:35 solution. I think one one thing that
3:17:39 guys might be getting at at this a
3:17:41 bigger issue is from the perspective of
3:17:43 customer service. How can we at least
3:17:45 answer these questions in a more
3:17:47 important time even if the answer is
3:17:52 any any business
3:17:55 best way to make me annoyed is it I'm
3:17:57 told I have no one nobody ever wants the
3:17:59 package saying it's one of the council
3:18:02 priorities
3:18:06 it's always I think I I doubt there's
3:18:08 anybody who's going to say don't worry
3:18:12 >> it's a priority of the administration
3:18:14 regard.
3:18:14 >> Exactly.
3:18:14 >> It doesn't have to be your priority
3:18:16 priority.
3:18:17 >> I a
3:18:20 see it's catchy.
3:18:21 >> Um
3:18:23 >> there we go. There we go. There we go.
3:18:25 >> That and if there's any I don't know how
3:18:26 council gets involved in that.
3:18:28 >> I I mean this this is the whole reason
3:18:29 how the customer service discussion came
3:18:31 up for all the reasons you just said
3:18:32 like that person is probably frustrated
3:18:34 with the city of Bisqu right now because
3:18:35 they basically got a very governmental
3:18:37 answer. It's a it's a challenge, right?
3:18:39 I mean,
3:18:41 >> so I'm not sure I see a strategy or a
3:18:45 set of priorities within the
3:18:47 transportation and mobility area. I've
3:18:50 heard pavement management, light rail,
3:18:52 small projects, metroflex, TBD sales
3:18:54 tax, you know, talking about metro levy,
3:18:59 safety challenges.
3:19:01 I don't know. That's a lot of things.
3:19:05 >> I don't know what of that is our
3:19:08 priority. And is our priority in what
3:19:11 metrics are we looking at? What are we
3:19:13 trying to achieve with that? Are we
3:19:16 focusing on
3:19:19 vehicle movement? How much of our focus
3:19:22 is on pedestrian and bike safety? How
3:19:25 much of it is on maintenance versus
3:19:29 building new capacity and otherwise? I
3:19:33 think there's there's a bigger set of
3:19:36 conversations that I don't know has
3:19:38 really happened
3:19:40 there.
3:19:41 >> I think I would definitely say
3:19:42 congestion relief is probably
3:19:45 a strong approach here. It's just
3:19:47 projects that provide congestion relief,
3:19:50 but I think the if we can get if we're
3:19:54 in a good position to get the grant from
3:19:55 PSRC, we just have to put up our share
3:19:57 of the money on the Newport project,
3:19:59 like I'm all for it. And I think the way
3:20:02 we approach things as a state that there
3:20:03 was federal dollars in the line that
3:20:05 went to the top of the list because if
3:20:06 we could do a project and we have to pay
3:20:08 for 20% of it like it's becomes you know
3:20:11 political malpractice to not pursue it.
3:20:14 So I think coming in with not knowing
3:20:17 where that stuff is going to lay out is
3:20:19 a little bit harder. I think the the
3:20:22 general broad theme I would say is
3:20:24 congestion relief is really important.
3:20:26 We also want to put in sidewalks. We
3:20:27 want to do the bike stuff when it makes
3:20:30 sense to be honest those score a lot
3:20:32 better for getting grants than just
3:20:33 doing congestion relief projects like
3:20:35 fixing front sunset which is when I say
3:20:37 that you're fixing the sunset part of
3:20:39 front and sunset not the front part and
3:20:42 uh we're not going to get a dollar for
3:20:44 that like we're going to have to pay the
3:20:45 entire 2.4 4 million to do that project.
3:20:47 No one's going to help us out is my
3:20:48 guess. But these other projects like a
3:20:51 Newport, you know, bike trail stuff, I
3:20:53 think we can get a lot of money for
3:20:55 those projects. So I think it's uh but I
3:20:58 think the overall if you want to know
3:21:00 the overall theme I would say congestion
3:21:02 relief is definitely
3:21:04 the the immediate goal right now kind of
3:21:07 responding to the community saying what
3:21:09 can we do where we can point to and some
3:21:11 of the safety stuff is like the
3:21:13 crosswalk of village theater and the
3:21:14 idea is another crosswalk we have you go
3:21:16 from the party store across black nugget
3:21:18 to where the 24-hour fitness is you know
3:21:20 we just are trying to find two places
3:21:23 where we seem to have a lot of
3:21:25 pedestrians crossing treats it don't
3:21:26 seem very safe.
3:21:27 >> So I think just to give sort of more
3:21:30 specific examples of of things we're
3:21:32 looking at that have come up in this
3:21:34 kind of first month of analysis
3:21:36 >> for the next six months we have to do
3:21:38 everything we can to save life.
3:21:40 >> Yeah.
3:21:40 >> So at six months time it either will be
3:21:42 there and they will have doubled down to
3:21:44 say yes we're committed to do it or it's
3:21:46 gone. And so either way that's going to
3:21:48 free.
3:21:50 We can channel the resources, different
3:21:52 kinds of resources, new money into light
3:21:55 rail or if light rail is gone, then
3:21:57 everybody who's fighting right now to
3:21:59 keep it, we'll have time to do it.
3:22:01 >> We cannot lose light rail. I was going
3:22:03 to say that
3:22:03 >> that's that that's layered on top of
3:22:05 everything we talked about is the next
3:22:07 six months of making sure that Sound
3:22:10 Transit
3:22:10 >> and anytime somebody sees I every time
3:22:12 we met with Canwell or Murray and
3:22:15 somebody said something about getting
3:22:16 live rail to Tacoma I said and is aqua I
3:22:20 want to ever and is aqua like it was
3:22:23 like we all have to pound this drop
3:22:25 every time you're talking to anyone in
3:22:26 the sound transit board you have to
3:22:28 pound the drop because everything's
3:22:29 going to happen like Wally said between
3:22:31 now and June 3rd
3:22:32 everything and it's I know some people
3:22:34 in here
3:22:35 >> Marie Fwell heard it from him because
3:22:38 Angela Bernie was busy saying I want
3:22:41 more I want more I want more and he said
3:22:43 but don't forget about isqua and the
3:22:45 senators each time turned to him and not
3:22:48 the mayor of Redmond and said and we're
3:22:50 listening so that advocacy at the
3:22:52 federal level with our two United States
3:22:54 senators last five days four days is
3:22:58 really critical
3:22:59 >> can I ask about this Newport is is
3:23:01 Newport We're reduction congestion
3:23:02 really the 70 million we're going to
3:23:04 spend it
3:23:04 >> we're we're not spending 70 million on
3:23:07 >> we're not spending it
3:23:08 >> okay if we spend 14 because we get 80
3:23:10 cents on the dollar from somebody else
3:23:12 is it congestion really
3:23:13 >> I think it would be I think it would
3:23:15 flow better I mean it's roundabouts it's
3:23:17 two roundabouts or three roundabouts
3:23:18 right
3:23:20 >> al also that would be like adding the
3:23:22 >> you'd have you'd have
3:23:24 >> which I bike there all the time every
3:23:28 so it would like help with
3:23:30 >> you haven't eaten it all you know
3:23:31 inducing demand for cycling
3:23:35 >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. I know.
3:23:39 >> Good.
3:23:40 >> Okay.
3:23:40 >> We'll worry about
3:23:41 >> we what we'll do is we will bring the
3:23:43 conversation and then put this back so
3:23:45 you can define what you want that to
3:23:47 look like. But I you know I like rail
3:23:49 advocacy sounds like it should be you
3:23:51 know important to prioritize.
3:23:53 >> You bet the ranks. So all right
3:23:57 there we go. Final final thoughts at
3:23:59 that time said suggest one thing that I
3:24:01 put on my list of things that I would
3:24:03 like to see. I would um and I think this
3:24:06 goes into economic development and also
3:24:08 on some level transportation mobility to
3:24:10 me mobility is about getting to
3:24:12 destinations right it doesn't
3:24:13 necessarily mean it doesn't have to mean
3:24:15 making traffic flow better on streets if
3:24:17 you have a grocery store that's closer
3:24:18 to your house that you can get to and
3:24:19 you don't have to drive all the better.
3:24:21 So, I think looking at the permanent
3:24:24 uses within our neighborhoods to
3:24:25 potentially allow neighborhood
3:24:27 businesses, cloth did this recently.
3:24:29 They have a whole section of their code
3:24:30 that we could just straight up copy to
3:24:32 our code, looked at it, and so that
3:24:34 could definitely be something to
3:24:35 investigate as well.
3:24:36 >> Is it working for them?
3:24:38 >> Uh, I mean, it's been like a few months.
3:24:40 >> Oh, okay.
3:24:41 >> So, but it's hope they're hopeful that
3:24:44 >> it may be. Yeah,
3:24:45 >> because like upper squawk will never
3:24:47 guess this.
3:24:49 So, I know we're over time, but we we
3:24:51 skipped the last bullet. We just agreed
3:24:52 to come back to that at some point. So,
3:24:54 the second weekend in May,
3:24:56 >> the next time you get together, and that
3:24:58 will be the top line.
3:25:01 >> Yeah, mom. We'll make sure to keep it in
3:25:04 >> Well, I think that's Nichols. I mean, my
3:25:07 background's finance. Like, I I think
3:25:09 Kristen, we've already talked. I think
3:25:10 she's already shifting money out of the
3:25:12 US bank account into the local
3:25:14 government investment pool. So, we start
3:25:15 earning interest on our cash reserves.
3:25:18 Uh, I mean, and like I got a city car
3:25:22 mayor, I donated to the fleet. I was
3:25:24 like, we're
3:25:26 there's going to be a serious attempt to
3:25:28 try to find ways to have our budget in
3:25:31 balance. And uh, and every time somebody
3:25:34 we have natural nutritionists in the
3:25:35 city, Wally and I are looking at these
3:25:36 spots like we're not just we're being
3:25:39 very intentional about how we do
3:25:40 everything, I think, this year. And I
3:25:42 think the goal is to put us on a very
3:25:44 sustainable fiscal path. And and that's
3:25:46 the focus. And so everything I think
3:25:49 that we can do from the administration
3:25:50 side, trust me, is just kind of what I
3:25:54 think about coming to work every day.
3:25:57 >> There we go.
3:25:59 >> I did.
3:26:00 >> Okay. Is that cool?
3:26:02 >> All right. So we are we're at time, but
3:26:05 what I want to do is I I wanted just to
3:26:06 kind of wrap us up. Um, with all of this
3:26:09 context in mind, uh, sort of quick table
3:26:13 stuff that you had to say the one thing
3:26:15 that you're most excited about for the
3:26:17 next year based on what we've been
3:26:18 talking about each year just to kind of
3:26:21 get into the room that I'm really
3:26:22 excited about this hard priority. Uh,
3:26:25 and then one word describe how you
3:26:27 feeling about this next year based on.
3:26:29 So those two things I want to ask you to
3:26:31 do. We'll just do a quick round round
3:26:33 the table knowing that we are
3:26:35 technically past.
3:26:38 >> I'm excited that we're going to get
3:26:39 going on transit or development and uh
3:26:42 I'm just uh extremely optimistic about
3:26:46 this group.
3:26:48 >> Thank you, sir.
3:26:50 >> No, and I would ditto the optimism of of
3:26:53 the crew for working with us. I mean, I
3:26:55 was I heard some horror stories this
3:26:56 past week of people. mayor's how they
3:26:59 interact with their councils. It is I
3:27:00 think I'm very optimistic and and I
3:27:03 really do want to see smart investments
3:27:06 in transportation and parks. I mean
3:27:08 parks when I say parks I mean trails I
3:27:09 mean the whole kind of umbrella of that
3:27:12 area and so that's what I'm most excited
3:27:15 about.
3:27:15 >> Correct.
3:27:16 >> I'm excited about the discussion about
3:27:18 the housing barriers of the future.
3:27:20 Cautiously optimistic.
3:27:22 >> That's as happy as I get.
3:27:26 >> It's fine. We'll take it.
3:27:28 So, first of all, how are you feeling?
3:27:30 Does this feel like did you get a lot?
3:27:32 >> I've got a lot. I'm extremely hopeful
3:27:34 and excited. This is really interesting,
3:27:36 exciting, and I'm really looking forward
3:27:38 to all of this. Uh, I'll try to just
3:27:41 pick one. I think all of these
3:27:42 priorities are fantastic. I'm really I'm
3:27:44 not actually most of the thing that
3:27:46 comes to mind most is just I'm excited
3:27:47 to know one way or the other on light
3:27:48 rail is what I'm most excited
3:27:52 >> that is such a pivotal moment of our
3:27:54 future that just to kind of get to the
3:27:56 answer of that is where the us all
3:27:58 rowing together like light rail is no
3:28:00 better example where all eight of us
3:28:02 need to be rowing that boat in the same
3:28:04 direction and not to say that bus rapid
3:28:07 transit isn't a form an option out there
3:28:09 but I'm just saying I think we need as a
3:28:11 community to really say this project's
3:28:13 important and we can do it under cost
3:28:15 and ahead of schedule and we want to be
3:28:17 the pilot projects. You guys actually
3:28:19 get a win rather than public ridicule
3:28:21 and which has been their MO.
3:28:24 >> Yes.
3:28:25 >> Um I'm excited to see action on all
3:28:29 kinds of things. I mean hearing about
3:28:30 the builder round table and the housing
3:28:33 meeting and the mayor retreat time
3:28:34 budget it just it feels very responsive
3:28:38 to both the community and council needs.
3:28:41 Action
3:28:43 your one word.
3:28:44 >> Oh god.
3:28:49 >> Action. Yeah.
3:28:50 >> Actionable.
3:28:52 Yeah. The action of evol.
3:28:56 >> Okay. Kevin.
3:28:57 >> Um I guess I I think I'm most excited
3:29:00 about uh getting to hopefully personally
3:29:03 shovel at least a half a cubic foot of
3:29:06 dirt. Mhm.
3:29:07 >> That will be the location of a transit
3:29:10 oriented development. Uh
3:29:14 >> much more than that um work-wise, but um
3:29:19 and then otherwise seeing us dig in and
3:29:22 hopefully make some very good progress
3:29:23 on um hous
3:29:29 >> describe how you feel about next year.
3:29:31 >> Uh optimistic.
3:29:33 >> Okay. Not cautiously, just like full.
3:29:36 Hold on. That's two words.
3:29:38 >> Oh,
3:29:40 by the rules.
3:29:43 >> Okay. I think uh Kevin stole my answer.
3:29:46 I'm excited to attend the groundbreaking
3:29:47 of the TODC. I'm excited to ride the new
3:29:50 shuttle bus that's going to go from
3:29:51 Isiqua Transit Center to Talis that's
3:29:53 going to be funded from the King County
3:29:55 Metro Levy. I'm manifesting this for
3:29:56 myself. Um, and uh I'm excited to see a
3:30:03 another housing development in central
3:30:05 Isiqua get through permitting that's not
3:30:07 the TODC.
3:30:08 So am ambitious
3:30:11 and your word is um progress.
3:30:14 >> Progress. All right. Very good.
3:30:17 Only one word. One word.
3:30:20 >> Thank you.
3:30:23 >> I'm sorry, Shannon. All right. Well,
3:30:25 that that is a wrap then unless there's
3:30:27 anything else that needs to happen here
3:30:29 today. Um great conversation, you know,
3:30:32 lot we have lots lots to pull together
3:30:34 to bring back to you and follow. Uh
3:30:37 thanks for having us to be a part of the
3:30:39 conversation. Appreciate it.
3:30:42 You're not even
3:30:45 >> Oh, one last piece of business. I know
3:30:47 that uh Kelly and Lindsay both need
3:30:50 Seahawk.
3:30:52 >> Anybody else need Seahawk wear? might
3:30:54 I'm going to see if I can get something
3:30:56 but I might think I got something
3:30:59 I have nothing to do Friday is turning
3:31:02 into blue Monday for the council
3:31:03 meeting.
3:31:04 >> It's smart ball like I

Attendance

Council / Members (12)
Barbara de Michele, Council President
Kelly Jiang
Russell Joe
Tola Marts, Deputy Council President
Kevin Nichols
Lindsey Walsh
Autumn Monahan, Administrative Services
Director
Minnie Dhaliwal, Community Planning &
Development Director
Alexis Fitzsimmons, Economic
Development Manager