City Council Regular Meeting · Monday, July 15, 2019 · City Council Digest

6. CONSENT CALENDAR

Accounts: Payables and Payroll of July 15, 2019, $ 4,273,113.99 ID 0390

Carried 7-0

Approve · packet pp.5–100

Topics: Budget

▶ Watch from 18:39 Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

Finance Department P.O. Box 1307 Issaquah, WA 98027 PH: 425-837-3050 www.issaquahwa.gov

Roll call:

Moved by MARTS · seconded by BETTISE

In favor: Mariah Bettise, Stacy Goodman, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Paul Winterstein

Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting, July 1, 2019

Carried 7-0

Approve · packet pp.101–105

Previously discussed: City Council Regular Meeting · Jun 17, 2019

▶ Watch from 18:43 Open packet at p.101 ↗

Staff report:

at a time, and concern with combining the three master site plans (ID 0459). • Kyle Buckner, 5220 NW Sammamish Road, spoke in support of the City's funding to support the I-90 Justification Project and the NW Sammamish Road Non-Motorized Improvements ("pinch point”). • David Bangs, 4314 193rd, spoke regarding the annexation of South Cove and the long- standing desire for South Cove residents to access the Lake Sammamish State Park. • Cyrus Krohn, 300 SE Bush St., spoke regarding competing priorities and the use of tax dollars.

Roll call:

Moved by MARTS · seconded by BETTISE

In favor: Mariah Bettise, Stacy Goodman, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Paul Winterstein

Minutes: Council Committee Work Session, July 8, 2019

Carried 7-0

Authorize · packet pp.107–108

▶ Watch from 18:46 Open packet at p.107 ↗

Staff report:

CONSENT CALENDAR c) 07-08-19 Council Committee Work Session Minutes Page (0000)

Roll call:

Moved by MARTS · seconded by BETTISE

In favor: Mariah Bettise, Stacy Goodman, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Paul Winterstein

Dept. of Commerce Local and Community Projects 2018 Program AB 7820

Carried 7-0

Accept Grant; Authorize Agreement · packet pp.115–144

▶ Watch from 18:50 Open packet at p.115 ↗

Staff report:

The Administration recommends authorizing the grant agreement and accepting the Dept. of Commerce grant in the amount of $199,820 for Confluence Park Turf and Irrigation Improvements.

Roll call:

Moved by MARTS · seconded by BETTISE

In favor: Mariah Bettise, Stacy Goodman, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Paul Winterstein

Donation Acceptance: King County Metro Van AB 7824

Carried 7-0

Adopt Ordinance · packet pp.145–152

Topics: Land UseTransportation

▶ Watch from 18:53 Open packet at p.145 ↗

Staff report:

The Administration recommends acceptance of the donation of a 7-passenger van from King County Metro Transit through adoption of the proposed ordinance and authorization to enter into the related agreement with King County.

Roll call:

Moved by MARTS · seconded by BETTISE

In favor: Mariah Bettise, Stacy Goodman, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Paul Winterstein

7. PUBLIC HEARING

2020-2025 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), including Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) AB 7759

Conduct Public Hearing; Approve Resolution · packet pp.153–328

Topics: TransportationBudget

Open packet at p.153 ↗

Staff report:

The Administration recommends approval of a resolution adopting the 2020-2025 Capital Improvement Plan and the Transportation Improvement Program contained therein.

9. GOOD OF THE ORDER

Upcoming Council Meetings

▶ Watch from 16:19

3030 segments .txt ↗

0:14 ↗ good evening I'd like to call the July

0:17 ↗ 15th 2019 City Council regular meeting

0:20 ↗ to order

0:21 ↗ welcome everybody this evening I'd like

0:24 ↗ to ask those who'd like to join the

0:25 ↗ council myself for the pledge of

0:27 ↗ allegiance - please thank you the first

0:51 ↗ item on our agenda this evening is

0:53 ↗ audience comments and this is your time

0:55 ↗ to address your council the guidelines

0:58 ↗ for public participation are up on the

1:00 ↗ screen please limit your comments to 5

1:02 ↗ minutes if you are here as part of your

1:04 ↗ group can you please identify yourself

1:07 ↗ and if you are listening today in the

1:10 ↗ audience and you hear a speaker say

1:11 ↗ something and you'd like to support

1:13 ↗ their point could you please raise your

1:14 ↗ hand so council gets an understanding of

1:17 ↗ the level of support from those that are

1:19 ↗ here this evening there is also a public

1:21 ↗ hearing tonight a b7 759 the 2020 2025

1:26 ↗ capital improvement plan including

1:29 ↗ transportation Improvement Plan and if

1:31 ↗ you want to comment on this topic you'll

1:33 ↗ have an opportunity to do that later in

1:35 ↗ the meeting tisha has anyone signed up

1:39 ↗ to speak this evening yes Julie Martin

1:51 ↗ hello again I'm Julie Martin I can't

1:57 ↗ hear me

1:58 ↗ I'm Julie Martin and I'm the executive

2:00 ↗ director of the downtown Issaquah

2:02 ↗ Association at 2:30 to Front Street

2:04 ↗ North the mission of the downtown

2:07 ↗ Issaquah sociation is to promote and

2:09 ↗ enhance the vitality of historic

2:10 ↗ downtown Ithaca

2:12 ↗ it's a quad through programs and events

2:14 ↗ that celebrate our unique culture it's

2:17 ↗ not an awesome mission statement it's

2:19 ↗ awesome it's very fun to fulfill I'd

2:22 ↗ like to give the council a brief update

2:24 ↗ on how the downtown Issaquah sociation

2:26 ↗ has worked to fulfill its mission and

2:28 ↗ partner with the city during the second

2:29 ↗ quarter of this year we have held

2:32 ↗ several events such as keep it so quite

2:34 ↗ beautiful excuse me

2:37 ↗ keep it so quite beautiful day the wine

2:38 ↗ walk series make music day Issaquah and

2:41 ↗ fenders on Front Street vendors on Front

2:44 ↗ Street as you know brought over six

2:45 ↗ hundred cars and over 7,500 attendees to

2:49 ↗ Front Street the local restaurants and

2:52 ↗ Merchants reported to us that their

2:53 ↗ busiest day of the year or second only

2:56 ↗ two salmon days is is the day offenders

3:01 ↗ to local restaurants reported having

3:03 ↗ lines of 1 had over 25 people waiting

3:06 ↗ and one had over 40 people waiting when

3:09 ↗ they opened and one restaurant even

3:11 ↗ opened a half an hour early make music

3:14 ↗ day and the wine walk days brought

3:16 ↗ people from all over the region to Old

3:18 ↗ Town to enjoy the culture of music and

3:20 ↗ visual arts here in Old Town Issaquah as

3:24 ↗ many of them also visited local shops

3:26 ↗ and restaurants

3:27 ↗ we appreciate the council members and

3:29 ↗ commissioners who join us at events both

3:31 ↗ as attendees and as volunteers the

3:34 ↗ downtown is across Association

3:36 ↗ participated in key stakeholder meeting

3:38 ↗ of the creative arts district

3:40 ↗ application process dia is a liaison

3:45 ↗ between the city merchants and building

3:47 ↗ owners on the Street scapes program we

3:50 ↗ are working to complete a business and

3:51 ↗ Merchants catalogue and update the

3:53 ↗ parking map I had a slide show but I

3:57 ↗ didn't get it there by five o'clock so

4:00 ↗ on the slide it also mentioned as part

4:04 ↗ of the old town Siberia plan number 4

4:07 ↗ Action Programme we're to work with this

4:10 ↗ dia is to work with the city on parking

4:13 ↗ analysis to increase public parking

4:14 ↗ availability and update private parking

4:16 ↗ requirements of the new development

4:18 ↗ which is why we're working on that

4:20 ↗ catalog and parking map market the

4:24 ↗ historic downtown Issaquah and support

4:26 ↗ the DA association fund and build the

4:31 ↗ remaining portion of phase 1 phase 3 in

4:34 ↗ front Street of downtown conceptual plan

4:36 ↗ amend the downtown street streetscape

4:39 ↗ conceptual plan to require lighting and

4:41 ↗ utility poles to be consistent with Old

4:43 ↗ Town character continue implementing in

4:47 ↗ partnership with dia recommendations

4:49 ↗ from the downtown streetscape conceptual

4:51 ↗ plan so as you can see we play a big

4:53 ↗ part in that streetscape plan and fund

4:56 ↗ and build phase 2 and the remaining

4:58 ↗ future phases of the downtown streets

5:01 ↗ can be conceptual plan that's a tongue

5:03 ↗ twister

5:06 ↗ dia activated community involvement this

5:09 ↗ quarter between April and June dia

5:12 ↗ activated 325 325 volunteers for a total

5:17 ↗ of one thousand four hundred and twenty

5:19 ↗ four hours of service to the Issaquah

5:21 ↗ community

5:22 ↗ this included events keep it's a quite

5:25 ↗ beautiful day flower baskets on Front

5:27 ↗ Street hanging and committee meetings

5:29 ↗ all of the flowers that you see the

5:31 ↗ beautiful flowers on Front Street are

5:33 ↗ 100% donor funded and volunteer

5:38 ↗ installation art by fire brought David

5:43 ↗ Salvadori

5:43 ↗ an 11th generation Italian glass artist

5:46 ↗ to Old Town Issaquah while he was here

5:49 ↗ he gave glass working demonstrations met

5:51 ↗ with local glass artists and intended a

5:53 ↗ reception hosted it hosted by dia at the

5:56 ↗ historic Shell station and I hope to see

5:59 ↗ you Thursday evenings at the historic

6:01 ↗ Shell station for gas station Blues in

6:03 ↗ Sunday the 25th of August at confluence

6:05 ↗ park for confluence Music Festival and

6:08 ↗ Dia is part of the work we do as a city

6:11 ↗ partner and on behalf of the DIA board

6:13 ↗ of directors and myself

6:14 ↗ thank you for supporting the work we do

6:16 ↗ Thank You Julie I did print out the

6:19 ↗ slideshow which I will leave say that is

6:22 ↗ a great look at the pictures yes you can

6:24 ↗ bring that up - tisha that'd be

6:25 ↗ fantastic thank you very much

6:32 ↗ no one further has signed up to speak

6:35 ↗ thanks is there anyone else that would

6:37 ↗ like to address Council this evening

6:39 ↗ that can call anyone wishing to address

6:42 ↗ Council during audience comments in last

6:45 ↗ call thank you out close the audience

6:48 ↗ comments and we will move on to

6:51 ↗ committee and regional reports starting

6:53 ↗ with councilmember Walsh thank you madam

6:56 ↗ mayor it's good to be back the East Side

7:00 ↗ transportation partnership meeting for

7:02 ↗ July was cancelled for the summer we

7:04 ↗ will reconvene in August and the agenda

7:09 ↗ hasn't been set yet so that concludes my

7:11 ↗ report thank you welcome back

7:13 ↗ councilmember hunt thank you madam mayor

7:15 ↗ I attended the cascade water Alliance

7:17 ↗ Resource Management Committee meeting on

7:19 ↗ July 11th we talked about results from

7:22 ↗ septic system monitoring as well as well

7:25 ↗ as storm water flow monitoring both of

7:28 ↗ these relates to the ongoing water

7:30 ↗ quality monitoring at Lake Tapps which

7:32 ↗ is the reservoir owned and managed by

7:34 ↗ cascade water alliance we also talked

7:37 ↗ about ongoing water quality as well as

7:40 ↗ herbicide application the next regular

7:41 ↗ meeting of the board or cascade water

7:44 ↗ Alliance is July 24th at 3:30 the land

7:48 ↗ and shore committee will meet on

7:50 ↗ Thursday August 1st at 6:30 p.m. here on

7:52 ↗ council chambers and we have two items

7:54 ↗ the first is amendment to Issaquah

7:57 ↗ Municipal Code 12.05 related to sidewalk

8:00 ↗ use districts a b7a2 - and the second

8:05 ↗ item is framework for residential growth

8:07 ↗ which is part of our ongoing discussion

8:09 ↗ at land and shore regarding residential

8:12 ↗ zoning that concludes my report

8:14 ↗ Thank You councilmember Rey the services

8:17 ↗ and Safety Committee met on Tuesday July

8:20 ↗ 9th here in council chambers there were

8:22 ↗ four informational items on the agenda

8:23 ↗ we received an update on

8:25 ↗ garage 18 cafe an update on the hazard

8:30 ↗ mitigation plan economic development

8:33 ↗ plan update and a parks update that

8:35 ↗ focused on the bike park the dog park

8:38 ↗ and green Issaquah the next meeting is

8:40 ↗ currently scheduled for August 13th at

8:43 ↗ 6:30 here in Council Chambers and that

8:45 ↗ concludes my report

8:46 ↗ Thank You councilmember winter Stein

8:48 ↗ thank you madam mayor of to reports

8:50 ↗ quick first the council Infrastructure

8:52 ↗ Committee which normally meets would

8:55 ↗ have met this Thursday that meeting has

8:56 ↗ been canceled due to no items on the

8:59 ↗ agenda next the Puget Sound regional

9:03 ↗ councils growth management policy board

9:05 ↗ met last Thursday on July 11th at PSR C

9:09 ↗ headquarters in Seattle and at that time

9:13 ↗ the board did direct staff to prepare

9:15 ↗ the draft vision 2050 plan for a 60-day

9:19 ↗ public review period during the board

9:22 ↗ meeting we discussed proposed revisions

9:24 ↗ to the draft multi County planning

9:26 ↗ policies and actions as well as policies

9:29 ↗ and actions around the regional growth

9:31 ↗ strategy preferred alternative a

9:33 ↗ slightly modified version of the transit

9:36 ↗ focused growth alternative from the

9:38 ↗ environmental impact statement was

9:39 ↗ recommended as the preferred alternative

9:42 ↗ yes our C staff is now working to

9:45 ↗ compile all materials into a draft plan

9:47 ↗ scheduled to be released for public

9:49 ↗ comment this Friday July 19th comments

9:52 ↗ on the draft plan will be reviewed with

9:54 ↗ the growth management policy board in

9:56 ↗ the fall and the board will have an

9:58 ↗ opportunity to continue refining the

10:00 ↗ policies and actions and the regional

10:02 ↗ growth strategy before a final

10:04 ↗ recommendation is made later the next

10:08 ↗ meeting of the growth management policy

10:09 ↗ board is the first Thursday in September

10:12 ↗ the fifth that concludes my report

10:14 ↗ councilmember Goodman thank you madam

10:16 ↗ mayor last Thursday I along with

10:19 ↗ councilmember Rea and the mayor attended

10:21 ↗ Eastside fire and rescues Board of

10:24 ↗ Directors meeting monthly meeting and

10:27 ↗ several interesting things on our agenda

10:29 ↗ the first cup three items in particular

10:33 ↗ are of interest to the community I'm

10:36 ↗ sure

10:37 ↗ on July 17th from 2 to 4 p.m. at the

10:41 ↗ North Bend Library Eastside Fire and

10:43 ↗ Rescue will be providing a demonstration

10:45 ↗ of their new drone they received this

10:49 ↗ year and I'm sure that would be very

10:53 ↗ interesting presentation because we saw

10:55 ↗ some videos and it was quite amazing

10:57 ↗ what it can do the second item of

11:01 ↗ interest of the community I talked about

11:02 ↗ a couple of months ago called it's

11:05 ↗ called community connect and it allows

11:07 ↗ the community to sign up through

11:10 ↗ Eastside fire and rescues website for

11:15 ↗ providing information to first

11:17 ↗ responders about information about your

11:20 ↗ personal circumstances at your place

11:23 ↗ that might help first responders when

11:25 ↗ they get to your place if there is an

11:27 ↗ emergency and it's right on the front

11:30 ↗ page of the website

11:30 ↗ Eastside Fire and Rescue its Eastside

11:32 ↗ fire - rescue dot org and so I would

11:35 ↗ encourage people to go look at that and

11:39 ↗ also at the meeting we were able to be

11:45 ↗ there with an award that was presented

11:47 ↗ to Chief Clark it's an award called the

11:51 ↗ I think it's called the Patriot award

11:53 ↗ and it is an award that a very few of

11:57 ↗ these are given out each year I think it

12:00 ↗ might be about 15 nationwide it is the

12:04 ↗ highest award that is given out by the

12:06 ↗ Secretary of Defense each year and it is

12:08 ↗ awarded to those people who provide

12:12 ↗ support to our our military personnel so

12:16 ↗ congratulations to Chief Clark we also

12:18 ↗ had two other items of business on our

12:21 ↗ agenda one is a an initial discussion on

12:24 ↗ governance right now Eastside Fire and

12:27 ↗ Rescue is comprised of five members and

12:29 ↗ we are governed by an interlocal

12:31 ↗ agreement there are some other options

12:33 ↗ for a government governance structure

12:35 ↗ and those discussions are anticipated

12:39 ↗ future discussions are anticipated to

12:41 ↗ happen

12:43 ↗ for the rest of the year and there are

12:48 ↗ some options other than our local

12:50 ↗ agreements that East Side Fire and

12:51 ↗ Rescue rescue members will be discussing

12:53 ↗ at the board and we will be bringing

12:54 ↗ those back to the council as soon as we

12:56 ↗ have more in-depth discussions we also

12:59 ↗ had a discussion about mutual aid and

13:03 ↗ this is about some issues that are

13:07 ↗ ongoing involving Fall City and

13:10 ↗ Snoqualmie and that topic will be

13:13 ↗ discussed in more detail at a committee

13:15 ↗ meeting that is July 31st at noon at

13:20 ↗ headquarters and that's my report Thank

13:23 ↗ You deputy council president batiste

13:24 ↗ thank you madam mayor no report this

13:26 ↗ evening Thank You council president

13:28 ↗ Mertz

13:29 ↗ thank you madam mayor sound cities

13:31 ↗ association public issues committee met

13:34 ↗ last Wednesday July 10th at Rendon City

13:37 ↗ Hall at 7:00 p.m. we had three issues

13:40 ↗ that are potential future action items

13:42 ↗ which is all of a sudden going from

13:44 ↗ famine to feast but we don't have an

13:46 ↗ August meeting so it isn't absolutely

13:49 ↗ essential that we dive into them this

13:51 ↗ evening and given that we have a full

13:52 ↗ council meeting and that the minutes

13:54 ↗ have not been published yet for pick I'm

13:56 ↗ gonna wait until they do the first is on

13:59 ↗ King County Charter Review and the

14:01 ↗ activities around that the second is on

14:04 ↗ vision 2050 as councilmember winter

14:06 ↗ Stein reported we are expecting to see

14:10 ↗ the draft plan this Friday July 19th we

14:15 ↗ have a king county growth management

14:19 ↗ policy council meeting on July 24th it

14:23 ↗ is not expected that the sca members

14:26 ↗ will be able to have much to say that

14:29 ↗ reflects the will of their cities

14:30 ↗ because such a short amount of time will

14:32 ↗ have occurred between those two however

14:35 ↗ GNPC does meet again September 27th

14:38 ↗ which will be five or six days after SCA

14:42 ↗ s Executive Board meets and so there is

14:44 ↗ a hope that with feedback from the

14:46 ↗ cities in the intervening intervening

14:48 ↗ couple of months and with a second

14:51 ↗ conversation on vision 2050 at the

14:53 ↗ September pick meeting

14:55 ↗ s-see a board will be able to talk

14:58 ↗ intelligently about this and thus GNPC

15:01 ↗ will be able to reflect that

15:02 ↗ intelligently at our committee meeting

15:04 ↗ such is the hope that we have and then

15:07 ↗ the third issue for potential action

15:10 ↗ revolves around potential position from

15:14 ↗ SCA on House bill 1406 state sales tax

15:18 ↗ credit for affordable housing and

15:20 ↗ whether SCA should sort of provide

15:23 ↗ umbrella guidance as to how that might

15:26 ↗ be structured so all three of these

15:28 ↗ items I plan on bringing back to Council

15:31 ↗ for it go to the order after pic minutes

15:34 ↗ have been released and you've had a

15:35 ↗ chance to take a look at them but we

15:36 ↗ have the rare luxury of two months

15:38 ↗ between a pic meetings so we have time

15:40 ↗ as I mentioned GMP sea meets July 24th

15:46 ↗ the agenda is still to be determined

15:49 ↗ this concludes my report Thank You

15:50 ↗ council president on to the main support

15:53 ↗ I do have one housekeeping item that is

15:55 ↗ not on my mayor's report I did Vicki

15:59 ↗ councilmember hunt and I have been

16:00 ↗ attending cascade water Alliance board

16:02 ↗ meetings where there has been discussion

16:04 ↗ about support services dealing with

16:07 ↗ Metro King County Sewer I do have some

16:10 ↗ additional information tonight the board

16:11 ↗ meeting I believe you said is next week

16:13 ↗ and I think they're going to be voting

16:16 ↗ on that item and so I have some

16:18 ↗ additional information to present to it

16:19 ↗ good of the order to sort of finish that

16:20 ↗ conversation before we have the board

16:22 ↗ meeting mirrors report there will be an

16:25 ↗ executive session this evening to

16:26 ↗ discuss cybersecurity per RCW 42.3 0.11

16:31 ↗ o paren one print a print to and pending

16:34 ↗ potential litigation per RCW 42.3 0.11 o

16:38 ↗ paren one per an eye these items are

16:40 ↗ expected to last seventy minutes no

16:43 ↗ action is anticipated to follow in open

16:45 ↗ session I'm gonna give a little update

16:47 ↗ on the city administrator recruitment

16:49 ↗ that's been going on for a couple of

16:50 ↗ months now we had a total of 80

16:55 ↗ applicants that have played for our

16:56 ↗ posting which closed on June 12

16:58 ↗ there were several first-round

16:59 ↗ interviews online via skype conducted in

17:02 ↗ the past few weeks and

17:03 ↗ conducted in person interviews for six

17:05 ↗ finalists on July 10th we invite all

17:08 ↗ council members residents and city staff

17:10 ↗ to attend a public forum to meet the top

17:13 ↗ two finalists on July 25th from 6 to 8

17:16 ↗ p.m. at workshop Issaquah on Front

17:19 ↗ Street last night imam report is an

17:23 ↗ update on a project in another city

17:25 ↗ it's the Issaquah fall city road project

17:28 ↗ our neighbors the city of Sammamish are

17:30 ↗ about to start a major construction

17:31 ↗ project along its the Quaffle city road

17:33 ↗ from to 42nd Avenue southeast to kahani

17:37 ↗ Drive southeast that will add capacity

17:39 ↗ and improve safety this project includes

17:42 ↗ widening the road adding three

17:46 ↗ roundabouts in building bike lanes

17:48 ↗ sidewalks landscaping in a protected

17:50 ↗ student crossing at Pacific cascade

17:52 ↗ middle school a new bridge located

17:55 ↗ between 247th and Kalani Drive will also

17:57 ↗ raise the roadway to improve safety and

17:59 ↗ meet drivers sight distance requirements

18:01 ↗ as well as enhanced the North Fork of

18:03 ↗ the apart Creek during most of this

18:05 ↗ two-year project the roadway will remain

18:07 ↗ open with two lanes of traffic however

18:10 ↗ it is estimated the road will be closed

18:12 ↗ to traffic between two 47th and kahani

18:14 ↗ Boulevard from the spring of 2020 to the

18:18 ↗ fall of 2020 while the new bridge is

18:21 ↗ built the city of Sammamish is hosting a

18:23 ↗ pre-construction open house at six to

18:25 ↗ eight pm July 31st at Pacific cascade

18:28 ↗ middle school more details including

18:30 ↗ maps of detours and additional

18:32 ↗ renderings of the project are available

18:33 ↗ at Sammamish dot US and that concludes

18:36 ↗ the mayor's report moving on to the

18:39 ↗ consent calendar the consent calendar

18:41 ↗ was distributed to council in advance if

18:44 ↗ authorized the items on the consent

18:46 ↗ calendar will be considered together and

18:48 ↗ approved in one motion have the payables

18:50 ↗ and payroll been reviewed yes thank you

18:53 ↗ does any councilmember desire to remove

18:55 ↗ any item from the consent calendar and

18:57 ↗ consider it under regular business is

19:00 ↗ there a motion madam mayor I move we

19:03 ↗ adopt the consent calendar is listed in

19:04 ↗ tonight's meeting agenda second it's

19:07 ↗ been moved and seconded all those in

19:09 ↗ favor signify by saying aye

19:12 ↗ that passes unanimously we'll move on to

19:16 ↗ our public hearing a B 77059 the 2020

19:19 ↗ 2025 capital improvement plan including

19:22 ↗ the Transportation Improvement Program

19:24 ↗ this item was continued from the July

19:27 ↗ 1st council meeting and was discussed at

19:29 ↗ the July 8th work session tonight there

19:31 ↗ will be a brief staff presentation

19:32 ↗ followed by the continued public hearing

19:35 ↗ following the hearing council action is

19:37 ↗ anticipated I'd like to invite finance

19:39 ↗ director Beth Goldberg to make a

19:41 ↗ presentation welcome back good evening

20:02 ↗ okay

20:04 ↗ good evening everyone we meet again to

20:08 ↗ talk about the 2020 to 2025 CIP

20:15 ↗ tonight's the purpose of tonight's

20:18 ↗ presentation is to provide you with a

20:21 ↗ brief overview of how we got to this

20:25 ↗ evening and what is being presented to

20:29 ↗ you for adoption going to cover a brief

20:33 ↗ overview of the process up to now an

20:36 ↗ overview of the projects that changed

20:38 ↗ from the original proposal and then next

20:42 ↗ steps there shouldn't be any surprises

20:45 ↗ to anyone in this presentation as these

20:49 ↗ do reflect things we've previously

20:50 ↗ discussed and the changes that we heard

20:53 ↗ from Council over the last couple of

20:56 ↗ council meetings so as a reminder we are

21:01 ↗ hopefully at the last step of this

21:03 ↗ process this evening concluding a

21:06 ↗ process that began on June 5th when the

21:09 ↗ administration transmitted the proposed

21:11 ↗ CIP to council we've had a number of

21:14 ↗ work sessions a public hearing on July

21:16 ↗ 1st tonight will conclude the public

21:20 ↗ hearing and then Council will consider

21:23 ↗ adoption of the CIP want to remind

21:27 ↗ Council something that we have mentioned

21:31 ↗ I think in every one of these

21:32 ↗ presentations is the CIP is a planning

21:37 ↗ document it is a statement of intended

21:42 ↗ plans but they are not final decisions

21:46 ↗ every project within the CIP is subject

21:49 ↗ to change subject to modification either

21:51 ↗ through subsequent budget processes

21:54 ↗ through subsequent policy discussions

21:57 ↗ we've talked about a number of policy

21:58 ↗ issues that will be coming back to the

22:00 ↗ council for discussion and then

22:02 ↗ subsequent updates to the CIP the CIP is

22:06 ↗ updated every two years so there are

22:08 ↗ opportunities to revisit at those

22:11 ↗ junctures I will also point out that by

22:14 ↗ its very nature capital improvement

22:17 ↗ projects

22:18 ↗ to be very fluid particularly the larger

22:20 ↗ projects the more complex they are so

22:22 ↗ again this is is a planning document as

22:28 ↗ a reminder the CIP we plan for a six

22:32 ↗ year period so 2020 through 2025 the

22:36 ↗ process that the city undertook to

22:38 ↗ prepare the CIP was exhaustive it

22:42 ↗ involved 22 capital managers and seven

22:46 ↗ city departments collaborated to produce

22:48 ↗ the proposed CIP the CIP covers a number

22:55 ↗ of asset categories within the city

22:57 ↗ capital equipment municipal facilities

23:00 ↗ Parks and Recreation technology systems

23:03 ↗ trails transportation and water sewer

23:07 ↗ and stormwater projects also as a

23:12 ↗ reminder we are required by state law to

23:15 ↗ adopt a transportation improvement plan

23:18 ↗ and the capital improvement plan that

23:21 ↗ the council will be adopting also serves

23:24 ↗ the purpose of the transportation

23:27 ↗ improvement plan so the resolution that

23:30 ↗ you will be considering later tonight

23:33 ↗ adopts both both required plans as we

23:38 ↗ have talked about during this process

23:40 ↗ with a six-year planning horizon there

23:44 ↗ is more certainty in the near term and

23:48 ↗ less certainty in the out-years so we

23:52 ↗ paid particular attention to projects in

23:55 ↗ 2020 and 2021 and made sure that the

24:01 ↗ revenues and expenditures balanced out

24:04 ↗ in those years as you get into the out

24:06 ↗ years again because this is a planning

24:08 ↗ document we've identified a number of

24:11 ↗ projects that and needs that the city is

24:14 ↗ facing for which we don't have revenue

24:17 ↗ sources and this is very typical for a

24:19 ↗ CIP or identifying things that we need

24:22 ↗ to be focusing our attention on both the

24:25 ↗ staff and then council is the

24:28 ↗ policy-making body into

24:30 ↗ the out-years and it's important that we

24:32 ↗ get some of these pretty ly some of

24:34 ↗ these larger policy things on the radar

24:36 ↗ now because they do take time to flesh

24:41 ↗ out and to have those policy discussions

24:47 ↗ so we proposed a number of projects

24:49 ↗ within the CIP and at the June 24th work

24:55 ↗ session Council expressed a desire to

24:59 ↗ accelerate work on southeast 43rd signal

25:03 ↗ improvements from commencing the project

25:06 ↗ in 2021 to commencing the project in

25:09 ↗ 2020 in order to do this this means

25:12 ↗ changing the funding source from the

25:14 ↗ proposed transportation benefit district

25:16 ↗ package to existing general fund debt

25:20 ↗ service capacity in order to accommodate

25:23 ↗ that desire by the council we did have

25:27 ↗ to make some other changes to the CIP

25:30 ↗ and they are listed on this slide

25:34 ↗ pk-12 Valley Trail and Creek site

25:37 ↗ acquisition PK 30 to hillside

25:40 ↗ acquisition TR 38 three trails crossing

25:44 ↗ all of those are now shown as unfunded

25:49 ↗ in the out-years 2022 through 2025 in

25:52 ↗ order to free up sufficient existing

25:56 ↗ debt service capacity in order to

25:58 ↗ accelerate work on southeast 43rd in

26:02 ↗ addition we've reduced the amounts of of

26:07 ↗ costs funded through general fund

26:10 ↗ supported debt in 2022 for the new fire

26:13 ↗ station

26:17 ↗ on the at the July 8th work session we

26:21 ↗ also heard from the council a couple of

26:25 ↗ things that led us to make a couple of

26:27 ↗ more changes to the CIP the first is to

26:32 ↗ TR 30 the pavement management program

26:34 ↗ there was a request by Council to change

26:38 ↗ the project description to better align

26:41 ↗ that with the intention of the

26:44 ↗ Transportation benefit district so the

26:46 ↗ CIP pages that you have before you

26:49 ↗ tonight reflect those changes and then

26:52 ↗ there was also a request to change the

26:55 ↗ description of the hillside Park project

26:57 ↗ to provide some clarity around the

27:00 ↗ likely reallocation of funds to support

27:03 ↗ the project so again those are reflected

27:05 ↗ in the revised CIP pages that have been

27:09 ↗ presented to you in preparation for this

27:11 ↗ meeting I also want to note one other

27:14 ↗ thing that's not reflected on this slide

27:16 ↗ but it is a change in the CIP documents

27:19 ↗ that were provided and that is that we

27:23 ↗ on the Sycamore soar project it was

27:27 ↗ originally in the original proposed CIP

27:29 ↗ was slated for funding in 2020 the

27:32 ↗ revised CIP that we presented to you now

27:36 ↗ reflects funding for that project in

27:38 ↗ 2024 and that reflects the discussion

27:41 ↗ that council had on July 8th on the

27:46 ↗ Sycamore project about the need for more

27:49 ↗ time for planning on the project so

27:52 ↗ we've pushed that project out so that

27:54 ↗ council has that planning time and time

27:57 ↗ to have that policy discussion so I'm

28:02 ↗ gonna wrap up the presentation where we

28:07 ↗ started which is the CIP is a planning

28:11 ↗ document and nothing in the CIP is a

28:18 ↗ certainty until we go through subsequent

28:20 ↗ budget processes and is subject to

28:23 ↗ change as council debates some of these

28:26 ↗ larger policy issues that will be coming

28:28 ↗ your way in

28:29 ↗ becoming months and years to come so

28:33 ↗ with that we'll pause there for

28:37 ↗ questions and hand it back to you madam

28:40 ↗ mayor

28:41 ↗ thank you before we go to the reopening

28:46 ↗ or continuing the public hearing does

28:49 ↗ counsel have any questions for Belle

28:52 ↗ Emily do do we need to list potential

29:00 ↗ funding sources including mitigation

29:02 ↗ funding sources in the CIP even if

29:04 ↗ there's not a specific amount planned

29:06 ↗ for a given project I know we don't and

29:13 ↗ then also can read one and mitigation

29:17 ↗ parks be used as potential sources of

29:20 ↗ funding for acquisitions both Creek and

29:22 ↗ hillside yes thank you

29:27 ↗ the administrator moon just I just want

29:30 ↗ to clarify on mitigation funds it it has

29:35 ↗ been guidance that we have received that

29:38 ↗ mitigation funds need to be identified

29:40 ↗ in the CIP now council has the

29:43 ↗ opportunity to amend the CIP and

29:45 ↗ identify project being eligible for

29:47 ↗ mitigation funds in the future so

29:49 ↗ mitigation funds are treated a little

29:51 ↗ bit differently than say reap funds are

29:54 ↗ other funding sources where we have a

29:58 ↗ little bit more flexibility to later

30:00 ↗ apply those funding sources to those

30:03 ↗ projects but with mitigation funds we

30:05 ↗ try to identify those upfront that these

30:07 ↗ are eligible projects for mitigation

30:08 ↗ funds when we try to describe the amount

30:10 ↗ of budget that we anticipate perhaps

30:13 ↗ taking from those funds for those

30:14 ↗ projects if they're not shown in this

30:17 ↗ adopted CIP does not preclude you from

30:20 ↗ using mitigation funds some point in the

30:22 ↗ future but we would highly recommend

30:23 ↗ that you come back and amend your CIP to

30:25 ↗ show that project is being eligible that

30:28 ↗ happens from time to time as scope

30:30 ↗ changes on a project or as more of that

30:33 ↗ funding source becomes available so you

30:36 ↗ always have the opportunity to amend the

30:38 ↗ CIP but with mitigation funds we would

30:41 ↗ advise you to show that as a funding

30:43 ↗ source along with anticipated amount of

30:45 ↗ that funding source that you plan to use

30:48 ↗ that's a member had I'm gonna let you

30:50 ↗ reframe your question because I think

30:52 ↗ your question more was about even if

30:54 ↗ mitigation funds were not currently

30:55 ↗ being put in in a dollar amount your

30:58 ↗ question is about whether or not there

30:59 ↗ should be just a category line item part

31:02 ↗ right and so to clarify my understanding

31:05 ↗ is we don't need to even for mitigation

31:08 ↗ we don't need to put that as a category

31:11 ↗ to use those funds but if there is a

31:13 ↗ specific project that is identified for

31:15 ↗ use of those funds with a dollar amount

31:18 ↗ associated that's when it would be

31:20 ↗ appropriate to include it but we

31:21 ↗ wouldn't include it even as a category

31:23 ↗ if there isn't a dollar amount yes

31:26 ↗ that's accurate okay great thank you

31:29 ↗ I've kind of lost track did you you got

31:32 ↗ an answer to your second question okay

31:35 ↗ are there any other questions

31:36 ↗ that's memory so I apologize for not

31:40 ↗ saying this ahead of time just follow up

31:41 ↗ on why I asked earlier but I what my

31:44 ↗ question was around encumbrances and it

31:46 ↗ deals with mitigation so what what

31:48 ↗ constitutes an encumbrance of a

31:50 ↗ mitigation fee

32:01 ↗ statute doesn't define encumbrance but I

32:04 ↗ would take it to mean an encumbrance

32:06 ↗ would be when you are legally obligated

32:08 ↗ to pay the fees so if you had entered

32:12 ↗ into a contract and you're legally

32:14 ↗ obligated to do that or if you had

32:16 ↗ pledged the fees to pay bonds or

32:20 ↗ something like that that would be

32:22 ↗ encumbering the fees right thanks are

32:25 ↗ there any other questions councilmember

32:27 ↗ Goodman yeah so we talked about the

32:30 ↗ sycamore sewer being pushed out a little

32:34 ↗ bit this is a capital improvement

32:37 ↗ planning document and at the meeting

32:41 ↗ that we had earlier this month they were

32:43 ↗ talked about there was talk about code

32:44 ↗ changes so those would not as I

32:48 ↗ understand it not be in this document

32:50 ↗ because those are not capital projects

32:52 ↗ and so at what point might the council

32:55 ↗ expect to see proposals on any code

33:02 ↗ changes and I don't mean months and

33:04 ↗ years I mean what what part of our

33:07 ↗ process during the year

33:08 ↗ might we council be entertained with the

33:13 ↗ proposal or monies to be spent on code

33:15 ↗ changes for example ministry to moon

33:22 ↗ counts Mary can you clarify what kind of

33:25 ↗ code changes here you're perhaps

33:27 ↗ anticipating well we talked about our

33:31 ↗ earlier in the month we talked about

33:33 ↗ code changes maybe for monitoring

33:36 ↗ testing things like that and I guess

33:38 ↗ what I'm for what I'm really getting at

33:39 ↗ and maybe I should just say is this

33:41 ↗ correct it would be something that we

33:43 ↗ would probably need to appropriate money

33:46 ↗ for unless there was mmm but that would

33:49 ↗ be a budget time right and so is it or

33:54 ↗ if it's on the planning calendar and we

33:57 ↗ don't need to necessarily have any more

33:58 ↗ staff time what I'm really getting at is

34:00 ↗ for folks in the Sycamore area who are

34:02 ↗ wondering if there could be anything

34:03 ↗ else between now and then between now

34:06 ↗ and what's in the capital or the CIP

34:08 ↗ it's possible between now and then that

34:11 ↗ we could see proposals to for code

34:12 ↗ changes correct okay

34:14 ↗ thank you for that I don't think we have

34:18 ↗ set forth the schedule and may ask the

34:20 ↗ mayor who was able to attend a meeting I

34:21 ↗ was not able to attend today to fill in

34:24 ↗ any blanks but that is an X cup of work

34:27 ↗ that were intended to do is go and

34:30 ↗ collect the additional data that was

34:32 ↗ described shape up some policy of

34:36 ↗ recommendations fine-tune the ones that

34:38 ↗ we have given you both but fill in some

34:40 ↗ gaps as well and strategize about the

34:43 ↗ way in which we can move toward a better

34:47 ↗ State and so I wouldn't anticipate that

34:50 ↗ we're probably not going to bring

34:52 ↗ forward those code changes before the

34:56 ↗ end of the year but more so early next

34:59 ↗ year is what I would anticipate just

35:01 ↗ given what the calendar foreshadows for

35:05 ↗ you over the fall okay

35:07 ↗ I'll add a little bit to that we we have

35:11 ↗ been having internal discussions about

35:13 ↗ and just to be clear we're in the middle

35:15 ↗ of a city administrator transition and

35:17 ↗ so miss moon will be retiring nice word

35:21 ↗ in two weeks I have been working with

35:24 ↗ our deputy City Administrator talking

35:26 ↗ with staff about what the next steps

35:28 ↗ look like because conversations last

35:31 ↗ year with the Sycamore neighborhood

35:33 ↗ contained multiple items and now things

35:35 ↗ are being pulled apart

35:36 ↗ I think the intent is in this year to

35:39 ↗ come back with an open house there's

35:42 ↗ still discussion on what that might look

35:43 ↗ like on what potential testing changes

35:47 ↗ might look like what possible code

35:48 ↗ language might look like thoughts of

35:51 ↗ having council attend the open house

35:53 ↗ with the community and looking at a

35:56 ↗ timeline that is maybe within two

35:59 ↗ quarters long of approving code so well

36:02 ↗ in advance of any consideration of a

36:04 ↗ capital project even for the following

36:06 ↗ year so that conversation is ongoing and

36:09 ↗ still moving forward and the capital

36:11 ↗ project conversation you will decide

36:13 ↗ tonight when you make your vote as to

36:14 ↗ move it to the outer years right thank

36:17 ↗ you I yeah I appreciate I realized that

36:20 ↗ that's not technically part of our

36:21 ↗ discussion tonight but I think if there

36:23 ↗ are people here or watching or hear what

36:25 ↗ happens tonight they will be curious

36:28 ↗ and so I I think that's appropriate

36:31 ↗ information to share thank you for doing

36:32 ↗ that are there any other questions

36:34 ↗ before we continue our public hearing so

36:41 ↗ the guidelines for the public hearing

36:43 ↗ are similar to the same as the ones we

36:45 ↗ had put up for audience comments earlier

36:47 ↗ and again if you're here speaking for a

36:49 ↗ group please identify which group you

36:51 ↗ are speaking for and those in our

36:53 ↗ audience who want to indicate support

36:55 ↗ and show counsel they support a

36:56 ↗ speaker's comments please raise your

36:58 ↗ hand I'm going to open the public

37:00 ↗ hearing at 7:37

37:03 ↗ and tisha do we have a list no one has

37:06 ↗ signed up to speak so I see Joe Verner

37:11 ↗ just jumping up and down in the front

37:12 ↗ row I'm sure he wants to put his hand up

37:14 ↗ we don't have anyone on the list but as

37:16 ↗ you all know I will continue and to open

37:19 ↗ it up to anyone who wishes to speak

37:22 ↗ tonight please raise your hand come on

37:24 ↗ up to the microphone and identify your

37:25 ↗ name and your address and if somebody

37:27 ↗ else would like to speak maybe you could

37:29 ↗ just queue up with a person so please

37:30 ↗ come on up and join us thank you

37:42 ↗ my name is Naomi Lorenson and thank you

37:45 ↗ for being here with all of us this

37:49 ↗ evening mostly I am here to thank you

37:52 ↗ for listening to the folks from

37:54 ↗ Providence point for many years it is my

37:59 ↗ fondest hope that you do not have to

38:02 ↗ listen to us again next year I also

38:06 ↗ would like to publicly thank two people

38:09 ↗ Ernie wolf who you know pretty well by

38:14 ↗ now I'm sure as he's been attending your

38:16 ↗ meetings forever and Daphne gran who's

38:19 ↗ also in the audience today who have done

38:21 ↗ a tremendous amount of work for

38:23 ↗ Providence Point to get that light as I

38:27 ↗ waited for 17 cars to go past me before

38:31 ↗ I could exit my village this evening I

38:33 ↗ thought to myself maybe next year at

38:37 ↗ this time the light will turn red for

38:40 ↗ them and green for me and I can just go

38:43 ↗ thank you

38:45 ↗ thank you so much and you and there are

38:47 ↗ some hands up in the air is there anyone

38:49 ↗ else they would like to address us this

38:50 ↗ evening

38:52 ↗ second call would anyone like to address

38:55 ↗ the council on this topic sure sir come

38:57 ↗ on up to the microphone

39:10 ↗ my name is Dan sho from Sycamore

39:13 ↗ resident and I'm here to talk about the

39:15 ↗ sewer I guess my first comment is what's

39:21 ↗ the status on Mike and Cathy Pierce's

39:24 ↗ question was that was sent to Council we

39:26 ↗ haven't had any response to that

39:28 ↗ letter and that was sent on the 25th of

39:30 ↗ June and I guess the question is when

39:32 ↗ should we expect an answer to those

39:34 ↗ questions thanks Dan if you can present

39:36 ↗ all of your information and then if

39:39 ↗ you're comfortable to leave it with the

39:40 ↗ clerk's that would be great I can have

39:42 ↗ the city administrator provide a follow

39:44 ↗ up when you're done thank you okay my

39:48 ↗ next comment then is on the s w09 the

39:52 ↗ sewer utility Upper Sycamore extension I

39:55 ↗ think as I read through that project

39:57 ↗ proposal it is pretty slim on facts for

40:01 ↗ the reason why we're gonna spend two

40:03 ↗ million-plus to put that project in

40:06 ↗ currently the statement is there are a

40:11 ↗ number of systems in the area that have

40:13 ↗ been characterized as in a state of tree

40:15 ↗ failure it's a simple question but why

40:18 ↗ is no number ever presented in any of

40:20 ↗ the discussions about sewer while we

40:23 ↗ here is a number well let's use the

40:25 ↗ number zero and then we just make this

40:28 ↗ whole thing go away for now until we do

40:30 ↗ the engineering studies and the testing

40:34 ↗ to find out if it's the sewer is even

40:37 ↗ needed in the neighborhood because right

40:39 ↗ now the data that was used to say there

40:41 ↗ were failures in the system was a

40:43 ↗ walk-around event by one of the city

40:46 ↗ engineers who walked from house to house

40:48 ↗ and there was some confusion in some of

40:50 ↗ the lots he thought the drain field was

40:52 ↗ here and the owner told him how it was

40:54 ↗ over there and so there was a lot of

40:56 ↗ mass confusion and again it's not an

40:58 ↗ acceptable test that's basically walking

41:00 ↗ on soggy ground or a sniff test neither

41:03 ↗ one is can be characterized this a way

41:07 ↗ to measure anything

41:10 ↗ and then my other comment well I guess

41:16 ↗ that was sort of raised here was the the

41:18 ↗ notion of the spending well unfunded it

41:21 ↗ sounds like all the funding gets sorted

41:23 ↗ out when the budget work gets done and I

41:26 ↗ would raise the issue that I would like

41:29 ↗ to see the city not have to raise sales

41:32 ↗ tax to fund some of these projects that

41:34 ↗ are coming on we need to learn to live

41:36 ↗ within our budget we've got plenty of

41:38 ↗ taxes in place right now we've got RTA

41:41 ↗ breathing down my back we've got 10% in

41:44 ↗ taxes already in the city and we're

41:46 ↗ going to go up to 10.2 I don't know when

41:48 ↗ it's going to stop and it's getting to

41:50 ↗ be kind of expensive to live in this

41:52 ↗ city for for what I'm not so sure

41:54 ↗ anymore you know so

42:04 ↗ I guess that's all I have thank you

42:07 ↗ yeah did you want to leave your notes

42:09 ↗ with is there information in there that

42:12 ↗ you would like to leave so that we can

42:13 ↗ answer fish okay thank you thank you

42:16 ↗ thank you very much

42:18 ↗ city administrator moon before we go on

42:19 ↗ I do remember seeing the comments that

42:22 ↗ were submitted by email by the residents

42:24 ↗ that were being referenced and I thought

42:28 ↗ I saw a response a follow-up response as

42:30 ↗ well from city administration saying

42:32 ↗ that it would thank you lots of

42:35 ↗ questions and it would take some time to

42:36 ↗ get back to it so maybe that information

42:38 ↗ hasn't gone back to the neighborhood but

42:41 ↗ I'm pretty sure it's a real detailed

42:44 ↗ list of questions madam mayor it was I

42:47 ↗ will have to look and see what sort of

42:49 ↗ response was sent out it was directed to

42:51 ↗ the City Council but that's all I can

42:53 ↗ say at this point okay thanks thank you

42:55 ↗ for bringing that up Dan is there anyone

42:57 ↗ else that would like to speak the saving

42:58 ↗ Joe come on up

43:04 ↗ thank you name is Joe Verner 1 2 3 0

43:08 ↗ Oakwood Place Issaquah don't have any

43:13 ↗ comments but have a question and that

43:17 ↗ question deals with the proposed

43:20 ↗ two-tenths of a percent sales tax

43:22 ↗ increase to help fund capital

43:27 ↗ improvement plans so 2 point question 1

43:32 ↗ is this item scheduled actually

43:35 ↗ scheduled for a vote and when is that

43:39 ↗ vote coming up and two what's the

43:45 ↗ estimated revenue per year for the city

43:52 ↗ on that proposal thank you

43:56 ↗ maybe we can get the answers this

43:58 ↗ evening or at least communicated back to

44:00 ↗ me text or email sure I don't have

44:04 ↗ enough to top my head but her thank you

44:08 ↗ is there anyone else who would like to

44:10 ↗ address council this evening during the

44:12 ↗ public hearing for the capital

44:14 ↗ improvement

44:15 ↗ program that can call anyone wishing to

44:18 ↗ address council final call so we will

44:21 ↗ close the public hearing at 8:40 for 744

44:30 ↗ a digital clock thank you

44:35 ↗ so counsel would you like to proceed

44:41 ↗ is there anyone prepared to make a

44:43 ↗ motion this evening or pose a question

44:49 ↗ or a comment councilmember Goodman I

44:53 ↗ would the last question about the 2% and

45:02 ↗ when is that

45:03 ↗ scheduled nothing is scheduled but I was

45:04 ↗ wondering if we could just get a few

45:06 ↗ sentences on the relationship between

45:07 ↗ the camp the CIP and that future

45:12 ↗ potentially anticipated revenue stream

45:15 ↗ yes would you like to come up and

45:18 ↗ address that question

45:22 ↗ yes so we had talked at the last work

45:27 ↗ session about coming back to Council

45:34 ↗ with a schedule or maybe let me step

45:37 ↗ back a bit counsel the June July 8th

45:44 ↗ sorry I'm suffering from time issues as

45:48 ↗ well

45:49 ↗ July 8th Council expressed an interest

45:53 ↗ in perhaps looking at southeast 43rd and

45:59 ↗ whether the TBD revenue could also back

46:03 ↗ that project along with general fund

46:05 ↗ general government debt service and we

46:08 ↗ said we were going to come back and talk

46:11 ↗ about potential timing of that I think

46:15 ↗ is that what you're asking well I think

46:18 ↗ that I got the sense that the question

46:20 ↗ was basically there relate a higher

46:22 ↗ level relationship between that

46:24 ↗ potential revenue stream and the CIP yes

46:27 ↗ so that's so that's one relationship

46:30 ↗ this and and they may or may not be

46:33 ↗ linked Council did not make a decision

46:35 ↗ about that they asked for more

46:37 ↗ information and we're working on a

46:39 ↗ presentation to do that in terms of the

46:42 ↗ TBD sales tax in particular there had

46:47 ↗ been talk about putting this on the

46:49 ↗ ballot in 2020 and so we would need to

46:53 ↗ come back to the council and settle on

46:56 ↗ ballot language sometime before then it

47:00 ↗ gets wrapped up into that last

47:02 ↗ discussion because that may come earlier

47:05 ↗ it may come later so council will need

47:08 ↗ to have a discussion about what to put

47:13 ↗ on the ballot when to put it on the

47:15 ↗ ballot what the content of that ballot

47:18 ↗ measure is the CIP talks about a series

47:22 ↗ of projects that are for potential

47:24 ↗ funding from that funding source but

47:26 ↗ until it is put on the ballot

47:28 ↗ this is just to use that word again a

47:31 ↗ planning document so that would be that

47:35 ↗ would be the timing and the CIP

47:37 ↗ contemplates a 2020 ballot which would

47:41 ↗ mean the revenue would start coming in

47:43 ↗ in 2021 which is why the projects slated

47:47 ↗ for the TBD in the CIP those aren't

47:51 ↗ funded until 2021

47:53 ↗ thank you that's I think we had a couple

47:56 ↗ of questions about that and I just

47:58 ↗ wanted there to be an opportunity to

48:00 ↗ kind of clear that up for people who

48:02 ↗ don't have the stream fortune to sit

48:05 ↗ through hours and hours and hours of

48:06 ↗ presentations or thank you Thank You

48:10 ↗ councilmember Walsh followed by

48:11 ↗ councilmember hunt just another

48:13 ↗ clarification on that for the public

48:15 ↗ when we say TBD we mean transportation

48:18 ↗ benefit district and that's just really

48:20 ↗ something that says hey we need to find

48:23 ↗ a way to fund some of these

48:24 ↗ transportation projects the way that the

48:27 ↗ council has kind of moved forward with a

48:30 ↗ potential recommendation as a sales tax

48:33 ↗ so when we talk about TBD often were

48:35 ↗ kind of referring to that sales tax idea

48:38 ↗ but none of those bold decisions have

48:41 ↗ been made nor are they being made with

48:44 ↗ the CIP member hunt related so I I

48:52 ↗ wanted to clarify a point on TR 0 3 1

48:56 ↗ which is the southeast for a third

48:57 ↗ signal improvements this was one that we

48:59 ↗ also heard public comments about tonight

49:01 ↗ and in many earlier nights so that in

49:04 ↗ our current CIP that is listed as T V D

49:07 ↗ package general fund existing debt

49:10 ↗ capacity and really it is general fund

49:14 ↗ existing debt capacity and so I wondered

49:16 ↗ if you could just clarify in that case

49:19 ↗ why the funding sources listed as as T V

49:22 ↗ D package because I found that confusing

49:24 ↗ and so just to clarify that and then

49:27 ↗ also just for our for everyone's

49:32 ↗ information that is funded with general

49:34 ↗ fund existing debt capacity in 2020 and

49:36 ↗ 2021

49:38 ↗ starting in 2020 in the current CIP yes

49:41 ↗ so I think we've talked about this at

49:44 ↗ previous council meetings that the

49:47 ↗ conversations on these seven unfunded

49:51 ↗ transportation projects they became

49:55 ↗ designated as projects to focus on last

49:58 ↗ August before my tenure here at the city

50:03 ↗ and the ad hoc Finance Committee was

50:06 ↗ directed to look at funding options for

50:10 ↗ those using TBD sales tax revenues

50:14 ↗ during the course of the ad hoc Finance

50:17 ↗ Committee deliberations about those and

50:19 ↗ this also was summarized to the council

50:23 ↗ I believe at a March 29th council

50:25 ↗ meeting and another one May 13th

50:28 ↗ during those deliberations determined

50:31 ↗ that there was not sufficient DVD sales

50:35 ↗ tax revenue to cover the full scope of

50:38 ↗ those projects so started looking at

50:42 ↗ existing debt service capacity as

50:45 ↗ another strategy all of those got

50:47 ↗ packaged together for continuity and to

50:52 ↗ point to the fact that that is how those

50:55 ↗ seven projects evolved and came before

50:59 ↗ the council in the CIP thank you yes

51:03 ↗ this was just a clarification because

51:05 ↗ that one in particular is not funded by

51:08 ↗ TVD sales tax counselor president Mart's

51:12 ↗ followed by councilmember Winterson

51:15 ↗ madam mayor I moved to adopt resolution

51:17 ↗ number 2019 - o7 adopting the capital

51:23 ↗ improvement plan for 2020 through 2025

51:26 ↗ including the six-year transportation

51:27 ↗ Improvement Program second it's been

51:31 ↗ moved and seconded we can still have

51:33 ↗ questions and conversation so did I see

51:37 ↗ council member is hand up yeah

51:39 ↗ council member who interesting thank you

51:41 ↗ actually going to continue just to make

51:43 ↗ a point for what it's worth I've you

51:47 ↗ what we've done is defined what we call

51:49 ↗ a transportation package

51:51 ↗ there's projects we have identified ways

51:52 ↗ to do it and then time frame to do it

51:54 ↗ it's not everything that's in the TI P

51:55 ↗ it's a subset of seven happens to be

51:58 ↗ that some of that funding may come from

52:00 ↗ bonds that we pay off the debt using a

52:03 ↗ sales tax increase as as made possible

52:07 ↗ by a TBD so we're doing it we're talking

52:11 ↗ about a transportation project package

52:13 ↗ in multiple ways

52:15 ↗ that it could be funded T V D is one of

52:18 ↗ them it is unfortunate I did see that

52:20 ↗ and I decided not to comment on it it is

52:22 ↗ unfortunate that it does say T V D

52:24 ↗ package because there isn't really not

52:25 ↗ in my mind a TV ad package there's a

52:27 ↗ transportation package and T V D is one

52:29 ↗ of the funding sources just that's the

52:31 ↗ way I think about it other comments or

52:34 ↗ questions councilmember a followed by

52:37 ↗ councilmember hen I want to do a little

52:38 ↗ further clarification on the T V D is

52:42 ↗ not a funding source T V D is a

52:44 ↗ transportation benefit district we will

52:48 ↗ go to the voters and it will be you who

52:49 ↗ will decide whether or not we are going

52:51 ↗ to do a 2.2 percent sales tax increase

52:54 ↗ one of the questions that we've wrestled

52:56 ↗ or were asked when putting together this

52:59 ↗ CIP was did we want to plan with the

53:02 ↗ assumption that that would happen and we

53:05 ↗ said yes but it's if when this goes to

53:09 ↗ you all to decide whether or not that's

53:11 ↗ something you want to do then we'll have

53:14 ↗ to take the results of that and decide

53:16 ↗ what impact that has on our capital

53:18 ↗ improvement plan so this is as the

53:21 ↗ director Goldstein's

53:22 ↗ R Goldberg has said more than once this

53:24 ↗ is a plan and and it is subject to many

53:27 ↗ changes over time so just a reminder

53:31 ↗ great clarifications as we speak though

53:35 ↗ we are speaking to each other up here

53:37 ↗ not directly to the audience so make

53:38 ↗ sure that you are addressing the mayor

53:40 ↗ addressing the council is you press on

53:42 ↗ your comments thank you unless you have

53:44 ↗ questions are there any questions or any

53:47 ↗ more comments or points of discussion

53:48 ↗ councilmember hunt I'd like to make a

53:50 ↗ motion sure so this is an amendment I

53:54 ↗ moved to direct the administration to

53:56 ↗ provide for councils consideration an

53:58 ↗ alternative CIP in which general

54:00 ↗ mitigate

54:01 ↗ and funds set to expire in 2021 would be

54:04 ↗ used to fund projects other than the FC

54:06 ↗ zero to two consolidated city offices

54:09 ↗ potentially including but not limited to

54:11 ↗ FC zero one eight

54:13 ↗ it's a quat Highlands storage site and

54:14 ↗ FC zero two zero parking building

54:17 ↗ expansion back in a second it's been

54:19 ↗ moved and seconded discussion council

54:23 ↗ member hunt followed by councilmember

54:24 ↗ Walsh part of my motivation for making

54:29 ↗ this amendment is that we just earlier

54:33 ↗ today received information that we have

54:35 ↗ four point nine seven million dollars of

54:38 ↗ mitigation general mitigation fund that

54:43 ↗ is expiring in 2021 and currently the

54:47 ↗ amount that is listed in our CIP or

54:51 ↗ using these funds for consolidated City

54:53 ↗ Hall is 4.4 approximately million so I

54:59 ↗ in discussion with the city

55:01 ↗ administrator earlier today also found

55:05 ↗ out that we have a few other projects in

55:07 ↗ the CIP that would be eligible for this

55:09 ↗ funding that includes the two that I

55:12 ↗ listed FC zero one eight is to go out

55:15 ↗ Highlands storage site an FC zero two

55:17 ↗ zero parking building expansion because

55:19 ↗ they both provide capacity and therefore

55:21 ↗ would be applicable for this source of

55:23 ↗ funding so this is new information that

55:26 ↗ I just found out I thought it was very

55:28 ↗ important to our conversation and I also

55:31 ↗ think it's very important for

55:32 ↗ transparency that we have a plan for how

55:35 ↗ to use this much money coming up so

55:38 ↗ quickly

55:39 ↗ in the events that we either do not use

55:42 ↗ all of it or do not use it for the

55:45 ↗ consolidated City Hall plan even if we

55:49 ↗ followed the CIP as it is here to to a

55:52 ↗ tee I think we would have some extra

55:54 ↗ funds so I think we need to think about

55:56 ↗ this expiring funding and then

55:59 ↗ additionally in the future years we have

56:02 ↗ expiring funding from general mitigation

56:04 ↗ that we should also take into

56:06 ↗ consideration as we do our planning

56:10 ↗ I am concerns that we haven't yet vetted

56:14 ↗ this plan with the community I'm

56:15 ↗ concerned that we have a plan to go out

56:17 ↗ to the community to discuss the

56:19 ↗ consolidated City Hall but we really

56:21 ↗ haven't yet done that engagement it's

56:23 ↗ it's 4.4 million in 2021 and then it's

56:26 ↗ setting us on a plan for potentially 40

56:29 ↗ million dollars for the for the work

56:31 ↗ this is a huge commitment and I think it

56:34 ↗ really needs to be vetted by the

56:35 ↗ community and then additionally we've

56:39 ↗ heard convincing arguments from

56:41 ↗ consultants that there are there is an

56:43 ↗ option to design-build which would be a

56:46 ↗ different process and which we would not

56:49 ↗ start until probably later than 2021

56:52 ↗ so what's represented in our CIP is a

56:54 ↗ design-bid-build

56:55 ↗ and we have been presented with

56:57 ↗ information that it would save us money

56:59 ↗ if we decided to go forward with the

57:01 ↗ City Hall if we did a different process

57:03 ↗ that wouldn't stay at start until later

57:05 ↗ so I I really think we need to know what

57:08 ↗ we can and can't do with these funds and

57:11 ↗ what we should do if it comes back that

57:13 ↗ we have a different option for funding

57:16 ↗ the City Hall if the timeline would be

57:18 ↗ different or if we should do something

57:21 ↗ different all together and so in

57:24 ↗ conclusion I think this is very cart

57:25 ↗ before the horse to have this funding in

57:27 ↗ 2021 and to have that be the only option

57:30 ↗ we're presented with I just found out

57:33 ↗ about a few other options that

57:34 ↗ potentially could be applicable for this

57:36 ↗ funding and I really think we need to

57:39 ↗ have a back-up plan and an understanding

57:40 ↗ of the ripple effects that will come

57:43 ↗ from that plan as but as has been

57:45 ↗ pointed out to me many times if we make

57:47 ↗ a change in one part of the CIP it'll

57:50 ↗ change a bunch of other things so we

57:52 ↗ need to have that holistic picture of

57:54 ↗ what the CIP will look like if we chose

57:56 ↗ to use these funds in a different way

57:57 ↗ and 2021 is coming up fast and lastly

58:02 ↗ it's been pointed out many times that

58:04 ↗ this is a planning document so I think

58:05 ↗ this is exactly where we should be

58:07 ↗ thinking about the back-up plan for this

58:09 ↗ once

58:12 ↗ councilman Walsh thank you madam mayor

58:16 ↗ I very much appreciate councilmember

58:19 ↗ hunt suggesting a back-up plan

58:21 ↗ what we should always be addressing my

58:25 ↗ question there is in regards to these

58:29 ↗ two particular projects when I'm looking

58:31 ↗ at their funding sources it looks like

58:35 ↗ right now most of their funds are coming

58:38 ↗ from utility funds so water storm water

58:41 ↗ sewer fund which have their own set of

58:45 ↗ costs and revenues that should be

58:48 ↗ balanced and if I look at kind of our

58:52 ↗ general government funds for the two of

58:54 ↗ those it's about sixty three thousand

58:57 ↗ and forty seven thousand both coming out

59:00 ↗ of REIT one I believe so I'm trying to

59:03 ↗ understand how this would represent

59:08 ↗ anything more than a hundred thousand

59:10 ↗ dollars worth of additional spend of the

59:15 ↗ general mitigation funds and whether the

59:19 ↗ proposal would be to replace some of the

59:22 ↗ utility under spending which I'm not

59:27 ↗ sure makes sense okay so I'm gonna City

59:30 ↗ Administrator move to jump in here I

59:33 ↗ hear a couple of things one is a concern

59:35 ↗ which I think council has expressed for

59:38 ↗ these the or five years that I've been

59:41 ↗ around that we want to make sure that we

59:43 ↗ when we collect our mitigation fees were

59:46 ↗ able to use them and we're hearing that

59:47 ↗ again tonight that the goal is not to

59:49 ↗ have to return mitigation funds and also

59:53 ↗ the question about the replacement

59:55 ↗ projects and whether or not that would

59:57 ↗ could be could be a option to use those

1:00:01 ↗ mitigation funds fully up to the five

1:00:04 ↗ million dollars sure so those two

1:00:09 ↗ projects do you show our typical split

1:00:11 ↗ in Public Works facilities or operations

1:00:14 ↗ where we have service areas that span a

1:00:18 ↗ multitude of funds so we have what we

1:00:21 ↗ call the 30 30 30 ten split which is 30

1:00:24 ↗ percent general fund 30 percent water 30

1:00:26 ↗ percent sewer and ten percent storm that

1:00:29 ↗ is how we typically pursue projects and

1:00:32 ↗ operations that are shared across

1:00:33 ↗ multiple funds

1:00:35 ↗ when utility funds are involved so a

1:00:38 ↗ councilmember Walsh is correct there's

1:00:40 ↗ only a small portion of the project that

1:00:43 ↗ both of those projects that's shown in

1:00:46 ↗ 2022 as being general fund sourced that

1:00:51 ↗ one could perhaps utilize those general

1:00:57 ↗ government building mitigation funds for

1:00:59 ↗ in lieu of Reid funds those two projects

1:01:05 ↗ we would argue our capacity enhancement

1:01:09 ↗ projects just for clarification for the

1:01:11 ↗ audience one would add Bay's parking

1:01:16 ↗ bays for equipment at Public Works the

1:01:20 ↗ portion of that might include for

1:01:21 ↗ example street sweepers which are on the

1:01:23 ↗ general fund side and then the second

1:01:26 ↗ project was a squat highland storage

1:01:28 ↗ site which would allow us to store

1:01:30 ↗ materials like sand and salt some of

1:01:34 ↗ which would be used again for street

1:01:35 ↗ operations which is general fund others

1:01:37 ↗ would be used for storm water and storm

1:01:41 ↗ funds so my a portion of that project

1:01:47 ↗ could be considered capacity maybe not

1:01:50 ↗ even that full amount that's listed for

1:01:52 ↗ the general fund if there was some

1:01:55 ↗ thought that that is those projects are

1:01:57 ↗ also covering existing deficiencies and

1:02:00 ↗ service in the future years in 2023 the

1:02:05 ↗ Kwajalein storage site does show some

1:02:08 ↗ potential expenditure from general fund

1:02:10 ↗ as well but still including that does

1:02:15 ↗ not get you to the 4.9 million that's

1:02:17 ↗ shown in general government building

1:02:19 ↗ mitigation funds so it is correct that

1:02:21 ↗ doesn't solve the issue of trying to

1:02:25 ↗ find a way to expend those funds in in

1:02:28 ↗ or by 2020 at the end of 2021 so that

1:02:32 ↗ they would not have to be returned so a

1:02:34 ↗ few things would have to happen you'd

1:02:36 ↗ have to shift those projects up in the

1:02:38 ↗ timeline and you'd have to find

1:02:39 ↗ additional projects capacity building

1:02:42 ↗ projects of which there are none

1:02:44 ↗ currently listed in the CIP most of our

1:02:47 ↗ CIP projects are maintenance taking care

1:02:50 ↗ of existing assets so this would also

1:02:52 ↗ require that between now and this time

1:02:58 ↗ next year when we develop the budget and

1:03:00 ↗ potentially make amendments to the CIP

1:03:02 ↗ that we are done in find other general

1:03:06 ↗ government capacity projects there are

1:03:08 ↗ currently not listed in the CIP that's

1:03:12 ↗ the president Mertz

1:03:15 ↗ I share councilmembers hunt

1:03:19 ↗ councilmember hunts urge to engage the

1:03:21 ↗ community on the future of city services

1:03:23 ↗ but I am gonna be opposing this

1:03:25 ↗ amendment I think if we move forward on

1:03:28 ↗ the main motion with the plan as it is

1:03:31 ↗ in place I am confident that we are

1:03:34 ↗ capable of having a robust and and

1:03:37 ↗ meaningful conversation with our

1:03:39 ↗ constituents about what we want the next

1:03:42 ↗ 20 30 years of city spaces for

1:03:48 ↗ engagement with the public to look like

1:03:51 ↗ I think that I'm confident that we would

1:03:56 ↗ not spend a dime of 4.4 million dollars

1:03:59 ↗ in 2021 until that conversation had

1:04:02 ↗ occurred and a consensus had been

1:04:04 ↗ developed in the same way that we

1:04:06 ↗ developed a consensus on the street just

1:04:07 ↗ Dziedzic plan but I don't want to have

1:04:10 ↗ that conversation with the public unless

1:04:12 ↗ we have the ability to do something

1:04:14 ↗ about it I don't want to have that

1:04:15 ↗ conversation with the public if we don't

1:04:18 ↗ actually have the ability to take that

1:04:20 ↗ feedback and do something with it in a

1:04:22 ↗ timely fashion and for that to occur

1:04:23 ↗ these monies have to be in the plan it

1:04:26 ↗ this in no way forces us to do to make

1:04:31 ↗ this commitment I think this is a

1:04:33 ↗ different kind of project than 56th I

1:04:36 ↗ think if you put money in for next year

1:04:39 ↗ on 56th I think we all agree that we've

1:04:43 ↗ made an emotional commitment to what

1:04:44 ↗ we've heard from the public but what

1:04:46 ↗ we've heard on the dais and what we've

1:04:47 ↗ heard from the public about city

1:04:49 ↗ services is to have a conversation and

1:04:51 ↗ to have that conversation we have to

1:04:54 ↗ move forward with the main motion then

1:04:56 ↗ not with this amendment

1:04:57 ↗ I will say one one last thing comment

1:05:01 ↗ was made about the goal is to not return

1:05:03 ↗ mitigation funds I would say it a little

1:05:04 ↗ differently

1:05:05 ↗ I think the goal is to be able to go to

1:05:07 ↗ the public and say these mitigation

1:05:10 ↗ funds will be used wisely and I believe

1:05:14 ↗ that the city has a plan and this

1:05:16 ↗ council has expressed support for having

1:05:19 ↗ that conversation with the public such

1:05:21 ↗ that we can be look people in the eye

1:05:22 ↗ and if it comes time to authorize that

1:05:24 ↗ 4.4 million ahead of a 2021 spent will

1:05:28 ↗ be well prepared to do so thank you it's

1:05:31 ↗ not councilmember Goodman's hand thank

1:05:34 ↗ you so I want to clarify or I have a

1:05:37 ↗ clarifying question so the proposed

1:05:42 ↗ amendment would be an alternative in

1:05:46 ↗ case the decision was made to not expend

1:05:51 ↗ or some million it's not - it's not to

1:05:56 ↗ displace the potential for approving

1:06:00 ↗ those the four million dollars it's just

1:06:03 ↗ and my understanding is that we would

1:06:07 ↗ embark on conversations with the public

1:06:10 ↗ about whether we are as a community

1:06:14 ↗ interested in a consolidated City Hall

1:06:17 ↗ and if that answer ends up to be no

1:06:21 ↗ right now then we need to know we need

1:06:25 ↗ to figure out what we're going to spend

1:06:26 ↗ mitigation which is a lot of mitigation

1:06:28 ↗ money on if not that what do we need

1:06:33 ↗ what are we going to spend it on before

1:06:35 ↗ we hit a deadline of ten years I'm it's

1:06:39 ↗ either seven or ten of returning it and

1:06:43 ↗ so the issue is we providing

1:06:47 ↗ transparency to the public about what

1:06:48 ↗ our plan B is it's not to displace it's

1:06:51 ↗ not to change what the plan and I'm

1:06:54 ↗ planning a plan B it's not to change

1:06:56 ↗ what the plan says now about what the

1:07:01 ↗ plan a is which is - can keep that

1:07:05 ↗ mitigation money in the plan for a

1:07:07 ↗ potential spend on city consolidated

1:07:10 ↗ City Hall

1:07:11 ↗ if we don't do that then what and that's

1:07:14 ↗ to provide transparency to the public

1:07:15 ↗ about how we would spend millions of

1:07:17 ↗ dollars what the plan is for spending

1:07:19 ↗ millions of dollars at the plan today

1:07:22 ↗ what that plan would be which of course

1:07:24 ↗ is subject to change but which we

1:07:26 ↗ haven't identified yet is that am I

1:07:28 ↗ getting that right it's a member hunt

1:07:29 ↗ that is correct so the motion is to

1:07:32 ↗ provide for councils consideration and

1:07:35 ↗ alternative CIP and part of that is that

1:07:38 ↗ we just today received information about

1:07:40 ↗ what other projects could be funded with

1:07:42 ↗ this and also how much money is expiring

1:07:44 ↗ in 2021

1:07:47 ↗ so rather than so I think rather than me

1:07:51 ↗ for example looking at FC zero twenty

1:07:54 ↗ parking building expansion and saying

1:07:55 ↗ okay so in 2023 we have to point for a

1:07:57 ↗ million dollars expended from the sewer

1:08:00 ↗ fund is that in particular line I mean

1:08:02 ↗ going through line by line rather than

1:08:03 ↗ hash that all out now because there is a

1:08:06 ↗ ripple effect and because it is a

1:08:07 ↗ complicated planning document I think

1:08:09 ↗ that we would be better served by having

1:08:12 ↗ an alternative and also be a better more

1:08:14 ↗ transparent for the for the public to

1:08:16 ↗ have a option to consider about how we

1:08:20 ↗ would be using that money so be an

1:08:22 ↗ alternative plan to consider is the

1:08:25 ↗ motion then suggesting that there would

1:08:28 ↗ be no adoption tonight and that an

1:08:30 ↗ alternative plan would return at a later

1:08:32 ↗ date for adoption that's my

1:08:33 ↗ understanding because we cannot actually

1:08:36 ↗ consider in its entirety a plan that

1:08:39 ↗ would use that funding for other

1:08:41 ↗ projects so the intent of the motion is

1:08:43 ↗ to edit the draft in front of you and

1:08:45 ↗ show the funding sources for mitigation

1:08:47 ↗ as to other projects not necessarily

1:08:52 ↗ those were the two projects that came up

1:08:54 ↗ in conversation earlier with the

1:08:56 ↗ administrator moon and I don't know if

1:08:57 ↗ there are others that could potentially

1:08:58 ↗ be funded okay hang on one second

1:09:00 ↗ administrator moon and then council

1:09:02 ↗ member a and then council member we

1:09:03 ↗ interesting thank you that's helpful

1:09:07 ↗ clarification I just want to also point

1:09:09 ↗ out council can adopt two CIPS you have

1:09:13 ↗ to adopt one so if you drop one tonight

1:09:15 ↗ and you still wish to see a plan that

1:09:19 ↗ spells out alternatives

1:09:23 ↗ if you chose to incorporate that

1:09:27 ↗ alternative plan you would amend your

1:09:29 ↗ originally adopted CIP so just can't

1:09:32 ↗ have two adopted CIP you can't have that

1:09:34 ↗ plan a CIP and Plan B CIP so I want to

1:09:38 ↗ make sure that that was clear

1:09:41 ↗ there aren't any additional capacity

1:09:43 ↗ projects on the general fund side that

1:09:45 ↗ we've identified that are in the CIP

1:09:47 ↗ currently so in order to identify other

1:09:51 ↗ projects we would we would have to have

1:09:53 ↗ significant conversation about what

1:09:55 ↗ other projects we could scope and cost

1:09:58 ↗ estimate etc and so along those lines as

1:10:02 ↗ well we are in the midst we have already

1:10:04 ↗ kicked off our operating budget and so

1:10:07 ↗ it would be helpful to understand what's

1:10:09 ↗ the timetable for returning an

1:10:11 ↗ alternative CIP because we are needing

1:10:15 ↗ to incorporate by the end of this month

1:10:18 ↗ for the operating budget preparation

1:10:21 ↗ plus our staff is needing to spend

1:10:24 ↗ majority of their time now developing

1:10:26 ↗ the operating budget so just some

1:10:28 ↗ clarification on the timeline because if

1:10:30 ↗ if if it was along the lines of what I

1:10:32 ↗ understood councilmember Goodman seen

1:10:37 ↗ monied action that alternative didn't

1:10:40 ↗ need to be reviewed until perhaps later

1:10:42 ↗ so it's it's this question of when when

1:10:46 ↗ you would plan to adopt a version of the

1:10:48 ↗ CIP use that clarification tonight

1:10:52 ↗ that's a member a so I have a couple of

1:10:56 ↗ concerns with FC 0 - - one is and I've

1:11:02 ↗ mentioned this before is why are we

1:11:05 ↗ setting aside money to do design on a

1:11:08 ↗ city hall or a city facility that we

1:11:11 ↗ don't intend to build until something

1:11:13 ↗ beyond 2026

1:11:14 ↗ so five or six years beyond when we

1:11:17 ↗ would do the design work so I understand

1:11:19 ↗ the desire to spend available mitigation

1:11:23 ↗ fees before they expire expend before

1:11:26 ↗ they expire but I don't want to get it's

1:11:30 ↗ been expend them on something that is of

1:11:32 ↗ my mind dubious value to to the

1:11:35 ↗ community so I think that it's

1:11:37 ↗ worthwhile taking the time to say Breck

1:11:41 ↗ the information that we had 4.9 million

1:11:44 ↗ dollars in mitigation fees that was due

1:11:46 ↗ to expire in 2021

1:11:48 ↗ was new information today and that that

1:11:50 ↗ really does changed the discussion so is

1:11:52 ↗ there a better place to spend that money

1:11:54 ↗ on capital and city facilities that we

1:11:58 ↗ should be considering I think that is

1:12:00 ↗ what I was taking as the intent of this

1:12:04 ↗ amendment was to say you know it's not

1:12:08 ↗ about these two small opportunities that

1:12:11 ↗ are currently in the CIP it's is there a

1:12:13 ↗ better place is there a better use of

1:12:15 ↗ the four point nine million dollars in

1:12:17 ↗ mitigation than to do design on a City

1:12:19 ↗ Hall that's five or six years away I'm

1:12:22 ↗ gonna discuss the city administrator to

1:12:24 ↗ clarify on that when you go beyond the

1:12:27 ↗ design years and it's currently showed

1:12:28 ↗ unfunded I go back to something council

1:12:31 ↗ president Mart said which was really

1:12:33 ↗ important to him was understanding and

1:12:36 ↗ going forward with a project like that

1:12:38 ↗ he'd want to know how its funded is is

1:12:41 ↗ that why those columns are blank in the

1:12:45 ↗ outer years is the intention to actually

1:12:47 ↗ design and build six years later is the

1:12:50 ↗ intention to have a conversation have a

1:12:52 ↗ funding strategy and to start to

1:12:54 ↗ populate those outer years so that we go

1:12:57 ↗ from design to construction yes the

1:13:00 ↗ latter so after the community

1:13:02 ↗ conversation and after we sort of design

1:13:05 ↗ what project do we want to pursue and we

1:13:08 ↗ have a conversation about how do we wish

1:13:10 ↗ to pursue that as a design-build

1:13:13 ↗ for example then we would populate those

1:13:16 ↗ those further out columns and decide

1:13:19 ↗ what's the appropriate year for

1:13:21 ↗ construction we had a project I'd also

1:13:24 ↗ like to clarify that City Council has

1:13:27 ↗ been provided with aging report for the

1:13:30 ↗ mitigation fund so this is not the first

1:13:32 ↗ time that council has been made aware of

1:13:34 ↗ the year in which those general

1:13:36 ↗ government building mitigation funds

1:13:39 ↗ would expire they remember that I would

1:13:42 ↗ just say for new council members in

1:13:44 ↗ their first year of a capital

1:13:45 ↗ an operating budget not all of that

1:13:47 ↗ stuff is front of mind so I think there

1:13:49 ↗ might be some council members here who

1:13:51 ↗ recognize and remember the aging

1:13:53 ↗ schedule but I would say it probably

1:13:55 ↗ wasn't particularly noticeable to

1:13:58 ↗ council member we're interesting

1:14:00 ↗ followed by deputy council president

1:14:01 ↗ batiste

1:14:02 ↗ it's actually a point of order the main

1:14:04 ↗ motion is to adopt the CIP the amendment

1:14:08 ↗ is to provide an alternative CIP and if

1:14:11 ↗ this amendment doesn't actually alter

1:14:13 ↗ any part of the motion in front of us

1:14:15 ↗ I'm not sure that the amendment is

1:14:17 ↗ appropriate if someone doesn't want the

1:14:20 ↗ current one then they should just vote

1:14:21 ↗ against it and then we can consider

1:14:23 ↗ another motion afterwards so that's a

1:14:25 ↗ question okay looking at my legislative

1:14:30 ↗ expertise might have order also not

1:14:38 ↗ meaning to put you on the spot if this

1:14:39 ↗ is a little more of a complicated

1:14:41 ↗ question than we thought we could take a

1:14:43 ↗ five-minute recess and let you convene I

1:14:49 ↗ an alternative to this could be to vote

1:14:54 ↗ down the amendment and vote down or

1:14:59 ↗ withdraw the amendment or the motion

1:15:02 ↗ that was made to approve the resolution

1:15:04 ↗ I think if the council is and the mayor

1:15:09 ↗ is agreeable to consider this germane to

1:15:12 ↗ the main motion they can you can proceed

1:15:15 ↗ to consider it so if there could be a

1:15:18 ↗ ruling that it's not if you wanted to

1:15:20 ↗ rise that point or you could proceed to

1:15:25 ↗ consider it so we have options and I'm

1:15:32 ↗ looking to the body to decide I can as a

1:15:38 ↗ mayor express where the clerk's

1:15:41 ↗ interpretation where I feel whether or

1:15:43 ↗ not it's germane or not but I would

1:15:44 ↗ really rather have the body decide how

1:15:46 ↗ to work on this on themselves

1:15:48 ↗ councilmember we're interesting well

1:15:49 ↗ thank you for allowing me to follow up

1:15:51 ↗ it seems the intent is to actually do

1:15:55 ↗ something

1:15:56 ↗ structurally different than what's in

1:15:58 ↗ front of us and I think an amendment

1:16:00 ↗ should reflect those changes I'm hearing

1:16:03 ↗ that maybe we don't have enough

1:16:04 ↗ information to put something like that

1:16:05 ↗ together and so I think it's either III

1:16:12 ↗ really don't

1:16:13 ↗ it doesn't feel germane to me this is a

1:16:15 ↗ proposal it says it was and we have it

1:16:17 ↗ in written form it was passed out to us

1:16:19 ↗ at a time that that provide an

1:16:24 ↗ alternative CIP and and so unless we can

1:16:32 ↗ ride that as amendment to the one in

1:16:34 ↗ front of us tonight and I don't see how

1:16:36 ↗ this is germane that's the president

1:16:39 ↗ merits comes member good man madam mayor

1:16:43 ↗ I would recommend that we take that

1:16:46 ↗ five-minute recess I think that a point

1:16:49 ↗ of order requires a ruling by the person

1:16:53 ↗ chairing the community at which point

1:16:56 ↗ there are options available to counsel

1:16:58 ↗ if they disagree or does it agree or

1:17:00 ↗ disagree with that ruling let's do a

1:17:02 ↗ five-minute recess okay thanks so we

1:17:05 ↗ will be in recess for five minutes

1:17:22 ↗ you

1:17:37 ↗ you

1:17:39 ↗ you

1:17:41 ↗ you

1:17:45 ↗ you

1:25:24 ↗ so we are back in session from our

1:25:27 ↗ recess I have consulted with the

1:25:29 ↗ parliamentarian expertise that we have

1:25:31 ↗ available tonight I want to thank

1:25:33 ↗ councilmember winter Stein for his

1:25:35 ↗ question actually it is a good question

1:25:37 ↗ the amendment that was proposed acts as

1:25:42 ↗ a substitute motion meaning there would

1:25:45 ↗ be a different outcome if you vote on it

1:25:46 ↗ so this is a multi-part vote on the

1:25:49 ↗ amendment the first vote that I will

1:25:51 ↗ call for after you are done with your

1:25:53 ↗ discussion and deliberation is a vote of

1:25:57 ↗ the council on whether or not you want

1:25:59 ↗ to vote on the substitute motion if that

1:26:02 ↗ vote were to fail we will go back to the

1:26:05 ↗ main motion you will continue

1:26:06 ↗ conversation if that vote is too fat to

1:26:08 ↗ pass we will vote on the substitute

1:26:11 ↗ motion which would be to prepare an

1:26:14 ↗ alternate alternate CIP that is a little

1:26:17 ↗ unusual for us I don't remember doing

1:26:20 ↗ this before I just want to understand if

1:26:24 ↗ there has been enough discussion and

1:26:26 ↗ deliberation that you know that you want

1:26:28 ↗ to proceed to the vote now or you feel

1:26:30 ↗ like you want to talk about this some

1:26:31 ↗ more

1:26:32 ↗ that's a member Walsh so as a question

1:26:37 ↗ on this and now the four point four

1:26:42 ↗ million right now is designated for a

1:26:45 ↗ consolidated City Hall if we had a

1:26:48 ↗ community conversation and the community

1:26:52 ↗ said strongly we would like to continue

1:26:55 ↗ with multiple locations we're still

1:26:58 ↗ gonna need expansion so could we use any

1:27:02 ↗ of that money potentially for working on

1:27:07 ↗ design and expansion of the existing

1:27:12 ↗ buildings and could we do that in 2021

1:27:15 ↗ with the general mitigation funds

1:27:18 ↗ question mr. moon

1:27:23 ↗ yes we could I'm a little unclear and

1:27:27 ↗ maybe city attorney can help clarify if

1:27:29 ↗ we're entertaining comments right now on

1:27:31 ↗ this on whether to consider the

1:27:33 ↗ substitute motion or we talking about

1:27:38 ↗ the actual replacement motion so at this

1:27:44 ↗ point in time that's a good point at

1:27:45 ↗ this point in time yeah

1:27:48 ↗ actually I gotta say I'm a little

1:27:50 ↗ confused about that too because I think

1:27:52 ↗ some of what Lindsay is asking is

1:27:54 ↗ germane to whether or not she may even

1:27:55 ↗ want to vote on a substitute so that's

1:27:57 ↗ definitely that's tough enough I saw the

1:28:00 ↗ city attorney nods okay just to make

1:28:02 ↗ sure we're following the procedure yes

1:28:05 ↗ Billy answer as long as those

1:28:09 ↗ renovations to existing facilities were

1:28:11 ↗ of the nature to create capacity then we

1:28:14 ↗ could utilize general government

1:28:15 ↗ building mitigation funds for those

1:28:16 ↗ projects okay

1:28:18 ↗ and a second question some of the other

1:28:22 ↗ projects listed here and potentially

1:28:26 ↗ other capacity building projects that

1:28:29 ↗ might be identified at another time if

1:28:32 ↗ those come up after we adopt a CIP could

1:28:37 ↗ they potentially use general mitigation

1:28:41 ↗ funds which I assume would require an

1:28:44 ↗ amendment to the CIP that's correct we

1:28:47 ↗ would propose to come back with an

1:28:48 ↗ amendment to the CIP and then identify

1:28:51 ↗ those funding sources okay thank you the

1:28:54 ↗ questions comments if he counts the

1:28:57 ↗ president patís so I we had talked a

1:29:02 ↗ couple times about not right right as

1:29:06 ↗ right now we don't have capacity

1:29:08 ↗ building projects identified I was just

1:29:12 ↗ wondering if I could learn a little bit

1:29:14 ↗ more about that is there is there a

1:29:17 ↗ reason that we don't have anything

1:29:19 ↗ identified right now but there are

1:29:21 ↗ things in the queue or I just wanted to

1:29:24 ↗ to better understand that sure I would

1:29:28 ↗ anticipate that we have some projects in

1:29:30 ↗ the future years we spend most of our

1:29:32 ↗ time trying to plan on the first six

1:29:34 ↗ years of the CIP but if you turn to for

1:29:36 ↗ example

1:29:37 ↗ the parks strategic plan I think there

1:29:39 ↗ are some potential projects into the

1:29:41 ↗ future that were identified in the park

1:29:44 ↗ strategic plan that are capacity

1:29:45 ↗ building projects that our strategic

1:29:50 ↗ plan identified not as a near-term

1:29:52 ↗ project but a longer-term project only

1:29:56 ↗ the near term projects are reflected in

1:29:58 ↗ this draft CIP I'll give you an example

1:30:02 ↗ we have spoken about the potential to

1:30:06 ↗ add on to the bone pool to add a another

1:30:14 ↗ meeting room party room swim team room

1:30:20 ↗ that would generate a capacity

1:30:24 ↗ enhancement and I would expect that

1:30:27 ↗ project to then be eligible for

1:30:29 ↗ mitigation funds so we've had some

1:30:31 ↗ conversation those projects are not

1:30:33 ↗ shown in the CIP currently so the

1:30:36 ↗ projects that are listed for those first

1:30:38 ↗ six years as I spoke about earlier the

1:30:41 ↗ only two that I see as being potentially

1:30:44 ↗ eligible for mitigation funds are those

1:30:48 ↗ two projects they answer your question

1:30:51 ↗ yeah I think so then I just had a

1:30:55 ↗ clarification that I wanted to address

1:30:59 ↗ the council member hunt so I can better

1:31:02 ↗ understand because we do in the the

1:31:05 ↗ language for the motion we do have it

1:31:07 ↗ you do have it listed as an alternative

1:31:09 ↗ CIP but then it also talks about would

1:31:13 ↗ be used to fund projects other than and

1:31:17 ↗ I just want to make sure that the intent

1:31:21 ↗ was additive to we've got the 4.4 and a

1:31:25 ↗ million and we're trying to look for

1:31:27 ↗ additional projects that could be could

1:31:32 ↗ be dealt with so the intent is to

1:31:35 ↗ understand first of all what which

1:31:39 ↗ projects could potentially be moved into

1:31:42 ↗ this

1:31:43 ↗ frame or that money could be encumbered

1:31:46 ↗ in the time frame it would need to be

1:31:47 ↗ encumbered in which projects would be

1:31:50 ↗ eligible for that and then also to

1:31:51 ↗ understand the ripple effects in terms

1:31:53 ↗ of what that would do to the rest of the

1:31:56 ↗ CIP if it were if it were funded

1:32:00 ↗ differently because it has been pointed

1:32:03 ↗ out to us many times that it's very

1:32:06 ↗ complicated and you make one change one

1:32:08 ↗ place and it changes many other many

1:32:11 ↗ other things that I think it would allow

1:32:13 ↗ us for more options and then I think in

1:32:17 ↗ regards to if it's purely the I guess

1:32:21 ↗ 0.5 million that is a half a million in

1:32:25 ↗ addition to what's currently in the plan

1:32:27 ↗ or if it's the entire amount I am

1:32:30 ↗ interested in seeing which projects are

1:32:33 ↗ eligible to be moved into that time

1:32:35 ↗ frame and if it turns out that that's

1:32:36 ↗ only the amount in above 4.4 million so

1:32:42 ↗ if it is less than 0.5 then I think it

1:32:44 ↗ makes sense that we don't have anything

1:32:46 ↗ else identified but if it were that

1:32:49 ↗ there are other projects that are in

1:32:50 ↗ there and I still don't have a good

1:32:52 ↗ understanding of that then I want to

1:32:53 ↗ know what our options are and I think

1:32:55 ↗ it's a bigger conversation and I'd

1:32:57 ↗ rather have all that information to make

1:32:58 ↗ a to make a good decision questions

1:33:06 ↗ comments council president Mertz

1:33:09 ↗ I'm confused the alternate CIP in which

1:33:17 ↗ general mitigation funds set to expire

1:33:19 ↗ in 2021 would be used to fund projects

1:33:22 ↗ other than fc0 to - but you're saying

1:33:26 ↗ that in your alternate version fc0 - -

1:33:29 ↗ would still be in or would not be in if

1:33:33 ↗ they're so

1:33:35 ↗ I do not have a complete understanding

1:33:38 ↗ of which projects aside from the two

1:33:41 ↗ that I listed I don't have an

1:33:43 ↗ understanding if there are other

1:33:44 ↗ projects that would be able to be funded

1:33:46 ↗ or to have money from this fund

1:33:49 ↗ encumbered in 2021 so I would like to

1:33:52 ↗ have that information it sounds to me

1:33:54 ↗ like it's possible that it's less than

1:33:59 ↗ 0.5 million of other projects that are

1:34:01 ↗ currently identified in which case I

1:34:03 ↗ think it makes sense in that alternative

1:34:05 ↗ CIP to fund other projects with the

1:34:08 ↗ mitigation funds in the amount of less

1:34:11 ↗ than 0.5 million and then also keep FC 0

1:34:14 ↗ 2 2 in the plan I mean I think that

1:34:16 ↗ makes sense because we don't have other

1:34:19 ↗ capacity projects in there but I also

1:34:21 ↗ need to have that information and this

1:34:23 ↗ is in my estimation my best way of

1:34:27 ↗ getting that information and looking at

1:34:28 ↗ a CIP that is funding that is using this

1:34:31 ↗ mitigation funds for capacity building

1:34:33 ↗ projects in 2021

1:34:38 ↗ deputy council president patís so I

1:34:42 ↗ guess my question is if we are to go

1:34:47 ↗ forward with the main motion and we have

1:34:51 ↗ the funds that we've identified in 2021

1:34:54 ↗ that are focused on the consolidated

1:34:56 ↗ City Hall but then we have more more

1:35:02 ↗ money than that that has to do with

1:35:05 ↗ impact fees that are expiring in that

1:35:07 ↗ case if we don't have anything

1:35:10 ↗ identified is is would it be something

1:35:14 ↗ where those would then come forward that

1:35:17 ↗ we at that time or I'm coming to trying

1:35:22 ↗ to mr. moon

1:35:24 ↗ thank you so we have employee to figure

1:35:30 ↗ out exactly how much is needed for

1:35:32 ↗ design because we don't know what we're

1:35:34 ↗ designing yet so that even that 4.4 is

1:35:37 ↗ not likely to be spot-on to what would

1:35:41 ↗ be needed we need to scope that project

1:35:44 ↗ first

1:35:46 ↗ if after scoping a project that council

1:35:51 ↗ concurred with we had not identified

1:35:56 ↗ full utilization of the 4.9 million

1:35:58 ↗ dollars then it is highly likely that

1:36:01 ↗ city administration would come back and

1:36:03 ↗ say okay there's an increment that still

1:36:05 ↗ hasn't been allocated to projects and we

1:36:08 ↗ would identify a couple other projects

1:36:10 ↗ that could potentially use those

1:36:12 ↗ mitigation funds for your consideration

1:36:18 ↗ councilmember Goodman thank you so I

1:36:21 ↗ just wanted to be clear on if the

1:36:26 ↗ amendment passed or if the substance is

1:36:31 ↗ get past it what it would come back

1:36:34 ↗ would be a revised CIP that then would

1:36:41 ↗ give the council two options from which

1:36:45 ↗ to choose the original proposed CIP and

1:36:47 ↗ an alternate no it would just be to come

1:36:53 ↗ back with and so then if the council at

1:36:56 ↗ that future time let's say it was a

1:36:59 ↗ added on to a meeting or special meeting

1:37:01 ↗ decided against that new proposed

1:37:06 ↗ alternative CIP in would we have to go

1:37:09 ↗ back again and revise come back so if

1:37:15 ↗ the what is the is is a hearing required

1:37:21 ↗ to amend the CIP later on we amend the

1:37:28 ↗ CIP what's the process

1:37:33 ↗ I believe a hearing is required before

1:37:36 ↗ council takes action to adopt the CIP

1:37:39 ↗ amend yes I would I would expect if

1:37:43 ↗ taking action to amend the CIP not just

1:37:47 ↗ a a particular project but the CIP and

1:37:50 ↗ you would hold a public hearing and so

1:37:53 ↗ if the council decided to not

1:37:56 ↗ appropriate for whatever a million

1:37:58 ↗ dollars or designing a City Hall my

1:38:02 ↗ understanding is that we're talking

1:38:04 ↗ about design but we're skipping the very

1:38:05 ↗ when we're talking tonight we're short

1:38:07 ↗ cutting our conversation there would

1:38:09 ↗ have to be a community conversation a

1:38:12 ↗ significant community conversation about

1:38:14 ↗ whether the community is interested in

1:38:16 ↗ this then if the council decides based

1:38:18 ↗ on that to appropriate the money and

1:38:20 ↗ decides against that and so then we have

1:38:23 ↗ to figure out what we're going to spend

1:38:24 ↗ that money on in order for us to amend

1:38:26 ↗ the CIP just spend that mitigation money

1:38:30 ↗ on projects that are in that that we

1:38:32 ↗ need to amend it to include those

1:38:34 ↗ projects to make sure that we have them

1:38:35 ↗ in the right years it would it would

1:38:38 ↗ require a public hearing I believe so

1:38:44 ↗ mr. Haney yes that is correct

1:38:49 ↗ it would require a public hearing to

1:38:51 ↗ amend the CIP that's a member Walsh so

1:38:57 ↗ similar on that vein if we were to adopt

1:39:02 ↗ the alternative motion whatever it is

1:39:07 ↗ which would present us another CIP we

1:39:12 ↗ would have to have the public hearing on

1:39:13 ↗ that as well let's present Mertz so I

1:39:19 ↗ would like to ask the administration if

1:39:22 ↗ we adopt the alternate motion this

1:39:26 ↗ evening we would not be adopting a CIP

1:39:29 ↗ this evening and can the administration

1:39:32 ↗ can please speak to that the implicate

1:39:36 ↗ the timing implications for the fall

1:39:40 ↗ budget of delaying this vote this

1:39:42 ↗ evening I think

1:39:44 ↗ really speaking considering we'd have to

1:39:46 ↗ have notification for a public hearing

1:39:48 ↗ we would be trying to fit that on before

1:39:50 ↗ the end of June July so we need to have

1:39:55 ↗ the information by the end of July to

1:39:56 ↗ feed into the operating budget so we

1:39:58 ↗ would be as councilmember Goodman said

1:40:00 ↗ looking for a special meeting or an

1:40:02 ↗ add-on to a meeting

1:40:03 ↗ however we could do that and meet our

1:40:05 ↗ notification requirements but there's

1:40:10 ↗ the sorry fallen but that isn't just it

1:40:14 ↗ isn't like we have a bill this evening

1:40:17 ↗ that we would be noticing right there

1:40:18 ↗ would be staff work and the question is

1:40:21 ↗ how much staff work to prepare this

1:40:23 ↗ alternate CIP the administrator moon I

1:40:26 ↗ would just expect we would have to table

1:40:30 ↗ much of the work that we have on our

1:40:33 ↗ plates right now in order to have a

1:40:34 ↗ conversation about what other projects

1:40:37 ↗ are out there in somebody's mind for

1:40:42 ↗ contemplation because again there are

1:40:44 ↗ only two projects other projects that

1:40:46 ↗ are identified in the currency IP that

1:40:48 ↗ are eligible so we would have to start

1:40:51 ↗ back where we started this spring or

1:40:55 ↗ february even with some department

1:40:59 ↗ conversations about what other projects

1:41:01 ↗ are they foreseen beyond six years and

1:41:06 ↗ even what we put in the future year's

1:41:08 ↗ column that might be capacity projects

1:41:10 ↗ that we could scope lightly scope

1:41:15 ↗ lightly cost estimate and bring back to

1:41:20 ↗ you in that alternative CIP so I don't I

1:41:23 ↗ don't have a good sense of how much

1:41:26 ↗ effort that would take I think some

1:41:28 ↗ departments are in better position than

1:41:29 ↗ others like Parks Department has already

1:41:32 ↗ identified those long-term projects they

1:41:34 ↗ can probably pull some of those out

1:41:35 ↗ relatively quickly but that's only one

1:41:38 ↗ area of general government operations so

1:41:42 ↗ I I would expect it will be very

1:41:44 ↗ challenging for us to present a prepare

1:41:47 ↗ and present an alternative CIP within

1:41:50 ↗ the next in days of the month if we had

1:41:55 ↗ more

1:41:55 ↗ time perhaps we could do that but again

1:41:58 ↗ that puts jeopardy our timetables for

1:42:01 ↗ preparing the operating budget so

1:42:05 ↗ something would have to give on the

1:42:07 ↗ operating budget which would mean

1:42:08 ↗ probably extending that adoption period

1:42:12 ↗ as well

1:42:13 ↗ what's my beret so I'm just gonna look

1:42:15 ↗ ahead a little bit so let's say we adopt

1:42:19 ↗ the CIP as presented and I understand

1:42:22 ↗ it's planning document so in 2020

1:42:27 ↗ sometime we would be working on the 2021

1:42:29 ↗ budget and we would see then a line item

1:42:32 ↗ for four point three two point whatever

1:42:34 ↗ whatever the number is we decide it's

1:42:36 ↗ going to be at that time to fund this

1:42:38 ↗ particular initiative so if at that time

1:42:41 ↗ we say yes that's what we're going to do

1:42:43 ↗ then we move ahead and it moves forward

1:42:45 ↗ in the budget for the 2021 if we for

1:42:50 ↗ whatever reason decide we don't want to

1:42:52 ↗ then do we need to amend the CIP at that

1:42:56 ↗ time or do we just say no that's not

1:42:58 ↗ something we want to do in the 2020 2021

1:43:01 ↗ budget I you would say both you would

1:43:04 ↗ say bring back amendments to the CIP so

1:43:07 ↗ that we could designate use of those

1:43:08 ↗ expiring funds and you would be giving

1:43:12 ↗ direction on what to prepare and put

1:43:14 ↗ into the operating budget for 2021 I

1:43:17 ↗ also want to clarify that it is our goal

1:43:20 ↗ to bring back those conversations in

1:43:22 ↗ advance of the operating budget

1:43:25 ↗ deliberations we know you will need more

1:43:27 ↗ time to process input from the community

1:43:29 ↗ and kind of decide your course of action

1:43:32 ↗ on this major project so we want to we

1:43:34 ↗ want to try to bring that right at the

1:43:36 ↗ same moment that you are considering the

1:43:38 ↗ operating budget so if we adopt the CIP

1:43:40 ↗ is presented today we still have

1:43:43 ↗ opportunities to

1:43:47 ↗ redirect a guide to tailor to tune this

1:43:52 ↗ discussion that's correct

1:43:54 ↗ thank you any other questions or

1:43:59 ↗ comments

1:44:00 ↗ Oh councilmember Goodman I think I'm

1:44:04 ↗ done for done with the questions first

1:44:06 ↗ of all I want to I know how I know what

1:44:10 ↗ I'm going to do here and I want to thank

1:44:12 ↗ councilmember hunt for raising this

1:44:15 ↗ issue and I think it's not only the

1:44:19 ↗ newer councilmembers that didn't have

1:44:21 ↗ the mitigation fees expiration timelines

1:44:28 ↗ on their minds when we were looking at

1:44:29 ↗ the Central District kua plan sorry I

1:44:31 ↗ think that you know some of us have been

1:44:37 ↗ up here a few years and and that was on

1:44:39 ↗ top of mine for me either and I think

1:44:41 ↗ this was a great conversation I think

1:44:43 ↗ it's raised a lot of questions I also

1:44:45 ↗ see that we have a potential issue

1:44:49 ↗ brewing in the future a couple of them

1:44:51 ↗ one is how the community feels about a

1:44:54 ↗ consolidated City Hall which of course

1:44:56 ↗ we don't know and the second one is

1:44:59 ↗ we've got some mitigation monies that

1:45:01 ↗ we're going to need to spend or lose and

1:45:03 ↗ so we need to have those conversations I

1:45:05 ↗ am satisfied that we have an opportunity

1:45:13 ↗ to involve the public later on in

1:45:19 ↗ amending the CIP if we need to with the

1:45:23 ↗ hearing process and it doesn't just have

1:45:25 ↗ to be one or two hearings I mean we have

1:45:27 ↗ work sessions so I I'm not I'm not going

1:45:35 ↗ to support the proposal but it's not

1:45:39 ↗ because I don't super super

1:45:41 ↗ respect the fact that the issues were

1:45:43 ↗ raised and I really really appreciate it

1:45:44 ↗ Thank You deputy council president patís

1:45:48 ↗ thank you madam mayor I

1:45:50 ↗ I'm just going to echo a bit of what

1:45:53 ↗ councilmember Goodman just talked about

1:45:55 ↗ I think that councilmember hunt raised

1:45:58 ↗ some really important questions and we

1:46:01 ↗ had a really great conversation about a

1:46:04 ↗ lot of things that are gonna be coming

1:46:06 ↗ forward in the future but I and I think

1:46:09 ↗ it's really important that we not lose

1:46:11 ↗ the general government building

1:46:13 ↗ mitigation funds I I had asked a

1:46:17 ↗ question about what would happen if if

1:46:20 ↗ we went forward and then would we have

1:46:23 ↗ another opportunity to take a look at

1:46:26 ↗ that if we had extra funds available and

1:46:30 ↗ being able to look at other projects but

1:46:32 ↗ more than that I know we'll have other

1:46:34 ↗ opportunities and and more importantly

1:46:37 ↗ compute community engagement so we can

1:46:39 ↗ better understand how the community is

1:46:41 ↗ feeling and can redirect if if needed so

1:46:46 ↗ for that reason I will be voting against

1:46:48 ↗ this but but I do very much appreciate

1:46:51 ↗ the conversation I think was a really

1:46:53 ↗ great question that's a member winters

1:46:56 ↗ time thank you madam mayor

1:46:57 ↗ I also appreciate the conversation

1:47:00 ↗ wanted everybody to know I've been I've

1:47:02 ↗ had the opportunity to take a look at

1:47:04 ↗ the capital facility plan from two years

1:47:06 ↗ ago and it does have future projects in

1:47:08 ↗ it and there are a couple of note in

1:47:11 ↗ there the whole municipal facilities

1:47:14 ↗ plan from five years ago had sixty four

1:47:17 ↗ million dollars total both in the near

1:47:19 ↗ the first five years and then the out

1:47:21 ↗ years is all total of sixty four two of

1:47:24 ↗ them constituted fifty seven million

1:47:26 ↗ dollars and neither of them was

1:47:28 ↗ consolidated city facilities they were

1:47:30 ↗ second phase of a Community Hall

1:47:31 ↗ Community Center and in an expansion of

1:47:34 ↗ the Aquatic Center I tell you that

1:47:39 ↗ because I realized boy any alternative

1:47:41 ↗ to what's in our current one is going to

1:47:43 ↗ have to bring that information into

1:47:45 ↗ consideration and my reason for not

1:47:50 ↗ wanting to consider an alternative CIP

1:47:55 ↗ today so I'm going to be against the the

1:47:58 ↗ who's that I think this is actually kind

1:48:02 ↗ of a mess and it's going to be a very

1:48:05 ↗ big distraction and I don't want it to

1:48:07 ↗ be hurried to fit a near-term schedule

1:48:10 ↗ commitments that we've made I think it's

1:48:12 ↗ going to be it's an important topic

1:48:14 ↗ that's going to need more time rather

1:48:16 ↗ than rushing it in this July or August

1:48:18 ↗ timeframe thank you

1:48:22 ↗ other council members that's a member

1:48:26 ↗ had well I will be in support of the

1:48:30 ↗ motion I made but I also wanted to just

1:48:33 ↗ say whether or not this passes I think

1:48:36 ↗ it's really important that we get the

1:48:38 ↗ information about what projects would be

1:48:40 ↗ eligible for these funds looking at

1:48:42 ↗ historically what we said we would do

1:48:44 ↗ for capacity whether it dropped off the

1:48:45 ↗ list or not and I think it's important

1:48:48 ↗ that we get that information and I

1:48:50 ↗ whether or not this passes I think it's

1:48:52 ↗ important that we see the ripple effects

1:48:53 ↗ through the CIP and part of my reason

1:48:55 ↗ for doing this motion is that I based on

1:48:59 ↗ the amount of work etc that it is I

1:49:01 ↗ haven't been able to see that yet so I

1:49:04 ↗ think it's very important for our

1:49:06 ↗ decision making to be able to see that

1:49:08 ↗ thank you

1:49:10 ↗ any other comments so the first vote

1:49:14 ↗ looking over at my parliamentarians is

1:49:17 ↗ to whether or not you want to consider

1:49:20 ↗ the amendment which is actually a

1:49:22 ↗ substitute motion so you're not voting

1:49:25 ↗ on the substitute motion you are just

1:49:26 ↗ voting on whether or not you want to

1:49:28 ↗ consider it

1:49:29 ↗ are there any questions or

1:49:31 ↗ clarifications required and when we're

1:49:32 ↗ voting on you see Goodman councilmember

1:49:38 ↗ Goodman acquisitive look at our

1:49:43 ↗ quizzical look on your face

1:49:47 ↗ well I guess I would consider is an

1:49:51 ↗ interesting word because if I say no

1:49:54 ↗ then it kind of tends to not lend any

1:49:57 ↗ credibility to what was raised and I am

1:50:00 ↗ conflicted about that that's why and I

1:50:02 ↗ thank you for that I think that's one of

1:50:04 ↗ the reasons why the clerk had said there

1:50:06 ↗ were several ways

1:50:10 ↗ sorry Jim go ahead I think the proper

1:50:14 ↗ way to consider this is that the first

1:50:18 ↗ motion is whether or not you wish to

1:50:20 ↗ substitute the motion that councilmember

1:50:24 ↗ hunt has made for the original motion

1:50:26 ↗ that was on the floor and it still is on

1:50:29 ↗ the floor to adopt the CIP as presented

1:50:33 ↗ so if your vote on the initial motion is

1:50:38 ↗ to substitute is in favor of the

1:50:42 ↗ substitution then that changes the

1:50:45 ↗ motion on the floor to what

1:50:46 ↗ councilmember hunt has proposed it it

1:50:50 ↗ and then if you if the vote is not to

1:50:53 ↗ substitute that that leaves on the floor

1:50:56 ↗ the current motion to adopt the CIP as

1:51:00 ↗ presented order how how is it possible

1:51:10 ↗ that we could vote in favor of a

1:51:13 ↗ substitute motion and then go back to

1:51:15 ↗ the original no at me what I'm saying is

1:51:17 ↗ that the first motion is in the first

1:51:21 ↗ vote is simply whether to substitute

1:51:24 ↗ councilmember hunts motion for the

1:51:26 ↗ existing motion on the floor if that

1:51:28 ↗ passes then the motion that is on the

1:51:31 ↗ floor becomes councilmember hunts

1:51:33 ↗ substitute substitute motion and the

1:51:37 ↗ current motion of for which is to adopt

1:51:39 ↗ the CIP as presented no longer is on the

1:51:42 ↗ floor if councilmember hunts motion if

1:51:46 ↗ the motion to substitute fails then the

1:51:50 ↗ motion that is on the floor is the

1:51:52 ↗ current motion which is to pass the CIPS

1:51:55 ↗ present though I'm calling for the vote

1:52:00 ↗ on whether or not to substitute the

1:52:02 ↗ motion you're not voting on the motion

1:52:05 ↗ itself you're voting on whether or not

1:52:06 ↗ you want to substitute what

1:52:08 ↗ councilmember hunt has proposed yep okay

1:52:11 ↗ so I don't think it's likely but so if

1:52:13 ↗ we voted to consider the substitute

1:52:16 ↗ motion

1:52:16 ↗ then we considered the substitute motion

1:52:18 ↗ and building on that that and it failed

1:52:20 ↗ then what the clerk can the clerk can go

1:52:26 ↗ through that but I'm guessing that

1:52:28 ↗ you'll have the ability to vote on

1:52:30 ↗ another motion I'm sorry

1:52:32 ↗ you'll have the ability to vote on

1:52:33 ↗ another motion I don't do not believe

1:52:35 ↗ that it ends the process and now we're

1:52:37 ↗ done and stuck I think there's a right

1:52:40 ↗ but what we need to have a motion again

1:52:42 ↗ to approve the CIP as as presented

1:52:45 ↗ initially so we would make the same

1:52:47 ↗ initial motion okay you don't know okay

1:52:55 ↗ so we are voting on your you are voting

1:52:59 ↗ on whether or not to consider the

1:53:00 ↗ substitute motion and if you do there

1:53:04 ↗ will be a vote on it and if you don't we

1:53:06 ↗ will go back to the main motion

1:53:07 ↗ all in favor of considering the

1:53:09 ↗ substitute substitute motion say Aye and

1:53:12 ↗ raise your hands I thank you all those

1:53:15 ↗ opposed the substitute motion or the

1:53:19 ↗ amendment fails and we are back to the

1:53:21 ↗ main motion which is to prove the CIP is

1:53:24 ↗ there any more discussion before we I

1:53:26 ↗ call for the vote on that councilmember

1:53:28 ↗ hunt have another I would like to make

1:53:31 ↗ another motion I moved to add the

1:53:34 ↗ following to the end of the project

1:53:35 ↗ summary of PK 0 45 Creek corridor in the

1:53:38 ↗ CIP and the wording to add is project

1:53:42 ↗ scope may include improvements to this

1:53:44 ↗ corridor as well as acquisition second

1:53:48 ↗ it's been moved and seconded to add the

1:53:51 ↗ following to the end of project summary

1:53:53 ↗ PK o 45 Creek quarter and the CIP did

1:53:56 ↗ you have a page number on that one as

1:53:58 ↗ well Vicki I don't project scope may

1:54:00 ↗ include improvements 6aq

1:54:02 ↗ to this corridor as well as acquisitions

1:54:03 ↗ of the CIP Mississippi is there

1:54:06 ↗ discussion thank you so one can one

1:54:13 ↗ concern I have with the CIP is that in

1:54:16 ↗ the process of recommending changes

1:54:19 ↗ through our work sessions we we found

1:54:23 ↗ that one of the ripple effects was

1:54:24 ↗ passed 2021 all of the

1:54:27 ↗ funding identified for Creekside Creek

1:54:30 ↗ and hillside and critical areas

1:54:34 ↗ acquisition was removed so there are not

1:54:37 ↗ funding sources identified for these

1:54:38 ↗ things beyond 2021 so this is a concern

1:54:42 ↗ I had and one in looking through the CIP

1:54:46 ↗ one potential remedy would be I think to

1:54:53 ↗ add this wording to the PK 0:45 I did

1:54:57 ↗ consult with Jeff Watling so this is a

1:55:01 ↗ this is a project that involves

1:55:02 ↗ connecting the corridor of the

1:55:06 ↗ Creek and I think it's a natural fit

1:55:09 ↗ that that may require acquisition so it

1:55:12 ↗ seems like a natural fit to me and I did

1:55:14 ↗ consult with Jeff Watling or parks

1:55:16 ↗ director he said he said PK 12 and PK 32

1:55:22 ↗ represent to represent two broad

1:55:25 ↗ acquisition priorities hillside

1:55:26 ↗ acquisitions and Valley Creek

1:55:28 ↗ acquisitions and strategies that came

1:55:29 ↗ out of the park strategic plan and he

1:55:31 ↗ needed acquisitions to help accomplish

1:55:33 ↗ PK 45 a development focused project

1:55:35 ↗ where a plan to come from PK 12 and

1:55:37 ↗ acquisition focused project that said I

1:55:39 ↗ don't have a major concern about adding

1:55:42 ↗ that one census we create 45 as a

1:55:43 ↗ planning document that the CIP is it

1:55:45 ↗ does give some additional flexibility in

1:55:48 ↗ terms of looking at these later years

1:55:50 ↗ later year long-range projects either

1:55:52 ↗ way there will be a great deal of

1:55:54 ↗ further community and policy discussion

1:55:56 ↗ needed before any actual properties are

1:55:58 ↗ purchased or phases of that future

1:56:00 ↗ project completed and one additional

1:56:03 ↗ fact is that that project currently has

1:56:06 ↗ read one funding and it is funded so

1:56:09 ↗ this would be a way that we could

1:56:11 ↗ potentially fund acquisition and show

1:56:13 ↗ that we have dedicated funding that

1:56:14 ↗ could be used for acquisition for Creek

1:56:17 ↗ properties to connect our green spaces

1:56:19 ↗ in the future thank you

1:56:23 ↗ I just want to check in with the city

1:56:24 ↗ administration and make sure that adding

1:56:27 ↗ that language for acquisitions is fine

1:56:30 ↗ using the REIT 1 and mitigation that

1:56:33 ↗ there's no concern adding that language

1:56:34 ↗ sure city administration doesn't have

1:56:36 ↗ any concern with that in that language

1:56:38 ↗ however said

1:56:39 ↗ I also want to emphasize that peak a45

1:56:43 ↗ Creek corridor is meant to be more of a

1:56:46 ↗ active recreation type project where the

1:56:50 ↗ other acquisition projects that were

1:56:52 ↗ shown in the CIP are meant to be more

1:56:54 ↗ passive recreation so the purposes of

1:56:59 ↗ those acquisitions is a little different

1:57:01 ↗ it's a habitat it's open space

1:57:03 ↗ dedication I just want to make sure that

1:57:05 ↗ it's understood the scope of this

1:57:06 ↗ project is a little bit different but

1:57:09 ↗ the flexibility it not opposed to that I

1:57:14 ↗ don't look you additional comments or

1:57:16 ↗ discussion my customer Walsh could you

1:57:19 ↗ reread the addition I want to clarify

1:57:22 ↗ whether or not it's saying instead of or

1:57:26 ↗ motion to add the following to the end

1:57:29 ↗ of the project summary of PK o 45 Creek

1:57:31 ↗ quarter and the CIP project scope may

1:57:34 ↗ include improvements to this corridor as

1:57:36 ↗ well as our positions it sounds like

1:57:38 ↗ it's added tip language thank you any

1:57:41 ↗ other comments or discussion ready for

1:57:45 ↗ the vote on the amendment I'm not gonna

1:57:49 ↗ read it cuz I just read it two seconds

1:57:51 ↗ ago all those in favor of the amendment

1:57:52 ↗ say aye

1:57:53 ↗ as opposed it carries unanimously

1:57:56 ↗ is there any other additional discussion

1:57:59 ↗ additional motion and amendments okay if

1:58:06 ↗ there's none then I'll call for the vote

1:58:08 ↗ on the main motion at a mere there

1:58:12 ↗ council member we interesting this is a

1:58:14 ↗ comment on the main motion to adopt the

1:58:15 ↗ CIP and here it now there there are

1:58:20 ↗ significant changes in this one in front

1:58:22 ↗ of us compared to what was originally

1:58:24 ↗ proposed and what I think everybody

1:58:28 ↗ who's involved with driving some of

1:58:30 ↗ those including Mayor Polly or you and

1:58:32 ↗ your staff as well I know that there

1:58:34 ↗ were certain things that you proposed

1:58:35 ↗ that you really wanted done a certain

1:58:38 ↗ way and the council and I know with a

1:58:41 ↗ lot of support from the community around

1:58:43 ↗ a certain project like yeah no let's

1:58:45 ↗ fund this with our cash on hand as

1:58:48 ↗ opposed to trying to borrow some money

1:58:50 ↗ to do the project for

1:58:51 ↗ 43rd Street intersection so I do

1:58:55 ↗ appreciate that collaborate

1:58:56 ↗ collaboration that cooperation I think

1:58:58 ↗ this definitely reflects the input from

1:59:00 ↗ a lot of people but as I think as we

1:59:02 ↗ just learned that you know it's still

1:59:05 ↗ there's still questions there's still

1:59:07 ↗ other information that people want out

1:59:09 ↗ your information what do we really do

1:59:12 ↗ about mitigation so it's it's going to

1:59:14 ↗ be continued to go and be an ongoing

1:59:15 ↗ process but I do appreciate the the

1:59:18 ↗ cooperation and the fully collaborative

1:59:21 ↗ effort that we just went through and I

1:59:24 ↗ last comment I wanted to make is earlier

1:59:26 ↗ finance director talked about this being

1:59:29 ↗ our intended plans and I know it's a

1:59:33 ↗ small little world word it's a nuanced I

1:59:36 ↗ can't I tend to think of a CIP as our

1:59:39 ↗ hoped for plans I think of a CIP as a

1:59:41 ↗ wish list it's not what we intend to do

1:59:44 ↗ nobody in their right mind would sign up

1:59:46 ↗ for hundreds of millions of dollars or

1:59:48 ↗ projects that they really have no idea

1:59:49 ↗ how they're gonna pay for them it really

1:59:51 ↗ is a wish list I think going forward and

1:59:54 ↗ likely I'll never be involved with a

1:59:57 ↗ capital plan again

1:59:58 ↗ as sitting up on this dais that that

2:00:02 ↗ moving forward I think a better

2:00:05 ↗ alignment between what we hope for what

2:00:09 ↗ we wish for and what's actually doable

2:00:12 ↗ is is guides the formation of future

2:00:16 ↗ plans or some other criteria to put them

2:00:20 ↗ together I know that staff does some

2:00:21 ↗ scoring and and we spend a lot of time

2:00:23 ↗ looking at that two years ago but I

2:00:27 ↗ think I think it's it's difficult for

2:00:31 ↗ any organization whether it be your home

2:00:33 ↗ whether it be a company whether it be

2:00:35 ↗ you know a business or government to

2:00:39 ↗ really manage the expectations of

2:00:42 ↗ stakeholders when you put something

2:00:44 ↗ together like this that has so big and

2:00:46 ↗ yet we cannot see a way to attain all of

2:00:49 ↗ that I just think that we have to be a

2:00:53 ↗ little bit more pragmatic and what we

2:00:55 ↗ put together thank you thank you we

2:00:58 ↗ didn't really else like me coming

2:00:59 ↗ counselor ever had

2:01:00 ↗ and so I have a couple concerns about

2:01:03 ↗ the CIP as it stands one is about the

2:01:07 ↗ consolidated City Hall funding and the

2:01:09 ↗ ends the fact that I think we have been

2:01:12 ↗ presented with information that makes it

2:01:14 ↗ seem very likely that our best our if we

2:01:18 ↗ were to proceed with the City Hall the

2:01:21 ↗ funding option that would ultimately

2:01:22 ↗ save us money would be a funding

2:01:25 ↗ strategy that would not be likely to

2:01:27 ↗ start in 2021 so I have some major

2:01:28 ↗ concerns about that and I have major

2:01:32 ↗ concerns that I don't feel it's been

2:01:33 ↗ vetted with the community and it looks

2:01:35 ↗ in my mind it looks like we're planning

2:01:38 ↗ to go ahead with it I I also have a

2:01:43 ↗ concern about the acquisitions I think

2:01:44 ↗ going forward we should be a city that

2:01:49 ↗ makes sure that we have funding into the

2:01:51 ↗ future for acquisition because we're

2:01:53 ↗ growing really fast and our open spaces

2:01:55 ↗ are a huge part of the character of the

2:01:57 ↗ city so going forward I would like to

2:02:00 ↗ make sure that that's not the thing that

2:02:01 ↗ gets sacrificed for lack of a better

2:02:05 ↗ word when we make changes in other parts

2:02:06 ↗ of the CIP which appears to be what

2:02:08 ↗ happens this year so that is another

2:02:11 ↗ major concern I have I am going to vote

2:02:16 ↗ in support and my reason is because I

2:02:20 ↗ think there are a number of projects

2:02:22 ↗ that we've heard so much from the

2:02:23 ↗ community about and so I I wouldn't want

2:02:26 ↗ my vote to be construed that I don't

2:02:28 ↗ support going forward with those

2:02:30 ↗ projects and there's many of those in

2:02:31 ↗ the near future so that's that I have

2:02:35 ↗ major concerns and I would like a lot

2:02:36 ↗ more information and I think I will be

2:02:39 ↗ bringing forward changes in the future

2:02:44 ↗ council president Mertz thank you madam

2:02:47 ↗ mayor this has been a long process

2:02:51 ↗ I'm gonna guess 16 months I think since

2:02:54 ↗ ad hoc Finance Committee first started

2:02:57 ↗ meeting to discuss discuss this topic

2:03:01 ↗ there's been a lot of feedback from the

2:03:04 ↗ community about taxes and how we spend

2:03:07 ↗ our money there will be I suspect more

2:03:10 ↗ conversations about

2:03:12 ↗ we're how we get our money and how we

2:03:15 ↗ spend our money but I hope that people

2:03:20 ↗ see that this council has taken both

2:03:23 ↗ feedback from the community and

2:03:25 ↗ commitments that have been made in some

2:03:29 ↗ cases but long before any of us were on

2:03:31 ↗ this dais although not before some

2:03:33 ↗ people were in Development Commission

2:03:35 ↗ taking that seriously and that we take

2:03:38 ↗ seriously and are careful and prudent

2:03:41 ↗ about how we make investments and that

2:03:44 ↗ we will continue in our discussion with

2:03:46 ↗ the public to bring things forward

2:03:48 ↗ prudently and carefully I will prudently

2:03:51 ↗ and carefully support this measure this

2:03:54 ↗ evening Thank You councilmember Goodman

2:03:57 ↗ yeah I think this is the most public

2:04:02 ↗ involvement we've had with a capital

2:04:04 ↗ improvement plan since I've been on the

2:04:06 ↗ council since 2011 and so I think this

2:04:09 ↗ roof that this plan reflects that

2:04:13 ↗ involvement and for that I'm very

2:04:15 ↗ appreciative and I think all the folks

2:04:16 ↗ who took the time out to tell us how you

2:04:18 ↗ feel about this plan and the projects

2:04:21 ↗ that are in it and I will support it any

2:04:25 ↗ other comments very good deputy council

2:04:27 ↗ president batise thank you madam mayor

2:04:29 ↗ so it you know the the CIP is a

2:04:34 ↗ complicated planning document and it's

2:04:37 ↗ been a I think a particularly

2:04:39 ↗ complicated planning year we had so many

2:04:43 ↗ important capital projects as we always

2:04:46 ↗ do we did get a lot of great community

2:04:49 ↗ engagement as you heard us discuss

2:04:52 ↗ tonight there are definitely projects

2:04:54 ↗ where we want to focus and have more

2:04:56 ↗ community engagement and I look forward

2:04:58 ↗ to that

2:05:00 ↗ just like with any budget process that

2:05:02 ↗ you go through our pre budget process as

2:05:04 ↗ you're doing strategic planning

2:05:06 ↗ identifying the funding sources as

2:05:08 ↗ always really the the tough part and

2:05:12 ↗ with all the really important

2:05:13 ↗ transportation projects that we had that

2:05:16 ↗ that that in particular I think that

2:05:19 ↗ just you know took it took so much

2:05:22 ↗ thought but I'm

2:05:23 ↗ I'm happy about where we've landed I

2:05:26 ↗ think we've got a good planning document

2:05:28 ↗ looking forward to some of the future

2:05:30 ↗ community engagement especially around

2:05:33 ↗ the discussion tonight about

2:05:35 ↗ consolidated City Hall but I'll be

2:05:37 ↗ supporting this this evening

2:05:39 ↗ that's Myra Walsh so I want to echo what

2:05:43 ↗ councilmember Goodman said about just

2:05:46 ↗ the amount of community engagement that

2:05:48 ↗ we've had which has resulted in some

2:05:51 ↗ substantial changes to the CIP this is

2:05:56 ↗ part of the conversation particularly

2:06:00 ↗ around transportation funding and we're

2:06:02 ↗ going to continue that conversation as

2:06:05 ↗ we really talk over what projects should

2:06:09 ↗ be in the TBD

2:06:11 ↗ we should go forward with potentially a

2:06:15 ↗ sales tax and so I would encourage the

2:06:17 ↗ community who is very interested in

2:06:20 ↗ these things to stay involved in that

2:06:23 ↗ conversation so that we can continue to

2:06:26 ↗ have that feedback because these are

2:06:28 ↗ some pretty big decisions for us as a

2:06:31 ↗ council yeah thank you Thanks

2:06:34 ↗ any other comments before we go to the

2:06:36 ↗ vote all those in favor of approving

2:06:41 ↗ resolution number 2019 - oh seven as

2:06:46 ↗ amended I don't sorry yes adopting the

2:06:51 ↗ capital improvement plan for 2022

2:06:53 ↗ through 2025 including the six-year

2:06:55 ↗ transportation Improvement Program

2:06:57 ↗ signify by saying aye

2:06:59 ↗ as opposed it passes unanimously

2:07:03 ↗ before we move to regular business I

2:07:06 ↗ wanted to thank you for the extremely

2:07:11 ↗ thoughtful consideration in the amount

2:07:13 ↗ of time you put into considering this

2:07:16 ↗ capital improvement plan it is super

2:07:19 ↗ important as the council president said

2:07:21 ↗ that we make sure that mitigation funds

2:07:23 ↗ are invested in the community in the

2:07:25 ↗ best way we can and hearing the

2:07:27 ↗ community voice which we heard loud and

2:07:28 ↗ clear from all of you tonight

2:07:30 ↗ as to what that has to look like is

2:07:32 ↗ super important that means a big

2:07:34 ↗ engagement X

2:07:35 ↗ sighs thank you for emphasizing that and

2:07:37 ↗ repeating it I also want to let you know

2:07:39 ↗ that I'm extremely proud and supportive

2:07:42 ↗ of your decision on Providence point and

2:07:45 ↗ funding it's in the current year my goal

2:07:49 ↗ was to make sure that the council

2:07:52 ↗ understood the ramifications of what it

2:07:55 ↗ means and made a fully informed decision

2:07:57 ↗ and you absolutely did that thank you

2:08:00 ↗ for listening to the community thank you

2:08:02 ↗ for spending so many hours going over

2:08:04 ↗ all the information we presented I think

2:08:07 ↗ you demonstrated a lot of thoughtfulness

2:08:11 ↗ in this process and I am super

2:08:13 ↗ appreciative so thank you very much for

2:08:15 ↗ doing that and we'll move on to regular

2:08:17 ↗ business a b-78 one for East Side Fire

2:08:20 ↗ and Rescue resolution on alternative

2:08:22 ↗ fuel requirements this is the first time

2:08:24 ↗ this item is coming before Council and

2:08:26 ↗ I'd like to invite management analyst

2:08:28 ↗ Jean Paul to the lectern good evening

2:08:39 ↗ I'm Jean Paul management analysts in the

2:08:41 ↗ executive office chief Clark will also

2:08:43 ↗ be presenting this evening but before he

2:08:45 ↗ speaks

2:08:45 ↗ I just wanted to ensure that the

2:08:47 ↗ administration but just in excuse me I

2:08:51 ↗ want to ensure that what the

2:08:53 ↗ administration is asking of Council is

2:08:55 ↗ clearly identified ultimately we are

2:08:57 ↗ asking council to approve a resolution

2:08:59 ↗ exempting the East Side Fire and Rescue

2:09:01 ↗ fire vehicles from the state's

2:09:02 ↗ requirement to use alternative fuels the

2:09:05 ↗ council is required to take action on

2:09:06 ↗ this because even though the East Side

2:09:09 ↗ Fire and Rescue Board of Directors has

2:09:11 ↗ already approved a resolution the

2:09:13 ↗ partner cities retain ownership of the

2:09:15 ↗ vehicles under the inner local agreement

2:09:16 ↗ so our resolution would provide an

2:09:19 ↗ exemption for the fire vehicles in which

2:09:21 ↗ the city has an ownership interest at

2:09:23 ↗ this point I'd like to turn it over to

2:09:24 ↗ chief Clark to provide more information

2:09:26 ↗ on the East Side Fire and Rescue request

2:09:32 ↗ thank you good evening mayor council

2:09:34 ↗ president members of council the agenda

2:09:37 ↗ bill and the resolution are pretty

2:09:39 ↗ descriptive so I would just give you a

2:09:40 ↗ quick overview as was just mentioned the

2:09:43 ↗ Eastside Fire and Rescue did approve the

2:09:45 ↗ exemption based on the law back in 2018

2:09:49 ↗ it was our councils direction to us that

2:09:53 ↗ we should pass an exemption and that

2:09:55 ↗ because the ila is what assembles us as

2:09:57 ↗ a partnership that each of the partner

2:10:00 ↗ agencies should also pass a companion

2:10:02 ↗ resolution to ensure that we're covering

2:10:04 ↗ all of our bases legally as far as the

2:10:07 ↗ fire service is concerned and moving

2:10:10 ↗ towards a greener fleet you know there's

2:10:12 ↗ one electric fire truck in the country

2:10:14 ↗ demo that I'm aware of that

2:10:17 ↗ is there it we're still we're probably a

2:10:19 ↗ decade out before the technology catches

2:10:22 ↗ up from electricity standpoint on fire

2:10:24 ↗ vehicles and then if we were to flip the

2:10:26 ↗ switch today when you consider our

2:10:28 ↗ replacement plan it would be 10 to 15

2:10:30 ↗ years before our entire response fleet

2:10:32 ↗ would be turned out over to electricity

2:10:34 ↗ or any other new industry that would hit

2:10:36 ↗ today and the other thing that the law

2:10:38 ↗ seems to address in a in pretty robust

2:10:40 ↗ fashion is biodiesel and of course most

2:10:42 ↗ of our response vehicles are in fact

2:10:43 ↗ diesel biodiesel however is not

2:10:46 ↗ distributed commercially in the area and

2:10:48 ↗ if it was our mechanical maintenance

2:10:50 ↗ would have to be retooled to include

2:10:53 ↗ what what it would be needed to maintain

2:10:56 ↗ a biodiesel fleet and it's just not

2:10:58 ↗ feasible at this point but with all that

2:11:00 ↗ said we do have a small fleet of staff

2:11:03 ↗ vehicles that would of course be

2:11:04 ↗ eligible to convert to electricity

2:11:06 ↗ tomorrow if it were up in our

2:11:08 ↗ replacement plan it is still another

2:11:11 ↗ year before we're replacing any new

2:11:12 ↗ staff vehicles but when we do I am

2:11:14 ↗ planning on bringing to the e4 board

2:11:16 ↗ what our plan would be to convert our

2:11:19 ↗ staff vehicles what it would take in the

2:11:21 ↗ form of charging stations and that kind

2:11:22 ↗ of thing at our headquarters facility

2:11:25 ↗ and an re4 board will then make the

2:11:27 ↗ decision on whether or not we move

2:11:28 ↗ forward through our standard budget

2:11:29 ↗ process with that element and when and

2:11:32 ↗ if the technology on the response side

2:11:34 ↗ does catch up with us and we no longer

2:11:36 ↗ have to rely on this exemption and could

2:11:37 ↗ actually go towards a greener stuff type

2:11:40 ↗ of fuel then of course we will do that

2:11:42 ↗ through yfir board action but I

2:11:44 ↗ expect that to be some time away but

2:11:45 ↗ I'll be happy to answer any questions

2:11:46 ↗ you may have

2:11:47 ↗ Thank You chief council president Mertz

2:11:50 ↗ so the Grange sells biodiesel right it

2:11:53 ↗ is commercially available yes III don't

2:11:56 ↗ know if you say grain just sells it yes

2:11:59 ↗ sir I believe it does on their website

2:12:01 ↗ okay so the mechanical engineer in me

2:12:02 ↗ wants to know what the issue is with

2:12:04 ↗ biodiesel because I thought Diesel's

2:12:05 ↗ diesel if it if you can compress it to

2:12:08 ↗ ignite it it'll run in a diesel do you

2:12:10 ↗ see diesel is diesel and it will run it

2:12:12 ↗ was my understanding

2:12:13 ↗ however the maintenance that is involved

2:12:15 ↗ it does gunk some parts up and I'm not a

2:12:17 ↗ mechanic so I'll I can certainly get you

2:12:19 ↗ an answer on that but what you end up

2:12:21 ↗ replacing the form of fuel filters and

2:12:23 ↗ where you use it does become more of a

2:12:26 ↗ maintenance issue from a mechanical

2:12:29 ↗ standpoint now the the other thing is

2:12:31 ↗ about efer is we are spread out over 190

2:12:33 ↗ square miles so we would need a

2:12:35 ↗ commercially available on a wide wide

2:12:37 ↗ spread throughout we do not circulate

2:12:40 ↗ fuel to each of our play to each of our

2:12:42 ↗ stations they go to the closest fueling

2:12:45 ↗ station in the jurisdiction they're

2:12:46 ↗ serving and to my knowledge we do not

2:12:49 ↗ have biodiesel in that many places if we

2:12:52 ↗ have it at the Grange we don't have it

2:12:53 ↗ in other areas at their service area but

2:12:55 ↗ that's certainly something I can look

2:12:57 ↗ into councilman Brown and so so one

2:13:01 ↗ thing that I noticed in our in the

2:13:05 ↗ resolution is that it also says that

2:13:08 ↗ biodiesel can be used in some fire

2:13:10 ↗ vehicles the use of biodiesel and many

2:13:12 ↗ of these vehicles will void the warranty

2:13:14 ↗ so that may be another reason and then I

2:13:19 ↗ also had a question so and this is more

2:13:21 ↗ for the administration

2:13:23 ↗ so is there is this expected to be the

2:13:27 ↗ only exemption that would be made or

2:13:32 ↗ government vehicles in our jurisdiction

2:13:34 ↗ I'm gonna have James come up and answer

2:13:38 ↗ so the administration is not

2:13:40 ↗ anticipating bringing another exemption

2:13:41 ↗ for the city fleet the State Department

2:13:44 ↗ of Commerce is the oversight agency for

2:13:47 ↗ this they're only looking for agencies

2:13:49 ↗ that use more than two hundred thousand

2:13:50 ↗ gallons of fuel a year to bring

2:13:52 ↗ exemption forward for reporting purposes

2:13:54 ↗ and the city average is about 70,000 so

2:13:57 ↗ we're not at

2:13:57 ↗ spitting looking for our own exemption

2:13:59 ↗ at this time is your second part to that

2:14:02 ↗ question yeah okay so we're also not

2:14:05 ↗ planning to we this also doesn't apply

2:14:08 ↗ to our fleet is that the subtext for

2:14:12 ↗ that so it does apply we're not looking

2:14:16 ↗ for an exemption from the rules we're

2:14:18 ↗ basically looking to follow the rules

2:14:21 ↗ over time we're just not at this point

2:14:23 ↗ requesting an exemption from it okay and

2:14:26 ↗ sorry what does follow the rules

2:14:28 ↗ overtime amount look like so essentially

2:14:33 ↗ it would be as we make acquisitions for

2:14:35 ↗ our fleet to incorporate these policies

2:14:37 ↗ and decisions into those processes new

2:14:40 ↗ purchases correct okay thank you it's my

2:14:44 ↗ rush along those lines for city

2:14:48 ↗ government vehicles do we have a policy

2:14:51 ↗ conversation or a policy of pursuing

2:14:56 ↗ alternative fuels vehicles in our

2:15:00 ↗ purchasing I'm not sure that I have the

2:15:02 ↗ right people here tonight to answer your

2:15:04 ↗ question but I see it we have at least

2:15:06 ↗ two council members are very interested

2:15:07 ↗ in the answer

2:15:08 ↗ so just to stay o do if you're if you

2:15:12 ↗ got it go for it I'm not sure we have an

2:15:14 ↗ adopted policy but we have direction

2:15:16 ↗ that has been given to our fleet manager

2:15:17 ↗ to explore particularly electric

2:15:20 ↗ vehicles were never possible and that is

2:15:22 ↗ how we have been replacing most of our

2:15:26 ↗ smaller fleet as chief Clark mentioned

2:15:29 ↗ did there are other considerations that

2:15:31 ↗ we get into as we look at some of our

2:15:33 ↗ larger vehicles come somewhere

2:15:39 ↗ interesting if you made a comment

2:15:43 ↗ earlier which I appreciated that even

2:15:44 ↗ though we're looking for in a hundred

2:15:46 ↗ percent exception you did exemption you

2:15:48 ↗ did say that there are other vehicles

2:15:50 ↗ such as your own staff vehicles or

2:15:51 ↗ whatever you call them in the future you

2:15:53 ↗ would be considering perhaps electric

2:15:55 ↗ and there is a section 3 of your

2:15:59 ↗ I guess it's called a resolution and

2:16:04 ↗ it's called it is called resolution 19 -

2:16:07 ↗ 2 0 0 4 and I I didn't get to look up

2:16:10 ↗ all the references in there and I was

2:16:12 ↗ just wondering if I guess when you made

2:16:14 ↗ that comment I thought to myself that

2:16:16 ↗ would be great I appreciated that as I

2:16:19 ↗ heard it as we have limitations over

2:16:22 ↗ there but there are some things we can

2:16:23 ↗ do over here you know trying to

2:16:25 ↗ demonstrate though your hands are tied

2:16:28 ↗ we're gonna do what we can and I'm not

2:16:30 ↗ it would have been great if the

2:16:30 ↗ resolution said that real clearly is

2:16:32 ↗ really wasn't the reaction that I have

2:16:34 ↗ and maybe section 3 says that I don't

2:16:36 ↗ know and in and maybe you know the

2:16:39 ↗ answer that question maybe you don't but

2:16:40 ↗ I do appreciate that and and please take

2:16:44 ↗ that message back because I think I

2:16:45 ↗ think no doubt that people understand

2:16:48 ↗ what's required and why we would be

2:16:50 ↗ doing these things this is important and

2:16:54 ↗ so and it's so easy for this because

2:16:56 ↗ it's a hundred percent exception to look

2:16:58 ↗ ok unless you if you don't read the

2:17:00 ↗ details it can be easily misunderstood

2:17:02 ↗ and misinterpreted so I appreciated your

2:17:05 ↗ comment earlier about hey that part we

2:17:07 ↗ can control in these other vehicles that

2:17:09 ↗ we will be looking for the electric

2:17:10 ↗ alternative thank you thank you - just

2:17:13 ↗ add on to that a little bit when we say

2:17:15 ↗ an exemption the exemption specifically

2:17:18 ↗ is for emergency response vehicles are

2:17:20 ↗ those related vehicles our staff

2:17:22 ↗ vehicles will not count towards that

2:17:24 ↗ exemption even under the the landscape

2:17:26 ↗ of the way the law was drawn if our

2:17:29 ↗ resolution is blurry on that that's my

2:17:31 ↗ fault but it is under the law we have to

2:17:34 ↗ comply even on those other vehicles or

2:17:36 ↗ work towards that or put a plan forward

2:17:38 ↗ and we plan on doing that and thank you

2:17:39 ↗ for that clarification any other

2:17:42 ↗ comments or questions none I'll call for

2:17:45 ↗ the vote

2:17:46 ↗ the solution have we moved in second to

2:17:51 ↗ this

2:17:51 ↗ no we haven't commotion I'd like to move

2:17:56 ↗ to approve resolution number 20 1908

2:18:00 ↗ exempting aside fire and rescue from the

2:18:03 ↗ alternative fuel requirement of RCW 40

2:18:06 ↗ 3.19 dot 648 open parent to close parent

2:18:11 ↗ open parent a closed okay it's been

2:18:15 ↗ moved in second it is there any

2:18:16 ↗ discussion comes to present merits so I

2:18:20 ↗ would just follow up that it does appear

2:18:23 ↗ from a cursory initial examination that

2:18:26 ↗ the blend of biodiesel that is available

2:18:29 ↗ commercially is fairly high blend and

2:18:33 ↗ that most fire departments that are

2:18:36 ↗ experimenting with biodiesel are using a

2:18:38 ↗ much lower blend of biodiesel so in

2:18:40 ↗ other words a larger fraction of

2:18:41 ↗ coarsely available diesel so I'm very

2:18:44 ↗ comfortable with this answer

2:18:46 ↗ clarification if there's no favor

2:18:49 ↗ there's no further discussion all those

2:18:52 ↗ in favor of approving resolution number

2:18:55 ↗ 2019 - 0-8 exempting safe fire and

2:18:58 ↗ rescue from the alternate fuels

2:18:59 ↗ requirement of RCW 43.1 9.6 for a print

2:19:03 ↗ to print a signify by saying aye

2:19:06 ↗ it carries unanimously I think she's

2:19:09 ↗ Thank You Jean we are moving into the

2:19:12 ↗ good of the order portion of the meeting

2:19:14 ↗ I do have one item which is a returning

2:19:17 ↗ item from cascade water Alliance

2:19:20 ↗ entirely sure but I believe

2:19:21 ↗ councilmember hunt might be actually the

2:19:24 ↗ one who is voting on this at the board

2:19:26 ↗ meeting because I will not be there we

2:19:29 ↗ had brought a discussion to you earlier

2:19:32 ↗ this year about a change in the scope of

2:19:35 ↗ services that cascade water alliance

2:19:37 ↗ could provide each of the member

2:19:38 ↗ organizations and it was related to some

2:19:40 ↗ ongoing negotiations with King County

2:19:43 ↗ over Metro and how big of a voice and a

2:19:46 ↗ voice vote

2:19:48 ↗ members that serve the ratepayers would

2:19:51 ↗ have in future conversations

2:19:54 ↗ cascade water Alliance has been doing

2:19:56 ↗ some of this work already the questions

2:19:59 ↗ that you had asked that I took down were

2:20:01 ↗ how much does this cost how much will

2:20:03 ↗ this cost going forward and is there a

2:20:06 ↗ possibility of a sunsetting provision so

2:20:09 ↗ the information that I got from cascade

2:20:12 ↗ water Alliance was for all of the member

2:20:14 ↗ organizations to date the total cost for

2:20:16 ↗ support services was $26,000 is the

2:20:20 ↗ questionnaire would be eight point one

2:20:21 ↗ percent of that the cost estimated

2:20:23 ↗ through the end of the year there are

2:20:25 ↗ some additional meetings with King

2:20:27 ↗ County plan he's forty five thousand

2:20:29 ↗ dollars again it's a questionnaire of

2:20:30 ↗ eight point one percent they will be

2:20:33 ↗ providing some new sunset language that

2:20:35 ↗ goes along the lines of and this year if

2:20:40 ↗ the negotiations proceeding through the

2:20:42 ↗ next two quarters go well or when larger

2:20:46 ↗ coalition of water districts and cities

2:20:50 ↗ form and decide on a different mechanism

2:20:52 ↗ for support services so just hearing

2:20:55 ↗ those numbers and the amounts it seems

2:20:58 ↗ that that is good value for what we're

2:21:00 ↗ getting in terms of pulling together

2:21:02 ↗ this first group to negotiate they seem

2:21:04 ↗ to have good traction with the county I

2:21:06 ↗ think would be a good idea for them to

2:21:07 ↗ continue their work I think this is a

2:21:09 ↗ reasonable share for us to pay and I

2:21:11 ↗ think the sunsetting provision is a

2:21:12 ↗ really good idea one other item that

2:21:16 ↗ councilmember hunt I'm not sure if it's

2:21:17 ↗ entirely clear but there was also a

2:21:19 ↗ request to make sure that the voting

2:21:21 ↗ mechanism for dissolving would be sent

2:21:24 ↗ or accepting would be similar to the

2:21:27 ↗ voting mechanism for regular major

2:21:30 ↗ actions which is there is a weighted

2:21:32 ↗ vote and we want to make sure that one

2:21:37 ↗ of the members that has a significant

2:21:39 ↗ weight on their voice isn't the one just

2:21:42 ↗ to decide to make this go forward so

2:21:43 ↗ it's meant to balance out based on the

2:21:45 ↗ size of the water user and so that

2:21:48 ↗ pretty much means it needs to be all of

2:21:50 ↗ the users have to vote to make this go

2:21:52 ↗ forward so I think it's a good it was

2:21:54 ↗ good to ask those questions I think we

2:21:55 ↗ got some good numbers I'm much more

2:21:57 ↗ comfortable now with the resolution to

2:21:59 ↗ expand the scope of services it's

2:22:01 ↗ limited it seems like it's good price I

2:22:03 ↗ think we're getting good

2:22:04 ↗ for the money in it and it sunsets so

2:22:06 ↗ just need to get some head nods if

2:22:08 ↗ that's how you'd like councilmember hunt

2:22:09 ↗ to vote at the July board meeting any

2:22:12 ↗ questions

2:22:13 ↗ awesome any other items for good of the

2:22:17 ↗ order look ahead in a few meetings

2:22:21 ↗ upcoming councilmember three July July

2:22:26 ↗ 23rd council committee of the whole at

2:22:28 ↗ 6:30 p.m. the potential agenda items for

2:22:31 ↗ that one are acceptance of donations for

2:22:33 ↗ park amenities neighborhood engagement

2:22:35 ↗ update update on our regional agenda

2:22:38 ↗ rules of procedure coming back

2:22:41 ↗ evaluation of progress with resolutions

2:22:44 ↗ on inclusion and condemning racism and

2:22:46 ↗ intolerance so a bunch of interesting

2:22:48 ↗ for it on the cow July 25th there's a

2:22:51 ↗ public forum to meet City Administrator

2:22:53 ↗ candidates as they announced earlier

2:22:55 ↗ this evening we will be bringing to

2:22:57 ↗ forward to the community on July 25th

2:23:00 ↗ 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. the location is 94

2:23:04 ↗ Front Street which is a new workshop

2:23:06 ↗ Issaquah door that has opened recently

2:23:10 ↗ it'll be a great place for an informal

2:23:12 ↗ having informal conversation and it will

2:23:15 ↗ be noticed so that council can also

2:23:17 ↗ attend August 5th we do have our last

2:23:20 ↗ regular council meeting of the summer so

2:23:23 ↗ far scheduled for 7:00 p.m. and the

2:23:25 ↗ potential agenda items are the 2019

2:23:28 ↗ comprehensive solid waste management

2:23:29 ↗ plan King County document and a regional

2:23:32 ↗ coalition coalition for housing program

2:23:35 ↗ update that's what I think we are

2:23:38 ↗ looking forward to councilmember

2:23:39 ↗ interesting no one might item I'm really

2:23:42 ↗ gonna repeat something I said earlier we

2:23:43 ↗ layer this week on Friday the PSR C will

2:23:46 ↗ be releasing the draft vision 2050

2:23:49 ↗ including the updated regional growth

2:23:50 ↗ strategy in the new multi county

2:23:52 ↗ planning policies I'll have a 60-day

2:23:55 ↗ window for accepting comments of course

2:23:58 ↗ then the board will be considering that

2:24:00 ↗ for a couple months afterwards but this

2:24:03 ↗ is a a request or something to consider

2:24:06 ↗ for whether our city wants to formally

2:24:09 ↗ make a provide comments feedback

2:24:14 ↗ during that 60-day window I'm looking at

2:24:17 ↗ Keith I know he's sitting up so that's

2:24:18 ↗ something I'd like you to discuss in

2:24:20 ↗ considering I know I would appreciate it

2:24:23 ↗ as a board member of my my city got had

2:24:27 ↗ a consolidated voice and with just speak

2:24:29 ↗ on anything especially we feel really

2:24:30 ↗ passionate about something either for or

2:24:33 ↗ against that's in there and in the

2:24:37 ↗ comment letter that was sent in earlier

2:24:39 ↗ in your review of the draft discussions

2:24:41 ↗ did you have any concerns with the new

2:24:43 ↗ draft that's coming out in terms of it

2:24:45 ↗ may not address some of the things that

2:24:47 ↗ the council members had expressed an

2:24:49 ↗ interest no I don't I think however

2:24:53 ↗ there were some changes over the last

2:24:55 ↗ sixty days which we may have are gonna

2:24:59 ↗ need explanation because it was the part

2:25:02 ↗ the the alternative that we considered

2:25:06 ↗ we were looking at the draft

2:25:08 ↗ supplemental EIS that preferred

2:25:10 ↗ alternative was tweaked a little bit

2:25:12 ↗ and there may there may be questions

2:25:15 ↗ about that and that's that's more of

2:25:17 ↗ what I'm thinking because we go I think

2:25:21 ↗ the process that we're about to go

2:25:23 ↗ through may somewhat depend upon this

2:25:30 ↗ feedback this this comment period to

2:25:33 ↗ help make some difficult decisions okay

2:25:37 ↗ you anticipate that the council would

2:25:40 ↗ benefit from having PSoC staff come and

2:25:43 ↗ explain the tweaks we can we can discuss

2:25:47 ↗ that I feel like I could but I don't

2:25:51 ↗ know if that's the best way to do it

2:25:52 ↗ let's discuss it thank you for bringing

2:25:54 ↗ that up

2:25:54 ↗ does anybody else want anything for good

2:25:56 ↗ of the order all right and we are

2:26:00 ↗ adjourned

2:26:01 ↗ don't no we're not oh so close I forgot

2:26:06 ↗ okay as I mentioned earlier we have a

2:26:09 ↗ lengthy executive session and so we will

2:26:15 ↗ be going into executive session

2:26:17 ↗ so there's earlier announced there'll be

2:26:19 ↗ an executive session this evening to

2:26:20 ↗ discuss cybersecurity / RCW forty two

2:26:23 ↗ point three oh one 104 and one print

2:26:26 ↗ apron - and pending potential litigation

2:26:28 ↗ / RCW 42.3 0.11 o / n 1 prayer and i

2:26:31 ↗ these items are expected to last 17

2:26:34 ↗ minutes and before i'm looking around -

2:26:37 ↗ we have to start with 70 minutes I think

2:26:40 ↗ that's a great question so no action is

2:26:45 ↗ anticipated to follow of an open session

2:26:46 ↗ I would suggest we start with 45 minutes

2:26:50 ↗ and go from there if that's acceptable

2:26:52 ↗ to the group okay so we'll be going into

2:26:54 ↗ executive session for 45 minutes thank

2:26:57 ↗ you

2:26:59 ↗ [Applause]

2:27:09 ↗ you

Approved minutes

Extracted from the next meeting's packet, where this meeting's minutes were approved as a consent-calendar attachment.

Open PDF

Attendance

Council / Members (7)

Mariah Bettise

Stacy Goodman

Victoria Hunt

Tola Marts

Chris Reh

Lindsey Walsh

Paul Winterstein

Motions and votes (6)

Direct the Administration to provide for Council’s consideration an alternative CIP in which general-mitigation funds set to expire in 2021 would be used to fund projects other than FC 022 Consolidated City Offices, potentially including, but not limited to, FC 018 Issaquah Highlands Storage Site an…

Moved by HUNT · seconded by REH

Failed 1-6

In favor: Hunt

Opposed: Mariah Bettise, Stacy Goodman, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Paul Winterstein

Amend the 2020-2025 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to add the following to the end of the project summary of project PK 045 Creek Corridor: “Project scope may include improvements to this corridor as well as acquisitions." .

Moved by HUNT · seconded by REH

Carried 7-0

In favor: Mariah Bettise, Stacy Goodman, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Paul Winterstein

Approve Resolution No. 2019-07 adopting the amended Capital Improvement Plan for 2020- 2025, including the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program. MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED, 7-0.

Moved by MARTS · seconded by WINTERSTEIN

Approve Resolution No. 2019-08, exempting Eastside Fire & Rescue from the Alternative Fuels Requirements of RCW 43.19.648(2)(a). .

Moved by REH · seconded by GOODMAN

Carried 7-0

In favor: Mariah Bettise, Stacy Goodman, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Paul Winterstein

APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. Page 202 of 496 CONSENT CALENDAR b) 07-15-19 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page (0000) a) ID 0390 - Accounts: Payables and Payroll of July 15, 2019, $ 4,273,113.99; Approved. b) Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting, July 1, 2019; Approved. c) Minutes:…

Moved by MARTS · seconded by BETTISE

Carried 7-0

In favor: Mariah Bettise, Stacy Goodman, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Paul Winterstein

Main motion as amended: APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. Page 202 of 496 CONSENT CALENDAR b) 07-15-19 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page (0000) a) ID 0390 - Accounts: Payables and Payroll of July 15, 2019, $ 4,273,113.99; Approved. b) Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting, July 1, 201…

Moved by (main motion as amended) · seconded by

Carried 7-0

In favor: Mariah Bettise, Stacy Goodman, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Paul Winterstein