City Council Regular Meeting · Tuesday, January 16, 2024 · City Council Digest

3. SPECIAL BUSINESS

Korean American Day Proclamation ID 1614

5 min · packet pp.5

Topics: Arts & Culture

▶ Watch from 1:11 Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, Korean-American Day is celebrated worldwide on January 13th to commemorate the first Korean immigrants to the United States in 1903; and

5. CONSENT CALENDAR

Accounts: Payables and Payroll of Jan. 16, 2024, $6,223,544.26 ID 1630

Carried 7-0

Approve · packet pp.7–43

Topics: Budget

▶ Watch from 22:37 Open packet at p.7 ↗

Staff report:

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

Roll call:

Moved by DE MICHELE · seconded by MARTS

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting, Sept. 18, 2023

Carried 7-0

Approve · packet pp.45–49

Previously discussed: City Council Regular Meeting · May 6, 2023 City Council Regular Meeting · May 24, 2023 City Council Regular Meeting · May 31, 2023 City Council Regular Meeting · Jun 5, 2023

▶ Watch from 22:49 Open packet at p.45 ↗

Staff report:

CONSENT CALENDAR b) 09-18-23 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page (0000) CITY OF ISSAQUAH City Council Regular Meeting 7:00 PM Council Chambers September 18, 2023 MINUTES 135 E. Sunset Way

Roll call:

Moved by DE MICHELE · seconded by MARTS

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

Informational Update: Lead Water Service Line Inventory Overview ID 1548

Carried 7-0

Receive Report · packet pp.51–52

Topics: Water

▶ Watch from 23:00 Open packet at p.51 ↗

Staff report:

Provide City Council with an Informational Update regarding EPA-mandated survey to determine the possibility of lead service lines in Issaquah’s water service area.

Roll call:

Moved by DE MICHELE · seconded by MARTS

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

Informational Update: Economic Development Quarterly Report - Q4 2023 ID 1575

Carried 7-0

Receive Report · packet pp.53–66

Topics: Economic Development

▶ Watch from 23:11 Open packet at p.53 ↗

Staff report:

This informational report is to provide an overview of economic development staff activities and trends in the 4th quarter of 2023.

Roll call:

Moved by DE MICHELE · seconded by MARTS

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

Solar Plus Storage Grant Award AB 8685

Carried 7-0

Accept Grant; Authorize Agreement · packet pp.67–83

Topics: ClimateBudget

▶ Watch from 23:22 Open packet at p.67 ↗

Staff report:

The City of Issaquah approved its first Climate Action Plan in December 2021. The Climate Action Plan (ICAP) engaged the community during many events in the summer of 2021, including workshops, focus groups, and a community-wide survey. Additionally, the City has developed a Climate Vulnerability Assessment (CVA) which is informing City work as it relates to emergency planning and community resilience. The Solar plus Storage planning grant will support City implementation of many ICAP actions related to renewable energy on municipal buildings (OV 2.4, OV 2.5) and community resilience (CR 1.1, CR 1.2) while addressing climate vulnerabilities identified in the CVA. The Solar Plus Storage planning grant is for work in 2024 related to identifying a resilient hub strategy and preparing for an anticipated Solar Plus Storage implementation grant administered by the Department of Commerce.

Roll call:

Moved by DE MICHELE · seconded by MARTS

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

Multi-Family Housing Tax Exemption Ordinance AB 8728

Carried 7-0

Approve Resolution · packet pp.85–90

Topics: HousingLand UseBudget

Previously discussed: City Council Regular Meeting · Nov 20, 2023

▶ Watch from 23:33 Open packet at p.85 ↗

Staff report:

In 2017, the City adopted a MFTE program pursuant to Chapter 84.14 RCW, allowing for special valuation of eligible improvements associated with multifamily housing in areas designated by the City Council as "residential targeted areas," for the purpose of increasing residential opportunities for affordable housing. The program is codified at Chapter 3.09 of the Issaquah Municipal Code (IMC). Currently, the City has established one residential targeted area, the Tibbetts Valley Transit-Oriented Development Targeted Area.

Roll call:

Moved by DE MICHELE · seconded by MARTS

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

2024 Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Annual Appointments AB 8744

Carried 7-0

Confirm · packet pp.91–92

Topics: BudgetTourismBoards & Commissions

▶ Watch from 23:44 Open packet at p.91 ↗

Staff report:

In 1998, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2192, establishing LTAC. Currently, hotels, motels, and bed-and- breakfast inns collect the City's one percent share of the lodging tax to pay all or any part of the cost of tourism promotion, acquisition or operation of tourism-related facilities.

Roll call:

Moved by DE MICHELE · seconded by MARTS

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

Appointment to Cascade Water Alliance Board Position AB 8760

Carried 7-0

Approve Resolution · packet pp.93–95

Topics: WaterBoards & Commissions

▶ Watch from 23:55 Open packet at p.93 ↗

Staff report:

Approve the resolution as presented.

Roll call:

Moved by DE MICHELE · seconded by MARTS

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

6. REGULAR BUSINESS

Public Records Policy & Fee Schedule AB 8553

Adopt Ordinance; Approve Resolution · 15 min · packet pp.97–209

Topics: Land UseBudget

Previously discussed: City Council Committee of the Whole · Jan 8, 2024

▶ Watch from 24:06 Open packet at p.97 ↗

Staff report:

Under state law, local government agencies are required to provide public records upon request. In 2022, the City worked on 1,576 public records requests. Of these,  75% were for police records  15% were for land use records  10% were for other departmental records

Julius Boehm Pool Feasibility Study AB 8750

Carried 7-0

Direct Administration · 45 min · packet pp.211–470

Topics: Parks

Previously discussed: Services, Safety & Parks Committee · Dec 11, 2023

▶ Watch from 35:00 Open packet at p.211 ↗

Staff report:

In late 2022, the City of Issaquah was awarded an Aquatic Facilities Grant from King County Parks. City Council accepted and authorized this grant on April 3, 2023, through AB 8587. This grant is funded through the 2020-2025 King County Parks Levy and is intended to assist communities in preserving and expanding access to public pools. The City of Issaquah sought and received the grant to study adding water capacity within the existing Julius Boehm Pool site.

Roll call:

Moved by MARTS · seconded by JOE

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

Financial Policy Ad Hoc Committee AB 8735

Adopt Ordinance · 30 min · packet pp.471–520

Topics: Land UseBoards & Commissions

Previously discussed: City Council Regular Meeting · Jan 1, 2022

▶ Watch from 1:07:41 Open packet at p.471 ↗

Staff report:

The Administration is seeking revisions to the Financial Management Policy to facilitate more efficient procurement and contracting and address existing ambiguities. At the Nov. 13, 2023 City Council Committee of the Whole meeting, draft amendments were presented to the City Council (Exhibit A).

9. GOOD OF THE ORDER

Upcoming Council Meetings

packet pp.521–525

▶ Watch from 2:51:34 Open packet at p.521 ↗

Staff report:

and for this amount?”

2024 City Council Appointments ID 1572

5 min

Topics: Boards & Commissions

▶ Watch from 2:56:34

10. EXECUTIVE SESSION

10a

Executive Session - Collective Bargaining per 42.30.140(4) ID 1619

15 min

▶ Watch from 1:29:29

10b

Executive Session Pending/Potential Litigation per RCW ID 1644

15 min

▶ Watch from 2:07:34

3883 segments .txt ↗

0:05 ↗ no welcome everyone I council president

0:08 ↗ Walsh call the January 16th city council

0:11 ↗ meeting to order mayor pully has an

0:14 ↗ excused absence tonight so I will be

0:16 ↗ serving as mayor proen the meeting is

0:19 ↗ being held on Tuesday due to Martin

0:22 ↗ Luther King Jr Day holiday that occurred

0:25 ↗ yesterday and as a reminder we continue

0:28 ↗ to live in a world that is both

0:30 ↗ virtual and in person so we will have

0:33 ↗ members of the public and staff um

0:36 ↗ participating virtually tonight in

0:38 ↗ addition to those we welcome in the room

0:41 ↗ the first item on the agenda is the

0:44 ↗ Pledge of Allegiance so I welcome

0:45 ↗ everyone to stand and join me in the

0:48 ↗ Pledge of

0:58 ↗ Allegiance

1:07 ↗ thank you we have several items on our

1:09 ↗ agenda tonight we're going to start with

1:11 ↗ special business followed by audience

1:13 ↗ comments then we've got a consent

1:16 ↗ calendar and three items on regular

1:20 ↗ business so I will start by inviting the

1:25 ↗ members of the Washington State Korean

1:29 ↗ American Day Foundation to the podium

1:32 ↗ with me uh for a

1:56 ↗ proclamation okay thank you everyone for

2:00 ↗ coming so the members of the Washington

2:01 ↗ State korean-american Day Foundation

2:04 ↗ I've got the names of song me suuna Kim

2:09 ↗ uh Ken Hong hillj Kim Lisa Cho and Siri

2:14 ↗ song Sherry song so thank you very much

2:16 ↗ for attending with us so I'm going to

2:18 ↗ read the proclamation and then give you

2:20 ↗ a moment to speak as well so whereas

2:24 ↗ korean-american day is celebrated

2:26 ↗ worldwide on January 13th to commemorate

2:29 ↗ the first Korean immigrants to the

2:31 ↗ United States in 1903 and whereas

2:35 ↗ isaquel recognizes the invaluable

2:37 ↗ contributions from korean-american

2:39 ↗ individuals families and businesses and

2:43 ↗ whereas we acknowledge those

2:44 ↗ contributions to our local Arts

2:47 ↗ education sciences and to our economic

2:50 ↗ social and Democratic

2:52 ↗ institutions that strengthen our city

2:54 ↗ and where whereas the United States is

2:57 ↗ home to the largest korean-american

2:59 ↗ community in the world and Washington

3:02 ↗ state has the fifth highest

3:03 ↗ concentration of korean-americans in the

3:06 ↗ country and whereas this year will Mark

3:09 ↗ 71 years of the US Korean Korean

3:13 ↗ Alliance signifying a staple of peace

3:16 ↗ and stability on the Korean Peninsula

3:19 ↗ and in the indopacific region and

3:22 ↗ whereas we come together as a community

3:24 ↗ in a spirit of unity to celebrate the

3:28 ↗ first pioneers that P paved the way for

3:30 ↗ the Vibrant korean-american Community

3:32 ↗ that thrives today and the invaluable

3:35 ↗ contributions that enrich our city now

3:39 ↗ therefore I uh Lindsay Walsh on behalf

3:43 ↗ of Mayor mayor L pully mayor of the city

3:45 ↗ of isqua do hereby Proclaim January 13th

3:49 ↗ 2024 to be korean-american day in the

3:53 ↗ city of isqua and I urge the community

3:55 ↗ to join in special observance and

3:57 ↗ celebration of uh Korean American day

4:01 ↗ thank you very

4:04 ↗ much would you like to make a few

4:07 ↗ comments

4:08 ↗ and sure thank you very much council

4:10 ↗ president Walsh and to the council

4:12 ↗ members that are present here as well as

4:14 ↗ the mayor who's not here um we really

4:17 ↗ appreciate this recognition that you

4:19 ↗ have made in this Proclamation for the

4:22 ↗ korean-americans living residing in

4:24 ↗ isqua the greater pre sou region as well

4:27 ↗ as in Washington state and behind me we

4:29 ↗ have the hardworking um committee

4:31 ↗ members that work every year to put on a

4:35 ↗ great event to commemorate

4:36 ↗ korean-american day and especially uh

4:39 ↗ our chair this year Huna Kim and she's

4:41 ↗ worked for several years tirelessly to

4:44 ↗ um put on the celebrations for the event

4:47 ↗ so once again on behalf of the Korean

4:49 ↗ Community thank you very much we are

4:51 ↗ proud Americans and we are also proud of

4:53 ↗ our heritage thank

4:56 ↗ you so we've got our city administrator

4:59 ↗ who going to take a picture if we want

5:00 ↗ to come around we can go

5:28 ↗ ahead

5:43 ↗ excellent well it is always lovely to

5:44 ↗ have people in uh the room with us we

5:47 ↗ sometimes are speaking to an empty room

5:49 ↗ in addition to all of the residents uh

5:52 ↗ and people who watch online so the next

5:55 ↗ uh point on our agenda is audience

5:58 ↗ comments so members of the public May

6:01 ↗ address council at this time either in

6:03 ↗ person or virtually those who signed up

6:06 ↗ in advance to make comments will be

6:07 ↗ called on first if you're joining us

6:10 ↗ virtually and would like to make

6:11 ↗ comments please raise your virtual hand

6:13 ↗ or send the host a chat message if

6:15 ↗ you're on the phone you're going to

6:17 ↗ press star three if you're um on a

6:20 ↗ computer or smart uh smartphone you're

6:22 ↗ going to look for the hand icon you can

6:24 ↗ also send the host a chat message if

6:28 ↗ you're in the room and did not sign up

6:29 ↗ up I will ask for other speakers before

6:31 ↗ we close that portion of the meeting and

6:34 ↗ so clerk has anyone signed up to speak

6:36 ↗ for General audience comments or

6:38 ↗ indicate a desire to speak this evening

6:40 ↗ we have a few virtual attendees who are

6:42 ↗ raising their hands okay fantastic so

6:46 ↗ for those making comments you are

6:48 ↗ invited to address the council regarding

6:50 ↗ matters that are directly related to

6:51 ↗ isqua's programs projects services or

6:54 ↗ events please direct comments to the

6:57 ↗ whole Council and not individuals while

6:59 ↗ this is not a question and answer

7:01 ↗ session we will contact a followup if

7:03 ↗ needed when recognized um if you're a

7:06 ↗ virtual attendee you can unmute your

7:07 ↗ microphone and if you want turn on your

7:10 ↗ camera if you're in person you can go

7:12 ↗ ahead and step up to the center lecturn

7:14 ↗ you're going to press a button so that

7:16 ↗ the microphone turns red so that we can

7:18 ↗ hear you you will state your name

7:20 ↗ address and relationship to the city

7:23 ↗ speak clearly and pause frequently and

7:26 ↗ uh limit the comments to five minutes

7:30 ↗ if you are attending virtually and do

7:32 ↗ not respond after your name or phone

7:33 ↗ number is called or if your connection

7:35 ↗ is lost unexpectedly the meeting will

7:38 ↗ need to proceed you're encouraged to

7:40 ↗ rejoin the meeting if you able personal

7:43 ↗ attacks obscene language derogatory

7:46 ↗ remarks and disruptive behavior will not

7:48 ↗ be permitted public comments written and

7:51 ↗ verbal are an important aspect of the

7:52 ↗ public process and the city and the

7:54 ↗ council takes comments seriously we

7:56 ↗ thank you for taking the time to address

7:58 ↗ us so cler can you please identify the P

8:01 ↗ first person who has signed up to speak

8:03 ↗ yes Connie Marsh Connie I'll make you a

8:05 ↗ panelist

8:13 ↗ now okay hi I'm Connie Marsh I live live

8:17 ↗ up on squawk you got an email uh from me

8:22 ↗ about the pool so I'm not going to

8:24 ↗ address that assume that you have read

8:27 ↗ it um the next next comment is about

8:32 ↗ public

8:33 ↗ accessibility to things of interest so

8:36 ↗ that includes both the public records

8:39 ↗ and also the ad hoc Finance

8:43 ↗ committee's

8:45 ↗ um H I don't know I guess c c

8:50 ↗ accumulation of comments from their

8:52 ↗ committee meeting so I appreciate the uh

8:56 ↗ easier access to General Public records

8:59 ↗ that has happened through the public

9:01 ↗ records process it's been long and

9:03 ↗ arduous but it's better now the

9:07 ↗ conversation in the ad hoc meeting was

9:10 ↗ actually not that different it turned

9:13 ↗ into a conversation about how do we

9:15 ↗ actually make

9:18 ↗ records uh easier to access and more

9:21 ↗ transparent to the community so that is

9:24 ↗ a great conversation but I am unwilling

9:28 ↗ to let over not oversight uh the city

9:33 ↗ council's review of how the community's

9:37 ↗ money is

9:38 ↗ spent um be reduced without a commitment

9:43 ↗ to increased transparency and ease of

9:46 ↗ access to this information by the

9:48 ↗ community and I am unsure of how that is

9:51 ↗ going to be linked strongly enough

9:54 ↗ together to actually make sure that the

9:57 ↗ information does be become available to

10:00 ↗ the community and so I would like you to

10:03 ↗ have a conversation about like what is

10:06 ↗ the council's role in ensuring that this

10:10 ↗ information is is provided to the

10:13 ↗ community and also what is the council's

10:15 ↗ role in ensuring that the Comm the

10:17 ↗ citizens money is well spent because I'm

10:21 ↗ a little hazy on all that so thank you

10:24 ↗ for your efforts it's been fascinating

10:26 ↗ to listen to and I hope you all get home

10:28 ↗ safe

10:29 ↗ thank

10:30 ↗ you thank you Connie I would say the

10:32 ↗ same to you but I believe you are home

10:34 ↗ so stay home

10:36 ↗ safely uh clerk do we have anyone else

10:39 ↗ uh signed up to speak uh yes we have an

10:42 ↗ individual with phone number 20630 who'd

10:45 ↗ like to make

10:48 ↗ comments uh I'm going to unmute you

10:52 ↗ now you have the floor hi hi this is

10:56 ↗ Steve Perera can you hear me okay we

10:58 ↗ should we can

11:00 ↗ Steve thank you uh let me go in my back

11:03 ↗ room real quick

11:05 ↗ so there are two items that I wanted to

11:08 ↗ comment on the first is

11:10 ↗ the uh financial affairs ad hoc

11:13 ↗ committee

11:15 ↗ and I guess I'm a little perplexed I see

11:18 ↗ two pieces to this or two parts the

11:21 ↗ first is that the administration wants

11:23 ↗ to have more control over what types of

11:27 ↗ items

11:29 ↗ they are authorized to speak on that

11:31 ↗ piece makes sense to

11:33 ↗ me uh so I'm not going to comment on

11:36 ↗ that the other part it seems to be the

11:38 ↗ administration seeking more approval of

11:41 ↗ budget authority to at a higher

11:44 ↗ Financial level than currently

11:47 ↗ committed I personally am opposed to the

11:49 ↗ administration having an increased

11:53 ↗ Financial ability to approve items I

11:56 ↗ like the Threshold at $100,000 it's a

11:58 ↗ nice round number it's arbitrary but

12:00 ↗ it's a cut off point that makes sense I

12:04 ↗ know and this is I make these comments

12:06 ↗ independent of any particular mayor or

12:08 ↗ any particular Administration I think

12:11 ↗ goes beyond that it's the role of city

12:13 ↗ council

12:14 ↗ to plan and approve the budget process

12:17 ↗ and increasing that budget Authority

12:19 ↗ outside of the the city council

12:22 ↗ process is not the reason why I elect

12:25 ↗ City Council Members to represent the

12:27 ↗ people in this body and

12:30 ↗ group uh it's not about again a

12:33 ↗ particular Administration it's not about

12:34 ↗ a strong

12:36 ↗ mayor campaigning it's about the voice

12:39 ↗ of the people while we can increase

12:41 ↗ transparency and visibility of those and

12:44 ↗ we should do those things I think it

12:47 ↗ belongs strongly in the city council

12:49 ↗ purview to approve the budget process as

12:52 ↗ part of their role in

12:54 ↗ policy and budget

12:57 ↗ financing I think it's somewhat of a der

12:59 ↗ elction of Duty to put those things onto

13:03 ↗ the administration and not do the city

13:05 ↗ council's due diligence role so I think

13:08 ↗ I've covered the things I wanted to on

13:10 ↗ that piece the other item I wanted to

13:12 ↗ talk on is a little bit more I think

13:15 ↗ still City business but still less

13:19 ↗ concise about the time that

13:22 ↗ the concrete barriers were going up

13:25 ↗ along I90 for Sound Reduction control I

13:27 ↗ sent an email to the city council saying

13:30 ↗ that I think we did the process of

13:34 ↗ becoming a regional growth Center a

13:36 ↗ little bit backwards we didn't plan for

13:37 ↗ it first and then decide what we wanted

13:40 ↗ it to be we decided to become a regional

13:43 ↗ growth Center and now we're kind to

13:44 ↗ backfill and de said what that means and

13:45 ↗ what that looks like and what that feels

13:47 ↗ like

13:49 ↗ and I kind of use a baseball metaphor

13:53 ↗ baseball

13:54 ↗ analogy I think strike one was when we

13:57 ↗ looked at a lot

13:59 ↗ growth in our forested hillsides we

14:01 ↗ decided to allow growth up to 15 to 45°

14:06 ↗ slopes that is not something we

14:09 ↗ initially uh looked at doing there was a

14:11 ↗ strong desire to have the forested

14:13 ↗ hillsides remain forested and now they

14:15 ↗ can be developed whether we lose those

14:18 ↗ cre cover and canopies and the water

14:21 ↗ retention that they retain in the

14:23 ↗ aesthetic and

14:24 ↗ the uh carbon sequ sequestration that

14:28 ↗ they do with losing our ability to for

14:31 ↗ our own

14:33 ↗ native resilience against climate warmth

14:37 ↗ and

14:39 ↗ climate climate growth and climate

14:42 ↗ warmth we're giving away commat so

14:45 ↗ that's strike one strike two is

14:49 ↗ the ability of the city to look at

14:54 ↗ building waving development fees in

14:57 ↗ favor of

15:00 ↗ supposedly promoting growth in the C

15:03 ↗ Central isqua plan

15:05 ↗ area another way of looking at this was

15:08 ↗ also consider whether we should change

15:09 ↗ the density or the lower area ratio and

15:13 ↗ whether we should reduce that to promote

15:15 ↗ growth those weren't things that we

15:17 ↗ looked at and we planned for and decided

15:19 ↗ we wanted to do when we first became

15:22 ↗ regional growth center now we're looking

15:24 ↗ at strike three which might come next or

15:26 ↗ who knows when the idea

15:30 ↗ of promoting growth and development over

15:33 ↗ the things that are Central and

15:35 ↗ character and key to isqu when just look

15:37 ↗ at what other cities or other

15:40 ↗ jurisdictions are doing to promote

15:41 ↗ growth we just want to become bigger and

15:45 ↗ not sure that we it's fair to expect

15:47 ↗ that we're going to retain our unique

15:48 ↗ character of isqua if we keep just

15:51 ↗ saying what can we do to promote growth

15:53 ↗ we change the question from what makes

15:55 ↗ us isqua unique and special to what can

15:59 ↗ we do to promote growth in the sense of

16:01 ↗ bigger can't ever be

16:03 ↗ defined we just seem to want more of it

16:06 ↗ and so I have an ask that we take this

16:09 ↗ issue and suspend the public comments

16:12 ↗ and publicly talk about

16:14 ↗ it Steve as a committee Steve you've

16:17 ↗ reached the end of your five minute

16:19 ↗ comment time proba gonna

16:20 ↗ stop I'm gonna end and say thank you for

16:23 ↗ your

16:25 ↗ time thank you Steve thank you for uh

16:28 ↗ summarizing at the end appreciate it and

16:31 ↗ clerk do we have anyone else signed up

16:33 ↗ to

16:34 ↗ speak no one else has signed up okay we

16:37 ↗ have a few members of the public do we

16:39 ↗ have anybody who would like to come to

16:41 ↗ the Das and uh

16:56 ↗ speak Elizabeth can start out while you

16:58 ↗ guys figure out but we would welcome you

17:01 ↗ up after Elizabeth makes her comments

17:04 ↗ thank you Elizabeth and if you press the

17:06 ↗ button yeah there you go thanks my name

17:10 ↗ is Elizabeth mopan I live at 100 Big

17:13 ↗ Bear Place Northwest in

17:15 ↗ issaqua and I understood that there were

17:18 ↗ to be some uh students here to speak

17:21 ↗ about a particular danger we're all

17:25 ↗ worried about climate change and rightly

17:28 ↗ so but there is a larger danger here in

17:32 ↗ Washington that we don't talk about here

17:35 ↗ in Washington we have a submarine base

17:37 ↗ with 720 nuclear warheads each capable

17:42 ↗ of destroying a city killing millions

17:45 ↗ and having long-term catastrophic

17:47 ↗ effects on the environment and future

17:51 ↗ Generations some say that these weapons

17:54 ↗ serve as a deterrent to war but Wars

17:57 ↗ keep happening all the

18:00 ↗ same any use of these weapons is likely

18:04 ↗ to produce an allout nuclear war with

18:07 ↗ death and destruction beyond belief I'm

18:10 ↗ going to interrupt you just for a moment

18:12 ↗ we have asked and we do have a new

18:15 ↗ policy to require our comments to be

18:17 ↗ related to City policies programs and

18:21 ↗ things so is there something that you

18:23 ↗ have related to what is happening in the

18:26 ↗ city that you could talk about I was

18:29 ↗ hoping that we could take a stand

18:35 ↗ against stockpiling nuclear

18:39 ↗ weapons because I feel that they pose a

18:43 ↗ threat accidents can and do happen in

18:47 ↗ 1994 a B52 crashed at Fairfield Air

18:51 ↗ Force Base missing a nuclear weapon

18:54 ↗ storage facility by 50

18:57 ↗ ft

18:58 ↗ that's all I had to say I'm sure the

19:01 ↗ students have something more fantastic

19:03 ↗ thank you Elizabeth uh any one of you or

19:07 ↗ all three of you if you want to come up

19:10 ↗ um and make comments we would love to

19:12 ↗ hear from you please don't feel

19:14 ↗ intimidated at

19:20 ↗ all so start out by stating your name

19:23 ↗ and any relationship to the city and

19:26 ↗ then you can make your comments thank

19:27 ↗ you

19:29 ↗ hello um my name is Ben and I am a

19:34 ↗ student at isqua high

19:37 ↗ school and I am a resident of squawk

19:40 ↗ mountain and um I would like to bring to

19:45 ↗ attention um a topic related to what the

19:50 ↗ lady who is just before me was speaking

19:54 ↗ which is that um we students in isqua

19:58 ↗ High School are also worried about the

20:01 ↗ fact that the US is closer

20:03 ↗ to um is that the US is closer to

20:09 ↗ nuclear war than it has been since the

20:11 ↗ Cuban Missile

20:13 ↗ Crisis and we would like

20:17 ↗ to um call on the city and ask the

20:21 ↗ city um how they

20:25 ↗ could how they can help to divest public

20:29 ↗ funds I'm going to have to take a moment

20:32 ↗ and just uh pause here we do have a

20:36 ↗ policy that asks for all of our comments

20:39 ↗ to be related to City programs um or

20:43 ↗ policies or procedures I really don't

20:46 ↗ want to discourage your ability to make

20:50 ↗ comments um but if you would go ahead

20:52 ↗ and write in we would love to hear from

20:56 ↗ you uh city council at isqua w.gov would

20:59 ↗ be a really good way to um take your

21:02 ↗ comments and address them to city

21:05 ↗ council particularly if you have

21:07 ↗ anything related to an action that you

21:10 ↗ would want us to take or something like

21:12 ↗ that that would be the best way to make

21:15 ↗ that

21:16 ↗ connection okay thank you thank you very

21:19 ↗ much it's a little bit of an awkward

21:21 ↗ situation is we're trying um a different

21:24 ↗ way of creating a policy there's been a

21:27 ↗ lot of hate speech um in the area and so

21:30 ↗ we're just trying to make sure that all

21:32 ↗ of our comments are relevant to City

21:35 ↗ programs and our business at hand so

21:37 ↗ thank you very very much for attending

21:40 ↗ do we have anyone else indicating a

21:42 ↗ desire to

21:43 ↗ speak okay fantastic thank you for

21:47 ↗ coming by we have heard from uh several

21:50 ↗ members of the community uh one

21:52 ↗ mentioning the pool and public records

21:55 ↗ as well as contract accessibility that's

21:58 ↗ coming through with our fiscal um

22:00 ↗ policies our financial policies Steve

22:03 ↗ pra also um talked about financial

22:05 ↗ policies and then also growth and our

22:08 ↗ different ways of discussing that um and

22:12 ↗ then we heard from two uh members of the

22:15 ↗ community a set of students and another

22:18 ↗ um just about the general state of the

22:21 ↗ world I will leave at that um so really

22:25 ↗ just thank you for taking the time and

22:27 ↗ making comments

22:28 ↗ uh written comments really can be and we

22:31 ↗ do read them all city council at isqua

22:34 ↗ wa.gov so the next item of business is

22:37 ↗ our consent calendar the mayor has noted

22:41 ↗ that she does not have any remarks on

22:43 ↗ tonight's consent calendar items uh

22:46 ↗ committee chairs are there any committee

22:48 ↗ chairs or chair designes who would like

22:50 ↗ to report on any of the consent calendar

22:54 ↗ items okay uh

22:56 ↗ no no okay

23:02 ↗ um the consent calendar was distributed

23:04 ↗ to Council in advance if authorized the

23:06 ↗ items on the consent calendar will be

23:08 ↗ considered together and approved by one

23:10 ↗ motion um have the payables and payroll

23:13 ↗ been remove reviewed they have yes great

23:18 ↗ uh does any council member desire to

23:19 ↗ remove any items from the consent

23:21 ↗ calendar and consider it under regular

23:25 ↗ business okay seeing none is there a

23:30 ↗ motion thank you council president wsh

23:32 ↗ Walsh um I move uh approval of the

23:35 ↗ consent agenda as presented is there a

23:39 ↗ second second thank you the motion is to

23:43 ↗ approve the consent calendar as

23:44 ↗ presented has been moved and seconded is

23:47 ↗ there any Council

23:49 ↗ discussion okay hearing none the motion

23:51 ↗ before council is to approve the consent

23:53 ↗ calendar as presented all those in favor

23:55 ↗ signify by saying I I I

23:59 ↗ those

24:00 ↗ opposed that passes

24:03 ↗ unanimously the next item of business is

24:06 ↗ regular business the first item on our

24:11 ↗ agenda in this section is AB 8553 public

24:14 ↗ records policy and fee schedule and we

24:17 ↗ are being asked to adopt the ordinance

24:19 ↗ and approve the resolution I'd like to

24:22 ↗ invite public records analyst Tammy

24:24 ↗ Mueller to the lect turn thank you

24:31 ↗ good evening Council thank you for

24:32 ↗ having me

24:34 ↗ back I have no presentation for you

24:36 ↗ tonight um and as was just explained uh

24:40 ↗ the January City uh sorry Committee of

24:42 ↗ the whole meeting uh the

24:44 ↗ administration's modified records uh

24:46 ↗ copy fee proposal was presented to you

24:48 ↗ uh this proposal removed the electronic

24:50 ↗ record system transmission fee of

24:52 ↗ $9 uh and uh for those requests that

24:55 ↗ would be fulfilled via our go QA public

24:57 ↗ records portal instead a proposal was

24:59 ↗ made for um a 25 cent fee per record uh

25:03 ↗ and um for records that we would be

25:05 ↗ provided via the online portal and then

25:07 ↗ across the board uh regardless of how

25:09 ↗ the requests are provided or the copies

25:11 ↗ of records are provided um we would

25:14 ↗ propose a $3 fee sorry a $3 minimum fee

25:18 ↗ where anything that is uh $3 and under

25:21 ↗ would not be charged any

25:23 ↗ fees um and at that meeting uh majority

25:26 ↗ of the council expressed report for this

25:28 ↗ modified recommendation and uh suggested

25:31 ↗ that it be brought forward tonight so

25:33 ↗ that modified recommendation is

25:34 ↗ incorporated into the substitute

25:36 ↗ resolution attached as exhibit a to the

25:38 ↗ agenda bill so please let me know if you

25:41 ↗ have any questions as you discuss

25:43 ↗ tonight okay let's start out with any

25:48 ↗ questions okay then I'm going to start

25:51 ↗ with the substitute

25:53 ↗ motion so let's

25:56 ↗ see I move to adopt a substitute

26:00 ↗ resolution exhibit a to agenda Bill 8553

26:03 ↗ incorporating the committee of the whole

26:05 ↗ recommendation to remove the $9

26:07 ↗ electronic records transmission charge

26:10 ↗ and instead charge an electronic record

26:12 ↗ copying fee of 25 cents per record with

26:15 ↗ a ra waiver of the first $3 of

26:20 ↗ fees okay and do we have a second on

26:24 ↗ that

26:26 ↗ substitution

26:30 ↗ second okay so the vote at this point is

26:35 ↗ going to be whether or not we want to

26:39 ↗ adopt this as the substitute motion

26:41 ↗ which we can then discuss question all

26:45 ↗ of that so um on the motion to adopt a

26:50 ↗ substitute resolution all those in favor

26:54 ↗ excuse me Council we need to allow for

26:56 ↗ any discussion on

27:06 ↗ saying I

27:08 ↗ I thank you all those in favor signify

27:11 ↗ by saying I

27:14 ↗ I all those

27:17 ↗ opposed signify by saying nay that

27:20 ↗ passes unanimously thank you as we

27:23 ↗ muddle through the substitutions so um

27:27 ↗ the following motion is now before the

27:30 ↗ council for a vote to approve the

27:32 ↗ substitute resolution number

27:35 ↗ 20238 adopting a public records policy

27:38 ↗ and public records fee schedule and

27:40 ↗ ordering publication of this resolution

27:43 ↗ and the public records act rules and

27:46 ↗ adoption adopt ordinance number

27:49 ↗ 3042 repealing chapter 1.2a public

27:52 ↗ records and chapter 3.60 charges for

27:56 ↗ Police Department report reps and

27:58 ↗ services of the isqua municipal code so

28:01 ↗ that is the resolution that we are

28:03 ↗ discussing at this time which reflects

28:06 ↗ the conversation that was had at the

28:08 ↗ committee of the whole so is there any

28:11 ↗ discussion on this motion you need a

28:15 ↗ second uh we do not need a second

28:17 ↗ because the we adopted the substitute

28:20 ↗ motion so what happened at the previous

28:24 ↗ uh regular meeting was that we had a

28:26 ↗ motion on the table which was seconded

28:29 ↗ and then we referred that to the

28:32 ↗ committee of the whole to discuss so

28:34 ↗ that motion was still sitting on the

28:36 ↗ table and what we're doing now is we're

28:39 ↗ we just voted to substitute in this new

28:42 ↗ motion for what was already on the table

28:46 ↗ does everybody here we are now talking

28:49 ↗ about basically what we talked about at

28:51 ↗ the committee of the whole which is that

28:53 ↗ the electronic records um item is no

28:56 ↗ longer in in place and there is a

28:59 ↗ $3 waiver

29:01 ↗ point so on that concept do we have

29:06 ↗ conversation about the general public

29:09 ↗ records idea that we

29:12 ↗ are the

29:15 ↗ policy council member Ray I feel like

29:18 ↗ the designated I'll get you started kind

29:20 ↗ of person um I'm generally supportive of

29:24 ↗ the um changes I I'm wholeheartedly in

29:29 ↗ support of the recommendation to remove

29:31 ↗ the $9 electronic records fee um and I'm

29:35 ↗ fine with the 25 cent copying fee um as

29:38 ↗ we talked about the committee of whole

29:39 ↗ I'm just going to say it again uh I

29:41 ↗ think the $3 minimum is way too low and

29:45 ↗ I think that as we go into this the

29:47 ↗ administration is going to find that the

29:49 ↗ cost of issuing invoice for $317 is

29:52 ↗ going to cost us more than

29:54 ↗ $317 so I am I will support the these

29:57 ↗ changes but I am beseeching the

29:59 ↗ administration to uh be diligent and U

30:03 ↗ evaluate the cost of running the program

30:06 ↗ so that we can come back and say what

30:08 ↗ should it be and true it up at a future

30:09 ↗ date but I am I am okay with where we

30:12 ↗ are at

30:14 ↗ today thank you council member

30:17 ↗ Hall thank you uh I guess just to repeat

30:19 ↗ some of my comments from last week I'm

30:21 ↗ um happy and supportive of this updated

30:23 ↗ approach um our staff have put a lot of

30:26 ↗ time and effort in into it this and

30:28 ↗ we're very grateful um to you for doing

30:30 ↗ that um our staff also put a lot of time

30:32 ↗ and effort into being professional and

30:34 ↗ responsive to public records requests

30:35 ↗ and making sure people get the

30:36 ↗ information that they need and want um I

30:39 ↗ think this proposal allows us to capture

30:41 ↗ uh that time and effort but also um

30:43 ↗ prepare us for more detailed body camera

30:46 ↗ redaction work also um to continue to

30:49 ↗ honor uh and respect um government

30:52 ↗ accountability and transparency more

30:54 ↗ generally um as for the electronic Rec

30:57 ↗ record system transmission fee I

30:59 ↗ actually think the

31:00 ↗ $3 um threshold is smart at least for

31:04 ↗ now I think the most compelling argument

31:06 ↗ for me last week during our committee

31:08 ↗ the whole was that it allows us to

31:09 ↗ narrow the scope the scope of the

31:11 ↗ individual who's who's requesting

31:13 ↗ records um which I think was one of our

31:16 ↗ stated goals at the outset too so um and

31:18 ↗ then it also helps those who really just

31:20 ↗ need access to that one record or that

31:21 ↗ one collection of Records um to get what

31:24 ↗ they need uh free of hassle um though I

31:27 ↗ I don't want to completely dismiss the

31:28 ↗ concern so the concern that council

31:30 ↗ member Ray brought up so let's just keep

31:32 ↗ an eye on that and um in case the time

31:35 ↗ and cost of of invoicing creates more

31:37 ↗ trouble than it helps but again thank

31:38 ↗ you very much for all the diligence that

31:41 ↗ you've put into this I really appreciate

31:42 ↗ it and I'm

31:44 ↗ supportive do we have any other

31:50 ↗ discussion okay uh I'm just going to

31:52 ↗ Echo what I've heard really professional

31:55 ↗ conversation on this I think that helps

31:57 ↗ the entire region as we um come into

32:01 ↗ these ideas it was particularly

32:03 ↗ necessary as we're looking at um body

32:06 ↗ Cam and the redaction requirements there

32:10 ↗ in order to serve the public um and have

32:13 ↗ that uh accessibility of public

32:16 ↗ information but also be protective of

32:19 ↗ those individuals who are caught on a

32:21 ↗ camera that they did not anticipate to

32:23 ↗ be um but it recognizes the cost to the

32:27 ↗ city to provide those Services um so

32:31 ↗ it's a fine balance and I think we've

32:32 ↗ done a good job I'm uh also supportive

32:35 ↗ of the idea of reflecting back on

32:38 ↗ whether the $3 fee serves Us in the

32:42 ↗ longterm or the $3 waiver um serves as a

32:45 ↗ longterm and consideration of

32:48 ↗ cost so um there is no further

32:52 ↗ discussion the motion before council

32:55 ↗ is let's see

32:58 ↗ trying to make sure I'm not on the

33:00 ↗ substitute

33:05 ↗ okay okay there we

33:10 ↗ go the motion before council is to

33:13 ↗ approve the substitute resolution number

33:16 ↗ 20238 adopting a public records policy

33:18 ↗ and public records fee schedule and

33:21 ↗ ordering publication of this resolution

33:23 ↗ and the public records act rules and

33:26 ↗ adopt ordance number 3042 repealing one

33:30 ↗ chapter 1.28 public records and chapter

33:33 ↗ 3.60 charges for Police Department

33:36 ↗ reports and services of the isqua

33:39 ↗ municipal code all those in favor

33:41 ↗ signify by saying I I

33:45 ↗ I those

33:48 ↗ opposed okay that passes unanimously

33:51 ↗ thank you very much Tammy appreciate it

33:54 ↗ the next item of business is AB 8750

33:58 ↗ Julius bone pool feasibility study and

34:02 ↗ we're going to invite parks and

34:03 ↗ Community Services director Jeff wling

34:06 ↗ and Recreation manager Brian Bernstein

34:09 ↗ to make a

34:11 ↗ presentation thank

34:12 ↗ you thank you council president Walsh

34:15 ↗ mayor protm and good evening Council uh

34:17 ↗ Jeff Watling parks and Community

34:19 ↗ Services

34:20 ↗ director um here tonight to give a a

34:22 ↗ brief introduction and then hand it over

34:24 ↗ to uh Brian burnson

34:28 ↗ am I now

34:32 ↗ sharing hey let's TR

34:45 ↗ again all right good evening thank you

34:48 ↗ so much um her direction from the uh

34:52 ↗ services safety and Parks committee um

34:54 ↗ at their December 11th meeting uh Brian

34:57 ↗ are here to present the pool feasibility

34:59 ↗ study as we presented it that evening uh

35:02 ↗ first some quick background um um as

35:06 ↗ shared with the the committee the the

35:07 ↗ Julius BPS pool as I'm sure we're all

35:10 ↗ aware is a very very popular facility um

35:14 ↗ and in many many ways

35:16 ↗ overprescribed uh be it swimming lessons

35:18 ↗ be it um um exercise be it need for lap

35:23 ↗ swim be it um School use um it's a it's

35:26 ↗ a very um overscheduled facility um with

35:30 ↗ that in mind and as well as as really

35:33 ↗ understanding and recognizing the the

35:35 ↗ relative high cost um it would take to

35:38 ↗ build an entirely new pool uh we sought

35:41 ↗ to explore um and better understanding

35:44 ↗ if if an onsite pool expansion uh was

35:48 ↗ even viable U for us to consider um we

35:52 ↗ sought and received some Grant funds to

35:53 ↗ get this work done um and completed this

35:56 ↗ work

35:57 ↗ um towards the end of last year uh this

35:59 ↗ work built upon uh the prior 2009

36:03 ↗ feasibility study that's also in your

36:05 ↗ agenda packet tonight um this work also

36:08 ↗ sought to leverage uh the 2014 2015

36:11 ↗ Capital Improvements that were made to

36:13 ↗ the pool you may recall uh thanks to uh

36:16 ↗ voters saying yes to the 2013 Park Bond

36:19 ↗ $5 million uh was invested into the pool

36:22 ↗ uh those improvements uh Focus primarily

36:25 ↗ on systems improvements and support

36:28 ↗ infrastructure to the building and in

36:30 ↗ many ways greatly extending the the life

36:32 ↗ of that

36:33 ↗ pool this study then really uh meant to

36:37 ↗ to frame the question um can we now

36:40 ↗ expand the pool can we now expand water

36:43 ↗ capacity um on that site um as I said at

36:48 ↗ the committee meeting without bearing

36:49 ↗ the lead the answer from the study is

36:51 ↗ yes uh it does appear uh there was an

36:54 ↗ option for us uh to consider further

36:57 ↗ so the purpose tonight is to share the

36:59 ↗ results of that study not just stop at

37:01 ↗ yes and then end the presentation um I

37:04 ↗ have a chance to to share that pool

37:06 ↗ feasibility study uh for that uh

37:08 ↗ potential expansion and then seek your

37:11 ↗ support um on next steps um as shared

37:14 ↗ with the Park Board in November and and

37:16 ↗ the committee earlier in December uh

37:18 ↗ those next steps would involve a further

37:20 ↗ explor exploration of this option

37:23 ↗ further Community engagement around this

37:24 ↗ option um and further

37:27 ↗ understanding of of funding that might

37:29 ↗ be available to to start to frame a

37:30 ↗ funding strategy uh we also in the next

37:33 ↗ steps want to consider um the context of

37:36 ↗ this potential Capital Improvement uh

37:39 ↗ with our other Capital priorities um

37:42 ↗ knowing that later this year uh we're

37:44 ↗ going to have a park Plan update uh

37:46 ↗ that's going to be completed and and

37:47 ↗ Community sharing uh their priorities

37:49 ↗ and needs for that work as well as uh

37:52 ↗ numerous other Capital infrastructure

37:54 ↗ needs uh so with that I am going to hand

37:57 ↗ it over to Brian bernston our Recreation

37:59 ↗ manager who who led this effort uh look

38:02 ↗ forward to any questions you might have

38:04 ↗ and um feedback you might have thank

38:10 ↗ you thanks Jeff uh good evening Council

38:13 ↗ thank you for having us here

38:17 ↗ tonight uh I'd like to just acknowledge

38:19 ↗ really quickly our steering committee

38:21 ↗ that worked on this uh you know a large

38:23 ↗ group of folks that really you know

38:25 ↗ spent a lot of time last year meeting

38:27 ↗ with us and discussing this topic um our

38:29 ↗ group consisted of a lot of uh we had

38:31 ↗ City staff from uh oh from the

38:35 ↗ Recreation services team Community

38:36 ↗ Planning Development uh the facility

38:39 ↗ services um we also included members of

38:42 ↗ disqual school district and members of

38:44 ↗ the uh aquatic uh

38:48 ↗ Community through a competitive

38:51 ↗ process uh the city selected NAC

38:53 ↗ Architects to be our consultant for this

38:55 ↗ project and uh here's just a quick

38:57 ↗ picture Brooke Hanley and uh Brian love

39:00 ↗ were the leads on this project and sort

39:02 ↗ of spearheaded the effort on the Nic

39:05 ↗ side of things uh we also worked with

39:07 ↗ Ryan uh Nash Shriner and Ken Ballard um

39:11 ↗ they were cons subc Consultants

39:12 ↗ underneath NAC and then we also worked

39:15 ↗ with Coughlin Porter London civil

39:16 ↗ consultants and uh the RC cost group for

39:19 ↗ cost

39:25 ↗ estimating

39:31 ↗ um our feasibility process there were

39:32 ↗ multiple steps involved in the

39:33 ↗ feasibility process uh we'll briefly

39:36 ↗ touch on these tonight in the

39:37 ↗ presentation uh with limited time I

39:39 ↗ won't be going into detail on detail on

39:41 ↗ these steps um but as reference these

39:44 ↗ are detailed and these are these are all

39:46 ↗ included in your Council packet as well

39:49 ↗ um I want to say I think that Council

39:50 ↗ pack was what 200 something Pages uh for

39:52 ↗ this topic uh for the purpose of this

39:55 ↗ study um the items that we talked about

39:57 ↗ here with the with the feasibility State

39:59 ↗ process we broke them down into three

40:01 ↗ tasks uh Jeff kind of touched on these

40:03 ↗ as well in his introduction uh the

40:05 ↗ number one was uh understanding isqua

40:07 ↗ water needs and project project goals

40:09 ↗ with a focus on expanding capacity on

40:11 ↗ the existing site uh the second task was

40:15 ↗ assessing the existing site and

40:16 ↗ opportunities for expansion looking at

40:19 ↗ the condition of the existing facility

40:21 ↗ and opportunities for expansion and

40:23 ↗ number three was building uh you know

40:26 ↗ build a developing building and

40:27 ↗ operating costs if an expanded facility

40:29 ↗ was built on this

40:36 ↗ site for the purpose of this study the

40:38 ↗ market uh the market area was broken

40:41 ↗ down into the city of isqua as the

40:43 ↗ primary Market sector and the isqua

40:46 ↗ school district as a secondary Market

40:48 ↗ sector uh Ballard King conducted a

40:50 ↗ market analysis that determined and

40:53 ↗ confirmed uh that additional water

40:55 ↗ capacity is needed to serve the existing

40:57 ↗ population within the city of

41:00 ↗ isqua and again I'm I'm just scratching

41:03 ↗ the very surface of that because there's

41:04 ↗ a lot of data there um within that

41:09 ↗ packet some of the key

41:13 ↗ points the analysis shows that there is

41:15 ↗ a strong desire for additional pool

41:17 ↗ space with both the primary and

41:18 ↗ secondary markets and currently there's

41:20 ↗ a lot of really popular programs

41:22 ↗ competing for space another item Jeff

41:24 ↗ quickly touched on you know we have uh

41:27 ↗ learn a lot of learn to swim classes

41:28 ↗ water safety uh and then the comp

41:31 ↗ competitive and recreational swimming

41:32 ↗ community that are all Desiring and and

41:34 ↗ wishing for more space in that within

41:36 ↗ that

41:42 ↗ facility our project goals the project

41:46 ↗ uh the purpose of the this feasibility

41:48 ↗ study was to Target and to look into how

41:50 ↗ we could expand and add on to the

41:52 ↗ existing Julius bone facility increasing

41:55 ↗ the water

41:57 ↗ and to develop a facility concept that

41:59 ↗ can prove service to all the existing

42:00 ↗ programs that are currently using the

42:02 ↗ pool so it wasn't for any just one

42:04 ↗ specific program it was for all current

42:06 ↗ and future users of the

42:12 ↗ pool part of our facility analysis uh

42:15 ↗ the picture you have here is sort of a

42:16 ↗ picture of our it's a picture of our

42:17 ↗ existing pool as is uh to give you a

42:21 ↗ quick hopefully be quick uh journey of

42:23 ↗ where we've been with this pool uh just

42:25 ↗ for those don't maybe know the history

42:27 ↗ of when it was you know constructed it

42:28 ↗ was built in 1972 under the King County

42:31 ↗ forward thrust program at that time the

42:34 ↗ pool was built the population of Isa has

42:36 ↗ 3,000

42:37 ↗ residents uh

42:39 ↗ 1994 through an agreement with King

42:41 ↗ County uh the city of isqua uh assumed

42:44 ↗ ownership and operation of the Julie bam

42:46 ↗ pool um 2009 the city conducted a pool

42:50 ↗ feasibility study that identified the

42:52 ↗ need for additional water capacity and

42:54 ↗ that study was included in your Council

42:55 ↗ package I think I think Jeff mentioned

42:57 ↗ that and then also as Jeff mentioned

42:59 ↗ 2013 City passed a park Bond allocating

43:02 ↗ $5

43:03 ↗ million um you know basically 50 years

43:06 ↗ later the amount of water we had in 1972

43:09 ↗ is the same amount of water we have in

43:10 ↗ uh 2024 so in a nutshell that's uh you

43:13 ↗ know the building's been upgraded but

43:16 ↗ our water space is still the

43:21 ↗ same um some of our key points here you

43:25 ↗ know the existing pool as evaluated by

43:28 ↗ water technology uh Incorporated the

43:31 ↗ pool's in really good shape for its age

43:33 ↗ um like to say the same same for myself

43:35 ↗ probably on that one but uh this can be

43:37 ↗ attributed to a solid maintenance

43:38 ↗ Management program and under the city's

43:41 ↗ leadership and the work that was done in

43:43 ↗ 2015 to update and upgrade the pool

43:46 ↗ systems uh both of those have really the

43:48 ↗ maintenance and then the upgrades in

43:49 ↗ 2015 really did help prolong the life of

43:51 ↗ it um and water Technologies was

43:53 ↗ surprised that for the age of the

43:55 ↗ facility just what great condition the

43:56 ↗ city's taking you know how they've taken

43:57 ↗ care of it and the work that was done to

44:00 ↗ extend its

44:01 ↗ life um there's room on site for a

44:04 ↗ reasonably sized expansion on the west

44:06 ↗ side and that side is relatively flat it

44:08 ↗ does slope down as you get going towards

44:10 ↗ uh Front Street uh the previous locker

44:13 ↗ room expansion that we completed in

44:15 ↗ 2015 uh will support most of the

44:17 ↗ plumbing uh most of the plumbing fixture

44:19 ↗ counts that are needed with a minimal

44:21 ↗ addition minimal additions if an

44:24 ↗ extended uh fac expanded facil is built

44:27 ↗ um so a lot of the infrastructure that

44:29 ↗ was built in 2015 is actually going to

44:31 ↗ help if an extended facility or an

44:33 ↗ expanded facility was built or is

44:35 ↗ built uh the existing door

44:38 ↗ opening

44:41 ↗ um I got that one oops my bad I got

44:47 ↗ uh bear with

44:52 ↗ me yeah there's an existing door um

44:54 ↗ opening that could be used to connect

44:57 ↗ the two facilities from the existing to

44:59 ↗ the uh expanded facility and uh one last

45:03 ↗ item we discovered that just want to

45:05 ↗ make sure share is that you know through

45:06 ↗ the study of this and looking at all the

45:08 ↗ different variables uh if an expanded

45:12 ↗ facility were built we would have to

45:13 ↗ include a sprinkler system to go into

45:15 ↗ the existing facility along with the uh

45:16 ↗ new

45:19 ↗ construction um a little bit go I'll go

45:22 ↗ through these next slides pretty quickly

45:23 ↗ but I felt it was important to share

45:25 ↗ these sides to underscore the

45:27 ↗ considerations that the steering

45:28 ↗ committee had when it came to thinking

45:29 ↗ about the design and location of uh an

45:32 ↗ expansion on this site

45:36 ↗ um an expansion to the West as you can

45:39 ↗ see

45:40 ↗ here where you know it's right at the

45:42 ↗ southern border of entry into Old Town

45:45 ↗ and into isquat it's really it's really

45:46 ↗ a nice focal point there for where

45:48 ↗ you're coming into the town and this

45:50 ↗ would be very visible to those entering

45:52 ↗ into our

45:54 ↗ community um the stearing committee

45:56 ↗ looked at the existing buildings and

45:58 ↗ spaces around the jewelry spoone pool to

46:00 ↗ consider what uh an expanded facility

46:03 ↗ would look like to others so trying to

46:04 ↗ try to take that look too of like not

46:06 ↗ just what's our facility what's it going

46:07 ↗ to look like when you're coming upon

46:09 ↗ this facility and seeing it from a

46:11 ↗ neighbor's point of view if you

46:15 ↗ will uh continue with the concept design

46:19 ↗ uh this slide is showing some of the

46:20 ↗ circulation of people arriving at julus

46:23 ↗ bone pool as well as uh that people are

46:26 ↗ using you one of the other major

46:28 ↗ destinations around it um it's

46:30 ↗ acknowledging you know that congestion

46:32 ↗ can happen specifically specific times

46:34 ↗ especially during uh you if you ever

46:36 ↗ been around during school pickup drop

46:38 ↗ off it does get pretty congested down

46:40 ↗ there

46:41 ↗ um if an expanded facility were built we

46:44 ↗ wanted to call out that you know if

46:46 ↗ construction we' want to make sure that

46:47 ↗ we considered you know other options to

46:49 ↗ improve some of that traffic flow if and

46:51 ↗ when we were to do some of that

46:54 ↗ work

47:02 ↗ uh development on the west side of the

47:03 ↗ existing building uh on the west side of

47:06 ↗ the existing building has great

47:08 ↗ visibility uh to a couple of our open

47:10 ↗ spaces and is just off the isqua creek

47:13 ↗ and as mentioned is at the uh Southern

47:15 ↗ Gateway of our town of our city and you

47:18 ↗ can see that here in this uh slide that

47:20 ↗ we got it just has great visibility some

47:22 ↗ Open Spaces of the city uh and it sits

47:25 ↗ right up there on the the hill where it

47:26 ↗ is very

47:36 ↗ noticeable and then on this you can also

47:38 ↗ see here that we we talked about that

47:40 ↗ utility door uh where there's a

47:42 ↗ connection piece you there's an existing

47:44 ↗ utility door right here in the middle

47:46 ↗ and it does create a nice flow for

47:47 ↗ traffic of people going between the two

47:49 ↗ different

47:54 ↗ facilities

47:58 ↗ you know this slide is just sort of a

48:00 ↗ it's kind of a nice slide to show how

48:02 ↗ important water is to the city of isqua

48:03 ↗ right that we have a lot of water themes

48:05 ↗ a lot of water connectivity that really

48:07 ↗ does uh you know bring the community

48:09 ↗ together through Recreation and

48:11 ↗ socialization

48:17 ↗ activities in an effort to explore some

48:19 ↗ of the cost-saving measures we looked

48:21 ↗ into a number of enclosures uh one being

48:23 ↗ the dino uh dino Dome structure pictured

48:26 ↗ here on the left with the ability to

48:28 ↗ open up during uh good weather months

48:32 ↗ and the other being a spr sprung

48:33 ↗ structure here on the right in a tent

48:36 ↗ type structure with aluminum Framing and

48:38 ↗ then lastly not depicted here but we

48:40 ↗ will be going into it is the CMU

48:42 ↗ construction which is concrete masonry

48:44 ↗ unit type of construction uh the kind of

48:46 ↗ construction we're most familiar with

48:47 ↗ and have run so this one here is the the

48:50 ↗ dino Dome it has as you can see there it

48:52 ↗ has a little opening where you could

48:54 ↗ open it up and have that indoor outdoor

48:56 ↗ experience is what the team was looking

48:58 ↗ at and then the uh sprung structure is

49:02 ↗ is you know I think we've seen those

49:04 ↗ around um it's hard to see in this

49:06 ↗ picture but that is a really large

49:08 ↗ structure in order to keep it so snow

49:09 ↗ and stuff comes off it would really sit

49:11 ↗ High On That Hill uh and and through

49:14 ↗ those the um you just the the steering

49:17 ↗ committee um you know preferred the CMU

49:20 ↗ build as the preferred uh just as it

49:23 ↗ sort of it fit with enhance and existing

49:25 ↗ structure the pool structure so it sort

49:27 ↗ of fit it just fit it fit the site

49:30 ↗ better in in their

49:35 ↗ discussions uh on the left of this uh

49:38 ↗ slide here we have uh it captures some

49:39 ↗ of the work that the you know the

49:41 ↗ stakeholder group um came up with on the

49:44 ↗ right uh and on the right we have the

49:46 ↗ expanded what the expanded facility

49:48 ↗ could look like um what we talked about

49:50 ↗ from the neighbors point of view you

49:52 ↗ know that right there sort of shows you

49:53 ↗ what it could look like from Front

49:54 ↗ Street and then on the left it it's

49:56 ↗ showing you a little bit about what the

49:58 ↗ work of what what the steering committee

50:00 ↗ came up with it uh you know on the left

50:03 ↗ you have an eight Lane 25 yard pool it

50:06 ↗ has a spectator area here with bleachers

50:10 ↗ uh you know we could have expanded ble

50:12 ↗ we could have retractable bleachers that

50:14 ↗ could also then retract and create

50:16 ↗ additional deck space for training and

50:18 ↗ exercise for swim teams uh we also have

50:21 ↗ a larger deck space up here to the north

50:24 ↗ as well as an outside area that could be

50:26 ↗ even could serve as some overflow space

50:28 ↗ as well for more just for more area and

50:30 ↗ space to work out in and for the

50:32 ↗ community to use

50:38 ↗ um so back on the right side you'll

50:41 ↗ notice the construction design with a

50:42 ↗ similar

50:45 ↗ outline you see the rooftop here and

50:47 ↗ then you have the the sub roof it the

50:49 ↗ similar it's a similar design to the the

50:51 ↗ existing pool it has that sort of a

50:53 ↗ higher roof and then it has a little bit

50:54 ↗ of a lower roof so the frame is the

50:56 ↗ outline and structure is very similar to

50:58 ↗ the existing pool sort of matching that

51:00 ↗ but this has then also a lot of Windows

51:03 ↗ and uh just open air that you can really

51:05 ↗ bring trying to make a connection

51:06 ↗ between the indoor outdoor

51:13 ↗ space this is sort of the top view here

51:15 ↗ and the right side you know shows you

51:17 ↗ the existing Julius bone pool entrance

51:20 ↗ into the facility um and then in front

51:24 ↗ of you here would be the new um that's

51:26 ↗ the expansion on the julus bone pool

51:29 ↗ that could have an additional entry

51:31 ↗ right here there'll be initial you know

51:33 ↗ could be an additional entry uh to be

51:35 ↗ used by Spectators during you know

51:37 ↗ Community you know events and

51:40 ↗ competitions um there's also a nice wall

51:42 ↗ space here that you know could be an

51:44 ↗ opportunity and then they put a we put a

51:46 ↗ little design in there but it could be

51:47 ↗ an opportunity for some public art to be

51:49 ↗ located there right Ryan before you move

51:52 ↗ on I think we have a question Deputy

51:54 ↗ council president pres D Michelle oh

51:56 ↗ absolutely thank you uh Brian go back to

51:58 ↗ the previous slide um so I'm looking at

52:02 ↗ that right now there's a big uh stone

52:04 ↗ wall there and um uh so I'm presuming

52:09 ↗ that this is proposing to take out that

52:11 ↗ stone wall and have that so people could

52:14 ↗ walk right onto the grass there is that

52:17 ↗ well this right here would be all new

52:19 ↗ construction so what we'd have as an

52:21 ↗ entryway to walk out into a patio and

52:23 ↗ then there would be grass out in this

52:25 ↗ area is that what you're talking about

52:26 ↗ yeah is this the is this Front Street uh

52:29 ↗ the Front Street View yes yeah so right

52:31 ↗ now there's a a tall wall you know that

52:34 ↗ you walk along correct it looks like it

52:37 ↗ would be removed and uh people then

52:40 ↗ would have access to kind of walk onto

52:42 ↗ that that Parky area and oh I see where

52:47 ↗ I believe I see you're saying this this

52:48 ↗ wall right here will still be a wall

52:52 ↗ okay we talked about you know it would

52:53 ↗ be an enhanced wall maybe some

52:55 ↗ Aesthetics and making it look a little

52:57 ↗ nice and also creating some pedestrian

52:59 ↗ pathway there it's hard to see but we

53:01 ↗ like I said in our discussions talked

53:03 ↗ about how can we make that a better

53:04 ↗ pathway and maybe even creating a buffer

53:06 ↗ between people using the sidewalk and

53:08 ↗ the street so that there was a little

53:10 ↗ bit of a safety barrier there too if we

53:11 ↗ can make some of those enhancements yeah

53:13 ↗ that would be a huge Improvement I walk

53:15 ↗ along there all the time especially you

53:17 ↗ know people with little kids it's it's

53:21 ↗ probably is a safe sidewalk it doesn't

53:23 ↗ feel safe because the traffic's going P

53:25 ↗ so fast so I'm really intrigued by by

53:28 ↗ that proposal because it would greatly

53:31 ↗ improve The Pedestrian experience along

53:34 ↗ there as well no you're not alone on

53:36 ↗ that the uh yeah the studing committee

53:38 ↗ had some of that same you know the

53:39 ↗ people anybody's walked it you kind of

53:40 ↗ feel that right

53:43 ↗ yeah thank you

53:50 ↗ yeah okay going through the entry into

53:54 ↗ the uh you know that we just mentioned

53:56 ↗ you we find ourselves in the expanded

53:58 ↗ facility you know as you'll see there's

54:00 ↗ a large number of Windows and skylights

54:02 ↗ connecting uh users indoors with the

54:05 ↗ outdoors just a lot of openness

54:08 ↗ brightness natural light uh that was

54:11 ↗ something that was really important to

54:12 ↗ the steering committee when the

54:18 ↗ discussions this scene we've now moved

54:20 ↗ on to the other side of the pool looking

54:22 ↗ back on where we were previously

54:24 ↗ standing uh the area with a salmon

54:27 ↗ colored wall right over here don't know

54:30 ↗ if you can see my cursor if it's

54:32 ↗ standing out okay but that would be that

54:34 ↗ connection point that we talked about um

54:37 ↗ you know the connection back and forth

54:39 ↗ between the existing ju bone pool and a

54:41 ↗ expanded facility um and I'm sure you've

54:44 ↗ all probably noticed that there's that

54:45 ↗ large wall there too right there above

54:48 ↗ the bleachers uh and that could be

54:50 ↗ another opportunity for some work of art

54:52 ↗ of some type as well it's like said the

54:55 ↗ what we put in there was just an example

54:57 ↗ of what could be um but that could be an

54:59 ↗ opportunity for some great artwork along

55:01 ↗ that big that big piece of

55:06 ↗ wall uh sustainability was an important

55:08 ↗ topic for the steering committee and

55:10 ↗ this slide just sort of calls out some

55:12 ↗ of the features that the team discussed

55:13 ↗ and the importance of sustainability if

55:16 ↗ an expanded facility occurs just they

55:18 ↗ really wanted to make sure that that is

55:19 ↗ a piece uh that is first and foremost on

55:23 ↗ our development and any new construction

55:28 ↗ overall project budget and cost

55:30 ↗ estimates uh cost estimates were run by

55:33 ↗ a professional cost estimator and

55:35 ↗ include the total cost for construction

55:38 ↗ um there's a little escalation for the

55:40 ↗ next couple of years that serve as a bit

55:42 ↗ of a buffer um to help us get a little

55:45 ↗ closer to what the price would be in the

55:47 ↗ future um you can see that out of the

55:50 ↗ three structures the steering committee

55:52 ↗ considered the dino doome enclosure was

55:55 ↗ was a little more expensive whereas the

55:56 ↗ sprung structure was a little less than

55:59 ↗ the traditional CMU construction um I

56:02 ↗ think it kind of surprised everybody

56:03 ↗ just how close all three of those

56:04 ↗ different structures

56:10 ↗ were Ballard King and Associates worked

56:13 ↗ with the city staff to develop the

56:15 ↗ business and operational analysis that

56:16 ↗ is included in your

56:18 ↗ packets uh assumptions were are based on

56:21 ↗ an expanded uh operations in

56:23 ↗ 2026 uh that's not a that's not a hard

56:26 ↗ and fast number that was just a number

56:27 ↗ that was used 2026 was used as a future

56:30 ↗ date that is it's close enough for the

56:32 ↗ data to be accurate yet not too far to

56:36 ↗ um skew any of the projections so they

56:38 ↗ had to use a basis in order to get

56:41 ↗ accurate data it was a couple years out

56:43 ↗ didn't want to go too far because then

56:44 ↗ as you get further out it just gets

56:45 ↗ harder and harder to

56:52 ↗ predict um the business operation

56:54 ↗ analysis looked at both the expenses and

56:55 ↗ revenues from uh both the added and

56:58 ↗ existing facility and uh came up with a

57:01 ↗ cost recovery rate of

57:08 ↗ 98% as a reminder uh I think Jeff

57:11 ↗ mentioned this in his introduction you

57:13 ↗ know we met with the council uh safety

57:15 ↗ and Parks committee and uh you know on

57:18 ↗ December December 11th and uh staff

57:22 ↗ presented feasibility study them uh out

57:24 ↗ of that meeting came support for

57:26 ↗ considering the pool expansion in the

57:28 ↗ future uh support for staff exploring a

57:31 ↗ funding strategy for this project and

57:33 ↗ important to consider the expanding and

57:35 ↗ important to consider expanding the

57:37 ↗ funding base and the committee wanted us

57:39 ↗ to come back to full Council here in

57:41 ↗ January so that's why we're here

57:44 ↗ today and just uh to put up our

57:47 ↗ recommendation uh you know we're

57:48 ↗ directing Administration to consider

57:50 ↗ this option for expanding pool capacity

57:52 ↗ further in the coming years and balance

57:54 ↗ with the other other capital investment

57:55 ↗ priorities acknowledging that there are

57:57 ↗ a number of priorities to consider um

58:00 ↗ explore possible funding sources and

58:02 ↗ develop a strategy that includes

58:04 ↗ Regional Grants County and state and

58:07 ↗ other

58:09 ↗ partners thank

58:15 ↗ you okay so at this point we are being

58:18 ↗ asked to direct the administration um

58:22 ↗ this is not a vote or anything like that

58:24 ↗ so the first point is to get feedback

58:28 ↗ from council member Marts as the chair

58:30 ↗ of the services safety and Parks

58:33 ↗ committee uh can you talk about the

58:35 ↗ committee's recommendation on this item

58:38 ↗ sure Ken thank you council president on

58:40 ↗ the December 11th Council services

58:43 ↗ safety and Parks committee uh the

58:45 ↗ committee unanimously recommended

58:46 ↗ considering expanding pool capacity

58:48 ↗ further in the coming years in balance

58:51 ↗ with other capital investment priorities

58:52 ↗ and exploring possible funding sources

58:55 ↗ developing a funding strategy that

58:57 ↗ includes Regional Grants County uh and

59:00 ↗ state as well as other partners other

59:02 ↗ feedback included that it would be

59:04 ↗ important to consider expanding the

59:05 ↗ funding base for P for a pool if it

59:08 ↗ proceeds and then the committee

59:09 ↗ recommended bringing back to council as

59:11 ↗ we have it here this

59:14 ↗ evening excellent so I have been

59:16 ↗ corrected we do have a motion um that I

59:20 ↗ will make in a moment but first we're

59:22 ↗ going to start just with question

59:24 ↗ questions have any questions for Brian

59:28 ↗ or Jeff uh council member

59:33 ↗ Joe thank you council president uh Brian

59:36 ↗ could you go back to the business and

59:38 ↗ operations analysis

59:40 ↗ slide um this one yep that one right

59:44 ↗ there yep no not that one next

59:46 ↗ one oh sorry down right there business

59:50 ↗ and operation analysis that one right

59:51 ↗ there y so can you um tell us a little

59:55 ↗ bit bit about the last point the total

59:57 ↗ direct operational cost recovery um

1:00:01 ↗ often times when we build Parks or we

1:00:04 ↗ build other facilities we have kind of a

1:00:06 ↗ free rider problem sometimes in the

1:00:08 ↗ sense that people that didn't

1:00:10 ↗ necessarily take part in the bond or pay

1:00:11 ↗ the taxes for that particular facility

1:00:14 ↗ in the city of ISAT still come from

1:00:16 ↗ outside the region enjoy our parks and

1:00:18 ↗ and and items like that here we have a

1:00:22 ↗ different situation where we have people

1:00:24 ↗ that be using the pool or from the

1:00:26 ↗ school district an area that we know

1:00:28 ↗ we're pooling people from and we'll be

1:00:30 ↗ paying fees commas with their their um

1:00:33 ↗ overall cost usually we don't see a

1:00:35 ↗ total direct operational cost recovery

1:00:37 ↗ that high can you go into that a little

1:00:39 ↗ bit and and kind of the numbers behind

1:00:41 ↗ that

1:00:42 ↗ absolutely you want to take that

1:00:48 ↗ one yeah great great question so

1:00:53 ↗ um

1:00:55 ↗ I think an important thing to point out

1:00:56 ↗ we talked about this at committee is is

1:00:59 ↗ that um the work that was done by

1:01:01 ↗ Ballard King really did look at direct

1:01:03 ↗ operational costs so this is all the

1:01:05 ↗ pool staff expenses um cost to heat the

1:01:08 ↗ pool cost of electricity what's not

1:01:11 ↗ included in this is facility staff time

1:01:14 ↗ uh we're working with um Genie Justice

1:01:17 ↗ uh right now and and part of this

1:01:19 ↗ further exploration will be getting a

1:01:21 ↗ better idea of what those facility

1:01:23 ↗ Staffing costs would be um at a at a

1:01:26 ↗ real cursory level it's still an

1:01:28 ↗ impressive cost recovery if and we're

1:01:30 ↗ interested too in seeing what a a total

1:01:33 ↗ cost recovery would be uh putting in

1:01:35 ↗ facility staff time into that we're

1:01:37 ↗ probably still in the neighborhood of 75

1:01:39 ↗ to 80% uh full cost recovery for a

1:01:42 ↗ facility which is a very impressive

1:01:44 ↗ number um one thing I would point out to

1:01:46 ↗ your to your comment of how do we

1:01:48 ↗ balance um investment by residents um

1:01:51 ↗ and use by non-residents um at the pool

1:01:54 ↗ we also much like our other Recreation

1:01:56 ↗ facilities have a resident non-resident

1:01:58 ↗ fee structure uh so there's still a

1:02:00 ↗ recognition that residents who are

1:02:01 ↗ making U who may be may be making an

1:02:04 ↗ additional investment into this facility

1:02:07 ↗ um are seeing um a reduced um fee and

1:02:10 ↗ increased access to a facility like

1:02:16 ↗ this okay any other questions coming

1:02:19 ↗ through council member Ray so um thank

1:02:22 ↗ you council member Joe I appreciate the

1:02:24 ↗ uh operational cost thing but I was

1:02:26 ↗ actually uh contemplating the capital

1:02:29 ↗ cost recovery do we have any plans on

1:02:32 ↗ Capital cost recovery um if we're going

1:02:35 ↗ to spend let's say 19 just because it

1:02:37 ↗ makes the math easier for me $19 million

1:02:39 ↗ is there some

1:02:42 ↗ um buyback period or is that just um

1:02:46 ↗ Community good and just like any other

1:02:48 ↗ Park that we're just going to eat the

1:02:50 ↗ capital cost there's no recovery of that

1:02:53 ↗ we discussed capital the capital

1:02:54 ↗ investment and capital recovery but the

1:02:56 ↗ study the scope of Discovery and the

1:02:58 ↗ amount of money we had for the

1:02:59 ↗ feasibility St did not dive into

1:03:02 ↗ that City administrator let me take a a

1:03:05 ↗ crack to a couple steps further um there

1:03:09 ↗ are multiple ways to fund a pool um

1:03:12 ↗ there are General obligation bonds which

1:03:15 ↗ we have used previously uh we also

1:03:17 ↗ believe that King County will continue

1:03:19 ↗ to make funds available for this we

1:03:21 ↗ believe the state of Washington would

1:03:22 ↗ make funds available uh to this uh we

1:03:25 ↗ also have a great partner in the isqua

1:03:27 ↗ school district as I think all of you

1:03:28 ↗ know uh the current pool is very heavily

1:03:31 ↗ used there are no Aquatics facilities

1:03:34 ↗ owned by the isqua school district so

1:03:36 ↗ all of their swimming and Diving teams

1:03:38 ↗ at all of the high schools located

1:03:40 ↗ throughout the district not only those

1:03:42 ↗ schools in isqua but all those located

1:03:44 ↗ outside of isqua all use our Aquatics

1:03:47 ↗ facilities so we think it is likely that

1:03:50 ↗ we can go to our partners at the isqua

1:03:52 ↗ school district for Capital dollars as

1:03:54 ↗ well so uh the reason we're here when we

1:03:57 ↗ brought this to the committee's

1:03:58 ↗ attention uh is that quite honestly we

1:04:01 ↗ didn't think this option existed uh we

1:04:03 ↗ thought that the feasibility study might

1:04:05 ↗ bring different kinds of options for

1:04:06 ↗ different kind of water related uh

1:04:09 ↗ issues but that that this came forward

1:04:11 ↗ with a pretty

1:04:12 ↗ straightforward uh uh proposal uh is the

1:04:15 ↗ reason we're here we first brought it to

1:04:17 ↗ the committee and we're here tonight so

1:04:19 ↗ we hope that the council will direct the

1:04:21 ↗ administration to continue looking at

1:04:23 ↗ what the options would be not only the

1:04:25 ↗ operational options but the capital

1:04:27 ↗ options we feel really positive uh that

1:04:30 ↗ we can come to some solutions uh we're

1:04:33 ↗ also doing a revised Park master plan be

1:04:35 ↗ a 5-year CIP up again before you know it

1:04:38 ↗ uh so we're not saying any way that this

1:04:40 ↗ project somehow uh cuts in line or uh

1:04:44 ↗ supersedes any of that other planning uh

1:04:46 ↗ but because Aquatics are so important to

1:04:49 ↗ our residents we felt bringing this

1:04:51 ↗ forward and getting the council's early

1:04:54 ↗ understanding of this information

1:04:55 ↗ sharing it with a larger Community was

1:04:57 ↗ The Prudent thing to do and we hope that

1:04:59 ↗ we'll get direction this evening uh to

1:05:01 ↗ continue to move

1:05:03 ↗ forward that's great thank you very

1:05:06 ↗ much any other

1:05:09 ↗ questions that's member hle speaking of

1:05:12 ↗ the school do we um are we aware of any

1:05:15 ↗ long-term plans that the district might

1:05:17 ↗ have for their own swim and dive

1:05:18 ↗ facility or are they squarely in the

1:05:20 ↗ city of bball basket yeah to my

1:05:22 ↗ knowledge the school doesn't have any

1:05:23 ↗ plans for full structure

1:05:27 ↗ facility and like just to expand a

1:05:30 ↗ little bit you know we do support the

1:05:31 ↗ liberty isqua and Skyland High School

1:05:34 ↗ swim teams at the julus

1:05:36 ↗ bity that's a good question for the uh

1:05:39 ↗ Bond and ly committee uh just throwing

1:05:42 ↗ it out

1:05:43 ↗ there um do we have any other

1:05:48 ↗ questions okay I will get into mine then

1:05:52 ↗ um this is

1:05:54 ↗ a strong recommendation that seems to

1:05:57 ↗ have a huge focus on Lane uh swim that

1:06:02 ↗ would serve School District swim team

1:06:05 ↗ all of that uh do we have a sense of

1:06:09 ↗ what our current usage is between

1:06:12 ↗ lessons and lap swim and exercise and

1:06:16 ↗ Community use and yeah because there's a

1:06:20 ↗ lot of different users do we know the

1:06:23 ↗ sense of how much is used by the

1:06:25 ↗ different types of

1:06:28 ↗ usages and which ones maybe are the most

1:06:31 ↗ constrained maybe even pushed out by the

1:06:33 ↗ highest users we also and it's been a

1:06:36 ↗ delicate balance that we've had I I can

1:06:38 ↗ remember back came into the late 90s um

1:06:40 ↗ I can say everybody and the beauty about

1:06:42 ↗ I think the way we've always conducted

1:06:44 ↗ ourselves as a city is everybody gets

1:06:45 ↗ something but I can guarantee you that

1:06:48 ↗ nobody including ourselves is getting

1:06:49 ↗ everything now what the actual

1:06:51 ↗ breakdowns of that are I couldn't give

1:06:53 ↗ you the exact numbers on on that but you

1:06:55 ↗ know would we like to run more swim

1:06:56 ↗ lessons during some other times we being

1:06:58 ↗ used by other users absolutely um would

1:07:00 ↗ the high school swim teams like more

1:07:02 ↗ time for practices absolutely would the

1:07:04 ↗ S swim team like to have more time

1:07:06 ↗ absolutely would the drop in swimmers

1:07:09 ↗ you know like to have more lap Lane time

1:07:11 ↗ definitely right so we've sort of given

1:07:14 ↗ a a little something to everyone but not

1:07:16 ↗ everybody nobody's getting everything

1:07:17 ↗ they

1:07:19 ↗ want oh please I add to that to to your

1:07:22 ↗ question as well um as we looked at um

1:07:26 ↗ this as a potential option um though I

1:07:29 ↗ you know you you see those renderings

1:07:31 ↗ and you see the the lap Lanes as if

1:07:34 ↗ that's the only prescribed thing they're

1:07:36 ↗ going to be what was really important to

1:07:37 ↗ us and the and the Steering group uh was

1:07:41 ↗ um all of that pool expansion is

1:07:43 ↗ immensely flexible in program prog

1:07:46 ↗ progam programable in a variety of ways

1:07:49 ↗ whether it water exercise swim lessons

1:07:52 ↗ so sort of the the spectrum of of

1:07:55 ↗ programming that we do currently in the

1:07:56 ↗ pool uh could be done at um in this

1:07:59 ↗ expanded space as

1:08:02 ↗ well on that idea before you go away uh

1:08:05 ↗ did we consider other types of pools

1:08:08 ↗ such as a Zero Entry or something that

1:08:11 ↗ has a slide or something like that that

1:08:16 ↗ is different from what we have do we

1:08:19 ↗ have a sense if there is a need or an

1:08:21 ↗ interest from the community something

1:08:24 ↗ different I think that's some of our

1:08:26 ↗ goal is is continued public engagement

1:08:29 ↗ um yes there is interest in our

1:08:30 ↗ community for some of those other

1:08:32 ↗ amenities um zero Beach entry Etc um how

1:08:37 ↗ that could be incorporated into this

1:08:40 ↗ kind of option that again is not trying

1:08:42 ↗ to be a whole new pool but just how do

1:08:44 ↗ we maximize water capacity at our

1:08:47 ↗ existing site um um we felt like staying

1:08:52 ↗ within the the current model model of of

1:08:55 ↗ of cool structure um gives us the most

1:08:58 ↗ flexibility whereas zero Beach entry

1:09:02 ↗ lazy Rivers slide some of those really

1:09:04 ↗ great amenities you see at at new

1:09:06 ↗ aquatic facilities um take up a lot of

1:09:09 ↗ square footage in a lot of space so as

1:09:11 ↗ we try and at least say what's how do we

1:09:14 ↗ maximize this site it felt like giving

1:09:17 ↗ ourselves most flexibility with this

1:09:19 ↗ kind of um water space was an option

1:09:22 ↗ that we initially exploring again the

1:09:26 ↗ goal before you tonight is not to

1:09:27 ↗ recommend this as a project um it's

1:09:29 ↗ really I think this next stage garnering

1:09:32 ↗ some public engagement understanding the

1:09:34 ↗ tradeoffs do we hold out and wait for

1:09:37 ↗ that new pool facility that we can build

1:09:39 ↗ it's probably 50 or $60 million that

1:09:42 ↗ might have all those great great

1:09:44 ↗ amenities but is going to come at a

1:09:46 ↗ higher price tag versus considering

1:09:50 ↗ something like this that again tries to

1:09:52 ↗ take advantage of prior inv or recent

1:09:54 ↗ Investments at this existing pool and

1:09:57 ↗ building upon it so that engagement

1:09:59 ↗ piece is going to be really key as a as

1:10:01 ↗ a Next

1:10:02 ↗ Step well you just brought up another

1:10:05 ↗ thing that I was going to ask about

1:10:07 ↗ which is why does this have a much lower

1:10:11 ↗ cost versus the 2009 study that was the

1:10:15 ↗ 50 to 60

1:10:18 ↗ million the 2009 study let's correct

1:10:20 ↗ that was not 50 or 60 million um for or

1:10:23 ↗ doing something on the site so the 2009

1:10:26 ↗ study had an array of options um a a

1:10:30 ↗ brand new pool at today's um dollars

1:10:33 ↗ offsite and another location is that 50

1:10:36 ↗ or $60 Million number the 2009 study did

1:10:40 ↗ sort of Kick the Can around how do we

1:10:42 ↗ maybe do something on the site I think

1:10:43 ↗ the number in the 2009 study was like 25

1:10:46 ↗ million I think where we're seeing that

1:10:48 ↗ cost savings and cost Effectiveness is

1:10:51 ↗ that $5 million investment that was made

1:10:54 ↗ um we're not having to upgrade systems

1:10:56 ↗ you know so so the the investment that

1:10:58 ↗ the community made at the existing pool

1:11:00 ↗ we can now maximize that with just

1:11:02 ↗ adding water

1:11:05 ↗ capacity thank you now I'll let you back

1:11:08 ↗ off rather than just keep at questioning

1:11:10 ↗ in um do we have any other

1:11:15 ↗ questions uh council member

1:11:17 ↗ hunt uh could you speak a little bit

1:11:20 ↗ about uh where we to where we to take

1:11:23 ↗ this action um and you would continue

1:11:26 ↗ considering this could you speak a

1:11:27 ↗ little bit about the community

1:11:29 ↗ engagement plan and um how you're

1:11:31 ↗ planning on reaching out and and

1:11:33 ↗ that reaching out for the actual funding

1:11:36 ↗ or reaching out for with the community

1:11:38 ↗ so Community engagement I'm sure there

1:11:40 ↗ would be a lot of interest in and

1:11:42 ↗ feedback from the community and so what

1:11:43 ↗ the plan for that looks like oh

1:11:46 ↗ absolutely I think and you can jump in

1:11:48 ↗ with me too if you want I'll get started

1:11:49 ↗ um I think you know we have a great

1:11:51 ↗ connection with all of our aquatic users

1:11:53 ↗ so we have that piece of the community

1:11:56 ↗ that we know well and would be able to

1:11:58 ↗ reach out to well I think an important

1:11:59 ↗ piece this be how do we reach out to the

1:12:01 ↗ areas and and spaces the people we don't

1:12:03 ↗ know right what is it they're looking

1:12:05 ↗ for and how would we engage them I think

1:12:06 ↗ we'd be very have to be very targeted in

1:12:08 ↗ some of that work um as well as I think

1:12:11 ↗ just getting out and you know talking to

1:12:13 ↗ we have all of our social media which we

1:12:15 ↗ all know but like I said I think an

1:12:16 ↗ important piece for me is we have a lot

1:12:19 ↗ of community that uses the pool there's

1:12:21 ↗ a lot that doesn't and I think it's

1:12:22 ↗ going to be hard get and figur out what

1:12:24 ↗ sectors of our community aren't using it

1:12:27 ↗ and how do we get Outreach to them you

1:12:28 ↗ know do we go up and speak to different

1:12:30 ↗ communities do we get inv I I think

1:12:32 ↗ that's what we would be doing is re

1:12:33 ↗ doing Outreach within those communities

1:12:34 ↗ that aren't getting that we're not

1:12:36 ↗ seeing within our

1:12:39 ↗ facility great question and to add to

1:12:42 ↗ some of that um parkboard continues to

1:12:44 ↗ to be interested and will be interested

1:12:46 ↗ so having conversations there um

1:12:48 ↗ something we're going to be doing uh

1:12:50 ↗ later this uh year probably Q2 uh maybe

1:12:53 ↗ even early q1 um as part of the the

1:12:56 ↗ mayor's goal of enhancing Recreation

1:12:58 ↗ programs we're going to be going out to

1:12:59 ↗ the community and with a survey and sort

1:13:01 ↗ of asking some some Recreation program

1:13:04 ↗ based questions uh we think that could

1:13:06 ↗ be a perfect platform for embedding some

1:13:08 ↗ of these pool related questions some

1:13:10 ↗ information about this uh to getting um

1:13:13 ↗ some Community feedback about this this

1:13:15 ↗ concept and this

1:13:19 ↗ idea great you need to look at the

1:13:22 ↗ council see if there are any other

1:13:25 ↗ questions from

1:13:28 ↗ Members okay uh coming in at the end

1:13:32 ↗ thank you council member Hall thank you

1:13:34 ↗ maybe just a oh yeah I forgot about

1:13:37 ↗ maybe just a quick one um can you talk

1:13:38 ↗ to me about kind of like how we're

1:13:40 ↗ thinking the timeline for figuring out

1:13:43 ↗ the funding part of this you know we've

1:13:45 ↗ had some discussions about a future Park

1:13:47 ↗ District has that ever been folded into

1:13:49 ↗ this conversation about how that could

1:13:50 ↗ potentially be a revenue Source are we

1:13:52 ↗ thinking that's to

1:13:53 ↗ long term for something like

1:13:57 ↗ this yeah all all of the above so um I

1:14:01 ↗ think timeline we identified a goal to

1:14:03 ↗ come back to services safety and Parks

1:14:04 ↗ committee Q3 or early Q4 uh by that time

1:14:09 ↗ um adoption of the park system Plan

1:14:11 ↗ update uh should be with you uh before

1:14:13 ↗ you as we as City Man City administrator

1:14:17 ↗ Bop kwit shared um are trying to balance

1:14:20 ↗ other community priorities and

1:14:22 ↗ investment needs

1:14:24 ↗ um Concepts such as a Park District we

1:14:26 ↗ feel could be folded into this this

1:14:28 ↗ conversation as well um we obviously

1:14:32 ↗ want to have partners and begin or

1:14:34 ↗ conversations with the school district

1:14:36 ↗ um I've already reached out to King

1:14:38 ↗ County and gotten a better understanding

1:14:40 ↗ their next tranch of um Aquatics Capital

1:14:43 ↗ grants will be coming out in 2025 so

1:14:46 ↗ we'll have a a really good idea um again

1:14:49 ↗ that Q3 Q4 time frame of when those

1:14:52 ↗ Grant funds and how those might line up

1:14:55 ↗ so you know a lot of work in the coming

1:14:58 ↗ in the next six months on this as well

1:15:00 ↗ as the park Plan update will I think

1:15:03 ↗ help to frame up some of that that more

1:15:06 ↗ macro level Capital funding um

1:15:09 ↗ opportunities or options to

1:15:14 ↗ consider okay so now I'm going to ask is

1:15:19 ↗ there a motion council member MZ yes

1:15:23 ↗ Madam uh council president I would like

1:15:25 ↗ to make a motion I'd like to request uh

1:15:28 ↗ direct the administration to further

1:15:30 ↗ consider the expansion of the julus bone

1:15:32 ↗ pools capacity in the coming years in

1:15:35 ↗ balance with other Capital Improvement

1:15:37 ↗ priorities and explore possible funding

1:15:39 ↗ sources and develop a funding strategy

1:15:41 ↗ that includes Regional Grants County and

1:15:43 ↗ state and other partners

1:15:46 ↗ second thank you the motion has been

1:15:50 ↗ moved and seconded is there any Council

1:15:52 ↗ discussion and starting with the motion

1:15:55 ↗ maker sure um thank you uh I've been

1:15:58 ↗ very impressed with the research that

1:16:00 ↗ was done on this uh it seems like a

1:16:03 ↗ really good way to um not start over

1:16:06 ↗ from scratch but rather build on a good

1:16:08 ↗ facility I was uh I was here when uh uh

1:16:12 ↗ director watling's predecessor sold us

1:16:14 ↗ on the $5 million uh improvements to the

1:16:17 ↗ pool um so to have that that effort that

1:16:21 ↗ was not all that long ago it's seems to

1:16:23 ↗ me um continue to uh give us a strong

1:16:26 ↗ core and then build on that core to

1:16:29 ↗ expand the capabilities of the pool

1:16:30 ↗ seems like a a sensible way to look uh

1:16:33 ↗ I'm eager to see funding models that um

1:16:36 ↗ as the city administrator uh said would

1:16:39 ↗ uh would allow us to partner I think

1:16:40 ↗ what we can't do is fund this entirely

1:16:42 ↗ on the shoulders of just the residents

1:16:44 ↗ of isqua it's such a regional resource

1:16:47 ↗ um but I'm confident that we'll go find

1:16:49 ↗ uh go find the uh funding mechanisms

1:16:51 ↗ that allow uh the regional users of this

1:16:53 ↗ pool to uh step forward and and uh and

1:16:57 ↗ expand its

1:17:00 ↗ capability Deputy council president D

1:17:05 ↗ Michelle thank you uh I I strongly

1:17:08 ↗ support uh the idea of going ahead and

1:17:11 ↗ exploring the feasibility of doing this

1:17:14 ↗ project um as uh C Mar said I think the

1:17:18 ↗ uh research that was done was impressive

1:17:21 ↗ and the feedback that we received uh

1:17:23 ↗ just a couple of uh items from the uh

1:17:27 ↗ SSP meeting uh we had one uh uh person

1:17:31 ↗ com and make comments but the comments

1:17:33 ↗ were powerful and so if people could

1:17:36 ↗ watch that video it would be worth your

1:17:38 ↗ time uh in the uh girls swim tea coach

1:17:43 ↗ from ISO High who regularly brings 80 to

1:17:47 ↗ 90 girls over to the bulbs pool and just

1:17:52 ↗ that boggles my mind so uh but she did

1:17:55 ↗ an excellent job of explaining how the

1:17:57 ↗ facility is stretched and how it's used

1:17:59 ↗ and how uh frequently they have to leave

1:18:02 ↗ before they're ready because the next 80

1:18:04 ↗ or 90 young people are coming in

1:18:06 ↗ following them uh it really gave us a

1:18:09 ↗ good insight into how uh much this

1:18:12 ↗ facility is used and needed uh the other

1:18:15 ↗ comment is uh I really want to plus one

1:18:17 ↗ the whole concept of uh partnering with

1:18:20 ↗ the school district and I had sent uh

1:18:23 ↗ Jeff a email earlier today uh just

1:18:26 ↗ asking the question uh have we ever

1:18:28 ↗ thought about a joint Bond uh with the

1:18:32 ↗ school district uh I don't even know

1:18:34 ↗ what the legality of such a thing is but

1:18:37 ↗ certainly uh I agree with council member

1:18:39 ↗ Mars again that we uh we should not uh

1:18:42 ↗ impose the taxes on just on the city of

1:18:46 ↗ isqua really it is the whole region uh

1:18:49 ↗ even outside of the school district that

1:18:51 ↗ is is using this schol so so uh those

1:18:55 ↗ two things I think are really important

1:18:56 ↗ for us to explore but I think the

1:18:59 ↗ research that's been done shows very

1:19:01 ↗ clearly that there's a high demand and

1:19:03 ↗ so I think that we need to continue to

1:19:05 ↗ look at how we can do this for our uh

1:19:08 ↗ residents and citizens of the region so

1:19:11 ↗ thank

1:19:12 ↗ you that council member

1:19:16 ↗ Hall um Echo what's been said I'll just

1:19:19 ↗ start by saying thank you clearly a lot

1:19:22 ↗ of time and effort has gone into this so

1:19:23 ↗ I really appreciate appreciate you

1:19:25 ↗ shepher this um and also all the

1:19:28 ↗ community members who engaged in the

1:19:29 ↗ process as well and our Consultants um

1:19:33 ↗ definitely um special to me this is

1:19:34 ↗ where I learn I learned to swim here so

1:19:36 ↗ this is very cool um there's definitely

1:19:38 ↗ no doubt that there's a great need in

1:19:39 ↗ the community for for more swim space um

1:19:43 ↗ and I suspect we'll see that again when

1:19:44 ↗ we engage more with the community about

1:19:46 ↗ what are the kinds of um Parks programs

1:19:49 ↗ and Recreation needs that you have and

1:19:52 ↗ how can we adapt to meet those needs

1:19:53 ↗ better it's a lot of money and you know

1:19:56 ↗ we just got done going through our CIP

1:19:59 ↗ and there are a lot of other Capital

1:20:02 ↗ needs that are top priorities of this

1:20:03 ↗ Council in the community too so I don't

1:20:05 ↗ think I'm anywhere near saying let's do

1:20:07 ↗ it like let's build the expansion of the

1:20:09 ↗ pool but certainly I'm I'm okay moving

1:20:12 ↗ forward with continuing to study it

1:20:13 ↗ trying to find how we would fund

1:20:15 ↗ something like this um and um comparing

1:20:19 ↗ it alongside all of our other Capital

1:20:20 ↗ priority and um needs there um

1:20:23 ↗ considering trade-offs all that good

1:20:25 ↗ stuff um I think potentially considering

1:20:29 ↗ Park District as part of the solution

1:20:31 ↗ here um is something that I'm interested

1:20:33 ↗ in exploring more especially because

1:20:35 ↗ those kinds of districts can be drawn at

1:20:37 ↗ the city lines or can be drawn even

1:20:38 ↗ farther so that might be worth um

1:20:40 ↗ exploring and then of course the school

1:20:43 ↗ district is a major user of um the pool

1:20:46 ↗ so making sure that they're along the

1:20:48 ↗ ride um every step of the process is

1:20:50 ↗ going to be really important too

1:20:51 ↗ especially as they continue continue to

1:20:53 ↗ grow and need more um uh space for pools

1:20:57 ↗ so again um happy to support the

1:20:59 ↗ proposal to move forward with studying

1:21:01 ↗ it um thank you again for all the

1:21:04 ↗ work council member

1:21:07 ↗ hunt well um firstly how exciting that

1:21:09 ↗ this is a option as determined by this

1:21:12 ↗ feasibility study um I think it's it's

1:21:15 ↗ great that we went in open-minded that

1:21:17 ↗ this might not be an option and we have

1:21:19 ↗ concluded that it is and I absolutely

1:21:21 ↗ think we should continue to consider it

1:21:24 ↗ um with the other uh items on our CIP um

1:21:27 ↗ and and look into funding strategies um

1:21:31 ↗ so very exciting there's absolutely a

1:21:34 ↗ huge need in the community for aquatic

1:21:37 ↗ activity opportunities and for swimming

1:21:39 ↗ opportunities and there's a there's a

1:21:41 ↗ big demand for that as well um one I I'm

1:21:45 ↗ I'm excited to hear about the community

1:21:47 ↗ engagement piece because I think the

1:21:49 ↗ community will will really um welcome

1:21:52 ↗ additional opportunities for swimming

1:21:54 ↗ and one group that I was thinking um you

1:21:57 ↗ could also reach out with which may

1:21:59 ↗ already be on your plan but is the

1:22:01 ↗ senior center and just you know reaching

1:22:03 ↗ out to those groups and seeing if if

1:22:05 ↗ there have been barriers to them um

1:22:08 ↗ participating in the programs at this at

1:22:10 ↗ the pool you know what are those and

1:22:12 ↗ making sure that we address that in this

1:22:14 ↗ um in this planning and considering

1:22:17 ↗ going forward um my kids learn to swim

1:22:20 ↗ at the pool um you know School groups

1:22:23 ↗ and and kids is another big group but

1:22:25 ↗ really I think aquatic activities are

1:22:28 ↗ very special in that people have many

1:22:30 ↗ abilities can take part and benefit from

1:22:31 ↗ that so huge Community benefit um I also

1:22:35 ↗ think that through Community engagement

1:22:36 ↗ we can hear more things about for

1:22:38 ↗ example the safety on the or safety or

1:22:40 ↗ perceived safety on the walkway um with

1:22:43 ↗ that wall um I've certainly experienced

1:22:45 ↗ that with kids kind of running fast

1:22:47 ↗ because they're coming out of the pool

1:22:49 ↗ and wanting to get to the cars and

1:22:50 ↗ things so just you know as you're Eng

1:22:52 ↗ engaging with the community about those

1:22:54 ↗ improvements that are

1:22:55 ↗ necessary um for increased capacity I

1:22:58 ↗ think that that will be a great

1:22:59 ↗ conversation to have and then lastly

1:23:02 ↗ since this does serve um this does serve

1:23:06 ↗ more than the residents of isqua it's a

1:23:08 ↗ it's a regional um the people across the

1:23:11 ↗ region benefit from having these

1:23:14 ↗ opportunities to swim at a at a pool

1:23:16 ↗ like this um I think it will be a very

1:23:19 ↗ strong candidate for state and County

1:23:21 ↗ grant funding um it's a huge benefit to

1:23:23 ↗ the whole region and so I I expect that

1:23:27 ↗ we will be um I expect that we will be a

1:23:29 ↗ very strong candidate for that sort of

1:23:31 ↗ funding and that's another reason why I

1:23:33 ↗ think we should absolutely continue

1:23:34 ↗ looking into

1:23:36 ↗ that council member

1:23:39 ↗ Joe thank you council president uh

1:23:41 ↗ through this conversation I've I've been

1:23:43 ↗ impressed with um some of the aspects

1:23:47 ↗ that the parks department continues to

1:23:49 ↗ bring forward um stewardship and

1:23:51 ↗ foresight came to mind as I was sitting

1:23:54 ↗ here listening to this conversation

1:23:56 ↗ stewardship in the sense that this is a

1:23:58 ↗ public asset and and the parks

1:23:59 ↗ Department's been taking care of it uh

1:24:02 ↗ and because they've been taking care of

1:24:03 ↗ it we're not putting money back into it

1:24:06 ↗ for a $5 million redo of the heaters or

1:24:08 ↗ anything like that we've been taking

1:24:10 ↗ care of the public asset there um and

1:24:12 ↗ that in turn was gives us a leverage to

1:24:16 ↗ to take that foresight forward and make

1:24:19 ↗ a public fund investment uh in this pool

1:24:22 ↗ as well so um want to compliment the the

1:24:25 ↗ parks department on stewardship and

1:24:27 ↗ foresight as you're going forward um

1:24:30 ↗ we're looking at trying to find ways to

1:24:31 ↗ leverage those public funds with our

1:24:33 ↗ different partners I'm fully in support

1:24:35 ↗ of this project and and uh look forward

1:24:37 ↗ to hearing the updates as they come

1:24:39 ↗ forward thank

1:24:42 ↗ you have any other comments coming

1:24:46 ↗ through I will just take a moment for

1:24:49 ↗ some of my comments I'm probably on the

1:24:53 ↗ more hesitant side than I think we have

1:24:56 ↗ heard at this point in fact until you

1:24:59 ↗ had mentioned that there have been maybe

1:25:02 ↗ some conversations or options for

1:25:04 ↗ working with the school district for

1:25:06 ↗ some funding and potentially Grant um

1:25:09 ↗ funding I was an absolute no um I know

1:25:15 ↗ that this is absolutely overprescribed

1:25:17 ↗ and there is a huge need but I am very

1:25:22 ↗ hesitant to kind of pre-sign off on what

1:25:27 ↗ would be multiple tens of millions of

1:25:30 ↗ dollars of cost without consideration

1:25:34 ↗ and having that really full conversation

1:25:36 ↗ about what are our biggest and largest

1:25:38 ↗ in needs and the one that comes to mind

1:25:42 ↗ for me is a city

1:25:44 ↗ hall the court that we're sitting in

1:25:47 ↗ right now um all of those are predefined

1:25:51 ↗ needs now that being said the fact that

1:25:54 ↗ this is uh looking at an option on

1:25:58 ↗ already existing land that's a big bonus

1:26:01 ↗ and so I can appreciate that I think the

1:26:06 ↗ other hesitation that I have

1:26:10 ↗ is going into this with what seems like

1:26:13 ↗ a very comprehensive

1:26:17 ↗ plan based on the needs IE view of the

1:26:22 ↗ school district and the swim teams for

1:26:25 ↗ Lane swim and so I don't want to get

1:26:27 ↗ boxed into a pred decided concept here

1:26:32 ↗ without really understanding what the

1:26:35 ↗ needs are and so I appreciate having

1:26:37 ↗ heard that there is a desire to go to

1:26:39 ↗ the community like council member hunt

1:26:41 ↗ said I'm sure there are going to be

1:26:43 ↗ opinions there's been a lot of opinions

1:26:45 ↗ from the highlands that they want a pool

1:26:48 ↗ up there um and so recognizing what the

1:26:52 ↗ full needs of the community are and

1:26:54 ↗ those that aren't being served currently

1:26:57 ↗ um is really important for me so I will

1:27:02 ↗ tentatively um agree with this as an

1:27:05 ↗ exploration idea but I have high needs

1:27:09 ↗ that will be need to be met with the

1:27:12 ↗ next phas phases of these conversations

1:27:16 ↗ about how we can share the funding

1:27:19 ↗ obligations um how this works in with

1:27:22 ↗ all of our other Capital needs also our

1:27:25 ↗ staff needs on the facility side and not

1:27:29 ↗ being overtaken by one new building

1:27:32 ↗ versus another um and then really what

1:27:36 ↗ the esqua school district is willing to

1:27:39 ↗ put up not only for Capital costs but

1:27:43 ↗ potentially um further operations costs

1:27:47 ↗ because if we are finding that they are

1:27:49 ↗ one of the largest users of this and

1:27:53 ↗ they are

1:27:55 ↗ saving potentially millions of dollars a

1:27:57 ↗ year from not having to operate and heat

1:28:01 ↗ um and maintain a building on one of

1:28:04 ↗ their school facilities then I think we

1:28:06 ↗ need to really take that into

1:28:09 ↗ consideration if they're not willing to

1:28:12 ↗ do that I I would potentially look at

1:28:16 ↗ pushing back and saying you've got a

1:28:19 ↗ high school that you could build that on

1:28:22 ↗ rather than necessarily a um football

1:28:26 ↗ stadium and so there really is a need to

1:28:31 ↗ recognize the users and where the costs

1:28:34 ↗ lie in all of this so those are kind of

1:28:37 ↗ my comments there so at this point if

1:28:41 ↗ there is no further

1:28:43 ↗ discussion the motion before council is

1:28:46 ↗ to direct the administration to further

1:28:49 ↗ consider the expansion of Julius bom's

1:28:51 ↗ pool capacity in the coming years in

1:28:53 ↗ balance with the other capital

1:28:54 ↗ investment priorities and explore

1:28:57 ↗ possible funding sources and develop a

1:28:58 ↗ funding strategy that includes Regional

1:29:01 ↗ Grants County and state and other

1:29:03 ↗ partners those in favor signify by

1:29:06 ↗ saying I I I I I those

1:29:11 ↗ opposed that passes

1:29:13 ↗ unanimously thank you to your both for

1:29:16 ↗ the presentation and conversation on

1:29:18 ↗ that okay we have one more item of

1:29:22 ↗ regular business but I'm going to check

1:29:23 ↗ in with the council here we've been

1:29:25 ↗ sitting down for an hour and a half

1:29:27 ↗ we've got one more regular business and

1:29:29 ↗ then an executive session do we want to

1:29:32 ↗ take a five or 10 minute break at this

1:29:36 ↗ point I'm seeing a few fives so I'm

1:29:40 ↗ going to take a five minute break before

1:29:42 ↗ we move into the next item thank

1:29:50 ↗ you

1:36:54 ↗ okay we are back in session at

1:36:57 ↗ 8:42 and the next item of business is AB

1:37:01 ↗ 8735 Financial policy ad hoc committee

1:37:06 ↗ um and we are being asked to adopt the

1:37:08 ↗ ordinance and we'd like to invite City

1:37:10 ↗ attorney Rachel blender Turpin to make

1:37:12 ↗ the

1:37:13 ↗ presentation get away thank you good

1:37:16 ↗ evening Council Rachel Bender tpen City

1:37:19 ↗ attorney I'm here this evening to talk

1:37:21 ↗ to you about the city's financial

1:37:23 ↗ management policy and proposed

1:37:26 ↗ amendments there

1:37:29 ↗ too next slide whenever you're ready to

1:37:31 ↗ sh no

1:37:34 ↗ worries if you will recall back to last

1:37:38 ↗ year in November we um met and discussed

1:37:43 ↗ proposed amendments to the financial

1:37:44 ↗ management policy at the November 20th

1:37:46 ↗ regular meeting at that time Council

1:37:50 ↗ expressed interest in forming an ad hoc

1:37:53 ↗ committee to uh review and consider the

1:37:56 ↗ proposed amendments in uh smaller group

1:37:59 ↗ setting in Greater detail that committee

1:38:02 ↗ was formed it constitutes council

1:38:05 ↗ members Ry the chair and council members

1:38:07 ↗ Marts Mar and hunt the purpose of the ad

1:38:12 ↗ hoc committee was to consider the

1:38:14 ↗ proposed feedback and then to make

1:38:16 ↗ recommendations to this body um as a

1:38:19 ↗ whole on which amendments to take and uh

1:38:24 ↗ and also to report back on January 16th

1:38:28 ↗ at the very least if there were no um

1:38:31 ↗ proposed amendments that the committee

1:38:33 ↗ was considering however that is not the

1:38:35 ↗ case as we will see later in this

1:38:37 ↗ presentation next

1:38:40 ↗ slide we met twice we met on December

1:38:42 ↗ 19th and then again on January 11th we

1:38:46 ↗ reviewed uh the council comments from

1:38:48 ↗ the committee or I gu was the yeah the

1:38:51 ↗ committee of the whole meeting on the

1:38:52 ↗ 13th and then we went through the

1:38:56 ↗ proposed amendments in detail staff gave

1:39:00 ↗ presentations at the meetings we opened

1:39:02 ↗ it up for questions and answer and then

1:39:04 ↗ we also provided uh a few items of data

1:39:08 ↗ for the committee to consider such as um

1:39:13 ↗ the number and dollar amounts of Grants

1:39:15 ↗ and the number and dollar amounts of

1:39:16 ↗ various types of contracts such as

1:39:19 ↗ Public Works contracts versus

1:39:21 ↗ Professional Services that kind of

1:39:24 ↗ thing next

1:39:27 ↗ Slide the committee also established

1:39:31 ↗ goals for the amendment

1:39:33 ↗ process things like transparency and

1:39:36 ↗ accountability making the product easy

1:39:39 ↗ to understand and use because uh staff

1:39:42 ↗ will have to understand it and use it in

1:39:44 ↗ order to follow the the council's wishes

1:39:46 ↗ with that to maintain the council's

1:39:50 ↗ position as the policy setting Authority

1:39:53 ↗ for the city and then of course to

1:39:54 ↗ increase efficiency so we can all get

1:39:56 ↗ work done a little bit faster and easier

1:40:00 ↗ next

1:40:04 ↗ slide some of the recommendations that

1:40:07 ↗ came out of the committee's meeting are

1:40:10 ↗ to proceed with a

1:40:11 ↗ $100,000 threshold for Grant approval

1:40:15 ↗ this would mean that the uh

1:40:18 ↗ Administration could apply for and enter

1:40:21 ↗ into grant agreements for um up to

1:40:24 ↗ $100,000 provided that any funds for a

1:40:28 ↗ match were budgeted for in the cities

1:40:32 ↗ Bay and

1:40:33 ↗ buget uh the ad hoc committee also

1:40:37 ↗ recommended that we include a

1:40:39 ↗ requirement for reporting of grants that

1:40:43 ↗ are awarded within the administrative

1:40:45 ↗ threshold to keep Council and the public

1:40:48 ↗ apprised of the of grants in those

1:40:52 ↗ processes and uh so language was added

1:40:55 ↗ to the policy that would require grants

1:40:57 ↗ to be addressed in the um quarterly

1:41:01 ↗ budget

1:41:03 ↗ updates we talked about donations too we

1:41:07 ↗ decided to proceed with two distinct

1:41:09 ↗ types of donations donations for any

1:41:13 ↗ Municipal purpose which means that

1:41:16 ↗ there's no um strings attached to that

1:41:19 ↗ gift we the the recommendation was to

1:41:23 ↗ allow administrative uh acceptance of

1:41:27 ↗ those types of gifts as long as they

1:41:29 ↗ don't exceed

1:41:31 ↗ $100,000 and then to also allow for

1:41:35 ↗ administrative acceptance of Grants up

1:41:37 ↗ to

1:41:37 ↗ $100,000 when they are ear earmarked for

1:41:41 ↗ a specific existing City program and the

1:41:46 ↗ expense the the donation can be used for

1:41:49 ↗ any expense related to that program we

1:41:53 ↗ did decide

1:41:54 ↗ to not touch another section of the

1:41:58 ↗ donation policy which requires city

1:42:02 ↗ council to accept any donation for a

1:42:06 ↗ new program that would be donation

1:42:08 ↗ funded so for instance let's say

1:42:11 ↗ somebody comes and they you know want

1:42:13 ↗ the city to establish an an

1:42:16 ↗ additional Landmark uh program where

1:42:20 ↗ people can donate to have have St put

1:42:23 ↗ statutes in statutes in the park we

1:42:25 ↗ would we would have the those would

1:42:27 ↗ still come back to council for your

1:42:29 ↗ consideration because that would be a

1:42:30 ↗ new policy or program that the council

1:42:33 ↗ would be considering and that would

1:42:34 ↗ therefore fall within your

1:42:37 ↗ purview we talked about delegation of

1:42:41 ↗ Contracting

1:42:42 ↗ Authority and we the the committee

1:42:46 ↗ recommended that we require Council

1:42:49 ↗ approval of all purchase and Sal sale

1:42:51 ↗ agreements and settlement agreements

1:42:53 ↗ regardless of the dollar value with the

1:42:55 ↗ exception of settlement agreements

1:42:57 ↗ related to labor and person labor and

1:42:59 ↗ Personnel matters which would be allowed

1:43:03 ↗ administratively as long as they didn't

1:43:05 ↗ exceed $50,000 that would allow us to

1:43:07 ↗ enter into very small um separation

1:43:11 ↗ agreements with staff as they leave

1:43:13 ↗ resolve small grievances that kind of

1:43:16 ↗ thing next

1:43:18 ↗ slide other minor edits that were made

1:43:21 ↗ we uh changed we added a reference to

1:43:24 ↗ the current

1:43:26 ↗ CIP um for the CIP criteria that were in

1:43:30 ↗ section 6.2 because those were outdated

1:43:33 ↗ we addressed actually a number of typos

1:43:35 ↗ throughout the the document thank you

1:43:37 ↗ council member D Michelle for your

1:43:39 ↗ thorough review and we changed uh

1:43:42 ↗ references from Finance director to

1:43:45 ↗ Chief Financial Officer to reflect the

1:43:47 ↗ current job

1:43:49 ↗ title we discussed Public Works

1:43:52 ↗ contracts at length the committee in the

1:43:55 ↗ end ultimately decided to recommend to

1:43:59 ↗ councel that we raise the signing

1:44:02 ↗ threshold for Public Works

1:44:05 ↗ contracts to 300,000 or more so Council

1:44:09 ↗ would be approving any Public Works

1:44:11 ↗ contract it that was valued at $300,000

1:44:15 ↗ or more where the current threshold is

1:44:19 ↗ $100,000 the

1:44:21 ↗ count the committee also recommended

1:44:22 ↗ publishing a list though of all the

1:44:24 ↗ contracts and awards that were made so

1:44:28 ↗ that um the public can see what all the

1:44:31 ↗ administratively approved contracts are

1:44:33 ↗ and then also somehow you know posting

1:44:36 ↗ those contracts online finding a way

1:44:38 ↗ that we exploring ways that we could

1:44:41 ↗ make all contracts available to the

1:44:44 ↗ public where they just have to click a

1:44:46 ↗ link and then they can pull up that

1:44:47 ↗ contract and view

1:44:49 ↗ it

1:44:52 ↗ we also

1:44:54 ↗ discussed uh thresholds for purchased

1:44:57 ↗ and general services and Professional

1:45:00 ↗ Services the committee was in agreement

1:45:02 ↗ that we should use the same threshold

1:45:05 ↗ for all of those types of contracts so

1:45:08 ↗ just backing up on that a little

1:45:12 ↗ bit the the line between purchase

1:45:16 ↗ services or general services and

1:45:18 ↗ Professional Services can be kind of

1:45:21 ↗ blurry uh there's some services that you

1:45:24 ↗ there are just certainly Professional

1:45:26 ↗ Services lawyers you know we have to

1:45:29 ↗ have professional liability insurance

1:45:31 ↗ Engineers they have to have professional

1:45:32 ↗ liability insurance there are others

1:45:35 ↗ though that it becomes more questionable

1:45:36 ↗ so we were getting a lot of Staff

1:45:39 ↗ confusion over which threshold to apply

1:45:42 ↗ because we had a $300,000 threshold for

1:45:45 ↗ Professional Services and $100,000

1:45:47 ↗ threshold for other services the so the

1:45:50 ↗ committee um was in agreement that we

1:45:53 ↗ should have the same threshold for all

1:45:56 ↗ of those types of

1:45:58 ↗ services but that we could treat Public

1:46:01 ↗ Works differently because Public Works

1:46:04 ↗ are a much more discreet type of

1:46:06 ↗ contract There's an actual statutory

1:46:08 ↗ definition of what a public works is so

1:46:10 ↗ it's a lot easier for us to identify

1:46:12 ↗ when a service is a public works versus

1:46:14 ↗ a professional service versus a a

1:46:16 ↗ general

1:46:18 ↗ service the committee discussed

1:46:20 ↗ potential thresholds for the public

1:46:23 ↗ works contracts once again those are

1:46:26 ↗ currently set at $100,000 but the

1:46:28 ↗ committee discuss potentially raising it

1:46:30 ↗ to

1:46:32 ↗ $200,000 the the uh administration's

1:46:36 ↗ recommendation is for $300,000 threshold

1:46:40 ↗ which was revised down from our original

1:46:43 ↗ recommendation of

1:46:45 ↗ $350,000 and once again the committee

1:46:49 ↗ suggested that we publish a list of all

1:46:52 ↗ of those Public Works contracts and

1:46:55 ↗ provide links to those as

1:46:59 ↗ well just to give you a little bit of

1:47:01 ↗ information about the data that we

1:47:04 ↗ pulled this chart here shows you how

1:47:08 ↗ many contracts were service contracts

1:47:12 ↗ were approved by the city council in the

1:47:14 ↗ last 2-year period at both the current

1:47:18 ↗ threshold and um

1:47:22 ↗ the the uh Professional Services

1:47:25 ↗ threshold here so as you can see

1:47:29 ↗ there

1:47:32 ↗ are quite a well I guess there's not

1:47:34 ↗ quite a few

1:47:37 ↗ here if the I think the most Salient

1:47:40 ↗ part of this slide is really that if the

1:47:42 ↗ Professional Services threshold were

1:47:45 ↗ reduced to $200,000 it would just result

1:47:48 ↗ in an additional 19 contract that came

1:47:50 ↗ to council for

1:47:53 ↗ approval next slide

1:47:57 ↗ please you have several options here

1:47:59 ↗ before you you can recommend um adoption

1:48:03 ↗ of the or I guess these should probably

1:48:05 ↗ be just you could adopt the proposed

1:48:07 ↗ amendments as recommended by the ad hoc

1:48:10 ↗ Committee of course this body can make

1:48:12 ↗ additional amendments and I know that

1:48:13 ↗ there are some amendments uh going

1:48:15 ↗ around that you've received from the

1:48:17 ↗ city clerk earlier today or you could

1:48:19 ↗ recommend that no amend m ments to the

1:48:20 ↗ policy be made and we just leave it as

1:48:25 ↗ is uh next steps are consideration of

1:48:29 ↗ the ordinance if it were approved we're

1:48:31 ↗ recommending an effective date of April

1:48:33 ↗ 1st to allow time for staff to learn the

1:48:37 ↗ policies and conduct training on them

1:48:40 ↗ our other next steps are to um begin

1:48:45 ↗ providing the grant reporting to council

1:48:47 ↗ and then also to explore ways to post

1:48:50 ↗ post all contracts and grants in a

1:48:52 ↗ public portal uh we discussed

1:48:54 ↗ transparency at length in the committee

1:48:56 ↗ meetings and I think there is clear

1:48:59 ↗ consensus among the committee and staff

1:49:01 ↗ that we should have transparency with

1:49:04 ↗ our contracts but that

1:49:06 ↗ perhaps solely bringing them to council

1:49:08 ↗ just so that they are in the the council

1:49:11 ↗ record is maybe not the most efficient

1:49:13 ↗ way to do

1:49:16 ↗ that uh this is the administration

1:49:20 ↗ recommendation I won't read it to you

1:49:22 ↗ there's also an optional motion here for

1:49:24 ↗ you to consider if you wish to uh insert

1:49:27 ↗ a different signing threshold for

1:49:31 ↗ professional and general service

1:49:34 ↗ contracts than $300,000 that was

1:49:37 ↗ recommended by the

1:49:39 ↗ administration with that I will take any

1:49:43 ↗ questions excellent um and let's see

1:49:48 ↗ council member Ray as chair of the ad

1:49:50 ↗ hoc committee do you have any comments

1:49:52 ↗ to add before we go to questions well I

1:49:55 ↗ certainly do um so the committee um

1:49:58 ↗ consists of council member hunt Marts

1:50:00 ↗ and myself and we met twice as Rachel

1:50:03 ↗ talked about and we did have some

1:50:06 ↗ overarching goals which Rich also talked

1:50:08 ↗ about that but there was one other one

1:50:10 ↗ that we didn't touch on was also

1:50:12 ↗ accountability so was transparency

1:50:14 ↗ accountability understanding um uhu

1:50:17 ↗ maintaining the council's role setting

1:50:19 ↗ polic or

1:50:20 ↗ role as setting policy and then just

1:50:22 ↗ overall effectiveness of the process um

1:50:25 ↗ first before I say anything else I want

1:50:26 ↗ to thank the City attorney I want to

1:50:28 ↗ thank the city clerk and City staff who

1:50:31 ↗ turned this around in like nothing flat

1:50:33 ↗ because we met on Thursday and it was in

1:50:35 ↗ the packet by Friday so thank you so

1:50:37 ↗ much that was uh that was fairly heroic

1:50:40 ↗ um so we could take action today so

1:50:42 ↗ thank you um generally the committee um

1:50:46 ↗ agreed on the revisions in the policy

1:50:48 ↗ there was one and and Rachel spoke to

1:50:50 ↗ this a little bit and it dealt with the

1:50:52 ↗ Professional Services and general

1:50:54 ↗ Services contract limit we were split on

1:50:57 ↗ whether or not the limit should be

1:50:58 ↗ 200,000 or 300,000 so I think that'll

1:51:01 ↗ come up during discussion here um but we

1:51:04 ↗ did agree to move forward even though we

1:51:06 ↗ weren't in alignment on that um because

1:51:08 ↗ we felt we would give this the whole the

1:51:11 ↗ the body of seven the opportunity and

1:51:13 ↗ then finally um and this is sprinkled

1:51:16 ↗ throughout the presentation uh to

1:51:18 ↗ promote our goal of transparency we've

1:51:20 ↗ requested a lot

1:51:22 ↗ of um work to be done in terms of making

1:51:25 ↗ contracts and grants Etc accessible to

1:51:29 ↗ the public um not just those that

1:51:31 ↗ require Council approval so um thank you

1:51:34 ↗ to council member Marts and council

1:51:36 ↗ member hunt it was a it was a it was a

1:51:39 ↗ great committee and I I think we I think

1:51:42 ↗ we came up with some good good

1:51:46 ↗ guidance and thank you three for doing

1:51:48 ↗ the Deep work so that the the rest of us

1:51:50 ↗ didn't have to appreciate it um do we

1:51:53 ↗ have any questions Council M hun thank

1:51:57 ↗ you on the next steps slide um there

1:52:00 ↗ were three and and the third one which

1:52:03 ↗ was the one about the public portal

1:52:04 ↗ didn't have a time frame on it um as was

1:52:07 ↗ just mentioned we had a quick turnaround

1:52:08 ↗ from our discussion last Thursday and

1:52:11 ↗ and that was something that we discussed

1:52:13 ↗ um at some length in that meeting and so

1:52:16 ↗ I'm wondering if you can um if you could

1:52:19 ↗ add some definition on the timeline uh

1:52:23 ↗ and what those steps would be towards

1:52:26 ↗ getting us closer to having the data

1:52:28 ↗ available in a public portal that would

1:52:30 ↗ be

1:52:32 ↗ accessible great question we've

1:52:35 ↗ identified the staff that we would need

1:52:37 ↗ to have there we do not have a meeting

1:52:39 ↗ set yet I think that I am the hold up

1:52:41 ↗ however because I'm going to be out of

1:52:42 ↗ the office next week in the week after

1:52:44 ↗ and so we realistically I don't think

1:52:46 ↗ we'll be getting it together until

1:52:48 ↗ mid-February but we we do know who needs

1:52:52 ↗ to be there we need it staff there

1:52:53 ↗ obviously and then we'll probably need

1:52:56 ↗ um Communications folks who manage some

1:52:58 ↗ of the website and then our um our uh

1:53:02 ↗ contract specialist as well could you

1:53:05 ↗ speak to the

1:53:07 ↗ platform existing

1:53:11 ↗ plat is it the doc no I can't

1:53:16 ↗ can okay so that's an important yeah we

1:53:19 ↗ we have to we have to figure out if our

1:53:22 ↗ current platform can manage that or if

1:53:26 ↗ we need to get different software to

1:53:29 ↗ allow that I think we I'm assuming

1:53:32 ↗ there'll be a module within it because

1:53:34 ↗ we already do have quite a robust

1:53:36 ↗ document depository or at least we have

1:53:39 ↗ all the the

1:53:41 ↗ Das Rachel if I if I may yes

1:53:45 ↗ hi hi just thought I'd chime in because

1:53:47 ↗ I um have had some discussion hi

1:53:49 ↗ everybody Deputy City administrator

1:53:51 ↗ Andrea Snyder um and interim CFO um I

1:53:56 ↗ have had initial conversations with some

1:53:58 ↗ staff before we've we've set up that

1:54:00 ↗ meeting that Rachel discussed and um I

1:54:03 ↗ think we're looking at a platform

1:54:05 ↗ through the website so we need to

1:54:07 ↗ discuss that a little further do more

1:54:09 ↗ exploration um but I have received some

1:54:11 ↗ initial uh feedback from the clerk's

1:54:14 ↗ office and others um but you know like

1:54:17 ↗ like Council has said and appreciate the

1:54:19 ↗ patients of council we just started

1:54:21 ↗ having this conversation late last week

1:54:23 ↗ and look forward to developing this idea

1:54:25 ↗ further thank

1:54:28 ↗ you thank you Andrea for chiming in

1:54:31 ↗ there appreciate

1:54:32 ↗ it um okay so questions council member

1:54:37 ↗ Hull so it sounds like one of our

1:54:41 ↗ discussions that we need to have is for

1:54:43 ↗ the purchased and professional service

1:54:45 ↗ contracts that threshold of 200 or

1:54:46 ↗ 300,000 so I kind of want to get a

1:54:48 ↗ better sense of what that impact is so

1:54:50 ↗ that slide that you have on the service

1:54:52 ↗ contracts information shows the number

1:54:55 ↗ of contracts that we approved last year

1:54:57 ↗ within a particular range of dollars so

1:55:00 ↗ if we set it at

1:55:03 ↗ 2,000 we 200 under 2,000 let's not set

1:55:06 ↗ it there 200,000 um we would be seeing

1:55:10 ↗ 15 contracts if we set it at 300 we

1:55:12 ↗ would be seeing 13 contracts is that am

1:55:17 ↗ I reading that right yeah can you bring

1:55:19 ↗ [Music]

1:55:21 ↗ up just a difference of

1:55:23 ↗ um not assuming not every year looks

1:55:26 ↗ like this it's not every Year's the same

1:55:28 ↗ but using last year as a base it would

1:55:30 ↗ be a difference of two contracts

1:55:35 ↗ right is if we were to reduce it from

1:55:39 ↗ 300 to 200,000 that would mean there

1:55:41 ↗ would be an

1:55:43 ↗ additional

1:55:44 ↗ nine there the other duration um the

1:55:48 ↗ other that's listed there duration or Z

1:55:50 ↗ contact th those were those wouldn't be

1:55:53 ↗ affected likely because those were not

1:55:55 ↗ approved by Council because of the

1:55:57 ↗ amount they were approved because they

1:56:00 ↗ were a z contract which was treated

1:56:04 ↗ differently under the old policy for

1:56:06 ↗ some reason or because they had a

1:56:08 ↗ duration that exceeded two years and

1:56:11 ↗ therefore required Council approval does

1:56:13 ↗ that make sense so yes it would be a a a

1:56:17 ↗ change of approximately then 11 if if

1:56:19 ↗ you went down to

1:56:21 ↗ two sir if you don't mind Rachel I I put

1:56:24 ↗ this slide together and I can tell I

1:56:26 ↗ maybe didn't do it in the most clear way

1:56:29 ↗ um because actually uh so the number of

1:56:32 ↗ 17 reflects all the purchased and

1:56:35 ↗ Professional Services the council

1:56:36 ↗ approved through 2022 and 2023 with the

1:56:40 ↗ existing threshold of 100 for purchased

1:56:43 ↗ 300 for professional so if we were to

1:56:45 ↗ move the threshold for Professional

1:56:47 ↗ Services down to 200 that number would

1:56:49 ↗ double if we're looking at the last two

1:56:51 ↗ years you'd be looking at 36 total

1:56:54 ↗ contracts so it would be somewhat

1:56:56 ↗ significant and you are right it could

1:56:58 ↗ definitely vary um in future years but

1:57:01 ↗ that's that's an approximation looking

1:57:02 ↗ at the last two years thank you city

1:57:04 ↗ clerk I was definitely not reading that

1:57:06 ↗ slide correctly so I appreciate that

1:57:09 ↗ clarification no thank you very much

1:57:11 ↗ okay I I have a better sense of the

1:57:14 ↗ impact okay still going on questions

1:57:18 ↗ council member hunt um I'll just I'll

1:57:21 ↗ add that we actually uh had the

1:57:24 ↗ information provided on what the

1:57:26 ↗ contracts were um to the ad hoc

1:57:29 ↗ committee and so that that was a

1:57:31 ↗ document that was provided in our P

1:57:33 ↗ pamphlet um and something that we

1:57:34 ↗ requested so we actually have not just

1:57:36 ↗ the number but we have the

1:57:39 ↗ specific uh types in that earlier

1:57:42 ↗ pamplet or the specific um title of the

1:57:47 ↗ cont okay can continuing on with

1:57:52 ↗ questions I'm feeling like there's a

1:57:55 ↗ little bit of hesitation here on any

1:57:57 ↗ more questions so I'm wondering if there

1:58:00 ↗ is a motion I'd like to make counc

1:58:03 ↗ member Ray um I I moved to adopt

1:58:05 ↗ ordinance

1:58:06 ↗ number

1:58:08 ↗ 3045 adopting amendments to the city's

1:58:11 ↗ financial management

1:58:14 ↗ plan is there a second okay

1:58:17 ↗ fantastic that um the motion has been

1:58:20 ↗ moved and

1:58:22 ↗ seconded I know we've got a few

1:58:24 ↗ amendments but let's start out any

1:58:29 ↗ discussion motion maker yeah I I just

1:58:32 ↗ would again just like to reiterate that

1:58:34 ↗ we we plowed through a ton of material

1:58:38 ↗ here and we're in um able to reach

1:58:42 ↗ agreement on I think all but one Salient

1:58:45 ↗ point in the in the document which I

1:58:47 ↗ think is amazing so um regardless of of

1:58:51 ↗ where we set the threshold or whether

1:58:52 ↗ minutes we have the the financial

1:58:55 ↗ management plan I really think with the

1:58:57 ↗ the transparency issues that um council

1:59:01 ↗ member hunt um raised um really did

1:59:04 ↗ address our transparency our

1:59:06 ↗ accountability issues ease of use and

1:59:09 ↗ understanding trying to have some

1:59:10 ↗ consistency um keeps the council in a

1:59:14 ↗ policy setting role and provides for a

1:59:17 ↗ more efficient framework so I I felt

1:59:18 ↗ like you know all things considered we

1:59:21 ↗ we uh we accomplish what we sent out to

1:59:23 ↗ and there's still some work to do in in

1:59:24 ↗ terms of the transparency part but I'm

1:59:27 ↗ I'm more than confident that we will get

1:59:31 ↗ there I'm going to take just a moment to

1:59:33 ↗ make the minor uh modification motion

1:59:37 ↗ that was requested by the administration

1:59:39 ↗ so I would like to move to amend section

1:59:43 ↗ 4.5 level of purchasing and contract

1:59:46 ↗ commitment authority to change the

1:59:48 ↗ following sentence to read quote maximum

1:59:51 ↗ contract length including any contract

1:59:54 ↗ amendments and extensions without

1:59:56 ↗ Council approval is three years with the

1:59:58 ↗ exception of software as as a service

2:00:01 ↗ and software licensing agreement which

2:00:03 ↗ are permitted for up to 5 years without

2:00:05 ↗ Council approval and easements which may

2:00:09 ↗ be for any

2:00:10 ↗ duration second end quote no second okay

2:00:15 ↗ so that's been moved and seconded so is

2:00:19 ↗ there any discussion on the

2:00:23 ↗ amendment he I am seeing no discussion

2:00:27 ↗ on the amendment so for Amendment one to

2:00:31 ↗ amend section 4.5 all those in favor

2:00:34 ↗ signify by saying I I I I all those

2:00:40 ↗ opposed okay that passes

2:00:43 ↗ unanimously so that is amendment

2:00:47 ↗ one um council president Walsh I'd like

2:00:50 ↗ to make a second amendment okay um I

2:00:53 ↗ move to amend section 4.5 level of

2:00:56 ↗ purchasing and commitment authority to

2:00:59 ↗ require Council approval of any

2:01:01 ↗ agreement for lease of city-owned

2:01:03 ↗ property except when such leases for a

2:01:05 ↗ term of less than one year and the value

2:01:08 ↗ of the lease agreement does not exceed

2:01:09 ↗ the mayor's contract approval threshold

2:01:12 ↗ as set forth in section

2:01:18 ↗ 4.5 and looking to see there we go there

2:01:22 ↗ is a second from council member Joe okay

2:01:24 ↗ so we have a second amendment motion on

2:01:28 ↗ the table would the motion maker like to

2:01:32 ↗ speak to the amendment I would indeed

2:01:35 ↗ thank you so much well first of all

2:01:37 ↗ thanks to the ad hoc committee who that

2:01:39 ↗ did a really wonderful job and I uh

2:01:42 ↗ totally agree with the tax task force

2:01:45 ↗ desire to increase efficiency and

2:01:48 ↗ decrease the Council load however I'm

2:01:51 ↗ proposing this amendment because I do

2:01:53 ↗ want to carve out an understanding in

2:01:55 ↗ the financial management policies

2:01:58 ↗ related to city-owned properties managed

2:02:00 ↗ by nonprofit groups and you're going to

2:02:02 ↗ hear that phrase several times in my

2:02:05 ↗ discussion here city-owned properties

2:02:07 ↗ that are managed by nonprofit groups uh

2:02:11 ↗ I'm speaking specifically about uh uh

2:02:14 ↗ properties like the history museum the

2:02:16 ↗ depot the Alexander house Hailstone Feed

2:02:19 ↗ Store the garage Gibson Hall food and

2:02:22 ↗ clothing bank and at work for these

2:02:25 ↗ properties I believe it's very important

2:02:26 ↗ that the council retain final approval

2:02:29 ↗ of leases and Lease extensions these

2:02:32 ↗ properties have many similar uh have

2:02:35 ↗ similar relationships within the city of

2:02:37 ↗ isqua each one being historic each one

2:02:41 ↗ being leased by a nonprofit organization

2:02:44 ↗ responsible for maintenance upkeep and

2:02:47 ↗ improvements either in L of rent or for

2:02:50 ↗ rent far below current market rates in

2:02:52 ↗ other words these are leases that really

2:02:55 ↗ it's very difficult to determine what

2:02:57 ↗ the value of the lease is so when we

2:02:59 ↗ talk about thresholds it's hard to

2:03:02 ↗ determine what a threshold would be for

2:03:04 ↗ these particular

2:03:06 ↗ leases

2:03:08 ↗ um um so these uh nonprofits get these

2:03:12 ↗ properties uh uh either for no rent or

2:03:16 ↗ little rent not no rent but little rent

2:03:19 ↗ or rent far below current market rate

2:03:21 ↗ each one of these properties serves a

2:03:23 ↗ public benefit and there is a definition

2:03:25 ↗ for public benefit as gathering places

2:03:28 ↗ for Community meetings Community

2:03:30 ↗ Services or Community

2:03:32 ↗ Education and uh finally the city has

2:03:35 ↗ longstanding relationships with each of

2:03:38 ↗ the nonprofits now managing these

2:03:40 ↗ properties Quan for example has

2:03:43 ↗ managed for 70 years the chambers manage

2:03:46 ↗ Alexander house for longer than uh 40

2:03:49 ↗ years for about 40 years and the

2:03:51 ↗ Historic Society has managed the museum

2:03:53 ↗ and Depot for longer than I even

2:03:56 ↗ know so in some cases it was the

2:03:59 ↗ nonprofit that built the facility in

2:04:01 ↗ others it was the nonprofit that rescued

2:04:03 ↗ the facility such as the depot and the

2:04:06 ↗ Alexander house these are properties

2:04:08 ↗ deeply embedded in the fabric of our

2:04:10 ↗ community and although the city legally

2:04:12 ↗ owns the properties the fate of each of

2:04:15 ↗ them is of high Community interest and

2:04:17 ↗ concern so by transferring approval of

2:04:21 ↗ leases and Lease extensions of

2:04:22 ↗ city-owned properties managed by

2:04:24 ↗ nonprofits solely to the mayor in the

2:04:27 ↗ administration as proposed in FMP

2:04:31 ↗ 4.5.2 the proposed policy would

2:04:33 ↗ effectively remove approval of leases

2:04:36 ↗ and Lease extensions for these high

2:04:38 ↗ Community interest properties from

2:04:40 ↗ public comment and from direct councel

2:04:43 ↗ oversight and while this mayor and this

2:04:45 ↗ Administration are supportive of our

2:04:47 ↗ nonprofit organization

2:04:49 ↗ by requiring Council approval we add an

2:04:52 ↗ additional layer of future protection

2:04:54 ↗ for the nonprofits who manage our

2:04:56 ↗ properties and have managed our

2:04:58 ↗ properties for decades not in the case

2:05:01 ↗ of the historic history Historic Society

2:05:04 ↗ maybe for centuries we don't know I want

2:05:07 ↗ to point out that the proposed amendment

2:05:09 ↗ does not change anything about the way

2:05:11 ↗ we currently operate it basically

2:05:13 ↗ retains the status quo the mayor or

2:05:16 ↗ Administration will continue to

2:05:18 ↗ negotiate leases for desired outcomes

2:05:20 ↗ from the properties and from the

2:05:22 ↗ nonprofits the mayor can still put the

2:05:24 ↗ proposed lease or lease extensions on

2:05:27 ↗ the consent agenda the council can

2:05:29 ↗ continue to approve them through the

2:05:31 ↗ consent agenda process the difference

2:05:34 ↗ here is that um I think that retaining

2:05:36 ↗ Council approval for leases of

2:05:38 ↗ city-owned properties managed by

2:05:40 ↗ nonprofits simply increases transparency

2:05:44 ↗ and allows for Community comment and

2:05:46 ↗ recourse if a group group is unhappy

2:05:49 ↗ with decisions made by the

2:05:51 ↗ administration or the mayor finally the

2:05:54 ↗ language of the amendment is broader

2:05:55 ↗ than my concern about city-owned

2:05:57 ↗ properties managed by nonprofits due to

2:06:00 ↗ the fact that current city leases with

2:06:02 ↗ nonprofits are uh vary in their terms of

2:06:06 ↗ length uh in the amount of rent or no

2:06:08 ↗ rent that's being charged than the

2:06:10 ↗ provision of the delial deliverables

2:06:13 ↗ from the nonprofits so instead of naming

2:06:16 ↗ specific properties this broader

2:06:18 ↗ language we hope will provide City staff

2:06:20 ↗ with clear Direction on the policy's

2:06:23 ↗ overall intent many many many thanks to

2:06:26 ↗ City attorney Rachel Turpin for talking

2:06:29 ↗ me through the right language for this

2:06:32 ↗ amendment so um I hope you'll join me

2:06:34 ↗ and supporting this amendment and I

2:06:36 ↗ welcome any questions or concerns that

2:06:39 ↗ uh uh the rest of the council may have

2:06:42 ↗ about this but um I feel very strongly

2:06:45 ↗ that the council should

2:06:47 ↗ retain um it's current ability to

2:06:50 ↗ approve or not approve uh the leases for

2:06:53 ↗ this particular set of nonprofits thank

2:06:59 ↗ you okay so we have a an amendment on

2:07:03 ↗ the table so we are discussing that so

2:07:05 ↗ council member hunt yes so I have a

2:07:08 ↗ question and I think this is for City

2:07:10 ↗ attor City attorney Ken um so I am

2:07:15 ↗ struggling with the exception to the

2:07:19 ↗ the uh not exceeding I think there's a

2:07:22 ↗ couple negatives in the second clause

2:07:25 ↗ and so um if the mayor's contract if the

2:07:29 ↗ value exceeds the mayor's contract

2:07:31 ↗ approval so it's a high value then isn't

2:07:34 ↗ it now an exception to requiring Council

2:07:38 ↗ approval and how does that language here

2:07:47 ↗ work

2:07:51 ↗ those following along at home I will

2:07:53 ↗ read the amendment again uh move to

2:07:56 ↗ amend section 4.5 level of purchasing

2:08:00 ↗ and commitment authority to require

2:08:03 ↗ Council approval of any agreement for

2:08:05 ↗ lease of city-owned property except when

2:08:09 ↗ such lease is for a term of less than a

2:08:13 ↗ year and the value of the lease

2:08:16 ↗ agreement does not exceed the mayor's

2:08:19 ↗ contract approval threshold as set forth

2:08:22 ↗ in section

2:08:24 ↗ 4.5 I'm going to share my screen and I'm

2:08:28 ↗ going to show you I've typed it into my

2:08:31 ↗ working document here and I think this

2:08:34 ↗ might I think it makes sense so but we

2:08:37 ↗ can all look at it and make sure that

2:08:39 ↗ there aren't any double negatives in

2:08:41 ↗ here that are

2:08:47 ↗ confusing

2:08:50 ↗ [Music]

2:08:53 ↗ okay can everyone see that or do I need

2:08:56 ↗ to blow it

2:08:57 ↗ up make it bigger all right here we go I

2:09:01 ↗ don't know I don't know it's

2:09:04 ↗ late okay so this is where I I put it

2:09:08 ↗ it's the it would be the the highlighted

2:09:10 ↗ language and so it will be this

2:09:13 ↗ delegation of authority ex specifically

2:09:16 ↗ excludes the following types

2:09:19 ↗ which therefore require approval by

2:09:23 ↗ the I can clean up that language in the

2:09:26 ↗ first sentence too but I I put in

2:09:30 ↗ um there which may be administratively

2:09:33 ↗ approved is that clear it up if I add

2:09:35 ↗ that language there for

2:09:39 ↗ you is it the dollar amount that bothers

2:09:42 ↗ you it is not it's the it's the

2:09:45 ↗ construction of the the sentence that is

2:09:48 ↗ just confusing so I'm just looking for

2:09:50 ↗ clarity okay so is it that um there

2:09:53 ↗ there is an exception to this when the

2:09:55 ↗ term is both less than a year and is a

2:09:59 ↗ small and is below why don't maybe it

2:10:02 ↗ can you can just write is below the yes

2:10:05 ↗ threshold yep below the 100,000 I

2:10:08 ↗ believe it would be that threshold but

2:10:09 ↗ yes below the yes threshold then we

2:10:12 ↗ don't have it does not exceed in an

2:10:13 ↗ exception yep y thank you I can do that

2:10:17 ↗ it won't make you watch me type but I

2:10:18 ↗ could do

2:10:19 ↗ that

2:10:21 ↗ okay question and and I do have one more

2:10:24 ↗ question so in um in the uh meeting that

2:10:29 ↗ uh in the ad hoc meeting we discussed um

2:10:33 ↗ a example of why it would be important

2:10:36 ↗ from the efficiency goal that we had to

2:10:39 ↗ allow for certain leases to um not

2:10:42 ↗ require Council approval or why it

2:10:44 ↗ didn't make sense and and the example

2:10:46 ↗ that was given was storage

2:10:48 ↗ a storage unit that the city was Leasing

2:10:51 ↗ and it was for a small amount and it was

2:10:53 ↗ something that the city was using for

2:10:55 ↗ you know routine programming and do they

2:10:56 ↗ need Council approval um and it that was

2:11:00 ↗ unclear so that those uh those

2:11:04 ↗ routine uh small

2:11:07 ↗ leases um those are not affected by this

2:11:13 ↗ so that efficiency

2:11:15 ↗ conversation that we still are able to

2:11:18 ↗ the administration under this proposed

2:11:20 ↗ amendment would still be able to um have

2:11:23 ↗ staff members not require Council

2:11:25 ↗ approval for those routine small leases

2:11:28 ↗ for things like storage unit that's

2:11:30 ↗ correct this amendment as worded would

2:11:33 ↗ only it wouldn't even affect the city

2:11:38 ↗ leasing any property for use by the city

2:11:43 ↗ I when I say with the city leasing I

2:11:45 ↗ mean where the city is the the Lessie

2:11:47 ↗ where the city is going out and trying

2:11:48 ↗ to lease property from someone else to

2:11:51 ↗ use as long as that was within the

2:11:53 ↗ dollar threshold obviously we're not in

2:11:56 ↗ the business

2:11:58 ↗ of entering long leases so I I I don't

2:12:01 ↗ expect that to be used other than for

2:12:03 ↗ things like storage units the other

2:12:07 ↗ exception that the new one that's been

2:12:09 ↗ been added here the reason for that so

2:12:12 ↗ what under this amendment Council would

2:12:14 ↗ then approve have to approve any Le pie

2:12:18 ↗ of city-owned property with minor

2:12:21 ↗ exceptions and that would be for

2:12:24 ↗ anything for a contract that was small

2:12:27 ↗ within the smaller within the threshold

2:12:29 ↗ and for a short term and and I can give

2:12:32 ↗ you a good example of that too we had a

2:12:34 ↗ contractor who wanted to use some space

2:12:37 ↗ in City Hall Northwest parking lot to

2:12:39 ↗ store some materials for a city project

2:12:43 ↗ and we they they wanted to know if they

2:12:45 ↗ could lease space from the city and of

2:12:48 ↗ of course we didn't think there would be

2:12:49 ↗ an issue with that but they needed to

2:12:52 ↗ come up with a plan like that week and

2:12:54 ↗ so we didn't have time to bring it to

2:12:56 ↗ the city council for approval and so it

2:12:58 ↗ would allow us to do those kinds of

2:13:01 ↗ small and it would it would also then

2:13:04 ↗ theoretically we we do have other rental

2:13:07 ↗ agreements which I guess could be

2:13:08 ↗ construed as a lease like our facility

2:13:10 ↗ rentals and so it also allow us to

2:13:13 ↗ continue doing those within policy

2:13:15 ↗ because they're less than a year and

2:13:17 ↗ small well does that make

2:13:23 ↗ sense council member right I want to um

2:13:27 ↗ kind of make sure I get the intent here

2:13:31 ↗ um

2:13:32 ↗ so because it's the it's the logic

2:13:35 ↗ that's of the sentence that's kind of

2:13:37 ↗ killing me um

2:13:40 ↗ so the the intent here is if we're

2:13:43 ↗ leasing city

2:13:45 ↗ property the the

2:13:48 ↗ General that would be ex exempt from the

2:13:52 ↗ other Provisions that we out outlined

2:13:54 ↗ here it would say those don't any all

2:13:58 ↗ leases of city

2:13:59 ↗ property would come to the council

2:14:02 ↗ correct except except um and this is

2:14:06 ↗ where I get confused uh short so less

2:14:08 ↗ than a

2:14:09 ↗ year and then and below the threshold or

2:14:13 ↗ or below the threshold and and so it's

2:14:15 ↗ got to be short and cheap yes

2:14:21 ↗ hey okay and so and we think that

2:14:26 ↗ captures knowing council member D

2:14:28 ↗ Michelle and I think I do um the intent

2:14:30 ↗ of this really is to make sure that

2:14:32 ↗ we're seeing some of these leases to not

2:14:34 ↗ for profits and this is making a little

2:14:36 ↗ broader so we have we have uh

2:14:38 ↗ flexibility um in some instances um but

2:14:41 ↗ but we get to see them for the things

2:14:44 ↗ that we think are important correct we

2:14:47 ↗ we discussed just making it more narrow

2:14:49 ↗ as uh originally requested by uh council

2:14:53 ↗ member de Michelle but as we discussed

2:14:56 ↗ it further it seemed like that might

2:14:57 ↗ raise more questions than provide

2:15:00 ↗ guidance to folks because I for instance

2:15:03 ↗ I thought well we could you know we

2:15:05 ↗ could limit it to those nonprofit

2:15:08 ↗ contracts that were that were uh noted

2:15:12 ↗ they most of them have some sort of

2:15:15 ↗ non-monetary compensation involved with

2:15:18 ↗ them and so I was like oh we'll just

2:15:20 ↗ limit it to ones where part of the

2:15:22 ↗ compensation for rent is is non-monetary

2:15:24 ↗ but our brilliant city clerk pointed out

2:15:27 ↗ to me that questions will still arise

2:15:29 ↗ with that because all lease agreements

2:15:31 ↗ require the lesie to do some sort of

2:15:35 ↗ work you know something an addition to

2:15:37 ↗ rent and so we I felt like we were

2:15:39 ↗ adding and and more ambiguity and most

2:15:42 ↗ of the the cont or the leases we're

2:15:44 ↗ talking about here are for small dollar

2:15:46 ↗ value so it likely would be below the

2:15:48 ↗ mayor's or the threshold oh yeah oh yeah

2:15:51 ↗ we won't see anything so that that and

2:15:55 ↗ though it's I think it's an important

2:15:56 ↗ and it's probably done an operational

2:15:58 ↗ and yes because it would probably would

2:16:00 ↗ not be effective but so it's really is

2:16:02 ↗ except if they're really short so we're

2:16:03 ↗ going to see every lease agreement

2:16:05 ↗ except stuff that's super

2:16:12 ↗ short I'm okay with

2:16:16 ↗ that

2:16:18 ↗ council member H I guess I'm just

2:16:20 ↗ wondering if the administration's okay

2:16:22 ↗ the administration have a position on

2:16:24 ↗ this

2:16:25 ↗ amendment um mayor Paulie's feeling when

2:16:28 ↗ we discussed it with her earlier was

2:16:30 ↗ that she did not want an exception just

2:16:32 ↗ for nonprofits that she felt it was

2:16:34 ↗ appropriate for any uh property we have

2:16:37 ↗ a few that are for profits and so she

2:16:39 ↗ wanted the blanket I think this

2:16:46 ↗ language

2:16:51 ↗ any other discussion on the amendment do

2:16:55 ↗ do we need to change the um I mean we

2:16:57 ↗ probably do a friendly Amendment but

2:16:59 ↗ given what we just talked about do we

2:17:01 ↗ need to change the language in the

2:17:02 ↗ amendment yes I was going to ask um

2:17:06 ↗ there is a suggestion from the clerk um

2:17:09 ↗ to reflect the

2:17:11 ↗ conversation um that would adjust the

2:17:15 ↗ piece um to rather than does not exceed

2:17:17 ↗ says is below so it reads um except when

2:17:21 ↗ such lease is for a term of less than

2:17:24 ↗ one year and the value of the lease

2:17:26 ↗ agreement is below the mayor's contract

2:17:30 ↗ approval

2:17:32 ↗ threshold so as a friendly adjustment

2:17:36 ↗ does that agree with the motion

2:17:38 ↗ maker yes thank you okay second the

2:17:43 ↗ second also agrees thank you thank you

2:17:46 ↗ okay and highlighted and bolded the

2:17:49 ↗ and just to be

2:17:52 ↗ safe great so um I'm not seeing any more

2:17:57 ↗ discussion I would like to take a vote

2:18:00 ↗ on the amendment so I will read it again

2:18:03 ↗ move to amend section 4.5 level of

2:18:06 ↗ purchasing and commitment authority to

2:18:08 ↗ require Council approval of any

2:18:10 ↗ agreement for lease of city-owned

2:18:12 ↗ property except when such lease is for a

2:18:15 ↗ term of less than one year and the value

2:18:19 ↗ of the lease agreement is below the

2:18:20 ↗ mayor's contract approval threshold as

2:18:23 ↗ set forth in section 4.5 all those in

2:18:27 ↗ favor signify by saying I I I I I all

2:18:31 ↗ those

2:18:32 ↗ opposed okay so that Amendment passes

2:18:36 ↗ unanimously council member

2:18:38 ↗ Mars thank you Madame council president

2:18:41 ↗ I move to amend the signing threshold

2:18:43 ↗ table in section 4.5 level of purchasing

2:18:46 ↗ and contract commitment Authority

2:18:48 ↗ to require city council approval of

2:18:49 ↗ non-public Works contracts that exceed

2:18:52 ↗ $200,000 per

2:18:55 ↗ year is there a second second okay we

2:18:59 ↗ have a third amendment council member

2:19:02 ↗ Marts so uh 200,000 versus 300,000 is

2:19:07 ↗ not a huge difference and I and I would

2:19:09 ↗ say um you know Finance policy ad hoc

2:19:13 ↗ committee chair Ray did a nice job

2:19:15 ↗ explaining that we had General uh

2:19:17 ↗ agreement and and we're not that far off

2:19:19 ↗ on this one either but the I have a very

2:19:22 ↗ specific reason why I like 200,000 more

2:19:25 ↗ than 300,000 and it really gets to

2:19:27 ↗ separation of powers that are inherent

2:19:31 ↗ the federal government and all the way

2:19:33 ↗ down to municipal government right we

2:19:35 ↗ write the checks and we write the laws

2:19:37 ↗ and so when does something become policy

2:19:40 ↗ to the extent that um it should be our

2:19:43 ↗ business and differing uh

2:19:46 ↗ well-intentioned Minds can differ but

2:19:48 ↗ for me I really wanted to take a

2:19:50 ↗ threshold of one ft year worth of Labor

2:19:53 ↗ so I took essentially the area median

2:19:56 ↗ income I put a 1.5 Factor on that which

2:19:59 ↗ is a general mullier

2:20:01 ↗ that have to pay somebody a salary

2:20:03 ↗ you've got some sort of multiplier on it

2:20:05 ↗ I came up with about2 200,000 so for me

2:20:09 ↗ um I wanted something that if somebody

2:20:11 ↗ in the public and we heard it from Steve

2:20:13 ↗ prea tonight right um bringing up this

2:20:15 ↗ issue so it's not not just me I'd love

2:20:17 ↗ to hear it I'd love to hear it from

2:20:19 ↗ Steve um you know if the public says are

2:20:22 ↗ you guys doing your duty are you guys

2:20:24 ↗ doing your job yes because if it's more

2:20:26 ↗ than a FTE years worth of Labor which is

2:20:28 ↗ a a a threshold that you we're going to

2:20:31 ↗ have we're going to have coverage so

2:20:33 ↗ that's why I chose that number um I

2:20:36 ↗ think uh council member hunt may have

2:20:38 ↗ arrived at at that number through a

2:20:40 ↗ slightly different process um but that's

2:20:42 ↗ how I came up with it it really involves

2:20:44 ↗ having a coherent methodology that I can

2:20:46 ↗ explain to you

2:20:48 ↗ as to why we pick

2:20:49 ↗ the so just wanted to share my thoughts

2:20:52 ↗ and why I I moved this this evening

2:20:54 ↗ thank

2:20:55 ↗ you council member hun thank you um I I

2:21:00 ↗ also on the ad hoc committee um

2:21:02 ↗ preferred the 200 threshold for this um

2:21:07 ↗ and uh I I appreciate the uh reasoning

2:21:11 ↗ that council member Mars gave and um the

2:21:14 ↗ the uh little bit different way that I

2:21:16 ↗ was thinking about it is we had

2:21:19 ↗ requested and actually I think council

2:21:20 ↗ president Walsh had requested

2:21:22 ↗ information about the different

2:21:23 ↗ contracts and how these different

2:21:24 ↗ thresholds would affect the number but

2:21:26 ↗ also the the uh type of contracts that

2:21:29 ↗ would come by Council or not under the

2:21:31 ↗ different thresholds so um at the ad hoc

2:21:34 ↗ committee we were we were provided with

2:21:37 ↗ that list um it was in our Council

2:21:39 ↗ packet and so I was looking in that list

2:21:42 ↗ if there were sort of um breaks in the

2:21:45 ↗ sorts of um um contracts that were being

2:21:48 ↗ approved at those different

2:21:50 ↗ thresholds uh to try to assess the

2:21:54 ↗ efficiency versus Council policy

2:21:57 ↗ oversight and Council maintaining that

2:21:59 ↗ Council policy role um and so in that

2:22:02 ↗ list the ones that are between 100 and

2:22:05 ↗ 200 were things like a landscape

2:22:07 ↗ Services contract and a

2:22:09 ↗ janitorial um Services contract and then

2:22:12 ↗ when you get into the um above 200 it

2:22:16 ↗ seems to me like there were more of the

2:22:18 ↗ design contracts so the the one at 208

2:22:21 ↗ is a Newport Way uh Landslide

2:22:23 ↗ stabilization project design contract

2:22:25 ↗ and then there are a number of other

2:22:26 ↗ ones at the higher level and so um I

2:22:30 ↗ that's that's where I that's why I uh

2:22:33 ↗ preferred the 200 threshold was more on

2:22:35 ↗ the it seems to me like there's a break

2:22:38 ↗ around the 200,000 for um things that

2:22:41 ↗ our routine and um and it would be ex uh

2:22:46 ↗ more efficient for for staff to be able

2:22:47 ↗ to do that with um with approval not

2:22:50 ↗ going by Council um and then for those

2:22:54 ↗ uh above 200,000 it seems that those

2:22:57 ↗ would um be beneficial for Council to

2:22:59 ↗ maintain that oversight role um so

2:23:02 ↗ that's how I came to that and I I will

2:23:03 ↗ point out that all of this is also

2:23:06 ↗ things that are budgeted as far as the

2:23:08 ↗ the role of um the role of council we do

2:23:12 ↗ have budget oversight and so um these

2:23:16 ↗ are things that are budgeted and then

2:23:18 ↗ it's coming back to us with the

2:23:20 ↗ specifics of the contract um but Council

2:23:22 ↗ also has an additional layer of policy

2:23:25 ↗ oversight through the budgeting process

2:23:27 ↗ which we do um which we do with a lot of

2:23:31 ↗ deliberation and diligence every time we

2:23:33 ↗ look at a

2:23:36 ↗ budget and every time we look at a 500

2:23:39 ↗ page packet um and all of that uh

2:23:41 ↗ council member Mars the clerk has

2:23:43 ↗ requested that you read the amendment

2:23:46 ↗ motion

2:23:47 ↗ again um because it seems to differ a

2:23:50 ↗ little bit from what's in the agenda

2:23:53 ↗ Bill okay well I'm I uh it was the

2:23:56 ↗ language that I got from uh our legal

2:23:58 ↗ council this that was my I wrote him a a

2:24:02 ↗ motion in the meeting before I

2:24:04 ↗ remembered there was actually one in the

2:24:08 ↗ packet would you prefer we use the

2:24:11 ↗ motion that's in the I don't I just need

2:24:14 ↗ the wording so if someone can send it to

2:24:17 ↗ the email okay fantastic it sounds like

2:24:20 ↗ we can have staff uh forward to staff

2:24:22 ↗ and we are good there okay so we have

2:24:26 ↗ Amendment Three on the table uh council

2:24:28 ↗ member Ray well let me let me speak to

2:24:31 ↗ um the other perspective and and this is

2:24:34 ↗ a discussion we had during the atoc

2:24:36 ↗ committee um and we we were okay with

2:24:39 ↗ not agreeing and we wanted to bring

2:24:41 ↗ these arguments or these points of view

2:24:43 ↗ forward to the to the larger body so um

2:24:46 ↗ I think grounding in something like an

2:24:48 ↗ FTE is an uh is is a way to do it um I I

2:24:52 ↗ I came with my number from a different

2:24:55 ↗ um perspective than a policy perspective

2:24:57 ↗ because I don't actually think that

2:24:58 ↗ approving a contract is necessarily a

2:25:00 ↗ policy decision I think budgeting um for

2:25:04 ↗ a particular piece of work that we're

2:25:05 ↗ going to contract with is a policy

2:25:07 ↗ decision I think establishing what our

2:25:10 ↗ guidelines are for how to let an RFP is

2:25:12 ↗ a policy decision I think having a

2:25:15 ↗ discussion around what the terms and

2:25:16 ↗ condition conditions of a contract

2:25:18 ↗ should be is a policy decision but once

2:25:20 ↗ the contract is put together within some

2:25:23 ↗ bounds um you know what we're uh opining

2:25:27 ↗ on is um are those terms and conditions

2:25:29 ↗ and is that scope of work the

2:25:31 ↗ particularly Professional Services or a

2:25:34 ↗ what's the other

2:25:35 ↗ services General Services it really

2:25:37 ↗ comes down to um what are the terms and

2:25:40 ↗ conditions of the contract and um what's

2:25:44 ↗ the scope of work in the contract and I

2:25:46 ↗ really feel like that's that is an

2:25:47 ↗ operational decision and and so to some

2:25:51 ↗ threshold that is um a

2:25:56 ↗ uh uh the job of the administration to

2:25:59 ↗ to do that now I do think there should

2:26:01 ↗ be a you know now I'll backtrack and say

2:26:03 ↗ I do think there is a threshold where we

2:26:04 ↗ want it but that is really around more

2:26:06 ↗ the accountability and the visibility

2:26:08 ↗ perspective we want to make sure that at

2:26:10 ↗ a certain point we want to make sure

2:26:12 ↗ that um there's accountability for

2:26:14 ↗ making sure that the contract is well

2:26:16 ↗ well constructed and well thought

2:26:18 ↗ through and we're doing an oversight

2:26:20 ↗ function um at some level so that's kind

2:26:24 ↗ of how the I separate out the policy

2:26:26 ↗ from the operational aspects of this the

2:26:29 ↗ other thing I the reason I picked 300

2:26:31 ↗ not you know 175 or 7,000 or whatever is

2:26:35 ↗ uh our Public Works we set at 300 um and

2:26:39 ↗ you know currently the professional

2:26:41 ↗ service is at 350 so 300 it is 300 it is

2:26:45 ↗ 300 okay well currently it's at 300 and

2:26:49 ↗ so it's a no change and then um and but

2:26:52 ↗ it is a big jump on the um the general

2:26:55 ↗ Services I think the currently is 100 um

2:26:57 ↗ so we're jumping that to 300 but one of

2:27:00 ↗ the big issues that um the City attorney

2:27:03 ↗ brought up was gets a lot of business

2:27:05 ↗ from us because uh staff doesn't always

2:27:08 ↗ have a good understanding of what's a

2:27:10 ↗ general services and what's the

2:27:11 ↗ Professional Services and so we're by we

2:27:15 ↗ agreed to align on whatever the number

2:27:17 ↗ is it should be the same so if we agree

2:27:19 ↗ it's 200 it should be all services

2:27:21 ↗ contracts should be 200 if we say it's

2:27:22 ↗ 300 it should be all services contracts

2:27:25 ↗ so that's that was how I picked uh that

2:27:27 ↗ was my rationale for picking a different

2:27:29 ↗ number so um I'm curious what other

2:27:32 ↗ people um perspectives might

2:27:36 ↗ be sounds like a robust conversation

2:27:39 ↗ that comes to uh the other four of us

2:27:42 ↗ council member Joe uh could we hear from

2:27:44 ↗ the administration uh if they have

2:27:46 ↗ anything to

2:27:47 ↗ add to the discussion for the

2:27:48 ↗ $300,000 recommendation they're putting

2:27:51 ↗ forward uh thank you council member Joe

2:27:54 ↗ and I want to recognize n McNab from our

2:27:57 ↗ finance department who's on the line

2:27:59 ↗ this evening she she is the rubber

2:28:01 ↗ meeting the road uh she is the

2:28:03 ↗ individual that that deals with us on a

2:28:05 ↗ daily basis you know we we've had a

2:28:08 ↗ similar discussion you're all having at

2:28:09 ↗ the Das internally um and we've tried to

2:28:13 ↗ weigh efficiency we've tried to weigh uh

2:28:16 ↗ accountability

2:28:17 ↗ and we we settled on the 300 is there

2:28:20 ↗ does the world come to an enough if it's

2:28:22 ↗ 200 of course not should it be 500 who

2:28:25 ↗ knows but we felt that 300 based on the

2:28:27 ↗ number of contracts the types of

2:28:29 ↗ contracts the discussion I think many of

2:28:31 ↗ the points that council member Ray made

2:28:33 ↗ that's where we

2:28:35 ↗ landed and I want to thank Natalie while

2:28:37 ↗ she's on with all of you um you know

2:28:41 ↗ it's very diff difficult to maintain all

2:28:44 ↗ the things you want and we have one

2:28:46 ↗ person who does the line share of that

2:28:48 ↗ working with all the Departments so

2:28:50 ↗ Natalie thank you for that you've been

2:28:52 ↗ very involved in all of this um you know

2:28:55 ↗ I think we're just trying to help you as

2:28:57 ↗ the administration uh meet all the

2:28:59 ↗ objectives that you've been talking

2:29:00 ↗ about over the last half an hour 45

2:29:04 ↗ minutes it's really largely a

2:29:06 ↗ consistency issue Natalie do you have

2:29:08 ↗ anything you want to add on

2:29:10 ↗ this no I just appreciate what Wally had

2:29:13 ↗ to say because that is all true we're

2:29:16 ↗ trying trying to make it visible and

2:29:19 ↗ everything to the community and the 300

2:29:24 ↗ would be the ideal because it would line

2:29:27 ↗ everything and it's understandable and

2:29:29 ↗ easy as

2:29:32 ↗ well you and thank you council member

2:29:35 ↗ Joe for asking for the administration's

2:29:38 ↗ perspective looking to see if any of the

2:29:41 ↗ other non-ad hook folk want to weigh in

2:29:46 ↗ on

2:29:49 ↗ this I know as soon as I talk council

2:29:52 ↗ member Hall is going to raise a uh go

2:29:55 ↗ ahead I don't know how that happens but

2:29:57 ↗ um no just really quickly to say I think

2:30:00 ↗ I'm comfortable keeping it at the

2:30:01 ↗ $300,000 limit I think it being aligned

2:30:03 ↗ across the board makes a lot of sense to

2:30:05 ↗ me and I thought council member raise

2:30:06 ↗ points were um most persuasive to me so

2:30:09 ↗ I think um so the motion is to change it

2:30:13 ↗ to 200 right okay so I think um for now

2:30:17 ↗ I won't be supporting this motion but

2:30:18 ↗ that doesn't mean this can't be

2:30:20 ↗ Revisited again in the future as we're

2:30:22 ↗ monitoring it but I just think kind of

2:30:24 ↗ the points of leaving it consistent

2:30:26 ↗ across the board seems a little bit more

2:30:27 ↗ compelling to

2:30:31 ↗ me anyone

2:30:36 ↗ else that would really be you Deputy

2:30:39 ↗ council president here

2:30:42 ↗ oh okay fantastic I'm just looking at

2:30:46 ↗ you and your you're looking at everybody

2:30:47 ↗ else

2:30:50 ↗ um yeah I guess I would say as my

2:30:54 ↗ comments I feel like we could kind of go

2:30:57 ↗ either way but for since one of the main

2:31:01 ↗ criteria on all of this was trying to um

2:31:03 ↗ simplify this for staff approval and the

2:31:08 ↗ concept that contracts are only one

2:31:13 ↗ portion of the over

2:31:17 ↗ oversight um really the oversight

2:31:20 ↗ happens at the program and expenditure

2:31:24 ↗ and policy level think I'm probably on

2:31:28 ↗ the

2:31:29 ↗ 300,000 um but I will hear from any

2:31:33 ↗ other any other council members want to

2:31:35 ↗ opine or shall we work on the

2:31:41 ↗ vote okay so um the amendment on the

2:31:46 ↗ table is uh move to amend the signing

2:31:49 ↗ threshold table in section 4.5 level of

2:31:52 ↗ purchasing and contract commitment

2:31:54 ↗ authority to require city council

2:31:56 ↗ approval of non-public work contracts

2:31:59 ↗ that exceed

2:32:01 ↗ $200,000 per year all those in favor

2:32:05 ↗ signify by saying I I

2:32:10 ↗ I all those opposed signify by saying

2:32:13 ↗ Nay n

2:32:15 ↗ nay

2:32:17 ↗ okay and so that fails 2 to

2:32:21 ↗ 5 okay and so we are back to the main

2:32:27 ↗ motion where we have the first

2:32:31 ↗ two um amendments that have passed and

2:32:35 ↗ so again we are looking at the financial

2:32:38 ↗ policy ad hoc committee

2:32:41 ↗ recommendations on the main motion do we

2:32:44 ↗ have any

2:32:45 ↗ discussion

2:32:47 ↗ council member

2:32:49 ↗ Joe thank you I would just comment that

2:32:52 ↗ um as a person who's been on the outside

2:32:56 ↗ trying to find city

2:32:59 ↗ contracts um for my former position with

2:33:02 ↗ a garbage and recycling company it's

2:33:05 ↗ very difficult to find an actual

2:33:06 ↗ approved contract for any City that I

2:33:09 ↗ was dealing with and I think that um

2:33:13 ↗ being able to look at those contracts

2:33:15 ↗ gives the competitors an opportunity to

2:33:18 ↗ see what is being done well and what is

2:33:21 ↗ not being done well and to offer

2:33:23 ↗ improvements because they know what the

2:33:25 ↗ requirements are and they know what

2:33:27 ↗ should be done and they can figure out

2:33:29 ↗ if they can do it at a lower price at a

2:33:31 ↗ more competitive basis with better

2:33:33 ↗ Personnel or whatever uh the case may be

2:33:36 ↗ so um opening these contracts up to

2:33:39 ↗ public view I think provides a a

2:33:41 ↗ windfall for our city in the sense that

2:33:43 ↗ the competition will be better for the

2:33:46 ↗ Services provided so just thought I'd

2:33:48 ↗ throw that in as a

2:33:50 ↗ comment thank you council member

2:33:53 ↗ hunt thank you um really appreciate all

2:33:56 ↗ the information that was provided in

2:33:57 ↗ this meeting and to the ad hoc um to

2:34:00 ↗ help us make these recommendations I um

2:34:03 ↗ I appreciate all of that work and um

2:34:05 ↗ finding us the information we requested

2:34:07 ↗ and um uh and I think the one thing that

2:34:12 ↗ is the kind of loose end is the public

2:34:15 ↗ portal for accessing the contracts and

2:34:18 ↗ so um I do look forward to having an

2:34:21 ↗ update on how those meetings go that

2:34:23 ↗ you're you're planning on having and um

2:34:26 ↗ and uh having progress on that because I

2:34:29 ↗ think that would be great and that does

2:34:31 ↗ seem like the next step in um improving

2:34:34 ↗ on the transparency piece of this and

2:34:36 ↗ making those contracts easily accessible

2:34:38 ↗ to the public and to um the people

2:34:41 ↗ looking for that so um I I think that's

2:34:45 ↗ the one area where it would be great to

2:34:46 ↗ have um a followup within a a reasonable

2:34:51 ↗ amount of time but you know as a Next

2:34:53 ↗ Step um to continue to move forward on

2:34:55 ↗ that and again thank you for all of the

2:34:58 ↗ um all of the support and documentation

2:35:01 ↗ that you've provided to guide us through

2:35:03 ↗ this

2:35:04 ↗ process thank you uh Deputy council

2:35:07 ↗ president

2:35:13 ↗ Michelle we can't tell whether that's up

2:35:15 ↗ or down so if you would just you know

2:35:18 ↗ yeah thanks no he he will be he will be

2:35:20 ↗ last so you know I just want to commend

2:35:23 ↗ the process uh we talked about this at

2:35:27 ↗ the council and and there was confusion

2:35:29 ↗ and there was lots of questions and and

2:35:32 ↗ so then it was suggested that we have an

2:35:34 ↗ ad hoc and we had people volunteer for

2:35:36 ↗ that and clarify a lot um you know

2:35:39 ↗ reading through all of the um uh

2:35:42 ↗ amendments uh they were really well done

2:35:45 ↗ and well thought out out and bringing it

2:35:47 ↗ back here tonight for further discussion

2:35:49 ↗ I think this process has been great and

2:35:51 ↗ I just wanted to commend um everybody

2:35:55 ↗ really because it was a a a really good

2:35:57 ↗ discussion and um people listen to each

2:36:00 ↗ other and I think we've arrived at a

2:36:02 ↗ much much better place so thanks to

2:36:04 ↗ everybody that participated and uh I

2:36:07 ↗ will be supporting you know the the

2:36:10 ↗ motion but um with a lot of appreciation

2:36:13 ↗ for my fellow council members

2:36:17 ↗ I think I will jump in at that point

2:36:19 ↗ just to add on to that this hasn't just

2:36:22 ↗ been a good process with the council I

2:36:24 ↗ really want to commend staff for not

2:36:28 ↗ just being satisfied with oh this is the

2:36:31 ↗ way it's always been done and has to be

2:36:33 ↗ done but to look at what are the needs

2:36:36 ↗ of the community and staff to be able to

2:36:39 ↗ do their jobs effectively and

2:36:41 ↗ efficiently and um to avoid areas of

2:36:46 ↗ confusion and it could be easy to just

2:36:48 ↗ say oh no that's just the way that it

2:36:51 ↗ has to be done and instead to be able to

2:36:54 ↗ go okay we're g to we're going to have

2:36:56 ↗ the conversations and figure out what

2:36:58 ↗ the needs are I appreciate the ad hoc

2:37:00 ↗ committee for setting goals of doing a

2:37:04 ↗ review and recognizing that when we make

2:37:07 ↗ a change it needs to be judged on some

2:37:10 ↗ sort of concept of are we making an

2:37:13 ↗ improvement if so what are the areas

2:37:16 ↗ that we're um making adjustments so just

2:37:19 ↗ appreciate it uh overall and um yeah

2:37:25 ↗ so anyone else speaking to the main

2:37:33 ↗ motion okay fantastic I'm just waiting

2:37:37 ↗ for

2:37:38 ↗ it okay so um the motion on the table is

2:37:44 ↗ to adopt ordinance number

2:37:46 ↗ 3045 adopting amendments to the city

2:37:49 ↗ financial management policy as has been

2:37:52 ↗ amended this evening um that motion has

2:37:55 ↗ been moved and

2:37:58 ↗ seconded all those in favor signify by

2:38:01 ↗ saying I I I all those

2:38:06 ↗ opposed that passes

2:38:10 ↗ unanimously thank you okay well thank

2:38:12 ↗ you everyone for working with me as we

2:38:14 ↗ go through motion and Amendment and all

2:38:18 ↗ of that so we made it through all of

2:38:21 ↗ that okay next item of business is

2:38:24 ↗ committee and Regional

2:38:27 ↗ reports um so council member Joe you are

2:38:31 ↗ starting us off thank you the Cascade

2:38:34 ↗ water Alliance board meeting will be

2:38:36 ↗ held January 24th at 3:30 p.m. um

2:38:40 ↗ there's a hybrid option and you can or

2:38:41 ↗ you can go there in person to see their

2:38:43 ↗ new offices uh February 7 the public

2:38:46 ↗ affairs committee will will be meeting

2:38:48 ↗ at 9:00 a.m. in the morning and finally

2:38:50 ↗ the lodging tax advisory committee will

2:38:53 ↗ be having a meeting on February 14th uh

2:38:56 ↗ in the afternoon the specific time will

2:38:58 ↗ be posted on the website thank you that

2:39:00 ↗ concludes my report thank you council

2:39:03 ↗ member

2:39:04 ↗ Hull the last meeting of the Eastside

2:39:07 ↗ fire and rescue board of directors was

2:39:09 ↗ last Thursday January 11th uh we had

2:39:11 ↗ lots of promotions and uh special

2:39:14 ↗ recognitions of staff we officially have

2:39:16 ↗ a new emergency manager on staff we also

2:39:18 ↗ have a new Deputy fire chief for

2:39:20 ↗ operations so is very exciting um we

2:39:23 ↗ also adopted a new code of conduct for

2:39:25 ↗ for public meetings um our next meeting

2:39:29 ↗ is Thursday February 8th at 4M at our

2:39:31 ↗ headquarters on Newport Way Northwest um

2:39:34 ↗ board orientation is that day and also

2:39:36 ↗ we'll be looking at some of our board

2:39:38 ↗ specific goals of the E Side Fire and

2:39:39 ↗ Rescue strategic plan and that concludes

2:39:42 ↗ my

2:39:43 ↗ report right council member hunt

2:39:46 ↗ thank you um the Planning Development

2:39:48 ↗ and environment committee um met on um

2:39:52 ↗ January 3rd and uh we had one item on

2:39:55 ↗ the agenda it was ID 1493 which is the

2:39:58 ↗ comp plan update and sea scope review um

2:40:02 ↗ the first thing we uh talked about and

2:40:05 ↗ got answers on was what this is and why

2:40:09 ↗ it's required and what's the benefit to

2:40:10 ↗ the city of having this information so

2:40:12 ↗ sea requires an Eis um to be completed

2:40:16 ↗ and the Eis must consider a reasonable

2:40:18 ↗ number of growth Alternatives the

2:40:20 ↗ benefit is that the city learns of the

2:40:22 ↗ potential infrastructure needs and

2:40:24 ↗ mitigation strategies under different

2:40:26 ↗ growth assumptions and then um this is

2:40:28 ↗ useful for long-range planning Public

2:40:30 ↗ Works uses the data for modeling and

2:40:31 ↗ prioritizing capital projects and then

2:40:33 ↗ developers can use this information also

2:40:35 ↗ to evaluate project feasibility um so we

2:40:40 ↗ uh discussed and reviewed the um

2:40:43 ↗ proposed growth Alternatives that would

2:40:45 ↗ be uh considered and um we were asked a

2:40:50 ↗ number of questions we uh one of which

2:40:52 ↗ was if there were additional topics or

2:40:56 ↗ um concerns and we didn't have anything

2:40:59 ↗ um we didn't have anything that we

2:41:01 ↗ wanted added specifically to the list

2:41:04 ↗ but we did we did have a number of uh

2:41:07 ↗ topic conversations that we wanted to be

2:41:09 ↗ considered in the process um we wanted

2:41:12 ↗ uh we discussed the importance of

2:41:13 ↗ partnering with the school District um

2:41:16 ↗ because these growth Alternatives uh

2:41:19 ↗ these will have a a big impact on um the

2:41:22 ↗ schools and they are also very invested

2:41:24 ↗ in doing the same sorts of planning

2:41:26 ↗ around these growth Alternatives um and

2:41:29 ↗ then we also talked about uh the

2:41:32 ↗ importance of disaster considering um

2:41:36 ↗ the infrastructure needed for disaster

2:41:38 ↗ planning and especially um with climate

2:41:41 ↗ change changing the risk for example

2:41:43 ↗ looking at evacuation capacity and

2:41:46 ↗ things like that and so we did we did um

2:41:48 ↗ flag those as wanting additional

2:41:51 ↗ consideration on

2:41:52 ↗ those um and then we did not add

2:41:56 ↗ additional specific uh growth

2:41:58 ↗ Alternatives that we thought they should

2:42:00 ↗ evaluate but we did vet um the growth

2:42:03 ↗ Alternatives that have been proposed by

2:42:04 ↗ staff and got a lot of information about

2:42:06 ↗ how they arrived at those um and uh and

2:42:11 ↗ we also clarified in the meeting that

2:42:14 ↗ when they have the results of those

2:42:17 ↗ studies on the different Alternatives

2:42:19 ↗ those will then be brought back to

2:42:21 ↗ council for a policy discussion and then

2:42:23 ↗ that's when Council can weigh in on

2:42:25 ↗ those different Alternatives that will

2:42:27 ↗ be that will have um the inform

2:42:29 ↗ information from the study about the

2:42:31 ↗ implications for longrange planning and

2:42:34 ↗ infrastructure so um very very detailed

2:42:37 ↗ conversation um and it was

2:42:40 ↗ ultimately asking for our feedback so

2:42:42 ↗ there was no um action and this as part

2:42:45 ↗ of the comp plan

2:42:46 ↗ update

2:42:48 ↗ um the uh one other upcoming meeting

2:42:51 ↗ there will be a meeting of the salmon

2:42:53 ↗ Recovery Council of wira 8 which is our

2:42:55 ↗ Watershed on uh this Thursday the 18th

2:42:58 ↗ and um among other items we will be

2:43:00 ↗ discussing the legislative priorities

2:43:03 ↗ and a letter to State legisl a letter to

2:43:05 ↗ State

2:43:06 ↗ Legislature letter to the state

2:43:08 ↗ legislature on the salmon recovery

2:43:10 ↗ priorities for this coming year that

2:43:12 ↗ concludes my

2:43:13 ↗ report thank you council member I unless

2:43:16 ↗ you want a recap of the ad hoc I'm going

2:43:18 ↗ to say no report

2:43:21 ↗ tonight I could go without thanks uh

2:43:23 ↗ council member Mars thank you as I

2:43:26 ↗ mentioned at the last meeting the sound

2:43:27 ↗ cities Association public issues

2:43:29 ↗ committee won't be meeting uh until

2:43:31 ↗ February uh the services safety and

2:43:34 ↗ Parks uh committee will be meeting

2:43:37 ↗ Tuesday January 23rd here in Chambers uh

2:43:40 ↗ at 6:30 uh currently on the agenda is

2:43:44 ↗ proposed Economic Development action

2:43:45 ↗ plan Arts grants funding and religious

2:43:49 ↗ and cultural calendar this concludes

2:43:51 ↗ M Deputy council president D Michelle

2:43:55 ↗ thank you um I chaired the Eastside

2:43:57 ↗ Human Services Forum monthly meeting on

2:43:59 ↗ January 11th and the easts side

2:44:01 ↗ Transportation partnership on January

2:44:04 ↗ the 12th and since uh these were the

2:44:06 ↗ first meetings of 2024 both meetings

2:44:09 ↗ were focused on internal operations and

2:44:12 ↗ organizational planning for

2:44:14 ↗ 2025 so the Eastside Human Services

2:44:16 ↗ Forum board approved Alisa Peterson to

2:44:20 ↗ be the forum's new executive director

2:44:22 ↗ and Miss Peterson's previous experience

2:44:24 ↗ includes reach for the King County

2:44:26 ↗ Sheriff's department and multiple

2:44:28 ↗ positions on Human Services Board Anna

2:44:31 ↗ stint as the executive director of a

2:44:33 ↗ startup nonprofit and she joined us uh

2:44:36 ↗ after we voted to approve her contract

2:44:39 ↗ she joined us and we had a a really good

2:44:41 ↗ conversation about Outreach across the

2:44:44 ↗ region for uh people in homelessness

2:44:48 ↗ during this freezing uh weather period

2:44:51 ↗ so um I'm excited and I think you'll

2:44:53 ↗ probably be getting to meet Miss

2:44:55 ↗ Peterson in the near future uh she's

2:44:58 ↗ coming on with a lot of passion and

2:45:00 ↗ energy and uh I'm excited for what she's

2:45:02 ↗ going to be able to do for the Forum um

2:45:05 ↗ the East Side Transportation partnership

2:45:07 ↗ also used our meeting time to discuss

2:45:09 ↗ future presentations and discussion

2:45:12 ↗ topics uh we also approved a potential

2:45:14 ↗ improve a meeting to be held in March

2:45:17 ↗ and another one in September and then we

2:45:20 ↗ discussed et's potential Financial

2:45:22 ↗ policy changes so um our regular

2:45:26 ↗ schedule of informational presentations

2:45:28 ↗ will Begin Again in February uh the

2:45:31 ↗ regional transit committee meeting for

2:45:33 ↗ January was cancelled thank

2:45:36 ↗ you okay I will start with my report and

2:45:39 ↗ then go to the mayor's report the puet

2:45:43 ↗ sound Regional Council growth management

2:45:45 ↗ policy board met on January 4th um we

2:45:48 ↗ had four discussion items nothing um of

2:45:51 ↗ action the King County affordable

2:45:54 ↗ housing committee actually meets this

2:45:56 ↗ Friday at the city of Belleview City

2:45:59 ↗ Hall we're going to have an in-person

2:46:01 ↗ meeting so we can have a nice

2:46:02 ↗ conversation about hey what's the point

2:46:04 ↗ of the affordable housing committee are

2:46:06 ↗ we meeting our goals should we shift our

2:46:08 ↗ Focus we're we're just going to delve

2:46:10 ↗ really deep into you know nasal gaving

2:46:13 ↗ and self-reflect but also so are we

2:46:16 ↗ doing the right things and so I really

2:46:20 ↗ appreciate that looking forward to that

2:46:22 ↗ conversation um and then for upcoming

2:46:24 ↗ meetings both the growth management

2:46:27 ↗ policy board and the affordable housing

2:46:29 ↗ committee both meet on February 1st um

2:46:33 ↗ and the agendas are not yet released so

2:46:36 ↗ that concludes my report there is no

2:46:38 ↗ mayor report this evening um but there

2:46:41 ↗ will be an executive session as noted on

2:46:44 ↗ the agenda

2:46:46 ↗ the next item of business is good of the

2:46:49 ↗ order I'll start with upcoming Council

2:46:52 ↗ meetings then we've got another one I

2:46:54 ↗ also want to announce the um city

2:46:57 ↗ council appointments so Tuesday January

2:47:00 ↗ 30th there is a special city council

2:47:02 ↗ meeting announced for the mayor's state

2:47:04 ↗ of the city address which occurs as part

2:47:07 ↗ of the isqua Chamber of Commerce

2:47:09 ↗ breakfast at 7:30 a.m. at the Hilton

2:47:11 ↗ Garden Inn for the council members you'd

2:47:14 ↗ like to attend

2:47:15 ↗ please get in contact with Regina in the

2:47:17 ↗ mayor's office so that she can get you

2:47:20 ↗ registered uh Saturday February 3D the

2:47:23 ↗ city council retreat at 9:00 a.m. at the

2:47:26 ↗ tibits Manor the agenda has not yet been

2:47:28 ↗ finalized we'll be emailing you guys

2:47:31 ↗ with the typical homework and uh ways to

2:47:34 ↗ be prepared so that we can come in and

2:47:36 ↗ have a robust conversation so look for

2:47:39 ↗ that a week before uh and then Monday

2:47:42 ↗ February 5th the regular city council

2:47:44 ↗ meeting the the anticipated agenda items

2:47:46 ↗ include a public hearing on the vacation

2:47:49 ↗ of a portion of 2 Avenue Southeast a

2:47:52 ↗ public hearing on a multifam tax

2:47:55 ↗ exemption ordinance and an informational

2:47:58 ↗ update on the 2022 greenhous gas

2:48:01 ↗ emissions inventory so those are

2:48:04 ↗ upcoming meetings I will let council

2:48:06 ↗ member Marts go then I'm going to go

2:48:08 ↗ into the city council

2:48:12 ↗ appointments I I have a couple of goof

2:48:14 ↗ the order um really I think questions

2:48:17 ↗ for my fellow council members uh the

2:48:20 ↗ first is I I was confused in public

2:48:22 ↗ comment today um having the public ask

2:48:26 ↗ us to consider drafting uh and

2:48:29 ↗ supporting a resolution seems like it is

2:48:33 ↗ the business of the council so I would

2:48:36 ↗ just ask um Council leadership to

2:48:38 ↗ discuss um with the administration and

2:48:42 ↗ perhaps with our legal council if it

2:48:44 ↗ does meet the standard I I would think I

2:48:46 ↗ mean we have had resolutions in the past

2:48:48 ↗ on various matters so that does seem

2:48:50 ↗ like it would be Germaine um to the

2:48:52 ↗ council uh the second is on the subject

2:48:55 ↗ of uh remote public comment um I I would

2:48:59 ↗ like to ask that the council consider

2:49:02 ↗ whether um in the current national

2:49:04 ↗ environment having uh remote public

2:49:08 ↗ comment uh it continues to be valuable

2:49:11 ↗ for us um I note that um having been on

2:49:14 ↗ the Council for a very long time before

2:49:16 ↗ we had remote public comment um it's

2:49:18 ↗ it's essentially the same cast of

2:49:20 ↗ characters um that and I mean that

2:49:22 ↗ lovingly like Connie and Steve and the

2:49:25 ↗ Gang like I I love hearing from them but

2:49:27 ↗ they're the same people who used to make

2:49:28 ↗ public comment physically in front of us

2:49:31 ↗ but time and time again we're seeing

2:49:32 ↗ nationally a challenge for this remote

2:49:34 ↗ public comment and um it would just be

2:49:37 ↗ heartbreaking to see that be a problem

2:49:38 ↗ here so I'd like to ask Council

2:49:39 ↗ leadership to consider again um in a

2:49:42 ↗ conversation with the administration

2:49:43 ↗ whether um remote public comment has out

2:49:46 ↗ outlived its useful thank

2:49:48 ↗ you thank you and I will note I was

2:49:51 ↗ acting based on um the provisions that

2:49:54 ↗ we had been given by legal council as

2:49:57 ↗ far as what is and isn't but I

2:49:59 ↗ absolutely having had that uh experience

2:50:02 ↗ tonight um we'll be looking to have

2:50:05 ↗ further conversation if anybody has any

2:50:07 ↗ input I would definitely welcome it both

2:50:10 ↗ on the concept of you know considering

2:50:14 ↗ res Solutions and whether that's

2:50:15 ↗ Germaine to um City business as well as

2:50:19 ↗ whether um there are concerns or desires

2:50:23 ↗ to continue with remote public

2:50:27 ↗ comment so we'll let everybody noodle on

2:50:30 ↗ that if anybody comes up with any

2:50:31 ↗ comments here great otherwise get in

2:50:34 ↗ touch um and all of that so uh council

2:50:39 ↗ member

2:50:40 ↗ Joe just briefly I have a just a good to

2:50:43 ↗ the order I I would like to to thank

2:50:44 ↗ East Side Fire and Rescue for their

2:50:47 ↗ prompt response and their

2:50:49 ↗ professionalism on Saturday the

2:50:51 ↗ apartment above mine um needed to have

2:50:54 ↗ East Side Fire and Rescue show up

2:50:55 ↗ because of a fireplace issue and uh

2:50:58 ↗ fortunately there was no water damage or

2:51:00 ↗ serious damage to uh their unit or my

2:51:03 ↗ unit but uh they showed up very promptly

2:51:05 ↗ as I said they're very professional uh

2:51:08 ↗ they did a great job I just wanted

2:51:09 ↗ everyone to know that uh they're out

2:51:11 ↗ there and they're protecting us so thank

2:51:13 ↗ you

2:51:16 ↗ always good to hear um so one of the

2:51:20 ↗ responsibilities of council leadership

2:51:22 ↗ at the beginning of the year is always

2:51:23 ↗ to look at our Council committees as

2:51:26 ↗ well as um any of the regional dedicated

2:51:29 ↗ seats and so you guys will have seen in

2:51:34 ↗ the packet in the good of the order um

2:51:37 ↗ the appointments but I'll just make a

2:51:39 ↗ point of announcing for our standing

2:51:41 ↗ committees we keeping everything from

2:51:44 ↗ last year so same chairs same committee

2:51:48 ↗ members so mobility and infrastructure

2:51:50 ↗ will be chaired by council member Ray

2:51:52 ↗ with members of Deputy council president

2:51:54 ↗ D Michelle and council member Hall

2:51:57 ↗ Planning Development environment

2:51:58 ↗ committee will be chaired by council

2:52:00 ↗ member hunt with members myself and

2:52:02 ↗ council member Hall and services safety

2:52:05 ↗ and Parks committee will be chaired by

2:52:08 ↗ council member Marts with members Deputy

2:52:11 ↗ council president D Michelle and council

2:52:13 ↗ member Joe I think I actually have to

2:52:17 ↗ ask the council if there are any

2:52:19 ↗ concerns with having the deputy council

2:52:22 ↗ president serve on two committees um so

2:52:26 ↗ the reason that we ended up on that was

2:52:30 ↗ just otherwise we would have had to

2:52:32 ↗ switch a bunch of people around because

2:52:34 ↗ then the chairs can't be on two

2:52:36 ↗ committees as well um but if anybody

2:52:39 ↗ does have any concerns with that

2:52:42 ↗ Arrangement please let me know know and

2:52:44 ↗ I will have the clerk look into whether

2:52:47 ↗ we need to actually make that through a

2:52:50 ↗ motion or Amendment so we'll get back to

2:52:52 ↗ if that's the case um for our dedicated

2:52:57 ↗ seats there were just a few adjustments

2:53:01 ↗ for Cascade water Alliance um the main

2:53:04 ↗ seat will be council member Joe with

2:53:06 ↗ mayor ply as the alternate Eastside fire

2:53:09 ↗ and rescue um council member Hall and

2:53:13 ↗ Mars are are the main um members and I

2:53:17 ↗ am coming in as the

2:53:19 ↗ alternate uh Eide Transportation

2:53:22 ↗ partnership continues with Deputy

2:53:24 ↗ council president D Michelle and council

2:53:26 ↗ member Hall is being added as the

2:53:29 ↗ alternate um greater is quad Chamber of

2:53:31 ↗ Commerce leaon continues with council

2:53:33 ↗ member Joe King County climate King

2:53:37 ↗ County City's climate collaboration K

2:53:39 ↗ fory representative uh council member

2:53:41 ↗ Hunt is the alternate uh mayor pully is

2:53:44 ↗ the regular member as is typical L coky

2:53:47 ↗ interlocal management committee is

2:53:50 ↗ council member hunt continuing the

2:53:52 ↗ lodging tax advisory committee eltac

2:53:54 ↗ continues with council member Joe and

2:53:57 ↗ then sound cities Association public

2:53:59 ↗ issues committee council member Marts

2:54:02 ↗ continues and then council member Hunt

2:54:04 ↗ is joining as the

2:54:05 ↗ alternate and the wira 8 Water Resource

2:54:09 ↗ inventory area 8 salmon Recovery Council

2:54:12 ↗ continues with council member

2:54:14 ↗ hunt um

2:54:16 ↗ so uh I hope this satisfies everybody's

2:54:20 ↗ needs if there are any concerns let um

2:54:23 ↗ your Council leadership know so that we

2:54:26 ↗ can get into it the next steps will be

2:54:29 ↗ the clerks reaching out to each of these

2:54:31 ↗ organizations um to make sure that there

2:54:34 ↗ are invitations going out so that

2:54:36 ↗ everybody gets the uh necessary

2:54:38 ↗ information since there are some changes

2:54:41 ↗ just be on the lookout for that you may

2:54:43 ↗ want to get in contact with anybody else

2:54:45 ↗ who is on the board such as I will be

2:54:47 ↗ doing for East Side Fire and Rescue to

2:54:49 ↗ make sure that we know when the next

2:54:50 ↗ meeting is um for any of those

2:54:54 ↗ changes and can we do a proposed motion

2:54:58 ↗ during good of the order okay so there

2:55:01 ↗ is a proposed motion to approve an

2:55:03 ↗ exception to the city council rules of

2:55:05 ↗ procedure section 2.04 appointment

2:55:08 ↗ standing committees to allow a member of

2:55:10 ↗ council leadership to be appointed to

2:55:12 ↗ two standing committees in 20 24 is

2:55:15 ↗ there a

2:55:16 ↗ second second hey is there any

2:55:20 ↗ discussion on the motion concerns in

2:55:25 ↗ there no concerns just to say I did it

2:55:28 ↗ last year as Deputy council president

2:55:30 ↗ and I have no doubt that Deputy councel

2:55:32 ↗ president B Michelle can as

2:55:37 ↗ well okay um maybe something we come

2:55:41 ↗ back at some point to our Council rules

2:55:43 ↗ of procedure um if we are finding I will

2:55:46 ↗ say as Council leadership it's been a

2:55:48 ↗ little bit difficult to meet all of the

2:55:49 ↗ criteria of chairs only being on one and

2:55:53 ↗ not on another and Leadership notot so

2:55:56 ↗ um just something we may look at in the

2:55:59 ↗ future but on that the proposed me uh

2:56:03 ↗ motion all those in favor signify by

2:56:07 ↗ saying I I I all those

2:56:11 ↗ opposed okay that passes unanimously

2:56:13 ↗ thank you thank you clerk for just

2:56:15 ↗ jumping in there on last minute and

2:56:18 ↗ council member hunt um I just wanted to

2:56:21 ↗ make one uh one additional comment to

2:56:23 ↗ the question that was posed um by

2:56:25 ↗ council member Marson and for the

2:56:28 ↗ leadership and for the administration on

2:56:30 ↗ public comment um I think our Equity

2:56:33 ↗ board has done a a good job advising us

2:56:36 ↗ on how to make sure that our um meetings

2:56:39 ↗ are accessible uh for example with our

2:56:41 ↗ religious and cultural holiday calendar

2:56:44 ↗ um part of that is is helping us make

2:56:46 ↗ sure that we're have having meetings on

2:56:48 ↗ days where people are um able to attend

2:56:52 ↗ and have it not conflict with those

2:56:54 ↗ those holidays um and so I think that uh

2:56:57 ↗ if there were to be a contemplated

2:56:59 ↗ change I think the impact on

2:57:01 ↗ accessibility would be important people

2:57:04 ↗ um that have jobs where they have to get

2:57:05 ↗ back to their job and wouldn't be able

2:57:07 ↗ to come in person people that have child

2:57:08 ↗ care issues that you know there are many

2:57:10 ↗ different many different um reasons why

2:57:13 ↗ a virtual option might be possible uh to

2:57:16 ↗ attend a meeting whereas a iners might

2:57:19 ↗ not be for a number of reasons and so I

2:57:21 ↗ think if we if we were to contemplate a

2:57:23 ↗ policy change on that I would want to

2:57:25 ↗ make sure that it is also considered um

2:57:28 ↗ I would I would recommends that we

2:57:30 ↗ consider that also going by the equity

2:57:34 ↗ board for those accessibility

2:57:37 ↗ concerns fantastic and thanks everybody

2:57:39 ↗ for bringing this up um we will talk

2:57:42 ↗ with the administration and see if there

2:57:45 ↗ is either an update to how we handle

2:57:47 ↗ things and um potentially conversations

2:57:52 ↗ maybe at the board level of how how we

2:57:56 ↗ approach

2:57:57 ↗ that fantastic lovely um are there any

2:58:01 ↗ other items for good of the

2:58:04 ↗ order okay so we have an executive

2:58:09 ↗ session um and so the next item of

2:58:12 ↗ business is an executive session city

2:58:14 ↗ council will now recess into executive

2:58:16 ↗ session to to discuss collective

2:58:19 ↗ bargaining per RCW

2:58:22 ↗ 42314

2:58:23 ↗ pen4 and pending potential litigation

2:58:26 ↗ per RCW

2:58:29 ↗ 42311 P1 pen I we are going to estimate

2:58:33 ↗ approximately 20 minutes for these items

2:58:36 ↗ and will extend the executive session as

2:58:38 ↗ needed no action is anticipated

2:58:41 ↗ following Open Session please note

2:58:44 ↗ executive sessions are closed to the

2:58:45 ↗ public and we will now recess into

2:58:48 ↗ executive session at 10:04 p.m. I ask

2:58:52 ↗ clerk to move the city council and any

2:58:54 ↗ relevant staff into a separate session

2:58:56 ↗ within this meeting anyone who is not

2:58:58 ↗ part of the closed session will remain

2:59:00 ↗ in the main meeting you're welcome to

2:59:01 ↗ stay in the meeting until it is

2:59:04 ↗ reconvened thank 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

Zach Hall

Victoria Hunt

Russell Joe

Tola Marts

Chris Reh

Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

Motions and votes (9)

Adopt a substitute resolution, Exhibit A to agenda bill 8553, incorporating the Committee of the Whole recommendation to remove the $9 electronic records transmission charge and instead charge an electronic record copying fee of $0.25 per record with a waiver of the first $3 of fees. . . b)

Moved by WALSH · seconded by HUNT

Carried 7-0

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

Direct Administration to further consider the expansion of the Julius Boehm Pool's capacity in the coming year(s) in balance with the other capital investment priorities and explore possible funding sources and develop a funding strategy that includes regional grants (County and State), and other pa…

Moved by MARTS · seconded by JOE

Carried 7-0

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

Adopt Ordinance No. 3045, adopting amendments to the City Financial Management Policy.

Moved by REH · seconded by HUNT

Amend Section 4.5, Level of Purchasing and Contract Commitment Authority, to change the following sentence to read: “Maximum contract length, including any contract amendments and extensions, without Council approval is three years, with the exception of software as service and software licensing ag…

Moved by WALSH · seconded by REH

Carried 7-0

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

Amend Section 4.5, Level of Purchasing and Contract Commitment Authority, to require Council approval of any agreement for lease of City-owned property, except when such lease is for a term of less than one year and the value of the lease agreement does not exceed the Mayor’s contract approval thres…

Moved by DE MICHELE · seconded by JOE

Carried 7-0

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

Amend the signing threshold table in Section 4.5, Level of Purchasing and Contract Commitment Authority to require City Council approval of non-public works contracts that exceed $200,000 per year. (In support: Hunt, Marts). MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED, 7-0.

Moved by MARTS · seconded by HUNT

Failed 2-5

In favor: Hunt, Marts

Opposed: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Russell Joe, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

Approve an exception to the City Council Rules of Procedure Section 2.04, Appointments, Standing Committees, to allow a member of Council leadership to be appointed to two standing committees in 2024. . Councilmember Hunt: Public Comment - Encouraged the Council consider accessibility and equity whe…

Moved by WALSH · seconded by MARTS

Carried 7-0

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. a) ID 1630 - Accounts: Payables and Payroll of Jan. 16, 2024, $6,223,544.26; Approved. b) Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting, Sept. 18, 2023; Approved. c) ID 1548 - Informational Update: Lead Water Service Line Inventory Overview; Received Report. d) ID 15…

Moved by DE MICHELE · seconded by MARTS

Carried 7-0

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem

Main motion as amended: APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. a) ID 1630 - Accounts: Payables and Payroll of Jan. 16, 2024, $6,223,544.26; Approved. b) Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting, Sept. 18, 2023; Approved. c) ID 1548 - Informational Update: Lead Water Service Line Inventory Overview; R…

Moved by (main motion as amended) · seconded by

Carried 7-0

In favor: Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Victoria Hunt, Russell Joe, Tola Marts, Chris Reh, Lindsey Walsh, Mayor pro tem