City Council Services, Safety & Parks Committee · Wednesday, August 9, 2023 · City Council Digest

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of July 18, 2023

packet pp.5–6

▶ Watch from 1:35 Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 07-18-23 City Council Services, Safety & Parks Page (1) Committee Minutes CITY OF ISSAQUAH City Council Services, Safety & Parks Committee 6:30 PM Council Chambers, 135 E. July 18, 2023 MINUTES Sunset Way, Issaquah WA

4. AGENDA ITEMS

Affordable Housing Capital Funding & Pioneer Program ID 1457

60 min · Jen Davis-Hayes, Economic Development Manager · packet pp.7–67

Topics: HousingBudget

Previously discussed: City Council Regular Meeting · May 22, 2023

▶ Watch from 42:21 Open packet at p.7 ↗

Staff report:

Affordable Housing Funding • Create fund to solicit proposals with specific priorities, aligned with community needs • Provide funding to ARCH Trust Fund

2103 segments .txt ↗

0:02 ↗ welcome everyone I council member Tola

0:04 ↗ Martz call the Tuesday Wednesday August

0:07 ↗ 9th 2023 uh city services safety and

0:11 ↗ Parks committee to order

0:13 ↗ there are multiple public comment

0:16 ↗ opportunities at tonight's meeting

0:17 ↗ there's a general public comment

0:19 ↗ opportunity at the beginning of the

0:21 ↗ meeting or you can make comments after

0:23 ↗ the presentation and counsel question

0:25 ↗ and answer period on tonight's agenda

0:27 ↗ item members of the public May address

0:29 ↗ council at this time in person or

0:31 ↗ virtually those who signed up in advance

0:33 ↗ to make comments will be called on first

0:34 ↗ if you're joining us virtually and would

0:36 ↗ like to make comments please raise your

0:38 ↗ virtual hand you can do that by pressing

0:39 ↗ star three if you've joined by computer

0:43 ↗ or smartphone look for a hand icon this

0:45 ↗ varies by device one option may be to go

0:48 ↗ to the participant panel and choose the

0:49 ↗ raise hand icon in the lower right hand

0:51 ↗ corner if you're in the room and did not

0:54 ↗ sign up I will ask for other speakers

0:55 ↗ before closing this portion of meeting

0:58 ↗ I'll wait a moment to see if anyone

1:00 ↗ wishes to raise their hand

1:05 ↗ Burke has anyone signed up to speak or

1:06 ↗ indicated a desire to speak this evening

1:10 ↗ chair Martz uh no one has indicated a

1:13 ↗ desire to speak at the general public

1:15 ↗ comment and we have no virtual attendees

1:17 ↗ at the moment

1:19 ↗ all right well I will save my spiel

1:22 ↗ about public comment to see if anyone

1:24 ↗ speaks to the

1:26 ↗ um

1:26 ↗ uh item that we have on this evening as

1:29 ↗ a reminder reading comments can be

1:30 ↗ submitted at any time to city council at

1:33 ↗ issaquah.gov

1:35 ↗ next item is approval of minutes

1:39 ↗ do we have a motion to approve the

1:42 ↗ minutes sure when I would move to adopt

1:44 ↗ the minutes from July 18th 2023. second

1:50 ↗ all those in favor say aye aye

1:52 ↗ opposed abstentions that carries

1:57 ↗ our next item is ID 1457 affordable

2:01 ↗ housing Capital funding and Pioneer

2:02 ↗ program the presentation this evening is

2:05 ↗ going to be from Jen Davis Hayes our

2:06 ↗ economic development manager take it

2:09 ↗ away Chen

2:15 ↗ microphone good evening

2:18 ↗ um thank you for having me here this

2:19 ↗ evening

2:21 ↗ um we're here tonight to talk about two

2:22 ↗ different topics the affordable housing

2:24 ↗ fund fun funding that we have as well as

2:26 ↗ an update in the Pioneer program that

2:29 ↗ Council has asked us to explore

2:31 ↗ so as we know affordable housing is a

2:33 ↗ very complex issue and the items we're

2:35 ↗ discussing tonight are two pieces of a

2:37 ↗ very large puzzle that we are will be uh

2:40 ↗ we as a city will be utilizing to

2:43 ↗ increase affordable housing in our city

2:44 ↗ so again the first one is to talk about

2:46 ↗ the funding and the second one uh is a

2:49 ↗ Pioneer project and as it states in the

2:51 ↗ central Islam Issaquah plan is intended

2:54 ↗ for initial residential projects within

2:56 ↗ the plan area that are given additional

2:58 ↗ incentives to balance the risk involved

3:01 ↗ in being the first in the market area so

3:03 ↗ again while it has some relation to

3:04 ↗ affordable housing it's a it's kind of a

3:06 ↗ little different as well

3:09 ↗ so for those of you in the power

3:11 ↗ following in the PowerPoint in the

3:12 ↗ packet I moved this one slide one uh

3:15 ↗ spot sooner but tonight we wanted to

3:16 ↗ gather their feedback about our approach

3:18 ↗ before we dive into the programmatic

3:20 ↗ details and data estimates of the impact

3:23 ↗ so the two distinct topics again do you

3:26 ↗ agree with the creation of the fund does

3:28 ↗ the approach support the policy aims the

3:31 ↗ committee wishes to further

3:33 ↗ do you agree with additional allocation

3:34 ↗ to the arch trust fund and the

3:36 ↗ recommendations and then the second part

3:39 ↗ about the the Pioneer program is do you

3:41 ↗ agree with framework changes we're

3:43 ↗ proposing tonight

3:45 ↗ so first talking about the funding um so

3:48 ↗ you probably remember this slide it is a

3:52 ↗ summary of what we anticipate to collect

3:54 ↗ between 2021 and 2024 what we have

3:58 ↗ allocated already for expenditures and

4:00 ↗ the remaining balance so we are talking

4:01 ↗ about the 2.4 approximately 2.4 million

4:04 ↗ dollars of the two Revenue sources here

4:07 ↗ outlined in red

4:09 ↗ um the we will we are beginning to have

4:11 ↗ internal conversations about the

4:12 ↗ development bonus funding that is

4:15 ↗ eligible for open space and affordable

4:18 ↗ housing so you want to have some initial

4:19 ↗ conversations and bring that back to

4:21 ↗ council later on

4:24 ↗ and then a reminder of the criteria of

4:27 ↗ the funding we're talking about because

4:28 ↗ uh there is some pretty uh specific

4:32 ↗ criteria so anything we add on to as as

4:34 ↗ we develop the fund we'll we'll further

4:37 ↗ refine the types of projects that could

4:38 ↗ be funded so the HB 1590 is the more

4:43 ↗ restrictive funding source so if

4:45 ↗ construction or acquiring affordable

4:47 ↗ housing there's specific populations

4:48 ↗ that are have to be at 60 percent area

4:51 ↗ meeting income Ami or or below or below

4:56 ↗ um hb1406 funding does not have that

4:59 ↗ requirement for the specific populations

5:01 ↗ and then the other two uh requirements

5:05 ↗ or criteria for the HB 1590 which is

5:09 ↗ where most of our resources are are the

5:11 ↗ behavioral health related facilities

5:13 ↗ which we are you know investing in the

5:15 ↗ terrains at Orient development and the

5:17 ↗ operations of new affordable housing or

5:19 ↗ facilities providing housing related

5:21 ↗ services or evaluation and treatment

5:23 ↗ centers so again very specific current

5:26 ↗ criteria so we of course need to follow

5:28 ↗ that so based on that criteria we are

5:31 ↗ really thinking about this on the

5:32 ↗ housing Continuum of what we can fund

5:34 ↗ could any be anywhere between Emergency

5:36 ↗ Shelters an affordable rental and

5:38 ↗ ownership scale

5:41 ↗ foreign

5:41 ↗ so when we were at the committee of the

5:43 ↗ whole on May 23rd City Council Members

5:46 ↗ expressed interest in exploring

5:48 ↗ preservation

5:49 ↗ making sure that our Transit Orient

5:51 ↗ development project is fully funded and

5:53 ↗ then there was an interest in exploring

5:55 ↗ an investment in the arch trust fund

5:57 ↗ so one of the questions around

5:59 ↗ preservation that was asked uh often was

6:04 ↗ about if uh the current of the current

6:08 ↗ uh residents in the affordable naturally

6:11 ↗ occurring affordable housing would meet

6:13 ↗ the crisis criteria we don't know that

6:16 ↗ because we do not have data income data

6:17 ↗ on private Market rental things so if we

6:21 ↗ would if we would receive a application

6:23 ↗ for this type if we proceed with this

6:25 ↗ and receive an application for

6:26 ↗ preservation we would get that

6:27 ↗ information that time and it would be

6:29 ↗ required one of the things in talking

6:31 ↗ with Arch staff said that there's

6:33 ↗ there's methods to do this including

6:35 ↗ transitioning as vacancies happen so I

6:37 ↗ know there was a concern about

6:39 ↗ displacing a current residence so again

6:42 ↗ that is not something that all the

6:44 ↗ details have been figured out but we can

6:45 ↗ we can adjust some of those

6:49 ↗ so our sorry our recommendation tonight

6:53 ↗ for the affordable housing funding that

6:55 ↗ we are currently collecting is to create

6:58 ↗ a strategic opportunity fund

7:01 ↗ um and to have a make a one-time

7:04 ↗ investment in the arch trust fund and so

7:07 ↗ we'll talk about each of these in more

7:08 ↗ details

7:10 ↗ so for the Strategic opportunity fund

7:13 ↗ um this slide references the policy aims

7:15 ↗ that one of our question references

7:18 ↗ so uh here we're talking about we could

7:20 ↗ focus on the priorities as mentioned in

7:22 ↗ this previous city council meeting a

7:24 ↗ preservation and Transit Orient

7:26 ↗ development and this one not just in

7:29 ↗ context to our current King County

7:31 ↗ Housing Authority Tod but any other

7:32 ↗ project that would come within a defined

7:35 ↗ area of the transit center so again if

7:38 ↗ there's other developments that are

7:39 ↗ going to meet that criteria

7:42 ↗ um and then in addition we added

7:44 ↗ Community Partnerships aspect so those

7:46 ↗ were things that uh looking at our

7:48 ↗ City's strategic plan

7:51 ↗ um two things that are mentioned in

7:52 ↗ there working with faith based

7:54 ↗ organizations faith-based and other

7:56 ↗ organizations to evaluate Partnerships

7:58 ↗ for housing affordable housing

8:00 ↗ development and facilitate non-profit

8:02 ↗ organizations to locate or expand to

8:05 ↗ provide needed Services locally so both

8:07 ↗ of those things already in our adoptive

8:08 ↗ strategic plan that made made a lot of

8:10 ↗ sense to include as one of the

8:12 ↗ priorities for this fund

8:15 ↗ um so one of the questions is uh for

8:18 ↗ Council is is there an um desire to

8:21 ↗ further Target populations so again

8:23 ↗ looking at that list of the specific

8:25 ↗ populations there's there are a

8:27 ↗ prioritization that we would like to

8:28 ↗ prioritize certain populations

8:31 ↗ something we can discuss

8:33 ↗ yeah

8:35 ↗ um thank you for this presentation I had

8:37 ↗ a question if you could just put a

8:38 ↗ little bit of meat on the bones so to

8:41 ↗ speak of Community Partnerships what

8:43 ↗ what are some of the examples are are we

8:46 ↗ looking at here yeah so it could be

8:48 ↗ working with a community but based

8:50 ↗ development organization so impact

8:52 ↗ impact housing

8:55 ↗ um it could mean working with a

8:56 ↗ faith-based organization that has land

8:58 ↗ it could mean working with a non-profit

9:01 ↗ in our community that is looking for

9:03 ↗ more space and provides services to the

9:05 ↗ populations that are eligible so

9:10 ↗ um you know we did see some interest in

9:12 ↗ a a religious organization uh just on

9:15 ↗ Front Street South I was looking to

9:16 ↗ build affordable housing and actually at

9:18 ↗ one time looking to house the food bank

9:20 ↗ so there are a lot of faith-based uh

9:23 ↗ organizations in the city that have a

9:24 ↗ lot of land and so that would be one

9:26 ↗ thing to kind of explore if there's

9:27 ↗ interest from others as well

9:30 ↗ is that a little bit similar to the

9:33 ↗ action that Bellevue took to look and

9:36 ↗ evaluate their their Church properties

9:39 ↗ and figure out whether or not some of

9:40 ↗ that city funding for affordable housing

9:42 ↗ could be used in partnership with with

9:44 ↗ those it sounds like I'm not sure the

9:46 ↗ details but it sounds like that okay yes

9:48 ↗ thank you yep that's on my to-do list to

9:50 ↗ go into and inquire about interest and

9:52 ↗ and make connections so again we

9:54 ↗ wouldn't be the housing developer but

9:55 ↗ making those connections where there's

9:57 ↗ interest

9:58 ↗ so as I mentioned if the committee

10:00 ↗ agrees with the creation of this fund

10:02 ↗ will return with more programmatic

10:04 ↗ details and including criteria but I

10:06 ↗ wanted to share a little bit of what

10:08 ↗ we're looking at

10:10 ↗ um what it could look like of course we

10:12 ↗ first need to meet the criteria of the

10:14 ↗ funding source

10:16 ↗ um then I in the gray brown boxes up

10:18 ↗ here are criteria that other cities

10:22 ↗ applications currently have so again

10:23 ↗ pretty specific things when you look at

10:26 ↗ requests for proposals that you want to

10:27 ↗ explore

10:28 ↗ and then the green boxes are criteria

10:30 ↗ that we could either require or add

10:33 ↗ additional points to further other City

10:35 ↗ goals and so again these are just ideas

10:37 ↗ not set in stone and we're you know

10:39 ↗ again interested to see if you're agree

10:41 ↗ with this approach moving forward so if

10:43 ↗ there's again a desire to this is where

10:46 ↗ it could be where you have a specific

10:47 ↗ population if you're serving teens you

10:49 ↗ get an extra five points or whatever it

10:51 ↗ may be so there's a way to again meet

10:54 ↗ our other goals within the city through

10:56 ↗ this fund

10:58 ↗ and then again we you know again we will

11:00 ↗ return further bring back further

11:02 ↗ information about metrics and criteria

11:05 ↗ so including the you know the mount per

11:08 ↗ uh funding per project

11:11 ↗ um and other what we expect how many

11:13 ↗ units we expect to create I did include

11:16 ↗ arches last quarterly report that has a

11:19 ↗ little bit of information about their

11:21 ↗ um funding to give you an idea because

11:23 ↗ again not every project is a little

11:24 ↗ different and it depends on the funding

11:26 ↗ source and this type of project but just

11:28 ↗ to give an idea of where where they are

11:31 ↗ looking at as far as

11:33 ↗ um actually per unit uh costs but we

11:37 ↗ would also want to make sure that we

11:38 ↗ look at for rental if it's something

11:40 ↗ around with a non-profit affordable

11:43 ↗ housing developer or for-profit housing

11:45 ↗ developer approaching those may be a

11:47 ↗ little different and if it's an

11:49 ↗ ownership making sure that we have

11:50 ↗ Covenant in there to have long long-term

11:53 ↗ affordability while allowing the current

11:55 ↗ the owners to gain some Equity as well

11:57 ↗ so again these are things that we will

11:59 ↗ further refine but we wanted to let you

12:01 ↗ know we are thinking about these they

12:03 ↗ are important we haven't dove into the

12:05 ↗ into the details yet

12:07 ↗ Michelle

12:11 ↗ um so uh with one of the eligible

12:14 ↗ expenditures be helping non-profits and

12:17 ↗ faith-based organizations to do the

12:19 ↗ planning for

12:20 ↗ affordable housing and I asked that

12:22 ↗ question because I was on the board of

12:25 ↗ the together Center when we started that

12:27 ↗ planning and boy did we need we needed a

12:30 ↗ consultant to come in and

12:32 ↗ um and she did a fabulous job but that's

12:36 ↗ a commitment of funds and

12:38 ↗ expertise to a project that really needs

12:41 ↗ to be helpful especially with people who

12:43 ↗ are not used to doing

12:45 ↗ major development projects so is that an

12:48 ↗ eligible expense that would be able to

12:50 ↗ look at and maybe I will ask a phone a

12:52 ↗ friend here so when I look at the

12:54 ↗ definition it says construct or acquire

12:56 ↗ affordable housing usually and construct

12:58 ↗ that does include design costs and so

13:00 ↗ I'm going to ask uh Our Guest here for

13:04 ↗ arched Lindsay Masters to make provide

13:08 ↗ some more context

13:10 ↗ that's generally been the interpretation

13:12 ↗ that we've received is it does need to

13:15 ↗ be tied to a project so if a community

13:19 ↗ or another property owner wasn't really

13:21 ↗ ready to commit their property to

13:23 ↗ affordable housing this wouldn't

13:26 ↗ necessarily be a good source of funding

13:28 ↗ for that but there could be other

13:29 ↗ sources of funding out there and we have

13:32 ↗ been working with Bellevue on some

13:34 ↗ approaches like that

13:37 ↗ foreign

13:59 ↗ yes so that was part one of our

14:01 ↗ recommendation for the funding part two

14:03 ↗ is uh making a 50 contribution of our

14:07 ↗ fifth HB 1406 allocations will will

14:10 ↗ collect through uh 2024 so that's an

14:13 ↗ approximately a little over three

14:14 ↗ hundred thousand dollars and this will

14:17 ↗ help to increase affordable housing

14:19 ↗ resources for the region as we heard

14:21 ↗ interest in the uh past meeting it

14:24 ↗ aligns with other cities that are doing

14:26 ↗ this

14:27 ↗ um we recommending 50 this time because

14:29 ↗ we have programs that are in the pilot

14:31 ↗ stage that may want to utilize as more

14:33 ↗ flexible funding so you know we have

14:35 ↗ we've used uh we have done rental

14:38 ↗ assistance prior we also have Motel 6

14:41 ↗ pilot going on and there's some other

14:42 ↗ programs so we we want to keep some of

14:44 ↗ this money for to be able to implement

14:46 ↗ some things in the in the future years

14:49 ↗ agenda did we already have out of as

14:51 ↗ part of our regular biennial budget and

14:54 ↗ Arch contribution yes and you're going

14:57 ↗ to ask me what that is and I'm going to

14:58 ↗ forget

14:59 ↗ so let me uh do you know yeah she

15:03 ↗ probably knows yes

15:06 ↗ um I believe the regular contribution to

15:08 ↗ the trust fund is 175 000.

15:12 ↗ so we're currently it annually or

15:14 ↗ biannually annually annually is 175. all

15:18 ↗ right thank you great question thank you

15:20 ↗ sorry I didn't have that to my tip of my

15:22 ↗ tongue

15:23 ↗ um and so then just as we looked at so

15:24 ↗ Bellevue is the only other city in the

15:26 ↗ east side that's collecting the 0.1

15:27 ↗ percent sales tax and they've done a

15:29 ↗ similar approach to this or would they

15:30 ↗ have a fund and then they have the in

15:32 ↗ the future actually going to be

15:33 ↗ contributing their 1406 money to Arch as

15:37 ↗ other cities are so again we're we're in

15:39 ↗ a line with what uh Bellevue is doing

15:43 ↗ um and when doing this we're going to

15:45 ↗ work very closely with Arch regarding

15:48 ↗ our funding and their funding

15:50 ↗ so in summary uh our two recommendations

15:53 ↗ for the funding are to create a

15:55 ↗ strategic opportunity fund with a

15:57 ↗ broader Focus allowing Issaquah to

16:00 ↗ pursue specific housing opportunities

16:01 ↗ within the community and it provides an

16:04 ↗ incentive and a tool that currently

16:06 ↗ doesn't exist to develop here in

16:07 ↗ Issaquah

16:09 ↗ um and then we again believe uh making a

16:11 ↗ contribution to add to our current

16:14 ↗ contribution for the arch trust fund is

16:16 ↗ a a wise decision to help

16:19 ↗ Regional Housing and or additional

16:22 ↗ housing here in Issaquah

16:24 ↗ and and can you remind me what 50 of the

16:28 ↗ 2021 to 2024 HB 1406 funding yes it is

16:32 ↗ just over 200 300 000 so again we we

16:36 ↗ expect to

16:37 ↗ um collect 612 456 so safe to say 300

16:43 ↗ 000 plus over per annually or over the

16:47 ↗ course of the three years sorry this is

16:49 ↗ this is uh the 612 000 is for the

16:52 ↗ four-year collection from 2021 to 2024.

16:56 ↗ so we would make a one-time contribution

16:58 ↗ of 300 000. or half of this yeah yeah

17:01 ↗ got it so it would be

17:04 ↗ um we currently so annualized that would

17:07 ↗ be seventy five thousand dollars on top

17:10 ↗ of the 175 that we do currently I was

17:13 ↗ just sort of trying to I just wanted to

17:14 ↗ get an order of magnitude about what we

17:16 ↗ were talking about compared to our you

17:19 ↗ know sort of persistent uh contribution

17:21 ↗ that's great

17:23 ↗ thank you yeah no these are great

17:24 ↗ questions so and again that's you know

17:27 ↗ it's estimated and I think that's a

17:28 ↗ pretty solid number because it's less

17:30 ↗ about sales tax collection and more

17:31 ↗ about pass-through money

17:33 ↗ okay so Switching gears a bit uh for the

17:37 ↗ Pioneer project

17:39 ↗ um so as I mentioned

17:42 ↗ um this is something that in the April

17:45 ↗ Committee of the whole meeting there was

17:47 ↗ a request to look into this more and so

17:49 ↗ while there is an affordability

17:50 ↗ component

17:52 ↗ um it mentions in the central physical

17:54 ↗ plan the reason to right to implement a

17:57 ↗ Pioneer program is to look at a phased

18:00 ↗ approach to the development to serve the

18:02 ↗ needs of our growth

18:04 ↗ um and it's for a certain number of

18:05 ↗ units uh it is not intended to set

18:08 ↗ precedent for future developments

18:10 ↗ um but it's really in recognition of the

18:12 ↗ increased challenges of initial

18:14 ↗ residential developments in this

18:16 ↗ transitioning area again those are all

18:17 ↗ words from the Issaquah essential

18:19 ↗ Issaquah plan and it aligns with the

18:23 ↗ desire to locate the majority of our

18:25 ↗ housing growth in central Issaquah so

18:28 ↗ after the May meeting met with Arch

18:31 ↗ staff several times to talk about what

18:33 ↗ other cities are doing and how we could

18:35 ↗ approach this

18:37 ↗ and so again looking at in the housing

18:40 ↗ Continuum we're looking at these two

18:42 ↗ boxes of affordable rental and market

18:45 ↗ rate rental options

18:48 ↗ so the recommendation we are the options

18:51 ↗ we're looking at is to oops I'm sorry my

18:53 ↗ mouse is going a little faster than me

18:56 ↗ um so to modify the Pioneer program as

19:00 ↗ outlined the central Issaquah planned

19:01 ↗ with some adjustments to address the

19:03 ↗ barriers and opportunities for other

19:05 ↗ City goal inclusion or simply not to

19:08 ↗ proceed with implementation of this plan

19:12 ↗ so this slide outlines the elements

19:14 ↗ defined in the central Issaquah plan

19:16 ↗ recommended for a Pioneer program one

19:19 ↗ small change I will tell you about is in

19:20 ↗ the green box where it says the first

19:23 ↗ hundred residential units in mixed use

19:25 ↗ Zone it actually said in the rest of

19:29 ↗ essential Issaquah I changed that

19:31 ↗ because we really are focused on the

19:34 ↗ mixed-use zone and urban core zones for

19:36 ↗ inclusionary zoning and where we want to

19:38 ↗ we have amenity Rich products there so

19:43 ↗ instead of allowing those 100 100 units

19:46 ↗ to be all throughout this the the other

19:49 ↗ area

19:50 ↗ so uh the I'm sorry

19:53 ↗ I know yeah um so the the the urban core

19:58 ↗ Zone and the mixed-use zone or basically

20:02 ↗ uh the the areas that are there have a

20:05 ↗ higher density through zoning they have

20:07 ↗ our amenities in so the shopping centers

20:09 ↗ along Gilman over by uh Costco and East

20:13 ↗ Lake sammamisha so those are those areas

20:14 ↗ there are some other zones in central

20:16 ↗ Issaquah like up by Newport and then

20:18 ↗ south of um Atlas where there's more

20:21 ↗ lower density residential so what I'm

20:24 ↗ saying is we're focusing this Pioneer

20:27 ↗ program on the urban core and the

20:29 ↗ mixed-use zone

20:31 ↗ um the change that I made for this green

20:33 ↗ box was that the original plan 10 years

20:36 ↗ ago said 100 units could be anywhere

20:39 ↗ else in central Issaquah and so since

20:41 ↗ we've had a lot of growth in Newport and

20:42 ↗ the other areas are less about density

20:44 ↗ and amenities that's just a little tweak

20:46 ↗ so I want to make sure I was being

20:48 ↗ honest about this is what it says in the

20:51 ↗ central escrow plan can you go back for

20:54 ↗ a second to that sort of Continuum of

20:55 ↗ housing that you had where you had

20:57 ↗ unhoused at one end in Market at the

20:59 ↗ other so I'm struck by the fact that

21:02 ↗ this is also the the part of the

21:04 ↗ spectrum where Tod

21:06 ↗ um really lies how did we decide that

21:08 ↗ this was the portion that if we move

21:11 ↗ forward this that the administration

21:13 ↗ would recommend in this portion of the

21:16 ↗ well this is really about where the so

21:19 ↗ the Pioneer program lands so we're

21:22 ↗ talking about 80 Ami and market rate you

21:25 ↗ know a mixed income building so I'm

21:27 ↗ sorry it's got to be 80 to well so we're

21:30 ↗ we're looking at 80 80 weird looking we

21:33 ↗ didn't we wouldn't have to no So

21:34 ↗ currently the requirement for the

21:36 ↗ inclusionary zone is at 60 percent

21:39 ↗ so that is again we'll get to my

21:41 ↗ recommendation of it being 80 percent

21:44 ↗ um in the in the central escort plan it

21:46 ↗ does talk about

21:48 ↗ um increasing or the the Ami increasing

21:52 ↗ the Ami percentages again to provide

21:54 ↗ that incentive for the first in the

21:56 ↗ market

21:57 ↗ um this Pi again this Pioneer program

21:59 ↗ isn't 100 about affordable housing only

22:01 ↗ it's about providing that incentive for

22:04 ↗ the first in the market

22:05 ↗ as well as providing what is first in

22:08 ↗ the market mean in this context

22:10 ↗ um so there are zero uh there has been

22:12 ↗ zero residential part uh communities

22:15 ↗ built in the urban core there's been one

22:19 ↗ residential Community built in mixed-use

22:21 ↗ zone since the plan adoption in 2012

22:24 ↗ that one is atlas

22:27 ↗ um Veil is actually in a different Zone

22:29 ↗ and so because we have what and with

22:32 ↗ those two zones we have zero affordable

22:35 ↗ housing built so this again would be

22:38 ↗ because nobody has built there so first

22:40 ↗ in the market there's always developers

22:42 ↗ or any other business always kind of

22:44 ↗ sits back and watches what happens are

22:46 ↗ you able to get the rents are you able

22:48 ↗ to be successful in getting the market

22:50 ↗ to uh pencil the project to pencil out

22:53 ↗ for you so I'm going to make sure I

22:56 ↗ heard you right you're going to later

22:58 ↗ explain why we're focusing on 80 to 100

23:00 ↗ rather than 60 to 80 is that what I

23:01 ↗ heard you say okay yeah thank you yep

23:04 ↗ yep no request okay

23:07 ↗ okay so

23:08 ↗ um

23:09 ↗ what so what we're looking at modifying

23:12 ↗ so we're proposing that again we do the

23:16 ↗ program as outlined in central squat

23:18 ↗ plan and we're proposing to further

23:20 ↗ adjust the development bonus requirement

23:23 ↗ that's in these zones from Ami

23:27 ↗ requirements from 60 to 80 percent but

23:30 ↗ also require the developer to choose

23:33 ↗ from a menu one additional thing that

23:36 ↗ helps reach another goal a set of the

23:38 ↗ city goals so they so here are examples

23:40 ↗ we could uh have that they increase

23:43 ↗ sustainability elements of their project

23:45 ↗ uh connection to the natural environment

23:48 ↗ um ground floor commercial space

23:50 ↗ provision of 80 to 100 120 Ami because

23:54 ↗ we talk about market rate we talked

23:56 ↗ about this before where it's not a

23:57 ↗ hundred percent in our community market

24:00 ↗ rate is not 100 Ami it's higher than

24:02 ↗ that so so that gets a little bit to the

24:04 ↗ missing middle and so

24:06 ↗ what we again what we're looking at um

24:09 ↗ the reason we're looking at these things

24:12 ↗ as I mentioned before is there hasn't

24:14 ↗ been development in here which means

24:15 ↗ we're not getting affordable housing as

24:17 ↗ part of our our uh

24:20 ↗ Central Issaquah Vision

24:22 ↗ um again focusing on Urban core and the

24:25 ↗ mixed uses where we already have a lot

24:27 ↗ of amenities we have the inclusionary

24:29 ↗ zoning we know that there's some

24:31 ↗ challenges to building in these areas

24:33 ↗ not all parts of the areas again every

24:35 ↗ partial is a little different that's why

24:36 ↗ you want to offer some options because

24:38 ↗ maybe one place would be best to have

24:41 ↗ more commercial ground floor where

24:42 ↗ another one is more connected to the to

24:44 ↗ the natural environment but

24:46 ↗ um because the the high water table that

24:49 ↗ requires structured parking to be above

24:51 ↗ ground which then

24:53 ↗ has the requirement you you meet you hit

24:57 ↗ the the height limit quicker than you

24:59 ↗ would if you had below ground parking so

25:01 ↗ again

25:02 ↗ um in this area we're finding that's a

25:05 ↗ one challenge now we as a city have uh

25:09 ↗ certain control over how development

25:11 ↗ happens right we can't control the price

25:14 ↗ of the land the price of the

25:16 ↗ construction but the levers that we can

25:17 ↗ control are are things like this you

25:20 ↗ know parking density those type of

25:22 ↗ things and so this is why we are here

25:24 ↗ saying we believe this will help to

25:26 ↗ encourage that development for the

25:28 ↗ Pioneer project can I ask you about

25:30 ↗ something that you just said yeah you

25:32 ↗ said we can't uh do below grade parking

25:36 ↗ because of the water in in a lot of

25:38 ↗ locations not in every location yes okay

25:41 ↗ because over here I mean we have a

25:42 ↗ wonderful jail that's below yeah so this

25:45 ↗ is essential Urban core and mixed-use

25:48 ↗ area so so Atlas did do have you know

25:51 ↗ one ground floor underneath or one floor

25:53 ↗ underneath other developments that have

25:56 ↗ so the Tod originally looked to doing

25:58 ↗ that and they decided they couldn't they

25:59 ↗ needed to be above ground because the

26:01 ↗ water level

26:02 ↗ um I

26:04 ↗ yeah so as you get towards the lake you

26:06 ↗ can imagine that's where the area that

26:08 ↗ is it's more challenging so if you think

26:10 ↗ about the recent development at Costco

26:11 ↗ and other places they didn't go

26:13 ↗ underground they went above ground okay

26:14 ↗ thank you yeah so again this is where

26:17 ↗ you know development gets challenging

26:18 ↗ because every parcel has a little bit

26:20 ↗ different council member G Michelle

26:23 ↗ so when we talk about the Pioneer

26:24 ↗ project are we developing a a

26:28 ↗ context for just a single project and I

26:32 ↗ think we kind of know which project that

26:34 ↗ is from previous uh comments but uh or

26:38 ↗ are we putting together a context that

26:41 ↗ would be applied to several developments

26:43 ↗ so going back to this slide here so it's

26:46 ↗ not developed we've heard from developer

26:48 ↗ of a certain project and this is this

26:50 ↗ idea though again was was in the Central

26:52 ↗ School plan in 2012 before any uh any uh

26:56 ↗ thought about this other project existed

26:58 ↗ so it would be for the fir this is again

27:00 ↗ how it's written so we could change this

27:02 ↗ the first 200 residential units in the

27:04 ↗ urban core and the first 100 residential

27:06 ↗ units in mixed-use zone so we could

27:09 ↗ adjust those numbers we could put a you

27:13 ↗ know deadline of five years I mean so

27:15 ↗ there's ways again that this is again

27:16 ↗ this isn't something that's meant to be

27:18 ↗ forever but it's meant to to help pull

27:21 ↗ one of those levers to get some

27:23 ↗ development happening where it isn't

27:24 ↗ happening so we can get some more

27:25 ↗ housing

27:28 ↗ so why make changes right so um we have

27:33 ↗ talked to some other cities and that uh

27:36 ↗ heard from actually the planning policy

27:38 ↗ commission has heard from developers as

27:40 ↗ well that

27:42 ↗ um 80 Ami uh with the mfte has been

27:46 ↗ successful in in getting development to

27:48 ↗ happen

27:50 ↗ um you know we again because the

27:53 ↗ recommendation is looking at changing

27:55 ↗ the development bonus uh affordable

27:57 ↗ requirements as well we feel that we can

27:59 ↗ ask for something in addition so the

28:02 ↗ examples that I had again are merely

28:04 ↗ examples but we have you know that

28:06 ↗ Issaquah climate action plan the parks

28:09 ↗ plan the city's housing strategy that

28:12 ↗ all can we can pull goals in to help the

28:15 ↗ help us reach those goals by an

28:18 ↗ additional requirement for the

28:20 ↗ developers so we're not giving away

28:23 ↗ um things completely we're asking for

28:25 ↗ something in return for that change

28:28 ↗ one of the things in the um

28:32 ↗ in this proposal is to adopt the

28:34 ↗ multi-family Tech assumption for the

28:37 ↗ Pioneer project this could be a full com

28:39 ↗ a full meeting conversation and we're

28:41 ↗ more than welcome to come back and have

28:43 ↗ this

28:43 ↗ um I did include the mfte 101 PowerPoint

28:46 ↗ deck that Arch has provided and they're

28:49 ↗ again one

28:50 ↗ willing to come back uh this is a tool

28:52 ↗ that Arch does support and you can see

28:54 ↗ that 55 cities in Washington state have

28:56 ↗ adopted this we have adopted this but is

28:59 ↗ very specific for the Tod project at the

29:01 ↗ Tod site so high level overview

29:05 ↗ um it is uh you would still collect

29:08 ↗ property tax on land in the commercial

29:10 ↗ portion of the property but on none of

29:13 ↗ the residential property for either the

29:15 ↗ 8 12 or 20 years the eight-year does not

29:19 ↗ require an affordable component from the

29:20 ↗ state but you we could we could require

29:23 ↗ that 12 years requires uh 12 I'm sorry

29:26 ↗ 20 of the units must be affordable and

29:29 ↗ the 20 years requires a ownership so

29:33 ↗ um there's also recently added into the

29:36 ↗ mfte legislation ability to add another

29:38 ↗ 12 years to the either the 8 or 12. so

29:40 ↗ again lots of detail is here I know the

29:43 ↗ council has heard about the mft before

29:45 ↗ and we can definitely provide more

29:47 ↗ information but this is Again part of

29:48 ↗ that

29:50 ↗ packet we're suggesting

29:53 ↗ so in in um summary we are recommending

29:58 ↗ to create the Pioneer program as as

30:01 ↗ outlined in the Central School plan from

30:03 ↗ 20 2012 adding on that we're changing

30:06 ↗ the affordability requirements for the

30:09 ↗ density I'm sorry development bonus

30:11 ↗ portion changing the Ami from 60 to 80

30:14 ↗ percent and requiring an additional

30:16 ↗ benefit as defined by a menu of services

30:19 ↗ so we believe that this is going to help

30:21 ↗ to contribute to this vision of the

30:23 ↗ Central School plan our city goals and

30:26 ↗ really move us forward and getting some

30:28 ↗ more housing where we have uh amenities

30:31 ↗ jobs stores Transit

30:35 ↗ um so looking at next steps uh we are

30:38 ↗ willing to come back to the September

30:39 ↗ 19th meeting with with again more

30:42 ↗ refined information the October 9th

30:44 ↗ Committee of the whole has been planned

30:46 ↗ for uh the buy I guess it would be a

30:49 ↗ bi-annual update of affordable housing

30:51 ↗ as a whole we're again here in April so

30:53 ↗ it would also include a presentation

30:54 ↗ from Kristen Leeson and planning and

30:58 ↗ Monica negrela from Human Services so

31:01 ↗ um thought it might be great to come

31:03 ↗ back to this committee prior but we're

31:05 ↗ open to that timeline

31:07 ↗ and then I uh just repeating the slides

31:09 ↗ here for the questions or the

31:10 ↗ recommendations I have both all these

31:12 ↗ slides at the end so I can keep whatever

31:13 ↗ slide up as requested

31:17 ↗ thank you

31:19 ↗ so do we have uh other question

31:23 ↗ councilmember John thank you

31:27 ↗ um the mfte can sometimes be seen as a a

31:32 ↗ big break for the developer they get you

31:35 ↗ know a break on their property tax bill

31:36 ↗ and the city residents and uh being a

31:41 ↗ little bit higher on their overall

31:42 ↗ property tax

31:44 ↗ um

31:44 ↗ up in the city of Snohomish now these

31:47 ↗ figures are going to be different but

31:48 ↗ the Snohomish County assessor's office

31:49 ↗ did a study and for every one million

31:51 ↗ dollars of exemptions approved the value

31:54 ↗ of a home in the value home in Snohomish

31:57 ↗ which is about 469 thousand dollars saw

32:00 ↗ an estimated increase in their tax about

32:02 ↗ 50 cents per year on their property tax

32:06 ↗ bill do you know if that is similar in

32:09 ↗ King County or are you planning to get

32:12 ↗ that information to US based on some of

32:15 ↗ the information and feedback you get

32:17 ↗ tonight

32:18 ↗ so I'm going to pass the phone a friend

32:20 ↗ here at uh Arch and so thank you for

32:23 ↗ that question because that is a

32:24 ↗ misconception that it's a big impact

32:28 ↗ um yeah that's certainly part of the

32:30 ↗ analysis that Arch often does when a

32:32 ↗ jurisdiction is considering adopting

32:34 ↗ mfte is looking at

32:36 ↗ um it's kind of a two-part Dynamic

32:38 ↗ there's a tax shift and then a tax

32:40 ↗ foregone

32:42 ↗ um one project alone

32:44 ↗ has a pretty nominal you know negligible

32:47 ↗ I would say effect on a tax bill taken

32:51 ↗ as a whole County and you combine all

32:52 ↗ the jurisdictions programs together you

32:55 ↗ can measure that and kind of see that

32:57 ↗ there is an impact on the whole so that

32:58 ↗ that would be information we could bring

33:00 ↗ back

33:02 ↗ thank you I certainly would like us to

33:04 ↗ have that information out there so that

33:07 ↗ we can have those conversations with our

33:09 ↗ citizens when we get some

33:12 ↗ um

33:14 ↗ inquiries as to how it's going to impact

33:16 ↗ the individual homeowner here in town as

33:18 ↗ as prices are increasing if we can say

33:21 ↗ that's 50 cents or under a dollar or

33:23 ↗ what have you I think that that gives us

33:25 ↗ some

33:26 ↗ um Credence or at least some viability

33:29 ↗ toward considering the mfte on a wider

33:32 ↗ basis thank you

33:36 ↗ other question

33:39 ↗ and do you have anything else to present

33:40 ↗ to us I do not right well uh that at

33:44 ↗ this point I think this is where we're

33:46 ↗ going to return to the possibility of uh

33:49 ↗ public comment so

33:51 ↗ um I will again say if anybody uh wants

33:57 ↗ to indicate an interest in speaking

33:59 ↗ either here with us or uh on phone

34:03 ↗ pressing star three or on your computer

34:05 ↗ or smartphone raising the hand icon now

34:08 ↗ would be a great time to do that and

34:10 ↗ I'll say again if you were in the room

34:11 ↗ and did not sign up I'll ask for other

34:13 ↗ speakers before closing this portion of

34:14 ↗ the meeting uh has anyone raised their

34:18 ↗ hand we have several uh in the audience

34:20 ↗ do we have anybody online as well

34:24 ↗ chair Martz we have nobody online

34:27 ↗ um and Brian runberg had signed up prior

34:31 ↗ to speak during this public comment

34:33 ↗ period all right well we'll start with

34:35 ↗ folks who have signed up I will say

34:37 ↗ citizen comments are an important part

34:39 ↗ of the public process we take them

34:40 ↗ seriously back to them into the

34:42 ↗ decisions we make please direct comments

34:44 ↗ to the whole Council and not individuals

34:46 ↗ while this is not a question and answer

34:47 ↗ session we will contact you to follow up

34:49 ↗ if needed been recognized uh if you're

34:52 ↗ at home on mute your microphone or if

34:55 ↗ you're here step up to the lectern state

34:57 ↗ your name address and relationship this

34:59 ↗ city speak clearly and pause frequently

35:01 ↗ make comments to five minutes if you are

35:05 ↗ attending virtually and do not respond

35:06 ↗ well we don't have anyone participating

35:08 ↗ virtually so worry about that

35:11 ↗ um personal attacks obscene language

35:13 ↗ derogatory remarks and disrupted

35:15 ↗ Behavior will not be

35:16 ↗ and you said there was one person who

35:18 ↗ signed up to speak let's start there

35:19 ↗ correct Brian runberg from the runberg

35:22 ↗ architecture group

35:27 ↗ welcome

35:30 ↗ Brian can you press the button on the

35:32 ↗ microphone so that the red light comes

35:34 ↗ on

35:35 ↗ there you go thank you Brian runberg

35:37 ↗ with the runberg architecture group with

35:39 ↗ me also is Jesse Claussen as well as

35:42 ↗ Conor Hansen from SRM development

35:46 ↗ yeah sorry uh we decided to do this as a

35:49 ↗ team sorry about that

35:51 ↗ um switching up a little bit

35:53 ↗ um uh I represent runbergen SRM who does

35:56 ↗ have the interest in the 1085 Lake Drive

35:58 ↗ property

35:59 ↗ obviously we're not doing this to just

36:02 ↗ be involved in our project that we are

36:04 ↗ very interested in the Pioneer project

36:05 ↗ for this project this isn't intended to

36:08 ↗ be a forever solution this is something

36:10 ↗ that is really to get as Jen said

36:13 ↗ development going in the near term since

36:15 ↗ the central Squad plan has been in for

36:17 ↗ 11 years now and you've only seen really

36:20 ↗ one project

36:22 ↗ um the site of of our site I guess it's

36:25 ↗ right next to Costco it's right next to

36:27 ↗ a future light rail station

36:30 ↗ um and we really appreciate the City of

36:32 ↗ Issaquah looking at this

36:34 ↗ um I think you're there are other cities

36:37 ↗ who are looking at Pioneer projects but

36:39 ↗ you're a little bit ahead of the curve

36:40 ↗ and that you know you're doing it

36:42 ↗ because you're like gosh let's get some

36:44 ↗ development like other cities are so we

36:46 ↗ really appreciate this

36:47 ↗ um the time really to act is now or this

36:50 ↗ year if you can

36:52 ↗ um if we started planning for this

36:54 ↗ project today and submitted plans to the

36:56 ↗ city Etc this project would not people

36:58 ↗ would not be living in a a building for

37:00 ↗ five years that's how long it takes so

37:03 ↗ getting things going now is very

37:05 ↗ important Brian do you want to

37:08 ↗ thank you next slide please

37:14 ↗ so as as Jesse pointed out yes we

37:17 ↗ started on this project about a year ago

37:19 ↗ trying to analyze it between SRM and and

37:21 ↗ ourselves just a little bit of

37:24 ↗ background and context of who we are SRM

37:26 ↗ and redberg architecture group we have a

37:28 ↗ 30-year

37:29 ↗ Collective or combined experience uh in

37:33 ↗ urban housing we've got roughly 20 Tod

37:37 ↗ projects that either designed or under

37:39 ↗ construction so we are expertise in this

37:41 ↗ type of uh of development and also just

37:44 ↗ want to point out that the intent of

37:46 ↗ this is a long-term lasting hold this

37:48 ↗ isn't an investment to turn but we

37:51 ↗ intend to be long-term investors in this

37:53 ↗ project for the for a long term there

37:56 ↗ next slide so our firm I know this has

38:00 ↗ been cited in some of the previous

38:02 ↗ conversations the the interest in

38:04 ↗ sustainability our firm has led the

38:07 ↗ nation in the last 10 years in in

38:09 ↗ multi-family housing as far as the most

38:11 ↗ uh High performing sustainable hope

38:15 ↗ housing projects within the United

38:16 ↗ States so we've got a good solid

38:19 ↗ reputation for that that can incorporate

38:20 ↗ that was one of Jen's comments about one

38:22 ↗ of the boxes there but is also making

38:25 ↗ good good design and good Urban spaces

38:28 ↗ which is aligns with the central escort

38:31 ↗ plan next slide please

38:34 ↗ and I will have Connor who's an expert

38:37 ↗ in the affordable housing kind of

38:39 ↗ explained this thing

38:42 ↗ I don't know if I'm an expert but I've

38:44 ↗ been developing affordable housing in

38:46 ↗ the region for last 15 years

38:49 ↗ I specialize in 50 to 100 percent Ami

38:52 ↗ housing so I'm here to support what Jen

38:55 ↗ just proposed a day of switching the

38:57 ↗ mandatory Zone

38:58 ↗ inclusionary Zone from 60 to 80 percent

39:00 ↗ and also just be a resource to answer

39:03 ↗ any questions if they come up about how

39:05 ↗ 50 and 60 Ami housing is financed but I

39:08 ↗ can

39:08 ↗ do a really quick 101 this is a slide

39:11 ↗ this slide is taken from a report that

39:13 ↗ Eco Northwest put out

39:15 ↗ um affordable housing developers we all

39:17 ↗ have the same costs and the same prices

39:20 ↗ for land unless we're getting it for for

39:22 ↗ free from somebody but our our rents are

39:25 ↗ capped right and so we we're we

39:27 ↗ leveraged debt just like a market rate a

39:29 ↗ developer does but the the rents are

39:31 ↗ lower and so there's always oftentimes

39:33 ↗ the Gap that has to be plugged which is

39:35 ↗ what uh Arch does for these projects so

39:39 ↗ I'm here to just comment that if if a

39:42 ↗ developer a market rate developer is

39:43 ↗ forced to put fifteen sixty percent Ami

39:46 ↗ housing in their projects with no

39:48 ↗ offsetting compensation like a tax

39:51 ↗ abatement it creates a lot of challenges

39:53 ↗ to finance those projects most most if

39:57 ↗ not all the 50 to 60 percent Ami

39:59 ↗ projects we Finance or utilize the low

40:01 ↗ income housing tax credit program which

40:04 ↗ is a federal program where Fortune 500

40:06 ↗ companies invest Equity into these

40:09 ↗ projects in exchange for a corporate tax

40:11 ↗ deduction so that's that's free money

40:14 ↗ coming into those projects to offset the

40:16 ↗ loss in the debt that we're able to

40:18 ↗ leverage so

40:20 ↗ um again I'm here to support the move to

40:23 ↗ mft and 80 it's been one of the state's

40:26 ↗ most successful programs and I think

40:28 ↗ it's important to remember that

40:30 ↗ all housing is created is helping the

40:34 ↗ problem of affordable housing so

40:36 ↗ anything we can do to get any housing

40:38 ↗ created is gonna in the long term

40:41 ↗ um help address

40:42 ↗ our affordable housing problem

40:47 ↗ thank you thank you

40:49 ↗ yep

40:51 ↗ councilmember I

40:55 ↗ I

40:55 ↗ no no I'll let you know we're less

40:58 ↗ formal than in a regular meeting

41:00 ↗ uh Jessica Jessica Clawson yes okay hi

41:04 ↗ so we work together on these site

41:06 ↗ housing yes exactly okay yes fantastic

41:09 ↗ I've never met you in person I know it's

41:11 ↗ so weird it's always been on on TV well

41:14 ↗ so I'll just disclosed to my colleagues

41:16 ↗ that I'm part of the East Side housing

41:18 ↗ Roundtable in Bellevue associated with

41:21 ↗ my position at my regular daytime

41:24 ↗ position so uh we work on increasing the

41:28 ↗ supply of housing it can have an

41:30 ↗ affordable element to it but just let

41:32 ↗ you know that Jesse and I are often on

41:36 ↗ phone calls for the East Side affordable

41:37 ↗ housing Roundtable

41:40 ↗ talking about all of this stuff yeah

41:42 ↗ exactly

41:43 ↗ right

41:44 ↗ thank you for your comments thank you

41:47 ↗ I'll ask if anyone else in the public

41:49 ↗ wishes to speak and

41:51 ↗ I see Miss triple

41:58 ↗ good evening council members it's great

42:00 ↗ to see you tonight I'm Christy triple I

42:02 ↗ work with rally properties and the

42:04 ↗ address is 1595 Northwest Gilman

42:07 ↗ Boulevard Suite one here in Issaquah so

42:11 ↗ um

42:12 ↗ the recommendation makes great sense

42:15 ↗ that has been put forward that report

42:18 ↗ was really well done so I want to kind

42:21 ↗ of speak to tonight's agenda item but

42:23 ↗ also from a bigger picture

42:26 ↗ um

42:27 ↗ I was thinking about what I wanted to

42:28 ↗ say this evening and decided let's just

42:31 ↗ cut to the chase the econ Northwest

42:33 ↗ report that was done as part of the

42:35 ↗ happy Grant was spot on and I don't

42:39 ↗ think that was any news to us

42:42 ↗ so I want to ask you to think bigger and

42:44 ↗ to go bigger because we do need to

42:47 ↗ increase the amount of housing Supply if

42:49 ↗ we're going to catch up and we're going

42:51 ↗ to begin to make things more affordable

42:53 ↗ from a housing accessibility and

42:56 ↗ affordability here in the city so I say

42:59 ↗ Let's Make a Difference please expand

43:02 ↗ the mfte program for 12 years at 80

43:06 ↗ percent am I at least in the urban core

43:09 ↗ if not

43:11 ↗ um further

43:13 ↗ and provide for a 20-year extension to

43:16 ↗ encourage affordable housing ownership

43:19 ↗ and accessibility

43:21 ↗ the One Pilot project that was buried

43:25 ↗ deep in the central issqua plan that's

43:27 ↗ just recently been discovered I don't

43:29 ↗ think it's enough to help us catch up as

43:31 ↗ a community I think back many many years

43:35 ↗ ago when Tola first joined Council and

43:37 ↗ we talked about what does housing cost

43:40 ↗ and back then it was for new development

43:43 ↗ a hundred dollars more per door per

43:46 ↗ month to build here in this claw as

43:48 ↗ opposed to as as Bellevue and our

43:52 ↗ residents at the time wanted bigger

43:54 ↗ space and more amenities so projects

43:56 ↗ back then were hard it's even more

43:58 ↗ difficult now in today's climate

44:01 ↗ so um

44:03 ↗ I also think the Tod it's a great way to

44:06 ↗ model by example for the city to take on

44:09 ↗ that project but again not enough

44:11 ↗ affordable housing for our community

44:14 ↗ and the solution is it partnership right

44:18 ↗ we saw that worked up in the Issaquah

44:20 ↗ Highlands and we know that it takes a

44:23 ↗ cast of many to facilitate positive

44:25 ↗ change

44:26 ↗ so I think we need to stimulate

44:28 ↗ development as a community that enables

44:30 ↗ those multi-family and ownership options

44:33 ↗ and if the city wants to see future

44:36 ↗ housing affordable housing in the 30 to

44:38 ↗ 50 percent Amis maybe strategically

44:41 ↗ allocate public land to serve as a base

44:45 ↗ and then couple with governmental grant

44:47 ↗ funding because Private Industry alone

44:49 ↗ cannot meet that demand without a lot of

44:52 ↗ change

44:53 ↗ so housing in this sector does need

44:55 ↗ fostering

44:56 ↗ and then lastly I just want to thank you

44:59 ↗ in advance for your consideration and

45:01 ↗ your commitment because

45:03 ↗ affordable housing AIDS in what Fosters

45:06 ↗ a Vibrant Community and ensures a

45:09 ↗ brighter future for all residents and

45:12 ↗ developers would like to help provide

45:14 ↗ that but we need assistance in doing

45:17 ↗ so thanks for the opportunity to speak

45:19 ↗ tonight and thanks for all that you do

45:25 ↗ sir please come to the microphone

45:30 ↗ my name is Jim Rivard can we have that

45:32 ↗ with SRAM development I'm just going to

45:34 ↗ finish here really quickly I may we have

45:37 ↗ that

45:38 ↗ the PowerPoint

45:40 ↗ thank you

45:42 ↗ no problem I'll make a comp before we

45:44 ↗ get there just really two quick comments

45:45 ↗ to finish what what Connor was

45:47 ↗ discussing momentarily or a second ago

45:50 ↗ when it comes to 50 and 60 percent

45:52 ↗ housing

45:54 ↗ um

45:55 ↗ the it requires Federal Financing or or

45:59 ↗ governmental financing and tax credit to

46:02 ↗ do that but there's also a gap and so it

46:04 ↗ takes either a and one of two things

46:07 ↗ either donation of land from the

46:09 ↗ community and or additional Gap funding

46:12 ↗ and so you can see in a market like

46:14 ↗ Seattle where they've created a

46:16 ↗ tremendous amount of fifteen sixty

46:17 ↗ percent housing and they have that Gap

46:19 ↗ funding because they've been collecting

46:21 ↗ funds through that for years they can

46:23 ↗ provide that Gap funding because you

46:25 ↗ can't afford to build that there's a

46:27 ↗ there's a gap right you can't charge

46:29 ↗ those rents and pay for the buildings so

46:31 ↗ the city or some other gap Ponder has to

46:33 ↗ participate to do that Bellevue on the

46:36 ↗ other hand has not collected those funds

46:38 ↗ and so you've seen basically zero units

46:41 ↗ created at the 50 to 60 percent level

46:43 ↗ with all the development there because

46:44 ↗ there's no Gap under and that's

46:46 ↗ something they're focusing on so when

46:47 ↗ you go to 50 60 it just becomes

46:49 ↗ untenable I mean it's just not going to

46:51 ↗ work whereas you see both cities also

46:54 ↗ have 80 percent

46:56 ↗ um of Ami with tech with tax abatement

46:59 ↗ and you can read the Puget Sound

47:00 ↗ Business Journal just last week where

47:02 ↗ Bellevue is now creating a lot more 80

47:04 ↗ units because of that tax credit where

47:06 ↗ it wasn't happening before so that's

47:07 ↗ that's really what we're targeting here

47:10 ↗ um you're talking apples and oranges a

47:12 ↗ market rate developer can't build 50 and

47:14 ↗ 60 and build the project unless the city

47:16 ↗ wants to or somebody wants to Pony up

47:19 ↗ millions of dollars but that's really

47:21 ↗ the point um if we go to the very last

47:22 ↗ slide we can we can skip the rest of

47:24 ↗ them which is the affordability impact

47:27 ↗ um

47:29 ↗ today

47:31 ↗ one more back I'm sorry

47:34 ↗ the numbers

47:36 ↗ high high level here if you're building

47:39 ↗ a product and you have a total cost of

47:41 ↗ of you know facts you need to build to a

47:44 ↗ certain return to make it viable and you

47:47 ↗ look at the first slide which is the uh

47:49 ↗ 50 to 60 percent 12 and a half percent

47:51 ↗ it shows a return of 5.33 which is

47:54 ↗ untenable it's it's below cost today and

47:57 ↗ so you're immediately driving your

47:58 ↗ project you're building it for more than

48:00 ↗ it's worth

48:02 ↗ um you know we're in a difficult market

48:03 ↗ right now but if you look at option two

48:05 ↗ that's becoming more

48:09 ↗ becoming a more viable project where the

48:11 ↗ incomes are the rents are at 80 percent

48:12 ↗ restricted there with the tax credit or

48:15 ↗ the tax abatement excuse me

48:17 ↗ um so that becomes a viable project so

48:19 ↗ that that's the same numbers for the

48:21 ↗ project from a cost standpoint from a

48:22 ↗ market red standpoint it's just

48:24 ↗ adjusting the affordable project uh

48:27 ↗ units in it and so you can it's it's a

48:30 ↗ really simple analysis we can provide

48:32 ↗ back up on it if you'd like to see it

48:34 ↗ but it takes it from not being a viable

48:35 ↗ project that nothing's getting built to

48:37 ↗ okay we can get something built and we

48:39 ↗ can provide some Unity

48:42 ↗ yeah thank you very much thank you for

48:45 ↗ your comments

48:47 ↗ everybody who's here has commented the

48:50 ↗ clerk I'll ask if there's any one has

48:52 ↗ joined online and the possibility of any

48:54 ↗ other commenters online before we

48:57 ↗ get into deliberation

48:59 ↗ chair Martz we have no virtual attendees

49:03 ↗ Jen I have a question so in this

49:06 ↗ conversation about

49:08 ↗ we've had several comments about 80 Ami

49:12 ↗ and 60 Ami

49:14 ↗ for as long as I've been on Council I I

49:17 ↗ don't think we ever thought that you

49:19 ↗ could magically get the same amount of

49:21 ↗ 60 Amis you can 80 am I I think we

49:24 ↗ always thought that you could get about

49:25 ↗ half as much 60 Amis you could eighty

49:27 ↗ percent am I roughly it doesn't exactly

49:29 ↗ cancel exactly at Ami but something like

49:32 ↗ that right so

49:35 ↗ um you know

49:37 ↗ I'm a little confused because it seems

49:39 ↗ like there's an option in this whole

49:40 ↗ thing of going to 80 I I continue to be

49:42 ↗ stuck on the fact that

49:44 ↗ um can you remind me Tod what the what

49:47 ↗ the fractions are on Tod of the the

49:50 ↗ where are the tears

49:53 ↗ yeah it's pulling back some memory so

49:55 ↗ there is some 30 because they have

49:57 ↗ vouchers so again King County Housing

49:59 ↗ Authority has access to different

50:01 ↗ funding that no others uh uh uh local

50:05 ↗ organization does and then they're

50:08 ↗ looking at 40 and 60 and then 80 as part

50:11 ↗ of the mfte so it is a much broader

50:14 ↗ Spectrum but again they they wouldn't

50:15 ↗ have that 30 if they didn't bring

50:17 ↗ vouchers into the program yeah yeah I'm

50:19 ↗ really just stuck trying to understand

50:21 ↗ you know does the market want more at 80

50:24 ↗ or does the market want a smaller amount

50:27 ↗ at 60 percent that it just this whole

50:31 ↗ idea of moving the bar from 60 to 80.

50:33 ↗ you know I get that you get less at 60

50:35 ↗ than you do uh if if for for a same

50:39 ↗ investment either the investment by a

50:41 ↗ developer or investment by the city in

50:43 ↗ terms of foregone Revenue right you get

50:45 ↗ a smaller amount at a lower Ami percent

50:48 ↗ but I'm still I'm I'm stuck that in the

50:50 ↗ olden days we used to sort of try to

50:51 ↗ analyze what the city actually needed

50:54 ↗ versus what we had right so that when if

50:57 ↗ we said let's move from 60 to 80 we had

50:59 ↗ something to base that on so right now

51:02 ↗ the 60 is required

51:03 ↗ um and the percentage is required for

51:05 ↗ the full so it wouldn't be less units at

51:09 ↗ 60 or less unit more units that

51:12 ↗ that 80 it's still 12.5 percent if

51:15 ↗ you're in the urban core of your oh so

51:18 ↗ let's just pretend it's you know 100 the

51:19 ↗ requirement is 12.5 for inclusionary

51:22 ↗ zoning and then there's an additional

51:24 ↗ requirement of more affordable housing

51:26 ↗ if you do the dense the development

51:28 ↗ bonus which again it goes up when you're

51:30 ↗ above the the height limit of 60 feet or

51:34 ↗ 80 feet so it it quick it quickly adds

51:37 ↗ up then and that's why that is why we're

51:40 ↗ suggesting to do for a Pioneer project

51:42 ↗ just again pull the levers that we can

51:44 ↗ see

51:45 ↗ um and and as some of the commenters

51:47 ↗ mentioned there was there has been some

51:49 ↗ look at the

51:51 ↗ um at this inclusionary zoning through

51:53 ↗ the Eco Northwest uh for the housing

51:56 ↗ action plan implementation Grant to the

51:58 ↗ Happy Grant and as part of a Next Step

52:01 ↗ our planning department is going to be

52:03 ↗ diving into that a little bit more and

52:05 ↗ we're looking at we're gonna be looking

52:06 ↗ at mft we're going to be looking at

52:08 ↗ inclusionary zoning and the development

52:10 ↗ bonus program to kind of really again

52:12 ↗ see how you move all those levers and

52:14 ↗ parking right so there's again lots of

52:16 ↗ levers that okay do you increase the

52:19 ↗ percentage does that make it easier or

52:20 ↗ decrease the percentage does that make

52:22 ↗ it harder

52:23 ↗ um so so that's

52:25 ↗ um again we'll more details will be

52:28 ↗ following for

52:29 ↗ longer term uh changes to our code this

52:33 ↗ Pioneer project is looking at other

52:36 ↗ Pioneer projects looking at the 80 with

52:37 ↗ mfte which has been standard and has

52:40 ↗ been successful in other cities so

52:42 ↗ um that's why we're looking at the 80

52:44 ↗ percent rather than 60 percent again

52:47 ↗ because that exists currently so

52:49 ↗ I I have a non uh Ami question now so um

52:54 ↗ we had we had a member of the public

52:56 ↗ present some some very pretty pictures

52:59 ↗ um uh you know we have had developments

53:02 ↗ in the past in the city that came in and

53:04 ↗ had very pretty pictures and then the

53:06 ↗ actual development wound up looking

53:07 ↗ quite different than

53:09 ↗ um um the pictures so I mean these

53:12 ↗ pictures are gorgeous I I mean I want in

53:15 ↗ high density I want what Bothell has and

53:17 ↗ I want what Woodenville has right this

53:19 ↗ this looks like that do we have the

53:21 ↗ ability as we move forward to enforce

53:25 ↗ the things that we like as part of this

53:28 ↗ program because what I don't I mean I

53:30 ↗ don't think there's anything wrong with

53:31 ↗ Atlas but Atlas doesn't look like the

53:34 ↗ downtown Bothell that I love and the

53:36 ↗ downtown Woodenville that I love right

53:37 ↗ they look like this so so how do we make

53:40 ↗ sure we know if we make an investment in

53:43 ↗ foregone Revenue

53:45 ↗ um what we're going to get so we uh

53:47 ↗ since the time of the development of

53:49 ↗ Atlas we had a moratorium and we

53:51 ↗ developed and adopted a design manual an

53:54 ↗ architectural manual that is very

53:56 ↗ prescriptive so it will it has some

53:59 ↗ teeth in it of what needs to be done

54:01 ↗ we've also done some updates to other

54:04 ↗ components of the code at that time and

54:07 ↗ then during our Title 18 uh update I'm

54:09 ↗ pretty sure Atlas was after the

54:11 ↗ moratorium um it was it was perfect yeah

54:14 ↗ I remember that time a little bit yeah

54:18 ↗ so it so

54:19 ↗ um actually

54:21 ↗ um

54:21 ↗ the and again I I don't mean to do that

54:24 ↗ list no but no no no it doesn't look

54:27 ↗ like and so part of it is again they

54:28 ↗ were first in the market there were so

54:31 ↗ many developers that were talking to me

54:32 ↗ that we'll see they can get that market

54:34 ↗ right we'll see if they can actually

54:35 ↗ make this pencil and so

54:37 ↗ um people were really watching and I

54:40 ↗ understand that the pictures look

54:41 ↗ different than what was implemented but

54:43 ↗ um and then again that's why uh we have

54:45 ↗ an architectural manual now and some

54:47 ↗ other details in Bothell for instance

54:49 ↗ that's that is a very different field

54:52 ↗ because City owned a lot of that land

54:54 ↗ and then can discount and ask for more

54:56 ↗ so that's one of the things as we're

54:58 ↗ looking at this Pioneer program if we

55:01 ↗ end up asking for 12 other things it may

55:03 ↗ not be used right

55:05 ↗ um and it may it may further delay some

55:09 ↗ development happening in these two areas

55:11 ↗ that we want to see some housing to

55:13 ↗ start again it's a phased approach we're

55:15 ↗ not looking at thousands of units

55:17 ↗ tomorrow we know that there's been a lot

55:20 ↗ of development on the fringes Essentials

55:21 ↗ also Newport Way has really developed

55:24 ↗ again but where we thought 10 years 12

55:27 ↗ 11 years ago that development would want

55:30 ↗ to be

55:31 ↗ um hasn't come there yet

55:35 ↗ my questions

55:37 ↗ council member Joe

55:38 ↗ thank you Mr chairman

55:40 ↗ um

55:43 ↗ correct me if I'm wrong but I think that

55:46 ↗ um the last speaker talked a little bit

55:48 ↗ about a land grant or a city

55:51 ↗ contribution of property I'm coming in I

55:55 ↗ seem to remember that Bellevue did was

55:58 ↗ considering some type of land trust

56:01 ↗ recently but they needed some help with

56:05 ↗ um

56:05 ↗ legislation from Olympia and uh if I'm

56:09 ↗ just wondering if you could take a look

56:10 ↗ at that and see if you can bring back a

56:13 ↗ little bit of information on that topic

56:15 ↗ what is preventing a city from doing

56:19 ↗ some type of land trust for affordable

56:21 ↗ housing is there something in Olympia

56:23 ↗ that needs to be changed or altered that

56:25 ↗ we can talk to our

56:27 ↗ legislative Representatives about

56:30 ↗ um I don't know all the details but

56:32 ↗ certainly would like to hear a little

56:33 ↗ bit more about that going forward

56:37 ↗ um just in councilman Joe it appears

56:39 ↗ that our guest my caller friend actually

56:41 ↗ knows some more details if you'd like

56:43 ↗ that question answered now

56:46 ↗ understanding your question right um

56:48 ↗ part of what the city of Bellevue was

56:50 ↗ hoping to do was to get some State

56:52 ↗ funding for to support land acquisition

56:55 ↗ um the city can directly acquire

56:57 ↗ property and has acquired property and

56:59 ↗ and is thinking about that as a

57:01 ↗ long-term strategy but it's very

57:03 ↗ expensive to acquire property in

57:05 ↗ Bellevue also in Issaquah so it really

57:07 ↗ is about financing there are existing

57:09 ↗ land acquisition programs that we use

57:11 ↗ all the time to get affordable housing

57:13 ↗ projects done but we're trying to grow

57:15 ↗ that resource

57:17 ↗ thank you very much for for that I

57:20 ↗ in the before times in the olden days we

57:24 ↗ took a look at uh even before I was on

57:26 ↗ Council we took a look at all the

57:27 ↗ property in town that we owned and we

57:30 ↗ found a couple of small slices of

57:33 ↗ property that we had and as I understand

57:36 ↗ it they figured out a way to work with

57:38 ↗ Habitat for Humanity and built a few I

57:41 ↗ want to say two or three affordable

57:42 ↗ housing units

57:44 ↗ um just south of town along Newport and

57:46 ↗ so that's just an opportunity that I

57:49 ↗ think we need to continue to be aware of

57:50 ↗ and continue to explore whether or not

57:52 ↗ there are these small pieces of land

57:54 ↗ that we can work with a habitat or other

57:56 ↗ non-profit to to move that ball just a

57:59 ↗ little bit down the down the field and

58:01 ↗ get a couple of affordable housing units

58:03 ↗ certainly it's different from what we're

58:06 ↗ discussing tonight but an opportunity

58:08 ↗ and I know the administration is

58:10 ↗ probably consistently looking at along

58:12 ↗ the way just as a as an option thank you

58:19 ↗ so do we want to uh go through the

58:23 ↗ questions in order

58:25 ↗ yeah that's that's what I mean one at a

58:27 ↗ time so we do that does the committee

58:29 ↗ agreed to creation of strategic

58:31 ↗ opportunity fund to provide Project

58:33 ↗ funding

58:35 ↗ councilmember Joe you look ready to

58:37 ↗ pounce on this one yes I think it's a

58:38 ↗ good idea to create those strategic

58:40 ↗ strategic opportunity fund excuse me and

58:43 ↗ uh we'll have to be a little bit

58:46 ↗ um careful in terms of making sure we

58:48 ↗ adhere to the rules and there might be

58:49 ↗ some other guard rails that we'll put on

58:52 ↗ there just to make sure that we are

58:53 ↗ using the funds uh the taxpayer funds

58:56 ↗ appropriately along the way but I do

58:58 ↗ support it as an idea going forward

59:01 ↗ councilmember to Michelle yeah I think

59:03 ↗ this is a great idea

59:06 ↗ um and I've been looking for this kind

59:08 ↗ of uh of an idea coming before us and I

59:11 ↗ I'm glad that it's here

59:14 ↗ um

59:15 ↗ I did mention uh and I'm I'm still

59:18 ↗ concerned about

59:20 ↗ um the barriers to some of our smaller

59:23 ↗ organizations and our faith-based

59:25 ↗ organizations and

59:27 ↗ um non-profits who just don't have the

59:30 ↗ bandwidth or the expertise

59:34 ↗ um what can we do perhaps not from this

59:36 ↗ fun but through other activities to

59:39 ↗ support them so that they can take

59:41 ↗ advantage of the funding that's

59:43 ↗ available here a lot of them are just

59:46 ↗ not prepared to do that because they

59:48 ↗ don't have the expertise in the planning

59:50 ↗ and Design

59:51 ↗ Arena to get to take advantage of the

59:55 ↗ Strategic opportunity fund but I think

59:57 ↗ it's a great idea that we would have it

59:59 ↗ available and I think we should move

1:00:02 ↗ forward with it and then think carefully

1:00:05 ↗ about how we might support

1:00:07 ↗ um I think it's an equity issue actually

1:00:09 ↗ actually how do we support those groups

1:00:12 ↗ that might need that extra support to

1:00:14 ↗ get to the level where they can take

1:00:17 ↗ advantage of it

1:00:20 ↗ so can you remind me of of the pieces

1:00:23 ↗ that we're talking about today they some

1:00:25 ↗ of them sort of blur together can you

1:00:26 ↗ tell me again

1:00:28 ↗ um this is this part is is what would do

1:00:31 ↗ what

1:00:39 ↗ so um it looking at Pro focus on the

1:00:42 ↗ priorities of preservation Tod Community

1:00:45 ↗ Partnerships

1:00:46 ↗ and again these are ideas of criteria

1:00:49 ↗ that we would look at

1:00:52 ↗ so this would so this would be money

1:00:56 ↗ that would be set aside to basically

1:00:59 ↗ supplement development in those areas

1:01:03 ↗ that met certain criteria yeah so it'd

1:01:06 ↗ be like a request for proposals process

1:01:08 ↗ we work very closely with Arch again the

1:01:11 ↗ city of Bellevue is doing this as part

1:01:13 ↗ of their they have much more funding but

1:01:14 ↗ they're doing part of that is collecting

1:01:17 ↗ rfps from developers and projects and so

1:01:20 ↗ we would work with Arch to make sure

1:01:21 ↗ that we're aligned and are able to

1:01:24 ↗ leverage funding as much as possible so

1:01:25 ↗ again we're looking at about 2.

1:01:28 ↗ um

1:01:28 ↗ yeah 2.4 million dollars at this point

1:01:31 ↗ and if if this is uh looks like it's

1:01:34 ↗ gaining ground we can our future

1:01:36 ↗ revenues we can decide at that time how

1:01:38 ↗ to invest that in a future budget

1:01:40 ↗ conversation okay I mean I I turned my

1:01:43 ↗ comments to my fellow council members I

1:01:45 ↗ have a certain

1:01:46 ↗ um heartburn in all this and it's

1:01:49 ↗ because on the time scale that I've been

1:01:52 ↗ on Council I mean there's been a blip in

1:01:54 ↗ recent years where we have not had much

1:01:56 ↗ development in the valley what I've seen

1:01:58 ↗ an immense amount of development in the

1:01:59 ↗ valley since I got on Council 14 years

1:02:01 ↗ ago it was huge for the first seven

1:02:04 ↗ eight years Arch was seven years ago

1:02:07 ↗ um and and so there's been you know

1:02:09 ↗ there's been this bit of a of a Hiatus

1:02:13 ↗ it's hard for me to tell how much of

1:02:15 ↗ that is covid and whatnot but I I

1:02:19 ↗ you know I want to see the right

1:02:21 ↗ development come in to the valley

1:02:24 ↗ um development will come

1:02:26 ↗ um I over the 14 years that I've been

1:02:28 ↗ here I've seen it the last few years

1:02:29 ↗ like I said to me are are a blip that

1:02:32 ↗ that has that has many possible causes

1:02:35 ↗ but I look at the fierce growth in the

1:02:37 ↗ next city over from us as soon as as

1:02:40 ↗ soon as development hits uh High Point

1:02:43 ↗ uh not High Point um Eastgate right

1:02:46 ↗ there will be spillover into our area

1:02:48 ↗ and things that are marginally viable

1:02:51 ↗ will become extremely valuable so I'm

1:02:53 ↗ I'm just careful about I I don't want to

1:02:57 ↗ see development for development's sake I

1:02:59 ↗ want to see development that makes sense

1:03:00 ↗ whether that's mixed use whether that's

1:03:04 ↗ um some 80 percent

1:03:05 ↗ you know I I think moving from just

1:03:08 ↗ blanket going from 60 to 80 is a

1:03:10 ↗ giveaway right it's just it's a it's a

1:03:12 ↗ demand it's a requirement that we had

1:03:14 ↗ that we're just going to loosen because

1:03:16 ↗ we want to see the development so

1:03:18 ↗ um

1:03:19 ↗ I want to be careful I I don't want to

1:03:21 ↗ see more development just for the sake

1:03:23 ↗ of saying yay we built another 500

1:03:25 ↗ Apartments because we've Issaquah over

1:03:27 ↗ the 14 years that have been on Council

1:03:29 ↗ we've had we've had tons of development

1:03:31 ↗ we've transformed the city and more

1:03:34 ↗ development will come in the valley in

1:03:35 ↗ our lifetimes it'll be profitable and

1:03:37 ↗ people will do it so I'm I'm cautious

1:03:40 ↗ about you know somebody mentioned the

1:03:42 ↗ term guardrails I would I really want to

1:03:44 ↗ see some guardrails I would rather see

1:03:46 ↗ us wait five or ten years to get more

1:03:48 ↗ development than to just get more boxy

1:03:50 ↗ Apartments

1:03:52 ↗ um in the valley at Market which is what

1:03:54 ↗ people want to build because it's really

1:03:55 ↗ profitable so that's my concern in all

1:03:59 ↗ this uh this is not to say that I would

1:04:01 ↗ vote against something in full Council

1:04:03 ↗ but I'm just cautious and I want to make

1:04:05 ↗ sure that we get something that really

1:04:07 ↗ benefits our community this is gonna

1:04:09 ↗ there will be a cost associated with

1:04:11 ↗ putting more housing in the valley Lord

1:04:13 ↗ knows we already have enough traffic

1:04:14 ↗ Lord knows we don't have enough Transit

1:04:16 ↗ right now we don't have enough schools

1:04:18 ↗ in the valley right now all these things

1:04:19 ↗ are super expensive so when when more

1:04:22 ↗ development comes I want to make sure

1:04:25 ↗ it's in a form that benefits the folks

1:04:28 ↗ in this region and serves a good need so

1:04:31 ↗ I'm you know I'm hearing tonight sort of

1:04:33 ↗ a we should have development because

1:04:35 ↗ development more housing is good and

1:04:38 ↗ over the timeline that I've been on

1:04:39 ↗ Council we've done more than our fair

1:04:40 ↗ share so that's my and I mean just

1:04:44 ↗ wanting to share that with the two of

1:04:46 ↗ you

1:04:48 ↗ Barb

1:04:50 ↗ well I will respectfully disagree uh

1:04:53 ↗ thank you for for that input and for

1:04:55 ↗ what you've had to say I guess I'm at

1:04:57 ↗ the other end of the poll I am

1:05:00 ↗ frustrated by the fact that we have not

1:05:02 ↗ seen any significant development in the

1:05:05 ↗ central Issaquah plan and I am

1:05:07 ↗ frustrated by the fact that we haven't

1:05:09 ↗ seen affordable units I don't think it's

1:05:13 ↗ a giveaway to move from 60 to 80 I think

1:05:16 ↗ it's working

1:05:18 ↗ in reality with developers who are

1:05:20 ↗ saying to us the 60 doesn't pencil out

1:05:23 ↗ and the 80 percent does and the 80 is

1:05:26 ↗ important those are teachers and

1:05:27 ↗ firefighters and construction workers

1:05:30 ↗ and clerks uh the 80 is important too

1:05:34 ↗ um and I will go back to what I think is

1:05:36 ↗ the strategy for the 60 but

1:05:40 ↗ we're talking about the this this now

1:05:44 ↗ um and I think the 12-year mfte is a

1:05:46 ↗ reasonable proposal

1:05:49 ↗ um and again we're trying to encourage

1:05:52 ↗ um and I don't think it's I mean we have

1:05:54 ↗ design standards uh those will all of

1:05:56 ↗ that will come back to us but right now

1:05:59 ↗ we're just at the big concept stage of

1:06:02 ↗ we really need affordable housing I

1:06:05 ↗ cannot tell you but every single day I

1:06:07 ↗ talk to somebody who has got a story

1:06:10 ↗ about how their kids couldn't move here

1:06:12 ↗ how they couldn't move here how uh they

1:06:16 ↗ couldn't find a place to retire to

1:06:18 ↗ affordable housing is a huge issue and

1:06:22 ↗ um so I'm not looking at it as

1:06:23 ↗ development for the sake of development

1:06:25 ↗ I think it's it's totally Community need

1:06:28 ↗ that is just crying out for some changes

1:06:31 ↗ to what we're doing so I would support

1:06:34 ↗ all of the pioneer project

1:06:36 ↗ recommendations that were put in front

1:06:39 ↗ of us

1:06:39 ↗ and I think that the developers have

1:06:42 ↗ made a really good case for moving from

1:06:46 ↗ 60 to 80 percent in that Pioneer project

1:06:50 ↗ pilot and I think let's try this and see

1:06:54 ↗ how it works and

1:06:56 ↗ um I hear what you're saying I do have

1:06:58 ↗ concerns

1:06:59 ↗ so that particular project that we

1:07:02 ↗ discussed is I heard from so many people

1:07:04 ↗ who hated the blue and the white and the

1:07:07 ↗ you know at that particular location

1:07:11 ↗ um so I think we do want to be sure that

1:07:13 ↗ we use the new standards that we have

1:07:15 ↗ and that we have a tighter grasp on what

1:07:18 ↗ it eventually looks like but I don't

1:07:21 ↗ want to wait another 10 years to see

1:07:24 ↗ whether some private developer comes

1:07:26 ↗ along and is able to build a development

1:07:30 ↗ I want the city to be open to supporting

1:07:35 ↗ these projects going forward because we

1:07:37 ↗ need housing I just think it's just such

1:07:39 ↗ a clear human need that we have in in

1:07:43 ↗ Issaquah so on the 60 front again going

1:07:46 ↗ back to our faith-based communities and

1:07:48 ↗ non-profits they are all built around

1:07:51 ↗ the mission of supporting people in

1:07:54 ↗ poverty and low-income people

1:07:56 ↗ those are the people who are going to be

1:07:59 ↗ evangelists or those 60 percent

1:08:02 ↗ developments and and that's what you

1:08:05 ↗ need you need you need people who are so

1:08:07 ↗ devoted and so uh you know wanting to do

1:08:11 ↗ those projects that they're going to

1:08:12 ↗ make sure that they work well and you

1:08:14 ↗ need people who are really really

1:08:17 ↗ incentivized and engaged in that process

1:08:19 ↗ so

1:08:21 ↗ um

1:08:22 ↗ there's there are reasons why that is

1:08:25 ↗ the 60 is is not affordable for most

1:08:28 ↗ developers it's not just a tax thing

1:08:30 ↗ it's it's a lot of different issues so

1:08:32 ↗ anyway I am supporting the Pioneer

1:08:35 ↗ Project's recommendations that were

1:08:36 ↗ brought before

1:08:41 ↗ City administrator Bob quits yes thank

1:08:44 ↗ you Mr chair members of the committee

1:08:46 ↗ um a few clarifying uh comments and

1:08:49 ↗ thoughts uh the administration is not

1:08:51 ↗ here tonight proposing uh development

1:08:54 ↗ just to develop

1:08:55 ↗ um what we do feel is that there's a

1:08:58 ↗ significant amount of money that we've

1:08:59 ↗ collected from various sources uh we

1:09:02 ↗ have uh not engaged the council and

1:09:04 ↗ conversation about the disposition of

1:09:07 ↗ these funds uh partially because of

1:09:09 ↗ covid partially because of the

1:09:11 ↗ commitment the mayor had to the

1:09:12 ↗ transitory and development project along

1:09:14 ↗ with the city council and until we knew

1:09:16 ↗ the parameters of that we did not want

1:09:19 ↗ to put anything on the table for

1:09:20 ↗ discussion so with the parameters of

1:09:22 ↗ that known we just feel it's appropriate

1:09:25 ↗ for these policy discussions if they

1:09:27 ↗ take two weeks five weeks six months

1:09:30 ↗ great whatever you think is appropriate

1:09:33 ↗ when looking at the questions before you

1:09:35 ↗ we feel strongly that the arch trust

1:09:39 ↗ fund dollars we feel very comfortable

1:09:42 ↗ with that we hope the council agrees and

1:09:43 ↗ that money then can be put in Arches

1:09:45 ↗ hands to move forward the Pioneer

1:09:47 ↗ program initiative certainly a lot of

1:09:51 ↗ discussion this evening continued

1:09:52 ↗ discussion uh there's a developer who

1:09:55 ↗ would like to use it so I think if we

1:09:57 ↗ can bring those discussions to a

1:09:58 ↗ conclusion soon that makes sense uh the

1:10:01 ↗ Strategic opportunity fund there is no

1:10:03 ↗ particular rush we want you to have the

1:10:07 ↗ do what you wanted to do and if that's

1:10:09 ↗ going to take one more meeting of

1:10:10 ↗ discussion or three more meetings of

1:10:11 ↗ discussion some additional community

1:10:13 ↗ outreach that's great

1:10:16 ↗ um and we can continue to have that be

1:10:17 ↗ on a separate path but the money is in

1:10:19 ↗ the bank we feel obligated to bring the

1:10:22 ↗ issues to you for discussion

1:10:24 ↗ um and again when you look at what's

1:10:25 ↗ before you this evening I think the

1:10:27 ↗ trust fund hopefully is straightforward

1:10:29 ↗ moving forward with Pioneer programs

1:10:30 ↗ straightforward but additional

1:10:32 ↗ discussions on how you would wish to use

1:10:34 ↗ the Strategic opportunities fund that

1:10:37 ↗ can take whatever time the council

1:10:38 ↗ thinks is appropriate

1:10:41 ↗ thank you

1:10:43 ↗ so

1:10:44 ↗ I want to clarify one so

1:10:47 ↗ I I have focused on Workforce housing

1:10:49 ↗ since the day that I first ran in 2009

1:10:52 ↗ and I have been a fierce advocate of

1:10:55 ↗ Transit art and development since I mean

1:10:58 ↗ there was a point where there were like

1:10:59 ↗ two of us that supported it on Council

1:11:01 ↗ I'm I'm just saying that we have we've

1:11:04 ↗ had a lot of projects that have had like

1:11:07 ↗ 12 uh you know at 80 Ami there's lots of

1:11:11 ↗ stuff in the highlands that's there I

1:11:13 ↗ want to make sure that what we build

1:11:17 ↗ is good in the community and the goal

1:11:19 ↗ isn't just to build more housing to

1:11:21 ↗ build housing that for instance also has

1:11:24 ↗ services and has you know Park amenities

1:11:27 ↗ that are good and has all the stuff that

1:11:30 ↗ is important to us so to me

1:11:33 ↗ 12 and a half percent at eight at 80 Ami

1:11:36 ↗ is like the floor to a conversation it's

1:11:39 ↗ not the ceiling tool

1:11:40 ↗ so I you know I don't know how it

1:11:43 ↗ somehow became that I was against uh

1:11:45 ↗ affordable housing I just want to make

1:11:48 ↗ sure that we

1:11:50 ↗ get housing that benefits

1:11:54 ↗ and done and I would I guess my point is

1:11:58 ↗ that

1:11:59 ↗ um

1:12:00 ↗ I I want to go with the pace that make

1:12:02 ↗ sure we get the housing the benefits

1:12:04 ↗ and it isn't the goal to me isn't just

1:12:06 ↗ to build more housing so hopefully we'll

1:12:09 ↗ be able to as we move forward I'm really

1:12:12 ↗ just signaling that those guard rails

1:12:14 ↗ are really important to me about what we

1:12:16 ↗ get because every single time we build

1:12:18 ↗ we say oh yes now we know what we're

1:12:20 ↗ gonna get and in the end we don't really

1:12:22 ↗ get what we get want because you know if

1:12:25 ↗ if a developer has two options and this

1:12:27 ↗ option is get gets them five dollars per

1:12:29 ↗ square foot and this option gets them

1:12:31 ↗ six dollars per square foot they'll go

1:12:32 ↗ for the one that gets them six dollars

1:12:33 ↗ per square foot that's how the world

1:12:35 ↗ works so I I just want to be I just want

1:12:38 ↗ to be cautious and measure twice and cut

1:12:40 ↗ one

1:12:41 ↗ you know as we go to spend these

1:12:43 ↗ important dollars that's all I'm really

1:12:44 ↗ saying I believe I I agree with both of

1:12:46 ↗ you that we should do something like

1:12:48 ↗ this I'm just saying that I those guard

1:12:50 ↗ rails are super important having a

1:12:53 ↗ number of times didn't get the public

1:12:55 ↗ benefit that we thought

1:12:58 ↗ we can shall we move on because

1:13:01 ↗ well I do you have your

1:13:03 ↗ Captain remember Joe we can go ahead and

1:13:05 ↗ move on I I think we've

1:13:08 ↗ yeah killed the horse on those all right

1:13:11 ↗ uh what policy aims does the committee

1:13:13 ↗ wish to further with the Strategic

1:13:15 ↗ opportunity

1:13:17 ↗ I'll go ahead and go first on that one I

1:13:20 ↗ I think um you know we need to be

1:13:22 ↗ cautious in terms of what additional

1:13:24 ↗ requirements we're putting on to a

1:13:27 ↗ developer but if items make sense uh for

1:13:32 ↗ instance if we are building on the

1:13:33 ↗ valley floor and there's an opportunity

1:13:35 ↗ to connect to a creek trail that makes

1:13:38 ↗ sense and and it enables us to uh build

1:13:42 ↗ on the concept of the green necklace or

1:13:45 ↗ having opportunities to access the creek

1:13:47 ↗ all the way from Lake samamas to our to

1:13:50 ↗ our furthest Southern border and that

1:13:52 ↗ can be worked in there that certainly

1:13:54 ↗ makes sense without

1:13:55 ↗ putting a huge cost on a developer I

1:13:59 ↗ would also like us to continue to

1:14:03 ↗ explore

1:14:05 ↗ um opportunities for health care

1:14:08 ↗ for people that live in the units that

1:14:13 ↗ we're building the Tod for instance has

1:14:16 ↗ this concept some of the healthcare

1:14:19 ↗ amenities there so the people don't have

1:14:21 ↗ to travel all the way to Bellevue so

1:14:23 ↗ people don't need to go across town but

1:14:25 ↗ can you know have a reasonable walk from

1:14:29 ↗ the bus stop to that health facility or

1:14:32 ↗ if they live in that facility come

1:14:34 ↗ downstairs and and get health care there

1:14:37 ↗ an ounce of prevention in terms of

1:14:40 ↗ catching something early for everybody

1:14:42 ↗ makes a huge difference in the health

1:14:44 ↗ care costs that we have overall for our

1:14:47 ↗ city so if we can find Opportunities to

1:14:51 ↗ have uh unique services that are not

1:14:55 ↗ elsewhere but give people an opportunity

1:14:58 ↗ to have a

1:15:00 ↗ walkable community and get to these so

1:15:05 ↗ services without having to get into a

1:15:07 ↗ car or they can take a bus in in city or

1:15:10 ↗ take our dial-up ride that we went

1:15:12 ↗ through last night last Monday to get to

1:15:16 ↗ these facilities I think that's that's a

1:15:18 ↗ great opportunity there

1:15:20 ↗ um

1:15:21 ↗ also for our non-profits I think that

1:15:25 ↗ our youth often have

1:15:28 ↗ um

1:15:29 ↗ challenges in terms of perhaps being

1:15:33 ↗ homeless or being unhoused and if there

1:15:36 ↗ are opportunities for us to explore

1:15:41 ↗ shelter for our youth that are homeless

1:15:44 ↗ I think that's a good opportunity to use

1:15:46 ↗ these funds

1:15:47 ↗ our closest overnight shelters in

1:15:50 ↗ Kirkland or Auburn or Seattle and I

1:15:53 ↗ really don't want our young people going

1:15:55 ↗ to Seattle

1:15:56 ↗ we have found that if people have the

1:16:00 ↗ support of their school and their

1:16:02 ↗ counselor and their teachers here in

1:16:04 ↗ town and they're able to live in town it

1:16:05 ↗ makes a difference in the opportunities

1:16:08 ↗ for success for our young people so I'll

1:16:11 ↗ throw that out there as a as as another

1:16:13 ↗ wish list for me but certainly those are

1:16:16 ↗ some of the the ideas that I have at

1:16:18 ↗ this point thank you

1:16:22 ↗ ah thank you I think my top

1:16:26 ↗ um you know if we're talking about what

1:16:28 ↗ policy Arenas we'd like to have

1:16:32 ↗ um my top thing would be equity and I

1:16:34 ↗ think

1:16:36 ↗ working through the equity board that we

1:16:38 ↗ have for the city and they bring a lot

1:16:41 ↗ of expertise on that I think would be a

1:16:45 ↗ really good thing make sure that they

1:16:48 ↗ have a look at what's what's happening

1:16:50 ↗ there

1:16:51 ↗ um and then the other thing I totally

1:16:53 ↗ agree that a connection to Open Spaces

1:16:57 ↗ especially if we're housing families

1:16:59 ↗ with children

1:17:01 ↗ that it's uh if if we can build in Open

1:17:06 ↗ Spaces that are usable for young

1:17:08 ↗ families I think that would be my second

1:17:11 ↗ highest priority in terms of policies

1:17:14 ↗ with that regard so those will be the

1:17:17 ↗ two that I would pick out

1:17:21 ↗ thank you

1:17:22 ↗ um in this conversation I think uh

1:17:25 ↗ networked uh to park amenities

1:17:29 ↗ the valley floor is large and want to

1:17:33 ↗ make sure that as development happens uh

1:17:36 ↗ families have have access to get to our

1:17:38 ↗ great Parks system and you don't want to

1:17:42 ↗ sort of a concrete uh

1:17:44 ↗ you know concrete desert

1:17:46 ↗ uh as people get as well as uh providing

1:17:50 ↗ uh conduit for wildlife to get to the

1:17:52 ↗ valley

1:17:54 ↗ that was a priority for me

1:17:57 ↗ so we move on to the what the third

1:17:58 ↗ question is uh Arch I believe doesn't

1:18:02 ↗ the community agree with the

1:18:03 ↗ recommendation on additional allocation

1:18:05 ↗ to Arch trust fund

1:18:07 ↗ yes

1:18:08 ↗ council member to Michelle

1:18:11 ↗ I I totally agree with councilmember Joe

1:18:13 ↗ yes

1:18:15 ↗ um and thanks for the report from Arch

1:18:17 ↗ and the list of projects that that were

1:18:21 ↗ funded and the realistic projects that

1:18:23 ↗ could be funded and uh I think this

1:18:26 ↗ one-time addition to our already

1:18:28 ↗ standing

1:18:30 ↗ um contribution is very warranted and

1:18:34 ↗ um

1:18:35 ↗ if we help affordable housing across the

1:18:37 ↗ east side that helps us as well so

1:18:40 ↗ absolutely I think that is a great use

1:18:42 ↗ of our funds

1:18:44 ↗ I'm a yes also I will say amazingly the

1:18:48 ↗ 14 years that I've been on Council

1:18:50 ↗ exactly coincides with the Gap in major

1:18:53 ↗ projects from March here because YWCA

1:18:56 ↗ started right before I got on Council uh

1:18:59 ↗ like six months before I got on Council

1:19:01 ↗ so I would love to see uh arch with a

1:19:03 ↗ major project back you know we're happy

1:19:05 ↗ to help with regional Solutions we get

1:19:07 ↗ that our investment helps you know

1:19:09 ↗ investing regionally benefits us as well

1:19:12 ↗ but I would love to see Arch Back In A

1:19:14 ↗ Major Way sometime soon question four

1:19:16 ↗ does the committee agree on framework

1:19:18 ↗ changes as recommended to Pioneer

1:19:20 ↗ programs

1:19:21 ↗ councilmember Joe thank you I think

1:19:24 ↗ council member Barb D Michelle said it

1:19:27 ↗ best that she does agree with all the

1:19:29 ↗ framework changes I think that we have

1:19:32 ↗ an opportunity to

1:19:34 ↗ um

1:19:35 ↗ take a little bit outside the box and

1:19:37 ↗ and look at mfte uh in a way that could

1:19:41 ↗ have the extension on there that makes

1:19:43 ↗ it something that could work for our

1:19:47 ↗ community I think that the mft in

1:19:50 ↗ particular spreads the

1:19:52 ↗ um

1:19:53 ↗ the decision to have affordable housing

1:19:55 ↗ to every property owner in town rather

1:19:59 ↗ than have it focused on uh one segment

1:20:01 ↗ of the population or one particular

1:20:03 ↗ industry and that's the kind of uh

1:20:07 ↗ um Community agreement that I think we

1:20:09 ↗ need to have that we understand that

1:20:12 ↗ affordable housing is needed more

1:20:14 ↗ housing is needed and we want to have

1:20:18 ↗ that tax burdens spread over the entire

1:20:22 ↗ community so it is quite small but in

1:20:25 ↗ the aggregate it's quite significant to

1:20:27 ↗ to move the ball forward thank you

1:20:30 ↗ thank you

1:20:32 ↗ Michelle yeah I think I've spoken to to

1:20:36 ↗ the proposal for the Pioneer project

1:20:38 ↗ I'm very supportive of it and hope that

1:20:41 ↗ it's able to go forward and I think

1:20:44 ↗ there was a statement in there about

1:20:46 ↗ um I think it was in the handout that we

1:20:49 ↗ had that it takes maybe five or six

1:20:51 ↗ years for a project to actually come to

1:20:54 ↗ Market and so

1:20:57 ↗ um

1:20:58 ↗ that's my experience as well is is

1:21:01 ↗ that's about what it takes so

1:21:04 ↗ um let's get going let's get going and I

1:21:06 ↗ would love to have you come back with a

1:21:08 ↗ more defined uh program for us to to

1:21:11 ↗ actually approve thank you

1:21:14 ↗ foreign

1:21:19 ↗ somebody said a camel is a horse

1:21:21 ↗ designed by committee uh there are a lot

1:21:25 ↗ of facets that go into a development in

1:21:28 ↗ terms of what municipalities ease up on

1:21:32 ↗ regulations

1:21:34 ↗ um to get what benefits I think it's

1:21:36 ↗ reasonable uh to have this as part of

1:21:40 ↗ the conversation I see the benefit of

1:21:42 ↗ having a Pioneer program but I want to

1:21:45 ↗ see a comprehensive package and those

1:21:48 ↗ guard rails I talk about before you know

1:21:51 ↗ going from 60 to 80 is uh

1:21:55 ↗ maybe giveaway is a loaded term but it's

1:21:58 ↗ a part of the conversation about what

1:22:00 ↗ what what's the city's investment in the

1:22:04 ↗ broadest sense of the word investment

1:22:06 ↗ for what they get in back and as as we

1:22:09 ↗ move forward trying to have you heard of

1:22:11 ↗ the conversation but I want to see what

1:22:13 ↗ it all looks like when it all gets put

1:22:14 ↗ together

1:22:18 ↗ City administrator do you have what you

1:22:20 ↗ were looking for from the community this

1:22:21 ↗ evening

1:22:22 ↗ uh yes Mr chair what I think we'll do is

1:22:26 ↗ we will come back at your September

1:22:28 ↗ meeting uh with a more fleshed out uh

1:22:32 ↗ guidelines for the uh the fund uh to see

1:22:36 ↗ if that and I appreciate the the

1:22:38 ↗ detailed comments that you gave we

1:22:40 ↗ should be able to take those and uh

1:22:42 ↗ flush those out more and bring back to

1:22:44 ↗ you that

1:22:45 ↗ um I think that the Pioneer program

1:22:47 ↗ looks like it is you're in concurrence

1:22:50 ↗ with the administration's

1:22:51 ↗ recommendations I think one more touch

1:22:52 ↗ here in committee makes sense

1:22:55 ↗ um and then the trust fund uh allocation

1:22:58 ↗ uh to Arch is a budgetary issue which

1:23:02 ↗ we'll uh discuss with our finance staff

1:23:04 ↗ and sort through the best way that

1:23:07 ↗ likely will not come back then to the

1:23:09 ↗ committee will have either roll that

1:23:11 ↗ into a a budget uh Amendment uh in the

1:23:15 ↗ future and have the chair Martz speak to

1:23:17 ↗ that as appropriate when it comes back

1:23:19 ↗ so in September you'll have additional

1:23:21 ↗ discussion about the fund and the

1:23:24 ↗ Pioneer programs and that'll give us

1:23:26 ↗ enough time then to take it one last

1:23:28 ↗ stop to the committee the whole and if

1:23:31 ↗ there's concurrence there uh whatever

1:23:33 ↗ Council actions required will file

1:23:34 ↗ sounds good you've gotten head nods from

1:23:37 ↗ the committee that all sounds good

1:23:39 ↗ um I want to thank my fellow committee

1:23:41 ↗ members members of the public you know

1:23:43 ↗ there's times where this this body is

1:23:45 ↗ accused of like we come up to the days

1:23:47 ↗ and we just have a unanimity and all

1:23:49 ↗ seven of us are sort of on the same page

1:23:51 ↗ so it's thrilling to be able to upon

1:23:53 ↗ occasion uh sort of Whittle things uh in

1:23:57 ↗ public view because that's how we're you

1:23:58 ↗ know we all we're all trying to do the

1:24:01 ↗ best thing for the city and folks

1:24:03 ↗ certainly got that this evening and with

1:24:04 ↗ that I will say that this meeting is

1:24:06 ↗ adjourned

1:24:10 ↗ foreign

Approved minutes

The minutes PDF below is the canonical record. Structured parsing of attendance and motions for this body's minutes format is not yet implemented — open the PDF for the full content.

Open PDF