City Council Regular Meeting · Monday, March 2, 2020 · City Council Digest

1. CALL TO ORDER -

Discuss pending/potential litigation pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(i). Action anticipated to follow in open session

Carried 7-0

Roll call:

Moved by HUNT · seconded by REH

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Stacy Goodman, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh

8. CONSENT CALENDAR

Accounts: Payables and Payroll of Mar. 2, 2020, $13,726,924.68 ID 0538

Carried 7-0

Approve · packet pp.5–162

Topics: Budget

▶ Watch from 1:12:57 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 HUNT · seconded by REH

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Stacy Goodman, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh

Minutes: City Council Special Meeting, Feb. 1, 2020

Carried 7-0

Approve · packet pp.163–164

▶ Watch from 1:13:01 Open packet at p.163 ↗

Staff report:

Presented by: Beth Goldberg, Finance Director Susan Monsell, Deputy Finance Director

Roll call:

Moved by HUNT · seconded by REH

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Stacy Goodman, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh

Minutes: City Council Study Session, Feb. 11, 2020

Carried 7-0

Approve · packet pp.165–167

▶ Watch from 1:13:04 Open packet at p.165 ↗

Staff report:

CONSENT CALENDAR c) 02-11-20 Council Study Session Minutes Page (0000)

Roll call:

Moved by HUNT · seconded by REH

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Stacy Goodman, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh

Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting, Feb. 18, 2020

Carried 7-0

Approve Resolution · packet pp.169–173

▶ Watch from 1:13:07 Open packet at p.169 ↗

Staff report:

CONSENT CALENDAR d) 02-18-20 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page (0000)

Roll call:

Moved by HUNT · seconded by REH

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Stacy Goodman, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh

Solid Waste Contract AB 7904

Carried 7-0

Authorize · packet pp.181–185

▶ Watch from 1:13:10 Open packet at p.181 ↗

Staff report:

The City of Issaquah contracts with Recology Cleanscapes for the collection of residential and commercial solid waste. The contractor was selected as the result of a procurement process in 2011. The contract with Recology is set to expire on June 30, 2021; however, the City may, at its sole discretion, extend the agreement under the current terms and conditions twice, each extension for two years in duration. The first extension was authorized by Council on March 5, 2018. Any notice to extend the agreement must be provided to Recology not less than 90 days prior to the expiration of the agreement.

Roll call:

Moved by HUNT · seconded by REH

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Stacy Goodman, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh

Position Reclassification AB 7932

Carried 7-0

Approve · packet pp.187

▶ Watch from 1:13:13 Open packet at p.187 ↗

Staff report:

The Administration recommends approval of the reclassification of the Payroll Analyst position to Senior Payroll Analyst, effective March 2, 2020.

Roll call:

Moved by HUNT · seconded by REH

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Stacy Goodman, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh

9. REGULAR BUSINESS

Park Impact Fees AB 7789

Carried 7-0

Adopt Ordinance · packet pp.227–283

Topics: Land UseParksBudget

▶ Watch from 1:13:17 Open packet at p.227 ↗

Staff report:

The State’s Growth Management Act provides that jurisdictions may collect

Roll call:

Moved by HUNT · seconded by REH

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Stacy Goodman, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh

10. GOOD OF THE ORDER

10a

Upcoming Council Meetings

▶ Watch from 2:24:52

2557 segments .txt ↗

0:07 ↗ you

0:11 ↗ you're just getting that was calling the

0:26 ↗ meeting to order I'm going to call the

0:29 ↗ Monday March 2nd City Council regular

0:32 ↗ meeting to order and to start off we

0:34 ↗ will be going into an executive session

0:38 ↗ Frannie when for anyone who may not be

0:41 ↗ aware an executive session is a closed

0:43 ↗ session of the council that can be

0:44 ↗ called for certain reasons usually to

0:47 ↗ discuss confidential information action

0:50 ↗ cannot be taken in an executive session

0:52 ↗ this executive session this evening will

0:54 ↗ be to discuss pending potential

0:56 ↗ litigation for RCW 42.3 0.11 o Moran one

1:01 ↗ prong I the item is expected to last 30

1:04 ↗ minutes I'm just taking a look at the

1:07 ↗ administrate 30 minutes 30 minutes

1:10 ↗ action is anticipated to follow in open

1:12 ↗ session so we will now be resetting into

1:14 ↗ executive session at 701

1:18 ↗ you

1:26 ↗ you

40:02 ↗ send its course just a reminder to us

40:04 ↗ become on camera from our very first

40:07 ↗ item okay so we are back in session at

40:10 ↗ 7:40 and when coming out of executive

40:13 ↗ session we all waits the public it's up

40:32 ↗ he's here

40:35 ↗ [Music]

40:50 ↗ thank you all for waiting and being

40:53 ↗ patient as we had our executive session

40:56 ↗ prior to start of our regular meeting

40:57 ↗ but we are now out of executive session

41:00 ↗ back in regular session and we will be

41:03 ↗ proceeding with emotion out of our

41:05 ↗ executive session do I have somebody

41:08 ↗ making a motion

41:09 ↗ council president hunch I moved to

41:12 ↗ authorize the mayor to enter into a

41:14 ↗ settlement agreement with American tower

41:16 ↗ on the terms discussed within the

41:18 ↗ executive session and moved and seconded

41:21 ↗ is there any discussion all those in

41:24 ↗ favor any opposed

41:27 ↗ that carries unanimously thank you I'm

41:34 ↗ so welcome we'll start our meeting as

41:36 ↗ usual with the Pledge of Allegiance and

41:37 ↗ if you'd like to join the council and I

41:39 ↗ please stand item on our agenda this

42:01 ↗ evening is audience comments and this is

42:04 ↗ your time to address your council this

42:05 ↗ evening guidelines for public

42:08 ↗ participation are posted up behind me on

42:11 ↗ the screen and please limit your

42:12 ↗ comments this evening to five minutes

42:14 ↗ if you signed up on the signup list you

42:17 ↗ will be called up first and if you did

42:19 ↗ not sign up do not worry when we get to

42:22 ↗ the end of the list we will ask to see

42:23 ↗ if there are any others who would also

42:25 ↗ like to address council this evening if

42:27 ↗ you are here speaking as part of a group

42:29 ↗ a group wearing green scarfs perhaps you

42:33 ↗ may want to identify that group as you

42:35 ↗ come up and if you're in the audience

42:37 ↗ this evening and you are hearing

42:39 ↗ comments by any of our speakers and you

42:41 ↗ want to demonstrate your support to

42:42 ↗ council please raise your hand so they

42:44 ↗ can see that support

42:46 ↗ Tina has anyone signed up to speak this

42:48 ↗ evening

42:53 ↗ Heather come on up you can come up

42:59 ↗ together okay I'm gonna go first so my

43:08 ↗ name is Malia green and you know me

43:09 ↗ because I've been here a few times I am

43:11 ↗ live on Bush Street in Old Town Issaquah

43:13 ↗ and I attended the meeting last week and

43:16 ↗ I went to thank you all for spending I

43:19 ↗ believe it was a good two hours

43:20 ↗ discussing the traffic calming issues in

43:22 ↗ Old Town Issaquah I left the meeting

43:26 ↗ with three basic oh well look there it

43:29 ↗ is okay I left the meeting with

43:32 ↗ basically three takeaways the first one

43:35 ↗ is that you are working on a traffic

43:36 ↗ plan and hoping to implement it by fall

43:39 ↗ 2020 and focused on safe crossings that

43:43 ↗ was option one option two was focusing

43:47 ↗ in addition to safe crossings improving

43:50 ↗ sidewalks and the second thing I took

43:52 ↗ away on the meeting was that you will

43:53 ↗ have conversations about funding for

43:56 ↗ these activities and these changes that

43:58 ↗ you'll be making and the third one that

44:00 ↗ I took away was that this is what said

44:03 ↗ by one of the council members was that

44:05 ↗ that we are not in a crisis right now

44:06 ↗ I'm addressing number one I am hopeful

44:10 ↗ that the traffic calming implementations

44:13 ↗ will be done in the fall however I do

44:16 ↗ think that we are needing traffic

44:18 ↗ calming now and a couple council members

44:21 ↗ did mention that they agree we're in

44:23 ↗ agreement with that that there should be

44:25 ↗ some changes now such as improving the

44:28 ↗ crossing for students on second and bush

44:30 ↗ with lighted beacons of some kind I also

44:34 ↗ heard the word that you were going to be

44:36 ↗ use that you were going to have a

44:36 ↗ conversation about fixing a lot of these

44:38 ↗ issues and I do feel like we've been

44:40 ↗ having conversations about this since

44:42 ↗ November of 2019 when Heather and I

44:45 ↗ first came to address the issue of the

44:48 ↗ elderly man that was kill almost killed

44:50 ↗ crossing the street near the preschool

44:56 ↗ and so I feel like we've really tried to

44:58 ↗ make an effort to show up as well as a

45:00 ↗ lot of our community members to focus on

45:01 ↗ this

45:02 ↗ so I'm kind of tired of hearing

45:03 ↗ conversation I really would like to see

45:05 ↗ some action as well as all my neighbors

45:08 ↗ also you mentioned that we were not in a

45:10 ↗ crisis right now and I found that

45:12 ↗ personally disturbing because I would

45:15 ↗ beg to differ I would say that the

45:17 ↗ gentleman who was struck in the

45:18 ↗ crosswalk and was hospitalized with

45:20 ↗ severe injuries I believe him

45:22 ↗ he and his family would definitely

45:24 ↗ disagree that this is not a crisis I

45:27 ↗ also would say that the young man that

45:29 ↗ was riding his bike to school that was

45:31 ↗ struck in the crosswalk would also

45:32 ↗ disagree that we are not in a crisis I

45:34 ↗ also would say that our crossing guard

45:36 ↗ who came and spoke to you about all the

45:38 ↗ issues we had in the crosswalk how many

45:40 ↗ of us have almost been hit how there

45:42 ↗ have been cars up where students are

45:44 ↗ standing that we are definitely in some

45:46 ↗ kind of crisis right now I am pretty I

45:49 ↗ am and she was speaking on behalf of all

45:51 ↗ the students at Clark it's a qua high

45:53 ↗ school Gibson a can i M s because she

45:56 ↗ sees these dangerous situations all day

45:58 ↗ I also would like to point out that a

46:01 ↗ lot of our neighbors have spoken

46:02 ↗ personally from seeing from seeing cars

46:05 ↗ on their own streets that we are in a

46:08 ↗ crisis and I'm not sure what exactly the

46:12 ↗ definition of a crisis would be at this

46:14 ↗ time but I certainly hope that we do not

46:16 ↗ define crisis as a reactive situation

46:20 ↗ where someone dies and then we react

46:23 ↗ because as you know I have been very

46:25 ↗ passionate about what happened on

46:26 ↗ Newport Way in 2015 and I do not want to

46:29 ↗ see that happening to one of our

46:31 ↗ students at Busch Sun Bush at Clark

46:33 ↗ elementary school Heather

46:34 ↗ Thank You Malia okay I'm gonna run

46:37 ↗ through the slideshow here I'm Heather

46:39 ↗ Finnerty either before to three South

46:41 ↗ East Clark Street and again I'd like to

46:42 ↗ also offer my thank you for all the

46:44 ↗ support that we did get last time we

46:46 ↗ were here talking to city engineers my

46:49 ↗ big takeaway along with Malia's was

46:51 ↗ something that chris said is looking at

46:53 ↗ what was the root cause and that's

46:55 ↗ really been playing around in my head is

46:56 ↗ are we chasing small fires with

46:59 ↗ band-aids or are we looking at the big

47:01 ↗ picture here and what is the root cause

47:02 ↗ of water that fixes in 2017 our problem

47:07 ↗ was speed and illegal turns in 2008 and

47:11 ↗ we came to you with that in 2018 the

47:13 ↗ speed bumps were installed the

47:15 ↗ roundabouts for

47:15 ↗ stall on the turn restrictions were

47:16 ↗ removed in 2019 because the turn

47:19 ↗ restrictions are removed we still have

47:22 ↗ speed and we have doubled the volume of

47:23 ↗ cars so now our problem is actually

47:25 ↗ worse than it was in 2017 because the

47:29 ↗ turn restrictions were removed the root

47:32 ↗ cause is beating the timing of the light

47:34 ↗ on second the root causes the removal of

47:36 ↗ the turn restriction the root causes the

47:38 ↗ overall volume of traffic on Sunset and

47:42 ↗ 2nd Avenue and it is school cut through

47:44 ↗ traffic and it is excuse me it is school

47:47 ↗ traffic and it is cut through traffic

47:48 ↗ how you discern between the two I'm not

47:51 ↗ sure you can really go there however it

47:53 ↗ is obvious to people within the

47:55 ↗ neighborhood what when it is a school

47:58 ↗ volume of traffic and when it is a cut

47:59 ↗ through volume of traffic and the root

48:02 ↗ causes also a lack of law enforcement

48:04 ↗ around the other issues so the solution

48:07 ↗ then if looking at four root causes I

48:09 ↗ have three solutions we either change

48:10 ↗ the laws change the enforcement or we

48:12 ↗ change the volume on the non arterial

48:14 ↗ streets and those are our neighborhoods

48:15 ↗ next slide please

48:18 ↗ how we go about those changes of course

48:20 ↗ is what was debated here's an example

48:22 ↗ however though because if I look on the

48:24 ↗ right-hand side here a something that

48:27 ↗ was said during the meeting last week is

48:28 ↗ there some traffic cut through the

48:30 ↗ neighborhood but not a lot I don't know

48:32 ↗ what constitutes a lot then same with

48:35 ↗ Maliha saying she does not know what

48:36 ↗ constitute a crisis if this isn't it

48:38 ↗ that was never defined however this

48:42 ↗ morning I did some work in my car and

48:44 ↗ sat on on the end of my street on Bush

48:46 ↗ Street and I just did some tick marks

48:48 ↗ while I was doing my work in my car and

48:49 ↗ so today a hand count on the corner of

48:52 ↗ Bush Street and fourth place I could see

48:54 ↗ Crossin and the alley in my rearview

48:56 ↗ mirror so I could see all of those

48:57 ↗ angles there were 129 cards between 7

49:00 ↗ o'clock and 8 o'clock this morning that

49:02 ↗ was very clearly a majority of school

49:05 ↗ cut through traffic I put that marking

49:08 ↗ on the graphic up there of Bush

49:10 ↗ westbound traffic the red mark on the

49:13 ↗ graphic graph between 7 and 8 o'clock is

49:16 ↗ what I counted if you look down much

49:19 ↗ further

49:20 ↗ that's the data that was collected by

49:22 ↗ traffic studies there's a huge gist and

49:25 ↗ presented last week

49:27 ↗ that's a huge discrepancy that's one day

49:29 ↗ and one snapshot of how what we see does

49:32 ↗ not match the data next slide please

49:39 ↗ yes and as I was looking there are some

49:44 ↗ things that I noticed well with that

49:46 ↗ little typo here how is speed measured

49:49 ↗ accurately for every single car if the

49:50 ↗ volume counts are off next slide please

49:58 ↗ something that I noticed while I was

50:00 ↗ sitting there counting cars as cars

50:02 ↗ approached and I looked at the backup

50:04 ↗ that was also presented last week the

50:06 ↗ speed bump

50:07 ↗ was a visual indicator for cars that

50:09 ↗ were coming down the road as soon as

50:11 ↗ they could see a certain amount of cars

50:12 ↗ and it was usually five or six cars

50:13 ↗ backed up it hit the speed bump at a

50:15 ↗ certain amount of time then the cars

50:17 ↗ would start to go off and they would go

50:18 ↗ down crossed in' or they would go down

50:19 ↗ the other alley and it would usually be

50:21 ↗ a pattern of five cars that would go to

50:23 ↗ the right or to the left and they could

50:25 ↗ see the cars backed up and when the car

50:26 ↗ back up got a little bit lower then they

50:28 ↗ would continue down bush street and when

50:30 ↗ it got back to the speed bump they would

50:32 ↗ turn left or they would turn right and

50:33 ↗ go down alley or the alley or crossed

50:35 ↗ in' i also noticed that cars were not

50:37 ↗ slowing over the speed bump and again

50:40 ↗ this is a snapshot of one day if we take

50:44 ↗ a look at this map on the left

50:47 ↗ the orange worth of the yellow circles

50:50 ↗ is what was presented last week of

50:52 ↗ extending the school zones which puts

50:54 ↗ just a little bit in front of Clark

50:55 ↗ elementary and then across Bush Street

50:57 ↗ in front of that and what we're

50:58 ↗ proposing is that we do much more than

50:59 ↗ that and this follows along with main

51:02 ↗ arterials which go with the Washington

51:04 ↗ school grants in the school grant zone

51:06 ↗ is taking the school zone and wrap it

51:09 ↗ around the entire perimeter half-mile

51:11 ↗ perimeter that matches with cougar Ridge

51:14 ↗ and Liberty High School now is what I'm

51:16 ↗ understanding follow something very

51:17 ↗ similar if we take that school zone of

51:20 ↗ what's original down 2nd Street they're

51:23 ↗ extending it in front of Clark

51:24 ↗ elementary school it should go down

51:26 ↗ Front Street if you look to the west of

51:28 ↗ Front Street

51:29 ↗ that's a walking zone there's no

51:31 ↗ transportation if you go down to sons

51:33 ↗ that way and cross over sunset

51:35 ↗ that's a walking area there's no school

51:36 ↗ transportation and then everything

51:38 ↗ inside that grid is a walking school

51:40 ↗ zone there is no transportation those

51:42 ↗ main arterials have to be school zones

51:44 ↗ we have to provide saves passage for the

51:47 ↗ kids to get across you want to write I

51:50 ↗ hate that noise Heather do you wanna

51:53 ↗ wrap up please

51:54 ↗ okay if we can get to the next slide I

51:58 ↗ won't go through that you can look at it

51:59 ↗ some other time I will wrap it up with

52:02 ↗ the last slide actually we can go ahead

52:04 ↗ and do that this is just addresses our

52:06 ↗ sidewalks we can skip the next slide to

52:07 ↗ this

52:08 ↗ as our sidewalks people walking down it

52:09 ↗ I asked last time we were here if you

52:13 ↗ could please is a good sign of good

52:15 ↗ faith put up the turn restrictions get

52:17 ↗ officers at second and Bush or second

52:20 ↗ and Bush right away show us that there's

52:22 ↗ something actionable that's happening

52:24 ↗ before summer before five years from now

52:26 ↗ the very last slide takes everything

52:28 ↗ that we have talked about since November

52:30 ↗ 4th and breaks it down we started a

52:32 ↗ Facebook page and it documents

52:34 ↗ everything we've been trained well I was

52:36 ↗ a teacher for 15 years in the Lake

52:37 ↗ Washington School District same on for

52:39 ↗ Malia in his law school district when

52:41 ↗ something looks wrong we document and we

52:43 ↗ duct document everything thoroughly and

52:45 ↗ it's all documented on that page to then

52:48 ↗ garner more support we're going to the

52:49 ↗ school board this school boards and

52:52 ↗ getting louder from there but I think

52:54 ↗ we've exhausted the information and we

52:57 ↗ need to see action not conversation

52:59 ↗ thank you

53:00 ↗ Thank You Heather next on the signup

53:03 ↗ sheet next and last time my list is

53:05 ↗ Larry Franks very frank

53:11 ↗ my name is Larry Franks I'm a 48 year

53:15 ↗ resident of Issaquah and I'm actually

53:18 ↗ here to speak on behalf of my friend

53:22 ↗ Chinni and her beef and why she chooses

53:25 ↗ that term is beyond my comprehension is

53:28 ↗ with improving services 85% is not a

53:32 ↗ good number

53:33 ↗ 95% is not a good number

53:36 ↗ we came within 4 inches of losing our

53:41 ↗ entire year class of fish at the is

53:43 ↗ request Hammond hatchery 3 million of

53:45 ↗ her relatives would have been washed out

53:48 ↗ to the lake to be consumed by the

53:51 ↗ Predators there that's her message she

53:55 ↗ also raises a fin in support of climate

53:59 ↗ change this is a Coldwater fish we've

54:02 ↗ got to keep her water cold thank you

54:04 ↗ Thank You Larry I expected a few more

54:08 ↗ clean green scarf hands to go out there

54:10 ↗ but there

54:11 ↗ some hands and support is there anyone

54:13 ↗ else would like to come up and address

54:14 ↗ the council this evening come on up Ann

54:21 ↗ I'm Ann Fletcher and I live at 255

54:24 ↗ southeast Andrews Street I'm with the

54:26 ↗ people for climate action group here and

54:29 ↗ I'm speaking about the k4c commitments

54:32 ↗ the k4c commitments being presented at

54:35 ↗ the council tonight indicate that each

54:39 ↗ city needs to determine how it will go

54:41 ↗ about its climate action tasks these

54:44 ↗ revised k4c commitments are now a

54:46 ↗ stronger framework within which cities

54:49 ↗ can determine the many actions they will

54:51 ↗ need to implement in order to impact

54:54 ↗ climate change this is a welcome

54:57 ↗ catalyst because our region has not been

55:00 ↗ meeting carbon emission goals that were

55:02 ↗ set by the previous 2014 k4c commitments

55:07 ↗ and we want to improve is the call

55:12 ↗ people for action PCA members are at

55:15 ↗ this meeting tonight just to support the

55:17 ↗ approval of the resolution for these

55:20 ↗ commitments and to be an example for how

55:23 ↗ cities and residents can collaborate for

55:26 ↗ the common good and to share our

55:28 ↗ appreciation for our city's

55:31 ↗ responsiveness which doesn't happen

55:33 ↗ everywhere to involve the community in

55:36 ↗ moving forward in addition we want to

55:39 ↗ point out and call to your attention the

55:42 ↗ complexity and depth of actions that

55:45 ↗ will be needed to have the desired

55:47 ↗ effect on climate and with that in mind

55:50 ↗ I recently emailed you a new document

55:53 ↗ from the PCA coalition working group it

55:57 ↗ is for your high-level review versus

56:00 ↗ detailed review but the Coalition sends

56:06 ↗ out information and analysis to help our

56:09 ↗ us provide cities with information and

56:13 ↗ it lists potential action options that

56:17 ↗ the cities could take using successful

56:21 ↗ city models as a basis

56:24 ↗ so we've already sent this document to

56:26 ↗ the Office of Sustainability

56:28 ↗ we are working with and for possible

56:31 ↗ future reference and particularly the

56:33 ↗ focus on building and energy efficiency

56:36 ↗ is seems important it's an area our

56:39 ↗ recent carbon inventory indicated was

56:42 ↗ important for us to address city groups

56:45 ↗ are also supporting each other and our

56:47 ↗ PCA group will be sharing is the clause

56:49 ↗ City actions with the coalition this

56:52 ↗ spring so we also understand that the

56:55 ↗ county will be providing consultant

56:57 ↗ support to the cities in the form of a

56:59 ↗ toolkit later in 2020 so tonight what we

57:04 ↗ want to do is just provide perspective

57:06 ↗ and to support this opportunity to

57:09 ↗ understand the work of our ethical

57:12 ↗ community and our government and how we

57:15 ↗ can best build on the k4c commitments we

57:18 ↗ want to acknowledge the substantial

57:20 ↗ implementation work that cities need to

57:23 ↗ do to succeed in reducing carbon

57:25 ↗ emissions but despite the considerable

57:29 ↗ efforts we we we fully we are fully

57:36 ↗ committed to to move forward on it and

57:39 ↗ with the city and we know it will be

57:42 ↗ worth it and we are hopeful about what

57:46 ↗ we can accomplish together

57:48 ↗ thank you thank you in and then green

57:53 ↗ scarves in the air is there anyone else

57:55 ↗ who would like to address council this

57:56 ↗ evening I'll do a second call anyone

57:59 ↗ wishing to address Council during

58:00 ↗ audience comments and a third and final

58:03 ↗ call

58:04 ↗ thank you all for coming tonight either

58:06 ↗ in Malia we all know you by your first

58:08 ↗ name now thank you we're also getting to

58:10 ↗ know those people for climate action by

58:12 ↗ their first name and appreciate that you

58:14 ↗ take the time to commit to the meetings

58:16 ↗ and talk to your council about these

58:17 ↗ issues the next item on our agenda this

58:20 ↗ evening is committee and regional

58:21 ↗ reports and we will start with

58:24 ↗ councilmember Hall thank you no report

58:27 ↗ councilmember d Michelle

58:31 ↗ I have a report today mayor Polly myself

58:36 ↗ and Human Services Director Monica know

58:39 ↗ gorilla attended a sound city's

58:43 ↗ association meeting regarding the King

58:45 ↗ County Regional homelessness authority

58:49 ↗ it was held in Tukwila and the so just

58:53 ↗ some general background about the King

58:55 ↗ County Regional homelessness Authority

58:57 ↗ the purpose of the KC RHA is to provide

59:01 ↗ consolidated align service for people

59:04 ↗ and families experiencing homelessness

59:05 ↗ or close to experiencing homelessness as

59:10 ↗ opposed to the King County Housing

59:11 ↗ Authority so that there's no confusion

59:14 ↗ between those two groups the

59:16 ↗ homelessness Authority does not build or

59:18 ↗ manage housing and it's focused on

59:20 ↗ crisis response and on increasing

59:23 ↗ effectiveness by pulling the

59:24 ↗ factionalized system of response

59:26 ↗ together this is a first time for the

59:31 ↗ sound cities association to sit on a

59:34 ↗ governance board for an organization

59:37 ↗ like this SCA will be represented by

59:40 ↗ Nancy Bacchus who is the mayor of Auburn

59:42 ↗ Angela Bernie who's the mayor of Redmond

59:45 ↗ Edie Prince his council member in Renton

59:47 ↗ and they will be our regional reps on

59:50 ↗ this new authority there are four tiers

59:54 ↗ in the organization chart there will be

59:57 ↗ a governing board and that's where sound

1:00:00 ↗ city's association will be represented

1:00:02 ↗ there will be a CEO that will be named

1:00:06 ↗ in the future there will be an advisory

1:00:10 ↗ committee representing community and

1:00:12 ↗ then there will be an expert / technical

1:00:16 ↗ / implementation committee

1:00:20 ↗ the funding for this group is coming

1:00:22 ↗ from the county 55 million and from the

1:00:26 ↗ city of Seattle

1:00:27 ↗ 73 million the technical committee will

1:00:31 ↗ be appointed in April there will be 13

1:00:33 ↗ members representing sectors relevant to

1:00:37 ↗ homelessness people on this group cannot

1:00:39 ↗ be elected officials they can't be city

1:00:43 ↗ staff and they cannot be

1:00:45 ↗ service providers and we are being

1:00:48 ↗ invited all the cities in the sound

1:00:50 ↗ cities Association are being invited to

1:00:52 ↗ nominate people for this group and to do

1:00:56 ↗ that soon but they are to be people who

1:00:59 ↗ are conversing with homelessness and who

1:01:03 ↗ can help guide the direction of this

1:01:06 ↗ group

1:01:07 ↗ and the first meeting of the governance

1:01:09 ↗ group will be on March the 12th

1:01:12 ↗ so the question and the reason they

1:01:16 ↗ brought us all together was to get our

1:01:18 ↗ input into what were some of the

1:01:23 ↗ challenges facing each of the cities

1:01:24 ↗ that were around the table I have to

1:01:27 ↗ commend mayor Poli because she really

1:01:31 ↗ got the ball rolling there when she

1:01:33 ↗ talked about the urgency of the issue

1:01:35 ↗ and then discussed one of the factors

1:01:39 ↗ that is a challenge for us which is that

1:01:42 ↗ many of our homeless encampments are on

1:01:44 ↗ land that is not owned or controlled by

1:01:48 ↗ us for example land it's owned by DNR or

1:01:51 ↗ wash dock or the state of Washington and

1:01:54 ↗ therefore makes it very difficult

1:01:56 ↗ because people in our community asked

1:01:58 ↗ why can't we do something and it's a

1:02:02 ↗ real challenge she made those remarks

1:02:05 ↗ and those were seconded by the city of

1:02:07 ↗ Snoqualmie and the city of Enumclaw and

1:02:10 ↗ generally by the cities that were

1:02:12 ↗ represented there who are rural or who

1:02:15 ↗ are like us between urban and rural

1:02:19 ↗ situations so this was a comment that

1:02:25 ↗ seemed to resonate with a lot of our

1:02:27 ↗ fellow City Council members and so we

1:02:32 ↗ heard from others that about a lack of

1:02:34 ↗ services but again styl Kwame talked

1:02:37 ↗ about the fact that they have very few

1:02:39 ↗ services tends to perpetuate

1:02:41 ↗ homelessness and they are now dealing

1:02:46 ↗ with generational homelessness which is

1:02:49 ↗ a new area that they are really

1:02:52 ↗ struggling with there so I thought it

1:02:55 ↗ was a good meeting and that it was

1:02:56 ↗ productive

1:02:57 ↗ and I hope that perhaps we will be able

1:03:00 ↗ to nominate some people from our

1:03:02 ↗ community for that committee and that

1:03:05 ↗ ends my report

1:03:06 ↗ Thank You councilman rush thank you the

1:03:10 ↗ Puget Sound regional councils Economic

1:03:13 ↗ Development District Board PS our CED DB

1:03:17 ↗ will be meeting on Friday where we are

1:03:22 ↗ actually jumping on a tour bus and going

1:03:25 ↗ to visit areas in Snohomish County that

1:03:30 ↗ have demonstrated economic development

1:03:33 ↗ opportunities so we are visiting

1:03:35 ↗ pain-filled the port of Everett and

1:03:38 ↗ Washington State University Everett to

1:03:42 ↗ get an opportunity to see these things

1:03:44 ↗ up close and personal and hopefully I'll

1:03:46 ↗ bring back some nuggets that we can use

1:03:48 ↗ here and that is includes my report

1:03:53 ↗ Thank You councilmember Goodman Thank

1:03:56 ↗ You Madame mayor

1:03:57 ↗ Eastside fire and rescues of Finance and

1:04:00 ↗ Administration Committee met last

1:04:02 ↗ Wednesday and as the city's

1:04:04 ↗ representative on the Eastside Fire and

1:04:06 ↗ Rescue Board I attend that committee and

1:04:09 ↗ we continued our discussion of the

1:04:12 ↗ potential new governance structure model

1:04:18 ↗ for Eastside fire a non profit and that

1:04:21 ↗ discussion will continue at our next

1:04:24 ↗ committee meeting later this month

1:04:27 ↗ with potentially a recommendation to the

1:04:29 ↗ full board and at that point those

1:04:34 ↗ documents many information about that

1:04:36 ↗ will be coming back to this full council

1:04:39 ↗ and all of the decision-making bodies of

1:04:42 ↗ the other members of Eastside Fire and

1:04:44 ↗ Rescue and probably will even ask the

1:04:46 ↗ fire chief Clark to come give us a

1:04:49 ↗ presentation the board also

1:04:52 ↗ Ystad foreign rescue board also held her

1:04:53 ↗ a retreat last Thursday evening and we

1:04:56 ↗ talked about retreat stuff

1:04:58 ↗ [Laughter]

1:05:02 ↗ it's not private or secret it is we got

1:05:06 ↗ a high-level overview of the agency and

1:05:09 ↗ about its budget and talk generally

1:05:13 ↗ about things that a board would talk

1:05:16 ↗ about once a year when they have new

1:05:18 ↗ members we talked about improving board

1:05:23 ↗ engagement with the agency and just a

1:05:25 ↗ number of different improvements that we

1:05:26 ↗ could make it really was a great retreat

1:05:28 ↗ and then on Saturday station 73 and

1:05:31 ↗ Issaquah Highlands had an open house and

1:05:33 ↗ I think they only have in these open

1:05:35 ↗ houses at these stations once every four

1:05:37 ↗ years so I might mention to the chief

1:05:39 ↗ that they might think about having them

1:05:41 ↗ more often because there was just a

1:05:44 ↗ great turnout it was a great event and I

1:05:45 ↗ want to thank East Side Fire and Rescue

1:05:47 ↗ and all the folks who put that together

1:05:49 ↗ and volunteered and including some from

1:05:53 ↗ our city obviously qua some of our

1:05:55 ↗ employees were there and it was you know

1:05:56 ↗ it was just a great event that's my

1:05:58 ↗ report thank you come from I Mertz

1:06:01 ↗ thank you madam mayor PS RC growth

1:06:05 ↗ management planning board will be

1:06:07 ↗ meeting this Thursday March 6th from

1:06:11 ↗ 10:00 until noon in the PS RC boardroom

1:06:14 ↗ we have two substantive items discussion

1:06:18 ↗ on regional housing strategy and how

1:06:20 ↗ we'll be developing a new one and

1:06:22 ↗ discussion on PSR C Council background

1:06:26 ↗ and overview which will be getting at

1:06:28 ↗ the year's work plan which I don't know

1:06:30 ↗ why we didn't start that last month at

1:06:33 ↗ the first meeting of the year but there

1:06:34 ↗ you have it sound cities Association

1:06:37 ↗ pick will be meeting next Wednesday the

1:06:43 ↗ 12th I believe and our agenda includes a

1:06:48 ↗ discussion with a legislative session

1:06:50 ↗ update regional transit funding measure

1:06:53 ↗ update of where where that's headed

1:06:55 ↗ update on the King County Regional

1:06:57 ↗ homelessness Authority an update on the

1:06:59 ↗ Affordable Housing Committee and an

1:07:01 ↗ update on vision 2050 all this to say no

1:07:04 ↗ action no planned or discussed potential

1:07:08 ↗ action in that agenda this concludes my

1:07:11 ↗ report

1:07:11 ↗ Thank You deputy council president right

1:07:14 ↗ Thank You mayor Poli the King County

1:07:16 ↗ growth management planning council met

1:07:17 ↗ on February 26 at 4 p.m. at the Puget

1:07:20 ↗ Sound Regional Council's offices in

1:07:22 ↗ Seattle King County provided a briefing

1:07:25 ↗ on proposed changes to the King County

1:07:27 ↗ urban growth boundaries is currently

1:07:28 ↗ included in the King County

1:07:29 ↗ Comprehensive Plan these changes

1:07:32 ↗ included a minor expansion in

1:07:34 ↗ Woodinville a minor expansion in Maple

1:07:36 ↗ Valley and of most interest us a

1:07:39 ↗ contraction of Issaquah urban growth

1:07:41 ↗ area that would remove three parcels on

1:07:43 ↗ Cougar Mountain that cannot be developed

1:07:45 ↗ to urban densities actions anticipated

1:07:48 ↗ on April 22nd G MPC meeting to make a

1:07:51 ↗ recommendation to the King County

1:07:52 ↗ Council GMP see also approved

1:07:55 ↗ appointments to members to the

1:07:56 ↗ Affordable Housing Committee on the

1:08:00 ↗ Affordable Housing Committee is

1:08:01 ↗ currently working on recommendation

1:08:03 ↗ recommended updates to the housing

1:08:05 ↗ chapter of King County's countywide

1:08:08 ↗ planning policies with the goal of

1:08:10 ↗ supporting meeting the region's needs

1:08:13 ↗ for portable housing their

1:08:14 ↗ recommendations are expected to come

1:08:16 ↗ back to the GMP C later this year likely

1:08:18 ↗ in the June timeframe and as

1:08:20 ↗ councilmember March just mentioned the

1:08:23 ↗ sca pic will be briefed on the work of

1:08:26 ↗ the affordable housing committee and

1:08:27 ↗ discussion and upcoming meeting in March

1:08:30 ↗ also staff provided an overview of the

1:08:33 ↗ work plan and schedule for GMP C

1:08:35 ↗ including updates the countywide

1:08:37 ↗ planning policies which will be the bulk

1:08:39 ↗ of the work we do in 2020 the countywide

1:08:43 ↗ planning policies established the urban

1:08:46 ↗ growth area boundaries criteria for

1:08:48 ↗ revising the UGA boundaries growth

1:08:51 ↗ targets for each jurisdiction and a set

1:08:52 ↗ of criteria for urban centers so lots of

1:08:54 ↗ important work to be done the county

1:08:57 ↗ planning policies are slated to be

1:08:59 ↗ updated in time to provide a framework

1:09:01 ↗ for updates to city comprehensive plans

1:09:04 ↗ which are due in 2023 staff also didn't

1:09:07 ↗ know that legislation is currently being

1:09:10 ↗ considered in Olympia that may extend

1:09:11 ↗ the deadline for updates to the

1:09:12 ↗ Comprehensive Plan to 2025 and if that's

1:09:15 ↗ the case the timeline and work program

1:09:18 ↗ for GMP GMP C will shift accordingly and

1:09:21 ↗ that concludes my report this evening

1:09:22 ↗ thank you council president hunt thank

1:09:25 ↗ you the title 18

1:09:27 ↗ use code ad-hoc committee councilmembers

1:09:30 ↗ met on February 29th this was a meeting

1:09:32 ↗ of just the three council members on

1:09:34 ↗ that committee and we took a step back

1:09:37 ↗ and overall concluded that we want to

1:09:40 ↗ refocus on the big picture objectives we

1:09:43 ↗ felt we have a real opportunity here to

1:09:46 ↗ with this land use code revision work to

1:09:51 ↗ get a land-use code that meets the

1:09:53 ↗ community's expectations and also gets

1:09:55 ↗ us outcomes that are aligned with our

1:09:57 ↗ strategic plan we for what for where we

1:10:01 ↗ felt in the we are in the process we

1:10:03 ↗ felt we were too far into the weeds in

1:10:05 ↗ certain parts and wanted to take a

1:10:06 ↗ bigger picture look over all of the

1:10:09 ↗ possibilities for land use code when it

1:10:11 ↗ comes back to the full council we will

1:10:13 ↗ be working with the staff to ensure that

1:10:15 ↗ for the next step which will employ

1:10:16 ↗ involve all of Council that that

1:10:19 ↗ presentation that that discussion is

1:10:21 ↗ meaningful and as useful as possible and

1:10:23 ↗ high-level and we also felt very

1:10:27 ↗ positively about the Old Town

1:10:29 ↗ architectural standards presentation

1:10:31 ↗ that we recently all saw as an example

1:10:34 ↗ of the kind of high-level presentation

1:10:37 ↗ with the reasons for why we might

1:10:40 ↗ consider changes in the big picture

1:10:42 ↗ outcomes that we're looking for with

1:10:44 ↗ those changes the next ad hoc meeting

1:10:47 ↗ with the three ad hoc committee council

1:10:49 ↗ members as well as with the city staff

1:10:51 ↗ will be on March 5th and that concludes

1:10:53 ↗ my report thank you on to the mayor's

1:10:56 ↗ report there was an executive session

1:10:58 ↗ held earlier this evening and action in

1:11:01 ↗ regular session the one item I want to

1:11:04 ↗ talk about this evening is the one

1:11:05 ↗ that's at the top of the headlines

1:11:07 ↗ everywhere I want to give an update on

1:11:08 ↗ the coronavirus disease Cove in nineteen

1:11:12 ↗ so as the confirmed cases count

1:11:14 ↗ continues to rise is coordinating

1:11:17 ↗ closely with Public Health Seattle and

1:11:19 ↗ King County and our first responders to

1:11:21 ↗ help keep our community prepared our

1:11:24 ↗ first responders have ample preventative

1:11:26 ↗ supplies on hand and response plans in

1:11:29 ↗ place the vast majority of the illnesses

1:11:32 ↗ around the world are mild with fever and

1:11:34 ↗ cough a much smaller percentage of cases

1:11:36 ↗ are severe and involve pneumonia

1:11:38 ↗ particularly in

1:11:40 ↗ elderly people in people with underlying

1:11:41 ↗ medical conditions it's important that

1:11:44 ↗ everyone use basic prevention methods to

1:11:47 ↗ reduce the spread of novel coronavirus

1:11:50 ↗ please be sure to stay home when you are

1:11:53 ↗ sick wash hands with soap and water for

1:11:56 ↗ at least 20 seconds have backup plans

1:11:58 ↗ for work and or childcare meanwhile we

1:12:01 ↗ must work together to proactively

1:12:03 ↗ address potential discrimination based

1:12:06 ↗ on ethnicity or ancestry a certain andas

1:12:09 ↗ ancestry does not make a person more

1:12:11 ↗ vulnerable to this disease

1:12:13 ↗ Karuna violent right coronavirus does

1:12:16 ↗ not recognize race nationality or

1:12:19 ↗ ethnicity here in Issaquah we're

1:12:22 ↗ stronger as a community when we stand

1:12:23 ↗ together against discrimination please

1:12:26 ↗ stay informed and prepared we'll

1:12:28 ↗ continue to keep our community updated

1:12:30 ↗ via our website and on twitter and if

1:12:33 ↗ you were not able to watch the

1:12:34 ↗ governor's address this afternoon at 3

1:12:36 ↗ o'clock it's available on youtube he

1:12:38 ↗ spent some time talking about the state

1:12:41 ↗ response and how it is coordinated with

1:12:43 ↗ the feds how it's coordinated with us

1:12:46 ↗ regionally and locally and provided a

1:12:48 ↗ lot of good information on links to stay

1:12:50 ↗ up to date so it's really worth a watch

1:12:53 ↗ if you did not get to see it today it

1:12:55 ↗ was at 3 o'clock moving on to the

1:12:57 ↗ consent calendar the consent calendar

1:13:00 ↗ was distributed to council in advance

1:13:01 ↗ and if authorized all of the items on

1:13:04 ↗ the consent calendar will be considered

1:13:06 ↗ together and approved by one motion have

1:13:08 ↗ the payables and payroll been reviewed

1:13:10 ↗ yes thank you does any council member

1:13:13 ↗ desire to remove any item from the

1:13:15 ↗ consent calendar and consider it under

1:13:17 ↗ regular business seeing none is there

1:13:20 ↗ anyone prepared to make a motion

1:13:23 ↗ president hon I moved to adopts the

1:13:26 ↗ consent calendar as listed in tonight's

1:13:28 ↗ published agenda second it's been moved

1:13:31 ↗ and seconded all those in favor signify

1:13:34 ↗ by saying aye

1:13:35 ↗ as opposed that carries unanimously

1:13:38 ↗ thank you our first item under regular

1:13:41 ↗ business this evening is a b7 9 1 7 k 4

1:13:44 ↗ C joint climate commitments update and

1:13:47 ↗ the question before council this evening

1:13:50 ↗ is to approve the resolution

1:13:51 ↗ this is the first time this item is

1:13:53 ↗ coming before the City Council and I'd

1:13:55 ↗ like to ask Megan Curtis Murphy our

1:13:58 ↗ sustainability coordinator to come up

1:14:00 ↗ and give a presentation thank you I'm

1:14:12 ↗ making Curtis Murphy with the

1:14:14 ↗ sustainability office thank you for

1:14:16 ↗ having me here this evening to talk

1:14:18 ↗ about the King County cities climate

1:14:20 ↗ collaboration also known as k4c and the

1:14:23 ↗ joint climate commitments so the purpose

1:14:26 ↗ of the presentation today is to talk

1:14:28 ↗ about the the background around the K

1:14:30 ↗ for C and the joint climate commitments

1:14:33 ↗ and the updates have been made to them

1:14:35 ↗ recently also before the council is a

1:14:38 ↗ resolution in support of the joint

1:14:39 ↗ climate commitments the city has been a

1:14:44 ↗ member of the key for C since 2012 and

1:14:47 ↗ the key for C works together with local

1:14:50 ↗ governments to enhance climate and

1:14:52 ↗ sustainability actions in 2014 the city

1:14:57 ↗ signed on to the joint climate

1:14:59 ↗ commitments and this charts our

1:15:01 ↗ opportunities for joint actions to

1:15:03 ↗ reduce greenhouse gas emissions and

1:15:05 ↗ accelerate progress towards a clean and

1:15:07 ↗ sustainable future a lot has changed in

1:15:09 ↗ the last five years so before us this

1:15:12 ↗ evening is an update to the joint

1:15:14 ↗ climate commitments and I'm going to be

1:15:16 ↗ joined in a moment by Rachel Braun BA

1:15:18 ↗ the energy and partnership specialist at

1:15:21 ↗ office of King County Executive Dow

1:15:23 ↗ Constantine to talk a little bit more

1:15:25 ↗ about the key for C and those updates to

1:15:27 ↗ the commitments I also want to touch on

1:15:31 ↗ the climate planning efforts that the

1:15:33 ↗ city has been working on as you remember

1:15:35 ↗ last month we were before the council to

1:15:38 ↗ present the carbon inventory update and

1:15:41 ↗ with that we have our majority of our

1:15:43 ↗ emissions coming from buildings at 62%

1:15:45 ↗ and 38% from transportation as directed

1:15:49 ↗ by council we've been working with

1:15:51 ↗ community groups some who are here this

1:15:53 ↗ evening on a climate convening which

1:15:56 ↗ we're going to be having on May 2nd of

1:15:58 ↗ this year we're still in the planning

1:15:59 ↗ stages for that but we'll be inviting

1:16:01 ↗ residents businesses and the community

1:16:03 ↗ to join us in that

1:16:05 ↗ planning effort the joint climate

1:16:08 ↗ commitments have really been

1:16:09 ↗ foundational and the work that we've

1:16:11 ↗ done on climate in the city to date and

1:16:13 ↗ I think they have a really great

1:16:14 ↗ framework and will bring in partnerships

1:16:17 ↗ that we'll be able to use as we continue

1:16:19 ↗ on this climate planning pathway so I'd

1:16:22 ↗ like to invite Rachel brahmbhatt to come

1:16:25 ↗ up and talk a little bit more about the

1:16:27 ↗ key for C well thank you for having me

1:16:39 ↗ here tonight and thanks for the PCA

1:16:42 ↗ community members for showing up my name

1:16:44 ↗ is rachel brahma energy in policy and

1:16:47 ↗ partnership specialist in the office of

1:16:50 ↗ King County Dow Constantine I want to

1:16:52 ↗ just talk a little bit about the k4c a

1:16:55 ↗ little bit of background first I want to

1:16:57 ↗ talk about who's in the k4c talk about a

1:17:01 ↗ little bit of the history of the joint

1:17:02 ↗ commitments and then review the updates

1:17:04 ↗ of the joint commitments and I'll go

1:17:07 ↗ through that fairly quickly it's a

1:17:09 ↗ little dense

1:17:13 ↗ so the caper C was really founded on the

1:17:17 ↗ goal that we can do more together we can

1:17:20 ↗ share resources and we can work and

1:17:23 ↗ split the load and be better together so

1:17:27 ↗ how we've worked in this regional

1:17:30 ↗ collaboration model is we collaborate on

1:17:32 ↗ goals and measuring progress so that

1:17:34 ↗ will speak to the goals that you'll see

1:17:36 ↗ in the joint commitments we share

1:17:38 ↗ experiences and learn from each other's

1:17:40 ↗ successes and challenges if you see

1:17:42 ↗ there's a rather dated picture of k4c

1:17:44 ↗ partner staff in 2016 but we meet almost

1:17:47 ↗ monthly to go over best practices learn

1:17:51 ↗ what we chose doing and learn from each

1:17:53 ↗ other at the top there is a picture of

1:17:56 ↗ k4c elected officials at a work session

1:17:58 ↗ in 2019 and I know mayor Poli you've

1:18:01 ↗ been a regular attendee at these

1:18:03 ↗ meetings thank you those have been

1:18:05 ↗ really great meetings where elected

1:18:07 ↗ officials can get together and meet with

1:18:10 ↗ each other and share best practices and

1:18:12 ↗ make decisions that help chart the k4c

1:18:14 ↗ going forward I want to put in a plug

1:18:16 ↗ for our next k4c elected official

1:18:18 ↗ meaning it's coming up April 24th I hope

1:18:21 ↗ you saw an invitation in your inbox this

1:18:24 ↗ morning actually I warmly invite you to

1:18:29 ↗ attend location TBD will figuring that

1:18:31 ↗ out soon there's more and more elected

1:18:34 ↗ officials and staff that attend and so

1:18:37 ↗ we keep having to find larger and larger

1:18:38 ↗ rooms which is a wonderful problem to

1:18:40 ↗ have what else we work on together is

1:18:44 ↗ sharing grants funding and resources

1:18:46 ↗ again sharing that knowledge

1:18:48 ↗ coordinating our outreach and messaging

1:18:50 ↗ so that we have uniform voices out

1:18:52 ↗ together raise the profile of our

1:18:55 ↗ climate work make sure that ordinary

1:18:57 ↗ residents know what we're doing and our

1:19:00 ↗ business partners know what we're doing

1:19:02 ↗ share staff training and expertise again

1:19:04 ↗ that peer-to-peer network that we have

1:19:06 ↗ that we can talk about what our best

1:19:07 ↗ practices that each jurisdiction is

1:19:10 ↗ doing we engaged elected officials not

1:19:12 ↗ only the ones that are active in it but

1:19:15 ↗ we engage with state level officials

1:19:17 ↗ frequently but really the the the bottom

1:19:20 ↗ two bullet points are the main you know

1:19:22 ↗ we speak with a collective voice for

1:19:24 ↗ greater impact and make sure that local

1:19:26 ↗ actions have a bigger impact and if you

1:19:29 ↗ look it really speaks to our who our

1:19:31 ↗ partners are we have very large cities

1:19:33 ↗ and we have some smaller cities and

1:19:35 ↗ everyone has an equal voice and when we

1:19:37 ↗ when we get together in the whole large

1:19:39 ↗ group it really makes the impact so the

1:19:42 ↗ KFOR see right now has 18 partners its

1:19:44 ↗ King County the Port of Seattle and 16

1:19:46 ↗ cities you can see who is up there it is

1:19:51 ↗ the elected officials represent 1.6

1:19:54 ↗ million people about 80% of King

1:19:56 ↗ County's population we continue to look

1:20:00 ↗ to recruit new members there's always

1:20:02 ↗ new interest so if you know other

1:20:07 ↗ council members and other jurisdictions

1:20:09 ↗ that are not members of the k4c always

1:20:11 ↗ appreciate a plug there then I want to

1:20:17 ↗ speak really to the joint commitments

1:20:18 ↗ background and Meghan touched on it

1:20:20 ↗ briefly but these are these are really

1:20:22 ↗ our foundational documents for how we

1:20:24 ↗ operate so they have the are guiding

1:20:27 ↗ policies and then our our pathways and

1:20:29 ↗ our investments and what

1:20:31 ↗ we do so the ones that we have been

1:20:34 ↗ operating off of for the past five years

1:20:36 ↗ were developed in 2014 Miss Vegas and

1:20:39 ↗ lots of things have changed well they

1:20:41 ↗ have guiding principles and actions for

1:20:43 ↗ for each sector and so we'll go over

1:20:45 ↗ them a little bit more in detail really

1:20:49 ↗ key to it and this might almost be one

1:20:51 ↗ of the biggest bullet points is it's not

1:20:52 ↗ one size fits all and you'll see we

1:20:54 ↗ called it out really explicitly in the

1:20:56 ↗ updated joint commitments is that the

1:20:59 ↗ the commitments are really focused on

1:21:02 ↗ allowing each individual jurisdiction to

1:21:05 ↗ do what is best for that jurisdiction

1:21:07 ↗ what actions and investments work with

1:21:10 ↗ particular land-use patterns your

1:21:12 ↗ population your demographics your

1:21:15 ↗ emissions profile of your jurisdiction

1:21:18 ↗ not everyone is expected to do the same

1:21:20 ↗ thing and I think that's really key that

1:21:24 ↗ that we're not expecting the same suite

1:21:25 ↗ of actions for every individual entity

1:21:29 ↗ this letter of commitment was optional

1:21:31 ↗ we also have the interlocal agreement

1:21:33 ↗ which sets the foundation of just paying

1:21:35 ↗ dues and will show up to meetings and be

1:21:38 ↗ a participant that's separate it is

1:21:40 ↗ optional most k4c partners signed on in

1:21:43 ↗ 2014 we are I think up to six or seven

1:21:49 ↗ jurisdictions have signed on to the new

1:21:52 ↗ commitments anyway there was a refresh

1:21:56 ↗ recommended at the 2019 k4c work session

1:21:59 ↗ and there were a variety of new state

1:22:01 ↗ laws just an update on technology it's

1:22:05 ↗ probably good to look at things every

1:22:06 ↗ five years anyway but it does reflect

1:22:09 ↗ our updated missions inventory that the

1:22:11 ↗ county runs countywide reflects the 100%

1:22:15 ↗ clean law and it's also this is really

1:22:17 ↗ key it's informed by County climate

1:22:19 ↗ change workshops that we held in summer

1:22:21 ↗ and fall of 2019 those were really to

1:22:24 ↗ also inform our strategic climate action

1:22:26 ↗ plan update that we're working on will

1:22:28 ↗ transmit to our council in June but we

1:22:31 ↗ had a lot of stakeholder meetings with

1:22:34 ↗ not-for-profit organizations and special

1:22:38 ↗ organizations but also had three public

1:22:40 ↗ meetings one in Bellevue one at the

1:22:43 ↗ University of Washington

1:22:44 ↗ one down Highline Community College and

1:22:46 ↗ we had over 250 really engaged citizens

1:22:50 ↗ come to these meetings and tell us what

1:22:52 ↗ was important to them both on the

1:22:54 ↗ operations side and on the community

1:22:55 ↗ wise scale so to super high level I want

1:23:00 ↗ to go over these and then we'll go over

1:23:01 ↗ each section but if there's a certain

1:23:03 ↗ aspect of it that's really important to

1:23:06 ↗ you I want you to let me know and please

1:23:07 ↗ of course feel free to ask questions but

1:23:11 ↗ as I mentioned earlier the the joint

1:23:14 ↗ commitment update really pulls out that

1:23:17 ↗ key tenant that each partner may not

1:23:20 ↗ pursue all actions and will act where it

1:23:22 ↗ has the most impact and influence given

1:23:25 ↗ the unique characteristics of the

1:23:26 ↗ jurisdiction I don't know that's super

1:23:28 ↗ important to every jurisdiction that

1:23:31 ↗ that the county is not telling you what

1:23:33 ↗ to do Seattle's not telling what to do

1:23:35 ↗ you get to figure out what is best for

1:23:38 ↗ you and for your residents

1:23:40 ↗ it adds the growth management planning

1:23:43 ↗ council adopted greenhouse gas reduction

1:23:45 ↗ targets and proposes that k4c partners

1:23:48 ↗ adopt their own supportive targets just

1:23:50 ↗ from how timing was the original

1:23:53 ↗ document didn't have the the GMP C

1:23:57 ↗ adopted targets call that clearly those

1:23:59 ↗ were actually adopted afterwards so

1:24:01 ↗ that's just a clarification really a

1:24:02 ↗ technical reflects our updated County

1:24:05 ↗ emissions inventory and new analysis of

1:24:07 ↗ pathways to reach the countywide goal of

1:24:10 ↗ 50% reduction by 2030 and 80% by 2050

1:24:15 ↗ another super important point in

1:24:17 ↗ incorporates stronger language rod

1:24:18 ↗ equity climate justice and transition

1:24:20 ↗ for workers that was that was not so

1:24:23 ↗ strong in the last version it extends

1:24:25 ↗ our transportation and energy efficiency

1:24:27 ↗ goals out to 2050 so really extends

1:24:29 ↗ those adds actions relating to reducing

1:24:32 ↗ the use of fossil fuels in buildings

1:24:34 ↗ adds language about tools to support

1:24:37 ↗ implementation of shared commitments

1:24:38 ↗ such as a toolkit which the county is

1:24:40 ↗ working on right now we will have ready

1:24:43 ↗ hopefully at the end of July and can

1:24:46 ↗ start sharing it at that point and

1:24:47 ↗ reflecting changes in technology adds a

1:24:50 ↗ new section for electric vehicles and

1:24:52 ↗ also a focus for preparing for climate

1:24:54 ↗ impacts

1:24:56 ↗ so Staffan a for the we went through the

1:24:59 ↗ each section and highlighted really some

1:25:01 ↗ of the key points of each one I can

1:25:04 ↗ speak to things that might be different

1:25:05 ↗ I just I do want to pause and see if

1:25:07 ↗ there were any specific questions that

1:25:09 ↗ folks had before we get before we we

1:25:13 ↗ dive in so Mike you're good to go okay

1:25:17 ↗ great no this is the I have to admit you

1:25:19 ↗ I present to a lot of councils and I'm

1:25:21 ↗ always impressed with the level of

1:25:24 ↗ detail that City Council's

1:25:26 ↗ are willing to go go to on things like

1:25:30 ↗ that I think it's amazing so kudos to

1:25:33 ↗ you so this is the first section it's

1:25:36 ↗ shared goals not a lot of changes on

1:25:39 ↗ this one this one is as I mentioned to

1:25:41 ↗ achieve the shared countywide greenhouse

1:25:43 ↗ gas emission targets that reduce the

1:25:47 ↗ emissions by 50 percent by 2030 and 80

1:25:49 ↗ percent by 2050 those are called out

1:25:51 ↗ explicitly they were not called out

1:25:53 ↗ before that's really the only change in

1:25:57 ↗ this section the next one climate policy

1:26:01 ↗ this one this one actually doesn't have

1:26:04 ↗ any change at all but it really looks

1:26:05 ↗ eeks

1:26:06 ↗ on that we will support strong federal

1:26:08 ↗ regional state countywide and local

1:26:10 ↗ climate policy which advocates for

1:26:13 ↗ science-based limits and a market-based

1:26:16 ↗ price there and carbon pollution with

1:26:17 ↗ reinvestment to areas where it's needed

1:26:20 ↗ most so no changes in this one at all

1:26:24 ↗ the next one here transportation and

1:26:26 ↗ land use this one really speaks to the

1:26:31 ↗ changes on this one really speak to how

1:26:34 ↗ how are we going to increase transit and

1:26:37 ↗ other options increased mobility

1:26:40 ↗ regionally with the goal of reducing

1:26:42 ↗ driving per capita 20% by 2030 and 50%

1:26:46 ↗ by 2050 compared to 2017 levels that

1:26:50 ↗ last sentence in that first paragraph is

1:26:51 ↗ super important understanding that

1:26:53 ↗ different areas of the county have

1:26:55 ↗ varying levels of transit access so so

1:26:59 ↗ so 20 percent or 50 percent reduction

1:27:02 ↗ per capita driving is much easier in

1:27:05 ↗ downtown Seattle which is super well

1:27:06 ↗ served by transit on

1:27:08 ↗ understand that in Issaquah which is I

1:27:11 ↗ would say less frequently served by

1:27:13 ↗ transit than downtown Seattle that would

1:27:15 ↗ be more challenging we do not expect

1:27:17 ↗ people to be able to drive only halfway

1:27:19 ↗ to Seattle or only halfway to the pass

1:27:21 ↗ or where they're going so again that one

1:27:23 ↗ is super important I think it's also one

1:27:27 ↗ where of course the county and our

1:27:29 ↗ partners describing one of them are

1:27:31 ↗ seeking to constantly improve transit

1:27:34 ↗ and make it faster better a preferred

1:27:37 ↗ mode option but until that time we

1:27:39 ↗ understand that probably a lot of folks

1:27:41 ↗ in this area need to drive to get where

1:27:44 ↗ they're going so I just really would

1:27:46 ↗ have called that out really the other

1:27:49 ↗ goals on here are not super have not

1:27:52 ↗ changed a lot continue to secure funding

1:27:55 ↗ for transit and support mobility through

1:27:58 ↗ land use and street planning implement

1:28:01 ↗ 25th 2015 day tattwas 2040 in the

1:28:05 ↗ previous version but most of this is

1:28:07 ↗ exactly the same the next one here clean

1:28:11 ↗ fuels and electric vehicles this one was

1:28:13 ↗ part of the transportation on land use

1:28:15 ↗ but we decided to split it out just

1:28:17 ↗ because clean fuels is obviously a topic

1:28:19 ↗ these days and electric vehicles have

1:28:21 ↗ come a long way since 2014 there's a lot

1:28:24 ↗ more of them and I think they're a lot

1:28:25 ↗ better so this one really the the

1:28:28 ↗ changes on here really are the base of

1:28:31 ↗ this is to protect fuel economy

1:28:33 ↗ standards and to adopt a statewide or

1:28:36 ↗ regional clean fuel standard that

1:28:38 ↗ reduces transportation fuel attends

1:28:40 ↗ intensities by at least 20% by 2030

1:28:42 ↗ compared to 2017 levels and so the last

1:28:46 ↗ part in this is increasing the use of

1:28:48 ↗ electric vehicles such as a 100 percent

1:28:50 ↗ of light duty vehicles and 60 percent of

1:28:52 ↗ medium duty and 40 percent of heavy duty

1:28:54 ↗ vehicles are electric by 2050 understand

1:28:57 ↗ that this is the community-wide goal

1:28:59 ↗ this is not the government operations

1:29:01 ↗ goal that to a certain extent we may not

1:29:05 ↗ have any power over its some market

1:29:07 ↗ forces that we do but to take those type

1:29:10 ↗ of steps that can help incent it like

1:29:12 ↗ enacting codes and programs to to incent

1:29:15 ↗ or require EB charging and buildings and

1:29:17 ↗ development so that people can plug in

1:29:19 ↗ where and when they need to and don't

1:29:21 ↗ that range anxiety next one energy

1:29:27 ↗ supply this one the this one reflexed

1:29:32 ↗ the passage of the Washington State

1:29:34 ↗ clean energy transformation Act which

1:29:37 ↗ actually met some of the goals in the

1:29:40 ↗ 2014 joint commitments which was to seek

1:29:44 ↗ clean electricity supplies and now the

1:29:46 ↗ with the passage of it we are well on

1:29:48 ↗ that way to it with also phasing out

1:29:51 ↗ coal-fired electricity sources by 2025

1:29:53 ↗ and we will have 80 percent carbon

1:29:57 ↗ neutral electricity by 2030

1:29:59 ↗ assuming that we implement the Act so

1:30:03 ↗ this one does not have a lot of changes

1:30:06 ↗ this is actually one of them it's a real

1:30:07 ↗ success story of the of the work of the

1:30:10 ↗ k4c to come together and help support

1:30:12 ↗ that law in the in the legislature last

1:30:15 ↗ year there is one of the changes that is

1:30:20 ↗ an addition in this one other than just

1:30:22 ↗ partnering with utilities and

1:30:23 ↗ stakeholders to support renewable energy

1:30:26 ↗ development you know community solar

1:30:29 ↗ green power streamline permitting I'm

1:30:31 ↗ doing using those jurisdictional tools

1:30:33 ↗ that you have to support it another one

1:30:36 ↗ that's new is participate in integrated

1:30:38 ↗ resource plan and energy plan

1:30:39 ↗ development process to ensure equitable

1:30:41 ↗ distribution of benefits and so this is

1:30:44 ↗ one of those areas where actually the

1:30:46 ↗ sharing and the peer sharing between

1:30:48 ↗ staff is really important so this is one

1:30:51 ↗ of the things that probably not every

1:30:53 ↗ staff member in every k4 City has the

1:30:55 ↗ capacity to do however I am lucky enough

1:30:59 ↗ that I get to do this and I actually

1:31:01 ↗ find it fascinating it's really

1:31:03 ↗ interesting to participate in the

1:31:04 ↗ dockets at the Washington State

1:31:06 ↗ utilities and Transportation Commission

1:31:09 ↗ it's also fundamental to our electricity

1:31:12 ↗ grid and when I participate in these I

1:31:15 ↗ share all the information with k4c staff

1:31:17 ↗ and if we decide that it's it would be

1:31:20 ↗ impactful to draft a show a letter to

1:31:24 ↗ chairman Danner or the UTC or to a

1:31:26 ↗ legislator I typically draft that ask

1:31:30 ↗ for comment from your respective staffs

1:31:32 ↗ and then circulate it so that

1:31:34 ↗ really trying to take a lot of that that

1:31:37 ↗ effort and that workload off of staff

1:31:40 ↗ that might not have the capacity but

1:31:42 ↗ this is definitely part of like this is

1:31:44 ↗ part of my job description that I do and

1:31:45 ↗ that I share Oh cut some remarks yeah I

1:31:50 ↗ have a question so I mean I'm proud that

1:31:53 ↗ is equal as I believe a founding member

1:31:55 ↗ of k4c but one question that I had is

1:31:58 ↗ around this energy supply issue I'm sure

1:32:02 ↗ you're aware it it makes reference in

1:32:04 ↗ one of our documents here that the city

1:32:07 ↗ of Issaquah chose not to sign on to the

1:32:11 ↗ 2019 King County and I had language in

1:32:15 ↗ front of me but now I don't

1:32:17 ↗ basically the 2019 comprehensive solid

1:32:20 ↗ waste management plan and so part of

1:32:23 ↗ that was around an ongoing discussion

1:32:25 ↗ that some of us felt around power plants

1:32:30 ↗ basically based on incinerators and so

1:32:34 ↗ the question is and this is a

1:32:35 ↗ conversation that I think is going on

1:32:38 ↗ throughout the county and does this

1:32:40 ↗ energy supply policy sort of bind k4c on

1:32:46 ↗ one side or the other on this long term

1:32:48 ↗ debate about you know sort of the

1:32:51 ↗ northern European model of doing garbage

1:32:53 ↗ incineration first is continued landfill

1:32:56 ↗ that were the path are on right now I

1:32:59 ↗ would say I would say no because

1:33:01 ↗ typically one doesn't think about a

1:33:05 ↗ waste to energy plant as actually a huge

1:33:08 ↗ portion of your overall electricity

1:33:10 ↗ supply the and and you could think of it

1:33:13 ↗ also as potentially qualifying for a

1:33:16 ↗ clean electricity supply so the goal was

1:33:19 ↗ really to focus on you know renewable

1:33:22 ↗ hydro and other clean sources instead of

1:33:25 ↗ the fought the the natural gas and the

1:33:27 ↗ Coal Fired well that was really the goal

1:33:29 ↗ of it not front and center was the the

1:33:32 ↗ waste to energy or the landfill debate

1:33:34 ↗ okay so we wouldn't see this you know if

1:33:38 ↗ in ten years or you know whenever this

1:33:41 ↗ subject came up again for the county in

1:33:43 ↗ the direction the county wants to go in

1:33:45 ↗ this wouldn't sort of tie a four C's

1:33:47 ↗ hands

1:33:48 ↗ on getting involved in that debate I

1:33:50 ↗ don't think so and that's where everyone

1:33:53 ↗ has an equal voice and that would be an

1:33:56 ↗ issue that if you saw that coming if you

1:33:58 ↗ were in that chair in ten years you

1:34:00 ↗ should bring that up and that would be

1:34:01 ↗ something that would would definitely be

1:34:03 ↗ you know it's a subjective debate but I

1:34:05 ↗ don't I don't see it going there thank

1:34:07 ↗ you thank you council president hunt a

1:34:09 ↗ comment which is it's my understanding

1:34:11 ↗ that under the state law it is

1:34:14 ↗ considered renewable energy the if

1:34:16 ↗ energy is generated from a landfill site

1:34:19 ↗ so it might for what that's worth

1:34:21 ↗ thank you okay thank you

1:34:26 ↗ let's keep moving on here green building

1:34:29 ↗ and energy efficiency as Megan pointed

1:34:31 ↗ out your largest source of carbon

1:34:35 ↗ emissions is from the built environment

1:34:37 ↗ that's not unusual actually a lot of

1:34:40 ↗ this focuses on the same goals that

1:34:44 ↗ we've had our reducing energy use in

1:34:46 ↗ existing buildings twenty-five percent

1:34:47 ↗ by 2030 and forty five percent by 2050

1:34:50 ↗ those have been stretched out that's one

1:34:52 ↗ of the goals has been stretched out but

1:34:54 ↗ really seeks to to continue to work on

1:34:57 ↗ building codes that provide for more

1:35:00 ↗ efficient homes and businesses that save

1:35:02 ↗ residents and building owners money and

1:35:05 ↗ energy and just reduce our over overall

1:35:08 ↗ impact the more efficient so we have the

1:35:10 ↗ less we have to to focus on what is our

1:35:12 ↗ renewable supply so one thing that is

1:35:16 ↗ new in here is a focus on reducing

1:35:19 ↗ natural gas and other fossil fuel use in

1:35:22 ↗ existing buildings by 20% by 2030 and

1:35:26 ↗ 80% by 2050 and how the county envision

1:35:30 ↗ visions it and I believe this is how the

1:35:32 ↗ rest of the k4c envisions is is not

1:35:34 ↗ through not through a ban i'm not gonna

1:35:36 ↗ say that word but through implementation

1:35:39 ↗ of stronger conservation per passed last

1:35:44 ↗ year hospital 1257 in the in the

1:35:46 ↗ legislature through conversion to

1:35:48 ↗ electrical sources and then through the

1:35:51 ↗ use of renewable natural gas which again

1:35:53 ↗ kind of speaks to the landfill so that's

1:35:56 ↗ that is one thing that is really

1:35:59 ↗ is a change in this one next one

1:36:04 ↗ consumption and materials management not

1:36:06 ↗ a lot has changed on this one seeking a

1:36:10 ↗ very high recycling rate and also

1:36:13 ↗ seeking zero waste of resources through

1:36:15 ↗ 2030

1:36:16 ↗ that's something that we're looking to

1:36:18 ↗ put forward in our 2020 strategic

1:36:20 ↗ climate action plan it's not the the

1:36:23 ↗ program and the policies are not fully

1:36:24 ↗ formed but we're setting that as a very

1:36:26 ↗ aspirational goal next forest and

1:36:32 ↗ farming not a lot of change on this one

1:36:36 ↗ seeking to preserve the the force that

1:36:40 ↗ we have in plenty around here but also

1:36:41 ↗ the farm and the agriculture by keeping

1:36:44 ↗ keeping those vibrant and focusing

1:36:47 ↗ growth and urban centers so that we do

1:36:49 ↗ have forests and farms that help the

1:36:51 ↗ salmon and and all the other great

1:36:54 ↗ things that we talked about a little bit

1:36:55 ↗ earlier the one thing that is different

1:36:58 ↗ on this one this edition is just

1:37:01 ↗ supporting the local food economy and

1:37:03 ↗ King County has the local food

1:37:05 ↗ initiative which seeks to link farmers

1:37:08 ↗ and buyers and really support our

1:37:11 ↗ agrarian economy here in the region last

1:37:15 ↗ one excuse me operations

1:37:19 ↗ this one is speaks to how does each

1:37:22 ↗ jurisdiction manage their own portfolio

1:37:24 ↗ of buildings and their operational use

1:37:27 ↗ this one does not have a lot of change

1:37:29 ↗ it seeks to have cities and partners

1:37:34 ↗ develop their own greenhouse gas

1:37:35 ↗ emission reduction targets and take

1:37:39 ↗ action in order to hit those with energy

1:37:41 ↗ efficiency benchmarking le constructing

1:37:46 ↗ new buildings to lead and other high

1:37:48 ↗ officia standards I know this cause

1:37:50 ↗ experience in that the only thing that's

1:37:52 ↗ new on that soon is electrifying

1:37:54 ↗ municipal vehicles that was something

1:37:56 ↗ that wasn't in the last iteration

1:37:58 ↗ because I don't think they were there

1:38:00 ↗ was as much market penetration at that

1:38:02 ↗ point climate preparedness this whole

1:38:04 ↗ section is brand new and it's there's

1:38:07 ↗ not a lot of detail on this just because

1:38:10 ↗ we're still trying to figure out what is

1:38:11 ↗ best model what what are some of the

1:38:14 ↗ best steps to take we want to make sure

1:38:16 ↗ that's informed by science but really

1:38:19 ↗ speaks to wanting to we need to talk to

1:38:21 ↗ preparedness not only for our own

1:38:23 ↗ operations but to protect our the

1:38:25 ↗ residents and our in our jurisdictions

1:38:28 ↗ and then lastly this one hasn't changed

1:38:32 ↗ at all just speaking to collaboration

1:38:34 ↗ which was participating in the k4c and

1:38:37 ↗ sharing knowledge and and and helping to

1:38:40 ↗ helping to lead us through the the

1:38:43 ↗ climate and sustainability efforts that

1:38:45 ↗ that we're all working on so that's the

1:38:51 ↗ overview I'll hand it back to Megan no

1:38:53 ↗ Thank You Rachel Megan is there any more

1:38:57 ↗ presentation this evening are we moving

1:38:58 ↗ to the recommendation moving to the

1:39:00 ↗ recommendation so the recommendation

1:39:04 ↗ before the council this morning or this

1:39:06 ↗ evening is to declare support for the

1:39:08 ↗ King County city's climate collaboration

1:39:10 ↗ joint letter of commitment and

1:39:12 ↗ authorizing the city of Issaquah to be a

1:39:13 ↗ signatory to the letter

1:39:17 ↗ are there any questions counselor

1:39:22 ↗ Michelle okay so looking at the at the

1:39:26 ↗ recommendations and I see that each city

1:39:29 ↗ is responsible for setting their own

1:39:32 ↗ measurements and ways of measuring our

1:39:36 ↗ progress is there any way that the the

1:39:41 ↗ county is measuring overall progress

1:39:43 ↗ toward these goals and did you just

1:39:48 ↗ speak to that a little bit because we

1:39:51 ↗ had a work study session a few weeks ago

1:39:54 ↗ on environmental issues in what we heard

1:39:57 ↗ real clearly from the citizens that were

1:40:01 ↗ there was that there's a great deal of

1:40:03 ↗ urgency a feeling of urgency in the

1:40:06 ↗ community about let's get going let's

1:40:08 ↗ start working on these goals and let's

1:40:11 ↗ start achieving some of these ends that

1:40:14 ↗ we want to achieve so if you could just

1:40:16 ↗ talk to how we're measuring it on a

1:40:18 ↗ countywide basis and not just on a local

1:40:20 ↗ that would be helpful absolutely thank

1:40:22 ↗ you for the question so the by design

1:40:26 ↗ the countywide goals of the of the

1:40:30 ↗ county's strategic climate action plan

1:40:32 ↗ align very closely with the k4c

1:40:35 ↗ commitments and that's because we don't

1:40:38 ↗ want to have countywide goals and

1:40:39 ↗ targets that we that our partners have

1:40:42 ↗ not bought into so with that in mind we

1:40:46 ↗ we have updates every two years on our

1:40:50 ↗ climate action plan and our latest one

1:40:53 ↗ was two years ago where we tracked

1:40:56 ↗ progress on a wide variety of these

1:40:59 ↗ goals and that's a document that I could

1:41:02 ↗ I could send to you I'd be happy to send

1:41:05 ↗ it to the whole council which shows on

1:41:08 ↗ many many of these how we are tracking

1:41:10 ↗ it we also do a countywide in greenhouse

1:41:14 ↗ gas emission inventory every two years

1:41:16 ↗ which is part of that report and some

1:41:20 ↗ things we're doing well on some things

1:41:23 ↗ like our overall energy supply our

1:41:27 ↗ energy supply is about 63 percent

1:41:30 ↗ renewable as of 2018 and this is just

1:41:34 ↗ the data that the most recent data I

1:41:35 ↗ don't have it for any anything more

1:41:38 ↗ recent so that's an improvement we're

1:41:41 ↗ not at the 80 percent or the 90 percent

1:41:44 ↗ that we want to be but it has been

1:41:45 ↗ improving on the flip side in building

1:41:48 ↗ efficiency their goal is 25% reduction

1:41:51 ↗ in the existing building stock by 2030

1:41:54 ↗ we are hate to admit this we're actually

1:41:57 ↗ going in the wrong direction and part of

1:41:59 ↗ that part of that is because we've had

1:42:01 ↗ hundreds of thousands of people move

1:42:04 ↗ into this region since 2015 and millions

1:42:07 ↗ of square feet of of commercial and

1:42:11 ↗ residential building stock come online

1:42:13 ↗ so you know much like a salmon we're

1:42:15 ↗ swimming uphill on that one that just

1:42:18 ↗ means that we need to work harder to get

1:42:21 ↗ the building stock better a lot of the

1:42:24 ↗ building that is coming online and it

1:42:26 ↗ has come online in the past couple years

1:42:27 ↗ are being built under more strict

1:42:29 ↗ building energy codes established by

1:42:31 ↗ local jurisdictions or or at the state

1:42:34 ↗ level but we really need to work on that

1:42:37 ↗ existing housing stock to get it more

1:42:39 ↗ efficient so I'd be happy to show that

1:42:41 ↗ document later I would really love to

1:42:43 ↗ have that thank you every gate reach on

1:42:45 ↗ if you could share that with the city

1:42:46 ↗ clerk it becomes part of the public

1:42:48 ↗ record and shield district distribute it

1:42:49 ↗ to Council I'm just a little

1:42:51 ↗ clarification on the last point that you

1:42:52 ↗ made about heading in the wrong

1:42:53 ↗ direction if you actually look at the

1:42:56 ↗ gross number of new units in new square

1:42:59 ↗ footage their rate of use of

1:43:03 ↗ non-renewables is declining so we have a

1:43:06 ↗ rate that's going in the right direction

1:43:07 ↗ but the volume of housing and new

1:43:11 ↗ commercial is added to the inventory

1:43:13 ↗ right so it speaks to how we need to

1:43:16 ↗ improve our our phrasing and measurement

1:43:18 ↗ of it other questions

1:43:23 ↗ okay are we ready for emotion accounts

1:43:27 ↗ president hunt I moved to approve

1:43:30 ↗ resolution number 2020 - zero for

1:43:34 ↗ declaring support for the King County

1:43:36 ↗ cities climate collaboration joints

1:43:38 ↗ letter of commitment and authorizing the

1:43:40 ↗ city of Issaquah to be a signatory of

1:43:42 ↗ that letter second it's been moved and

1:43:46 ↗ seconded is there any discussion I can't

1:43:49 ↗ remember wash thank you so I'm going to

1:43:55 ↗ support the idea of us working together

1:43:59 ↗ with k4c and the joint letter of

1:44:01 ↗ commitment I just get concerned when we

1:44:05 ↗ talk plans and letters and resolutions

1:44:08 ↗ and all of that I want to see action and

1:44:11 ↗ I don't want this to be seen as us

1:44:14 ↗ greenwashing

1:44:15 ↗ our reputation and saying oh look we

1:44:18 ↗ signed on to something we're doing well

1:44:20 ↗ I think as a city both our residents and

1:44:24 ↗ our elected officials are very

1:44:27 ↗ interested in making movement on this

1:44:31 ↗ and so what I would ask of k4c is help

1:44:35 ↗ us with that which is I think what the

1:44:38 ↗ relationship is designed to do to help

1:44:41 ↗ support hey if we say we want to look at

1:44:44 ↗ building codes what can we do to help

1:44:47 ↗ improve that I'm hoping that we can have

1:44:50 ↗ that kind of a relationship where we can

1:44:53 ↗ move the needle and not just sign a

1:44:56 ↗ document so that is a great point there

1:44:59 ↗ are a couple of things going on here one

1:45:01 ↗ if you notice the map with all the

1:45:02 ↗ cities on it is that this group is

1:45:06 ↗ really trying to build momentum within

1:45:08 ↗ the state itself not all cities are part

1:45:11 ↗ of this so a lot of what has been going

1:45:13 ↗ on over the last few years is to get

1:45:15 ↗ them excited to get them to join and

1:45:17 ↗ then to look at those areas of science

1:45:19 ↗ and research that are going on that can

1:45:21 ↗ help and if anybody is ever ready to put

1:45:24 ↗ their hand up to do it pilot it's

1:45:26 ↗ definitely this council they are very

1:45:28 ↗ action-oriented and when there are

1:45:30 ↗ things that can be done this is the kind

1:45:32 ↗ of council that likes to get that done

1:45:33 ↗ so thank you that's a really good

1:45:35 ↗ comment

1:45:35 ↗ any other comments or questions it's the

1:45:38 ↗ president hunt I wanted to thank you

1:45:41 ↗ Rachel for the very comprehensive

1:45:43 ↗ presentation and I think that this is a

1:45:46 ↗ good way for us to share success stories

1:45:48 ↗ as well as the areas where we need

1:45:51 ↗ improvement or need to try something

1:45:53 ↗ else within the cities in the

1:45:54 ↗ collaboration so I think that for that

1:45:57 ↗ as well as for sharing things like the

1:45:59 ↗ toolkit that we heard about and you know

1:46:02 ↗ sharing ideas of how we can actually

1:46:04 ↗ take those actions and start making more

1:46:06 ↗ improvements I think it's a good way to

1:46:09 ↗ to share among the cities and I also

1:46:12 ↗ appreciate hearing about the progress in

1:46:15 ↗ the areas where we've made progress and

1:46:17 ↗ I'm in strong support any other comments

1:46:22 ↗ if not I'm gonna call for the vote on

1:46:26 ↗ the motion all those in favor of

1:46:28 ↗ approving resolution number 20 2004

1:46:31 ↗ declaring support for the King County

1:46:33 ↗ cities climate collaboration joint

1:46:35 ↗ letter of commitment and authorizing the

1:46:37 ↗ city of Issaquah to be a signatory to

1:46:39 ↗ the letter signify by saying aye all

1:46:43 ↗ those opposed that passes unanimously

1:46:46 ↗ thank you thank you for coming Rachel

1:46:48 ↗ thank you thank you Meghan thank you

1:46:49 ↗ next item I oh wow there are waving

1:46:53 ↗ hands and lots of green scarves in there

1:46:55 ↗ if moving on to the next item on the

1:46:58 ↗ agenda this evening a b7 7 8 9 park

1:47:02 ↗ impact fees the action before council

1:47:04 ↗ the request to council this evening is

1:47:06 ↗ to adopt this ordinance this item was

1:47:09 ↗ before council at the December 10th 2019

1:47:12 ↗ council study session and we'll get

1:47:15 ↗ parks and Community Services Director

1:47:17 ↗ Jeff Watlington lectern but I hear you

1:47:20 ↗ have a new boss Monica is now the

1:47:22 ↗ director of Human Services willing I'm

1:47:25 ↗ willing to serve yeah

1:47:27 ↗ urban you called thank you out for

1:47:29 ↗ Monica today you gave her a promotion in

1:47:31 ↗ your thank you

1:47:36 ↗ Thank You mayor good evening Council

1:47:39 ↗ yeah

1:47:41 ↗ Trish Heinonen with Development Services

1:47:44 ↗ Department is out of the office this

1:47:46 ↗ week she's been leading this impact V

1:47:48 ↗ effort along with the other impact fee

1:47:50 ↗ updates with her out of the office here

1:47:53 ↗ you're stuck with me tonight for this

1:47:55 ↗ introduction and then I'll be handing it

1:47:57 ↗ over to our consultant team from FCS

1:47:59 ↗ group to go over this we're seeking

1:48:03 ↗ action tonight as the mayor said on this

1:48:05 ↗ agenda bill to update our Park impact

1:48:09 ↗ fees real quickly before handing it over

1:48:13 ↗ the rate study that really makes up the

1:48:17 ↗ justification for this impact fee

1:48:19 ↗ ordinance and an update was built upon

1:48:22 ↗ our 2018 community-led Park strategic

1:48:26 ↗ plan effort that parks strategic plan if

1:48:30 ↗ you recall then built our current parks

1:48:35 ↗ capital improvement plan our CIP by

1:48:38 ↗ allowing this rate study to build upon

1:48:41 ↗ those we are bringing forward to you

1:48:44 ↗ tonight a parking pack fee update that's

1:48:47 ↗ aligned with those efforts with the park

1:48:50 ↗ strategic plan and in the park CIP the

1:48:55 ↗ actions were requesting tonight is to

1:48:57 ↗ again review the information all of John

1:48:59 ↗ from FCS group come up and do that

1:49:02 ↗ including questions and answers Trish

1:49:06 ↗ did a very nice job of in the agenda

1:49:09 ↗ bill identifying the questions that you

1:49:11 ↗ asked at the December 10th study session

1:49:13 ↗ and responses to that will then open it

1:49:17 ↗ up for a discussion in any Q&A and then

1:49:19 ↗ seek your approval tonight for this Park

1:49:23 ↗ impact fee update and with that I'll

1:49:27 ↗ hand it over to John to give an an

1:49:30 ↗ overview thank you Jeff Thank You mayor

1:49:35 ↗ and council so I'll start out by

1:49:39 ↗ answering or at least addressing the

1:49:41 ↗ questions that we came away with from

1:49:44 ↗ the December 10th meeting and then a

1:49:47 ↗ little bit of background which will be a

1:49:49 ↗ refresher for some of

1:49:50 ↗ you what is an impact fee and the

1:49:52 ↗ statutory basis for an impact fee and

1:49:55 ↗ then we'll go right into the results and

1:49:57 ↗ some comparative information with

1:49:59 ↗ neighboring jurisdictions and also how

1:50:02 ↗ these proposed fees would impact

1:50:04 ↗ different land uses in Issaquah so in in

1:50:10 ↗ the meeting in December there was a

1:50:13 ↗ question asked about looking at the

1:50:16 ↗ growth projections that we were using

1:50:17 ↗ and the average occupancy rates and

1:50:21 ↗ comparing that with school district

1:50:23 ↗ assumptions because they've done so much

1:50:25 ↗ work with population forecasting and we

1:50:28 ↗ found that the data that they had was

1:50:31 ↗ mostly about existing housing counts

1:50:35 ↗ they were not forecasting growth and so

1:50:38 ↗ we certainly didn't find any conflicting

1:50:39 ↗ information with the comp plan growth

1:50:42 ↗ assumptions that we had been using

1:50:44 ↗ they're also not using any occupancy

1:50:48 ↗ rates that differ from the average

1:50:51 ↗ occupancy rates that are built into the

1:50:53 ↗ park impact fee calculations that we've

1:50:56 ↗ used so we did do that check and found

1:50:58 ↗ nothing that contradicted the work that

1:51:01 ↗ that we've been doing to date the other

1:51:04 ↗ question that was asked in the in the

1:51:06 ↗ preliminary fees that we presented to

1:51:09 ↗ you in December we were deducting

1:51:12 ↗ outstanding debt against the impact fee

1:51:15 ↗ cost basis and we were asked about that

1:51:17 ↗ and investigated it and ended up

1:51:20 ↗ agreeing that we should not being we

1:51:22 ↗ should not be deducting debt from the

1:51:25 ↗ impact fee cost basis so we're no longer

1:51:27 ↗ deducting that debt and there are a

1:51:31 ↗ couple of other modifications up and

1:51:35 ↗ down to the fee so the results you see

1:51:37 ↗ will be slightly different that's part

1:51:40 ↗ of the reason from the ones you saw in

1:51:42 ↗ December

1:51:46 ↗ so an impact fee this is a a one-time

1:51:50 ↗ fee paid by new development at the time

1:51:54 ↗ of development and it is supposed to

1:51:56 ↗ represent a proportionate share of the

1:52:00 ↗ cost of system facilities so in this

1:52:03 ↗ case parks a share of the park system

1:52:06 ↗ that will serve new growth that will

1:52:10 ↗ serve that new development so there has

1:52:13 ↗ to be a nexus there between the

1:52:15 ↗ facilities and the benefits being

1:52:18 ↗ provided to growth the math is pretty

1:52:23 ↗ straightforward it's it's a little bit

1:52:27 ↗ difficult isolating these numbers there

1:52:30 ↗ are a number of adjustments we have to

1:52:31 ↗ make but that future project component

1:52:35 ↗ is the main piece of the impact fee if

1:52:37 ↗ you picture the full list of planned

1:52:41 ↗ parks capital improvements we're

1:52:44 ↗ isolating the growth related portion of

1:52:47 ↗ each of those projects and we're

1:52:50 ↗ dividing it by the growth that those

1:52:52 ↗ projects will serve and that gives us

1:52:55 ↗ our impact fee at least the future

1:52:59 ↗ looking piece the law allows you to

1:53:02 ↗ charge a buy-in to the existing parks

1:53:06 ↗ system however to do that you'd have to

1:53:09 ↗ show that there was surplus capacity in

1:53:11 ↗ the park system and we'd have to account

1:53:14 ↗ for how that system was funded so in

1:53:17 ↗ short in Issaquah as in most cities in

1:53:21 ↗ the state of Washington there is no

1:53:23 ↗ existing component to this impact fee

1:53:26 ↗ it's all about the future looking paying

1:53:29 ↗ for the planned projects so I'll start

1:53:35 ↗ with moving into the results now I'll

1:53:37 ↗ start with the denominator in the impact

1:53:40 ↗ fee calculation and that is the growth

1:53:42 ↗ that the project list will serve we had

1:53:46 ↗ population information for 2015 we grew

1:53:51 ↗ it to 2019 which we'll call the current

1:53:54 ↗ year and then grew that

1:53:58 ↗ to the end of the planning period 20

1:54:00 ↗ years in 2039 using growth assumptions

1:54:04 ↗ consistent with the comp plan growth so

1:54:08 ↗ that resulting number as you see there

1:54:11 ↗ 14,000 165 new residents expected in

1:54:16 ↗ Issaquah between now and 2030 9 we also

1:54:22 ↗ had employee counts and we grew those

1:54:25 ↗ from 2019 to 20 39 that's actually a

1:54:28 ↗ slightly different growth rate there

1:54:30 ↗ different growth expected in the

1:54:32 ↗ employee base than there is in the

1:54:35 ↗ population growth that employs about

1:54:38 ↗ 11,000 11,000 144 we know that

1:54:43 ↗ non-resident employees folks working in

1:54:46 ↗ Issaquah aren't going to be able to use

1:54:48 ↗ the parks as much as a full-time

1:54:51 ↗ resident so that line you see resident

1:54:54 ↗ residential equivalent employees there

1:54:58 ↗ one employee is about 10 percent of a

1:55:01 ↗ resident in terms of how they can access

1:55:04 ↗ and impact the park system so those are

1:55:08 ↗ residential equivalents we add that top

1:55:11 ↗ line and the third line to get our total

1:55:14 ↗ number of residential equivalents 15,000

1:55:17 ↗ 341 that's the growth again expected

1:55:20 ↗ between now and 2030 9 that's going to

1:55:23 ↗ be the denominator in the charge

1:55:25 ↗ calculation you see a calculated growth

1:55:30 ↗ eligibility percentage there of 27 point

1:55:33 ↗ 6 2 percent all that is is the 15,000 in

1:55:39 ↗ growth

1:55:39 ↗ divided by the total number of

1:55:42 ↗ residential equivalents projected for

1:55:44 ↗ 2039 so what we're saying is in twenty

1:55:49 ↗ thirty nine twenty seven point six two

1:55:52 ↗ percent of that population of

1:55:56 ↗ residential equivalents will be made up

1:55:58 ↗ of the growth from now to twenty thirty

1:56:01 ↗ nine so we'll actually use that

1:56:04 ↗ percentage to allocate project costs for

1:56:08 ↗ parks improvements that we know will

1:56:11 ↗ benefit current population and future

1:56:15 ↗ proportionally it's basically it's

1:56:17 ↗ basically a proportional allocation lot

1:56:24 ↗ on that slide so then the numerator the

1:56:29 ↗ dollars part of the calculation this is

1:56:33 ↗ a very high-level summary of a long list

1:56:35 ↗ of capital improvements totaling a

1:56:38 ↗ little over three hundred million

1:56:40 ↗ dollars of those we took out projects

1:56:46 ↗ which were straight replacement so if

1:56:48 ↗ they're not adding any capacity for for

1:56:51 ↗ future users we can't include them in

1:56:54 ↗ the impact feed cost basis so they are

1:56:56 ↗ not included there's zero percent

1:56:57 ↗ eligible there are a number of projects

1:57:01 ↗ which are adding acreage adding lineal

1:57:05 ↗ miles of trail and those because they're

1:57:09 ↗ not correcting any deficiencies in the

1:57:11 ↗ parks and they're not adding surplus

1:57:15 ↗ capacity that you don't need they are a

1:57:17 ↗ hundred percent eligible so those

1:57:19 ↗ projects are a hundred percent included

1:57:23 ↗ those what we're calling improvement

1:57:25 ↗ projects are improvements to existing

1:57:28 ↗ parks in the city existing part land

1:57:32 ↗ which will add capacity that will be

1:57:35 ↗ enjoyed by the current population and

1:57:37 ↗ growth those get that proportional

1:57:41 ↗ allocation of twenty seven point six two

1:57:43 ↗ percent the final adjustment we're

1:57:47 ↗ making and this we acknowledged since

1:57:50 ↗ the December meeting we went back and

1:57:52 ↗ took a harder look at the list of

1:57:54 ↗ projects and and due to uncertainty

1:57:58 ↗ about whether the city could fully

1:58:00 ↗ execute the long term projects in that

1:58:04 ↗ parks plan in the park CIP whether those

1:58:08 ↗ costs would hold up we decided to wait

1:58:12 ↗ those at fifty percent again due to that

1:58:16 ↗ uncertainty about whether the city would

1:58:17 ↗ be able to accomplish that whole list

1:58:19 ↗ it's a substantial amount of that

1:58:23 ↗ of that total project list so the end

1:58:26 ↗ result of those adjustments of that 303

1:58:29 ↗ million a hundred and ninety-eight

1:58:32 ↗ million in projects are included and of

1:58:36 ↗ those fifty 2.4 million

1:58:40 ↗ is the impact the eligible portion of

1:58:42 ↗ that project list so that's going to be

1:58:45 ↗ the numerator and a charge calculation

1:58:49 ↗ I can't see my Ross how does that

1:58:53 ↗ numerator compare to the presentation to

1:58:56 ↗ us in December yeah that's thank you

1:59:03 ↗ validated Luke's presents here at the me

1:59:06 ↗ I was trying to look it up too so I yeah

1:59:10 ↗ I should have that I didn't bring it up

1:59:11 ↗ so may I continue until he has that or

1:59:16 ↗ okay we do me I have it now it was a

1:59:21 ↗ sixty eight point six million previously

1:59:25 ↗ so there you go thank you so that fifty

1:59:33 ↗ 2.4 million

1:59:34 ↗ you you recognize you can still check

1:59:37 ↗ the work and then fifty two point four

1:59:42 ↗ million you recognize from the previous

1:59:43 ↗ slide we have to deduct from that the

1:59:46 ↗ city's existing fund balance in impact

1:59:49 ↗ fees because that money is available to

1:59:51 ↗ spend on on those projects if we left it

1:59:54 ↗ in we would be over

1:59:55 ↗ collecting we'd be double charging for

1:59:57 ↗ that which we've already charged so the

2:00:00 ↗ the adjusted basis is forty-nine point

2:00:02 ↗ five million that divided by the fifteen

2:00:06 ↗ thousand plus in growth in residential

2:00:10 ↗ equivalence gives us a dollar amount per

2:00:14 ↗ residential equivalent of a little over

2:00:17 ↗ three thousand dollars we then convert

2:00:19 ↗ that to the schedule based on the

2:00:23 ↗ average occupancy by dwelling unit in

2:00:26 ↗ the case of residential so single-family

2:00:28 ↗ residential you see that resulting

2:00:31 ↗ impact fee of nine thousand 107 forty

2:00:34 ↗ seven and for multifamily because they

2:00:36 ↗ have a lower average occupancy rate five

2:00:39 ↗ thousand five ninety seventy one per

2:00:42 ↗ dwelling unit the charges shown for

2:00:46 ↗ non-residential are based on in typical

2:00:51 ↗ employee counts per square foot of space

2:00:55 ↗ for those different types of land-uses

2:00:57 ↗ so that's how you apply those charges if

2:00:59 ↗ a restaurant applies for a building

2:01:02 ↗ permit

2:01:03 ↗ they would be charged a dollar 70 per

2:01:06 ↗ square foot of leasable square footage

2:01:08 ↗ for the restaurant for example and

2:01:10 ↗ likewise for those other land uses can

2:01:15 ↗ you go back to the previous slide sure

2:01:18 ↗ so when I'm looking at this presentation

2:01:21 ↗ from our December 10th you basically

2:01:25 ↗ wish I could also show it so you had the

2:01:28 ↗ bubble initial impact at sixty eight

2:01:31 ↗ point six less the two point nine

2:01:35 ↗ million impact fee fund ballast but then

2:01:38 ↗ also less the outstanding parks debt of

2:01:42 ↗ thirteen point three million that's

2:01:44 ↗ right so that's not included on here we

2:01:50 ↗ we we agreed with a council members

2:01:54 ↗ point challenging whether we should be

2:01:57 ↗ deducting the outstanding debt or not so

2:02:01 ↗ we are no longer deducting the

2:02:02 ↗ outstanding debt okay these two point

2:02:09 ↗ four which is a coincidence

2:02:11 ↗ okay believe it or not yeah so that's

2:02:20 ↗ the proposed schedule and then well

2:02:25 ↗ before we look at the comparative

2:02:27 ↗ information a few thoughts on housing

2:02:30 ↗ affordability these are increases from

2:02:33 ↗ the current charges for the residential

2:02:36 ↗ the residential impact fees particularly

2:02:39 ↗ single-family residential what we found

2:02:42 ↗ is that impact fees are obviously a

2:02:45 ↗ crucial component of funding for park

2:02:48 ↗ system improvements they do affect the

2:02:52 ↗ cost of new housing construction when

2:02:56 ↗ you look at the cost of housing the

2:02:59 ↗ price of housing the increases proposed

2:03:02 ↗ are relatively small compared to how

2:03:04 ↗ construction costs have changed and as a

2:03:07 ↗ percentage of the cost of new dwelling

2:03:10 ↗ units they're relatively small however

2:03:15 ↗ we do see and we hear this a lot from

2:03:18 ↗ the development community that they

2:03:19 ↗ impact the type of decisions they make

2:03:23 ↗ about what type of residential units to

2:03:26 ↗ build they might build higher-end

2:03:28 ↗ single-family residences in order to

2:03:30 ↗ fully recover their costs and make the

2:03:33 ↗ profits that they need to make so they

2:03:36 ↗ will they're unlikely to slow down

2:03:38 ↗ residential development we haven't seen

2:03:40 ↗ that really anywhere but they may impact

2:03:43 ↗ the type of housing that's constructed

2:03:45 ↗ in the city to that end we did feel we

2:03:51 ↗ should at least point out there is a

2:03:53 ↗ section in the 80 to o2o6 o which is the

2:03:58 ↗ growth Management Act that allows for

2:04:01 ↗ exemptions or partial exemptions to be

2:04:04 ↗ provided for low-income housing if that

2:04:08 ↗ if those exemptions do not exceed 80

2:04:11 ↗ percent of the impact fee then a city

2:04:13 ↗ doesn't have to replace that revenue

2:04:17 ↗ from an outside source of funding which

2:04:19 ↗ is what we would recommend that you do

2:04:21 ↗ that's my remember it's has a question

2:04:24 ↗ how would this work with the proposed

2:04:27 ↗ Tod project I'm going to look for Andrea

2:04:33 ↗ who is not here next up is Wally but I

2:04:37 ↗ do believe on the Tod project that we're

2:04:40 ↗ talking about full fee waivers No

2:04:43 ↗ I also just wanted to clarify something

2:04:46 ↗ you want to make sure that the council

2:04:49 ↗ is clear that impact fees are collected

2:04:52 ↗ but also as some proposals the developer

2:04:57 ↗ themselves builds the park improvement

2:05:00 ↗ and gets a credit against an impact fee

2:05:02 ↗ so it's not always us collecting money

2:05:05 ↗ and putting it in the mitigation account

2:05:06 ↗ sometimes the developer develops the

2:05:09 ↗ park and his impact fee is little to

2:05:12 ↗ nothing so it depends on there's a

2:05:15 ↗ couple different ways to do this that's

2:05:16 ↗ right and if they do construct say one

2:05:20 ↗ of the projects on that list you are

2:05:22 ↗ required to provide them a credit for

2:05:24 ↗ their cost of the improvement

2:05:27 ↗ and I just want to make sure because

2:05:28 ↗ it's the new council members that

2:05:30 ↗ everybody's clear on that right yeah

2:05:33 ↗ does it does have to be on the list

2:05:35 ↗ that's my remotes we'll get you a better

2:05:38 ↗ answer than my guess I'll share it with

2:05:40 ↗ the others yeah I mean my question is

2:05:42 ↗ around that remaining 20% must be paid

2:05:44 ↗ back filter mother than impact fee

2:05:46 ↗ accounts yes that's right so in the case

2:05:52 ↗ of a full waiver then you do have to

2:05:55 ↗ replace the 20% that would have that you

2:05:59 ↗ would not have had to replace it if it

2:06:01 ↗ was a partial waiver

2:06:02 ↗ you saw that okay so in the last year

2:06:09 ↗ the city has adopted updated fees as

2:06:14 ↗ shown on this on this table except for

2:06:17 ↗ parks that's the one that has not been

2:06:19 ↗ adopted yet and you can see how the

2:06:22 ↗ impact of all these changes would affect

2:06:25 ↗ a single-family a new single-family

2:06:26 ↗ residence assuming adoption of the park

2:06:31 ↗ impact fee and the total of all those

2:06:33 ↗ impact fees would go from about

2:06:36 ↗ seventeen five to twenty three twenty

2:06:39 ↗ three thousand six hundred for a new

2:06:41 ↗ single-family dwelling that's an

2:06:43 ↗ increase as you see a little less than

2:06:46 ↗ six thousand one hundred dollars it want

2:06:49 ↗ one thing to point out here the fire

2:06:52 ↗ impact fee the traffic impact fee and

2:06:54 ↗ the parks impact fees are impact fees

2:06:58 ↗ under the growth management act the

2:07:01 ↗ other fees shown here are SEPA

2:07:03 ↗ mitigation fees they are authorized

2:07:06 ↗ under a different statute and would only

2:07:09 ↗ apply to projects which require SEPA a

2:07:12 ↗ SEPA process they're calculated much the

2:07:15 ↗ same as an impact fee but I just did

2:07:17 ↗ want to make that distinction only fire

2:07:19 ↗ traffic and parks are authorized under

2:07:23 ↗ the growth management act as impact fees

2:07:28 ↗ so as you see at the bottom of the at

2:07:31 ↗ the bottom of the slide there the

2:07:33 ↗ previous fees using the average cost of

2:07:36 ↗ a single family home in Issaquah made up

2:07:40 ↗ about two and a half percent of the

2:07:41 ↗ total value now about three and a third

2:07:43 ↗ assuming the Parkes was adopted as

2:07:47 ↗ proposed for a multi-family dwelling

2:07:50 ↗ unit that cost also goes up

2:07:53 ↗ less so about eighteen hundred dollars

2:07:56 ↗ total per dwelling unit one thing you'll

2:07:59 ↗ notice is the parks the increase in the

2:08:02 ↗ park impact fee for multi-family

2:08:05 ↗ dwelling units is not as substantial as

2:08:07 ↗ it is for single-family residential and

2:08:09 ↗ that's just because of the average

2:08:11 ↗ occupancy rates having changed

2:08:15 ↗ disproportionately since the last update

2:08:20 ↗ in order to calculate or estimate the

2:08:24 ↗ percentage of a total value as you see

2:08:29 ↗ at the bottom there

2:08:30 ↗ 4% previously and 4.6 percent we had to

2:08:34 ↗ make some assumptions about a typical

2:08:35 ↗ project so we assumed a 300 pretty large

2:08:39 ↗ complex 350 units and 110 million

2:08:42 ↗ dollars in value for an office building

2:08:48 ↗ and these costs are are these fees are

2:08:52 ↗ per square foot of leasable square

2:08:55 ↗ footage up about a dollar sixty six

2:09:00 ↗ looking at all the different fees that

2:09:02 ↗ parks fee actually goes down for an

2:09:04 ↗ office building and then looking at

2:09:13 ↗ neighboring cities we have single-family

2:09:15 ↗ multifamily and then just the the office

2:09:17 ↗ building unit cost there you'll see the

2:09:20 ↗ single-family charge and multi-family

2:09:23 ↗ charges both are are among the highest

2:09:26 ↗ the highest in among this group but

2:09:30 ↗ again the multifamily rate per dwelling

2:09:32 ↗ unit not not going up nearly as much

2:09:36 ↗ councilmember Mertz followed by

2:09:38 ↗ councilmember Hall can I ask why we have

2:09:40 ↗ so many essays on this in trying to

2:09:42 ↗ compare with other municipalities they

2:09:45 ↗ not everyone charges park impact fees to

2:09:48 ↗ non residential customers so in those

2:09:51 ↗ cases they're charging only residential

2:09:54 ↗ development okay I just know that in our

2:09:59 ↗ ongoing conversation about how trying to

2:10:02 ↗ get more mixed-use in the valley it's

2:10:07 ↗ it's interesting that that we would have

2:10:10 ↗ I mean potentially have the option of

2:10:12 ↗ not collecting it on office buildings we

2:10:14 ↗ would choose we would be lower than some

2:10:16 ↗ of the other ones in here like retina

2:10:19 ↗ and for instance lower than Redmond but

2:10:23 ↗ anyhow that's a very good point many

2:10:25 ↗ cities use the collection or not

2:10:28 ↗ collection of impact fees as an economic

2:10:31 ↗ driver for a sector that they're trying

2:10:32 ↗ to grow council member Hall oh yeah that

2:10:38 ↗ answered my question thank you okay and

2:10:41 ↗ let's keep going so one one final look

2:10:47 ↗ at the proposed schedule of charges

2:10:58 ↗ great Before we jump into Q&A this slide

2:11:02 ↗ it seeks to respond to a question we've

2:11:05 ↗ heard multiple times both from us

2:11:08 ↗ Council and the mayor and tries to

2:11:10 ↗ provide you some context as we worked

2:11:11 ↗ with finance looking at our CIP and then

2:11:14 ↗ looking at these proposed fees and that

2:11:16 ↗ question being what what portion of our

2:11:20 ↗ park capital plan revenue plan would be

2:11:23 ↗ supported by these impact fees and so

2:11:26 ↗ what this graph represents is as we look

2:11:30 ↗ at our current adopted CIP and with

2:11:34 ↗ these proposed fees its anticipated

2:11:37 ↗ about 27% of the revenue needed would be

2:11:41 ↗ coming from park impact fees the

2:11:44 ↗ remaining percentage would need to be

2:11:47 ↗ derived from other other revenue sources

2:11:51 ↗ so again this is an attempt to think

2:11:54 ↗ provide that big picture and recognize

2:11:58 ↗ against the park strategic plan laid out

2:12:00 ↗ a lot of our reinvestment strategy and

2:12:03 ↗ and therefore a lot of our capacity is

2:12:06 ↗ really found within our existing system

2:12:09 ↗ and so there is this proportionality

2:12:12 ↗ reality as we move forward in terms of

2:12:20 ↗ timing next steps think we we sort of

2:12:22 ↗ highlighted this that with the study

2:12:23 ↗ session in December we're back before

2:12:25 ↗ you tonight requesting your

2:12:28 ↗ authorization and the park impact fees

2:12:31 ↗ if you were to take action tonight these

2:12:34 ↗ new park impact fees would be effective

2:12:36 ↗ March 11th and I think with that we'll

2:12:40 ↗ close the staff report thank you for

2:12:43 ↗ discussion any additional questions

2:12:46 ↗ let's present hunt on the change in how

2:12:52 ↗ the parks debt was not included could

2:12:57 ↗ you give the rationale and could you

2:12:58 ↗ also give the change that was

2:13:01 ↗ attributable in the impact fees due to

2:13:05 ↗ that change

2:13:07 ↗ sure so the the debt outstanding is was

2:13:13 ↗ all used to fund existing parks parks

2:13:17 ↗ that are already out there being used

2:13:20 ↗ and enjoyed so we don't have to worry

2:13:24 ↗ about double charging folks for those

2:13:29 ↗ those costs we don't have any existing

2:13:32 ↗ parks in the impact fee the impact fees

2:13:34 ↗ all about future looking parks and none

2:13:37 ↗ of that debt will be used on those

2:13:39 ↗ future parks so we don't need to make

2:13:43 ↗ that deduction could you come to the

2:13:49 ↗ microphone direct so in the sorry sorry

2:13:53 ↗ coaching wrong approach apologize so in

2:13:57 ↗ the prior I'm sort of asking a question

2:14:00 ↗ here John can confirm in the prior rate

2:14:03 ↗ studies on December there was a

2:14:05 ↗ deduction of that debt to this impact

2:14:11 ↗ fee study through I think the

2:14:12 ↗ conversation councilmember winter Stein

2:14:14 ↗ brought this up it was recognized and

2:14:16 ↗ the changes that that deduction does is

2:14:19 ↗ not given to this to this rate study

2:14:23 ↗ correct so the approximate net impact of

2:14:29 ↗ this changes so and Luke probably has

2:14:34 ↗ that but I can I can show you on that

2:14:40 ↗ one slide which is right

2:14:43 ↗ here so the where before our initial

2:14:49 ↗ impact the cost basis was 62 60 68

2:14:54 ↗ million we deducted the impact fee fund

2:14:58 ↗ balance and we deducted the 13 million

2:15:00 ↗ in debt to arrive at fifty two point

2:15:04 ↗ four as our impact fee cost basis that

2:15:07 ↗ was the previous study two things

2:15:11 ↗ happened since then our beginning

2:15:13 ↗ initial impact fee cost basis went down

2:15:16 ↗ to fifty two point four coincidental

2:15:18 ↗ with with the previous final number but

2:15:21 ↗ the reason that went down is because of

2:15:24 ↗ that acknowledgement that the long-term

2:15:27 ↗ project list we had a lot of uncertainty

2:15:30 ↗ about executing all of those long-term

2:15:34 ↗ projects and so reduced the assumption

2:15:38 ↗ that they would all be built within the

2:15:41 ↗ planning period to fifty percent so the

2:15:44 ↗ result of taking half of those long-term

2:15:46 ↗ projects out was this initial cost basis

2:15:49 ↗ of fifty 2.4 million

2:15:51 ↗ we then take the impact fee fund balance

2:15:54 ↗ out we're no longer reducing it for the

2:15:57 ↗ debt and the resulting cost basis was

2:15:59 ↗ the forty nine point five so two things

2:16:02 ↗ happened to result at this and then Luke

2:16:05 ↗ can tell you what the resulting fee was

2:16:07 ↗ yours was specific to the debt portion

2:16:10 ↗ removal not any readjustment it's

2:16:13 ↗ because there's there's a few moving

2:16:17 ↗ okay you but you want the impact on that

2:16:21 ↗ you want the the impact on the impact

2:16:24 ↗ fee or do you just want to know the

2:16:25 ↗ dollar amount of the debt outstanding

2:16:26 ↗ the impact on the impact that's what I

2:16:28 ↗ thought yeah we knew it was thirteen

2:16:33 ↗ million yeah okay you can you can let me

2:16:35 ↗ know yeah it's

2:16:40 ↗ I mean it's just a percentage of okay

2:16:46 ↗ we'll get that we'll get that for you

2:16:49 ↗ okay I did have two more questions so

2:16:54 ↗ related to that we had a public comment

2:16:56 ↗ with the question in there about that it

2:17:00 ↗ does not seem accurate

2:17:02 ↗ it seems inaccurate not to include

2:17:04 ↗ existing parks that and new development

2:17:06 ↗ fees as residents and new developments

2:17:08 ↗ are reasonably expected to use existing

2:17:09 ↗ parks so it's my understanding that we

2:17:12 ↗ can't use impact fees to fund existing

2:17:17 ↗ parks because it is only the new or only

2:17:19 ↗ improvements new improvements that's

2:17:22 ↗ right that's right the law is very

2:17:26 ↗ explicit we can't use impact fees other

2:17:29 ↗ than to build growth related facilities

2:17:33 ↗ facilities that they will benefit from

2:17:35 ↗ and we can't use them to correct

2:17:37 ↗ existing deficiencies did you know so

2:17:39 ↗ not clarify that if there was unused

2:17:41 ↗ capacity in existing parks but then they

2:17:45 ↗ impact fees could be used to pay for

2:17:49 ↗ that they would also still have to be

2:17:52 ↗ used to add capacity to the park system

2:17:55 ↗ and we would have to take into account

2:17:58 ↗ how they were funded right which adds

2:18:01 ↗ another layer of complexity to it okay

2:18:07 ↗ thank you the affordable housing impact

2:18:11 ↗ fee question did come up specific to a

2:18:13 ↗ project but I wondered if we could get a

2:18:15 ↗ just brief high-level overview of what

2:18:18 ↗ the policy is I know that we waive

2:18:19 ↗ impact fees for affordable housing so if

2:18:22 ↗ we could get a overview of our current

2:18:23 ↗ policy on that okay wouldn't it be fair

2:18:29 ↗ to say that we waive but we have to pay

2:18:31 ↗ them ourselves that we have to use other

2:18:33 ↗ revenue funds of our own it's not that

2:18:36 ↗ they go away it's that they're not paid

2:18:38 ↗ by the developer we make those

2:18:40 ↗ investments

2:18:42 ↗ okay and and this doesn't change that

2:18:45 ↗ policy

2:18:47 ↗ okay last question I had was one I

2:18:51 ↗ believe that one conversation we had

2:18:53 ↗ when this study was presented to Council

2:18:56 ↗ last time was around the timing of

2:18:58 ↗ updates and so we had some other impact

2:19:01 ↗ fees where they hadn't been updated in

2:19:04 ↗ quite a while and that we should get on

2:19:07 ↗ a you know the consultants gave us a

2:19:09 ↗ recommendation that we should get on a

2:19:10 ↗ more regular schedule and more frequent

2:19:13 ↗ schedule because these rates could be

2:19:16 ↗ changing the CIP could be changing

2:19:18 ↗ projects on the list could be changing

2:19:20 ↗ and so I wondered if we what that

2:19:24 ↗ recommended schedule is and if we are

2:19:27 ↗ going to follow it going forward so our

2:19:31 ↗ understanding is that recommendation was

2:19:33 ↗ every three years that they be looked at

2:19:36 ↗ to update there's no statutory guidance

2:19:38 ↗ on that so that would be a city that

2:19:41 ↗ would be a City choice in a city policy

2:19:43 ↗ mm-hmm and so from the city's point of

2:19:46 ↗ view are we going to adhere to that

2:19:49 ↗ yes playing the role of park director

2:19:51 ↗ and development services representative

2:19:54 ↗ yes what we've talked about at a staff

2:19:57 ↗ level is achieving that three year

2:20:00 ↗ renewal in terms of doing a rate study

2:20:03 ↗ any time we look to impact our updated

2:20:05 ↗ impact fee that would mean getting doing

2:20:07 ↗ a rate study and performing that as the

2:20:09 ↗ foundation so three years will be our

2:20:12 ↗ our goal okay thank you other questions

2:20:17 ↗ is there a motion I couldn't I can

2:20:21 ↗ answer the five person question we'll

2:20:25 ↗ take it okay so the counterbalancing

2:20:30 ↗ effect is about five percent so the fees

2:20:33 ↗ are seeing tonight are about five

2:20:35 ↗ percent less than the ones you saw in

2:20:39 ↗ December as a result of no longer

2:20:43 ↗ deducting the debt and the reductions

2:20:46 ↗ made to the project list by moving out

2:20:49 ↗ the half of the long term projects

2:20:53 ↗ Thank You emotion president I moved to

2:21:02 ↗ adopt ordinance number two nine zero two

2:21:07 ↗ relating to impact fees adopting the

2:21:10 ↗ 2020 park impact fee study amending the

2:21:13 ↗ definition of park rate study in IMC

2:21:16 ↗ three point seven two point zero two

2:21:18 ↗ zero French a to reflect such adoption

2:21:22 ↗ and thereby update the cities park

2:21:24 ↗ impact fees to recognize changes in

2:21:27 ↗ capital facilities needs and costs as

2:21:30 ↗ provided in the 2020 study and amending

2:21:33 ↗ IMC eighteen point one zero point two

2:21:35 ↗ six zero Prem B to add the 2020 study to

2:21:39 ↗ the city's Seba policies second it's

2:21:43 ↗ been moved and seconded is there any

2:21:44 ↗ discussion I gots my remarks you know

2:21:49 ↗ sometimes we fret over some of these

2:21:52 ↗ fees and worried about their whether

2:21:58 ↗ they're fair or whether we're growing

2:22:00 ↗ them too fast but then sometimes there's

2:22:03 ↗ the really easy decisions and this the

2:22:05 ↗ law around impact fees makes it so clear

2:22:11 ↗ that we have to show our homework and it

2:22:14 ↗ makes it so easy to talk to the

2:22:16 ↗ community about why to do this that I'm

2:22:19 ↗ thrilled and I'm glad that we put the

2:22:23 ↗ work into it

2:22:24 ↗ and it's one of the very also rare

2:22:26 ↗ occasions or I don't mind us being a

2:22:28 ↗ high site outlier it's the the services

2:22:33 ↗ that we provide as a city are so

2:22:35 ↗ important to our community growth does

2:22:38 ↗ have such an impact on our community

2:22:39 ↗ that pegging this knob to eleven makes

2:22:43 ↗ me feel better talking about the growth

2:22:45 ↗ that we do have with the community so I

2:22:46 ↗ will be an enthusiastic yes this evening

2:22:48 ↗ Thank You counsel my remerged Scott

2:22:50 ↗ summer Walsh thank you I really

2:22:54 ↗ appreciate taking another look at those

2:22:56 ↗ long-term projects I think well this may

2:22:59 ↗ not be appropriate in all cases after

2:23:02 ↗ we've had the community come together in

2:23:04 ↗ this really excited perc strategic plan

2:23:07 ↗ and have all of these wish lists

2:23:09 ↗ projects added to the CIP it's really

2:23:13 ↗ important to be strategic again about

2:23:15 ↗ that when we're looking at the impact

2:23:17 ↗ fees so that we're not looking to

2:23:20 ↗ increase our housing prices for

2:23:23 ↗ unnecessarily for something that may not

2:23:25 ↗ happen within that time period and so I

2:23:29 ↗ I appreciate that adjustment I think

2:23:32 ↗ that makes a big difference and I will

2:23:34 ↗ be supporting us thank you any other

2:23:37 ↗ comments okay all those in favor of

2:23:44 ↗ adopting ordinance number two 9:02

2:23:46 ↗ relating to impact fees adopting the

2:23:49 ↗ 2020 Park impact fee study amending the

2:23:52 ↗ definition of Park rate study in IMC 3.7

2:23:56 ↗ 2.0 2.oh per NJ to reflect such adoption

2:24:00 ↗ and thereby update the city's park

2:24:02 ↗ impact fees recognize changes in capital

2:24:05 ↗ facility needs and costs as provided in

2:24:07 ↗ the 2020 study and demanding imc 18.1

2:24:11 ↗ 0.26 Oprah and B to add the 2020 study

2:24:15 ↗ to the city's SEPA policies signify by

2:24:18 ↗ saying aye opposed thanks I just want to

2:24:23 ↗ do a special thanks to Jeff and DSD and

2:24:26 ↗ our consultants it is fantastic when you

2:24:31 ↗ have a good conversation with the

2:24:32 ↗ council you listen to their concerns you

2:24:34 ↗ come back with great answers and you

2:24:37 ↗ adjusted and modified what you brought

2:24:39 ↗ back based on what you had heard from

2:24:40 ↗ them the presentation was very very

2:24:43 ↗ clear and very understandable and I want

2:24:45 ↗ to thank you for all your work on it

2:24:46 ↗ it's very good next item is good of the

2:24:50 ↗ order do council members have anything

2:24:52 ↗ for good of the order also president hon

2:24:54 ↗ I have two items actually the first one

2:24:59 ↗ is about kokanee so in November of last

2:25:02 ↗ year Council authorized execution of an

2:25:05 ↗ ila into the agreement for a kokanee

2:25:08 ↗ work group and kokanee are a kind of

2:25:10 ↗ landlocked salmon they are very special

2:25:13 ↗ to our region and they're also the Lake

2:25:15 ↗ Sammamish kokanee population is very

2:25:17 ↗ close to extinction

2:25:19 ↗ so this group is going to be moving

2:25:21 ↗ ahead they will have a member of the

2:25:26 ↗ committee that will be appointed as well

2:25:28 ↗ as an alternate and the alternate can be

2:25:30 ↗ elected or non elected the first meeting

2:25:33 ↗ of the kokanee Management Committee is

2:25:35 ↗ anticipated for March 30th from 1 to 30

2:25:37 ↗ from once at 3 p.m. and the location is

2:25:41 ↗ not yet determined

2:25:42 ↗ Allen Quinn will be serving as the

2:25:45 ↗ city's representative on a staff

2:25:46 ↗ committee of the kokanee workgroup and

2:25:49 ↗ this committee is expected to only meet

2:25:52 ↗ two times per year so because this

2:25:55 ↗ committee is a new committee it's also

2:25:58 ↗ very closely related to the Huayra 8

2:26:00 ↗ salmon recovery council and in fact

2:26:02 ↗ we've been getting updates about kokanee

2:26:04 ↗ routinely during our salmon recovery

2:26:06 ↗ council meetings I think it makes sense

2:26:07 ↗ for the same person to serve on both so

2:26:10 ↗ that person is currently me but we also

2:26:14 ↗ do want to appoint a alternate and so if

2:26:16 ↗ you are interested in the alternate

2:26:18 ↗ please or you have ideas about who would

2:26:21 ↗ be good for that they can be elected or

2:26:23 ↗ not elected then please let me know so

2:26:28 ↗ that's my first before you move on on

2:26:30 ↗ that one they are anxious to get names

2:26:31 ↗ as well so I believe it's David Fujimoto

2:26:34 ↗ who is submitting names and so we'll

2:26:36 ↗ make sure that he has council president

2:26:37 ↗ hunts but if you're interested in it

2:26:39 ↗ please let us know okay and I have one

2:26:43 ↗ other item for good of the order which

2:26:45 ↗ is the leadership team discussed a

2:26:48 ↗ question that had been raised earlier by

2:26:50 ↗ councilmember Walsh regarding the our

2:26:53 ↗ leadership goals for the coming year and

2:26:56 ↗ so we have a list that we put together

2:27:00 ↗ it's it's fairly short but we wanted to

2:27:03 ↗ bring it up for discussion this evening

2:27:06 ↗ and that the list has four items the

2:27:10 ↗ first one and there's sort of pared

2:27:12 ↗ between a goal and an action the first

2:27:15 ↗ one is that all council members feel

2:27:17 ↗ that they have the information they need

2:27:19 ↗ to make decisions that's the goal and so

2:27:21 ↗ we will the action would be to

2:27:23 ↗ facilitate timely answering of questions

2:27:26 ↗ and ensure information is getting to the

2:27:29 ↗ whole council then the second

2:27:31 ↗ action second and goal action pair is

2:27:34 ↗ that we are aligning our work with the

2:27:37 ↗ strategic plan so council agendas and

2:27:40 ↗ work items are allowed with aligns with

2:27:42 ↗ the strategic plan we want to work to

2:27:44 ↗ prioritize agenda items and focus energy

2:27:46 ↗ with a strategic plan in mind

2:27:49 ↗ third is that the community knows that

2:27:53 ↗ the council values their input and that

2:27:55 ↗ their engagement is important and so for

2:27:57 ↗ this we will be responding to council

2:28:01 ↗ correspondence and so I will as the

2:28:04 ↗ council president be responding but then

2:28:05 ↗ council members can always also respond

2:28:08 ↗ directly with additional feedback if

2:28:11 ↗ they so choose and then the fourth one

2:28:13 ↗ which is the sort of more complicated

2:28:15 ↗ one is that we had a discussion about

2:28:18 ↗ that we we want to have when we look

2:28:21 ↗ back on the year we want to be able to

2:28:22 ↗ say we've moved the needle in all of the

2:28:24 ↗ areas of the strategic plan and so the

2:28:27 ↗ way we thought we could do this is we

2:28:31 ↗ want to support council members that

2:28:33 ↗ have specific interests in taking

2:28:36 ↗ actions to move the needle in different

2:28:38 ↗ strategic plan areas and we thought we

2:28:42 ↗ would divide this up so from the

2:28:46 ↗ strategic plan goal areas with MB as

2:28:49 ↗ follows mobility Rea : development hunt

2:28:54 ↗ environmental stewardship hunts social

2:28:57 ↗ and economic vitality hunt City

2:28:59 ↗ leadership and services Rea and

2:29:00 ↗ infrastructure Rea so we thought we

2:29:03 ↗ would divide that up so we could divide

2:29:05 ↗ and conquer and move the needle on some

2:29:07 ↗ of our strategic goal areas and that

2:29:11 ↗ that was what we came up with do you

2:29:12 ↗ have anything you would know I thought

2:29:15 ↗ it was great and I really love the idea

2:29:16 ↗ of embracing the strategic plan is our

2:29:21 ↗ guiding document and I counts the

2:29:26 ↗ president I breaking that up we're able

2:29:28 ↗ to kind of focus in areas and help move

2:29:30 ↗ things forward and at the same time

2:29:32 ↗ we'll be talking about everything across

2:29:35 ↗ the board but it's to provide some focus

2:29:38 ↗ that we can get things

2:29:39 ↗ and what are the things that anything we

2:29:42 ↗ really talked about wanting to do is to

2:29:45 ↗ start to help to shape the overall

2:29:48 ↗ legislative agenda for the city and to

2:29:52 ↗ dovetail that legislative agenda with

2:29:55 ↗ the strategic plan that we worked so

2:29:57 ↗ diligently on last year

2:29:58 ↗ you mean regional agenda or legislative

2:30:01 ↗ agenda well our city's legislative

2:30:03 ↗ agenda so the work that the council is

2:30:05 ↗ doing so not not necessarily regionally

2:30:08 ↗ but possibly regionally if appropriate

2:30:09 ↗ not legislative like state legislature

2:30:12 ↗ but unless that's appropriate but really

2:30:14 ↗ focusing on what do we need to do here

2:30:16 ↗ at this dais for the city of Issaquah to

2:30:19 ↗ really move the needle on these really

2:30:21 ↗ six important focus areas and I'm sure

2:30:25 ↗ you're opening it up for comments mm-hmm

2:30:27 ↗ what's my redeem yourself Oh on the

2:30:30 ↗ communications piece and I I totally

2:30:32 ↗ agree with with what you've laid out

2:30:35 ↗ there my only caveat would be in

2:30:38 ↗ situations like the coronavirus where

2:30:41 ↗ we're dealing with a regional emergency

2:30:43 ↗ and I do think it's really important

2:30:45 ↗ that we put out consistent information

2:30:48 ↗ and customer president hunt and I had a

2:30:52 ↗ little bit of discussion about this on

2:30:54 ↗ email in regard to answering an email

2:30:58 ↗ that came in and and the flooding would

2:31:02 ↗ be another example where we really need

2:31:04 ↗ consistent information going out and all

2:31:07 ↗ of us answering might lead to us giving

2:31:11 ↗ different answers so I'm just wondering

2:31:13 ↗ if the council president and the mayor

2:31:16 ↗ could coordinate and say on this

2:31:18 ↗ particular issue we're going to let the

2:31:21 ↗ mayor or the council president be the

2:31:22 ↗ spokesperson for us and then everything

2:31:26 ↗ else we can answer you know as you've

2:31:29 ↗ laid out that we're able to answer but

2:31:32 ↗ just there are certain times when you

2:31:35 ↗ want to make absolutely sure that the

2:31:37 ↗ information is vetted and clear and

2:31:40 ↗ consistent that is great point so

2:31:43 ↗ typically if something is to address the

2:31:46 ↗ city council mayor and has an

2:31:47 ↗ operational taste to it then I take the

2:31:50 ↗ lead in the answering and if it has a

2:31:52 ↗ policy flavor to it the council

2:31:55 ↗ president does but we both used the

2:31:57 ↗ communication staff to help us prepare

2:31:59 ↗ talking points for it and there are

2:32:01 ↗ times when those talking points can be

2:32:03 ↗ distributed to you as well

2:32:05 ↗ even if you haven't answered an email

2:32:07 ↗ just so that when you're out in the

2:32:08 ↗ community you have the same consistent

2:32:10 ↗ information that we have because you're

2:32:12 ↗ absolutely right we want to be sending a

2:32:14 ↗ consistent message whether it's by email

2:32:16 ↗ phone or just a conversation on the

2:32:18 ↗ street so thank you for bringing that up

2:32:19 ↗ if you feel like we have somehow missed

2:32:22 ↗ the boat and council president has

2:32:25 ↗ answered over our I have answered and we

2:32:27 ↗ don't have all the talking points and

2:32:29 ↗ just poke us and we will make sure that

2:32:30 ↗ all seven of you get good talking points

2:32:32 ↗ to share Frank

2:32:34 ↗ councilmember Goodman I want to thank

2:32:38 ↗ you for raising this at the good of the

2:32:42 ↗ order and that sharing your goals with

2:32:46 ↗ your fellow council members and with the

2:32:48 ↗ public I think that is a number one it's

2:32:53 ↗ it's I think it's the as leadership has

2:32:58 ↗ been evolving you know that's one more

2:33:00 ↗ evolution and I really appreciate that

2:33:02 ↗ and it also means that as you publicly

2:33:06 ↗ declare those as your goals for the year

2:33:08 ↗ that means other people who are holding

2:33:12 ↗ you accountable so it's a courageous

2:33:14 ↗ thing to do and I not only courageous

2:33:17 ↗ but I think it also shows your

2:33:19 ↗ commitment to do leadership as not just

2:33:27 ↗ you know talking with the administration

2:33:30 ↗ once a week it's a it's a working job it

2:33:35 ↗ takes a lot of extra time to be in

2:33:37 ↗ leadership and so I appreciate that

2:33:39 ↗ extra step that you're taking and I also

2:33:41 ↗ appreciate all the very thoughtful

2:33:43 ↗ responses that you're providing to the

2:33:46 ↗ communications that we get I think

2:33:49 ↗ that's very important and I think the

2:33:50 ↗ community I know the community

2:33:52 ↗ appreciates that Thank You councilmember

2:33:54 ↗ Goodman are there any other comments I

2:33:55 ↗ just said I'll just agree with that

2:33:58 ↗ completely I think the emails that have

2:34:00 ↗ gotten gone out in responsib in very

2:34:03 ↗ well-crafted and very clear and very

2:34:05 ↗ I'm sure very appreciated so yes and I

2:34:08 ↗ would like to just add one thing to it I

2:34:10 ↗ was grinning ear-to-ear as you guys are

2:34:12 ↗ talking about the strategic plan I think

2:34:15 ↗ the council the prior councils those

2:34:17 ↗ that are sitting here you did an amazing

2:34:19 ↗ job listening to the community and

2:34:21 ↗ crafting something that we can use and

2:34:23 ↗ to hear that that's how the leadership

2:34:25 ↗ is divided up and divide and conquer on

2:34:28 ↗ that list I am so proud of you I think

2:34:29 ↗ that is great thank you

2:34:31 ↗ I I just was grinning like crazy as you

2:34:34 ↗ guys are talking that is wonderful

2:34:36 ↗ there's nothing else for good of the

2:34:38 ↗ order I'm gonna talk a little bit about

2:34:39 ↗ some upcoming council meetings

2:34:41 ↗ March 10th there is a council study

2:34:43 ↗ session at 6:30 and potential agenda

2:34:46 ↗ items are I'm I'm going to be be

2:34:50 ↗ providing for the first time a mayor's

2:34:51 ↗ housing overview this is a subject that

2:34:54 ↗ is got enormous attention and normos

2:34:57 ↗ complexity and so I'll be speaking for a

2:35:00 ↗ short period of time at the beginning

2:35:01 ↗ you will also be hearing a potentially

2:35:03 ↗ about the Housing Strategy work plan

2:35:05 ↗ council update a real regional coalition

2:35:07 ↗ for Housing arch update title 18

2:35:11 ↗ land-use code update this is the ad-hoc

2:35:14 ↗ planning committee report out that the

2:35:17 ↗ council president had mentioned earlier

2:35:18 ↗ and potentially imposing a local sales

2:35:21 ↗ and use tax for affordable and

2:35:23 ↗ supportive housing a march 16th at the

2:35:26 ↗ regular City Council meeting at 7:00

2:35:28 ↗ p.m. the potential agenda items are old

2:35:31 ↗ town land use code amendments so there

2:35:34 ↗ will no not be an executive session

2:35:36 ↗ after our meeting since we held it

2:35:39 ↗ earlier today and we are now adjourned

2:35:42 ↗ at 9:36

2:35:51 ↗ 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)

Barbara de Michele

Stacy Goodman

Zach Hall

Victoria Hunt

Tola Marts

Chris Reh

Lindsey Walsh

Motions and votes (4)

Authorize the Mayor to enter into a settlement agreement with American Tower on the terms discussed within the Executive Session. . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pauly led the Pledge of Allegiance. AUDIENCE COMMENTS The following individuals advocated for improvements to the Olde Town Traffic Calming p…

Moved by HUNT · seconded by REH

Carried 7-0

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Stacy Goodman, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh

Approve Resolution No. 2020-04, declaring support for the King County-Cities Climate Collaboration Joint Letter of Commitment and authorizing the City of Issaquah to be a signatory of the letter.

Moved by HUNT · seconded by REH

Carried 7-0

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Stacy Goodman, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh

Adopt Ordinance No. 2902, relating to impact fees; adopting the 2020 Park Impact Fee Study; amending the definition of “park rate study” in IMC 3.72.020(J) to reflect such adoption and thereby update the City’s park impact fees to recognize changes in capital facilities needs and costs as provided i…

Moved by HUNT · seconded by REH

Carried 7-0

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Stacy Goodman, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh

APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED

Moved by HUNT · seconded by REH

Carried 7-0

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Stacy Goodman, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh