City Council Regular Meeting · Monday, March 17, 2025 · City Council Digest

3. SPECIAL BUSINESS

Arbor Day Proclamation ID 1808

5 min · packet pp.5

▶ Watch from 1:00 Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

CITY OF ISSAg__yAH Mayor's Office WASHINGTON 130 E. Sunset Way I P.O. Box 1307 Issaquah, WA 98027 (425) 837-3020 issaquahwa.gov

2025 Transportation Advisory Board Workplan ID 1824

10 min · packet pp.7–10

Topics: Transportation

▶ Watch from 5:19 Open packet at p.7 ↗

Staff report:

Provide the City Council the opportunity to review and provide feedback on the 2025 Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) work plan as required by IMC 2.92.050.

Board and Commission 2025 Workplans ID 1804

5 min · packet pp.11–37

▶ Watch from 13:58 Open packet at p.11 ↗

Staff report:

To provide the City Council an overview of the City’s advisory board/commission work items in 2025.

5. CONSENT CALENDAR

Accounts: Payables and Payroll of March 17, 2025, $13,788,643.20 ID 1787

Carried 6-0

Approve · packet pp.39–65

Topics: Budget

▶ Watch from 26:00 Open packet at p.39 ↗

Staff report:

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

Roll call:

Moved by Walsh · seconded by de Michele

In favor: Lindsey Walsh, Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Kelly Jiang, Russell Joe, Tola Marts

Minutes: City Council Special Meeting, Jan. 11, 2025

Carried 6-0

Approve · packet pp.67

▶ Watch from 26:16 Open packet at p.67 ↗

Staff report:

CONSENT CALENDAR b) 01-11-25 City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page (0000) CITY OF ISSAQUAH City Council Special Meeting 11:00 AM Council Chambers January 11, 2025 MINUTES 135 E. Sunset Way

Roll call:

Moved by Walsh · seconded by de Michele

In favor: Lindsey Walsh, Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Kelly Jiang, Russell Joe, Tola Marts

Minutes: City Council Special Meeting - Tour, Jan. 11, 2025

Carried 6-0

Approve · packet pp.69–70

▶ Watch from 26:31 Open packet at p.69 ↗

Staff report:

CONSENT CALENDAR c) 01-11-25 City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page (0000) CITY OF ISSAQUAH City Council Special Meeting – Middle Housing Walking Tour 1:00 PM Various Locations January 11, 2025 MINUTES

Roll call:

Moved by Walsh · seconded by de Michele

In favor: Lindsey Walsh, Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Kelly Jiang, Russell Joe, Tola Marts

Minutes: City Council Committee of the Whole, Feb. 10, 2025

Carried 6-0

Approve · packet pp.71–74

▶ Watch from 26:47 Open packet at p.71 ↗

Staff report:

CONSENT CALENDAR d) 02-10-25 City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page (0000) CITY OF ISSAQUAH City Council Special Meeting 6:30 PM Council Chambers February 10, 2025 MINUTES 135 E. Sunset Way

Roll call:

Moved by Walsh · seconded by de Michele

In favor: Lindsey Walsh, Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Kelly Jiang, Russell Joe, Tola Marts

Informational Update: Grant and Contract 2024 4th Quarter Report ID 1774

Carried 6-0

Receive Report · packet pp.75–81

▶ Watch from 27:03 Open packet at p.75 ↗

Staff report:

The Q4 2024 grant and contract

Roll call:

Moved by Walsh · seconded by de Michele

In favor: Lindsey Walsh, Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Kelly Jiang, Russell Joe, Tola Marts

Surplus City Equipment AB 8992

Carried 6-0

Approve Resolution · packet pp.83–86

▶ Watch from 27:19 Open packet at p.83 ↗

Staff report:

The City has determined that the items listed on the Surplus Equipment List 250228, which includes vehicles and equipment, are no longer useful or necessary.

Roll call:

Moved by Walsh · seconded by de Michele

In favor: Lindsey Walsh, Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Kelly Jiang, Russell Joe, Tola Marts

2025 Water Main Replacement Project (WT 015) AB 8998

Carried 6-0

Award Bid · packet pp.87–91

Topics: Water

▶ Watch from 27:35 Open packet at p.87 ↗

Staff report:

City Attorney Review Rachel Bender Turpin City Attorney Review Date: March 13, 2025

Roll call:

Moved by Walsh · seconded by de Michele

In favor: Lindsey Walsh, Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Kelly Jiang, Russell Joe, Tola Marts

FLOCK Camera System AB 9003

Carried 6-0

Receive Report · packet pp.93–110

▶ Watch from 27:51 Open packet at p.93 ↗

Staff report:

From 2016 to 2022, there was a 42% increase in property crime incidents and a 60% increase in larceny theft incidents (958 cases to 1,529 cases) in Issaquah. The majority of these estimates come from shoplifting and burglaries, seen at a rate Issaquah had not seen before. In 2023, the Issaquah Police Department decided to partner more closely with the Issaquah Business Loss Prevention Group, a collaboration of local businesses and City staff, to work together to leverage data and information to lower shoplifting estimates. The estimates began to lower with 1,078 larceny theft incidents in 2024, but Issaquah's rates are still among the highest in King County.

Roll call:

Moved by Walsh · seconded by de Michele

In favor: Lindsey Walsh, Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Kelly Jiang, Russell Joe, Tola Marts

6. REGULAR BUSINESS

2025 Proposed Docket of Comprehensive Plan Amendments AB 8979

Approve · 30 min · packet pp.111–133

Topics: Land Use

Previously discussed: Planning Policy Commission · Jan 23, 2025

▶ Watch from 28:07 Open packet at p.111 ↗

Staff report:

The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requires that certain counties and the cities within those counties adopt comprehensive plans. By state law, comprehensive plans may be amended no more than once a year. The 2025 docket includes minor amendments related to ongoing city projects.

Establish Fourth of July Commission AB 9002

Approve Resolution · 15 min · packet pp.135–139

▶ Watch from 1:02:48 Open packet at p.135 ↗

Staff report:

The United States will celebrate the 250th anniversary of American Independence on July 4, 2026. The City of Issaquah would like to plan local festivities to honor this momentous occasion with the input of community members.

9. INFORMATIONAL UPDATES

Informational Update: Permit Process Improvements ID 1828

45 min · packet pp.141–178

Topics: Land Use

Open packet at p.141 ↗

Staff report:

The purpose of this meeting is to provide an update on the permit process improvements that are underway for making the permit review process more efficient and in compliance with the target timelines of SB 5290. Additionally, staff is seeking feedback from City Council on performance measurement metrics, specifically if there are any additional measures that should be measured.

10. GOOD OF THE ORDER

10a

Upcoming Council Meetings

▶ Watch from 2:21:51

3647 segments .txt ↗

0:14 ↗ good evening everyone I am calling to

0:16 ↗ order the March 17th city council

0:20 ↗ meeting and happy St Patrick's Day as a

0:24 ↗ reminder we continue to have a remote

0:25 ↗ aspect to our meetings and both staff

0:28 ↗ and members of the public may be

0:30 ↗ participating in tonight's meeting

0:31 ↗ remotely bya WebEx so the first item on

0:34 ↗ the agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance

0:36 ↗ and if you'd like to join

0:39 ↗ us I pledge allegiance to the flag of

0:42 ↗ the United States of America and to the

0:45 ↗ republ for which it stand one nation

0:49 ↗ under God indivisible with liberty and

0:52 ↗ justice for

0:57 ↗ all the next item of business today is

1:00 ↗ special business and uh it's ID 1808 the

1:04 ↗ Arbor Day Proclamation and I'd like to

1:06 ↗ invite Urban Forest supervisor Dan hints

1:08 ↗ to the Le

1:19 ↗ turn so whereas in 1872 J Sterling

1:23 ↗ Morton proposed to the Nebraska Board of

1:25 ↗ Agriculture that a special day will be

1:27 ↗ set aside for the planting of trees and

1:30 ↗ whereas this holiday called Arbor Day

1:33 ↗ was first observed with the planting of

1:34 ↗ more than a million trees in Nebraska

1:37 ↗ and whereas the anniversary of the

1:39 ↗ holiday and Arbor Day is now observed

1:41 ↗ throughout the nation and the world and

1:44 ↗ whereas trees produce lifegiving oxygen

1:46 ↗ provide habitat for wildlife beautify

1:48 ↗ our city increase property values and

1:51 ↗ enhance economic vitality and whereas

1:53 ↗ trees wherever they are planted are a

1:56 ↗ source of joy and spiritual renewal and

1:59 ↗ whereas the city of isqua is an active

2:01 ↗ Tree City USA designate for 32 years and

2:05 ↗ the City of isqua celebrates Arbor Day

2:07 ↗ year round with many events to enhance

2:09 ↗ and expand our tree

2:11 ↗ canopy and whereas the city of isqua is

2:14 ↗ celebrating its annual Arbor Day

2:16 ↗ Saturday April 5th

2:18 ↗ 2025 now therefore I Mary Le paully the

2:21 ↗ mayor of the city of isqua do hereby

2:23 ↗ Proclaim that isqua celebrates Arbor Day

2:25 ↗ and Carries that Spirit through our

2:27 ↗ activities policies and priorities all

2:30 ↗ year long I urge all citizens to join in

2:33 ↗ this celebration and support efforts to

2:34 ↗ protect our trees and Woodlands further

2:37 ↗ I urge all citizens to plant trees to

2:39 ↗ create a healthier community and promote

2:41 ↗ the well-being of future generations and

2:43 ↗ Dan with our city team is going to

2:45 ↗ receive the proclamation and say a few

2:47 ↗ words

2:49 ↗ welcome thank you mayor Paulie thank you

2:51 ↗ Council um this is really exciting this

2:53 ↗ is my third year getting to be here to

2:54 ↗ accept the Arbor Day Proclamation which

2:56 ↗ is crazy it's gone by that fast um but

2:59 ↗ as mayor Paulie mentioned our 32nd year

3:01 ↗ as a tree City USA community so for a

3:04 ↗ little context um if people aren't aware

3:06 ↗ uh Arbor Day Foundation oversees this

3:08 ↗ award and then at the state level it's

3:10 ↗ usually Department of Natural Resources

3:11 ↗ or some equivalent so Washington DNR

3:13 ↗ kind of does the initial review here in

3:15 ↗ our state um we are one of almost a 100

3:18 ↗ communities in the state that have this

3:20 ↗ recognition last I checked there was

3:21 ↗ about 95 or 96 and we have the eighth

3:24 ↗ longest ongoing streak which is pretty

3:26 ↗ impressive so only seven other

3:27 ↗ communities that have been receiving

3:29 ↗ this reward Bo for as many years as

3:30 ↗ isqua has so I think that's really cool

3:32 ↗ something we should really be proud of

3:34 ↗ um as we mentioned lots of really great

3:36 ↗ opportunities to come out and get

3:38 ↗ involved in this work obviously very

3:40 ↗ timely after the bomb cyclone in

3:42 ↗ November but even so you know this is

3:44 ↗ ongoing work that is is really important

3:46 ↗ to you know achieve our tree canopy

3:48 ↗ goals make sure we have a healthy

3:49 ↗ sustainable Urban forest and also engage

3:51 ↗ the community in that work but also the

3:54 ↗ you know kind of education and uh

3:55 ↗ community building that goes around with

3:57 ↗ uh getting out there planting trees um

4:00 ↗ pulling weeds doing all the stuff that

4:02 ↗ that that goes into making sure we have

4:03 ↗ a a healthy Urban Forest so just want to

4:06 ↗ make a couple plugs real quick as you

4:08 ↗ heard April 5th is going to be our city

4:10 ↗ Arbor Day so part of our tree City USA

4:12 ↗ recognition is having an annual Arbor

4:14 ↗ Day event so that'll be at Confluence

4:15 ↗ par from 9:00 a.m. to noon we love to

4:17 ↗ see anyone there we're going to be

4:19 ↗ replacing about 15 to 20 larger ball and

4:22 ↗ burlap trees some of them one for one

4:24 ↗ trees that we lost in the Windstorm some

4:25 ↗ of them nearby but not in exact

4:27 ↗ locations and we'll be actually kind of

4:29 ↗ adding uh to some of the maintained

4:31 ↗ areas of Confluence Park with with a

4:33 ↗ really cool new uh diversity of trees

4:36 ↗ um that will be kind of our last

4:38 ↗ planting event of this season before we

4:40 ↗ kind of pick up in the fall season again

4:42 ↗ and so far to date we are actually over

4:44 ↗ 3,000 trees put in the ground uh one of

4:47 ↗ the really cool events we just had this

4:48 ↗ past Saturday was planting a miwaukee

4:50 ↗ forest with isels Trails club uh so if

4:53 ↗ you have a chance to go along Northwest

4:55 ↗ Dogwood Street at uh isqua Creek uh not

4:58 ↗ more than a few blocks away from here

4:59 ↗ you see about 600 new native plants and

5:01 ↗ trees put in the ground over 30

5:04 ↗ different species a miwaukee forest is

5:06 ↗ named after a Japanese uh arboric

5:09 ↗ culturalists who really kind of focused

5:10 ↗ on urban areas degraded soils uh

5:13 ↗ restoring those soils restoring native

5:15 ↗ plants and really engaging the community

5:17 ↗ in that process these forests are a

5:18 ↗ little denser they're usually kind of

5:20 ↗ pocket small forest and really help uh

5:22 ↗ sequester carbon really quickly create

5:24 ↗ habitat and and like I said really in

5:26 ↗ places where the community can come

5:27 ↗ engage and interact with these sites

5:29 ↗ which we think is going be really cool

5:30 ↗ in kind of a high visible site along

5:32 ↗ Dogwood where we had neighbors all week

5:34 ↗ telling us how much they were well first

5:35 ↗ of all curious what was going on and

5:36 ↗ then as they kind of started to see

5:37 ↗ plants come out and go in the ground

5:39 ↗ we're very excited so um that was uh one

5:41 ↗ of our kind of tailin planting events

5:43 ↗ like I said April 5th Arbor Day couple

5:45 ↗ other small events uh that are on our

5:47 ↗ green isical calendar so encourage

5:49 ↗ anyone here tonight or listening to come

5:51 ↗ check that out and we would love to

5:52 ↗ plant trees with you here uh the rest of

5:54 ↗ the winter and then starting again in

5:55 ↗ October so um yeah thank you so much for

5:58 ↗ having me so what could I possibly add

6:01 ↗ Dan is such an advocate for our forests

6:04 ↗ and our trees but if salmon is number

6:06 ↗ one in town the trees are number two and

6:09 ↗ not that far behind so Dan I'd love to

6:10 ↗ get a picture with

6:13 ↗ you thank

6:24 ↗ you of course yes

6:29 ↗ [Applause]

6:34 ↗ so

6:36 ↗ fun uh the next item on our agenda this

6:38 ↗ evening is ID 1824 the 2025

6:42 ↗ Transportation Advisory board work plan

6:44 ↗ and we have some members here I'd like

6:46 ↗ to invite senior Transportation planner

6:48 ↗ Thomas valdre Transportation Advisory

6:51 ↗ Board chair Julia midell Mel and vice

6:54 ↗ chair Tom McDonald to present this

6:58 ↗ item thank you may here and thank you

7:00 ↗ members of the council appreciate your

7:02 ↗ time

7:03 ↗ tonight be presenting on the tab work

7:17 ↗ plan great so again yeah my name is

7:19 ↗ Thomas FDR senior Transportation planner

7:21 ↗ I'm also happy to say I'm also the tab

7:24 ↗ uh staffle aison uh so first time for me

7:27 ↗ doing this but uh it's it's been great

7:30 ↗ working with tab has been wonderful and

7:32 ↗ we've developed a work plan for the year

7:34 ↗ uh that we'd like to talk to you about

7:37 ↗ so little brief introduction the uh

7:39 ↗ isqua Municipal Municipal Code does

7:41 ↗ require the tab to meet with the council

7:45 ↗ uh prior to adoption of the work plan so

7:48 ↗ this is unique to the tab um the work

7:51 ↗ plan is a non-binding uh sort of list of

7:55 ↗ topics that the tap will be covering

7:57 ↗ over the next uh you know 12 months or

7:59 ↗ so um so really briefly uh in front of

8:03 ↗ you on the screen um is the work plan

8:06 ↗ there are several items that we'll be

8:08 ↗ covering this year um various action

8:11 ↗ discussion and informational items uh we

8:14 ↗ also plan to meet and have a joint board

8:17 ↗ meeting with the equity board in

8:20 ↗ October various topics will be brought

8:22 ↗ throughout the year and uh there are

8:25 ↗ several scheduled items as well as some

8:28 ↗ potential items these are items that are

8:31 ↗ um more flexible in nature um given uh

8:35 ↗ you know project timelines in the back

8:37 ↗ half of the year you can be seen on the

8:41 ↗ second page here so these highlighted

8:44 ↗ areas are the potential dates that have

8:46 ↗ not yet been

8:48 ↗ solidified so with that I'll just maybe

8:50 ↗ turn it over to the tab chairs uh we

8:53 ↗ have Jillian and Tom they'll talk a

8:55 ↗ little bit about the tab and then we'd

8:57 ↗ be happy to field some questions in uh

9:00 ↗ receive Council

9:02 ↗ feedback so do I need to correct that

9:04 ↗ Julian is it

9:05 ↗ co-chairs or is it it is chair okay

9:09 ↗ great

9:13 ↗ thanks well thank you Thomas um for

9:16 ↗ presenting that you've been a great tab

9:18 ↗ leaz on for these first couple of months

9:21 ↗ um so my name is Julian I'm the chair of

9:25 ↗ the transportation Advisory Board um

9:28 ↗ last year I was here I was Vice chair

9:29 ↗ and there's also some change on the

9:32 ↗ other side so um I'm mostly

9:34 ↗ reintroducing myself but uh introducing

9:36 ↗ myself formally in this capacity uh to

9:39 ↗ at least one of you um so um I've been

9:43 ↗ on the transportation advis board since

9:45 ↗ 2021 and then became vice chair in 2022

9:48 ↗ and then became chair last June um and I

9:52 ↗ will highlight um you know just as last

9:54 ↗ year I highlighted the equity uh portion

9:57 ↗ I'm really excited that you know we are

9:59 ↗ doing some followup uh for that and

10:01 ↗ really engaging with the equity board

10:03 ↗ and and really diving into that Equity

10:05 ↗ data um for for um October and so I'm

10:09 ↗ really excited about that joint meeting

10:10 ↗ that we're doing a couple other updates

10:13 ↗ um that I'm particularly interested in

10:15 ↗ is the climate action plan um and really

10:19 ↗ engaging in um some updated um updated

10:24 ↗ um language for that as well and I'll

10:27 ↗ highlight that I'm also part of the work

10:30 ↗ the the task force um that's going into

10:32 ↗ effect um for the overall IAP um update

10:37 ↗ and so um really interested in that uh

10:41 ↗ tab is really interested in that as well

10:43 ↗ and then all the central isqua stuff I

10:44 ↗ think is really exciting um with station

10:47 ↗ area planning and really focusing on

10:50 ↗ that as well so just those are just a

10:52 ↗ couple of the things I'm interested in

10:53 ↗ and I'll give it to Tom to discuss some

10:56 ↗ other things of interest

11:02 ↗ good

11:03 ↗ evening uh I'm Tom McDonald I'm the

11:06 ↗ co-chair of the transportation Advisory

11:08 ↗ Board and uh actually been on the board

11:11 ↗ since this Inception so sometime as far

11:13 ↗ as developing uh the original plan and

11:16 ↗ then as we look at meetings now focusing

11:18 ↗ in on specific

11:20 ↗ items

11:22 ↗ um one of the things that we're doing

11:24 ↗ like as Julian was mentioned is as we

11:25 ↗ look at these items we're also trying to

11:27 ↗ keep our attention within the goals of

11:29 ↗ the transportation Advisory board and

11:32 ↗ the mobility Master action

11:34 ↗ plan uh and not to wonder off to on side

11:38 ↗ changes we're trying to focus in on on

11:40 ↗ those items so each tab meeting is

11:42 ↗ focused on those as I mentioned and the

11:45 ↗ uh the

11:46 ↗ primary goals within the plan are the

11:50 ↗ improved mobility within the isqua as it

11:52 ↗ is prepare for growth and think about

11:54 ↗ how growth is going to happen and how

11:55 ↗ that's going to impact multim modals of

11:58 ↗ Transportation where there biking

11:59 ↗ walking Transportation Transit rail

12:02 ↗ eventually coming in uh better

12:04 ↗ connection within this quad reason

12:05 ↗ connectivity connectivity within the

12:07 ↗ different areas between

12:09 ↗ here south uh Lake up on the highlands

12:13 ↗ uh promote environmental sustainability

12:16 ↗ Mobility part of that is uh leverage

12:18 ↗ Regional Investments and prepare for L

12:20 ↗ Rail and how that's going to change

12:22 ↗ travel patterns and traval habits coming

12:24 ↗ into this the future and again looking

12:27 ↗ at uh budgets and investing ways as we

12:29 ↗ look at the tip program uh we look at

12:32 ↗ that annually as far as the projects

12:33 ↗ coming up and which ones uh might be the

12:36 ↗ better focus for what can be done with

12:38 ↗ the dollars that we have understanding

12:40 ↗ that dollars may or may not change with

12:44 ↗ uh current progress in current uh uh

12:48 ↗ Federal funding as it

12:50 ↗ comes um and then the other part is uh

12:52 ↗ anticipate Transportation or

12:54 ↗ transformation uh that's everything from

12:57 ↗ technology car type car TR travel modes

12:59 ↗ of transportation uh changing modes and

13:02 ↗ stuff and so as we're looking at these

13:04 ↗ projects trying to incorporate within

13:06 ↗ the framework of what uh of how we're

13:09 ↗ looking at those

13:10 ↗ so we that's all I have open for any

13:13 ↗ questions that you guys might have so

13:16 ↗ thank you Council are there any

13:17 ↗ questions on the work plan for the tab

13:19 ↗ members or Thomas go ahead counc H Hall

13:23 ↗ thank you very much for uh being here

13:25 ↗ with us it seems like you've um kind of

13:28 ↗ nailed down some of of the most

13:29 ↗ important priorities to talk about over

13:31 ↗ the year Street standards is certainly

13:33 ↗ on our minds right now climate work

13:35 ↗ Equity work I'm glad um that's showing

13:37 ↗ up here I'm just curious um if we feel

13:39 ↗ there's a need to have a discussion

13:41 ↗ around microtransit options depending on

13:43 ↗ what happens with um

13:46 ↗ Metroflex yeah that's a great question

13:48 ↗ uh in our uh uh Mobility action plan we

13:51 ↗ are looking at microtransit um we're

13:54 ↗ hoping to look at that in like 2026 27

13:57 ↗ um as funding becomes available um but

14:00 ↗ um you'll recall uh you know this is a a

14:03 ↗ topic that uh we have some control over

14:07 ↗ the council has some control over but

14:09 ↗ also we um are getting um our service

14:12 ↗ through King County Metro so uh future

14:14 ↗ discussions on that and um you know

14:17 ↗ we'll see what the future looks

14:19 ↗ like council

14:21 ↗ president thank you and thank you for

14:23 ↗ this I love seeing what you guys are

14:26 ↗ going to work on giving us a sense of

14:28 ↗ what's coming back to us at that point

14:31 ↗ um I noticed that some things are listed

14:34 ↗ as discussion some things are listed as

14:37 ↗ information is there a different intent

14:39 ↗ in how you would engage I imagine with

14:41 ↗ such an Engaged group that there's

14:45 ↗ likely to be feedback on all of the

14:47 ↗ items but how do you differentiate

14:49 ↗ between those and what should be our

14:51 ↗ expectation of what's coming out yeah

14:54 ↗ great question again um so discussion

14:55 ↗ items there will be specific questions

14:57 ↗ that will be asked of the tab

14:59 ↗ um informational will be um you

15:02 ↗ know uh will be uh just you know um

15:05 ↗ General feedback will be uh you know

15:07 ↗ discussed um but yeah certainly the tab

15:10 ↗ loves to ask questions we love to answer

15:12 ↗ those so there's going to be a healthy

15:13 ↗ dialogue um with all the items did you

15:15 ↗ want to add

15:19 ↗ something I'll just add like in terms of

15:22 ↗ the distinction between discussion

15:24 ↗ versus information I would say that a

15:25 ↗ couple of years ago we kind of Switched

15:28 ↗ or you know transformed the general

15:31 ↗ agendas of these tab meetings to be more

15:34 ↗ discussion focused um you know prior to

15:37 ↗ about

15:38 ↗ 2022 um and and talking to to a couple

15:41 ↗ of council members here uh we we were

15:43 ↗ really just getting a barrage of

15:45 ↗ informational items and not necessarily

15:47 ↗ the option to contribute and after about

15:49 ↗ mid 2022 we really uh transformed our

15:52 ↗ conversations to be more you know we

15:54 ↗ discussed one or two things maybe three

15:57 ↗ but two things usually and really focus

15:59 ↗ in on those um during our meetings and

16:02 ↗ so that's kind of the evolution that

16:04 ↗ we've had um kind of more into that

16:06 ↗ discuss you know discussers um

16:08 ↗ discussion um focused topics yeah thank

16:12 ↗ you Julian are there any other

16:14 ↗ questions well I think on behalf of the

16:17 ↗ council and myself we just want to thank

16:20 ↗ our community volunteers for stepping up

16:21 ↗ and doing this important work many

16:23 ↗ people think you are paid professionals

16:25 ↗ we know that you come and give up your

16:27 ↗ time to do this because you care about

16:29 ↗ your community and we appreciate it

16:31 ↗ Thomas did you have anything to close us

16:32 ↗ out that's all I got thank you I

16:34 ↗ appreciate your time great thank you the

16:38 ↗ next item uh is ID 1 1804 boards and

16:41 ↗ commissions the 2020 2025 work plans and

16:46 ↗ our city clerk Tisha gizer is here to

16:49 ↗ present this

16:50 ↗ item hi city council uh Tisha gizer City

16:53 ↗ Clerk and you just heard from the

16:55 ↗ Transportation Advisory Board one of our

16:57 ↗ 13 boards and they have a ique provision

16:59 ↗ in the municipal code that requires that

17:01 ↗ they discuss their work plan with the

17:03 ↗ city council before approval but I'm

17:05 ↗ here to acknowledge that our 12 other

17:07 ↗ advisory boards have also been working

17:09 ↗ on their work plans they've approved

17:10 ↗ them in the first quarter of the year

17:13 ↗ and so those were included in your

17:14 ↗ Council packet tonight um as you may

17:17 ↗ recall this is something we started

17:19 ↗ doing last year uh out of a desire to

17:22 ↗ bring some standardization to the groups

17:25 ↗ and have them thinking in that um 12

17:28 ↗ month in about what the year holds I I

17:30 ↗ think it also hopefully is helping um

17:33 ↗ them and their staff Liaisons to sort of

17:35 ↗ manage their time uh so you'll see those

17:38 ↗ in your Council packet um I'm not

17:40 ↗ prepared to answer specific questions on

17:43 ↗ the work plans but certainly if you have

17:45 ↗ questions about any of them um we you

17:47 ↗ are welcome to reach out uh to the city

17:51 ↗ and let us know and we can work on

17:53 ↗ getting you answers if you have any

17:54 ↗ general feedback or general questions

17:56 ↗ about the work plans or how they're

17:58 ↗ being approved or anything like that I'm

18:00 ↗ uh happy to uh do my best to answer your

18:03 ↗ questions and that's all I have mayor

18:05 ↗ thank you clerk gisher are there any

18:06 ↗ questions about the process not

18:08 ↗ necessarily the

18:10 ↗ specifics not seeing anything thank you

18:12 ↗ very much thank you for your work on

18:14 ↗ this it's been ongoing it's been much

18:16 ↗ appreciated the next item in our meeting

18:18 ↗ this evening is audience comments and

18:20 ↗ members of the public May address the

18:22 ↗ council at this time in person or

18:23 ↗ virtually and those who signed up in

18:25 ↗ advance will be called on first um if

18:27 ↗ you're joining us virtually and would

18:28 ↗ like to make comments please raise your

18:30 ↗ virtual hand or send the host a chat if

18:32 ↗ you're in the room and I'm not seeing oh

18:35 ↗ I see Connie y i we do have some members

18:37 ↗ of the public in the room this evening I

18:39 ↗ will ask for other speakers before

18:40 ↗ closing this portion of the meeting city

18:42 ↗ clerk has anyone signed up to speak for

18:44 ↗ General audience comments this

18:47 ↗ evening no mayor but we do also have a

18:49 ↗ few members of the public with us

18:51 ↗ virtually but no one has signed up in

18:53 ↗ advance okay

18:57 ↗ um so

19:01 ↗ I guess Connie I'm looking over your way

19:03 ↗ to see if you're going to raise your

19:04 ↗ hand for public comments and then I'll

19:06 ↗ go through the in case somebody online

19:08 ↗ decides to speak after you

19:11 ↗ speak okay come on up and I'm just going

19:13 ↗ to go through those guidelines for those

19:15 ↗ making comments tonight you're invited

19:16 ↗ to address the council uh regarding mes

19:19 ↗ that are directly related to is sequest

19:21 ↗ programs projects Services Grants or

19:22 ↗ events comments related to political

19:24 ↗ campaigns are not permitted please

19:27 ↗ direct comments to the whole Council and

19:28 ↗ not individuals and while this is not a

19:30 ↗ question and answer session we will

19:32 ↗ contact you to follow up if needed if

19:34 ↗ those that are online with us choose to

19:37 ↗ join in and raise their hand uh when you

19:39 ↗ are recognized online you can unmute

19:41 ↗ your

19:42 ↗ microphone uh we have one member in the

19:45 ↗ public here who will be speaking at the

19:46 ↗ lect this evening state your name

19:48 ↗ address relationship to the city speak

19:50 ↗ clearly and pause frequently please

19:52 ↗ limit your comments to 5 minutes um if

19:55 ↗ you are attending virtually and do

19:56 ↗ decide you'd like to speak tonight but

19:58 ↗ not able to connect we are still going

20:00 ↗ to have to move move along with the

20:02 ↗ meeting personal attacks obsene language

20:04 ↗ derogatory remarks and disruptive

20:06 ↗ behavior will not be permitted and

20:08 ↗ public comments written and verbal are

20:09 ↗ an important aspect of the public

20:11 ↗ process the city takes comments

20:13 ↗ seriously and we thank you for taking

20:14 ↗ the time to address us so if we have no

20:16 ↗ one signed up we have called Connie up

20:18 ↗ to the podium go

20:22 ↗ ahead hey I'm Connie Marsh live up on

20:26 ↗ and I have sent you a flurry of

20:29 ↗ emails so I sort of hesitate to speak

20:31 ↗ when I send you a flurry of emails but I

20:33 ↗ never really know if everybody has time

20:35 ↗ to read things so uh email number one

20:38 ↗ was I spent 10 hours at a school board

20:43 ↗ retreat and there was no public comment

20:45 ↗ allowed so I got a lot of work done um

20:49 ↗ and the school board was actually uh

20:54 ↗ this is this is the most I've liked the

20:57 ↗ esqua school board in

20:59 ↗ the last six months they were uh civil

21:02 ↗ they were thoughtful they asked good

21:06 ↗ questions um one of the most striking

21:09 ↗ days was a day when I think out of two

21:12 ↗ hours I didn't understand a single thing

21:14 ↗ that they were talking about because of

21:16 ↗ the jargon that was used and they didn't

21:18 ↗ provide any of the information to the

21:20 ↗ public in advance of the meeting and so

21:24 ↗ instead of teaching or teachers they use

21:27 ↗ the word pedagogue

21:29 ↗ and I'm you know have yet as yet I have

21:31 ↗ not found a person who actually knows

21:33 ↗ the dictionary definition of pedagogue

21:36 ↗ and so it is uh teach and teacher so I

21:40 ↗ was I was confused as to why you would

21:42 ↗ use that terminology when you could say

21:46 ↗ teach or teacher and it is the first

21:49 ↗ time in a very long time I have been in

21:52 ↗ front of a group where I don't know the

21:54 ↗ lingo at all and I'm trying to hear with

21:58 ↗ no support whatsoever from any paperwork

22:02 ↗ or advance and I'm thinking that that is

22:04 ↗ what the typical citizen feels like when

22:08 ↗ they come into one of you all's meetings

22:12 ↗ I don't feel it so much because I've

22:14 ↗ been doing it too long and I know all of

22:16 ↗ your your initials and acronyms and

22:19 ↗ words like pedagogue except for City

22:22 ↗ Style so I I would

22:25 ↗ say again try to be extra careful about

22:30 ↗ the

22:31 ↗ terminology and what you all think is

22:34 ↗ totally understandable because I feel

22:37 ↗ like two hours I was just pedalling

22:41 ↗ right and it was very

22:43 ↗ uncomfortable it was uncomfortable for

22:45 ↗ 10 hours but it was really uncomfortable

22:47 ↗ for two so then the next thing uh I'm

22:51 ↗ going to do which is I thought pedagogue

22:54 ↗ frankly meant sort of preaching from a

22:57 ↗ higher platform

22:59 ↗ but it doesn't seem to have that

23:01 ↗ connotation in the dictionary it's just

23:03 ↗ teaching and so this feels like being my

23:07 ↗ definition of a pedagogue because I'm

23:11 ↗ going to talk about

23:13 ↗ policy strategy and code and the

23:17 ↗ different levels there you guys are used

23:20 ↗ to policy right it's up here it's fluid

23:23 ↗ you can move it around and it's it's an

23:26 ↗ idea of what you might want to do and

23:28 ↗ then you have your strategies and you've

23:30 ↗ honed those down and you say Okay within

23:32 ↗ five years we want to do a certain

23:34 ↗ grouping of things and those aren't

23:36 ↗ really set in stone we're trying to do

23:38 ↗ them but the way you do them is loose

23:41 ↗ and then you have code and code is law

23:44 ↗ code is shs if there is a shall then

23:48 ↗ it's law that you shall right and so

23:51 ↗ that is just so different a level than

23:54 ↗ Council usually has to do that when you

23:58 ↗ you see code language that you sort of

24:00 ↗ want to fidget with it because you're

24:02 ↗ thinking well this is like most language

24:04 ↗ but code is Law and so if you don't do

24:08 ↗ what that code says then you can create

24:11 ↗ precedence for whoever comes behind you

24:14 ↗ who doesn't want to follow that

24:16 ↗ particular code and it tends to allow

24:19 ↗ that to happen so you do have to be a

24:21 ↗ lot more careful with code language than

24:24 ↗ strategic plan or comprehensive plan

24:27 ↗ language which are more fluid so

24:28 ↗ hopefully that didn't sound too high in

24:32 ↗ the InStep there it's just that

24:34 ↗ vacillation between in the gears and up

24:37 ↗ to policy it's hard to decide where you

24:39 ↗ are on that hierarchial structure oh on

24:43 ↗ that

24:44 ↗ ladder thanks

24:47 ↗ see thanks

24:59 ↗ no one's indicating a desire to

25:18 ↗ speak oh okay let's start that over

25:22 ↗ there's no one else in the room and uh

25:24 ↗ nobody else online indicating a desire

25:26 ↗ to speak so that will close this portion

25:29 ↗ this will uh close audience comments um

25:31 ↗ but I do want to thank um our testifier

25:35 ↗ this evening for talking about her

25:37 ↗ attendance at another agency Retreat and

25:39 ↗ the importance of elected officials

25:41 ↗ using understandable speech when the

25:44 ↗ public is

25:45 ↗ participating and if there is any time

25:49 ↗ during um after a meet before after

25:51 ↗ meeting or jury that you wish to contact

25:53 ↗ your Council you can always submit your

25:55 ↗ comments to them at city council at

25:56 ↗ isqua w.gov

25:58 ↗ the next item of business this evening

26:00 ↗ is the consent calendar and I do not

26:02 ↗ have any remarks on any items on the

26:03 ↗ consent calendar but I'd like to see if

26:05 ↗ the committee chairs have any council

26:07 ↗ member Ms yes pardon me thank you Madame

26:11 ↗ mayor the uh services safety and Parks

26:13 ↗ subcommittee met on February 25th and

26:16 ↗ discussed what was at the time Co 0089

26:19 ↗ the flock camera system um there isn't

26:21 ↗ any specific proposal ready for review

26:23 ↗ so number of cameras locations types of

26:26 ↗ cameras Etc that's all TBD but uh we did

26:29 ↗ get a staff presentation our comments

26:30 ↗ included generally being in favor of the

26:32 ↗ proposed camera system felt the system

26:34 ↗ would provide another another level of

26:36 ↗ security for the community system

26:38 ↗ appears to be reasonably priced uh We've

26:40 ↗ urged staff to be sensitive regarding

26:42 ↗ potential privacy issues and also to

26:44 ↗ perform Outreach to groups that may have

26:46 ↗ concerns and get ahead of any uh rumors

26:49 ↗ or or whatnot about the system so

26:52 ↗ basically the net net is that the

26:53 ↗ committee recommended that staff move

26:55 ↗ forward with developing a purchase and

26:56 ↗ implementation plan the administration

26:58 ↗ will be pursuing grant funding for the

27:00 ↗ flock camera system and will return to

27:02 ↗ the city council if additional

27:03 ↗ non-budgeted resources are needed thank

27:05 ↗ you committee chair are there any other

27:07 ↗ committee chairs who would like to share

27:09 ↗ uh an update on something in the

27:10 ↗ calendar well thank you very much um the

27:13 ↗ consent calendar was distributed to

27:15 ↗ Council in advance and if authorized the

27:16 ↗ items on the consent calendar will be

27:18 ↗ considered together and approved by one

27:20 ↗ motion have the payables and payroll

27:22 ↗ been reviewed they have they have thank

27:25 ↗ you does any council member desire to

27:26 ↗ remove any item from the consent

27:28 ↗ calendar and consider it under regular

27:30 ↗ business not seeing any

27:33 ↗ indication uh would someone like to make

27:35 ↗ a motion council president I move we

27:38 ↗ approve the consent calendar as as

27:42 ↗ distributed second it's been moved and

27:45 ↗ seconded is there any

27:47 ↗ discussion I'm not seeing any uh

27:49 ↗ discussion um all those in favor signify

27:52 ↗ by saying I I those

27:56 ↗ opposed that carries unanimously 6 and0

27:59 ↗ did I mention that council member Ry had

28:01 ↗ an excused absence this evening okay

28:04 ↗ already forgetting okay the next item of

28:07 ↗ business is regular business um 2025

28:10 ↗ proposed docu of comprehensive plan

28:12 ↗ amendments the request before Council

28:14 ↗ this evening is to approve and I would

28:16 ↗ like to invite assistant planning

28:18 ↗ director step padwa to the podium

28:20 ↗ welcome

28:21 ↗ Stephen thank you mayor py and good

28:23 ↗ evening members of the city council give

28:25 ↗ me one second to connect

28:31 ↗ okay tonight we are going to talk about

28:33 ↗ the proposed 2025 docket for the

28:35 ↗ comprehensive plan

28:38 ↗ amendments just a little background

28:40 ↗ information about the dock it's a state

28:42 ↗ required process for the community to

28:45 ↗ holistically review comprehensive plan

28:47 ↗ amend amendments before the

28:48 ↗ administration actually pursues them and

28:50 ↗ so the approval of the docket is

28:52 ↗ actually approval of the list of

28:54 ↗ potential amendments not the actual

28:56 ↗ individual amend amend ments themselves

28:59 ↗ and so to help with that decision

29:01 ↗ process there's criteria provided in

29:02 ↗ code and there's two different sets of

29:05 ↗ criteria the first set of criteria

29:08 ↗ identifies is that any amendment that

29:09 ↗ meets any one of these individual um

29:12 ↗ items in the criteria are deemed

29:15 ↗ appropriate to be on the docket list uh

29:17 ↗ that includes requests related to

29:19 ↗ rezones um any requirements from state

29:22 ↗ law or any technical area that uh the

29:25 ↗ administration is trying to fix

29:28 ↗ and if an amendment doesn't meet any one

29:30 ↗ of those criteria in the first set then

29:33 ↗ it must meet all of the criteria in the

29:35 ↗ second set and I won't go through each

29:36 ↗ of them but I will go through them um

29:38 ↗ when I'm going through the docket

29:41 ↗ list the planning policy commission

29:43 ↗ reviewed the docket back in January 9th

29:46 ↗ and then held a public hearing on

29:47 ↗ January 23rd where when the commission

29:50 ↗ voted to recommend approval of the 2025

29:52 ↗ dock as uh

29:55 ↗ proposed and then the Planning

29:57 ↗ Development environment Council

29:58 ↗ committee met on March 4th to discuss

30:01 ↗ the docket list and the majority um

30:03 ↗ expressed support for the docket as

30:05 ↗ presented whether I express concerns

30:07 ↗ about the U proposed change to community

30:09 ↗ facility zoning and whether or not it

30:12 ↗ meets a public benefit is part of the uh

30:16 ↗ criteria so what's on the docket list

30:19 ↗ includes uh first a potential name

30:22 ↗ change to single family zones this is

30:23 ↗ part of the middle housing project

30:25 ↗ that's ongoing to comply with house

30:28 ↗ bills 1110 and 1337 to incorporate or

30:31 ↗ allow middle housing types in our land

30:34 ↗ use code the this project is a part of a

30:40 ↗ state requirement to meet comply with

30:42 ↗ those State bills and so this docket

30:43 ↗ item complies with that first set of

30:45 ↗ docket

30:46 ↗ criteria the second item on the docket

30:48 ↗ list is the proposal to uh amend

30:53 ↗ policies to allow co-living housing in

30:56 ↗ compliance with House Bill 1998

30:58 ↗ this is in compliance with the first set

31:00 ↗ of docket criteria that has deemed

31:02 ↗ appropriate to be on the docket

31:05 ↗ list the third amendment is actually two

31:08 ↗ parts um and that is to the update the

31:11 ↗ land use map

31:13 ↗ designation the first part of this is

31:15 ↗ the proposal to remove commuity

31:16 ↗ facilities as a land use designation

31:20 ↗ this does not meet the first set of

31:22 ↗ docket criteria and so we evaluated the

31:24 ↗ second second set of criteria and

31:28 ↗ um looking at criteria a we believe the

31:32 ↗ staff believes that this proposed

31:35 ↗ amendments improves process improvements

31:38 ↗ and efficiency around managing public

31:40 ↗ resources looking at criteria B we do

31:44 ↗ the staff does not believe that this

31:45 ↗ amendment rais any land use or policy

31:48 ↗ issues looking at criteria C staff

31:52 ↗ believe that this amendment supports

31:54 ↗ changing conditions as it relates to uh

31:56 ↗ facilities planning a major effort

31:58 ↗ that's been ongoing for the last several

31:59 ↗ years and then for the last criteria D

32:04 ↗ this amendment does not conflict with

32:05 ↗ any local County Regional or state goals

32:09 ↗ and

32:10 ↗ policies and for that reason we find

32:12 ↗ that it complies with the second set of

32:14 ↗ docket

32:15 ↗ criteria the other part of the update to

32:18 ↗ the land use designation map is to look

32:20 ↗ at the food and clothing bank site as

32:22 ↗ part of a rezone request and for that

32:24 ↗ reason it complies with the first set of

32:26 ↗ criteria to be on the docket

32:29 ↗ list and the last Pro proposed amendment

32:33 ↗ is to update the transation element and

32:35 ↗ that's related to the ongoing effort to

32:37 ↗ update concurrency to comply with House

32:40 ↗ Bill 1881 and that is to incorporate

32:42 ↗ multimodal level service in the

32:44 ↗ comprehensive plan and for that reason

32:47 ↗ it complies with the first set of

32:48 ↗ criteria to be on the

32:51 ↗ docket for reference this is the current

32:54 ↗ site of the food and clothing bank which

32:55 ↗ is currently designated as community

32:57 ↗ facil facilities land use and the

33:00 ↗ proposal is to change it to

33:03 ↗ retail and for your reference uh the map

33:06 ↗ on your screen shows all the community

33:08 ↗ facilties community facilities sites

33:11 ↗ throughout the

33:14 ↗ city for next steps to the docket list

33:17 ↗ uh if it is approved tonight each of the

33:20 ↗ items on the docket list will go and

33:22 ↗ move forward as their own individual

33:23 ↗ projects that will be reviewed by the

33:25 ↗ planning policy commission as well as

33:27 ↗ the

33:28 ↗ committee uh prior to being reviewed by

33:30 ↗ full council at the end of the year as

33:32 ↗ part of the comprehensive plan Amendment

33:33 ↗ amendments to be

33:35 ↗ adopted and the administration

33:37 ↗ recommends approval of the 2025 docket

33:40 ↗ of the comprehensive plan and land use

33:42 ↗ designation map amendments as

33:45 ↗ proposed that concludes my presentation

33:48 ↗ thank you Council questions this

33:53 ↗ is council member

33:56 ↗ Hall um yeah thank you um so you added a

34:00 ↗ bit more context around um one of the

34:03 ↗ criteria for the community facilities

34:05 ↗ bit the 2C the one around have

34:09 ↗ conditions what was

34:11 ↗ it Amendment addresses significant

34:14 ↗ significantly changed conditions can you

34:16 ↗ speak to that again because the memo

34:18 ↗ said the memo said there was no change

34:19 ↗ in conditions so I just wanted to kind

34:21 ↗ of get at

34:22 ↗ that potential contradiction

34:25 ↗ there in the Mumble we were trying to

34:28 ↗ cite specifically to the criteria that

34:30 ↗ there's no specific change in in

34:32 ↗ conditions but we are trying to address

34:35 ↗ the ongoing conditions that might change

34:37 ↗ as part of facilities planning and

34:39 ↗ looking at the U the example being the

34:41 ↗ food and bank or food and clothing bank

34:44 ↗ and the sudden need to want to sell the

34:46 ↗ property and having to wait it entire

34:48 ↗ year to go through a comprehensive plan

34:50 ↗ Amendment to rezone the property as part

34:52 ↗ of that sale and so we were trying to

34:54 ↗ address that issue that's been raised by

34:56 ↗ facility staff

34:59 ↗ and um I forgot to ask you for your

35:01 ↗ report chair if you would like to also

35:03 ↗ do your report at this time and that may

35:05 ↗ generate some additional questions from

35:07 ↗ those that are not on your committee uh

35:09 ↗ yeah sure well Stephen captured it very

35:10 ↗ well um the committee um agreed with uh

35:14 ↗ the majority of the docket proposed

35:16 ↗ docket amendments um that they should go

35:18 ↗ through and be put on the docket it was

35:19 ↗ just this community facilities item

35:22 ↗ where we were a little bit mixed but the

35:24 ↗ majority of the committee did think that

35:25 ↗ it f the or it met the criteria should

35:27 ↗ move forward I was the minority in that

35:31 ↗ just thinking that maybe we should have

35:32 ↗ a little bit more discussion about it

35:33 ↗ because it didn't seem to fit um the

35:35 ↗ criteria just in my mind but the

35:37 ↗ committee recommended moving forward

35:38 ↗ with it okay did you have additional

35:41 ↗ questions and we'll also open it up to

35:43 ↗ every the others as well but go ahead

35:45 ↗ yeah I did have a followup if that's

35:46 ↗ okay so so how should we think about

35:49 ↗ what significantly changed conditions

35:52 ↗ even means like what how how do we think

35:54 ↗ about that as a criteria that's kind of

35:56 ↗ this interesting abstract one I mean

35:59 ↗ typically the the criteria is being um

36:02 ↗ applied to privately private requests

36:05 ↗ for comprehensive land amendments and so

36:07 ↗ change of conditions in land use change

36:09 ↗ of conditions in um any development

36:12 ↗ Economic Development that's typically

36:14 ↗ how it's been applied but for uh in this

36:17 ↗ situation we're applying it to changing

36:19 ↗ conditions and nothing specific as it

36:21 ↗ relates to facilities planning and so it

36:24 ↗ it really is trying to relate to

36:27 ↗ any conditions that might impact the uh

36:32 ↗ what the amendment is is is actually

36:34 ↗ being directed

36:39 ↗ at it doesn't look like it's clear in

36:41 ↗ your

36:43 ↗ head no I I think I I understand um I

36:48 ↗ understand now what staff rationale is

36:50 ↗ around changing conditions versus change

36:52 ↗ conditions and how we're interpreting

36:54 ↗ that I think it's interestingly Broad

36:58 ↗ and it almost brings like a policy

37:00 ↗ element to what the criteria is so I

37:02 ↗ think there'll just be some discussion

37:04 ↗ had around that one but thank you I now

37:06 ↗ I understand what the staff

37:08 ↗ is any other questions on the

37:12 ↗ docket okay I not seeing

37:15 ↗ any um chair would you care to make a

37:19 ↗ motion

37:28 ↗ um yes um so I will move to amend the

37:33 ↗ motion to remove do I oh whoops one

37:36 ↗ second um we need a main motion first

37:39 ↗ yeah main

37:41 ↗ motion I have it here somewhere my bad

37:44 ↗ and if you want to the council president

37:46 ↗ property already has it pulled up oh go

37:48 ↗ ahead sure I move to approve the 2025

37:51 ↗ docket of the comprehensive plan and

37:53 ↗ land use designation map amendments

37:57 ↗ there we go okay and is it okay council

38:00 ↗ president if we allow the second to

38:02 ↗ discuss the the motion and and perhaps a

38:05 ↗ potential Amendment to the

38:11 ↗ motion um yeah then thank you I I will

38:14 ↗ offer an amendment um um I move to amend

38:19 ↗ the motion to remove DACA item number 3A

38:22 ↗ to remove Community facilities and

38:23 ↗ Community facilities privately owned

38:25 ↗ from the land use designation map

38:28 ↗ is there a

38:33 ↗ second and just uh a suggested practice

38:37 ↗ is you can second it just to discuss it

38:39 ↗ it doesn't necessarily mean that it is

38:41 ↗ in support but you can also not second

38:43 ↗ it it's your

38:45 ↗ choice uh Council Mars I will second for

38:48 ↗ the purpose of discussion

38:50 ↗ great go ahead council member H uh thank

38:53 ↗ you very much for the second uh for the

38:54 ↗ purpose of discussion um I didn't want

38:56 ↗ to make the well I'll just start by

38:58 ↗ saying I didn't want to make the main

39:00 ↗ motion with this out of it just to

39:02 ↗ respect the majority opinion of the

39:04 ↗ committee was that um it met the

39:06 ↗ criteria um I feel a little bit

39:08 ↗ differently um and don't think that

39:12 ↗ we're ready to move this up to the comp

39:13 ↗ plan docket so I did want to offer this

39:15 ↗ amendment it's mostly to do with process

39:16 ↗ too so I have some thoughts I wrote it

39:18 ↗ down so bear with me um so the first bit

39:22 ↗ is is really about kind of this public

39:25 ↗ benefit um definitions

39:27 ↗ so well number one we can't add it to

39:30 ↗ the docka unless we feel as a council

39:32 ↗ it's a public benefit to remove the

39:34 ↗ community facilities designation um

39:37 ↗ that's just part of the criteria um to

39:39 ↗ me that seems like a significant policy

39:42 ↗ question that Council should potentially

39:44 ↗ weigh in on beforehand and discuss

39:46 ↗ really what does public benefit mean um

39:50 ↗ certainly one way of thinking about it

39:52 ↗ is um it's quicker and more efficient to

39:55 ↗ Surplus public lands um and the quicker

39:58 ↗ and more efficient the better um

40:00 ↗ especially when the policy question

40:01 ↗ there is is like really what are the

40:03 ↗ barriers to development and surplus

40:06 ↗ totally makes sense I get it the other

40:08 ↗ way you know another way of thinking

40:09 ↗ about public benefit here is that the

40:11 ↗ process of waiting and getting on the

40:13 ↗ docket to rezone a property is actually

40:15 ↗ a tool that could be used to protect

40:17 ↗ public lands and then the policy

40:19 ↗ questions have to do with kind of values

40:21 ↗ attached to public lands um and um

40:26 ↗ really whether or not land use is a good

40:28 ↗ tool to to do that in the first place

40:31 ↗ and if it's not the best tool then what

40:33 ↗ is and in the meantime should we really

40:34 ↗ get rid of the old tool while we bring

40:36 ↗ in a new tool so I think you kind of get

40:39 ↗ what I'm thinking there are a lot of

40:40 ↗ questions in my mind around public

40:42 ↗ benefit and there's a pretty significant

40:45 ↗ difference here depending on what

40:46 ↗ council says the policy direction is of

40:48 ↗ how we Define public benefits so um I

40:51 ↗ think it's good to ask these questions

40:53 ↗ and have them answered and have the

40:54 ↗ space to do that first um cuz I just

40:57 ↗ feel like personally I can't make that

40:59 ↗ either one of those claims yet I see I

41:02 ↗ see

41:03 ↗ um reasons that why we would go with

41:05 ↗ both so that's where my head is at for

41:08 ↗ kind of public

41:10 ↗ benefit and it would be really good

41:12 ↗ especially since there's not any urgency

41:13 ↗ to have kind of a fuller conversation

41:15 ↗ and ask ourselves you know what's the

41:17 ↗ problem we're trying to solve right

41:18 ↗ let's examine that and kind of Define

41:20 ↗ that what's the value of community uh

41:22 ↗ Community facilities the intent behind

41:25 ↗ it was simply to classify what are

41:28 ↗ public spaces right or what are public

41:30 ↗ properties but the effect seems to have

41:32 ↗ been more than that um you know what

41:34 ↗ options are available to us are there

41:36 ↗ other kinds of options that we can think

41:38 ↗ about um and then what are the potential

41:40 ↗ future impacts right you never really

41:41 ↗ know what future councils will do so

41:43 ↗ let's just kind of examine potential

41:45 ↗ outcomes there um so that's the first

41:48 ↗ bit the second bit is around just

41:50 ↗ getting on the docket um so

41:52 ↗ demonstrating public benefit is

41:54 ↗ definitely one of those criteria that we

41:55 ↗ saw in that second list and that's

41:58 ↗ certainly a policy question so it's kind

42:01 ↗ of debatable we can decide whether that

42:03 ↗ makes sense um I think there's an

42:05 ↗ argument too that our call out

42:09 ↗ of City facilities in strategizing and

42:12 ↗ planning in the Strategic plan

42:14 ↗ constitutes like an ongoing work program

42:16 ↗ that's approved by the city council um

42:20 ↗ that also somewhat debatable though too

42:23 ↗ um but the the other criteria that I see

42:26 ↗ is less debatable and I appreciate um

42:28 ↗ some more clarification around what we

42:31 ↗ think constitutes like changed

42:33 ↗ conditions

42:35 ↗ um I don't know that seems less less

42:38 ↗ debatable and I'm not necessarily buying

42:42 ↗ um the argument that like we're trying

42:43 ↗ to anticipate changed conditions with

42:46 ↗ our uh upcoming facilities conversations

42:49 ↗ so so we should go through with this

42:53 ↗ um with your kind of ration now it's a

42:55 ↗ little bit more debatable than I thought

42:57 ↗ was in my head um given the packet was

43:00 ↗ saying no but the criteria was saying um

43:04 ↗ has to have changed condition

43:06 ↗ so it seems to me that at least where we

43:08 ↗ sit right now there are enough questions

43:10 ↗ up in the air that it would be good to

43:13 ↗ press pause on adding this to the docket

43:15 ↗ and kind of have a fuller

43:17 ↗ conversation um this year around some of

43:19 ↗ the policy questions um that tie into

43:23 ↗ this I would pref prefer that we um

43:25 ↗ remove it from the docket but um if

43:27 ↗ Council doesn't think that maybe we can

43:29 ↗ have a discussion up here uh on the Das

43:32 ↗ about some of these policy questions

43:33 ↗ right now just in terms of like how are

43:35 ↗ we thinking about public benefit as a

43:37 ↗ council how are we thinking about um the

43:40 ↗ criteria for for getting on the docket

43:42 ↗ and whether we think this fits it well

43:44 ↗ so those are my kind of initial great a

43:46 ↗ couple of questions for the city clerk

43:49 ↗ um so the discussion about the amendment

43:51 ↗ to the motion can it go as far as the

43:54 ↗ council member just suggested about

43:55 ↗ talking about the definition of public

43:57 ↗ benefit are you talking like I little

43:59 ↗ confused if you meant during the motion

44:01 ↗ before they vote on it

44:03 ↗ or trying to but that was one question

44:06 ↗ we'll let the city clerk noodle on that

44:07 ↗ for a second um the second is uh wanted

44:11 ↗ to ask if it's okay to ask the staff two

44:13 ↗ questions one does timing make a

44:15 ↗ difference and two what is an unintended

44:18 ↗ outcome is the worst outcome you could

44:20 ↗ possibly get as you start talking this

44:22 ↗ year and you end another year from now

44:24 ↗ so it's okay to ask those two questions

44:27 ↗ okay so um Stephen um or Andrea whoever

44:31 ↗ is close or Minnie who's ever closest to

44:33 ↗ a microphone um those two questions

44:35 ↗ would be great and then we'll go back to

44:37 ↗ council comments and we'll find out from

44:39 ↗ the clerk what kind of what we need to

44:41 ↗ stick to on that

44:43 ↗ Amendment good evening mayor Paulie and

44:46 ↗ council member uh in terms of your two

44:49 ↗ questions the first one was got to

44:51 ↗ introduce yourself oh this is Man Dolly

44:53 ↗ Community planning and development

44:55 ↗ director um and thank you for those

44:58 ↗ questions so in terms of timing for the

45:00 ↗ for this you know there is really not an

45:03 ↗ urgency on our part to do the this this

45:05 ↗ year I think that's part of the process

45:07 ↗ of docket that we put everything that we

45:09 ↗ think what potentially needs to be

45:11 ↗ addressed and then you as Council as a

45:13 ↗ body debates and discuss and give us the

45:16 ↗ direction to whether to move forward on

45:17 ↗ that the second part the second question

45:20 ↗ was um if it's on the docket and it

45:23 ↗ takes two years to finish it uh is that

45:27 ↗ the bad outcome is that it's a more

45:29 ↗ complex conversation like the council

45:31 ↗ member is saying and the worst outcome

45:32 ↗ is that the conversation goes on longer

45:35 ↗ than year sure sure so it's an you know

45:37 ↗ it's an annual docket so it would get

45:40 ↗ put up in the docket next year again um

45:43 ↗ the complexity of this this issue will

45:45 ↗ come up if it remains on the docket and

45:48 ↗ some of it is it's not all city-owned

45:50 ↗ properties there's s plat that owns some

45:53 ↗ there's a school district there's County

45:55 ↗ and so there are other entities that

45:57 ↗ would have to kind of engage with and

45:59 ↗ and see where that goes so it's not you

46:01 ↗ know I think the the tension here with

46:03 ↗ the criteria is really for From staff's

46:06 ↗ perspective all we were trying to do was

46:08 ↗ to clean up and not have to do a rezone

46:10 ↗ every time an issue comes up and the

46:12 ↗ city wants to um sell so with the food

46:14 ↗ bank with the city hall Northwest those

46:16 ↗ were the items but as you dig into any

46:19 ↗ complex issue it becomes you know things

46:22 ↗ like Community facilities become a more

46:24 ↗ complex issue time um so let's go back

46:27 ↗ there we go Deputy council president um

46:30 ↗ so I'm hearing you say that it's not an

46:32 ↗ urgency for us but is it an urgent issue

46:36 ↗ for the food and clothing

46:37 ↗ bank has gone through a site specific

46:40 ↗ reone so that's on a separate track um

46:43 ↗ so that's just resoning for their

46:45 ↗ particular property so that one was easy

46:47 ↗ because everything around it is Zone

46:49 ↗ retail and so that's the zoning it would

46:51 ↗ get other properties like the ones like

46:55 ↗ Community um you know are

46:57 ↗ um any public facility that we have like

46:59 ↗ the community center the separate

47:01 ↗ standards in the code that talk about

47:03 ↗ Community Center Height buildings and

47:05 ↗ all that so those standards apply to

47:07 ↗ that so it's not going to be as easy to

47:09 ↗ pick the most surrounding lowest and or

47:12 ↗ highest use and and switch out the

47:14 ↗ zoning so it will get complex uh in

47:17 ↗ terms of picking what what to replace it

47:20 ↗ with and and what not I think that was

47:21 ↗ not the intent of staff to to go down

47:24 ↗ that level of work it was mostly to see

47:27 ↗ if we could avoid having to do site

47:29 ↗ specific reasones for any potential

47:30 ↗ sales now those two have already been

47:33 ↗ handled City Hall Northwest and the food

47:35 ↗ bank so in terms of the urgency and the

47:37 ↗ timing issue those two are already

47:39 ↗ addressed through a separate process

47:41 ↗ great council

47:43 ↗ president thank you so I want to take a

47:46 ↗ step back here for people that aren't on

47:48 ↗ the Planning Development environment

47:50 ↗ committee and

47:51 ↗ just recognize that first of all what

47:53 ↗ we're doing here is looking at

47:56 ↗ comprehensive plan docket items so this

47:59 ↗ is should we have this conversation and

48:02 ↗ direct staff to go about doing the

48:05 ↗ research um so that we could consider

48:08 ↗ this at the end of the year that's on

48:09 ↗ this larger motion on

48:13 ↗ the um Amendment here we're talking

48:17 ↗ specifically about Community

48:20 ↗ facilities and

48:23 ↗ um one of the things that staff

48:25 ↗ mentioned to us is is no other City

48:28 ↗ really does a community facilities um

48:30 ↗ land use it it's not the way that they

48:34 ↗ designate land use they designate based

48:37 ↗ on how is it used you know is it a

48:40 ↗ retail space is it something like that

48:43 ↗ and so um my perspective is first of all

48:47 ↗ I appreciate that staff has brought this

48:49 ↗ up to us because we have had two

48:51 ↗ instances in the last few years where

48:54 ↗ this has been a what I would say a major

48:57 ↗ problem in that we had to wait a full

49:01 ↗ year in order to rezone two sets of

49:04 ↗ property so that we could get the best

49:06 ↗ and highest use out of it um that to me

49:10 ↗ is problematic for the users of that

49:16 ↗ particular land use in one case it was

49:18 ↗ the food and clithing Bank in another

49:20 ↗ case it was us wanting to sell City Hall

49:23 ↗ Northwest and so we end up with one

49:27 ↗ extra staff time on something that is

49:30 ↗ just a procedural waiting point in my

49:35 ↗ perspective and

49:37 ↗ two um potential Financial ramifications

49:42 ↗ for whoever is trying to get the best

49:46 ↗ use of that property at that point I

49:49 ↗ would also note that we already have

49:52 ↗ Surplus criteria in place and so we

49:55 ↗ already have a process for for deciding

49:58 ↗ if something should be surplused what

50:01 ↗ our use is what our maintenance

50:03 ↗ requirements are and um how we would go

50:06 ↗ about that process this is another layer

50:09 ↗ on top of that that just creates a

50:13 ↗ year-long waiting period really truly um

50:18 ↗ and so I would recognize all of that as

50:21 ↗ kind of the mindset that I have in going

50:23 ↗ into this I think it's appropriate

50:25 ↗ absolutely to look at the code language

50:29 ↗ and recognize you know is there a public

50:31 ↗ benefit yes I think there is in the fact

50:34 ↗ that there's efficiency that we're not

50:37 ↗ causing you know government employees to

50:40 ↗ have to go through this process and that

50:44 ↗ we could get the best use out of a piece

50:47 ↗ of property rather than waiting for a

50:50 ↗ year um and then what was the C point oh

50:55 ↗ the changing condition I I think that

50:57 ↗ one's a little bit difficult to

50:59 ↗ interpret as is because we're talking

51:01 ↗ about an entire concept rather than an

51:04 ↗ individual property on that but I would

51:07 ↗ say from my

51:10 ↗ perspective this came about not because

51:13 ↗ somebody was like o we should do this

51:15 ↗ but because we've experienced this as a

51:18 ↗ problem and are trying to address that

51:21 ↗ and so um uh that would be my

51:24 ↗ interpretation on significantly changed

51:26 ↗ condition is the fact that we have had

51:30 ↗ issues and had unanticipated

51:32 ↗ consequences um because of that policy

51:35 ↗ so my perspective I am not in favor of

51:39 ↗ the amendment um and I am in favor of

51:41 ↗ making this change as a part of the

51:43 ↗ docket any other comments uh council

51:46 ↗ member Jang thanks mayor Paulie um yeah

51:49 ↗ just to reiterate and add- on to the

51:50 ↗ council president's point so you know

51:52 ↗ just adopting something onto the docket

51:54 ↗ doesn't necessarily mean that we're

51:56 ↗ going to ad the zoning change it just

51:58 ↗ means that staff can then spend time

51:59 ↗ working on it and then you know we'll

52:01 ↗ have a chance to review the proposed

52:03 ↗ updates to the zoning probably later

52:05 ↗ this year is my understanding um another

52:08 ↗ thing you know one thing that I had

52:09 ↗ asked staff was do other neighboring

52:11 ↗ cities do this and apparently the reason

52:13 ↗ why this came up in isqua was that we

52:16 ↗ use zoning as a way to uh determine what

52:19 ↗ Quant which properties are owned by the

52:20 ↗ city which apparently no one else does

52:23 ↗ um and I did look at you know what are

52:24 ↗ some of the other similar types of

52:26 ↗ zoning in other cities for example in

52:28 ↗ isqua schools are zoned as Community

52:30 ↗ facilities facilities in samamish

52:32 ↗ Skyline High School the zoning category

52:34 ↗ is school so so you know categorizing

52:38 ↗ things like that I think Mak sense and

52:40 ↗ is more in line with what other um

52:42 ↗ cities are doing um also you know I

52:44 ↗ don't necessarily think we should be

52:46 ↗ using zoning as the method by which to

52:49 ↗ determine how properties are used um

52:51 ↗ actually Connie found you know a

52:53 ↗ document from the 80s when originally in

52:56 ↗ think it was related to like the

52:58 ↗ Sportsman's Club or something like that

53:00 ↗ where you know kind of the concept of

53:02 ↗ public benefit came up um but I think

53:05 ↗ that should be a decision more you know

53:07 ↗ in like the city's rules about how we

53:10 ↗ you know operate properties rather than

53:13 ↗ what the underlying land use is because

53:15 ↗ you know when it comes down to for

53:17 ↗ example with you know City Hall

53:18 ↗ Northwest needing to wait a whole year

53:19 ↗ to be able to move forward with that in

53:21 ↗ the market and not that this happened

53:24 ↗ this time but for example you could

53:25 ↗ foresee a world in which because you

53:28 ↗ didn't do that the real estate market

53:29 ↗ crashed and the city's out like multiple

53:31 ↗ millions of dollars because we weren't

53:33 ↗ able to move quickly on a sale so that's

53:35 ↗ those are just some of the things that I

53:36 ↗ think about um you know with this policy

53:40 ↗ um and again you know I think in terms

53:43 ↗ of the significantly changed conditions

53:45 ↗ I do agree that the way that it's worded

53:47 ↗ is a little bit confusing but I think um

53:49 ↗ you know significantly changed

53:51 ↗ conditions are those resulting from

53:52 ↗ unanticipated consequences of an adopted

53:55 ↗ policy the adopted policy of community

53:57 ↗ facility zoning had the unintended

53:59 ↗ consequence of making it really

54:01 ↗ difficult to Surplus City land and

54:03 ↗ that's something that has you know come

54:05 ↗ up more recently and I think that

54:07 ↗ warrants staff working on figuring out

54:09 ↗ this change thank you any other comments

54:12 ↗ and I do have another staff question too

54:14 ↗ um I know that when this was added to

54:16 ↗ the docket it was considered to be I'm

54:19 ↗ not going to call it a light

54:21 ↗ conversation but nowhere near as in

54:23 ↗ depth as now the council has indicated

54:24 ↗ that they want so I guess my question

54:26 ↗ would be would Council be disappointed

54:29 ↗ if uh director Dolly wall goes back and

54:32 ↗ looks at the workload with the current

54:34 ↗ expectations of what this conversation

54:35 ↗ should look like and finds out that

54:37 ↗ you're not getting all of that by the

54:38 ↗ end of the year she may be able to come

54:40 ↗ back and let you know that based on the

54:41 ↗ questions that were asked the complexity

54:43 ↗ of the level of conversation you want to

54:44 ↗ have that this is the piece that will

54:47 ↗ get talked about this year but you're

54:48 ↗ very likely to be working on this longer

54:51 ↗ just because of Staff availability

54:52 ↗ because I don't think they thought they

54:54 ↗ were going to have as robust a

54:55 ↗ conversation as the parent L the council

54:57 ↗ desires to have so mini is that a fair

54:59 ↗ way of stating the expectation sure um

55:02 ↗ you know and and I would also um say in

55:04 ↗ terms of changed conditions you know

55:06 ↗ when we were looking at the criteria

55:08 ↗ because as part of the code update the

55:10 ↗ criteria used to be very difficult it's

55:13 ↗ density and you know not increasing that

55:15 ↗ and the idea there was that these things

55:17 ↗ aren't looked at oneoff things that

55:19 ↗ you're you're looking at all of the city

55:22 ↗ comprehensively in the comprehensive

55:24 ↗ plan and then unless there's a

55:26 ↗ significant change in a new light rail

55:28 ↗ station gets built and now suddenly the

55:30 ↗ the zoning around that needs to be

55:32 ↗ looked at or some something of the major

55:35 ↗ significance change that that was sort

55:37 ↗ of the discussion during the criteria

55:39 ↗ write up that happened with the planning

55:41 ↗ and policy commission and council at the

55:43 ↗ time um so you know with this current

55:47 ↗ proposal has anything changed I think

55:50 ↗ that's where the debate is has it

55:52 ↗ anything changed in physically in the

55:54 ↗ city or since the comp plan update

55:57 ↗ change I think there's argument to be

55:59 ↗ made no but what has changed you know I

56:01 ↗ think like Stephen said maybe the the

56:05 ↗ idea that um but to answer your specific

56:07 ↗ question um we don't have the bandwidth

56:11 ↗ to do to take deeper conversations with

56:13 ↗ all the other agencies and sit down and

56:15 ↗ figure out what that zoning uh is going

56:17 ↗ to be that's not what this topic was

56:19 ↗ ever meant to be it was meant to be more

56:22 ↗ of a cleanup kind of a thing I think in

56:24 ↗ staff's mind we're happy to take

56:25 ↗ Direction

56:27 ↗ figure that out we will spend a lot of

56:29 ↗ time then we'll come back to council

56:30 ↗ with a you know with what you can do

56:33 ↗ yeah and they're different ways I mean

56:34 ↗ we could do an overlay Zone and keep the

56:37 ↗ zoning underneath because the uh we we

56:40 ↗ there are also Provisions in the code

56:41 ↗ that uh protect public um you know

56:44 ↗ investment and resources so you're

56:47 ↗ allowed to go have more non-conforming

56:50 ↗ you know abilities to expand and do

56:52 ↗ other things uh because it's Public's

56:54 ↗ investment it's public dollars uh that

56:56 ↗ that are built into it so there's code

56:58 ↗ language that protects some of those

57:01 ↗ things so it you know we'll have to kind

57:02 ↗ of keep those protections regardless of

57:04 ↗ the zoning whatever is put in if it is a

57:08 ↗ community center a senior center a

57:10 ↗ school property or S plat property or

57:13 ↗ anything that County owns that we've

57:14 ↗ given it a community facilities on so I

57:17 ↗ I'm appreciative that the committee had

57:19 ↗ a good conversation and that you got to

57:21 ↗ discuss um the differences of where

57:24 ↗ different uh individual Council

57:25 ↗ committee are are on this um but I think

57:28 ↗ that the realistic answer is it could

57:29 ↗ stay on the docket you're probably not

57:31 ↗ going to get what you want this year um

57:33 ↗ it probably would move into another year

57:35 ↗ if you don't if you take it off the

57:37 ↗ docket there's still a little bandwidth

57:39 ↗ to have the beginning of the

57:41 ↗ conversation this year before it wases

57:42 ↗ on the docket there just isn't extra

57:44 ↗ bandwidth to expand the conversation

57:45 ↗ this year so I don't think you're going

57:47 ↗ to

57:48 ↗ lose either way council

57:51 ↗ president even though this conversation

57:54 ↗ has come up

57:57 ↗ there was an initial

58:00 ↗ intent by staff of hey the idea is to

58:05 ↗ eliminate Community

58:07 ↗ facility zoning and or land use and then

58:11 ↗ um be able

58:13 ↗ to assign them to an appropriate zone

58:17 ↗ for each instance is that still

58:20 ↗ something that is doable at this

58:24 ↗ point you know it will get com well

58:27 ↗ we'll have to look at all of this um

58:29 ↗ some some of these properties may be

58:31 ↗ surrounded by zones that that existing

58:34 ↗ use isn't even allowed for instance so

58:36 ↗ then are we going to be having a

58:38 ↗ conversation of making it non-conforming

58:40 ↗ because your surrounding zoning is isn't

58:42 ↗ what this is so in the end we may just

58:44 ↗ end up calling it something else but

58:46 ↗ it's still not you know getting the

58:49 ↗ adjacent zoning if that's the intent uh

58:52 ↗ and each one of is going to be different

58:54 ↗ um and we make ccle back and come back

58:56 ↗ to the same conclusion that the way

58:58 ↗ we've kind of have this laid out right

59:00 ↗ now maybe that's as to stay for until we

59:03 ↗ have more um further conversations with

59:06 ↗ all these other agencies that own the

59:08 ↗ property or even what the city's

59:10 ↗ facilities plan looks like what what is

59:12 ↗ the long-term plan so it may be

59:15 ↗ premature for that uh because of those

59:17 ↗ reasons as

59:19 ↗ well any other Council comments before

59:23 ↗ we move on to voting on the amendment

59:28 ↗ council member H well I would just love

59:30 ↗ to hear um so the committee we've

59:32 ↗ definitely talked about kind of how we

59:34 ↗ might think about um how we're defining

59:36 ↗ public benefit and the policy around

59:38 ↗ that I'm just curious if there are any

59:39 ↗ other council members that are thinking

59:42 ↗ about public benefit differently or the

59:44 ↗ same way or before we vote anybody else

59:48 ↗ would like to comment on that council

59:49 ↗ member

59:50 ↗ Merz well I'm going to answer the

59:52 ↗ question a little bit differently than

59:53 ↗ you asked it um I'm going to not support

59:56 ↗ this amendment because um my general

1:00:00 ↗ policy is that I let these things get

1:00:04 ↗ resolved in committee and then if I hear

1:00:06 ↗ something in the full Council that uh

1:00:09 ↗ makes me change my mind then I will

1:00:11 ↗ change my mind but I I sort of wanted

1:00:14 ↗ default to supporting the the way the

1:00:16 ↗ committee chooses to look at these

1:00:17 ↗ things and the committee has spent a

1:00:19 ↗ bunch of time on this and the fact that

1:00:22 ↗ uh it did it was a two to1 vote but the

1:00:24 ↗ fact that the committee had a reference

1:00:27 ↗ um I have not heard anything this

1:00:28 ↗ evening yet that would make me want to

1:00:31 ↗ overturn uh the work that the committee

1:00:33 ↗ did so that's that's I wanted to fairly

1:00:36 ↗ give you an answer to the question of

1:00:37 ↗ why I'm going to vote no on the

1:00:38 ↗ amendment thank you any other council

1:00:40 ↗ members wanted to weigh

1:00:45 ↗ in I am not seeing an indication so I'm

1:00:47 ↗ going to call for the

1:00:49 ↗ vote um the motion for the amendment is

1:00:54 ↗ to amend the motion to remove docket

1:00:56 ↗ item number 3A to remove Community

1:00:58 ↗ facilities and Community facilities

1:01:00 ↗ privately owned from the land juice

1:01:01 ↗ designation map all those in favor of

1:01:04 ↗ this amendment signified by saying I I

1:01:08 ↗ those opposed Nay Nay Nay the amendment

1:01:12 ↗ uh fails 5 to one are there any other

1:01:16 ↗ amendments is there any other further

1:01:18 ↗ discussion on the main motion council

1:01:21 ↗ president thank you um I appreciate that

1:01:25 ↗ this was brought up I always love seeing

1:01:27 ↗ our docket of um comprehensive plan

1:01:30 ↗ amendments as much as it's a geeky

1:01:33 ↗ Municipal thing it also represents

1:01:36 ↗ progress and it represents us trying to

1:01:40 ↗ adjust the way that we do business um

1:01:43 ↗ for the betterment of our community and

1:01:45 ↗ so I appreciate the things that we do in

1:01:48 ↗ these areas that um are trying to move

1:01:51 ↗ things forward whether it's one property

1:01:53 ↗ at a time as is the case in some

1:01:56 ↗ instances or um overall so thank you

1:01:59 ↗ great any other comments council member

1:02:01 ↗ Hall yeah thinkk definitely geeki

1:02:03 ↗ Municipal fun stuff so appreciate that

1:02:06 ↗ um I'm going to vote in favor of the

1:02:07 ↗ docket as well just in favor of process

1:02:10 ↗ we we have it now um it seems like

1:02:13 ↗ Council has kind of made um uh the

1:02:16 ↗ policy Choice um already for what public

1:02:19 ↗ benefit should be in here so that's okay

1:02:20 ↗ we had a conversation on on the Das

1:02:22 ↗ which is success in my mind so I'm glad

1:02:24 ↗ we talked about that um um I I do think

1:02:27 ↗ that there is some opportunity to look

1:02:30 ↗ at this criteria a little bit at a

1:02:31 ↗ certain time maybe this is something we

1:02:32 ↗ add to the Whiteboard it's so vague in

1:02:35 ↗ some ways and things that aren't defined

1:02:37 ↗ and I would love to have a conversation

1:02:38 ↗ about that at some point maybe I'm

1:02:41 ↗ seeing some Smiles maybe much later I

1:02:43 ↗ mean we have a long Title 18 whiteboard

1:02:46 ↗ list and stuff like that but um it seems

1:02:48 ↗ like potentially an opportunity to have

1:02:50 ↗ some more policy level discussions but

1:02:52 ↗ I'll be supporting the doet this evening

1:02:54 ↗ any other comments on the motion which

1:02:57 ↗ is to approve the

1:02:58 ↗ docket not seeing any um all those in

1:03:02 ↗ favor of approving the 20125 docket of

1:03:04 ↗ the comprehensive plan and land use

1:03:06 ↗ designation map amendments please say

1:03:12 ↗ I those opposed that carries unanimously

1:03:15 ↗ six and0 Minnie I think they've had

1:03:18 ↗ enough conversation that can help you

1:03:20 ↗ and Stephen frame up um what you can

1:03:23 ↗ accomplish in this year that's great so

1:03:25 ↗ thank you very much uh the next AB on

1:03:29 ↗ our list this evening is AB

1:03:31 ↗ 9002 establishment of a 4th of July

1:03:34 ↗ commission and I see she's already up

1:03:36 ↗ there Deputy City administrator Andrea

1:03:38 ↗ Snyder here to present this item

1:03:41 ↗ welcome uh thank you mayor good evening

1:03:44 ↗ Council I'm Andrea Snider Deputy City

1:03:46 ↗ administrator standing in for uh City

1:03:48 ↗ administrator Bob Kitz this evening and

1:03:51 ↗ uh we uh the administration is proposing

1:03:55 ↗ that in celebration of the 250th

1:03:59 ↗ anniversary of America's Independence

1:04:01 ↗ which is next year that we establish a

1:04:04 ↗ 4th of July commission and um that the

1:04:08 ↗ commission could start this year and get

1:04:11 ↗ their feet wet in planning the Fourth of

1:04:13 ↗ July uh event for this summer and then

1:04:17 ↗ stay as a commission to help plan for

1:04:19 ↗ isqua celebration of the

1:04:22 ↗ 250th anniversary of our country so um

1:04:27 ↗ the commission would be nine members and

1:04:32 ↗ would go towards planning uh isqua

1:04:36 ↗ celebration and we seek approval uh to

1:04:39 ↗ create this commission

1:04:41 ↗ tonight thank you Andrea any

1:04:45 ↗ questions I am not seeing any questions

1:04:47 ↗ from

1:04:48 ↗ Council uh could somebody please make a

1:04:53 ↗ motion council president

1:04:56 ↗ I move to approve resolution number 2025

1:05:00 ↗ d08 establishing a Fourth of July

1:05:02 ↗ commission through December 31st

1:05:06 ↗ 2026 second it's been moved and second

1:05:10 ↗ seconded is there any discussion council

1:05:12 ↗ president thank you um I think we have

1:05:15 ↗ talked often um on Council about the

1:05:18 ↗ loneliness epidemic and the fact that

1:05:23 ↗ you know we as a country and Community

1:05:26 ↗ are um divided in many ways and so I see

1:05:30 ↗ this as much as just a simple planning

1:05:34 ↗ of a parade and event but also about

1:05:36 ↗ bringing our community together and um

1:05:39 ↗ creating opportunities for engagement

1:05:42 ↗ it's also important to recognize that

1:05:44 ↗ you know we we have difficult budget

1:05:47 ↗ years and so this is not something that

1:05:49 ↗ we have necessarily a staff position for

1:05:52 ↗ but which creates an opportunity for

1:05:56 ↗ Community to get involved and to

1:05:58 ↗ recognize the importance of having s an

1:06:01 ↗ event like this in our community and how

1:06:03 ↗ they can contribute so I appreciate the

1:06:05 ↗ administration for bringing this up as a

1:06:08 ↗ possibility thank you any other

1:06:11 ↗ comments not seeing any other comments

1:06:13 ↗ all those in favor please signify by

1:06:15 ↗ saying

1:06:17 ↗ I those

1:06:19 ↗ opposed that carries unanimously six

1:06:21 ↗ and0 uh we're moving on to committee and

1:06:23 ↗ Regional reports and we'll start with

1:06:25 ↗ council member

1:06:28 ↗ um my report is that I attended my first

1:06:31 ↗ pick meeting so sound City's Association

1:06:33 ↗ public issues committee meeting as an

1:06:35 ↗ alternate there's a very robust and

1:06:37 ↗ interesting discussion about the

1:06:38 ↗ upcoming King County Parks lovey um and

1:06:43 ↗ I don't know I don't know if council

1:06:44 ↗ member Mars wants to talk a bit about

1:06:46 ↗ you know some of the specifics of that

1:06:48 ↗ discussion that's a good one thank you

1:06:50 ↗ council member J council member Joe

1:06:53 ↗ thank you at our last lodging tax

1:06:55 ↗ advisory committee we went through the

1:06:57 ↗ uh proposals for

1:07:00 ↗ funding um those will be coming back to

1:07:02 ↗ council uh soon um so stay tuned for

1:07:05 ↗ those the next ltac meeting will be May

1:07:08 ↗ 5th at 2 p.m location is Spring Hill

1:07:12 ↗ Suites um we often will meet at the um

1:07:15 ↗ hotels of the uh committee members in

1:07:18 ↗ the interest of uh convenience for them

1:07:20 ↗ as they're giving their time to this

1:07:23 ↗ this uh committee

1:07:26 ↗ um Cascade water Alliance board will

1:07:29 ↗ will be meeting on March 26th and the

1:07:32 ↗ Cascade water Alliance public affairs

1:07:35 ↗ committee will be meeting on April 2nd

1:07:38 ↗ that concludes my report thank you thank

1:07:40 ↗ you council member Hall uh thanks I have

1:07:42 ↗ a small collection of reports um

1:07:45 ↗ although I don't have to give PD's

1:07:46 ↗ report since we just had that so yeah we

1:07:48 ↗ talked about the proposed docket of comp

1:07:50 ↗ plan amendments there um our next

1:07:52 ↗ meeting is April 1st Tuesday ail 1st and

1:07:56 ↗ we'll be looking at uh middle housing

1:07:58 ↗ draft regulations and 2025 Title 18

1:08:01 ↗ clarifying amendments so that'll be fun

1:08:04 ↗ um for eer Eide fire and rescue we last

1:08:07 ↗ met on Thursday March 13th um we had a

1:08:10 ↗ presentation from members of the

1:08:11 ↗ internal M Mission Vision Values work

1:08:14 ↗ Group which is a stakeholder group

1:08:16 ↗ across the agency that have spent the

1:08:18 ↗ last years working on updating um the

1:08:21 ↗ agency's Mission Vision and values we

1:08:23 ↗ were really impressed with their work um

1:08:25 ↗ so I will pass here I'll pass this down

1:08:28 ↗ this way first just in case you want to

1:08:29 ↗ take a look at that work um we

1:08:32 ↗ officially approved moving forward with

1:08:34 ↗ a contract for services with GMP

1:08:36 ↗ Consultants to conduct our fire

1:08:38 ↗ recruitment fire chief recruitment

1:08:40 ↗ process um I emailed out their proposal

1:08:43 ↗ um and um I'll pass this around or just

1:08:46 ↗ let me know if you want to take a look

1:08:47 ↗ at this proposal too if you're

1:08:48 ↗ interested but um let us know if you

1:08:50 ↗ have any questions uh we appointed

1:08:52 ↗ members to the long-term ad hoc

1:08:53 ↗ committee including council member marts

1:08:56 ↗ um the first thing they'll be looking at

1:08:58 ↗ is uh an issue uh that kind of limits

1:09:00 ↗ our ability to take on debt as an agency

1:09:02 ↗ um which is kind of meant we've had to

1:09:04 ↗ press pause on financing some apparatus

1:09:06 ↗ so um we'll likely need to amend the

1:09:09 ↗ interlocal agreement in some way so stay

1:09:11 ↗ tuned on that work um and then we had a

1:09:14 ↗ presentation on our our fee for

1:09:15 ↗ transport policy which I also emailed

1:09:17 ↗ out in case you're interested um and

1:09:19 ↗ learning more about that just to clarify

1:09:21 ↗ this is for BLS for or for basic life

1:09:24 ↗ support so if you need to be transported

1:09:26 ↗ to a medical facility like a hospital if

1:09:28 ↗ it's something more serious right that's

1:09:30 ↗ what's called ALS Advanced Med um

1:09:33 ↗ Advanced life support which is fully

1:09:35 ↗ funded by the King County EMS Levy so uh

1:09:37 ↗ again feel free to reach out with any

1:09:39 ↗ questions and I can get you connected

1:09:40 ↗ with agency staff in our next meeting is

1:09:42 ↗ Thursday April

1:09:44 ↗ 10 um council member Mars and myself

1:09:47 ↗ will be on the new safety and Civic

1:09:50 ↗ facilities uh task force with members of

1:09:52 ↗ the community so excited about that

1:09:53 ↗ thank you Marly first meeting is

1:09:56 ↗ tomorrow evening um and on the agenda is

1:09:59 ↗ a project overview visioning exercise

1:10:01 ↗ and Survey discussion and it looks like

1:10:04 ↗ members of the task force are getting U

1:10:05 ↗ more or less the same kind of tour that

1:10:07 ↗ we got of City facilities so that'll be

1:10:09 ↗ good for most of us hopefully you get an

1:10:11 ↗ opportunity to you should do that too

1:10:13 ↗ yeah um anyways things for moving along

1:10:15 ↗ we'll keep you in the loop um I have not

1:10:18 ↗ had time to look at the agenda my

1:10:20 ↗ apologies but I on Thursday this

1:10:22 ↗ Thursday I'm going to the Ria 8 salmon

1:10:25 ↗ Recovery Council we're having a meeting

1:10:27 ↗ there and then on Friday the Cy Ila

1:10:29 ↗ management committee and that concludes

1:10:31 ↗ my report nice thank you Council Merz

1:10:35 ↗ thank you madam mayor um as already

1:10:37 ↗ mentioned sound cities Association

1:10:38 ↗ public issues committee did indeed meet

1:10:40 ↗ on March 12th at 7.m couple of things we

1:10:42 ↗ talked about there was a growth Target

1:10:44 ↗ reconciliation conversation that

1:10:46 ↗ involved the targets for for Carnation

1:10:49 ↗ and squami uh they had both requested uh

1:10:52 ↗ changes to their targets and uh they had

1:10:56 ↗ made counterproposals that basically

1:10:59 ↗ reduced some of their market rate

1:11:00 ↗ targets but kept their uh subsidized or

1:11:04 ↗ uh Workforce housing targets uh close to

1:11:07 ↗ the same basically Pi came away and said

1:11:10 ↗ that we were in support of these changes

1:11:13 ↗ they represented a minuscule change in

1:11:15 ↗ the overall uh County targets and uh we

1:11:19 ↗ our recommendation was that those

1:11:21 ↗ numbers would not have to get folded

1:11:22 ↗ back into the rest of the cities of

1:11:24 ↗ County but that they should just be the

1:11:25 ↗ new uh the new overall targets um we'll

1:11:28 ↗ see where that goes then um the other

1:11:31 ↗ thing that was mentioned was the King

1:11:33 ↗ County Parks Levy renewal uh there was a

1:11:35 ↗ long it was a long conversation I would

1:11:38 ↗ say an hour of the two hours uh was on

1:11:41 ↗ this topic um and uh some of the points

1:11:45 ↗ that were raised um that we were also uh

1:11:49 ↗ had concerns about was the fact that uh

1:11:52 ↗ they were looking for approximately uh

1:11:54 ↗ 8% % return to the cities um versus you

1:11:59 ↗ know recent levies uh that had Direct

1:12:02 ↗ returns uh like the Arts uh Levy of more

1:12:05 ↗ like 25% so we were hoping to see

1:12:08 ↗ something closer to that uh the overall

1:12:11 ↗ amount is a significant increase over

1:12:14 ↗ the previous Parks Levy we'd like to see

1:12:16 ↗ it more of a continuous function so

1:12:19 ↗ people wouldn't see an increase uh in

1:12:22 ↗ their bills everyone is concerned about

1:12:25 ↗ uh we we you know people have been

1:12:27 ↗ saying for 10 years we have tax fatigue

1:12:30 ↗ and Levy fatigue but uh you know not

1:12:34 ↗ going into details in the last six

1:12:35 ↗ months we've now been seeing that in uh

1:12:37 ↗ what the what the voters are actually

1:12:38 ↗ telling us so there was a lot of concern

1:12:40 ↗ there um having this Levy fail would be

1:12:44 ↗ catastrophic for the county because they

1:12:45 ↗ do do their operating funds out of this

1:12:47 ↗ Levy so um it it's really one of those

1:12:50 ↗ can't fails so um there were also

1:12:53 ↗ questions around how grants are given

1:12:55 ↗ out to the communities and you put it

1:12:57 ↗ all together and a number of our

1:12:58 ↗ communities said look we need to be able

1:13:00 ↗ to go to the public and tell them what

1:13:02 ↗ the benefit of this is and we don't feel

1:13:05 ↗ that um as it's written right now

1:13:07 ↗ without some of these changes it's going

1:13:08 ↗ to be a more challenging conversation

1:13:10 ↗ and we understand it needs to pass so um

1:13:12 ↗ help us uh help give us the tools to to

1:13:15 ↗ make it pass um that my understanding is

1:13:17 ↗ there was at least as of last Wednesday

1:13:19 ↗ lots of conversation behind the scenes

1:13:21 ↗ about potential changes uh so we kept

1:13:24 ↗ open open the the possibility of having

1:13:26 ↗ an emergency pick session to respond to

1:13:29 ↗ potential changes uh so that we could

1:13:31 ↗ then give guidance to the board uh and I

1:13:34 ↗ have not seen any uh Communications yet

1:13:36 ↗ about it in emergency session

1:13:38 ↗ so that concludes my report thanks

1:13:41 ↗ Deputy council president D

1:13:42 ↗ Michelle thank you mayor paully um so

1:13:46 ↗ Friday uh March 14th we had a really

1:13:49 ↗ robust uh Eastside Transportation

1:13:51 ↗ partnership meeting uh in person in

1:13:54 ↗ Redmond it was really great to see

1:13:56 ↗ everybody in person and not on Zoom uh

1:13:58 ↗ we had great reports uh so good news um

1:14:02 ↗ from Metro uh King County Council passed

1:14:05 ↗ the restructuring that will be taking

1:14:08 ↗ place in 2025 and 2026 which means that

1:14:11 ↗ Metro has been authorized to add over

1:14:14 ↗ 3,300 bus trips each week all across the

1:14:18 ↗ east side and the first round of those

1:14:21 ↗ uh uh improvements will start on March

1:14:23 ↗ the 29th and then the second round will

1:14:26 ↗ of course be instituted when the lake

1:14:28 ↗ Light Rail in Redmond opens on May the

1:14:30 ↗ 10th we're all invited it's going to be

1:14:33 ↗ a huge party let's let's go and uh so at

1:14:37 ↗ that time they'll have have uh the total

1:14:40 ↗ addition will be 3500 service hours uh

1:14:44 ↗ every week um across the east side so

1:14:47 ↗ all of this benefits the entire East

1:14:49 ↗ Side uh particularly for us the 269 will

1:14:53 ↗ be adding uh service that's the

1:14:55 ↗ connection we have to uh Redmond and uh

1:14:59 ↗ they're increasing weekdays nights and

1:15:01 ↗ weekend services so uh good for those

1:15:05 ↗ people who use transit for work and uh

1:15:08 ↗ getting uh around uh in not on commute

1:15:12 ↗ times so that was a great great report

1:15:14 ↗ they also reported they had a

1:15:16 ↗ significant Improvement in the uh

1:15:20 ↗ ridership levels this last quarter so

1:15:22 ↗ everything's looking really a lot better

1:15:25 ↗ for Metro than it has for the last few

1:15:27 ↗ years so the second item on the agenda

1:15:30 ↗ at ETP was we received a legislative

1:15:32 ↗ update from petown Regional Council uh

1:15:35 ↗ staffer Robin kosy that was a little bit

1:15:38 ↗ more

1:15:39 ↗ grim and not the not the best news but

1:15:43 ↗ uh everything is still in process down

1:15:44 ↗ in Olympia so um there's a new I think a

1:15:48 ↗ revenue forecast coming up on Thursday

1:15:50 ↗ and so then we'll start looking at

1:15:52 ↗ budgets for transportation so um at any

1:15:56 ↗ rate we'll we'll see how the process

1:15:57 ↗ plays out and then the last thing on the

1:16:00 ↗ uh in on the agenda is we just

1:16:01 ↗ participated in around Robin where we

1:16:04 ↗ went around the room and everybody

1:16:06 ↗ talked about the impacts to uh

1:16:09 ↗ transportation in our individual

1:16:11 ↗ localities and coming out of that

1:16:14 ↗ discussion which was really really good

1:16:16 ↗ to hear from everybody there's 22 cities

1:16:19 ↗ that are involved in East Side

1:16:20 ↗ Transportation partnership and we heard

1:16:22 ↗ from most of them uh the upshot thought

1:16:25 ↗ of that was that chair critzer the the

1:16:27 ↗ current chair of ETP suggested that we

1:16:30 ↗ collate a letter uh that we could share

1:16:32 ↗ with our Congressional Delegation

1:16:34 ↗ meaning the the Congressional Delegation

1:16:37 ↗ that represents East Side uh regarding

1:16:40 ↗ the impacts of the decisions both at the

1:16:43 ↗ federal level and the state level on our

1:16:46 ↗ uh Transportation needs um and thanks to

1:16:50 ↗ um uh City administrator Bob ktz we

1:16:52 ↗ already started the process of sharing

1:16:54 ↗ that with with the Metro Staff and that

1:16:57 ↗ letter will be assembled soon and I

1:17:00 ↗ volunteered to be on the letter writing

1:17:01 ↗ committee so so at any rate very very

1:17:04 ↗ exciting meeting um I have a regional

1:17:07 ↗ transit committee meeting Wednesday

1:17:09 ↗ afternoon that I'll be attending and

1:17:11 ↗ then Thursday afternoon I'll be

1:17:13 ↗ attending the Board of Health so that

1:17:16 ↗ concludes my report thank you council

1:17:18 ↗ president thank you um on March 6th I

1:17:22 ↗ attended the Puget Sound Regional counc

1:17:25 ↗ 's growth management policy board and we

1:17:28 ↗ also got an update from Robin kosi which

1:17:31 ↗ was also Grim um which suggested that at

1:17:36 ↗ the federal level the US Housing and

1:17:38 ↗ Urban Development was expecting staff

1:17:41 ↗ reductions of

1:17:43 ↗ 50% and that section four Grant

1:17:46 ↗ contracts have been terminated um which

1:17:48 ↗ is what provides help for

1:17:51 ↗ startups um for affordable housing

1:17:55 ↗ projects where they're trying to

1:17:56 ↗ determine whether or not it's a viable

1:17:58 ↗ project or not and so we got that we

1:18:02 ↗ also continued looking through the

1:18:05 ↗ comprehensive plans for Belleview Bothel

1:18:07 ↗ buan Port Orchard and Wilkerson and

1:18:10 ↗ recommended certification of those plans

1:18:13 ↗ so that will go forward and um they will

1:18:16 ↗ potentially qualify for Grants and such

1:18:20 ↗ um had an initial conversation about

1:18:22 ↗ Regional Center system monitoring um

1:18:25 ↗ just queuing that up for a potential

1:18:28 ↗ redesignation process that will begin in

1:18:31 ↗ the summer and fall of

1:18:34 ↗ 2025 and so that was that meeting and

1:18:37 ↗ then I also same day attended the King

1:18:41 ↗ County affordable housing committee uh

1:18:43 ↗ we continued looking through the housing

1:18:45 ↗ elements of comprehensive plans in this

1:18:47 ↗ case looking at Sky comish population

1:18:50 ↗ 500 really uh big changes there so we

1:18:55 ↗ approved a comment letter there looked

1:18:58 ↗ at our work plan and then really just

1:19:01 ↗ started a conversation that's going to

1:19:03 ↗ continue about the new strategic

1:19:06 ↗ direction for the affordable housing

1:19:07 ↗ committee as chair beluchi often says of

1:19:11 ↗ the K County Council the affordable

1:19:13 ↗ housing committee is an advisory

1:19:15 ↗ committee to an advisory committee

1:19:17 ↗ because we sit underneath the growth

1:19:19 ↗ management um planning Council gmpc

1:19:24 ↗ um and so all of those advise up to the

1:19:28 ↗ King County Executive and so we're just

1:19:30 ↗ grappling with this idea of you know we

1:19:33 ↗ don't have funding we don't have the

1:19:36 ↗ ability to really bring cities together

1:19:40 ↗ and um kind of make big changes so just

1:19:44 ↗ trying to figure out where the

1:19:46 ↗ organization goes for the next year and

1:19:49 ↗ how we can best be useful as so far it's

1:19:52 ↗ been very focused on land use because we

1:19:55 ↗ sit underneath the growth management um

1:19:56 ↗ planning Council so it um whether we

1:20:00 ↗ stay there and continue that as the

1:20:02 ↗ focus or otherwise uh will be the

1:20:05 ↗ discussion next time that concludes my

1:20:07 ↗ report thanks moving on to the next

1:20:09 ↗ agenda item is the mayor's report so

1:20:11 ↗ there will not be an executive session

1:20:12 ↗ this evening and I am excited to share

1:20:15 ↗ more progress in one of isqua's key

1:20:17 ↗ Transportation projects our Newport Way

1:20:19 ↗ corridor from State Route 900 to

1:20:21 ↗ Southeast 54th Improvement project is

1:20:24 ↗ going to be award awarded an additional

1:20:27 ↗ almost

1:20:28 ↗ $650,000 in Federal Highway

1:20:30 ↗ Administration funding from The puet

1:20:32 ↗ Sound Regional Council bringing the

1:20:34 ↗ total investment so far in this project

1:20:36 ↗ up to 2.85 million this new funding will

1:20:39 ↗ support right away acquisition for the

1:20:41 ↗ improvements and the project will when

1:20:43 ↗ built out uh will construct with new

1:20:46 ↗ bike Lanes sidewalks landscape medians

1:20:48 ↗ improved intersections and a new mixed

1:20:50 ↗ use path they will enhance the mountain

1:20:53 ↗ to sound Greenway connection the project

1:20:55 ↗ represents a thoughtful blend of funding

1:20:57 ↗ resources including federal grants

1:20:59 ↗ mitigation fees and utility revenues

1:21:01 ↗ ensuring that we maximize external

1:21:03 ↗ dollars while responsibly managing local

1:21:05 ↗ funds so once complete the Newport Way

1:21:07 ↗ Northwest Corridor will offer safer more

1:21:09 ↗ accessible travel options for all users

1:21:12 ↗ while strengthening our community's

1:21:13 ↗ mobility and infrastructure so thanks to

1:21:15 ↗ the Puget Sound Regional Council and all

1:21:17 ↗ of our regional Partners so supporting

1:21:19 ↗ isqua Vision keeping the critical

1:21:21 ↗ dollars working here at home join meet

1:21:24 ↗ tomorrow at the spring business open

1:21:26 ↗ house tomorrow March 18th drop in

1:21:28 ↗ anytime between 8:00 to 9:30 a.m. at

1:21:30 ↗ Blakeley Hall in the isqua highlands

1:21:33 ↗ entrepreneurs and business owners can

1:21:35 ↗ speak one-on-one with City staff about

1:21:37 ↗ lots of different topics permitting

1:21:39 ↗ public safety light rail planning

1:21:41 ↗ business resiliency business assistance

1:21:44 ↗ and more immediately following the event

1:21:46 ↗ uh co-working is going to be open at

1:21:48 ↗ Blakeley Hall from 9:30 to 1:00 p.m. so

1:21:50 ↗ that business owners and remote workers

1:21:52 ↗ can spend a little more time there

1:21:53 ↗ meeting more folks in their business

1:21:55 ↗ Community uh more information is

1:21:57 ↗ available at the city's calendar and we

1:22:00 ↗ are also now opening nominations for the

1:22:02 ↗ isqua Hall of Fame award this is a top

1:22:05 ↗ city award for making for an individual

1:22:09 ↗ to honor them for making a lasting

1:22:11 ↗ contribution to our community this award

1:22:13 ↗ shall go to someone who has made a

1:22:14 ↗ significant impact on the isqua

1:22:16 ↗ community over the course of their

1:22:18 ↗ career and each year the mayor and

1:22:19 ↗ council president select a person to

1:22:21 ↗ induct into the isqua Hall of Fame for

1:22:23 ↗ their exemplary Rec record of

1:22:25 ↗ inspiration leadership and service the

1:22:28 ↗ award will be presented at the Chamber

1:22:30 ↗ of Commerce annual isqua community

1:22:32 ↗ Awards event on June 3rd and you can

1:22:34 ↗ submit nominations at isqu

1:22:36 ↗ w.gov nominate the deadline is 5:00 P pm

1:22:40 ↗ on April 30th and that concludes the

1:22:43 ↗ mayor's report um there is an

1:22:45 ↗ informational update this evening ID

1:22:48 ↗ 1828 on permit process improvements and

1:22:51 ↗ we have Community planning and

1:22:52 ↗ development director Minnie doall you

1:22:54 ↗ doing the

1:22:55 ↗ presentation or are you handing it

1:22:58 ↗ off good evening again um mini Dolly

1:23:01 ↗ wall Community planning and development

1:23:02 ↗ director I wanted to introduce the team

1:23:04 ↗ and then I'll come back and present

1:23:06 ↗ excellent so tonight we've got our whole

1:23:08 ↗ um CPD leadership team our community

1:23:11 ↗ Planning and Development we have Emily

1:23:13 ↗ Appleton our engineering manager so she

1:23:16 ↗ oversees all the review processes for

1:23:19 ↗ water sewer roads utilities you name it

1:23:22 ↗ and then we've got James Gray our

1:23:23 ↗ building official

1:23:25 ↗ uh he makes sure all the buildings are

1:23:27 ↗ safe um and Steven Padua he manages both

1:23:31 ↗ long range and current planning um so

1:23:33 ↗ all land use related stuff and they've

1:23:35 ↗ been working on the materials that are

1:23:38 ↗ in your packet today and then last but

1:23:41 ↗ not least is Tina Edgars uh in the

1:23:43 ↗ executives office has been loaned over

1:23:46 ↗ to community Planning and Development

1:23:48 ↗ Department uh since the beginning of

1:23:50 ↗ this year to work with all of our staff

1:23:52 ↗ that have been divied up into different

1:23:54 ↗ teams that have taken up one of the 12

1:23:57 ↗ recommendations that that we'll get into

1:23:59 ↗ in a little bit uh and working with our

1:24:01 ↗ staff um CPD staff um and she'll share

1:24:04 ↗ some information um so come on up Tina

1:24:07 ↗ will kick it off thank you welcome

1:24:14 ↗ Tina I it's just looping through status

1:24:18 ↗ thank you appreciate that hit cancel

1:24:30 ↗ great well while she's doing that uh

1:24:32 ↗ Tina aers from the executive department

1:24:35 ↗ um uh am here this evening to provide an

1:24:37 ↗ update on the permit process

1:24:39 ↗ improvements uh the last time that this

1:24:42 ↗ was in front of you was June of last

1:24:44 ↗ year 2024 where our

1:24:46 ↗ consultant um rapis provided a report

1:24:51 ↗ and recommendations to streamline the

1:24:53 ↗ processes and to help CPD the community

1:24:56 ↗ Planning Development Department become

1:24:58 ↗ compliant with our permit timelines

1:25:01 ↗ established under Senate Bill

1:25:03 ↗ 5290 uh those went into effect January

1:25:06 ↗ 1st of this year uh additionally we'll

1:25:09 ↗ be seeking feedback regarding

1:25:10 ↗ performance uh measures and determine if

1:25:13 ↗ there's any additional metrics that we

1:25:15 ↗ should be

1:25:19 ↗ tracking uh see next slide please

1:25:24 ↗ uh as this is a city priority um as

1:25:27 ↗ identified under the growth and

1:25:29 ↗ development it reads improve project

1:25:31 ↗ permitting review process as a priority

1:25:34 ↗ it's important to keep you updated and

1:25:35 ↗ that's why we're here next slide I'll

1:25:39 ↗ start with the 12 recommendations

1:25:40 ↗ identified in the ref Talis report and

1:25:44 ↗ include staff efforts to date um we

1:25:47 ↗ refer to these as PPI so I'll refer to

1:25:50 ↗ them by number throughout the the 12

1:25:53 ↗ recommendations um this is the update

1:25:55 ↗ well this update represents the great

1:25:57 ↗ work of the department staff who created

1:25:59 ↗ cross division teams they work together

1:26:02 ↗ meeting regularly weekly monthly and at

1:26:05 ↗ our quarterly retreats to realign

1:26:08 ↗ prioritize and work on next

1:26:10 ↗ steps next slide perfect uh I'll be

1:26:14 ↗ brief so you can spend more time on the

1:26:16 ↗ performance measures because I think

1:26:17 ↗ that's where um you start seeing the

1:26:20 ↗ information so ppi1 submitted guidelines

1:26:23 ↗ this is important information to the

1:26:25 ↗ applicant this is when they're were

1:26:26 ↗ preparing to submit their

1:26:28 ↗ application uh so as of date many uh

1:26:31 ↗ guidelines have been uh updated and the

1:26:34 ↗ department continues to delve deeper

1:26:36 ↗ into the various

1:26:37 ↗ guidelines uh most currently due to

1:26:39 ↗ Staffing changes the team was

1:26:41 ↗ reconfigured and continues to focus on

1:26:43 ↗ their top 13 prioritized

1:26:46 ↗ list this item as all of the ppis is

1:26:49 ↗ targeted for completion by the end of

1:26:52 ↗ Q2 PPI two complet list review this is

1:26:55 ↗ the review by which the department

1:26:57 ↗ determines completeness of

1:27:00 ↗ application as recommended by the

1:27:02 ↗ consultant staff are uh eliminating

1:27:05 ↗ email commun communication between each

1:27:07 ↗ other meaning rather than um talk about

1:27:11 ↗ the

1:27:12 ↗ complex uh review processes via email

1:27:16 ↗ they're going to use the systems that

1:27:18 ↗ are in place such as track it or my

1:27:21 ↗ building permit um and then they have uh

1:27:25 ↗ what they call like the the staff on

1:27:27 ↗ duty at the counter and they'll use that

1:27:30 ↗ team to talk through um and communicate

1:27:35 ↗ the status of of

1:27:38 ↗ those PPI 3 applicant communication

1:27:41 ↗ template this is essential communication

1:27:42 ↗ to the applicant this speaks to the next

1:27:45 ↗ steps and so this item is in progress

1:27:49 ↗ PPI 4 peer review this is for items that

1:27:52 ↗ require consultant review so the goal

1:27:55 ↗ the goal is specifically

1:27:57 ↗ um to identify the need when a

1:28:01 ↗ consultant peer review is needed more

1:28:03 ↗ quickly streamline the process for

1:28:05 ↗ things like the contract billing and

1:28:09 ↗ deposits and those are the things that

1:28:11 ↗ are underway PPI 5 internal

1:28:14 ↗ collaboration meetings this relates to

1:28:17 ↗ the internal um departments specifically

1:28:21 ↗ other departments that require permits

1:28:23 ↗ for City projects

1:28:25 ↗ CPD staff are routinely on hand to

1:28:27 ↗ answer staff questions but wanted to

1:28:30 ↗ provide more support through the

1:28:32 ↗ creation of uh sop and submittable

1:28:35 ↗ checklists for for those teams this is

1:28:38 ↗ to enhance the collaboration meetings

1:28:40 ↗ with specifically with public works and

1:28:43 ↗ Parks DPI 6 high volume mailings the

1:28:47 ↗ Consultants suggested that we contract

1:28:49 ↗ our out our mailing services staff

1:28:51 ↗ determined this did not provide the

1:28:53 ↗ flexibility

1:28:54 ↗ nor desired cost Savings in lie of third

1:28:57 ↗ party service the team implemented a

1:29:00 ↗ postcard mailing system this has proven

1:29:03 ↗ to be very effective with both time and

1:29:05 ↗ costs PPI 7 permit coordination position

1:29:09 ↗ this is a budgeted position one that I'm

1:29:11 ↗ partially filling at this time this

1:29:14 ↗ position will be critical it's a

1:29:15 ↗ critical asset to the departments in

1:29:17 ↗ managing projects and ensuring that

1:29:19 ↗ required timelines are

1:29:21 ↗ met we hope to have this position

1:29:24 ↗ recruited for and filled uh later this

1:29:26 ↗ year and that coincides with my

1:29:27 ↗ departure with the

1:29:29 ↗ city next slide PPI 8 performance

1:29:33 ↗ measures this has been implemented great

1:29:36 ↗ success and you'll hear more about that

1:29:38 ↗ in just a bit PPI

1:29:40 ↗ 09 these are our Sops these are the

1:29:43 ↗ department-wide standard operating

1:29:45 ↗ procedures current efforts underway to

1:29:47 ↗ compile the Sops into one location

1:29:49 ↗ Marcus keep delete modify uh next

1:29:53 ↗ working with the clerk's office on

1:29:55 ↗ proper SharePoint in uh to implement

1:29:58 ↗ those uh PPI 10 quarterly Improvement

1:30:01 ↗ review this has been implemented this is

1:30:03 ↗ a quarterly Retreat of the department

1:30:05 ↗ all staff coming together dedicating

1:30:07 ↗ three hours every few months to make

1:30:10 ↗ greater improvements the most recent ret

1:30:12 ↗ Retreat held on February 26 uh staff

1:30:16 ↗ were engaged they work

1:30:17 ↗ collaboratively um they received some

1:30:19 ↗ training from the clerk's office we

1:30:21 ↗ delved into realigning determining areas

1:30:24 ↗ of

1:30:25 ↗ prioritization and other next steps it

1:30:27 ↗ was great to see the team in action and

1:30:30 ↗ I regret not having a photo of that oper

1:30:32 ↗ with that experience it was it was

1:30:34 ↗ really

1:30:35 ↗ neat uh ppi1 training program staff has

1:30:39 ↗ completed its colors training that's um

1:30:42 ↗ learning about distinct behavior and

1:30:43 ↗ communication Styles crucial

1:30:46 ↗ conversations training that was to help

1:30:48 ↗ Foster open dialogue and

1:30:50 ↗ alignment

1:30:51 ↗ and let's see next training will be on

1:30:55 ↗ the updated Sops checklists and code

1:30:58 ↗ interpretation this is so that there's

1:31:00 ↗ consistency within the

1:31:02 ↗ department PPI 12 the last on the list

1:31:06 ↗ contract with software developer this

1:31:09 ↗ item is marked as paused because the

1:31:12 ↗ consultant's recommendation was for

1:31:14 ↗ in-house soft software developer uh our

1:31:17 ↗ Focus currently uh is that we're working

1:31:20 ↗ with it department and a consultant to

1:31:22 ↗ determine the best course for software

1:31:24 ↗ upgrades and replacement there's also

1:31:26 ↗ conversations happening over at East

1:31:28 ↗ City gov so uh we wanted to make sure

1:31:30 ↗ that we were spending our time having um

1:31:33 ↗ the best

1:31:34 ↗ conversations so that concludes the list

1:31:36 ↗ of the 12 recommendations again I'd like

1:31:38 ↗ to reiterate the great work of Staff

1:31:40 ↗ their interests their efforts are

1:31:42 ↗ observed in the work that they do um I

1:31:45 ↗ again I have a big thank you to the team

1:31:47 ↗ so I'll be sure to pass that on I'll

1:31:50 ↗ invite Minnie over

1:31:54 ↗ thanks Dina um there we go Council Merz

1:31:58 ↗ before we move off those uh 12 um steps

1:32:03 ↗ I can't tell from this which ones you

1:32:06 ↗ are they all going to be done by end of

1:32:08 ↗ Q2 or are there any other than the other

1:32:10 ↗ than the one that's paused are there any

1:32:12 ↗ that are not anticipated to be completed

1:32:14 ↗ by the end of Q2 our goal is to get all

1:32:17 ↗ of them done by quarter two um but we're

1:32:19 ↗ not done with it forever you know the

1:32:22 ↗ the idea of being a continuous

1:32:24 ↗ Improvement model so the first hump you

1:32:27 ↗ know we've collected all our standard

1:32:29 ↗ operating procedures we put them in one

1:32:31 ↗ place we've deleted a modified added

1:32:34 ↗ more but then get on a cycle where

1:32:37 ↗ annually by you know or or twice a year

1:32:40 ↗ we we look at that stuff and see what's

1:32:43 ↗ missing what what changed you know State

1:32:45 ↗ Law changes or some something so it's a

1:32:47 ↗ continuous thing but yes the first stage

1:32:49 ↗ of getting through most of them would be

1:32:52 ↗ the end of second quarter that's a goal

1:32:54 ↗ I totally get that that's the goal are

1:32:56 ↗ you on Pace to be done with all of them

1:32:58 ↗ by the end of Q2 do you have positive

1:33:00 ↗ float on all 12 we will know more um at

1:33:04 ↗ in a couple of months uh at this point

1:33:06 ↗ you March April May for sure but we we

1:33:09 ↗ do believe it's doable it's not by in

1:33:12 ↗ the sky that we won't get to it you

1:33:14 ↗ don't know the current float on

1:33:17 ↗ these if if they're du at the end of

1:33:20 ↗ June I would sure hope that you'd know a

1:33:21 ↗ lot sooner than the end we are on track

1:33:23 ↗ if you're if your question yeah if your

1:33:25 ↗ question is are we on track to finishing

1:33:27 ↗ it by quarter two I would say

1:33:29 ↗ yes okay thank you yeah council

1:33:33 ↗ president thank you um in this case

1:33:36 ↗ there were a few things that were kind

1:33:39 ↗ of mentioned as in progress um with the

1:33:42 ↗ submittal guidelines you identified and

1:33:44 ↗ prioritized a list and with the

1:33:47 ↗ applicant communication template uh

1:33:49 ↗ three templates created in either of

1:33:51 ↗ those cases is

1:33:54 ↗ anything active with applicants or is it

1:33:58 ↗ still in the internal development and

1:34:00 ↗ hasn't seen outward use good question so

1:34:04 ↗ um the check checklist you know we did a

1:34:06 ↗ big scrub of the checklist after Title

1:34:08 ↗ 18 update just to reflect the new code

1:34:10 ↗ so those have been live uh for a long

1:34:13 ↗ time um out of the the other

1:34:15 ↗ construction permits you know oneof

1:34:17 ↗ things the solar permit or mechanical

1:34:20 ↗ permit and these kind of things um we um

1:34:23 ↗ haven't put them online you know on but

1:34:26 ↗ but we have those applications online

1:34:28 ↗ but there will be tweaks and things like

1:34:30 ↗ that that will go online I think out of

1:34:31 ↗ this effort we prioritize there are 13

1:34:34 ↗ that in addition to the ones that we had

1:34:36 ↗ previously updated that we are we are

1:34:38 ↗ looking at at this point so those 13 we

1:34:40 ↗ want to update and put them online as

1:34:42 ↗ soon as possible but they're not online

1:34:45 ↗ yet okay and followup question to that I

1:34:48 ↗ know one of the um things in the initial

1:34:52 ↗ report was look at concerns that um

1:34:55 ↗ submitt were coming through that either

1:34:58 ↗ didn't have all of the

1:35:00 ↗ information or were didn't have the

1:35:02 ↗ quality of information and so I'm

1:35:05 ↗ wondering if there I didn't see a metric

1:35:08 ↗ that would necessarily suggest whether

1:35:10 ↗ or not you are achieving more

1:35:14 ↗ completed um complete applications on

1:35:17 ↗ first submittal or not um versus you

1:35:21 ↗ know basically trying to determine if

1:35:24 ↗ those checklists are effective at

1:35:26 ↗ achieving the goal that you were looking

1:35:28 ↗ for yeah um we can track a number of

1:35:33 ↗ complete applications um you know

1:35:35 ↗ definitely for land use because we are

1:35:36 ↗ actually sending them a letter for

1:35:38 ↗ completeness and in completeness for

1:35:40 ↗ construction permits we didn't want to

1:35:42 ↗ create extra work for just sending a

1:35:44 ↗ letter of completeness if they're

1:35:45 ↗ complete we move them along only the

1:35:47 ↗ ones that are incomplete would we then

1:35:50 ↗ reach out to the applicant and say

1:35:52 ↗ you're missing these two things or five

1:35:53 ↗ things um and that's what I think um as

1:35:57 ↗ Tina was uh presenting um we used to do

1:36:00 ↗ that for construction permits by you

1:36:03 ↗ know the permit Tech can make the

1:36:05 ↗ decision about 80% of them they see the

1:36:08 ↗ materials it's there it's part of the

1:36:09 ↗ checklist 20% of them are sometimes

1:36:12 ↗ questionable so we used to do that

1:36:14 ↗ through email you know send an email to

1:36:16 ↗ all the reviewers uh what we're trying

1:36:18 ↗ to do that is the Planner on duty the

1:36:21 ↗ engineer on duty and uh for the day

1:36:24 ↗ um or the plans reviewer uh that they

1:36:26 ↗ can call them up that day for a quick

1:36:28 ↗ huddle for you know 10 minutes and they

1:36:30 ↗ can look at what what they already have

1:36:32 ↗ it on the screen and determine what

1:36:34 ↗ what's missing or not missing and then

1:36:35 ↗ send it back out uh so it that review

1:36:39 ↗ happens in mybuildingpermit.com which is

1:36:41 ↗ the um online portal before it even hits

1:36:45 ↗ the our permitting software so it's it's

1:36:48 ↗ a little bit because we have two

1:36:50 ↗ disjointed things and it doesn't show up

1:36:52 ↗ in the system it's harder

1:36:54 ↗ to get a report out of my

1:36:56 ↗ mybuildingpermit.com but we can look

1:36:58 ↗ into it um because we're doing a

1:37:00 ↗ construction permit uh completeness

1:37:02 ↗ review at MVP stage before we even route

1:37:05 ↗ it in in our system so once it's

1:37:08 ↗ accepted that means it's complete and it

1:37:10 ↗ gets routed um but we can't run reports

1:37:13 ↗ through my building permit.com

1:37:15 ↗ unfortunately at this point okay thank

1:37:17 ↗ you definitely for land use we can sorry

1:37:21 ↗ Hall well on what you just said around

1:37:23 ↗ my building permit is that something

1:37:25 ↗ that would we would hope would change

1:37:26 ↗ with the state request that we have

1:37:28 ↗ around kind of the backend development

1:37:30 ↗ of my building permit um yes if we you

1:37:33 ↗ know regardless um of if if we switch

1:37:36 ↗ out from track it and it's the the front

1:37:39 ↗ end and the back end it's a different

1:37:40 ↗ system um certainly we could you we

1:37:42 ↗ would that would be our ask that we

1:37:44 ↗ configure it but it's it's going to take

1:37:46 ↗ time you know even if it is eity gov MH

1:37:50 ↗ starting from scratch building a product

1:37:52 ↗ testing it launching it coming it it's

1:37:54 ↗ not going to be in the next year or so

1:37:57 ↗ right well and I assume we though we're

1:37:59 ↗ keeping a list of things we would like

1:38:00 ↗ to see on whatever yes yes so it

1:38:03 ↗ department has hired um a consulting

1:38:05 ↗ firm that is talking to all of our staff

1:38:08 ↗ um and trying to get A needs assessment

1:38:10 ↗ down so regardless of what path the city

1:38:12 ↗ chooses to do at least we know what we

1:38:14 ↗ need um so that's happening as we

1:38:17 ↗ speak any additional questions or

1:38:19 ↗ continue with the

1:38:21 ↗ presentation and um Minnie is there

1:38:24 ↗ additional presentation uh yes so we

1:38:27 ↗ wanted to uh share with you um you know

1:38:30 ↗ all this is great if we can measure our

1:38:32 ↗ progress that's where we wanted to kind

1:38:34 ↗ of focus and get your feedback and share

1:38:36 ↗ what we have so this is a screen that

1:38:38 ↗ you all may be familiar with this is a

1:38:40 ↗ city's dashboard it hasn't gone live

1:38:42 ↗ with the 2024 data but uh you'll get a

1:38:45 ↗ separate presentation from Dale when

1:38:47 ↗ that is um online but she gave us a

1:38:49 ↗ preview of our piece uh so there are a

1:38:52 ↗ few screens um this was set up many

1:38:54 ↗ years ago and it's really looking at

1:38:56 ↗ only the first permit review time so

1:38:59 ↗ when something comes in it gets routed

1:39:01 ↗ the first round of review because that's

1:39:03 ↗ all we could measure under the system at

1:39:05 ↗ the time um because creating reports

1:39:07 ↗ that measures multiple review times

1:39:09 ↗ wasn't something that was feasible so

1:39:12 ↗ and at the time the decision was made to

1:39:14 ↗ focus on small tenant Improvement so

1:39:17 ↗ tenant Improvement is just working

1:39:19 ↗ inside um usually not an expansion of a

1:39:22 ↗ business um but just a swap out of one

1:39:25 ↗ small business into uh into a commercial

1:39:27 ↗ space with another one uh or a large

1:39:30 ↗ tenant Improvement which could include a

1:39:32 ↗ little bit more expansion but generally

1:39:34 ↗ work in the in inside of a commercial

1:39:37 ↗ space uh preliminary plat which is more

1:39:40 ↗ than nine Lots um and platting uh

1:39:44 ↗ commercial multifam so for 2024 these

1:39:48 ↗ were the target timelines that were set

1:39:49 ↗ up uh for the first round and we seem to

1:39:52 ↗ have met the four those four targets

1:39:54 ↗ next

1:39:55 ↗ slide um uh there were two other

1:39:59 ↗ measures that were not meeting currently

1:40:00 ↗ so new single family um first round of

1:40:04 ↗ review and short plats short plats are

1:40:06 ↗ low volume so it may have been one or

1:40:08 ↗ two things that that came in that were

1:40:10 ↗ difficult sites or something but we're

1:40:12 ↗ looking at the new single family piece

1:40:14 ↗ um and and have lowered the bar uh

1:40:18 ↗ because we have these State guidelines

1:40:20 ↗ we have we're not giving ourselves um

1:40:23 ↗ the the targets that we' set up uh

1:40:25 ↗ initially for the first round of review

1:40:28 ↗ next

1:40:29 ↗ slide um the other thing that the city's

1:40:32 ↗ dashboard currently measures is uh an

1:40:34 ↗ assortment of permits but those were

1:40:36 ↗ selected at the time uh between short

1:40:39 ↗ plat site development permits site work

1:40:41 ↗ building Mechanical plumbing right away

1:40:43 ↗ and so on um so uh just over the years

1:40:47 ↗ uh how does the volume uh of those

1:40:50 ↗ specific types uh fluctuates that gives

1:40:53 ↗ um you know a a snippet of are there

1:40:57 ↗ Peaks and valleys or are we sort of U

1:41:00 ↗ maintaining our volume of work uh on for

1:41:03 ↗ those specific types um kind of um

1:41:06 ↗ similar next slide so that's what

1:41:09 ↗ historically we've measured uh but we

1:41:11 ↗ wanted to kind of uh take you know get

1:41:14 ↗ get further along on our measurement uh

1:41:17 ↗ because if you're making progress we

1:41:18 ↗ should be able to measure that um and

1:41:21 ↗ particularly with um the State Bill

1:41:24 ↗ 5290 uh there are three tiers um of per

1:41:28 ↗ timelines so the first one is 65 days so

1:41:31 ↗ those are um permits and land use uh

1:41:34 ↗ decisions that don't have any public

1:41:37 ↗ notice um and then we have the ones that

1:41:39 ↗ require public notice but no public

1:41:42 ↗ hearing those are 100 days and then we

1:41:44 ↗ have the ones that require public

1:41:45 ↗ hearing those are 170 days so we looked

1:41:48 ↗ at the data from 2024 and this is this

1:41:51 ↗ slide only shows the land use uh permits

1:41:53 ↗ so that's the entitlement phase before

1:41:55 ↗ they actually apply for construction

1:41:57 ↗ permits um so we did pretty good in

1:42:00 ↗ terms of the total number but we you

1:42:02 ↗ know in the last category uh not so much

1:42:06 ↗ so we're taking a deeper dive to see you

1:42:09 ↗ know what what can we learn from the

1:42:11 ↗ ones that we exceeded the timeline what

1:42:12 ↗ could we have done differently um next

1:42:16 ↗ slide and then you know that's the past

1:42:19 ↗ data but we also are monitoring what's

1:42:21 ↗ in the hopper today that is actively

1:42:24 ↗ being reviewed so that's something that

1:42:25 ↗ we can actually do something about and

1:42:28 ↗ it's looking pretty good but I also

1:42:30 ↗ wanted to kind of caveat it with we do

1:42:33 ↗ have one permit here and maybe you know

1:42:36 ↗ a few that may come in that are vested

1:42:38 ↗ to the old code are generally on very

1:42:41 ↗ difficult sites uh they have been back

1:42:43 ↗ and forth with the applicant a number of

1:42:45 ↗ times but there are either severe

1:42:48 ↗ geotechnical issues you know Landslide

1:42:50 ↗ hazards or things like that that that

1:42:52 ↗ are still in our process and it'll take

1:42:54 ↗ some time for all of those to kind of

1:42:56 ↗ get resolved um so the reporting for

1:42:59 ↗ next year may show a few of those

1:43:01 ↗ carry-on ones that have been in the city

1:43:04 ↗ system for many years but we're trying

1:43:06 ↗ to resolve most of them and get them to

1:43:08 ↗ to a completion place um next

1:43:12 ↗ slide um so that was land use and then

1:43:15 ↗ we moved on to construction permits so

1:43:18 ↗ this is an excerpt from uh the refis

1:43:20 ↗ report that looked at the trends from 21

1:43:24 ↗ through uh May of 2024 I believe that's

1:43:27 ↗ when the report was done and in these

1:43:29 ↗ different categories so while we show

1:43:32 ↗ progress um overall in our timelines of

1:43:35 ↗ over those years uh we wanted to then

1:43:38 ↗ see how did we end

1:43:40 ↗ 2024 so next

1:43:43 ↗ slide so that Trend continued in

1:43:47 ↗ 2024 uh in this slide we we we focused

1:43:50 ↗ mostly on construction permits because

1:43:52 ↗ land use are doing differently one thing

1:43:54 ↗ to note here was there was debate about

1:43:57 ↗ whether 5290 actually applied to

1:43:59 ↗ construction permits or not uh very late

1:44:03 ↗ breaking uh you know Department of

1:44:05 ↗ Commerce guidance said cities we

1:44:07 ↗ recommend you should consider those

1:44:09 ↗ timelines also apply to construction

1:44:11 ↗ permits there's a little bit of a um you

1:44:14 ↗ know construction permits generally

1:44:16 ↗ don't have a public hearing but a small

1:44:18 ↗ house versus a large building you know

1:44:21 ↗ if you're going to give everyone 60 days

1:44:23 ↗ for that or is it the one large building

1:44:27 ↗ that went through a public hearing

1:44:29 ↗ process gets the 170 days that's where

1:44:31 ↗ we've landed um but I think it's my

1:44:34 ↗ understanding State Legislature is

1:44:35 ↗ trying to clarify whether the building

1:44:37 ↗ permits it these timelines even apply to

1:44:39 ↗ building permits um some cities are

1:44:41 ↗ taking a position it doesn't apply we've

1:44:44 ↗ taken a position they do apply and we'll

1:44:46 ↗ do our best to to uh have them um you

1:44:50 ↗ know at least monitor how we're doing on

1:44:52 ↗ our construction permit

1:44:53 ↗ um so the first uh column here shows

1:44:57 ↗ overall how many permits we we processed

1:45:00 ↗ just a construction permits um so it's

1:45:03 ↗ over about 1,700 permits uh but they

1:45:05 ↗ also include over the- counter things

1:45:07 ↗ like Plumbing permits or mechanical

1:45:10 ↗ where FK you know there's not a plan

1:45:12 ↗ review involved um so the average days

1:45:15 ↗ for those look fairly decent but we also

1:45:19 ↗ wanted to see does average really paint

1:45:21 ↗ a true you know give us all the data

1:45:23 ↗ that we're looking for because there may

1:45:24 ↗ be few outliers that can skew that data

1:45:27 ↗ um so then we focused on the third

1:45:29 ↗ column was just the the building

1:45:31 ↗ construction permits that actually had

1:45:33 ↗ plan review uh part of it and for those

1:45:38 ↗ uh those are the numbers of how many of

1:45:40 ↗ those were there and then we looked at

1:45:42 ↗ how what percentage of those did

1:45:43 ↗ actually meet the Target and how many

1:45:45 ↗ did not so about a third of building

1:45:48 ↗ permits we did not meet our Target and

1:45:51 ↗ closer to 43% so about half of site work

1:45:54 ↗ permits we didn't but for all the others

1:45:56 ↗ we looked pretty good so we're going to

1:45:58 ↗ focus on the building and the site work

1:46:00 ↗ permit to see where where the um you

1:46:04 ↗ know where we can make improvements on

1:46:06 ↗ and of course our goal is that we get

1:46:08 ↗ all 100% of those um that that the 0%

1:46:12 ↗ that exceeds the target next

1:46:16 ↗ slide um so part of this is also uh the

1:46:19 ↗ Commerce reporting so next slide uh so

1:46:23 ↗ depart as part of the bill 5290 was some

1:46:26 ↗ reporting requirements so while these

1:46:28 ↗ timelines came into effect starting

1:46:30 ↗ January of 2025 the reporting also is

1:46:33 ↗ going to be for

1:46:35 ↗ 2024 um the you know we've been waiting

1:46:37 ↗ for Department of AC Commerce to give us

1:46:39 ↗ guidance that was delayed it was

1:46:41 ↗ provided in February and therefore they

1:46:43 ↗ extended the reporting timeline to March

1:46:45 ↗ 31st so we will be submitting it by

1:46:47 ↗ March 31st uh in the meantime Council

1:46:50 ↗ has adopted a resolution which was also

1:46:52 ↗ part of the guidance that came from

1:46:54 ↗ Commerce that it's actually language in

1:46:57 ↗ the bill that if you have eight three

1:47:00 ↗ out of eight measures then the refund

1:47:02 ↗ Provisions don't apply which you all

1:47:04 ↗ adopted that resolution you know we have

1:47:07 ↗ adopted fees we have made

1:47:09 ↗ pre-applications optional we have peer

1:47:11 ↗ review contracts um on file so we met

1:47:15 ↗ those requirements and and the refund

1:47:17 ↗ Provisions don't apply to uh our to the

1:47:20 ↗ city um we we are finalizing the report

1:47:24 ↗ we have a little summary for you in the

1:47:26 ↗ next slide or so um U but Commerce is

1:47:31 ↗ really focusing on very small slice of

1:47:34 ↗ permits so they're talking about

1:47:35 ↗ preliminary subdivisions final

1:47:38 ↗ subdivisions binding site plan which is

1:47:40 ↗ really for condominium type of uh

1:47:42 ↗ development if you're trying to create

1:47:43 ↗ those multif family housing permits um

1:47:47 ↗ and permits for construction of each of

1:47:49 ↗ those uh but they're not interested in

1:47:51 ↗ getting um numbers for single family

1:47:54 ↗ detached or commercial or mechanical or

1:47:56 ↗ Plumbing or any of those while those

1:47:58 ↗ timelines still apply to them but their

1:48:00 ↗ report is going to be this smaller uh

1:48:03 ↗ section um of permits next

1:48:06 ↗ slide so here's what um we're working on

1:48:10 ↗ and and we'll be presenting to them um

1:48:12 ↗ so we had two preliminary subdivisions

1:48:15 ↗ which have been in the city system for

1:48:17 ↗ sometime um uh one final subdivision um

1:48:21 ↗ four multif family and four construction

1:48:23 ↗ permits um so the subdivisions are you

1:48:26 ↗ know more than nine Lots so one of them

1:48:28 ↗ was um f on Talis and the other one is

1:48:31 ↗ Edward short plat which had coal mines

1:48:34 ↗ and so on you know this these have been

1:48:36 ↗ in the city's process for a while but so

1:48:39 ↗ the Commerce guideline talks about

1:48:41 ↗ average days in review and average total

1:48:43 ↗ days and so we we're showing here um you

1:48:46 ↗ know the time inhouse time for the city

1:48:49 ↗ and the time the city was waiting for

1:48:51 ↗ the applicant to resubmit

1:48:53 ↗ um but that's that's sort of the the

1:48:55 ↗ snippet of data that Commerce is

1:48:57 ↗ collecting from all the cities and

1:48:59 ↗ they'll be presenting um we have one or

1:49:01 ↗ two uh other larger Legacy projects like

1:49:05 ↗ that that you know may show up in our uh

1:49:07 ↗ reporting for next year but but anything

1:49:10 ↗ new that's coming in under the new code

1:49:13 ↗ and under the streamlined processes is

1:49:15 ↗ is a totally different uh picture than

1:49:17 ↗ what you see

1:49:19 ↗ here next slide um so so that that was

1:49:23 ↗ land use construction permits but then

1:49:26 ↗ um refis you know report appendix I

1:49:30 ↗ think a also had other metrics that we

1:49:32 ↗ could consider so we we've chosen a few

1:49:35 ↗ um Emily's worked on these and if you

1:49:37 ↗ have questions so next slide um um you

1:49:42 ↗ know this is really a workload metric so

1:49:45 ↗ internally for us to

1:49:47 ↗ know uh how many are uh Community

1:49:49 ↗ Planning and Development uh reviews and

1:49:52 ↗ inspect ctions uh but we also have other

1:49:55 ↗ City departments that sometimes uh need

1:49:57 ↗ to look at it say for Frontage

1:49:58 ↗ improvements Public Works will need to

1:50:00 ↗ know what the city's project is over

1:50:02 ↗ here if there's a round planned how does

1:50:05 ↗ it intersect with the city's plan

1:50:07 ↗ project or or whatnot um but we also

1:50:10 ↗ have S plat and epher U that do permit

1:50:14 ↗ reviews so those are not City staff but

1:50:17 ↗ we rely on on fire department and uh s

1:50:21 ↗ plat to do those reviews we've had an

1:50:23 ↗ initial conversations with them told

1:50:25 ↗ them about these permit timelines all we

1:50:27 ↗ can do is request that they honor when

1:50:29 ↗ they sent out and then they meet the

1:50:31 ↗ timelines but we'll be monitoring that

1:50:33 ↗ as well um next

1:50:37 ↗ slide go ahead uh counc raal uh thank

1:50:40 ↗ you so so we do go more granular than

1:50:42 ↗ just outside agencies we can see when

1:50:44 ↗ the fire Marshall's office is yeah how

1:50:47 ↗ many times they're okay cuz because the

1:50:50 ↗ agency is also thinking well they need

1:50:52 ↗ more money in order to hire another Fire

1:50:54 ↗ Marshal to go like that so have have

1:50:56 ↗ there been any more conversations

1:50:58 ↗ about how to meet these dead these

1:51:02 ↗ deadlines for kind of fire permit fees

1:51:04 ↗ in particular or yeah I mean our process

1:51:07 ↗ has been you know if we see some things

1:51:09 ↗ delayed on their end we you know James

1:51:11 ↗ has a great um relationship with them

1:51:14 ↗ and he'll call the fire marshal and say

1:51:16 ↗ how can we help is this working you know

1:51:18 ↗ sometimes there's a track it issue they

1:51:19 ↗ can they get locked out of track it or

1:51:21 ↗ something like that and then it

1:51:23 ↗ department has to get on and and help

1:51:25 ↗ them kind of figure that part out um but

1:51:29 ↗ um for the most part I think there were

1:51:31 ↗ there there are ups and downs where they

1:51:33 ↗ can sometimes fall behind but I think

1:51:35 ↗ for the most part James they're they've

1:51:37 ↗ been staying on track

1:51:41 ↗ yeah um so this one is kind of on the

1:51:45 ↗ same uh theme of workload metrics uh

1:51:47 ↗ this uh took the total number of reviews

1:51:50 ↗ and inspections and divided it by FTE so

1:51:54 ↗ really looking at how much uh how many

1:51:57 ↗ permits and reviews we have and how much

1:51:59 ↗ staff do we have to cover it so if we

1:52:01 ↗ start seeing big fluctuation there's a

1:52:03 ↗ huge amount of work and are we're not

1:52:04 ↗ staffed up in resources this sort of

1:52:08 ↗ will uh show us that um next

1:52:11 ↗ slide um this is what we're calling an

1:52:15 ↗ Effectiveness metrics um and this is you

1:52:18 ↗ know how many rounds of review do we

1:52:20 ↗ take to approve a permit um and and our

1:52:22 ↗ goal is that by second review we can get

1:52:25 ↗ to majority of the permits being

1:52:27 ↗ approved there'll always be some that

1:52:29 ↗ you know go through a cycle more than

1:52:31 ↗ two rounds of review um but on the left

1:52:34 ↗ hand side you see all the land use

1:52:35 ↗ permits

1:52:36 ↗ 69% in

1:52:39 ↗ 20124 um were approved by second round

1:52:42 ↗ but in 2025 there's

1:52:44 ↗ 88% um for construction permits they've

1:52:47 ↗ all hovered over 83% but we want to take

1:52:49 ↗ a deeper dive into it because what a

1:52:52 ↗ about the 177% that we took longer you

1:52:55 ↗ know was there a pattern among them was

1:52:57 ↗ it all building permits and construction

1:52:59 ↗ permits and and so on and so forth so

1:53:02 ↗ but this at least gives us um are we

1:53:05 ↗ going through many many rounds and what

1:53:07 ↗ is the cause for it and what what I

1:53:09 ↗ think ref has told us it's you know

1:53:11 ↗ incomplete applications that are coming

1:53:13 ↗ in people not being clear about what

1:53:15 ↗ they need to submit we're not clear

1:53:17 ↗ about our communication about the next

1:53:19 ↗ steps and so on and so forth um next

1:53:24 ↗ slide um same things two rounds of

1:53:27 ↗ review so the ones that are in our

1:53:30 ↗ Hopper that are active for land use we

1:53:32 ↗ have 40 of them five of them have

1:53:34 ↗ already passed the two rounds of review

1:53:36 ↗ same thing but there's a smaller slice

1:53:38 ↗ at the top so we'll be looking at at

1:53:41 ↗ least getting those uh issues and

1:53:44 ↗ understanding those issues but also

1:53:46 ↗ looking at the the blue uh portion and

1:53:48 ↗ making sure that they don't slide into

1:53:50 ↗ more than two rounds um um and and

1:53:53 ↗ that's going to be you know all those

1:53:56 ↗ Sops all those checklists will then

1:53:59 ↗ we'll have to give it some time for that

1:54:01 ↗ to become effective where um these

1:54:04 ↗ numbers start uh show it starts

1:54:06 ↗ reflecting here in the

1:54:08 ↗ effectiveness next

1:54:10 ↗ slide um so that's what we've been

1:54:13 ↗ working on you know thanks to this team

1:54:15 ↗ thanks to our all of our staff the all

1:54:17 ↗ the the little small chart that you saw

1:54:20 ↗ that Tina shared there's a lot you know

1:54:22 ↗ there's like hundreds of standard

1:54:23 ↗ operating procedures and going through

1:54:25 ↗ each one of them it's a tedious um you

1:54:28 ↗ know each one of those submittal

1:54:30 ↗ guidelines is a very tedious uh thing

1:54:32 ↗ but it needs to be done and so I think

1:54:34 ↗ uh we're really thankful we have very

1:54:36 ↗ talented staff who's engaged and

1:54:38 ↗ involved at this point of you know

1:54:40 ↗ making it part of their um mindset of

1:54:44 ↗ having that continuous Improvement um

1:54:46 ↗ path so that's what we're working on but

1:54:48 ↗ if you have any feedback for us about

1:54:51 ↗ what we've shared today um about the

1:54:53 ↗ metrics um what you want to hear uh next

1:54:57 ↗ yep council member

1:55:00 ↗ Ms couple uh do we seek customer

1:55:04 ↗ feedback and uh do we have metrics

1:55:07 ↗ associated with the the evaluations that

1:55:09 ↗ we get from our great question um so

1:55:12 ↗ that we we put that in our next steps

1:55:14 ↗ but in your um we do an annual uh survey

1:55:20 ↗ but you know you can take the survey

1:55:21 ↗ it's on the the city's web page any

1:55:23 ↗ applicant can take it any time when they

1:55:25 ↗ get their permit they're told you can

1:55:28 ↗ submit your comments how we can do our

1:55:30 ↗ uh you know serve you better uh here but

1:55:33 ↗ then we do an end will we push out of

1:55:35 ↗ the survey to the applicants for that

1:55:37 ↗ year so generally in March April we

1:55:40 ↗ pushed that one out we did one about 10

1:55:42 ↗ days ago we pushed it out to 300 people

1:55:45 ↗ there were 40 clicks people that opened

1:55:47 ↗ 12 of them

1:55:49 ↗ submitted um so on the city's dashboard

1:55:51 ↗ we measure how many what percentage of

1:55:54 ↗ um applicants were satisfied with a

1:55:56 ↗ service or very happy or very upset um

1:55:59 ↗ So currently for 23 data we're showing

1:56:03 ↗ 76% were satisfied with the new data

1:56:06 ↗ that we pushed out you know about for

1:56:09 ↗ the the people that did submit it's

1:56:11 ↗ about

1:56:12 ↗ 83% um so people had to say good things

1:56:15 ↗ about our inspection inspectors you know

1:56:17 ↗ so and so came to my my field and they

1:56:19 ↗ were very happy with the service they

1:56:21 ↗ got from them I me they literally name

1:56:23 ↗ them in their service so I look at that

1:56:25 ↗ very carefully I read every comment I

1:56:27 ↗ look at how what feedback you know they

1:56:29 ↗ have for us because ultimately it's the

1:56:31 ↗ service that folks are coming in and we

1:56:33 ↗ want to hear from them and do we have a

1:56:35 ↗ number that we want to hit is there a

1:56:36 ↗ number that we you know think is is

1:56:39 ↗ sufficient and a number below which we

1:56:41 ↗ don't want sure I think we're happy with

1:56:42 ↗ 83% but it it uh you know we want more

1:56:45 ↗ people to tell us where we're missing

1:56:47 ↗ too so uh you know the the so getting

1:56:50 ↗ more people to give us the feedback uh

1:56:52 ↗ I've met so generally the the survey you

1:56:55 ↗ know folks that really know the survey

1:56:57 ↗ say people that are either very happy or

1:56:59 ↗ very upset um you know even companies

1:57:02 ↗ like Google they say you you capture

1:57:04 ↗ those but you miss the people in the

1:57:06 ↗ middle because they don't take the time

1:57:07 ↗ to to submit to your but they may have

1:57:09 ↗ good feedback for us so we don't per se

1:57:12 ↗ have a metric but the you

1:57:16 ↗ know we can 83 you

1:57:18 ↗ like yeah and then the other question is

1:57:21 ↗ uh I always at the name oh what it's

1:57:24 ↗ Wally's whatever National Association of

1:57:27 ↗ uh city

1:57:28 ↗ managers icma yeah does icma have

1:57:32 ↗ guidelines for uh metrics to use in the

1:57:35 ↗ evaluation of the permitting

1:57:37 ↗ process probably do you know we we did

1:57:40 ↗ the whole data um Andrea might have an

1:57:42 ↗ opinion um or more information Dale

1:57:46 ↗ yeah there's there's all kinds of uh

1:57:50 ↗ recommended metrics out there and so

1:57:52 ↗ that was one of the reasons why we

1:57:53 ↗ wanted to hire

1:57:55 ↗ refis uh last year was to get their take

1:57:58 ↗ on it they'd work with cities all over

1:58:00 ↗ the United States on how to improve

1:58:02 ↗ permit processing and so um that's why

1:58:06 ↗ we took a got some recommendations from

1:58:08 ↗ them on metrics they were able to kind

1:58:09 ↗ of compile those best practices and um

1:58:13 ↗ that that's the list that we've been

1:58:15 ↗ working off of to review thank you any

1:58:18 ↗ other questions uh Council M Jang um a

1:58:22 ↗ couple I guess thoughts on you know

1:58:25 ↗ potential other metrics that we could

1:58:27 ↗ track um so going back to the council

1:58:29 ↗ president's point from earlier you know

1:58:30 ↗ do we want to track like what's the

1:58:32 ↗ number percent of application that are

1:58:34 ↗ complete the first time to see if you

1:58:35 ↗ know the Sops are adequate and if people

1:58:38 ↗ are reading them and they're clear um

1:58:40 ↗ and then one of the other questions that

1:58:41 ↗ I had was on um I think a couple sites

1:58:44 ↗ back there was a breakdown you know

1:58:46 ↗ number or percent of applications that

1:58:48 ↗ are complete within two reviews versus

1:58:50 ↗ more than two um is Is it feasible or

1:58:53 ↗ possible to disaggregate that between

1:58:55 ↗ one and two and then more than two um

1:58:58 ↗ cuz you know obviously it would be great

1:59:00 ↗ if it's all you know most of them can be

1:59:01 ↗ complete within one versus two or does

1:59:03 ↗ it not make sense to disaggregate it

1:59:04 ↗ more than we already have you know we we

1:59:08 ↗ could we've been living in this data

1:59:10 ↗ world sorry for bombarding you with all

1:59:12 ↗ this data the limitation is a system and

1:59:14 ↗ the reporting that we can pull out um

1:59:18 ↗ Emily do you have a quick answer can we

1:59:20 ↗ distinguish one and two

1:59:32 ↗ yeah thank you Emily's not miked but

1:59:34 ↗ just for those that might be listening

1:59:36 ↗ the goal was two but it looks like they

1:59:37 ↗ can dis segregated for you council

1:59:41 ↗ member thank you council

1:59:45 ↗ president thank you yeah when I'm

1:59:47 ↗ thinking through you

1:59:49 ↗ know first of all love this so second of

1:59:52 ↗ all I'm always looking back at that R

1:59:54 ↗ Tellis report because I think it gave us

1:59:56 ↗ a really clear set of ideas of how we

1:59:58 ↗ can improve the processes and so when

2:00:01 ↗ I'm looking at it um recommendation one

2:00:05 ↗ and three I think are my top areas where

2:00:08 ↗ I think we can improve and I think you

2:00:10 ↗ mentioned that earlier you know we're

2:00:12 ↗ receiving um some middles that are not

2:00:15 ↗ complete and that causes problems and

2:00:18 ↗ then the um number three is is

2:00:23 ↗ communicating to the applicant what the

2:00:25 ↗ next steps are and what the feedback are

2:00:27 ↗ so thinking through potential metrics on

2:00:31 ↗ that I think the first one is yes I'd

2:00:33 ↗ like to see what percentage

2:00:39 ↗ of answering answering your phone oh

2:00:42 ↗ turning off the alarm yep um what

2:00:46 ↗ percentage of the applicants are

2:00:49 ↗ complete applications are complete

2:00:51 ↗ complete on submitt and then the next

2:00:55 ↗ part looking

2:00:57 ↗ at you know are people understanding

2:00:59 ↗ what the next steps are I know there

2:01:03 ↗ there is a metric that you were looking

2:01:05 ↗ at that was you know how long are you

2:01:07 ↗ waiting on the applicant to respond I

2:01:11 ↗ wonder if there is a metric or even if

2:01:15 ↗ it just looks make sense to look at

2:01:18 ↗ after you provide that detailed you know

2:01:22 ↗ next steps how long does it take them to

2:01:24 ↗ follow up on that that would indicate

2:01:27 ↗ that you've made progress in that area

2:01:30 ↗ it yes and no because I think uh

2:01:33 ↗ sometimes it's outside even the

2:01:35 ↗ applicant's hand because the consultant

2:01:36 ↗ that they're working with is to booked

2:01:39 ↗ and even if they want to resubmit

2:01:42 ↗ they're not going to be able to get that

2:01:43 ↗ stuff in so a lot of times we you know

2:01:45 ↗ when I talk to applicants they're

2:01:47 ↗ feeling the pinch between the cities you

2:01:49 ↗ know they can't get their permit from

2:01:50 ↗ the city but they're the Consultants

2:01:52 ↗ blaming the city but you know they

2:01:54 ↗ really see it's it's kind of like going

2:01:56 ↗ both ways um so I'm not sure if that

2:01:59 ↗ will be a measure for City's time uh

2:02:02 ↗ perhaps not as my first um reaction to

2:02:05 ↗ it um but then the bill also has if the

2:02:10 ↗ applicant takes more than 60 days the

2:02:13 ↗ city's timelines get extended so we have

2:02:15 ↗ to measure that somehow um it's you know

2:02:19 ↗ measuring anything is a challenge

2:02:20 ↗ because I think these things aren't set

2:02:22 ↗ up where there's a automatic um click

2:02:25 ↗ and you know we manually can't measure

2:02:27 ↗ everything so but I think we have to

2:02:30 ↗ come up with some sort of a report that

2:02:31 ↗ when we send a correction letter out and

2:02:34 ↗ 60 days have gone up um then the clock

2:02:37 ↗ time for the city gets extended so we'll

2:02:40 ↗ look into that yeah and I I guess I

2:02:43 ↗ would give the feedback of I I think

2:02:45 ↗ it's more important to see progress and

2:02:47 ↗ see that you're effective I wouldn't

2:02:48 ↗ want to put in a metric that is just

2:02:51 ↗ just there in order to answer a question

2:02:54 ↗ one time and so if you don't feel like

2:02:56 ↗ that is an effective metric to

2:03:00 ↗ understand whether or not you're making

2:03:01 ↗ progress on that that's fine but I do

2:03:04 ↗ think it's important particularly to

2:03:06 ↗ look at whether or not the

2:03:09 ↗ applicants feel like having that they're

2:03:12 ↗ getting detailed next steps and that

2:03:15 ↗ they're able to thus respond more

2:03:17 ↗ quickly and more completely yeah it gets

2:03:19 ↗ comp yeah absolutely I think we could do

2:03:22 ↗ overall time and the city's time and do

2:03:24 ↗ the subtraction like we showed you on

2:03:25 ↗ one and you know that may be a way to

2:03:28 ↗ kind of handle you know the total time

2:03:31 ↗ that the applicant took not just for

2:03:33 ↗ each review maybe that's some easier for

2:03:35 ↗ us to track I think it's

2:03:38 ↗ also a matter of um from the from the

2:03:42 ↗ applicant side uh you know people have

2:03:44 ↗ told me that you know they know they're

2:03:46 ↗ not going to get approved in the first

2:03:47 ↗ round but they want to get in the line

2:03:50 ↗ so they want to turn something in just

2:03:52 ↗ to see what kind of comments they're

2:03:54 ↗ going to get from the city because they

2:03:56 ↗ know there's going to be a second round

2:03:58 ↗ so I think we have some some of those

2:04:00 ↗ systemic things that also come into play

2:04:02 ↗ just from practical reality of what

2:04:04 ↗ folks see that it's not going to get

2:04:06 ↗ approved in the first round so the they

2:04:09 ↗ let's just get get have finished product

2:04:12 ↗ in just to get in the queue that happens

2:04:15 ↗ not all the time but sometimes folks

2:04:17 ↗ have told me you know we just submitted

2:04:19 ↗ because we wanted to see what all you

2:04:20 ↗ had to say

2:04:23 ↗ yeah um just a mini a follow up on

2:04:27 ↗ council member Jen's question um maybe

2:04:30 ↗ related to the answer that you just gave

2:04:31 ↗ and that is that a um handing in a

2:04:35 ↗ complete package that meets all the

2:04:37 ↗ requirements with one review is not

2:04:40 ↗ necessarily a measurement of the clarity

2:04:42 ↗ of your um checklist or anything it's

2:04:46 ↗ also the experience and competency of

2:04:49 ↗ the person who is doing the submitting

2:04:51 ↗ so

2:04:52 ↗ um is there a way when you're reporting

2:04:55 ↗ how many one time you know these ones

2:04:57 ↗ were all onetime review but these were

2:04:59 ↗ two is there a way for you to clarify

2:05:01 ↗ that there's a group of these that were

2:05:03 ↗ a two or a three or a four because of a

2:05:07 ↗ lack

2:05:09 ↗ of um not just completeness but even

2:05:13 ↗ like we get Builders with all different

2:05:14 ↗ kinds of experience sometimes it's their

2:05:15 ↗ first project sometimes they've never

2:05:17 ↗ built in Washington state are you able

2:05:19 ↗ to sus that out I wouldn't want to be

2:05:21 ↗ giving

2:05:22 ↗ us a um a metric that was making it seem

2:05:27 ↗ like what we're doing is your

2:05:28 ↗ information your guidance is clear when

2:05:30 ↗ it's actually this is an experienced

2:05:31 ↗ Builder this is an inexperienced build

2:05:33 ↗ yeah we want to see patterns you know

2:05:34 ↗ each one can be a unique thing that

2:05:37 ↗ comes into play but I think with James

2:05:39 ↗ um do you want to come share some

2:05:41 ↗ examples I think uh there have been

2:05:43 ↗ examples for like the IBC versus the go

2:05:48 ↗ ahead thank you James Gray Building

2:05:50 ↗ official um love the conversation

2:05:52 ↗ so um this is the stuff that we live in

2:05:54 ↗ every day and just a just a little bit

2:05:57 ↗ of a fine distinction so we're talking

2:05:59 ↗ about number of turnarounds of reviews

2:06:01 ↗ and then sufficiency and that's a number

2:06:04 ↗ that that that's a the important

2:06:06 ↗ distinction so when you submit a set of

2:06:08 ↗ plans the first thing we have to do is

2:06:10 ↗ is look at it and say is this is this

2:06:12 ↗ even complete for review did you give us

2:06:14 ↗ structural calculation so we can see if

2:06:17 ↗ the building is structurally sound

2:06:20 ↗ sometimes we don't get that so we have

2:06:22 ↗ to do a process and you actually have to

2:06:24 ↗ do a pretty deep dive to figure out just

2:06:27 ↗ if it's sufficient so here's an example

2:06:30 ↗ we have in in isagel we have these

2:06:32 ↗ critical areas like a lot of cities have

2:06:34 ↗ so someone will come in for something

2:06:37 ↗ and it will be in a critical area like

2:06:39 ↗ it'll have a it'll be a coal mine region

2:06:42 ↗ okay it sounds really simple but the

2:06:43 ↗ coal mine seams are in very specific

2:06:46 ↗ areas as some of you probably know so we

2:06:49 ↗ can't just look at a map and say well

2:06:51 ↗ it's in a mine region so you have to do

2:06:53 ↗ this particular thing we have to get a a

2:06:56 ↗ a thirdparty a peer reviewer to review

2:06:59 ↗ what the what the applicant has

2:07:01 ↗ submitted to determine if that's even

2:07:03 ↗ sufficient to to review before we put a

2:07:06 ↗ whole bunch of time into it because we

2:07:08 ↗ don't want to get into six weeks into

2:07:10 ↗ the review process and then determine

2:07:13 ↗ hey you did your you gave us some stuff

2:07:14 ↗ on coal mines but you didn't tell us how

2:07:16 ↗ deep they are the type of footings

2:07:18 ↗ you're putting in over the coal mines so

2:07:20 ↗ that's just a sufficiency piece the

2:07:23 ↗ other piece that I wanted to share is um

2:07:25 ↗ about how the applicant gets back to us

2:07:28 ↗ and how many turnarounds it is so

2:07:30 ↗ remember that the regulations are

2:07:31 ↗ getting more and more complex and a lot

2:07:34 ↗ of that is things that we um I would say

2:07:37 ↗ we as Society is promulgating because we

2:07:39 ↗ want more efficient buildings right

2:07:42 ↗ that's that's our our big our big push

2:07:45 ↗ is more green energy efficient buildings

2:07:47 ↗ using less carbon resources to do that

2:07:51 ↗ we're getting uh smaller and smaller

2:07:53 ↗ incremental gains so as an example the

2:07:56 ↗ energy code has become so complex that

2:07:58 ↗ if you build a commercial building today

2:08:01 ↗ and you submit it to my team for review

2:08:04 ↗ it has to be modeled all right with

2:08:06 ↗ computer modeling and that model has to

2:08:08 ↗ be checked with a computer model so we

2:08:12 ↗ don't have staff on board that can do a

2:08:15 ↗ Compu to check your computer model um we

2:08:18 ↗ have to have staff do that used to be

2:08:21 ↗ you build a building and you put r19 in

2:08:24 ↗ the walls and you put R38 in the lid and

2:08:27 ↗ you do some you know your windows are

2:08:30 ↗ certain r value and we call it good

2:08:32 ↗ that's prescriptive construction we

2:08:34 ↗ don't do that anymore now you you put

2:08:36 ↗ your building together you put a much of

2:08:38 ↗ heat into it you put a bu of cold into

2:08:39 ↗ it in the summer and we see how much

2:08:42 ↗ squirts out of the holes and and that

2:08:45 ↗ that modeling is complex so for someone

2:08:48 ↗ to come come back and get that right in

2:08:51 ↗ one round of review it's um it's it's a

2:08:55 ↗ it's a tall order

2:08:57 ↗ often council member hall and then

2:08:59 ↗ council member

2:09:02 ↗ Jang um so the example you were just

2:09:04 ↗ giving about the coal mine so coal

2:09:06 ↗ region would us having questions and it

2:09:09 ↗ bouncing back to them does that count as

2:09:11 ↗ one cycle review like I'm looking at the

2:09:13 ↗ list of potential criteria in the back

2:09:15 ↗ of the rais report and it talks about

2:09:16 ↗ cycles of review so is that one cycle

2:09:19 ↗ review or is it by touch like that would

2:09:21 ↗ be one two no it's one

2:09:24 ↗ cycle it's not a linear thing so when we

2:09:26 ↗ get an application if there's

2:09:28 ↗ geotechnical issue it'll go to the

2:09:30 ↗ geotechnical peer revie it'll

2:09:31 ↗ simultaneously go to James team to the

2:09:34 ↗ engineering team and to the planners it

2:09:35 ↗ happens at the same time so that's one

2:09:38 ↗ round for everyone gets to see the first

2:09:41 ↗ round together not linearly waiting for

2:09:44 ↗ one team to be done if that's your

2:09:46 ↗ question okay thanks customer J oh sorry

2:09:49 ↗ we also have to determine if the

2:09:50 ↗ designer gets all of those disciplines

2:09:53 ↗ in that one round right so the the so in

2:09:56 ↗ that one round there's land uses looking

2:09:58 ↗ at it for very complex land use

2:10:00 ↗ standards and energy standards and

2:10:02 ↗ structural standards and the coal Coal M

2:10:05 ↗ everybody's taking a punch at it but

2:10:07 ↗ that one designer that submitted it has

2:10:09 ↗ to get all of that stuff so yeah and you

2:10:13 ↗ know part of it is the learning curve I

2:10:14 ↗ mean it's energy code was new so I think

2:10:17 ↗ the The Architects and the you know the

2:10:19 ↗ people that are on the applicant side

2:10:20 ↗ are also kind of getting up to speed uh

2:10:23 ↗ but the other example that I I think

2:10:25 ↗ often comes up is for the interior

2:10:28 ↗ tenant improvements there's the IBC code

2:10:31 ↗ and then there's the iebc and so you

2:10:35 ↗ know majority of the people forget to

2:10:38 ↗ verify the

2:10:39 ↗ iebc and so my question to James was

2:10:42 ↗ shouldn't we educate all the Architects

2:10:44 ↗ and Engineers that why are we missing

2:10:46 ↗ this you know so we're constantly

2:10:48 ↗ looking for are there patterns that we

2:10:50 ↗ can addressed the root cause not just

2:10:53 ↗ the you know they they missed it but if

2:10:55 ↗ 100% of the people are missing it then

2:10:57 ↗ something's not you know right and the

2:11:00 ↗ other part I think is just the

2:11:01 ↗ communication the way we write up our

2:11:04 ↗ comments is that very clear and succinct

2:11:08 ↗ uh and understandable on the applicant

2:11:10 ↗ side or are they just missing the point

2:11:12 ↗ I think that's part of the refis

2:11:14 ↗ recommendation also in the communication

2:11:16 ↗ piece um Council M Jen um yeah thank you

2:11:21 ↗ so um I have some questions on the

2:11:23 ↗ energy code um because that kind of

2:11:25 ↗ raised my interest so I'm curious like

2:11:26 ↗ the requirement to do an energy model is

2:11:28 ↗ that a state energy code requirement or

2:11:31 ↗ local we adopt this uh the code that's

2:11:34 ↗ by State Building Code Council okay so

2:11:37 ↗ we don't have our own amendments other

2:11:39 ↗ than the fire uh we we adopt uh City of

2:11:42 ↗ Bell viws because we have a uh common

2:11:45 ↗ response from them um but it's all the

2:11:48 ↗ State Building Code Council yeah okay

2:11:51 ↗ okay and then my other question is so

2:11:53 ↗ you said the state or we have to verify

2:11:56 ↗ the energy model like cuz my

2:11:59 ↗ understanding and typically where I've

2:12:00 ↗ seen it elsewhere is like you know some

2:12:03 ↗ accredited you know company like some PE

2:12:05 ↗ will sign off on the energy model is

2:12:07 ↗ that something that and similarly like

2:12:09 ↗ with structural like is does the city

2:12:11 ↗ have a structural engineer like double

2:12:13 ↗ check the work of the structural

2:12:14 ↗ engineers in the yes okay uh go ahead

2:12:17 ↗ and explain yeah so so a lot a lot there

2:12:20 ↗ to unpack um on the on the energy code

2:12:23 ↗ side um uh we don't have a we don't have

2:12:28 ↗ someone that that that does an energy

2:12:30 ↗ code analysis with an energy code

2:12:32 ↗ software right so we have a third party

2:12:34 ↗ that that does that but um for instance

2:12:38 ↗ your energy code package might have a

2:12:40 ↗ certain type of light in it uh for the

2:12:42 ↗ for the lighting piece of it but the

2:12:44 ↗ amount of coverage of that light is not

2:12:47 ↗ enough to um

2:12:49 ↗ to you've got delve down into into each

2:12:53 ↗ one of those little pieces and and

2:12:55 ↗ that's that's what the comments come

2:12:56 ↗ back at um it's it's not like we're

2:13:00 ↗ asking uh is it red and it should be

2:13:02 ↗ blue it's more the the issues are more

2:13:05 ↗ black and white um on the on the

2:13:07 ↗ structural side so we we have um I'm a

2:13:12 ↗ I'm a PE we have uh couple more pees

2:13:15 ↗ that work in our department um but uh on

2:13:18 ↗ the really complex structural stuff like

2:13:20 ↗ the Costco buildings we just finished we

2:13:22 ↗ talk about that pretty often we we're

2:13:24 ↗ going to Outsource something like that

2:13:25 ↗ because they're very they're they're

2:13:27 ↗ they're much more um uh uh complex and

2:13:31 ↗ they also take computer modeling

2:13:32 ↗ software to check them that's my Jang I

2:13:35 ↗ heard a different question in there um

2:13:37 ↗ we it sounds like what we're doing in

2:13:40 ↗ practice is verifying but I thought your

2:13:42 ↗ question was does the law require you to

2:13:46 ↗ verify or are we choosing to verify yeah

2:13:49 ↗ certainly uh mayor good question uh what

2:13:52 ↗ we what we do in plan review is we're

2:13:54 ↗ doing a code check we're not actually

2:13:56 ↗ doing we're not checking your design

2:13:59 ↗ we're we're checking what the what the

2:14:01 ↗ code specifies so the code specifies

2:14:04 ↗ these minimums and designers designed

2:14:07 ↗ to a different set it it's what the

2:14:10 ↗ owners want and it's what the what the

2:14:12 ↗ public wants for that particular

2:14:14 ↗ building but we're we're just checking

2:14:16 ↗ for

2:14:19 ↗ code I guess my question is like so for

2:14:22 ↗ example for my company you know we do

2:14:24 ↗ like reviews of solar systems for our

2:14:26 ↗ clients and we we look to see you know

2:14:30 ↗ did did a structural engineer say that

2:14:32 ↗ this roof will structurally support

2:14:34 ↗ solar we're not like verifying their

2:14:35 ↗ calculations so I'm just curious like is

2:14:38 ↗ what you're doing you know

2:14:39 ↗ double-checking their calculations and

2:14:40 ↗ is that something that you're legally

2:14:41 ↗ required to do on the structural side

2:14:43 ↗ and then yeah then I'll ask about the

2:14:46 ↗ energy we do um we do and we find errors

2:14:50 ↗ so so we uh uh for for instance on a on

2:14:53 ↗ a home with something that we can do a

2:14:55 ↗ hand check on somebody has a beam over a

2:14:57 ↗ window I've looked at this many many

2:14:59 ↗ times so I I see a point load coming

2:15:02 ↗ down on that beam I'm like gosh it's a

2:15:04 ↗ it's a 4x10 it's got a big span it

2:15:06 ↗ doesn't quite look right we'll run it

2:15:09 ↗ out maximum bending moment WL squ or8

2:15:11 ↗ and figure out what the what the bending

2:15:13 ↗ modulus is Right J find errors I think

2:15:16 ↗ the question isn't about are we checking

2:15:18 ↗ it or why it's does the laws say we have

2:15:22 ↗ to check it it it does it's all in the

2:15:24 ↗ it's in the in the building code chapter

2:15:26 ↗ 16 of the building code specifies what

2:15:29 ↗ we have to look for and and actually our

2:15:32 ↗ our uh uh Ison municipal code in chapter

2:15:37 ↗ um

2:15:39 ↗ 16004 uh 110 specifies what we have to

2:15:42 ↗ look for in plans they have to they have

2:15:44 ↗ to have the the minimum requirements of

2:15:47 ↗ the structural mechanical electrical all

2:15:49 ↗ that all those pieces

2:15:53 ↗ go ahead did you have additional on

2:15:55 ↗ energy yeah I guess so then then

2:15:58 ↗ similarly on the energy code we have to

2:15:59 ↗ do a similar level of verification which

2:16:02 ↗ requires you know doing an energy model

2:16:04 ↗ ourselves to verify the applicants

2:16:06 ↗ energy model is that is my understanding

2:16:08 ↗ correct correct and unfortunately we

2:16:11 ↗ often find errors I mean just mostly

2:16:13 ↗ it's like you have to meet certain

2:16:15 ↗ points and but there could be multiple

2:16:17 ↗ ways to meet the points um and they the

2:16:20 ↗ design chooses this is the PA path that

2:16:23 ↗ they want to take we're not arguing

2:16:25 ↗ whether the path that they chose is

2:16:26 ↗ correct or not but did the did those add

2:16:29 ↗ up to what the code requires you to to

2:16:31 ↗ provide I think that's at a more simpler

2:16:35 ↗ level I get into it um I think I have

2:16:39 ↗ some homework to do in looking at the

2:16:41 ↗ code and seeing if I have more detailed

2:16:43 ↗ questions that great uh council member

2:16:46 ↗ Joe and uh anybody else wishing to speak

2:16:49 ↗ because I do want to get them to go

2:16:51 ↗ through their next steps as well okay

2:16:53 ↗ council member Joe thank you Madame

2:16:55 ↗ mayor um on your other metric slide uh

2:16:58 ↗ you talked about it's 19 of 26 you

2:17:01 ↗ talked about um assesses efficiency and

2:17:05 ↗ Effectiveness and improve decision-

2:17:08 ↗ making um and and I think those are two

2:17:11 ↗ things you're focused on that are are

2:17:13 ↗ Central to this um I work with a water

2:17:17 ↗ district in an undisclosed location that

2:17:20 ↗ uh

2:17:21 ↗ you know doesn't communicate back with

2:17:24 ↗ the people that are applying that they

2:17:27 ↗ even receive the application and that

2:17:29 ↗ it's complete because water districts

2:17:32 ↗ are not under

2:17:33 ↗ 5290 yet um could you talk a little bit

2:17:37 ↗ about um I I heard that for decision

2:17:42 ↗ making you don't have necessarily A a

2:17:46 ↗ straight line of people that need to

2:17:49 ↗ approve something but you have people on

2:17:51 ↗ duty that may be able to answer

2:17:53 ↗ questions and keep a application moving

2:17:55 ↗ forward without having specific people

2:17:58 ↗ there because of Vacations or absences

2:18:01 ↗ Etc could you expand on that a little

2:18:03 ↗ bit more so we can have a better picture

2:18:05 ↗ of how you're increasing eff efficiency

2:18:08 ↗ and Effectiveness through that

2:18:10 ↗ application process sure um so I think

2:18:13 ↗ what the example we will giving um was

2:18:16 ↗ um our permit center is open Monday

2:18:18 ↗ through Friday 9: to 4:00 p.m. um so

2:18:21 ↗ each um staff member from each of their

2:18:25 ↗ teams is um on duty that day so for any

2:18:29 ↗ walk-ins that come in you know we want

2:18:30 ↗ to provide the service that they can get

2:18:32 ↗ talk to a live person if there's a phone

2:18:34 ↗ call that they're calling in we also

2:18:35 ↗ have an ability for people to schedule a

2:18:38 ↗ cuity meetings um and so on and so forth

2:18:41 ↗ so so they're already they know that

2:18:43 ↗ that for that particular day but they

2:18:45 ↗ cycle through right so we have you know

2:18:48 ↗ four planners um they'll each pick a day

2:18:52 ↗ so one's here on Monday then the other

2:18:54 ↗ one's Tuesday Thursday they know the day

2:18:56 ↗ they're on duty they are going to be

2:18:57 ↗ interrupted with phone calls with

2:18:59 ↗ walk-ins and assistance of that nature

2:19:02 ↗ but it's one day a week the rest of the

2:19:03 ↗ day they can focus on their other pieces

2:19:05 ↗ so for that day the permit Texs that are

2:19:07 ↗ under James um do the intake and

2:19:11 ↗ issuance and fee um pieces to of the

2:19:14 ↗ permitting software so they touch it

2:19:15 ↗ first and they touch it the last uh and

2:19:18 ↗ and Route it and all that kind of stuff

2:19:20 ↗ so when when the permit techs have taken

2:19:22 ↗ the stuff from my building permit.com

2:19:24 ↗ they have it loaded on their two

2:19:26 ↗ monitors and Screen they're trying to

2:19:28 ↗ figure out is it ready for me to stamp

2:19:30 ↗ create the blue beam session do all of

2:19:32 ↗ that kind of stuff and Route it um

2:19:35 ↗ sometimes majority of the 80% they can

2:19:37 ↗ make the call it's complete sometimes

2:19:39 ↗ it's really not clear it's labeled this

2:19:42 ↗ but they're not quite sure is this a

2:19:43 ↗ structural set or not um in those cases

2:19:46 ↗ we wanted the the team members that are

2:19:49 ↗ on duty that day to be able to assist

2:19:51 ↗ them on their call so that saves them

2:19:54 ↗ time so they don't have to close it send

2:19:56 ↗ an email wait for a response go some

2:19:58 ↗ other day that they have it all open

2:20:00 ↗ that they should be able to make that

2:20:02 ↗ call if they need help we should be able

2:20:04 ↗ to provide help to them to make that

2:20:06 ↗ call and I appreciate the uh cross

2:20:09 ↗ training that I I think I'm hearing

2:20:11 ↗ within your department and uh as we look

2:20:14 ↗ at the facilities and how we're going to

2:20:17 ↗ uh have a new city hall or some Min City

2:20:20 ↗ or whatever we decide to do I think the

2:20:22 ↗ model that you have that you developed

2:20:25 ↗ um can help us as we try to hone down

2:20:29 ↗ the number of people that might be in

2:20:30 ↗ the office but still improve the

2:20:32 ↗ efficiency and the quality of service

2:20:34 ↗ that we're providing so thank you thank

2:20:36 ↗ you council member um any more questions

2:20:39 ↗ at this time it won't be the end of

2:20:40 ↗ questions it's just questions at this

2:20:42 ↗ time and if not I will have Minnie go

2:20:46 ↗ through the next steps yeah this is real

2:20:49 ↗ um quick so you know we'll continue to

2:20:51 ↗ analyze um the survey data that we

2:20:53 ↗ talked about um and all these

2:20:55 ↗ performance measures um we have this

2:20:58 ↗ target data end of quarter two for uh at

2:21:00 ↗ least getting the first uh big um push

2:21:04 ↗ for getting all of those recommendations

2:21:05 ↗ in place um we plan to recruit and fill

2:21:09 ↗ the permit coordinator position um by

2:21:12 ↗ July um and then we'll come back to

2:21:14 ↗ Council in September with the progress

2:21:17 ↗ report that's what we're thinking but

2:21:19 ↗ we're happy to adjust whatever you think

2:21:20 ↗ think and we're back to

2:21:23 ↗ questions any additional questions had

2:21:26 ↗ some great ones

2:21:28 ↗ already okay Minnie I'm not seeing

2:21:31 ↗ anything want to thank you for bringing

2:21:32 ↗ so many of the team members here today

2:21:35 ↗ including borro Tina Edgars from the

2:21:37 ↗ executive

2:21:39 ↗ office um nice to get that report and

2:21:42 ↗ see what you're working on there's a lot

2:21:44 ↗ going on thank you okay so as a reminder

2:21:48 ↗ there is no action for this tonight this

2:21:50 ↗ was just a informational update we're

2:21:51 ↗ going to move into good of the order I

2:21:53 ↗ have a couple of meeting announcements

2:21:55 ↗ and I believe uh Deputy Council uh

2:21:58 ↗ president D Michelle and I have a little

2:22:00 ↗ update on a convening that was held this

2:22:02 ↗ morning so I'll go through the dates and

2:22:05 ↗ put up your microphone if you've got

2:22:06 ↗ something else Monday March 31st is a

2:22:08 ↗ special city council meeting with the

2:22:09 ↗ isqua school district board of directors

2:22:12 ↗ it will be at 6 pm at the Holly Street

2:22:14 ↗ Early Learning Center and dinner is

2:22:16 ↗ going to be catered by L Cafe Liberty

2:22:18 ↗ High Liberty High School school's

2:22:20 ↗ culinary program Monday April 17th is a

2:22:23 ↗ regular city council meeting and the

2:22:25 ↗ anticipated agenda items are light rail

2:22:28 ↗ station area vision and guiding

2:22:29 ↗ principles city council vacancy process

2:22:33 ↗ debrief okay good good of the order if

2:22:36 ↗ I'm not seeing anything I'll introduce

2:22:38 ↗ Barb and hand it over to you um as was

2:22:41 ↗ mentioned at the council retreat by both

2:22:43 ↗ council member Joe and Deputy council

2:22:44 ↗ president this is a very uniquely

2:22:48 ↗ difficult challenging time again

2:22:51 ↗ so for the second time in 5 years we're

2:22:52 ↗ finding oursel in a situation where

2:22:54 ↗ things are changing very

2:22:56 ↗ rapidly um at the federal level we're

2:22:59 ↗ hearing financial crisis at the state

2:23:01 ↗ level at the county level and you did

2:23:03 ↗ your own belt tightening last year as

2:23:05 ↗ you looked at your projected revenues

2:23:07 ↗ and expenditures um it has a lot of

2:23:10 ↗ different groups within our community

2:23:13 ↗ anxious and nervous for different

2:23:15 ↗ reasons um so during the retreat uh

2:23:18 ↗ Deputy Council D Michelle and Council m

2:23:20 ↗ both suggested whether or not there was

2:23:22 ↗ an opportunity to convene the Human

2:23:24 ↗ Services nonprofit group um during covid

2:23:28 ↗ there were some coalitions that were

2:23:30 ↗ formed amongst different service

2:23:32 ↗ providers that were super helpful and so

2:23:33 ↗ I think the hope is here you know the

2:23:36 ↗ city doesn't have the staff the city

2:23:38 ↗ doesn't have the budget to take on

2:23:40 ↗ organization of an outside group but we

2:23:42 ↗ definitely can use our time as electeds

2:23:44 ↗ to help with convenings where these U

2:23:48 ↗ participants in this particular sector

2:23:49 ↗ see value and continue themselves so

2:23:52 ↗ what we learned today with this first

2:23:54 ↗ convening was the attendance was

2:23:57 ↗ overwhelming way more uh organizations

2:23:59 ↗ showed up than we expected it went on 45

2:24:03 ↗ minute was it going to be a 45 minute or

2:24:05 ↗ an hour long one it went on for I'm

2:24:08 ↗ thinking about 90 minutes I actually had

2:24:10 ↗ to step out myself at the end and um

2:24:13 ↗ with one of our Council candidates Tina

2:24:16 ↗ Hayes also participating kind of to

2:24:19 ↗ document sort of the St of what was

2:24:21 ↗ going on the check-in is going to yield

2:24:23 ↗ a lot of good information I don't I

2:24:25 ↗ don't have the direct data to share but

2:24:27 ↗ the questions were asked um what federal

2:24:29 ↗ funding have you lost what federal

2:24:32 ↗ funding is at risk and what have you not

2:24:35 ↗ heard about in terms of federal funding

2:24:37 ↗ that's a possibility for you in 2025

2:24:39 ↗ what percentage of your overall budget

2:24:40 ↗ is this is and the answers were so

2:24:44 ↗ widely variable that we will be sending

2:24:47 ↗ you the spreadsheet that shows you um

2:24:50 ↗ and and that after the state budget

2:24:52 ↗ drops this group would like to convene

2:24:54 ↗ again because there will be a little

2:24:56 ↗ more clarity around additional Cuts

2:24:58 ↗ besides just Federal program

2:25:00 ↗ interruptions additional cuts that may

2:25:02 ↗ impact services and um that potentially

2:25:07 ↗ throughout this entire year this group

2:25:09 ↗ should convene once a quarter just to

2:25:11 ↗ talk about the CH the changes that are

2:25:14 ↗ ongoing we're not thinking stabilization

2:25:17 ↗ is coming anytime soon we're thinking

2:25:19 ↗ chaos is going to be

2:25:22 ↗ 2025 um Council M de Michelle took some

2:25:26 ↗ very brief summary notes that she can

2:25:27 ↗ share with you right now um but when we

2:25:29 ↗ get the data we will help there's other

2:25:31 ↗ groups in town that also want to have

2:25:32 ↗ convenings we have employees in we have

2:25:35 ↗ residents in town who have been let go

2:25:37 ↗ from federal employment and they have a

2:25:39 ↗ unique set of needs that they'd like to

2:25:41 ↗ sit down and talk about so I see this as

2:25:43 ↗ kind of this is the work that the

2:25:45 ↗ electeds will be doing in the community

2:25:47 ↗ throughout the year and then sharing

2:25:49 ↗ back here council member D Michelle yeah

2:25:52 ↗ oops there we go uh thank you mayor

2:25:54 ↗ paully and yeah we had a really

2:25:56 ↗ excellent discussion and mayor paully

2:25:58 ↗ did a fantastic job of leading the

2:26:00 ↗ discussion and probing uh the comments

2:26:03 ↗ so that we got really good nuanced

2:26:05 ↗ information from people I counted 16

2:26:08 ↗ agencies and several of the agencies

2:26:11 ↗ brought more than one representative so

2:26:13 ↗ we had uh well over 20 22 people on the

2:26:17 ↗ line uh during the the uh process so

2:26:21 ↗ what I'm going to give you is a really

2:26:23 ↗ high level uh what we heard this is what

2:26:25 ↗ I shared with them at the end uh that I

2:26:28 ↗ had that I had heard the first thing

2:26:31 ↗ that we heard is that some agencies are

2:26:33 ↗ already feeling the impacts of federal

2:26:35 ↗ and state decisions either in their

2:26:38 ↗ budgets or with their clients so uh it's

2:26:41 ↗ it wasn't the uh majority that are doing

2:26:44 ↗ that but it certainly was a significant

2:26:47 ↗ group of people who are already feeling

2:26:49 ↗ the impacts second thing is that all

2:26:52 ↗ agencies everybody that we talked to or

2:26:55 ↗ talk to us uh said that they are feeling

2:26:58 ↗ the impacts of threatened disruptions

2:27:00 ↗ threatened funding losses or threatened

2:27:03 ↗ impacts with their clients so everybody

2:27:06 ↗ is on high alert they're they're

2:27:08 ↗ watching what's going going on and they

2:27:11 ↗ are anticipating that something is going

2:27:14 ↗ to happen sooner rather than

2:27:16 ↗ later the third thing we heard uh from

2:27:19 ↗ more than one is that in isqua there is

2:27:21 ↗ an ecosystem of care so that what

2:27:25 ↗ happens to one agency or one client can

2:27:27 ↗ Ripple across several

2:27:29 ↗ agencies uh but we also felt like the

2:27:32 ↗ ecosystem can be a strength going into

2:27:35 ↗ the future because there are lots of

2:27:36 ↗ connections between our nonprofits that

2:27:39 ↗ uh provide Human Services uh especially

2:27:43 ↗ as uh many of them care for the same

2:27:46 ↗ people and that are in uh different

2:27:49 ↗ agencies are being being served by

2:27:50 ↗ different

2:27:51 ↗ agencies uh four it was really clear

2:27:54 ↗ unfortunately that there are specific

2:27:57 ↗ populations that are already feeling

2:27:59 ↗ severe

2:28:01 ↗ repercussions uh and our hearts go out

2:28:03 ↗ to them we heard some heartbreaking

2:28:05 ↗ stories already today uh and we won't go

2:28:08 ↗ into details but you'll get more details

2:28:10 ↗ when you see the spreadsheet that we're

2:28:11 ↗ going to share with you and then finally

2:28:14 ↗ uh the Human Services employees are

2:28:17 ↗ really feeling Stress and Anxiety about

2:28:19 ↗ the future right right now uh and about

2:28:22 ↗ their their jobs because just like

2:28:24 ↗ everybody else as this rolls down uh

2:28:28 ↗ different agencies different Human

2:28:30 ↗ Service Providers may have to cut their

2:28:33 ↗ Workforce uh in response to what is

2:28:36 ↗ happening in other places so uh we got

2:28:40 ↗ many thank yous yeah you weren't there

2:28:42 ↗ to hear oh hear them but I heard a few

2:28:45 ↗ when I in it people felt very good about

2:28:47 ↗ being heard about being able to share

2:28:49 ↗ and uh everyone uh nodded yes that they

2:28:53 ↗ would like to meet again yeah there was

2:28:54 ↗ big just like during Co um big consensus

2:28:58 ↗ that this is a difficult time for many

2:29:00 ↗ people for different reasons but they

2:29:02 ↗ need a place to go and talk and they

2:29:03 ↗ need a place to bounce ideas off of and

2:29:06 ↗ to perhaps form new connective tissue

2:29:08 ↗ that didn't exist before in their

2:29:10 ↗ particular sector so um it was good but

2:29:14 ↗ it was very hard to listen to and I I

2:29:15 ↗ just think that's what this kind this

2:29:17 ↗ year is going to be so really appreciate

2:29:19 ↗ the council member D Michelle being

2:29:22 ↗ there and like I said we'll report out I

2:29:24 ↗ think the big takeaway was that people

2:29:26 ↗ need to be heard right now and um I

2:29:30 ↗ don't I I don't think there's any way

2:29:32 ↗ that um we can't do enough listening

2:29:35 ↗ right now I mean we could listen 24

2:29:37 ↗ hours a day and people are still not

2:29:38 ↗ going to feel hurt so as much as you can

2:29:40 ↗ I would just encourage people um not

2:29:43 ↗ only the elected sit are sitting here

2:29:44 ↗ but people in our community to recognize

2:29:46 ↗ that there is a big need out there right

2:29:48 ↗ now uh due to the uncertainty it's

2:29:50 ↗ causing enormous anxiety um and the best

2:29:53 ↗ thing we can do in most cases right now

2:29:55 ↗ is to find out where it's happening and

2:29:58 ↗ listen and talk about you know ways the

2:30:01 ↗ community itself all of us can come

2:30:03 ↗ together and try and help yeah so yeah

2:30:07 ↗ it was

2:30:08 ↗ good and uh any more good of the

2:30:12 ↗ order not seeing it the there is no

2:30:15 ↗ executive session this evening so we are

2:30:18 ↗ adjourned at 9:30 right

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 (6)

Lindsey Walsh

Barbara de Michele

Zach Hall

Kelly Jiang

Russell Joe

Tola Marts

Staff (4)

Wally Bobkiewicz, City Administrator

Andrea Snyder, Deputy City Administrator

Rachel Bender Turpin, City Attorney

Tisha Gieser, City Clerk

Excused

Chris Reh

Motions and votes (1)

approve the consent agenda as presented. . a)

Moved by Walsh · seconded by de Michele

Carried 6-0

In favor: Lindsey Walsh, Barbara de Michele, Zach Hall, Kelly Jiang, Russell Joe, Tola Marts