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

Extracted from the next meeting's packet, where this meeting's minutes were approved as a consent-calendar attachment.

Open PDF

Attendance

Council / Members (3)

Tola Marts

Barbara de Michele

Russell Joe

Staff (2)

Wally Bobkiewicz, City Administrator

Chris Grabowski, Deputy City Clerk

Recommendations & actions (2)

Sentences extracted from the narrative containing words like recommended, requested, directed, moved, or approved. Best-effort — verify against the full minutes for context.

a) Minutes of July 18, 2023 - CM Joe moved (de Michele 2nd) to approve the minutes as presented.
Committee asked staff to return to its September 19 meeting with more information on the Opportunity Fund and Pioneer Program.