← Back to City Council Digest

City Council Mobility & Infrastructure Committee Auto captions

Tuesday, July 9, 2024

6:30 PM · 37m 51s · Council Chambers, 135 E. Sunset Way, Issaquah WA
Topic tracked across meetings:
Solid Waste Contract Administrative Fee AB 8879 3/4
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
3a
Minutes of June 24, 2024
packet pp.5–6
Staff report:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 06-24-24 City Council Mobility & Infrastructure Committee Minutes Page (0000)
4. AGENDA ITEMS
4a
Solid Waste Contract Administrative Fee COM 0018
30 min · Stacy Vynne McKinstry, Sustainability Manager Evan Brumfield, Environmental and Regulatory Program Administrator · packet pp.7–32
Topics: Budget
Staff report:
The Administration recommends that the Committee approve the proposed changes to the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program policy. Background In 2003, Issaquah’s City Council adopted the “Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program” with the intention to address both real and perceived traffic issues in residential areas. Though the program has served the City well over the last 21 years, the ways in which Traffic Calming Programs are administered has changed a fair amount in the intervening years and it is time for the City to update accordingly.
0:06 uh good evening and welcome I hope
0:07 everyone is staying cool out there today
0:09 I'm council member Chris Ray and I'm
0:11 going to call to order the July 9th 2024
0:14 city council mobility and infrastructure
0:16 committee uh with me this evening are
0:18 Deputy council president uh Barbara D
0:20 Michelle and council member Zach Hall
0:23 public comment uh there will be multiple
0:25 public comment opportunities this
0:27 evening there's a general public comment
0:29 comment opportunity
0:30 at the beginning of the meeting or you
0:32 can make comments after the presentation
0:34 and Council question answer
0:36 period um city clerk do we have anybody
0:40 online who might be wanting to make
0:42 public
0:43 comment chair Ray we have had nobody
0:46 sign up before the meeting to speak and
0:48 nobody online indicating a desire to do
0:53 hey there anybody
0:56 online yes we do have a one attendee
0:58 online okay all right well if uh members
1:00 of the public are interested in making
1:03 comment you can uh if you're on your
1:04 phone press star three or if you're on a
1:07 computer or smartphone look for a hand
1:09 icon um that may vary by a device so I'm
1:12 going to just wait a second and see if
1:13 anybody would like to make comments at
1:19 time
1:20 okay not seeing anybody okay then we're
1:23 going to move on we have H one item on
1:26 our agenda for this evening and that is
1:29 I'm sorry chair rake could I interrupt
1:30 you for approval of the minutes yeah
1:33 just a second oh
1:36 sorry I will do the minutes I promise
1:38 you um all right before I get to the one
1:41 item on our agenda um any object uh
1:45 objections to approving uh the minutes
1:48 from the June 24th 2024 meeting all
1:51 right hearing no objections the minutes
1:53 are approved we have one item on our
1:55 agenda this evening uh it's co 0018
1:59 Solid Waste contract administrative fee
2:01 and we have Stacy mckinstry and Evan
2:05 Broomfield um presenting this evening so
2:09 Stacy are you starting us off right
2:44 uh Deputy council member D Michelle and
2:46 council member Hall great to see you all
2:48 again this evening uh my name is Stacy V
2:50 mckinstry I'm the sustainability manager
2:52 with the city and joined tonight by Evan
2:54 Brumfield our environmental and
2:56 Regulatory program manager um from
2:59 Public Works
3:03 tonight we're here to discuss with you a
3:05 proposed increase to the solid waste
3:07 contract administrative fee the fee
3:09 provides Revenue to our city
3:11 sustainability fund which supports
3:13 implementation of the issaqua climate
3:15 action plan and our waste diversion
3:17 programming and
3:20 projects we are seeking input tonight on
3:23 a recommendation to increase the fee by
3:25 3% which would be from 6% to 9% in order
3:30 to further support our IAP and waste
3:34 programming the sustainability fund
3:37 supports our climate action and solid
3:38 waste programming revenue from the
3:40 administrative fee on the solid waste
3:43 contract uh uh goes into this fund we
3:47 currently have a 6% administrative fee
3:50 which went into effect with the new
3:51 waste huler contract a year ago the fee
3:54 was lower than previous years given the
3:56 increase rates with the new contract and
3:59 trying to reduce the impact on our
4:01 residents currently the revenue
4:03 generated from the pr from the fee
4:05 brings in approximately $660,000 per
4:08 year this number is approximate because
4:11 it depends on the number of residential
4:13 and Commercial customers and the size of
4:15 their
4:18 account for the first year of IAP
4:20 implementation we relied on a small
4:23 allocation of City funds funds requested
4:25 through Council and grants we were able
4:28 to accelerate implementation of actions
4:30 in 2023 using the sustainability fund
4:33 and additional grant
4:35 funding in addition to actions
4:37 associated with climate mitigation and
4:39 resilience the IAP includes a number of
4:41 actions related to waste
4:43 diversion because of limited capacity
4:46 work on our Solid Waste was uh limited
4:49 uh to really consultant support in both
4:51 2022 and
4:54 2023 in the summer of 2023 we also
4:57 completed our leadership and Energy
4:59 Efficiency and design or lead for City
5:02 certification through that certification
5:05 process we identified many limitations
5:07 in our Solid Waste work which
5:09 highlighted the need to bring back
5:10 dedicated staff to work on those issues
5:13 we hired a solid waste analyst in the
5:15 spring of
5:17 2024 in conversations with the
5:19 environmental board Council and
5:21 Community we know that both climate
5:23 action and solid waste programming and
5:25 projects are high priorities we have
5:28 plans that identify Road apps for
5:30 implementation to make progress on those
5:33 targets based on our draft budget for
5:35 2025 26 we cannot currently support the
5:39 work that staff have identified as
5:41 needed for the next BM in order to
5:43 advance progress towards our targets
5:46 with the current Revenue that's
5:48 anticipated with the administrative fee
5:51 we are pursuing all possible grants as
5:53 we discussed last night but this takes a
5:55 lot of resources to prepare applications
5:58 manage those grants and Report on them
6:01 we will continue to pursue any and all
6:03 possible grants to supplement our budget
6:05 but additional dedicated Revenue to the
6:07 sustainability fund will support our
6:09 essential climate and waste
6:13 work in order to support that climate
6:15 and waste programming and projects we
6:17 are proposing the recommendation to
6:19 increase the fee to
6:24 9% a fee increase supports a variety of
6:27 climate and solid waste projects and
6:28 programming with the fee increase we can
6:31 support those uh projects and programs
6:33 that are identified in the meeting
6:34 packet and I'll highlight a few of those
6:36 here without the fee increase we will be
6:40 able to maintain our ongoing costs but
6:42 any projects or program funding will
6:44 need to come from Grants which will
6:46 limit implementation for period as staff
6:49 really work to secure that additional
6:51 funding last night council heard about
6:53 our progress on actions and Targets in
6:55 the climate action plan we identified
6:57 the need to accelerate our work and in
7:00 some cases expand projects and
7:01 programming our proposed budget does
7:04 this some of these major budget requests
7:07 are capital projects such as solar
7:09 energy for several City facilities
7:12 electric vehicle charging for Fe Fleet
7:14 and at some public sites and completing
7:16 a conversion of our street lights to
7:19 LEDs we are also looking to continue and
7:22 expand on a number of our programs this
7:25 includes our residential heat pump
7:26 program and expanding electrification in
7:29 incentives to other appliances we are
7:31 looking to continue our program with
7:33 existing commercial and nonprofit
7:36 buildings for Energy Efficiency
7:38 renewable energy and
7:39 electrification and continuing and
7:42 expanding uh projects around building
7:44 Community
7:46 resilience there are many other smaller
7:48 project projects and programs that the
7:50 sustainability team will support but
7:54 these ones on the screen here are the
7:56 larger ticket item as we prepare our
7:59 budget we are in the process of tying
8:01 these major projects to their impact
8:03 including greenhouse gas emissions
8:05 reduced Energy
8:07 savings I can pause here um and then
8:09 I'll hand it over to Evan to talk about
8:11 our solid Wass programming and projects
8:13 that will advance with additional
8:15 Revenue I can take any questions first
8:17 any questions at this
8:19 time I think
8:27 not all right thanks Stacy
8:30 uh as Council saw last night in the IAP
8:32 mid uh midpoint check-in our diversion
8:35 rates have been heading in the wrong
8:37 direction with the hiring of Sam Tarvin
8:39 as a full-time staff resource for our
8:41 Solid
8:42 Waste we now have dedicated staff to
8:45 develop and Implement our waste
8:46 reduction programs in support of IAP and
8:48 lead certification goals we also heard
8:51 last night at the midpoint check-in that
8:53 there's interest in policy to require
8:54 Recycling and composting at multif
8:56 family uh properties in the future this
8:59 is something something that we can
9:00 evaluate and determine in the
9:01 development uh of a policy uh if
9:05 appropriate with current proposed budget
9:07 uh using our staff and consultant
9:09 support so the increase of the admin fee
9:12 back to our 9% will allow us uh the city
9:16 uh to implement a wide range of solid
9:18 waste programs across multiple uh
9:21 sectors
9:22 standardizing uh including uh
9:24 standardizing Solid Waste resources
9:26 across all City facilities this includes
9:28 consistent containers and signage as
9:31 well as uh developing policy that pushes
9:33 the city towards zero waste through
9:35 sustainable events and other
9:38 program we'll also develop a
9:40 comprehensive public information
9:42 campaign on waste aversion this campaign
9:44 will create an Outreach
9:46 calendar for uh information on how to
9:49 engage with solid waste programs to
9:52 include social social media posts and
9:54 information we also build out our social
9:57 uh sorry our Solid Waste uh web pages to
10:01 increase information and access to these
10:03 resources we also want to create a
10:05 potential uh competition within the city
10:07 for organizations and individuals to
10:09 track waste redu uh reducing
10:13 activities we also plan to partner with
10:16 ecology on their food waste prevention
10:18 month uh this will help develop specific
10:20 food waste prevention resources uh that
10:23 allow individuals families and
10:25 organizations to track current food
10:27 waste and provide tips to reduce and
10:30 prevent food waste at
10:32 home we also plan to potentially expand
10:34 the city's uh construction and
10:36 demolition ordinance or CND uh to
10:39 enforce CN requirements to help us track
10:41 diversion from these larger construction
10:43 projects to help uh us track diversion
10:47 on these more
10:49 accurately then as we uh we also plan to
10:52 set up more opportunity for community
10:54 members to participate in City level
10:56 repair and reuse uh programs
11:00 uh we're we're thinking that the last
11:02 two items the CND and Community re reuse
11:04 and repair might be a good opportunity
11:06 for us to partner with uh udub uh Evans
11:09 School grab program to they can evaluate
11:11 the programs and see how we can roll
11:13 them out in the city better these
11:15 programs uh directly will align and
11:17 support IAP and uh lead certification
11:19 goals and will allow the city to achieve
11:21 its waste conversion
11:27 SL I do it
11:30 it's not my fingers
11:33 yeah okay options um so yeah
11:38 Administration is recommending a move
11:39 back to our 9% admin fee with that uh
11:44 with that move back to 9% admin fee our
11:47 residents which in our most uh
11:49 substantial service level which is the
11:51 32 gallon garbage cart they can expect a
11:54 approximate $114 increase in their
11:57 monthly bill
11:59 um with that would result in about
12:01 $13.68 a year um total or that moved
12:05 from a
12:06 9% this would result in $330,000 of
12:09 increased annual revenue over our
12:11 current 6% admin fee Revenue uh the 9%
12:16 admin fee would be higher than some of
12:18 our surrounding jurisdictions but it
12:19 would also be lower than some of our
12:21 surrounding jurisdictions so it kind of
12:22 put us in a nice happy
12:26 medium uh next year it's also propos
12:29 that King County is going to be
12:30 increasing their fixed annual rate uh
12:33 right now that is shown to be about 2.8%
12:36 is what they're increasing that to be um
12:39 so with that and cost of living and our
12:41 admin fee we're looking at a rough
12:44 estimate of about $3 increase over our
12:47 existing 2024 rates for the move to a 9%
12:51 admin that's per
12:53 month this will allow for larger more
12:56 impactful projects to meet our IAP uh
12:58 and leads certification
13:00 goal alternative option number two so
13:03 this is more of kind of a baby step
13:05 approach where we have our 6% where
13:07 we're at right now we move to we move up
13:09 a a percent and a half to 7 and a half
13:12 2025 and then an additional a percent
13:15 and a half get to 9% in
13:18 2026 in 2025 this would result in about
13:22 60% monthly or sorry 60 Cent uh increase
13:27 in uh the admin fee for a residence bill
13:30 again this is that 32 gon uh garbage
13:35 part uh which would result in
13:37 $684 annual increase in their in the
13:40 admin fee that our residents would see
13:42 this phase approach would offset a King
13:44 County fee increase going into effect in
13:47 2025 while also generating
13:49 $165,000 in Revenue in in additional
13:53 Revenue over our current 6% admin fee
13:56 however carryover revenue revenue going
13:58 into 202 6 would be less than the
14:01 recommended option and staff would need
14:02 to reduce current proposed projects in
14:04 the
14:05 budget particularly for residential
14:07 electrification commercial energy uh
14:10 efficiency EV charging renewable energy
14:13 of City facilities uh and larger Solid
14:15 Waste projects as
14:17 well uh the so taking again that King
14:21 County rate our cost of living kind of
14:23 where we're at kind of in draft proposed
14:25 uh with that 7.5% we're looking at about
14:28 a 2 .40 increase uh monthly bill uh for
14:33 the again that 32 gallon subscription
14:37 level option three is to stay at three
14:41 which is no increase so there would be
14:43 no increase to the admin fee uh for our
14:46 residents at this level staff would need
14:48 to reduce their ongoing cost
14:50 significantly as current revenue does
14:52 not support ongoing costs uh for
14:55 2025 so again we mix that King County
14:58 rate uh the cost of living uh with uh
15:02 that our existing 6% admin fee and we're
15:06 at about A180 increase um and that's due
15:08 to the the cost of living and uh
15:11 increase to the King County
15:13 rate so this would significantly reduce
15:15 or eliminate many current ongoing
15:17 programs and new projects for IAP
15:20 implementation and solid waste programs
15:22 staff will need to allocate more
15:23 capacity to pursuing these Grand
15:25 opportunities like Stacy mentioned as
15:27 well uh to make up for the L in the
15:30 revenue so it's basically a120 you know
15:34 approximate right now a month between
15:36 our preferred option of the 9% to the
15:39 option three uh 6% talking about $120 a
15:42 month
15:49 different so recommendation uh the
15:52 administration recommends uh an increase
15:54 in the administrative fee by 3% to raise
15:57 the fee to 9% the administration
15:59 recommends the committee Advance this
16:01 proposal to council for approval uh
16:04 later in
16:07 July so timing and next steps excuse me
16:12 uh if the committee approves advancing
16:14 the recommendation to council and
16:16 Council approves uh the 9% admin fee the
16:19 new fee will take place January 1 when
16:22 uh all new fees set for our Solid Waste
16:25 following council's decision uh staff
16:28 will alert recall ology um of any uh
16:31 change that we need to make in the fee
16:32 and we have till September 1st do that
16:35 when their fees come to us uh the new
16:38 rates come to us for approval the
16:40 administration will review this fee in
16:41 the second quarter of 2025 and determine
16:44 if uh additional adjustments might be
16:49 needed so the direction needed here
16:51 tonight is we're seeking input on the
16:53 recommendation to increase the solid
16:55 waste contract administrative fee from
16:57 6% to 9% % to support implementation of
17:01 the esqua climate action plan uh lead
17:03 certification goals and waste diversion
17:05 programming
17:08 project great thanks Heaven thanks Stacy
17:12 all right
17:15 questions council member Hall uh thank
17:18 you well the two that I emailed in you
17:21 answered in your presentation like you
17:22 said you would so thank you
17:24 um so can we let's talk about
17:31 appendix a kind of looking at the fund
17:35 over the two years
17:37 so option one is the only option that at
17:41 the end of 2026 we're not in the red for
17:44 the sustainability fund that's with our
17:49 current oh okay and so and that assum
17:52 okay
17:53 so the list of activities that would be
17:56 cut or reduced in the memo isn't
17:58 incorporated
18:00 into the numbers in attachment a is that
18:04 right then um those the activities
18:12 in so if we want with say option two and
18:15 scale back on some of the things that
18:17 are listed in the memo would we still be
18:19 in the red as depicted in option two or
18:22 is that just if we went ahead Full Steam
18:25 with the full list that was included
18:27 yeah sorry um
18:32 with uh with so um if we move forward
18:35 with option based approach would fine
18:39 for 25 we' have um we would need assment
18:43 in our current
18:46 project projects
18:53 programming okay um but those are
18:56 projects back
19:03 are there any other do you mind if I
19:05 just go for it are there any other
19:08 options that were considered in terms of
19:09 like percentages that might see
19:14 um not have so much of a surplus at the
19:17 I mean it's not that much but have so
19:19 much of a surplus at the end of 2026
19:21 where we're just trying to kind of bring
19:23 it up to exactly what we need to get
19:26 through the bium or or were these kind
19:28 of three options the the ones that we
19:30 focused on um with the right now
19:38 we're yeah I mean I think there are many
19:41 projects and
19:48 programs I
19:50 think like
19:54 to Horizon is like so it provides us
19:58 offer um
20:06 if it allows
20:14 us okay thank you um oh oh good to go oh
20:18 good going um this might be a question
20:20 for City administrator btz I didn't
20:23 think about it beforehand but is this do
20:26 we know if the sustainability fund is
20:28 elig for like in fund borrowing with do
20:30 we do any in fund borrowing that that
20:34 we've explored is that worth exploring
20:35 at all
20:37 or we don't do a lot of that excuse me
20:40 good evening council members um we don't
20:42 do a lot of that I mean it's not not
20:45 allowed um you know I the reason you're
20:48 seeing a pretty straightforward approach
20:50 here is uh we believe the council the
20:53 community certainly mayor Paulie want us
20:55 to continue this work and so as we look
20:58 at potential funding options this has
21:00 historically been how uh we have done
21:02 this the sustainability fund has
21:04 supported that as has been detailed
21:06 tonight we kind of went through a
21:08 revisioning of how this all works three
21:11 or four years ago and so we're really
21:13 now very focused on spending this money
21:15 um toward the climate action plan as
21:17 well as some of the solid waste work so
21:20 that's why you don't see a whole lot of
21:22 different approaches um you know we
21:24 think the 3% makes sense we look at what
21:26 other jurisdictions charge we think it's
21:28 comparable um and we know that there's
21:31 an interest in doing this uh doing these
21:33 programs so we could come up with any
21:36 other scenario you like um but we just
21:39 wanted to keep it
21:44 simple council member Hall anything else
21:47 want to take a
21:48 break all right Deputy council president
21:52 uh well this is sort of following up on
21:55 K bber Hall's comments and also we
21:58 touched on is briefly at last night's
22:00 meeting um have we looked
22:03 at how uh repeal of the climate and I'm
22:09 sorry I
22:10 don't climate commitment act uh might
22:13 affect this uh our thinking around this
22:17 um and I guess my question specifically
22:19 is if that were to be repealed um would
22:23 we be coming back and looking at another
22:25 increase or would we we absolutely be in
22:29 the position of having to cut programs
22:32 so I maybe that's for a city
22:34 administrator to discuss our our sense
22:37 council member Deputy council president
22:39 is that the repeal would be a
22:41 significant impact um and I think last
22:43 night sty said it was in the millions
22:46 that we're receiving and we don't have
22:48 that kind of money um and because the
22:50 cuts to other services in the city would
22:53 be so significant um I don't suspect
22:55 that we' be Rec um we want to try to do
22:58 more we're hearing again from lots of
23:00 constituencies we want to do more is
23:03 $330,000 even enough probably not um for
23:07 some of our residents they would like us
23:08 to you know decarbonize every property
23:11 we own every service that we provide um
23:14 and that is in the millions of dollars
23:16 more a year so but we think that this is
23:18 responsible we think that um the work
23:20 that we're doing on Solid Waste really
23:22 needs to be done because when we look at
23:23 the data um that is the one piece that
23:26 we have the most control over um what
23:29 petown energy does with their the
23:31 cleanness of the mix of energy they
23:33 provide us we don't have much control
23:34 over but we have the ability to work on
23:37 our residents to get them to divert so
23:39 um we think this makes the most sense
23:41 with lots of various factors floating in
23:43 the air um but if the council's not
23:45 comfortable with 3% we can talk 1 and a
23:49 half% we can talk fund balance we can
23:51 talk borrowing all those things are
23:53 possible but our recommendation is just
23:55 to continue moving forward with the good
23:57 work that we're doing and we think the
23:59 3% given the marketplace
24:02 is thanks anything else CC member
24:08 Hall do we
24:11 um do we have a sense of I actually I
24:15 didn't know that the prices in the memo
24:18 like the increases the approximate
24:20 increases in the memo were for the
24:22 largest um trash bin is that is that
24:26 what you said no it's for the the most
24:28 subscribed in the city which is 32 Gall
24:30 so 96 are the big totes yeah um and so
24:34 32 is whatever smaller than that but
24:38 it's our most okay I misheard you that
24:41 good I'm glad I asked and you said
24:44 around
24:45 2.8% increase is what we're expecting in
24:48 County that's what's being proposed
24:50 right now yeah oh
24:52 okay when does that start Jan January 1
24:56 if they
24:58 it would kick on uh January
25:05 1 I've got a couple if you want to think
25:07 for a bit okay
25:09 um so the 9% is that a maximum or is
25:12 that just our historic maximum we can do
25:15 more we can do more yeah and other
25:18 cities
25:20 um other cities uh have higher
25:26 ad and then based on what what Evan said
25:29 it sounds like we can make these changes
25:31 uh annually so we got one one shot each
25:35 year to adjust the fee correct um so I
25:40 should know this but I don't um what are
25:42 the other sources of revenue for the
25:44 sustainability fund other than the this
25:46 what are the other major ones that
25:49 is this is it so the balance is all
25:53 coming out of general fund then no so
25:58 historically the city has funded the
26:00 office of sustainability using uh the
26:02 sustainability fund uh and no other
26:05 funds Okay so we've reconstituted the
26:07 office of sustainability it used to
26:09 provide a whole variety of unrelated
26:11 services and now doesn't um so any
26:14 additional dollars that were able to get
26:17 in Grants above and beyond that so I
26:20 guess strictly speaking those grants
26:22 probably don't go through the
26:23 sustainability general fund but they're
26:27 specific so there is no there's no
26:29 ongoing general fund support for these
26:33 programs okay and and then
26:36 the the administrative fee on Solid
26:38 Waste is our sole source of the
26:40 sustainability fund that's correct as
26:43 but that's Council policy okay the
26:46 council wish to spend money on other
26:48 things it could there's also an argument
26:50 that this sustainability fund could be
26:51 spent on other programs so largely um
26:55 it's funded with
26:56 grants sounds like
26:59 well $660,000 currently in the existing
27:02 fund so we're able to buy a few things
27:05 with that
27:06 okay it currently funds what two two
27:09 full-time staff and sustainability the
27:11 Civic spark uh position of the solid
27:16 waste position and probably some great
27:17 percentage of Evans portions and
27:21 portions of other scattered around okay
27:26 um are there other any savings that we
27:30 have identified that are associated with
27:32 some of our Energy Efficiency efforts
27:34 that we have done in our city buildings
27:36 I mean are we are we seeing a reduction
27:38 in the cost of our
27:40 utilities yes um and that's something we
27:43 will be tracking as proposed
27:46 Capital by annel are those savings those
27:50 savings typically facilities or
27:53 Department
28:00 or the funds that pay those yeah not the
28:03 no I I understood that um and then um if
28:06 we actually became better at diversion
28:08 would we reduce the cost to Recology for
28:13 for landfill I mean I I I guess I don't
28:15 know if they have a fixed rate that they
28:17 just pay and they dump all they want or
28:18 if they pay by the load or how that
28:20 would work uh so I mean we you would
28:23 reduce your bill would be the the
28:25 biggest part and that's the biggest sell
28:27 that we do when we go into businesses
28:29 and we talk to them about hey you should
28:30 get compost because that's cheaper than
28:32 just throwing everything to garbage on
28:34 top of you know what's best for the
28:36 environment and everything else too uh
28:39 but you know that's that's the sales
28:40 pitch that we give and rology gives as
28:43 well okay so it's really U because I
28:46 won't need that 96 gallon uh pable I'll
28:49 just I get by with the 24 gallon little
28:51 green thing yeah got it okay so it
28:54 really that there is a reduction in cost
28:56 potentially to the consumer and that's
28:58 part of our Outreach and communic yes
29:01 okay great thanks all I got for right
29:03 now Hall anything any other
29:08 questions I was really intrigued with
29:11 the chart you showed us
29:14 um yesterday for greenhouse gas
29:16 emissions both the one with King County
29:18 that shows like federal state and then
29:21 local action thing that they bottom as
29:23 well but then also kind of our own trend
29:26 line City and how do we get from being
29:29 just shy of meeting our greenhouse gas
29:31 emission goals to meeting it so would in
29:35 your opinion does 9% accelerate us to
29:38 the point where we think we have our
29:39 best chance of meeting our goal or is
29:40 that some point past 9% and this is
29:44 just 9% is what we think we can
29:47 accomplish for these two
29:50 years great question um I think it will
29:53 sign
30:04 missions um a lot of our dependence is
30:11 on our community members but the
30:14 programming and project
30:18 climate Behavior change
30:35 all right anything
30:36 else um I think we've now reached
30:39 another public comment opportunity is
30:41 there anybody in the room who'd like to
30:44 make comments at this
30:47 time
30:48 anybody um anybody online interested in
30:51 making public comment at this
30:55 time here Ray nobody online has
30:58 indicated a desire to speak at this
31:00 point
31:01 okay think everyone tuned in for the
31:03 second game of the double
31:05 header um all right uh thoughts from the
31:12 committee go
31:16 ahead uh thank you
31:20 um yeah you know I think the policy
31:23 question before us really is cost
31:25 benefit here um I think you put it
31:27 really well for for just
31:31 A14 per month more for the average rate
31:35 payer um our community it seems like can
31:37 fund quite a bit of expanded programming
31:40 that list was actually a lot more than I
31:41 thought um and as was said maybe just a
31:43 little bit more of an increase with
31:45 theing County rate increase next year as
31:47 well um we have heard from our residents
31:50 that rates are high and that's been a
31:52 challenge but we've also heard um
31:55 oftentimes even here during public
31:56 comment that um climate action is a
31:59 really priority and even recently uh
32:02 that task force charged with updating
32:05 the Strategic plan seems
32:07 to um be indicating some priority around
32:10 Pace um for climate action
32:13 um and um like we said we or like we saw
32:17 last night um how important local action
32:20 is when combined with state and federal
32:22 action and all the other jurisdictions
32:24 for meeting our greenhouse gas reduction
32:26 targets um that the big takeaway from
32:29 that is that we are not without
32:30 influence ourselves especially one
32:32 combined with others um plus as you
32:36 noted as well solid waste was one of
32:39 those areas that was identified when we
32:41 got the lead gold certification as an
32:43 area an opportunity for improvement with
32:45 the city um and I think another way of
32:48 thinking about this decision too is
32:50 through the the context of our upcoming
32:52 budget discussions I think we all
32:53 recognize it's going to be a challenge
32:55 um and this does seem to be a l that we
32:58 can pull for modest gains and high
33:01 impact U for continuing our leadership
33:04 um in the region for climate action in
33:06 the space and um making progress on this
33:09 important Community prior priority even
33:11 even if time times are tough um I do so
33:15 I do think that the admin recommendation
33:17 is compelling um and I would support
33:19 moving forward with moving up 9% um that
33:22 said we we have heard quite a bit from
33:26 residents concerned about
33:28 um their waste bills so I think if we're
33:31 going to do that we also need to be very
33:33 prepared to tell them exactly what
33:34 they're getting for that added cost and
33:37 why it will
33:39 benefit I so you'll be able to pull
33:42 something together and that's some sort
33:43 of communications effort but also having
33:46 events and those kinds of activities I
33:48 mean you list at the sustain
33:49 sustainability fair in the memo as well
33:51 where people are actually seeing okay
33:53 sustainability maybe there's some sort
33:55 of insert that once a year here's what
33:58 you've helped
34:01 accomplish those are my thoughts great
34:03 thank you deput council
34:07 president um yes I agree with uh much of
34:10 what council member Hall said um I
34:14 support the 9% um and I'm just going to
34:17 note that even with uh with that
34:21 increase the carryover in at the end of
34:24 2026 is about half of what the carry
34:27 over over is in 2025 so even with this
34:30 increase we will be slowly but surely
34:32 diminishing uh our carryover so um and I
34:38 have as uh City administrator Bob quits
34:41 has pointed out I have a lot of concern
34:44 about what happens if uh the climate
34:46 commitment Act is repealed uh it's going
34:49 to impact us significantly so I support
34:53 this um and then within the context of
34:56 what's happening in our community um and
35:01 in the State uh may be prepared to do
35:05 more next year uh so uh and as has been
35:11 noted several times absolutely on our
35:14 community surveys and uh just
35:17 conversations with
35:18 citizens um the environment and uh
35:22 combating climate change in our
35:24 community is by far one of our top
35:26 priorities so this is a very modest
35:29 increase that will get a big bang for
35:31 the buck so absolutely support uh option
35:35 one thank you all right I'm going to
35:38 just pile on uh yes and yes um but I
35:42 also wanted to add um because I was
35:43 ringing my hands over the increase and I
35:46 think what kind of got me over the hump
35:48 there is what we need to do is push on
35:50 diversion because that's how we minimize
35:52 the impact of the increase is by saying
35:54 your your base bill is going down so
35:56 hooray and that's a win-win right so I
35:59 think one of the things we have to focus
36:00 on is making sure that we can really be
36:02 successful um getting the diversion
36:04 rates up because that amates the need
36:07 for the bill um your uh monthly bill
36:12 year um to go up for fash haing I think
36:15 it's a modest amount of money quite
36:17 honestly um I think let's go ahead and
36:20 do 9% now but
36:23 um Deputy council president D Michelle's
36:26 Point uh I think we should have this
36:27 conversation again next year and see
36:28 where we want to go um and and then what
36:31 other sources of uh funding we might
36:33 want to look at because there is a big
36:35 lift to to be had um in these programs
36:39 so I think um I I will do like a a vot
36:43 here um all of those in favor of moving
36:46 forward with recommending to the full
36:48 Council that we change the uh Solid
36:50 Waste contract administrative fee from
36:52 6% to 9% uh to support um implementation
36:55 of climate action plan say I all right
36:58 so that's that's unanimous so we're
37:00 we're fully behind this and uh look
37:02 forward to uh taking this to our
37:04 colleagues at the full Council thank you
37:06 both um sty for yesterday too if you're
37:10 kind of become a regular uh Evan thank
37:12 you again yeah thank you and Mr chairman
37:15 one last question regarding the
37:17 placement before the full Council the
37:18 administration would recommend regular
37:20 business yeah I think regular business
37:22 any objection to regular business no
37:24 we're we're all for that thank
37:26 you okay okay um yeah I think actually
37:30 it just makes sense if we're actually
37:31 going to do something with money and
37:32 fees and and uh increasing the the
37:34 financial burdens regular business makes
37:37 tons of
37:38 sense um okay uh any
37:42 announcements all right it's uh at 7:07
37:46 we're going to adjourn mobility and
37:47 infrastructure