City Council Services, Safety & Parks Committee · Tuesday, May 5, 2026 · City Council Digest

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

City Council Services, Safety & Parks Committee Meeting, February 24, 2026

packet pp.5–6

Topics: ParksPublic Safety

Previously discussed: City Council Regular Meeting · Mar 16, 2026

▶ Watch from 1:33 Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 02-24-26 City Council Services, Safety & Parks Page (01) Committee Minutes CITY OF ISSAQUAH City Council Services, Safety & Parks Committee 7:00 PM Council Chambers, 135 E. February 24, 2026 MINUTES Sunset Way, Issaquah WA

4. AGENDA ITEMS

Equity Goals and Evaluation COM 0264

45 min · Gillian Straub, Management Analyst Andrea Lehner, Deputy City Administrator · packet pp.7–48

Topics: Equity

Previously discussed: Equity Board · Apr 8, 2026

▶ Watch from 0:32 Open packet at p.7 ↗

Staff report:

Equity Work to Date The following summarizes three key moments in the City’s equity work as it relates to city services and programs; this is not an exhaustive list, rather it highlights moments that led up to this project.

Potential Park Bond Renewal COM 0265

Director · 60 min · Jeff Watling, Parks & Community Services · packet pp.49–75

Topics: Parks

Previously discussed: City Council Regular Meeting · Apr 6, 2026

▶ Watch from 0:58 Open packet at p.49 ↗

Staff report:

Following the April 6, 2026 presentation on a potential park bond renewal measure going to Issaquah voters this fall, City Council provided questions and requested feedback within the following four categories. The May 5 SSP Committee presentation will cover these questions and requests for additional information.

2410 segments .txt ↗

0:08 ↗ There we go. All right.

0:11 ↗ Uh, welcome everyone. I, Council Member

0:14 ↗ Adair, call the May 5th, 2026 City

0:16 ↗ Council Services, Safety, and Parks

0:18 ↗ Committee to order. Uh, there are no

0:21 ↗ excused absences.

0:24 ↗ Uh, so the first item on the agenda is

0:27 ↗ the public comment. Uh this is an

0:29 ↗ opportunity to provide general comments.

0:30 ↗ There will also be an opportunity for

0:32 ↗ public comments on each agenda item

0:34 ↗ after the presentation and the

0:36 ↗ committee's question and answer period.

0:38 ↗ Comments can be made in person or

0:39 ↗ virtually. Those who have signed up in

0:41 ↗ advance will be called on first. Uh if

0:43 ↗ you're joining us virtually and would

0:45 ↗ like to make comments, please raise your

0:46 ↗ virtual hand or send the host a chat

0:48 ↗ message. If you're on the phone, press

0:50 ↗ star three. Uh if you've joined by

0:53 ↗ computer or smartphone, look for a hand

0:55 ↗ icon. Uh if you're in the room and did

0:57 ↗ not sign up, there will be an

0:59 ↗ opportunity for you to raise your hand

1:00 ↗ if you'd like to speak before I close

1:02 ↗ this portion of the meeting. Uh clerk,

1:04 ↗ has anyone signed up to speak or

1:05 ↗ indicated a desire to speak this

1:07 ↗ evening?

1:10 ↗ >> Uh not on the signup sheet yet, but

1:12 ↗ there may be members in the room who

1:14 ↗ wish to speak or online.

1:16 ↗ >> Okay.

1:17 ↗ Uh is there anyone in the room who would

1:20 ↗ like to make a comment?

1:22 ↗ Not yet. Okay. Uh then so it looks like

1:28 ↗ no one virtually still. Okay. Then we'll

1:31 ↗ move on. The next item of business is

1:33 ↗ going to be the approval of the minutes.

1:36 ↗ The minutes were distributed to the

1:37 ↗ committee in advance. Are there any

1:39 ↗ corrections?

1:42 ↗ Nope. Nope. Uh hearing none. The minutes

1:44 ↗ are approved as presented.

1:47 ↗ Uh then we move into our full agenda.

1:51 ↗ All right. The first is going to be

1:54 ↗ COOM0264

1:55 ↗ equity goals and evaluation uh presented

1:58 ↗ by Jillian Stro and Andrea Ler.

2:02 ↗ Believe this is virtual correct?

2:10 ↗ >> Yes, thank you. Give me just a moment to

2:12 ↗ pull up my PowerPoint and then we'll

2:13 ↗ begin.

2:29 ↗ All right.

2:33 ↗ Uh, thank you for having me. My name is

2:35 ↗ Jillian Stro. I'm a management analyst

2:37 ↗ with the executive department. I'm here

2:39 ↗ tonight to present on the equity goals

2:41 ↗ and assessment project. with us tonight.

2:43 ↗ We also have Andrea Leonard Leonard,

2:45 ↗ deputy city administrator to jump in um

2:48 ↗ as I present and answer any questions as

2:50 ↗ well.

2:52 ↗ So, tonight we'll be reviewing the

2:54 ↗ equity project plan, the goals and

2:56 ↗ phases of that work. We'll then review

2:58 ↗ the community engagement plan in more

3:00 ↗ depth, and we'll be looking forward to

3:02 ↗ receiving uh committee feedback on the

3:04 ↗ community engagement plan.

3:08 ↗ To guide that discussion, we have four

3:10 ↗ direction questions needed on the slide

3:12 ↗ here. I'll go over them now. So, the

3:15 ↗ first one is assessing if there's a

3:18 ↗ mismatch u between the goals of the

3:20 ↗ engagement and what we want to get out

3:21 ↗ of it. The second is covering the

3:23 ↗ methods used um for to gather feedback

3:27 ↗ and priority groups to reach out to.

3:29 ↗ Here, we'll want to hear from the

3:30 ↗ committee if there are any other groups

3:32 ↗ that we that you'd like to see um

3:34 ↗ reached out to by the administration as

3:36 ↗ part of this work. Third, we'll accept

3:38 ↗ any general feedback um from the

3:40 ↗ committee on the overall project plan.

3:43 ↗ And finally, as a next step, we'll be

3:45 ↗ seeking committee feedback on bringing

3:47 ↗ the draft equity vision and goals back

3:49 ↗ to services, safety, and parks in the

3:51 ↗ fall or coming before committee of the

3:54 ↗ whole meeting before moving to council

3:56 ↗ for action.

3:58 ↗ So, with that, I'll move into a

4:00 ↗ background on equity work to date. From

4:04 ↗ the city's comprehensive plan, we have

4:06 ↗ this equity guiding principle that

4:08 ↗ states ensure that the isiqua's services

4:12 ↗ um

4:14 ↗ and outstanding quality of life are

4:15 ↗ accessible to everyone.

4:17 ↗ This was developed by a consultant with

4:19 ↗ limited community engagement. And as a

4:22 ↗ staff member, if I was directed to

4:24 ↗ implement this, I might not know where

4:25 ↗ to begin. So this is what's in our

4:27 ↗ comprehensive plan. It's also reflected

4:29 ↗ in our strategic plan.

4:33 ↗ In addition

4:35 ↗ uh to what's in the comprehensive plan,

4:37 ↗ we also have a selection of equity

4:39 ↗ actions taken by the administration and

4:41 ↗ city council over the past few years. Um

4:44 ↗ first, the administration established

4:47 ↗ the equity advisory board in 2021.

4:50 ↗ However, we didn't give them uh any

4:52 ↗ direction or how to advise on what to

4:55 ↗ compare um progress on our equity work

4:58 ↗ to. Um, and second, during the 2024

5:01 ↗ strategic plan update, that community

5:03 ↗ task force noted a need for an equity

5:06 ↗ operational plan. These two actions kind

5:09 ↗ of illustrate the problem that we're

5:10 ↗ hoping to address here. We say in a lot

5:13 ↗ of our planning documents that equity is

5:15 ↗ a priority, but we don't give a

5:16 ↗ definition that allows for comparison to

5:19 ↗ where we are um or how to get there. So,

5:23 ↗ we lack a strategy with some of our

5:25 ↗ equity actions

5:27 ↗ to address this. In the in 2024, city

5:30 ↗ council adopted the 2526 budget,

5:33 ↗ including $50,000 for equity

5:35 ↗ professional services to start

5:37 ↗ addressing this issue. In 2025, the city

5:41 ↗ issued an a request for proposals for

5:43 ↗ phase one and two of this work, equity

5:45 ↗ visioning and goal setting and equity

5:48 ↗ tool um assessment development.

5:51 ↗ In 2026, we selected a consultant with

5:54 ↗ the help of the equity board who was

5:56 ↗ part of the selection committee for this

5:58 ↗ work.

6:02 ↗ So I want to talk a little bit about

6:03 ↗ where we're going. Um we envision three

6:06 ↗ phases of work. First, we need to know

6:08 ↗ what equity and ser in city services

6:11 ↗ looks like and what we want it to be.

6:14 ↗ Second, we need to audit our services

6:16 ↗ and programs to understand where we are

6:19 ↗ in comparison to our goals and identify

6:21 ↗ the gaps in comparison to where we want

6:22 ↗ to be. And third, we need a strategy

6:25 ↗ that outlines the actions and resources

6:28 ↗ to close the gaps and meet our goals.

6:31 ↗ Items one and two on your screen in the

6:33 ↗ darker green are the ones that we're

6:34 ↗ going to address in 2026 and perhaps

6:36 ↗ early 2027. And we'll talk a little bit

6:39 ↗ more about what that looks like in this

6:40 ↗ presentation.

6:42 ↗ But if the end result is an equity

6:44 ↗ action plan, then we need to know why

6:45 ↗ we're going there. So there is obviously

6:48 ↗ community need from the equity board and

6:51 ↗ the strategic plan update task force

6:53 ↗ calling for an equity operational plan

6:55 ↗ or equity action plan. It's a clearly

6:58 ↗ stated community and city value, but it

7:00 ↗ doesn't have consistent definition or

7:02 ↗ application. By having an equity action

7:05 ↗ plan, we operationalize the commitment

7:06 ↗ to equity. And we also comply with best

7:09 ↗ practice from the government alliance on

7:11 ↗ race and equity. And we're in good

7:12 ↗ company in the region with other cities

7:14 ↗ having DEI action plans that focus on

7:17 ↗ various parts of their city services.

7:23 ↗ Once we have an an equity action plan, I

7:25 ↗ want to talk a little bit about what we

7:27 ↗ do with it. So when we think about other

7:29 ↗ focus areas like transportation or

7:31 ↗ climate, the comprehensive plan largely

7:34 ↗ sets the vision, goals, and policies of

7:36 ↗ that work. For example, in the

7:37 ↗ transportation element of the

7:39 ↗ comprehensive plan, but these focus

7:41 ↗ areas also have a have a functional plan

7:44 ↗ that lay out the strategies, actions,

7:46 ↗ and resources to achieve the goals,

7:49 ↗ policy, and vision. that's laid out in

7:51 ↗ the comprehensive plan. So for example,

7:54 ↗ taking the transportation element, the

7:56 ↗ mobility action plan includes the goals

7:59 ↗ and policies from the comprehensive plan

8:02 ↗ in the map and it lays out the

8:04 ↗ strategies and actions specific to those

8:06 ↗ goals um to achieve them so that staff

8:09 ↗ can uh follow that as a road map and the

8:12 ↗ transportation advisory board in turn

8:15 ↗ measures progress against the mobility

8:16 ↗ action plan. This is similar to the

8:19 ↗ Isiqua climate action plan and other

8:21 ↗ focus areas for city services. However,

8:24 ↗ equity lacks this. This work will

8:27 ↗ establish a new vision and goals for the

8:29 ↗ comprehensive plan, a way to see where

8:31 ↗ we are in comparison to those vision and

8:33 ↗ goals and eventually a plan for

8:35 ↗ roadmapping how we get to where we want

8:36 ↗ to be. The equity board would also own

8:39 ↗ this equity action plan um and and

8:42 ↗ advise and recommend based on based on

8:44 ↗ it.

8:47 ↗ I'll briefly cover the request for

8:49 ↗ proposals deliverables that the city

8:51 ↗ issued in late 2025.

8:54 ↗ Um it's split up into two phases. So

8:55 ↗ first is that visioning and goal setting

8:57 ↗ that we've been talking about. The

8:59 ↗ outcome of this work is comprehensive

9:01 ↗ and communitydriven equity vision and

9:03 ↗ goals. So we know that where we're

9:05 ↗ going. Phase two is equity program

9:07 ↗ evaluation.

9:09 ↗ We've uh enlisted a consultant for phase

9:12 ↗ one and phase two of this work. Um, as

9:14 ↗ part of phase two, we'd like them to

9:15 ↗ develop a tool that all staff can use to

9:17 ↗ evaluate equity in city program against

9:19 ↗ the goals established in phase one and

9:22 ↗ take a stab at evaluating evaluating two

9:25 ↗ city programs as part of that work

9:27 ↗ knowing that staff is going to have to

9:29 ↗ conduct a larger audit of city programs

9:31 ↗ once the tool is finalized.

9:33 ↗ But the outcome there is program evalu

9:36 ↗ is a program evaluation tool that can be

9:38 ↗ used across a broad array of city

9:40 ↗ programs by staff.

9:43 ↗ With that, I'll pause for any questions

9:45 ↗ before we go into the community

9:46 ↗ engagement plan.

9:50 ↗ >> Uh thank you. Do any of my fellow

9:53 ↗ members have any questions for this

9:56 ↗ time?

10:02 ↗ Do we have uh good examples of uh other

10:05 ↗ like regional to uh tools used by other

10:08 ↗ cities?

10:10 ↗ We do. We did a a search when we started

10:13 ↗ this work to see if there was a tool

10:15 ↗ that maybe we could just grab and use

10:17 ↗ ourselves. We did a search a nationwide

10:20 ↗ search for that tool. Um and after

10:22 ↗ consulting with the internal staff

10:25 ↗ equity team and the equity board, it was

10:28 ↗ decided that none of the the tools that

10:30 ↗ we had found quite met what we need.

10:31 ↗ What we often see is that these tools

10:33 ↗ focus either really heavily internally

10:36 ↗ or really heavy heavily externally and

10:38 ↗ beyond the scope of city services. We

10:40 ↗ needed something that was tailored to um

10:42 ↗ city services that we provide. So we'll

10:45 ↗ certainly look at what else is out there

10:47 ↗ again as we engage in this work. Um, but

10:49 ↗ we we also looked at that as we started.

10:56 ↗ >> I guess if I can have a followup to that

10:58 ↗ is uh I'll try and figure out how to

11:00 ↗ phrase this into a question of is there

11:03 ↗ what measures

11:05 ↗ I realize this is a hypothetical as I'm

11:07 ↗ asking it. if we pursue a tool, what

11:09 ↗ measures will be taken so that it

11:13 ↗ doesn't become

11:15 ↗ um I don't want to fall into uh equity

11:18 ↗ becoming a a checkbox and a process. Um

11:23 ↗ >> so I guess how yeah, how can we be

11:25 ↗ proactive about that?

11:28 ↗ >> And I think I can I can provide some of

11:31 ↗ the guard rails we're thinking about. We

11:33 ↗ won't know exactly what it's going to

11:34 ↗ look like until we're kind of in phase

11:36 ↗ two. We also developed guidance for

11:38 ↗ staff on how to use it. Um, but that was

11:40 ↗ strongly considered as we selected the

11:42 ↗ consultant for this work is their

11:44 ↗ ability to deliver a tool that is easy

11:46 ↗ to use. Um, and knowing that we would

11:49 ↗ need to develop some city processes

11:50 ↗ around how it gets used so that you're

11:53 ↗ right, it doesn't become just a checkbox

11:55 ↗ um, but is integrated into decision-m

11:57 ↗ that also kind of speaks to tool design

11:59 ↗ so that it's applicable across a variety

12:01 ↗ of programs, size, different audiences,

12:04 ↗ things like that.

12:09 ↗ Uh I have a question in terms of just

12:11 ↗ getting some clarity because you brought

12:12 ↗ up you know the searching for multiple

12:13 ↗ tools and they did different things and

12:15 ↗ so I'd love to have just a little bit of

12:16 ↗ a clarity in terms of because you bring

12:18 ↗ up that the intent of this is for city

12:21 ↗ services just trying to clarify exactly

12:24 ↗ what where the equity is are trying to

12:26 ↗ apply to you mention it's not internal

12:28 ↗ it's more how our services are being

12:30 ↗ used by the community or what is the

12:33 ↗ kind of the real equitable intent that

12:35 ↗ we're trying to get out of this that

12:36 ↗ none of the tools then satisfied.

12:40 ↗ >> Yeah. The focus of this um is communityf

12:43 ↗ facing programs. So you can think about

12:45 ↗ for example some of our parks and

12:47 ↗ recreation programs. The reason we want

12:49 ↗ to focus here is not because other

12:51 ↗ facets of equity like procurement and

12:53 ↗ hiring aren't important. Um but we

12:55 ↗ thought that this was the the most

12:57 ↗ important set of services to look at

12:59 ↗ first. Um as we consider equity

13:02 ↗ evaluations. This is something that was

13:04 ↗ discussed with the internal staff equity

13:06 ↗ team as well as the equity board when we

13:08 ↗ talked about what is the scope of the

13:10 ↗ work that we're doing.

13:12 ↗ Got it. Okay. Yeah, that does help

13:14 ↗ clarify. Any other questions before she

13:15 ↗ moves on? Oh, one more. Council Nichols,

13:20 ↗ >> have you given any thought to expanding

13:21 ↗ this to considering the equity

13:23 ↗ implications of broader policy decisions

13:25 ↗ that both we as a council and the

13:27 ↗ administration make? Um there's there's

13:29 ↗ a lot that we do as a city that

13:33 ↗ sets things from affordability to um

13:37 ↗ ease of access for for many services uh

13:40 ↗ that people rely on. Are those types of

13:42 ↗ things a possibility to be considered in

13:45 ↗ this?

13:47 ↗ >> Yes, certainly. I think that's something

13:49 ↗ that we would consider as we get into

13:50 ↗ phase two and we scope exactly who the

13:52 ↗ tool is for. similar to how the equity

13:55 ↗ framework that was developed by the

13:57 ↗ equity board um was designed to be used

13:59 ↗ by staff and then got used by council

14:01 ↗ alike. Um I think there'd be value in it

14:04 ↗ being used across all levels of the

14:06 ↗ organization from elected

14:07 ↗ [clears throat] decision makers to

14:08 ↗ programmatic staff.

14:14 ↗ >> Any other comments or questions before

14:16 ↗ she moves on?

14:18 ↗ >> All right, you can continue.

14:21 ↗ >> Thank you.

14:24 ↗ Okay. Now, talking a little bit more

14:25 ↗ specifically about the community

14:27 ↗ engagement plan itself. So, I've already

14:29 ↗ covered the the intended outcome of this

14:32 ↗ work. Um, but we developed some goals

14:34 ↗ around the community engagement plan

14:36 ↗ itself to ensure that we were we were

14:38 ↗ going to reach that outcome. So, first

14:40 ↗ we're seeking sufficient diverse

14:42 ↗ community input to shape the city's

14:44 ↗ highle equity goals. And second, we're

14:47 ↗ hoping that decision makers understand

14:48 ↗ and honor the community input in the

14:50 ↗ draft goals.

14:54 ↗ So now I'll run through the different

14:55 ↗ tasks associated to the community

14:57 ↗ engagement plan. So task one and two are

15:00 ↗ fairly similar. We're seeking feedback

15:02 ↗ on the plan itself from first the equity

15:04 ↗ board. Um and I'll run through their

15:06 ↗ feedback um at the end of this

15:08 ↗ presentation and a lot of it's been

15:09 ↗ incorporated into the community

15:11 ↗ engagement plan in your packet tonight.

15:13 ↗ Um, and we also wanted to get city

15:15 ↗ services, safety, and parks feedback um,

15:18 ↗ in an effort to kind of meet goal number

15:20 ↗ two from the community engagement plan.

15:24 ↗ So, tasks three through five really

15:26 ↗ cover the breadth of seeking community

15:29 ↗ input on equity and municipal services.

15:32 ↗ So, I'll talk through these three tasks,

15:34 ↗ which are three kind of different

15:35 ↗ methods um, for reaching the community.

15:37 ↗ So, first we'd like to develop a survey

15:40 ↗ of the public um that will be live from

15:43 ↗ sometime in May through July on really

15:45 ↗ high level equity in city services.

15:49 ↗ We're looking at other cities who have

15:51 ↗ done this to see what's been successful

15:53 ↗ and helpful in guiding their similar

15:55 ↗ work. We would also have the consultant

15:57 ↗ review this survey. We intend to share

15:59 ↗ it via posters around town, social media

16:02 ↗ or city publications um and paper copies

16:04 ↗ at specific locations. We'd also have

16:06 ↗ this professionally translated. The

16:09 ↗ groups that we hope to reach out to

16:11 ↗ through this survey include a mix of

16:13 ↗ those who I would generally say are

16:14 ↗ already plugged in or connected to the

16:16 ↗ city in some way. Thinking about our

16:18 ↗ board and commission members, HOAs,

16:21 ↗ those kinds of groups and some groups

16:23 ↗ and locations that are specific to those

16:25 ↗ who have been under reppresented in

16:27 ↗ historic pro um underrepresented in

16:30 ↗ civic processes historically. So a

16:32 ↗ little bit more about that in the the

16:34 ↗ second task um on this page. So the

16:38 ↗ outreach to faith and cultural groups is

16:40 ↗ is occurring concurrently as the survey

16:44 ↗ in part because part of this work is to

16:47 ↗ get some of these groups to um to take

16:50 ↗ the survey

16:52 ↗ um and and to receive the same feedback

16:54 ↗ that the the survey is providing. So

16:56 ↗ some of the groups that we are looking

16:58 ↗ at include um communities of Russian,

17:02 ↗ Chinese, Hindu or Indian, Korean,

17:04 ↗ Hispanic um communities as well as dis

17:08 ↗ disability rights groups, seniors and

17:10 ↗ youth. The types of organizations that

17:12 ↗ we're looking at connecting with include

17:14 ↗ um grocery stores, and I'll explain that

17:16 ↗ a little bit more in a minute, religious

17:18 ↗ communities, nonprofits who work with

17:20 ↗ these groups, and social groups. Um our

17:24 ↗ goal is to get feedback through the

17:25 ↗ survey. So, for example, um posting a

17:28 ↗ poster at a grocery store that invites

17:31 ↗ people to take the survey, dropping off

17:33 ↗ paper copies at a church. Um we'd also

17:36 ↗ like to offer the opportunity to focus

17:38 ↗ group the survey with these groups um if

17:40 ↗ that's a lower barrier, easier way to

17:42 ↗ get the feedback from folks. We also

17:45 ↗ hope to identify some leadership for the

17:47 ↗ workshop that I'll talk about on the

17:49 ↗ next slide from this group to ensure

17:50 ↗ that folks who maybe haven't been part

17:52 ↗ of the city's processes on something

17:53 ↗ like this before are at the table both

17:56 ↗ in the broad community engagement that's

17:58 ↗ collected and those who will be drafting

18:00 ↗ the equity vision and goals.

18:04 ↗ Tabling the last task on your screen

18:06 ↗ there is just another means of getting

18:08 ↗ that community feedback. Again, this

18:10 ↗ will this will take a couple of

18:11 ↗ questions from the survey. So, we're

18:13 ↗ asking the same questions across

18:15 ↗ multiple different methods. Um, but

18:17 ↗ perhaps a more inviting or lower barrier

18:20 ↗ way to um to get feedback, something

18:23 ↗ like dot voting or something like that

18:24 ↗ to draw people in at a community event

18:26 ↗ who might not otherwise take the survey.

18:29 ↗ We're thinking about a variety of of

18:31 ↗ events including things like uh farmers

18:33 ↗ markets but also also culturally

18:35 ↗ specific events to again reach some of

18:37 ↗ those groups that perhaps our processes

18:39 ↗ haven't reached and that are

18:40 ↗ particularly important to reach in a

18:42 ↗ process and a topic like this one.

18:46 ↗ So with that um once we have all of that

18:49 ↗ community feedback um in July we intend

18:52 ↗ to convene a community leadership

18:54 ↗ workshop.

18:55 ↗ This is where the consultant will really

18:57 ↗ step in to start facilitating. This

18:59 ↗ group is going to be no more than 20

19:00 ↗ folks to allow for decision-m and

19:03 ↗ consensus. We intend for this group to

19:05 ↗ be geographically, age, and racially

19:07 ↗ representative of the city. Um, we are

19:10 ↗ including elected officials in the group

19:11 ↗ at this time because the decision by

19:13 ↗ elected officials will happen later in

19:15 ↗ the process. We envision this taking one

19:17 ↗ to two meetings to draft the vision and

19:19 ↗ goals. um perhaps one meeting to really

19:22 ↗ understand the community feedback and

19:24 ↗ begin the drafting process and a second

19:26 ↗ to dial that in. We will then take the

19:30 ↗ draft vision and goals to services,

19:31 ↗ safety, and parks or committee of the

19:33 ↗ whole if that's what you recommend for

19:35 ↗ the committee's recommendation on the

19:37 ↗ draft vision and goals to city council.

19:39 ↗ We anticipate city council action in

19:42 ↗ October of 2026.

19:47 ↗ We went to the equity board with a

19:50 ↗ version of the community engagement plan

19:51 ↗ that you have in your packet tonight. Um

19:53 ↗ we asked them largely the same questions

19:55 ↗ around goals and outcomes and method and

19:57 ↗ groups as we're asking you. They were

19:59 ↗ largely supportive of the goals and

20:00 ↗ outcomes of the um of the plan. They

20:03 ↗ rightly suggested that we define

20:05 ↗ sufficient community engagement. So

20:07 ↗ we're working on that. They also

20:09 ↗ suggested some additional groups to

20:10 ↗ reach out to. They had some suggestions

20:12 ↗ on how feedback should be weighted or

20:14 ↗ linked to certain communities and had

20:16 ↗ some more technical um recommendations

20:18 ↗ on translation methods. We're also

20:21 ↗ asking the equity board to help table if

20:23 ↗ possible alongside city staff and to

20:26 ↗ have at least one member actually

20:27 ↗ probably just one member um be a part of

20:30 ↗ that workshop. Um and they were

20:32 ↗ supportive of these uh these touch

20:34 ↗ points.

20:37 ↗ We also sought feedback from our

20:39 ↗ consultant, Equity Matters. Um, and we

20:42 ↗ have two slides on this, but I'll

20:43 ↗ summarize it as there's a brief memo in

20:45 ↗ your packet that goes over this um in in

20:48 ↗ succinct detail. So, they note what the

20:51 ↗ plan does well, and I'll just call out a

20:52 ↗ few items. They note the multiple

20:54 ↗ engagement methods, um the specific

20:57 ↗ demographic communities that are named

20:58 ↗ as outreach priorities, and that some of

21:01 ↗ this um diversity is built into the

21:03 ↗ workshop participant selection.

21:07 ↗ They [clears throat] also had some

21:08 ↗ recommendations on how to improve the

21:09 ↗ plan. I won't read through all of these.

21:11 ↗ Anything that's bolded on this list is

21:13 ↗ something that the administration can

21:15 ↗ build into the community engagement plan

21:17 ↗ and is working on without holding up the

21:19 ↗ overall um community engagement uh phase

21:22 ↗ one work. There is one item that we

21:24 ↗ can't implement um without significantly

21:26 ↗ holding up the plan and that's item

21:28 ↗ three, hiring community liaison for

21:30 ↗ engagement. This is a programmatic like

21:33 ↗ higher level city decision that requires

21:35 ↗ um additional staff time uh and

21:38 ↗ resources like budget resources in order

21:40 ↗ to implement um and we wanted to move

21:42 ↗ forward with the equity visioning and

21:44 ↗ goal setting work um

21:48 ↗ this year.

21:50 ↗ So with that, um, we think the next

21:52 ↗ council touch point or committee touch

21:54 ↗ point will be in September and then

21:56 ↗ it'll go to council for action in

21:58 ↗ October. And following that, we'll begin

22:00 ↗ phase two to start looking at what an

22:02 ↗ equity evaluation tool uh could look

22:05 ↗ like um to see how we're doing on those

22:08 ↗ adopted vision and goals.

22:12 ↗ With that, I'm happy to take any

22:13 ↗ questions, any clarifying questions on

22:15 ↗ what I've presented. Um, before moving

22:17 ↗ into, I guess, public comment and

22:19 ↗ direction needed.

22:22 ↗ >> Any questions from the consumers?

22:25 ↗ Council member Boyd.

22:28 ↗ >> Um, was there any discussion of uh in

22:31 ↗ doing outreach about the equity plan to

22:34 ↗ uh communities who historically uh we

22:37 ↗ haven't engaged with so much?

22:42 ↗ what those communities might perceive

22:43 ↗ of, you know, government coming to them,

22:48 ↗ uh, and their trust level of that. Be

22:51 ↗ curious what those discussions were, if

22:53 ↗ they came up at all in the equity board

22:54 ↗ or as this was being thought out.

22:58 ↗ >> Yeah, that was definitely a discussion

22:59 ↗ that we had as we developed the plan.

23:01 ↗ So, um, just to get into the

23:03 ↗ nitty-gritty a little bit, this will be

23:05 ↗ largely in-person outreach done largely

23:08 ↗ just by me.

23:10 ↗ um meeting people where they're at or

23:11 ↗ where they'd be comfortable with meeting

23:13 ↗ if doing kind of an initial touch point

23:14 ↗ via email or phone. That's also why

23:17 ↗ we're offering the option to focus group

23:19 ↗ the survey instead of having it recorded

23:21 ↗ electronically if that helps people

23:23 ↗ people feel more trusted as they submit

23:26 ↗ um information to a government entity.

23:28 ↗ So, we're definitely aware of the um

23:30 ↗ both historic and current environment

23:33 ↗ around um that some of these groups are

23:35 ↗ facing and we're trying to make it as

23:37 ↗ easy um and as safe as possible to

23:39 ↗ participate in this process.

23:46 ↗ Uh yeah, that was actually going to be

23:47 ↗ my question as well was making sure that

23:49 ↗ we're addressing the trust issues and

23:52 ↗ the fears that many of these groups have

23:54 ↗ in terms of when we outreach and making

23:56 ↗ sure that's kind of upfront and clear uh

23:58 ↗ was going to be my question as well. So

23:59 ↗ I believe that's been addressed. Council

24:01 ↗ member Nichols, did you have any more

24:02 ↗ questions before we move to public

24:03 ↗ comment?

24:03 ↗ >> Just comments.

24:04 ↗ >> Just comments. Okay. All right. So then

24:05 ↗ we will move on to the public comment

24:08 ↗ portion of this agenda. So, the

24:10 ↗ committee will now accept public

24:11 ↗ comments about this agenda item. As

24:13 ↗ stated earlier, comments can be made in

24:15 ↗ person or virtually. Those who have

24:17 ↗ signed up in advance will be called on

24:18 ↗ first. If you're joining us virtually or

24:20 ↗ would like to make comments, please

24:21 ↗ raise your virtual hand or send the host

24:23 ↗ a chat message. If you're on the phone,

24:25 ↗ press star three. If you have joined by

24:27 ↗ computer or smartphone, look for the

24:28 ↗ hand icon. And if you are in the room

24:30 ↗ and did not sign up, there'll be an

24:31 ↗ opportunity for you to raise your hand

24:33 ↗ if you'd like to speak before I close

24:35 ↗ this portion of the meeting. Uh, so

24:36 ↗ clerk, has anyone signed up or indicated

24:38 ↗ a desire to speak this evening?

24:43 ↗ >> Sorry, I'm giving we do have some

24:45 ↗ virtual attendees online. I'm giving

24:46 ↗ them just a moment to find their virtual

24:48 ↗ hand. Uh, but otherwise, no, there's

24:50 ↗ nobody that signed up in advance and I

24:53 ↗ do not see any hands raised at this time

24:55 ↗ virtually.

24:56 ↗ >> Okay. Um, and then also as a reminder,

24:59 ↗ written comments can be submitted any

25:00 ↗ time to city council at isiquawah.gov.

25:04 ↗ Um and then um is there anyone else in

25:07 ↗ the room who would like to speak? No.

25:10 ↗ Okay. Then uh the committee Oh yes.

25:15 ↗ Oh please. Yeah. Please come up and if

25:16 ↗ you uh press the center button on the

25:18 ↗ microphone.

25:22 ↗ Yes. Uh so if you could please state

25:24 ↗ your name and relationship to the city

25:25 ↗ and then

25:28 ↗ >> speak into the microphone. Thank you.

25:29 ↗ >> My name is Michelle Kenny. Uh actually

25:31 ↗ um I play pickle ball in this area a lot

25:34 ↗ so I kind of in the city. I just out of

25:36 ↗ curiosity so are you finding that um

25:40 ↗ people of various other groups are are

25:44 ↗ commenting that they're not included in

25:47 ↗ city uh organizations or uh why was this

25:52 ↗ plan developed? Is this just being part

25:55 ↗ of your overall overreaching, you know,

25:58 ↗ overall reaching uh process or have you

26:03 ↗ gotten comment back from people saying I

26:05 ↗ don't feel I'm representative?

26:08 ↗ >> Uh well for typically we do not do

26:11 ↗ questions quit question and answer. It's

26:12 ↗ more of a comment portion of this uh

26:14 ↗ meeting. So I can't quite address those

26:16 ↗ directly other than what has been

26:17 ↗ presented in the uh discuss the

26:20 ↗ presentation. Oh,

26:21 ↗ >> but Oh, but can Excuse me.

26:24 ↗ >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah, you can be city staff

26:26 ↗ can speak with you afterwards. Give a

26:27 ↗ better clarity on that.

26:28 ↗ >> Okay.

26:28 ↗ >> All right. Thank you.

26:30 ↗ >> Thanks.

26:35 ↗ >> All right. Anyone else like a chance to

26:37 ↗ speak?

26:39 ↗ Okay. All right. Then uh the committee

26:41 ↗ can now deliberate. Any comments on

26:44 ↗ this?

26:55 ↗ Um I guess um overall broadly um very

27:00 ↗ supportive especially when it's framed

27:01 ↗ as you know the other community boards

27:03 ↗ and liaison often. Can you hear me now?

27:06 ↗ Okay, let me see this.

27:10 ↗ Uh

27:13 ↗ uh I am uh

27:18 ↗ in fully in favor of the pursuit of an

27:20 ↗ action plan. Um I come from uh the

27:22 ↗ transit trans transportation advisory

27:24 ↗ board. Um having that mobility action

27:26 ↗ plan to point to is very helpful and I

27:28 ↗ think that um having an action plan for

27:32 ↗ equity can also help serve as an

27:34 ↗ accountability measurement and a tool

27:36 ↗ for risk while residents to as they're

27:38 ↗ advocating for their own needs. it's

27:40 ↗ something to point to. I try and be very

27:42 ↗ grounded in the plans that um the city

27:45 ↗ has, whether it's a strategic plan or

27:47 ↗ the park strategic plan, a lot of them

27:49 ↗ are strategic plans. And so if we've got

27:50 ↗ an action plan, um I think that can only

27:53 ↗ be helpful moving forward. So that's my

27:55 ↗ broader high level. Um I am pretty um

27:59 ↗ bummed that uh the community liaison um

28:02 ↗ due to I understand just I'm presumably

28:05 ↗ funding we can't pursue that path and

28:07 ↗ I'm it makes me wonder if we are

28:13 ↗ maybe sacrificing um

28:18 ↗ further engagement or a level of depth

28:21 ↗ of engagement in planning this at um for

28:25 ↗ some expediency we can pursue this

28:27 ↗ sooner if we don't have to wait for that

28:30 ↗ process that would have to you know come

28:32 ↗ before a full council and for us to make

28:34 ↗ a financial decision on that. So it's

28:35 ↗ just that's my observations.

28:41 ↗ >> Council member Nichols,

28:44 ↗ >> thank you. Uh so first of all, I really

28:45 ↗ appreciate the effort put into this um

28:48 ↗ and the clear desire to help make our

28:50 ↗ equity policies more real. Um, I'll just

28:53 ↗ be brief on my overall support of the

28:55 ↗ the broad strokes that were addressed in

28:57 ↗ this presentation. Uh, and I'm really

28:59 ↗ looking forward to seeing those

29:00 ↗ clarified and and approved through

29:01 ↗ public engagement and public process.

29:04 ↗ Um, the only thing that I want to add is

29:05 ↗ that I really would encourage everyone

29:07 ↗ in that process to try to think big. Um,

29:10 ↗ when we set policy that affects

29:11 ↗ affordability, that affects equity. When

29:14 ↗ we set policies that affect childare,

29:15 ↗ that also affects equity. And when we

29:17 ↗ set policy that affects mobility that

29:19 ↗ includes pedestrian non-motorized

29:21 ↗ transit, that also affects equity. But

29:23 ↗ these are often times hard things to get

29:25 ↗ feedback on through that lens. So in in

29:28 ↗ brief, uh I urge the uh the continued

29:30 ↗ folks that will be involved with this to

29:32 ↗ think big and develop a framework that

29:33 ↗ helps us push to always be aiming

29:35 ↗ higher. So thank you.

29:38 ↗ >> Uh thank you. Yes, I equally um support

29:42 ↗ this. I appreciate all the hard work

29:43 ↗ that's gone to this and it is kind of to

29:45 ↗ some extent it was almost like eye

29:47 ↗ opening to realize that we did not have

29:49 ↗ a concrete plan in this area because it

29:51 ↗ is something that is brought up

29:52 ↗ regularly as you brought up in the plan

29:54 ↗ it's stated but that there is no clear

29:56 ↗ framework for it there's no clear

29:58 ↗ direction for it um and no real way to

30:01 ↗ measure it um so I do support uh what

30:04 ↗ you've developed so far you know I do uh

30:07 ↗ agree with council member Boyd's points

30:08 ↗ of that you know the concern of are we

30:11 ↗ is this not going to be as good if we

30:13 ↗ don't, you know, the doing it now versus

30:14 ↗ doing it right dilemma is in there. I

30:18 ↗ would say um I I I agree with that

30:22 ↗ point, but I I feel and feel free to

30:24 ↗ correct me if I'm wrong, that this

30:26 ↗ because this will have multiple touch

30:28 ↗ points and this will be somewhat of a

30:30 ↗ work in progress. The potential is that

30:32 ↗ it could start now and then develop

30:34 ↗ further and additional investment could

30:36 ↗ go into it to create a more robust plan.

30:39 ↗ You know, it won't be locked in stone.

30:40 ↗ So I would support going ahead and

30:42 ↗ continuing now even though some

30:44 ↗ components might not be able to be

30:45 ↗ completed at this time. Um and I also

30:48 ↗ agree that we when developing it making

30:52 ↗ sure that it it it is thought of in

30:54 ↗ terms of how it can apply to all aspects

30:57 ↗ of you know of governing the cities and

31:00 ↗ as well as not just in terms of you know

31:02 ↗ do we have a form that we can check off

31:04 ↗ and make sure we're meeting these goals

31:05 ↗ but equally the outreach that you're

31:07 ↗ going to do will if there's a way to

31:11 ↗ maintain those lines of communication

31:13 ↗ throughout the work we do going forward

31:16 ↗ because that's going to

31:17 ↗ Equity is something that I don't feel is

31:19 ↗ always easy to just look at a box and

31:21 ↗ know you've succeeded. A lot of the

31:23 ↗ success is going to come from the

31:24 ↗ community responding to the actions you

31:26 ↗ do. So I would you know you know with

31:30 ↗ that mindset make sure that as we build

31:32 ↗ these you know get this feedback we're

31:34 ↗ also perhaps building lines of

31:35 ↗ communications to all of these groups to

31:38 ↗ all these ones and showing that we hear

31:40 ↗ them as well as allowing them to keep

31:42 ↗ talking to us as we go forward. Um yeah,

31:46 ↗ in terms of the direction uh needed. Um

31:49 ↗ you had the specific questions. Um and I

31:53 ↗ just want to propose these to the rest

31:55 ↗ of uh the committee to make sure that

31:57 ↗ everything here has been addressed. But

31:58 ↗ there was the are the goals for the

32:00 ↗ community engagement appropriate and are

32:01 ↗ they aligned with the outcome? Are the

32:04 ↗ methods and groups the right ones for

32:05 ↗ the project? Is there anyone missing? um

32:07 ↗ and if there's any additional feedback

32:09 ↗ we need to uh give and as well as do

32:12 ↗ they feel that we should come back to

32:14 ↗ the committee before moving to the

32:15 ↗ council. Do any of the other committee

32:17 ↗ members have any specific points these

32:19 ↗ questions that they would like to add?

32:26 ↗ >> Um I guess if I don't know if we're just

32:28 ↗ jumping into it, but I would be

32:30 ↗ interested in uh this coming before the

32:33 ↗ full council. Um

32:36 ↗ it's I just think that we would get a

32:38 ↗ more robust conversation and feedback

32:40 ↗ and especially if uh I'm also interested

32:43 ↗ as well in seeing how we can you this

32:45 ↗ can be used and other policy touch

32:47 ↗ points and when we have the fuller

32:50 ↗ council um I think we'll have their

32:54 ↗ thoughts and feedback. Um like I'm not

32:56 ↗ on the planning committee right that's

32:58 ↗ um [snorts] I would be supportive of the

33:01 ↗ full council weighing in on it. Uh well

33:03 ↗ I believe the idea is that it would they

33:05 ↗ would prepare this draft, it would come

33:06 ↗ to us, we would review it again and then

33:08 ↗ go to the full council. Okay. Is and do

33:10 ↗ you agree with that step or would you

33:12 ↗ want to skip the return to us and just

33:14 ↗ go straight to council after they have a

33:16 ↗ draft?

33:17 ↗ >> If I if I could clarify, um I apologize.

33:20 ↗ It is whether or not we bring this

33:21 ↗ before the services, safety, and parks

33:23 ↗ committee or the committee of the whole

33:25 ↗ before moving to full counsel. We

33:27 ↗ wouldn't propose skipping the the

33:29 ↗ committee step.

33:33 ↗ >> Yeah. So for me, I the cow was my

33:36 ↗ preferred but

33:39 ↗ I would love to hear arguments against

33:41 ↗ that.

33:44 ↗ >> Council Nichols.

33:45 ↗ >> Yeah,

33:47 ↗ >> I I don't feel strongly between cow and

33:50 ↗ SSP for this. Um,

33:53 ↗ I do think this is one where we might

33:55 ↗ just given that the number of things

33:57 ↗ that might be on committee the whole

33:58 ↗ later in the year, it might make more

33:59 ↗ sense for us to be able to devote a

34:01 ↗ little bit more time to it. Um, so I

34:04 ↗ think I would want to if it's going to

34:06 ↗ be a lengthy discussion that would

34:08 ↗ otherwise have to be cut if it goes to C

34:10 ↗ committee the whole I would prefer

34:12 ↗ taking it to SSP if we end up at that

34:14 ↗ time of the year having plenty of

34:15 ↗ availability in SSP. Um, I'm I think

34:18 ↗ that's potentially fine too. though my

34:19 ↗ own my my main reason to bring it here

34:21 ↗ would be to give us the ability to dive

34:22 ↗ a little bit deeper. That's all.

34:24 ↗ Otherwise, as far as the other the

34:25 ↗ direction questions needed, I'm I'm

34:27 ↗ aligned with all.

34:30 ↗ >> Um I agree. I think I feel I would like

34:32 ↗ it to come to SSP again and that I feel

34:34 ↗ this is such an early thing that's

34:35 ↗ likely to have a little more

34:37 ↗ workshopping component to it, especially

34:39 ↗ in a first draft. I just feel like there

34:41 ↗ I I doubt when it after this first pass

34:44 ↗ it's all, you know, just ready to go. I

34:46 ↗ feel like there's going to be a little

34:47 ↗ more workshopping involved. I think my

34:48 ↗ preference would be SSP um to just dive

34:52 ↗ in a bit more before it moves on. So um

34:55 ↗ but other than that uh do you feel you

34:57 ↗ have uh everything you need for this

34:59 ↗ agenda item?

35:03 ↗ >> Yes. Thank you.

35:10 ↗ >> Great. Okay. So we uh can now move to

35:15 ↗ the next agenda item. Uh, COOM0265,

35:19 ↗ the potential park bond renewal,

35:21 ↗ presented by Jeff Wadling.

35:27 ↗ Thank you, Chair Adair, and uh, good

35:29 ↗ evening, council. Pardon me as I uh,

35:31 ↗ navigate the getting the presentation

35:34 ↗ up.

35:48 ↗ Still navigating.

36:41 ↗ really appreciate that uh audience

36:43 ↗ support. Thank you. All right, I'm

36:45 ↗ ready. Uh, thank you again. Good

36:47 ↗ evening. Um, uh, here tonight to, uh,

36:52 ↗ talk through, um, and provide some

36:54 ↗ follow-up information requested by

36:56 ↗ council members, um, at the April 6

36:58 ↗ committee of the whole meeting regarding

37:00 ↗ the potential park bond renewal measure

37:03 ↗ uh, that could uh, be going to Isqua

37:05 ↗ voters this November.

37:10 ↗ some of the questions that and direction

37:12 ↗ that we're really seeking tonight. Um,

37:16 ↗ uh, center around three questions. U

37:18 ↗ given the additional information that

37:20 ↗ we'll discuss and is going to be

37:21 ↗ provided to you tonight, does the

37:23 ↗ committee support the recommendation

37:24 ↗ from administration to move forward with

37:26 ↗ a park bond renewal this November at the

37:29 ↗ 8 cents per 10,000 assessed valuation?

37:33 ↗ any additional feedback on the

37:35 ↗ considerations for the project uh and

37:37 ↗ the package of of potential bond

37:40 ↗ projects. Um and then also direction

37:43 ↗ we're we're seeking is really what

37:45 ↗ should staff prepare to present to the

37:47 ↗ full city council um at the May 9th city

37:50 ↗ council retreat this Saturday.

37:58 ↗ So with that, um, tonight, uh, again

38:01 ↗ really focuses on responding to, uh, the

38:04 ↗ great requests and feedback that that

38:05 ↗ you all sought at that April 6th

38:07 ↗ meeting. Um, um, I put those, um,

38:10 ↗ questions and and feedback you requested

38:13 ↗ really into four categories. Um, and

38:16 ↗ then, um, in that organization, um,

38:19 ↗ organized this presentation around, uh,

38:21 ↗ those four categories. So those four

38:23 ↗ categories being we'll first talk

38:24 ↗ through the questions raised about parks

38:27 ↗ capital funding itself. Um we'll then

38:30 ↗ dive into the questions and feedback you

38:32 ↗ requested pertaining to the projects. Um

38:36 ↗ and then after that um questions

38:39 ↗ pertaining to vision uh for the for the

38:42 ↗ plan. And then uh lastly um questions

38:45 ↗ and research uh that you sought

38:47 ↗ pertaining to uh other park specific

38:51 ↗ ballot measures um around uh the county.

38:56 ↗ I'll dive into those specific questions

38:58 ↗ as we as we go through each of these

39:00 ↗ categories. Again, trying to be as

39:02 ↗ efficient as I can to save ample time

39:04 ↗ for questions and uh uh deliberation.

39:09 ↗ So starting with that first category

39:11 ↗ parks capital funding um some questions

39:14 ↗ were ren really centered around what are

39:17 ↗ the priorities within parks capital uh

39:19 ↗ what is some of the availability of reat

39:21 ↗ fund within capital um um also uh some

39:25 ↗ interest was raised in taking a historic

39:28 ↗ look back and how were how have we

39:30 ↗ funded a development and redevelopment

39:32 ↗ projects um here in the city um

39:36 ↗ start with the one fact that um parks

39:39 ↗ capital funding in really most if not

39:42 ↗ all municipalities and and forms of

39:44 ↗ government really can be categorized

39:46 ↗ into three areas of of of pursuit.

39:49 ↗ Acquisitions um capital maintenance

39:52 ↗ programs um and development

39:54 ↗ redevelopment projects. Um I think we're

39:57 ↗ all familiar with what acquisitions are.

39:59 ↗ Um um capital maintenance programs

40:02 ↗ really um encapsulate um taking care of

40:05 ↗ what we have. Uh that's really um

40:07 ↗ investing into assets that have already

40:09 ↗ been built. Uh picnic shelters age out.

40:12 ↗ Um um um everything within the system

40:15 ↗ ages out, restrooms age out. So um how

40:18 ↗ do we put programs in place? Irrigation

40:20 ↗ systems wear out uh the like. Um and

40:23 ↗ then development redevelopment projects

40:24 ↗ really are those um either new park

40:27 ↗ developments uh andor sizable more

40:30 ↗ sizable redevelopments. Hillside Park is

40:32 ↗ a great example. That was a

40:33 ↗ redevelopment project we recently

40:35 ↗ completed

40:37 ↗ um within uh the limited capital revenue

40:39 ↗ that the city has and and I say that

40:42 ↗ more in the context of not only managing

40:44 ↗ parks capital but also investments into

40:47 ↗ transportation capital um and facilities

40:49 ↗ capital. Uh the recent priority by both

40:52 ↗ administration and city council when you

40:54 ↗ look at parks capital really has been

40:56 ↗ focused on acquisitions and capital

40:59 ↗ maintenance programs. Um we have been

41:01 ↗ very very successful um in continuing to

41:04 ↗ nurture our um and meet our goals for

41:08 ↗ strategic acquisitions doing that

41:10 ↗ through really a very healthy

41:12 ↗ combination of city resources and grant

41:14 ↗ resources. Um and then capital

41:16 ↗ maintenance programs have have really

41:18 ↗ been that second priority. Um what

41:22 ↗ hasn't really been the top priority is

41:24 ↗ development and redevelopment uh

41:26 ↗ projects. um working with finance. When

41:29 ↗ you look at um our current um six-year

41:33 ↗ CIP, um the citywide CIP um one of our

41:37 ↗ primary revenue sources for funding

41:39 ↗ capital is REIT. Um we had some question

41:41 ↗ and discussion on April 6 around REIT.

41:44 ↗ Um finance confirmed that REIT will be

41:47 ↗ um in a deficit position um in the next

41:50 ↗ banual budget in 2728. So pretty pretty

41:53 ↗ soon we're going to be in a def deficit

41:55 ↗ position given actual REIT revenues that

41:58 ↗ are that are coming in. Um so as we look

42:01 ↗ ahead with that fact there will be very

42:04 ↗ limited to no actual REIT funding

42:06 ↗ available for park development and

42:08 ↗ redevelopment projects. Um I guess it's

42:11 ↗ certainly important to highlight that

42:12 ↗ and and realize I think some of the

42:15 ↗ importance of considering um park bond

42:19 ↗ uh funding as a

42:22 ↗ as a baseline. Um some other questions

42:25 ↗ pertaining to park capital funding.

42:28 ↗ Sorry, I'm trying to advance it.

42:39 ↗ Not sure why it's not advancing.

42:50 ↗ Frozen prison.

43:15 ↗ Thank you. Sure how you did that magic,

43:17 ↗ Autumn, but that was impressive. Um,

43:19 ↗ some other questions really pretend uh

43:21 ↗ pertain to um historically um how have

43:24 ↗ we funded uh development and

43:26 ↗ redevelopment projects? Um and so taking

43:29 ↗ a look back over the last 10 years, what

43:31 ↗ you see here is a list of seven

43:33 ↗ projects. Um these aren't focused on

43:36 ↗ acquisition and capital maintenance

43:37 ↗ programs. Really trying to paint that

43:39 ↗ picture of what has been left to invest

43:41 ↗ in development redevelopment projects.

43:44 ↗ Um uh these seven projects um have been

43:47 ↗ funded um as you see them a variety of

43:49 ↗ ways. Some of the larger projects,

43:51 ↗ Confluence Park phase 2, uh, Central

43:53 ↗ Park Pad 1 turf fields that were

43:56 ↗ completed in 2017 and 2018 were actually

43:58 ↗ funded through the 2013 park bond. Um,

44:01 ↗ and other grant funds uh, leveraged with

44:05 ↗ those park bund funds funds. Um, in 2022

44:08 ↗ and 2025, the neighborhood park

44:10 ↗ renovations that we did both, uh,

44:12 ↗ successfully at Blackberry Park and at

44:14 ↗ Hillside Park were funded by city

44:16 ↗ capital revenues. that when I say that

44:19 ↗ what's really grouped in there is REIT

44:21 ↗ park impact fees those city directed

44:23 ↗ revenues that I was talking about um

44:26 ↗ earlier in 2025 we completed pedestrian

44:29 ↗ park senior center plazas uh those were

44:31 ↗ not funded by city capital revenues

44:33 ↗ those were funded by ARPA uh federal

44:36 ↗ dollars as well as a state grant uh and

44:39 ↗ then lastly uh just a couple weeks ago

44:41 ↗ we cut the ribbon on the Reineer Trail

44:43 ↗ dog park uh that too was funded by city

44:45 ↗ capital uh revenue news. So, um, all

44:49 ↗ told and some key takeaways as we take

44:51 ↗ this look back, um, it really does

44:53 ↗ confirm that park bond funding and

44:56 ↗ grants have been historically a

44:58 ↗ foundational revenue source when it

45:00 ↗ comes to development and redevelopment

45:02 ↗ within the Isqua Park system. I think

45:05 ↗ another key takeaway is that um when you

45:09 ↗ look at the sum of the city directed

45:12 ↗ revenues that went towards those seven

45:14 ↗ projects um it totals approximately $3.2

45:17 ↗ million. That's not to project that's

45:19 ↗ all that could be available moving

45:21 ↗ forward. But if we were to extrapolate

45:24 ↗ historical funding, it would take uh

45:27 ↗ decades uh for us to complete the same

45:30 ↗ level of work that this potential bond

45:32 ↗ park bond renewal uh would be able to

45:34 ↗ accomplish.

45:42 ↗ Autumn, you're going to have to teach me

45:43 ↗ your magic. What button did you push?

45:45 ↗ The arrows are not working.

45:55 ↗ Don't move the cursor. Great.

45:58 ↗ All right. So, transitioning now to

46:00 ↗ questions really pertaining to the

46:01 ↗ projects themselves um and um both how

46:04 ↗ we got to those uh potential recommended

46:07 ↗ projects. um other near-term projects

46:10 ↗ identified in the park plan. Um as well

46:13 ↗ as questions around um uh initial cost

46:16 ↗ estimates and um potential grant um

46:20 ↗ grant funds that those projects could

46:22 ↗ seek. Uh first uh again just another um

46:26 ↗ overview of the considerations um that

46:29 ↗ these candidate projects really uh went

46:32 ↗ through um as we developed possible

46:34 ↗ projects uh within the um um uh this 8

46:39 ↗ cent uh per 1000 proposed package. Uh we

46:43 ↗ we really wanted to consider a package

46:45 ↗ of medium-siz projects. uh no project

46:48 ↗ that would overwhelm the uh 20ome

46:51 ↗ million dollars available with grant

46:53 ↗ funds. Um but a multitude of

46:56 ↗ medium-sized projects that really

46:57 ↗ increase the functionality of our

46:59 ↗ existing system and provide a a really

47:02 ↗ broad community benefit as broad as we

47:04 ↗ can. um a mix of priority projects uh

47:07 ↗ within that available funding that uh

47:09 ↗ really addresses the diversity of

47:12 ↗ interests uh the diversity of uses that

47:14 ↗ we know are represented and reflected

47:16 ↗ within the residents of Isiqua. Um our

47:19 ↗ residents love to do everything from

47:21 ↗ court sports to getting on trails to um

47:24 ↗ playing on ball fields. Um, and no one

47:28 ↗ no one family, no one household um is

47:30 ↗ the same uh when it comes to um use of

47:34 ↗ our city park system as well as really

47:35 ↗ any city park system. Um, another key

47:39 ↗ consideration was um really making sure

47:41 ↗ we're not trying to propose projects um

47:45 ↗ uh that could still have a high level of

47:47 ↗ either site complexity or project

47:49 ↗ complexity uh that might make it

47:51 ↗ difficult to properly scope um or cost

47:55 ↗ estimate um u the the work or the

47:58 ↗ project prior to the ex extensive design

48:00 ↗ work that still needs to happen. And I

48:02 ↗ think it's an important thing to

48:03 ↗ remember is these projects, none of them

48:06 ↗ have been designed or permitted yet. So

48:08 ↗ they they they still have that process

48:10 ↗ to do. So we want to make sure we're not

48:12 ↗ um we're not considering projects that

48:15 ↗ have such a high degree of uncertainty

48:17 ↗ and complexity. Another consideration

48:19 ↗ was um you know does this project have

48:22 ↗ does a project have a a heightened level

48:25 ↗ of controversy or community concern

48:27 ↗ around it uh that might be difficult to

48:30 ↗ resolve. Um again in such an early

48:32 ↗ conceptual stage of the project um there

48:36 ↗ are some projects that do have such a

48:38 ↗ high degree of community concern that

48:40 ↗ public outreach that we do on any

48:42 ↗ capital project is so important because

48:44 ↗ that helps um that helps build consensus

48:47 ↗ and create consensus knowing we haven't

48:49 ↗ done that yet on these projects. We we

48:51 ↗ want to um as best we can um avoid those

48:55 ↗ types of projects. Um, another really

48:59 ↗ important consideration uh when it comes

49:01 ↗ to uh the the prior conversation of

49:04 ↗ equity is looking at geographic equity.

49:06 ↗ How are we distributing these

49:07 ↗ investments um throughout um our

49:10 ↗ community?

49:17 ↗ Next on your questions uh pertaining to

49:20 ↗ uh projects u was uh taking a first look

49:23 ↗ at initial estimates um and grant

49:26 ↗ opportunities. Um as we look through

49:29 ↗ these uh proposed projects um again

49:33 ↗ important to point out these estimates

49:35 ↗ do not have a design behind them. Um

49:38 ↗ these really are initial estimates uh

49:41 ↗ that we've done myself and and Robin

49:43 ↗ Spear. Um when we look at um e house,

49:48 ↗ we're looking at a about a $2.5 million

49:50 ↗ project that's not just work on the e

49:52 ↗ house that is also incorporating the e

49:54 ↗ house into confluence park so that

49:56 ↗ northeast corner of the park finally

49:58 ↗ feels completed uh and finished. Uh we

50:02 ↗ think this project is a terrific um

50:04 ↗ candidate uh for grant funding both from

50:07 ↗ the county and for culture um as well as

50:10 ↗ uh state department of commerce and the

50:12 ↗ landmark commission.

50:14 ↗ the Ramos trail head improvements uh

50:17 ↗ project we estimated about 1.5 million.

50:19 ↗ This would include uh restrooms as well

50:22 ↗ as addressing um a much more sustainable

50:25 ↗ surfacing solution. Um great candidates

50:29 ↗ through RCO, that's state recreation

50:31 ↗ conservation office uh state grants as

50:34 ↗ well as uh county l grants through the

50:37 ↗ the King County Park levy.

50:46 ↗ Next projects

50:48 ↗ um are the trail corridor projects both

50:51 ↗ on Cougar Mountain and Squawk Mountain.

50:52 ↗ These were utilizing our our more recent

50:55 ↗ acquisitions of both Bergsma property

50:57 ↗ and that corridor on Cougar as well as

50:59 ↗ the Kari Waymouth properties um uh and

51:02 ↗ the new corridor in Squawk Mountain. We

51:04 ↗ estimate in total about $4 million for

51:06 ↗ both of those. the design, permitting

51:09 ↗ and construction of those projects. Um

51:12 ↗ corridors with this kind of um

51:14 ↗ significance um not only for a city's

51:17 ↗ trail system, but the fact that these

51:18 ↗ trails would connect to a regional

51:20 ↗ network, both the state park system on

51:22 ↗ Squawk Mountain as well as the King

51:24 ↗ County regional system on Cougar

51:26 ↗ Mountain uh would be great candidates

51:28 ↗ for both um county uh trail uh grant

51:32 ↗ funding as well as uh state level grant

51:34 ↗ funding.

51:37 ↗ the athletic field projects that we're

51:38 ↗ considering uh these conversions um of

51:41 ↗ grass fields to multi-use synthetic turf

51:44 ↗ um community sports fields um um at the

51:47 ↗ elementary schools um if we were to do

51:49 ↗ all three elementary schools but as we

51:52 ↗ um have had further community

51:53 ↗ conversation as we've had further

51:56 ↗ conversation with administration and

51:57 ↗ most recently last night with the park

51:59 ↗ board uh I think there's really strong

52:01 ↗ consensus and feeling that focusing on

52:04 ↗ all three of those elementary schools

52:06 ↗ would be a very equitable approach. Um

52:09 ↗ um again the concept of these community

52:11 ↗ sports fields is um making an investment

52:14 ↗ on public land um and creating publicly

52:18 ↗ accessible um publicly city- managed um

52:22 ↗ city-maintained community sports fields

52:25 ↗ that become a tremendous asset for the

52:27 ↗ elementary school during the school day

52:29 ↗ and a great recess facility. uh but just

52:32 ↗ as importantly prov be become a

52:34 ↗ community asset for drop in uh field use

52:37 ↗ um on the evenings on weekends um in the

52:40 ↗ summer um as well as um rental use for

52:44 ↗ uh sports groups. a an innovative

52:46 ↗ project like this is a great candidate

52:48 ↗ for both RCO. Again, that's state uh

52:51 ↗ grant funding uh county uh youth and

52:54 ↗ amateur amateur sports grants as well as

52:56 ↗ grant funding through the King County um

52:59 ↗ King County levy.

53:06 ↗ And lastly, in terms of the the category

53:08 ↗ of projects, uh the variety of park

53:10 ↗ amenities uh that we'd be considering,

53:12 ↗ again, in total, these three would be

53:14 ↗ about $6.6 million. This would include

53:17 ↗ expanding pickle ball, um courts, um at

53:21 ↗ Central Park, um at about $2.6 million.

53:24 ↗ Um and then um really important initial

53:27 ↗ investments at Tibbitz Valley Park of a

53:29 ↗ community park- sized all-inclusive play

53:31 ↗ area um and a dog park um at Tibetsz

53:36 ↗ Valley Park for that uh portion of town.

53:39 ↗ Um all of these projects would be great

53:41 ↗ candidates for a variety again of county

53:44 ↗ um county grants as well as some some

53:46 ↗ private grants. Um grant funding when it

53:49 ↗ comes to in total grant funding when it

53:51 ↗ comes to development and redevelopment

53:53 ↗ projects um is highly highly

53:56 ↗ competitive. Um grant funding for

53:58 ↗ acquisitions is highly competitive but I

54:00 ↗ can say in my experience is not nearly

54:02 ↗ as competitive as development and

54:05 ↗ redevelopment grant applications. What's

54:07 ↗ really really important and what makes

54:10 ↗ grant funders um um score projects

54:14 ↗ higher is when they know that grant

54:16 ↗ funding is the last money in when when

54:18 ↗ there's when there's base funding

54:20 ↗ already in place. Um if you're going to

54:23 ↗ a granter seeking initial funding, it's

54:26 ↗ going to be really really hard to

54:27 ↗ compete and score. And so, um, I say

54:30 ↗ that to to just say in context the it's

54:32 ↗ it's bond proceeds like this potential,

54:35 ↗ um, renewal, uh, that really allow for

54:38 ↗ all of these projects to become really

54:40 ↗ that much more compelling and

54:41 ↗ competitive, um, to grant, um, to grant

54:45 ↗ agencies.

54:48 ↗ Another

54:50 ↗ question pertaining to projects was um

54:53 ↗ what are what are the other near-term

54:55 ↗ priorities within the park system plan.

54:59 ↗ Um what you see here is a list. Um I

55:03 ↗ think an important thing to note and

55:04 ↗ certainly happy to answer any questions

55:06 ↗ um to these as we get to Q&A. Um what we

55:10 ↗ do know is the park bond um renewal

55:13 ↗ proceeds so at the renewal rate uh would

55:16 ↗ not be enough to fund all of the

55:17 ↗ near-term priorities. Um there had to be

55:21 ↗ a somewhat of a a a selection process

55:25 ↗ and both work with the park board as

55:26 ↗ well as working through those filters

55:29 ↗ and considerations that I noted earlier.

55:31 ↗ Um though these other projects would not

55:34 ↗ be recommended um are not currently

55:36 ↗ recommended for the the the package. um

55:38 ↗ these near-term priorities remain a

55:41 ↗ priority and and when I say that um like

55:44 ↗ other historical periods of park bond

55:48 ↗ projects going on um work and

55:51 ↗ exploration continues on these

55:53 ↗ priorities as well. Uh there may be

55:56 ↗ opportunities for some of these projects

55:58 ↗ uh to happen while the park bond

56:01 ↗ projects are happening. Um Anthology

56:03 ↗ Linear Park is a great example that is

56:05 ↗ probably of a size and scale. um that

56:08 ↗ might not need bond proceeds. If you're

56:10 ↗ familiar with that area, that's by the

56:12 ↗ Anthology Apartments. There's a a

56:14 ↗ current trail corridor uh that functions

56:17 ↗ and is very well used. Um there are two

56:21 ↗ really small grass pods uh that uh this

56:24 ↗ project is really, you know, a

56:26 ↗ consideration of how do we activate

56:27 ↗ those? Um that's a it's an example of

56:30 ↗ that work um could um could continue

56:33 ↗ with or without um a bond renewal.

56:43 ↗ Another set of questions uh pertaining

56:45 ↗ to to projects um had to do with sort of

56:48 ↗ exploring other scenarios. Um

56:52 ↗ um I want to be clear these are not

56:54 ↗ meant to be an all-inclusive list of

56:56 ↗ options. Um this is really um an effort

57:00 ↗ to at least demonstrate um

57:04 ↗ what two two scenarios would look like

57:06 ↗ if we wanted to consider asking voters

57:08 ↗ for more than just the the the renewal

57:11 ↗ as a as a as a means of sort of

57:13 ↗ comparing some bookends and a middle

57:16 ↗ ground. Uh there are hundreds of other

57:19 ↗ um options or scenarios that that could

57:21 ↗ certainly be considered. Uh the first

57:23 ↗ one you see as a comparison and and I

57:25 ↗ want to point out is administrations and

57:28 ↗ the mayor's recommended uh rate and

57:30 ↗ that's remaining at the 8 cents per 1000

57:34 ↗ um park bond rate um and treating it as

57:37 ↗ a renewal. Um if you remember from

57:39 ↗ projected revenues um um including both

57:43 ↗ the bond proceeds as well as

57:45 ↗ contributions from park impact fees and

57:47 ↗ then leveraging grants as we discussed

57:49 ↗ um is a you know estimated 23 24 million

57:53 ↗ package um you see the list of projects

57:57 ↗ um and categories of projects that we

58:00 ↗ just went over. um if we were to

58:02 ↗ consider um doubling uh that levy rate

58:06 ↗ uh to 16 cents. So um just for

58:10 ↗ comparative purposes at an 8 cent per

58:12 ↗ 1000 AV um continuation what that

58:16 ↗ represents for a million-doll home would

58:18 ↗ be $80 a year. Uh so at a 16 cent

58:22 ↗ request, we would be saying not only,

58:24 ↗ hey, we're residents, we're interested

58:26 ↗ in you considering renewing that $80

58:28 ↗ that you're already paying, uh but we'd

58:30 ↗ want an additional $80 on top of that is

58:33 ↗ what 16 cents would represent. Uh that

58:35 ↗ would generate just under $50 million.

58:38 ↗ Um a potential package of projects that

58:41 ↗ could be done with that though would be

58:43 ↗ um looking at all of those 8- cent levy

58:46 ↗ projects that we just went over as well

58:48 ↗ as the the pool expansion um at the at

58:51 ↗ Julius Bones pool.

58:53 ↗ Another scenario is sort of a middle

58:56 ↗ ground at 12 cents uh generating just

58:58 ↗ under $34 million again with park impact

59:01 ↗ fees leveraged and grant uh proceeds uh

59:04 ↗ leveraged uh could be um those 8-cent

59:07 ↗ levy projects plus um a compilation of

59:11 ↗ some of those other near-term projects.

59:13 ↗ Um again, not intending to try and

59:16 ↗ recommend or say exactly which ones

59:18 ↗ those are. Um um but at 12 cents um

59:22 ↗ there would not be enough funding to do

59:24 ↗ a compilation of of projects um uh such

59:27 ↗ as what is proposed now and and the pool

59:36 ↗ within these scenarios. Again, a lot to

59:38 ↗ digest there. It's not meant to be a um

59:42 ↗ like I said forced choice between those

59:45 ↗ three. Um but some of the reasoning and

59:48 ↗ some of the uh the thought behind

59:50 ↗ administration's recommendation for

59:52 ↗ staying at the 8 cent levy rate um is

59:55 ↗ that it it it it

59:58 ↗ represents a renewal that maintains the

1:00:00 ↗ current levy rate that uh residents are

1:00:02 ↗ paying in that expiring levy. We're

1:00:05 ↗ really just asking or expiring bond and

1:00:07 ↗ asking them to uh renew again that if

1:00:11 ↗ it's a million-doll home that $80 per

1:00:13 ↗ year. um that scenario we feels we feel

1:00:17 ↗ given the relatively timecompressed

1:00:20 ↗ nature we have between now and November

1:00:22 ↗ offers a much simpler financial message

1:00:25 ↗ uh to voters we think that's compelling

1:00:28 ↗ and really really important. um

1:00:32 ↗ it would still result at that 8 cents

1:00:35 ↗ per uh rate and at that 23 to $24

1:00:38 ↗ million package, the largest park

1:00:40 ↗ investment package requested to voters

1:00:42 ↗ um here in Isiqua.

1:00:44 ↗ This would be significant meaningful

1:00:46 ↗ work. Um and then lastly, we really feel

1:00:51 ↗ keeping at that same rate leaves room

1:00:53 ↗ for other voter approved funding

1:00:54 ↗ requests in the future. Uh whether

1:00:56 ↗ that's other infrastructure,

1:00:58 ↗ transportation facilities, or whether

1:01:00 ↗ that's continued park or other park

1:01:03 ↗ investments. Um as well, uh I think

1:01:06 ↗ another really important consideration

1:01:08 ↗ when we talk about this is just staff

1:01:10 ↗ capacity and and our ability to deliver

1:01:13 ↗ on these projects in an efficient

1:01:15 ↗ effective way. Um and if we really look

1:01:17 ↗ at um the reality of our staffing

1:01:21 ↗ resources um that 8 cent uh rate and the

1:01:24 ↗ subsequent package is really the most

1:01:27 ↗ realistic that we would be able to um

1:01:29 ↗ deliver on given our given our staffing

1:01:32 ↗ resources.

1:01:35 ↗ So deliverability is is I guess another

1:01:38 ↗ really important consideration.

1:01:43 ↗ Next, there were some questions around

1:01:44 ↗ vision and really what what is the what

1:01:47 ↗ is the vision of this um consideration,

1:01:49 ↗ this possible uh bond renewal. And what

1:01:52 ↗ you have before you I'm not going to

1:01:53 ↗ recite this. Um this is what what you

1:01:56 ↗ have is is page 10 of our park system

1:01:58 ↗ plan. Um within this um it's really just

1:02:02 ↗ to affirm um um the vision, the need,

1:02:06 ↗ the the idea of making these investments

1:02:09 ↗ within the park system is born directly

1:02:11 ↗ out of the vision and core values of of

1:02:14 ↗ the park plan. Um I I draw your

1:02:17 ↗ attention in particular to the four core

1:02:19 ↗ values uh that is park board um and and

1:02:23 ↗ community spent a lot of time thinking

1:02:25 ↗ through and discussing and those four

1:02:27 ↗ core values being connectivity,

1:02:29 ↗ vibrancy, resiliency, and balance. Um

1:02:32 ↗ I'd love to recite all of those goal

1:02:34 ↗ statements for all three four of those,

1:02:35 ↗ but I'm not going to. But I would

1:02:37 ↗ encourage you to really read those

1:02:39 ↗ because it really speaks to uh the

1:02:41 ↗ importance of investing from a

1:02:43 ↗ development and redevelopment

1:02:45 ↗ standpoint, activating our city park

1:02:48 ↗ system that um in many ways is starting

1:02:51 ↗ to feel tired.

1:02:54 ↗ Those four core values really informed

1:02:57 ↗ the near-term, midterm, and long-term

1:02:59 ↗ priorities that um came out of that park

1:03:02 ↗ plan. Um and um equally so um as we

1:03:07 ↗ consider putting together a a draft

1:03:10 ↗ vision um those four core values really

1:03:13 ↗ informed this uh this draft vision. Um

1:03:17 ↗ and that draft vision being renew the

1:03:19 ↗ park bond to build on past investments

1:03:21 ↗ and advance the vision of Isiquas Creeks

1:03:23 ↗ to Peaks park system by enhancing

1:03:25 ↗ developed parks and school spaces for

1:03:28 ↗ more places to play, gather and connect.

1:03:32 ↗ I would note as I recite that this is

1:03:34 ↗ not intended to be a campaign vision. Um

1:03:38 ↗ should we move forward on this um a

1:03:40 ↗ campaign vision would be the job of a um

1:03:44 ↗ a citizen-led campaign committee that

1:03:46 ↗ that would need to be put together. So

1:03:48 ↗ just just wanted to point that out.

1:03:54 ↗ Uh last um u bit of followup and and um

1:03:58 ↗ question that came from uh that April

1:04:00 ↗ 6th meeting was uh some information and

1:04:03 ↗ data and research around u recent park

1:04:06 ↗ specific ballot measures. Um looking

1:04:08 ↗ back the past five years, there were

1:04:10 ↗ five ballot measures um um spanning uh

1:04:14 ↗ different areas of the county. Um I will

1:04:16 ↗ not go through every single one of

1:04:18 ↗ these. Um but uh certainly um here to

1:04:23 ↗ answer any questions you might have. You

1:04:24 ↗ will note that uh four of them passed.

1:04:27 ↗ Um one of them failed. Uh they were a

1:04:30 ↗ mix of both bond measures as well as

1:04:31 ↗ levies. Just a reminder, if it's a bond

1:04:34 ↗ measure, it needs 60% approval. Um if

1:04:37 ↗ it's a levy, it needs 50% um approval. U

1:04:41 ↗ many of these uh were either a mix of

1:04:44 ↗ renewal um or renewal and addition. Um

1:04:49 ↗ but again, happy to happy to answer uh

1:04:52 ↗ questions you might have as we as we get

1:04:54 ↗ into as we get into that.

1:04:57 ↗ Wrapping up uh my presentation to save

1:05:00 ↗ room for public comment and certainly

1:05:01 ↗ your questions. Um looking at timing and

1:05:03 ↗ next steps, here we are on May 5th. Um

1:05:07 ↗ um we have the the city council retreat

1:05:11 ↗ coming up uh this Saturday. Um, we're

1:05:14 ↗ really hoping as staff and

1:05:16 ↗ administration uh to begin to see if

1:05:19 ↗ there's a sense of consensus among city

1:05:21 ↗ council uh while while this work is

1:05:24 ↗ happening. I I as I shared on April 6th,

1:05:27 ↗ uh given timing, we're we're also

1:05:29 ↗ engaging in community outreach and

1:05:31 ↗ beginning to educate the community on

1:05:33 ↗ this potential um though we don't know

1:05:36 ↗ what the final package is going to be uh

1:05:38 ↗ but at least expressing um um and

1:05:41 ↗ beginning to communicate the potential

1:05:43 ↗ as bond that that community outreach

1:05:45 ↗ will continue. Um we'll continue our

1:05:47 ↗ conversations with the park bond and be

1:05:49 ↗ seeking a final recommendation from them

1:05:51 ↗ uh later this month. Um, ideally we're

1:05:54 ↗ back to you as city council sometime in

1:05:56 ↗ June uh for um a a council ordinance and

1:06:01 ↗ and council approval uh just so we can

1:06:04 ↗ not only begin to tee up the work that

1:06:06 ↗ needs to be done to prepare to get

1:06:08 ↗ information to King County elections,

1:06:10 ↗ but also uh save time for that uh um

1:06:14 ↗ education throughout the summer months

1:06:16 ↗ and work with a resident campaign group

1:06:20 ↗ if one of those groups is is formed.

1:06:24 ↗ before we know it, we would be into uh

1:06:27 ↗ into November and uh general election.

1:06:32 ↗ So with that, thank you. Um here are the

1:06:35 ↗ the questions again. Um appreciate your

1:06:38 ↗ time. Really appreciate the discussion

1:06:39 ↗ we had on April 6th and uh the the the

1:06:42 ↗ feedback you sought, the additional um

1:06:45 ↗ information that you sought. So

1:06:47 ↗ hopefully this was helpful. Thanks.

1:06:50 ↗ >> All right. any questions from the

1:06:51 ↗ committee on the material that was just

1:06:54 ↗ presented uh before we do public

1:06:56 ↗ comment. All right, Council Member

1:06:57 ↗ Nichols.

1:06:58 ↗ >> So, first off, thank you. This is a a

1:07:01 ↗ great set of packages that are

1:07:02 ↗ presented. I really appreciate all the

1:07:04 ↗ work that's gone into these. Um and uh

1:07:06 ↗ it's it's really good to see. Um I I've

1:07:09 ↗ only got one question and that's um I

1:07:11 ↗ did read through the report on the 2023

1:07:14 ↗ report on the the the pool. Are there is

1:07:18 ↗ is what's different since 2023 at a high

1:07:21 ↗ level is what the the direction of that

1:07:24 ↗ report was recommending does that still

1:07:27 ↗ seem reasonable assuming

1:07:30 ↗ lots of things were to come true etc. Um

1:07:33 ↗ is

1:07:35 ↗ is there anything that obviously out of

1:07:36 ↗ date I I recognize this has not been

1:07:38 ↗ even partially scoped so it's a I accept

1:07:42 ↗ a very 30,000 foot answer. I just want

1:07:44 ↗ to understand if that report still seems

1:07:46 ↗ relevant today.

1:07:47 ↗ >> I'm sorry. The feasibility report for

1:07:49 ↗ the pool. Yeah. Is that Yeah. Yeah.

1:07:52 ↗ >> Yes. I think it is still it is still

1:07:54 ↗ very relevant. Um at a at a high level

1:07:56 ↗ that feasibility study um explored um

1:08:00 ↗ and really confirmed the ability to do

1:08:02 ↗ an expansion on the existing Julius Pone

1:08:06 ↗ Pool site. Um I think what's important

1:08:08 ↗ to note in that report and in the

1:08:10 ↗ approach we took in 2023 it was

1:08:12 ↗ realizing um the funding strategy to do

1:08:16 ↗ a project like that really is ideally

1:08:18 ↗ three-fold. Um what is a city level of

1:08:21 ↗ contribution? what is the school

1:08:23 ↗ district uh level of contribution given

1:08:26 ↗ the the importance that that um pool

1:08:29 ↗ plays and if there is a fourth high

1:08:31 ↗ school to be built um what is that um

1:08:33 ↗ due to the capacity constraints um um at

1:08:36 ↗ that pool and then lastly um a funding

1:08:39 ↗ strategy that involves King County as

1:08:42 ↗ well uh the original builders of all

1:08:44 ↗ those forward thrust pools uh we still

1:08:46 ↗ feel like regional aquatics is a um

1:08:50 ↗ shouldn't be just left at the hands of

1:08:51 ↗ the

1:08:52 ↗ Um so um the the project itself I think

1:08:57 ↗ is still very relevant um given the um

1:09:03 ↗ um school district um not passing uh the

1:09:05 ↗ bond measures. Um you know what that

1:09:08 ↗ what that funding piece looks like with

1:09:10 ↗ the school district remains a a

1:09:12 ↗ unanswered question uh right now. Um, I

1:09:16 ↗ think we would also want to, council

1:09:18 ↗ member Nichols, just look at assumptions

1:09:20 ↗ given um, I think that I think that cost

1:09:23 ↗ estimate assumed a 2027 construction.

1:09:26 ↗ Obviously, that would we would just want

1:09:28 ↗ to look at escalation and what that

1:09:30 ↗ might mean, but again, that project

1:09:33 ↗ scoped roughly a $20 million project um,

1:09:36 ↗ in 2027. So, still very relevant.

1:09:41 ↗ Thank you,

1:09:44 ↗ Council Boy.

1:09:46 ↗ >> I had a question about the Kirkland levy

1:09:49 ↗ out of the table that you showed us.

1:09:50 ↗ That was the one that failed. Um, can

1:09:53 ↗ you give more context for that? Was that

1:09:55 ↗ uh increasing versus a maintenance

1:09:57 ↗ level? Uh, was there any controversy

1:10:00 ↗ around

1:10:01 ↗ >> Great, great question. And as I've

1:10:03 ↗ certainly talked to my colleagues in

1:10:04 ↗ Kirkland and and talked to them

1:10:05 ↗ throughout that process, I I don't mean

1:10:07 ↗ to represent all their lessons learned,

1:10:09 ↗ but I I you know, I think it was

1:10:12 ↗ multiple things. Um they were seeking a

1:10:14 ↗ permanent levy. So that was a a

1:10:17 ↗ permanent tax increase they went to

1:10:19 ↗ voters with primarily around capital

1:10:22 ↗ projects. uh the the the core of that of

1:10:26 ↗ that um measure was a new community

1:10:29 ↗ center aquatic facility uh that still

1:10:32 ↗ had a high degree of I don't want to say

1:10:35 ↗ controversy but a lot of community

1:10:37 ↗ opinion and didn't have consensus around

1:10:39 ↗ it and so I think as you sort of look at

1:10:43 ↗ their afteraction what did we learn I

1:10:47 ↗ think a lot of it was um the concerns

1:10:50 ↗ residents had about an an uncertainty

1:10:52 ↗ they had about permanence and why is

1:10:54 ↗ this permanent and some of the it wasn't

1:10:56 ↗ a it wasn't a simple financial um um um

1:11:03 ↗ presentation um um and then the uh

1:11:06 ↗ uncertainty and differences of opinion

1:11:09 ↗ of the community center and aquatic

1:11:10 ↗ facility being such a large piece of

1:11:13 ↗ that of that project.

1:11:18 ↗ Uh, two questions I had, uh, are one,

1:11:21 ↗ you mentioned like avoiding certain

1:11:23 ↗ controversial, potentially controversial

1:11:25 ↗ projects in the park plan. Like what

1:11:27 ↗ would some of those potentially be? Is

1:11:29 ↗ it the pool or what would represent like

1:11:31 ↗ ones that you have avoided because you

1:11:33 ↗ felt the community might

1:11:35 ↗ >> Good. That's a good question. I'm using

1:11:36 ↗ my park director Spidey sense when I

1:11:38 ↗ when I when I say these. I I would say

1:11:42 ↗ um, Tippetsz Valley Park is probably a

1:11:45 ↗ good example. do, you know, saying,

1:11:47 ↗ "Hey, we've got an answer on how we're

1:11:48 ↗ going to address all the athletic fields

1:11:50 ↗ at Tibbitz Valley Park right now." That

1:11:52 ↗ might bring with it some controversy and

1:11:54 ↗ concern because the ecological function

1:11:57 ↗ of that of that site has still a lot of

1:12:00 ↗ really really important site work we

1:12:02 ↗ need to do. And so I would feel as the

1:12:05 ↗ park professional, I would rather have

1:12:08 ↗ a visioning process and a community

1:12:11 ↗ engagement around that to really work

1:12:13 ↗ through those community concerns and

1:12:15 ↗ that balance before

1:12:18 ↗ proposing a project like that on a on a

1:12:20 ↗ ballot measure. Looking back, an example

1:12:23 ↗ I would give is Hillside Park. Um

1:12:25 ↗ Hillside Park is a hugely successful

1:12:27 ↗ reinvestment, right? But early early on

1:12:31 ↗ in that there was a lot of community

1:12:34 ↗ concern, uncertainty. What are you doing

1:12:36 ↗ to the park? Um I don't feel like there

1:12:39 ↗ was a strong enough sense of community

1:12:41 ↗ consensus that had we put that on a

1:12:44 ↗ ballot measure without answering those

1:12:46 ↗ questions, it could have brought more um

1:12:51 ↗ concern and rightfully so than us

1:12:53 ↗ spending the time and going through

1:12:54 ↗ community engagement and answering. Does

1:12:56 ↗ that make sense?

1:12:57 ↗ >> Yeah. Yeah, that makes sense. And then

1:12:59 ↗ kind of the further to that is of the

1:13:01 ↗ projects presented obviously you said

1:13:03 ↗ you kind of assess that to some extent

1:13:05 ↗ in these projects but is there anything

1:13:08 ↗ in the ones presented that you think

1:13:09 ↗ could cause it to fail in some way

1:13:11 ↗ whether it be controversy or something

1:13:13 ↗ like that or well obviously everything

1:13:14 ↗ has its risks. Is there something that

1:13:16 ↗ is a a potential risk to any of these

1:13:19 ↗ projects that we should be aware of

1:13:20 ↗ where they'd be presented? You know,

1:13:23 ↗ >> um again, other than just knowing

1:13:25 ↗ respecting 40,000 pe human beings will

1:13:28 ↗ have different opinions, right? I there

1:13:30 ↗ will be I think questions and different

1:13:32 ↗ opinions and I totally respect that. Um,

1:13:35 ↗ no, as we look at these projects, there

1:13:38 ↗ um feels to be either enough consensus

1:13:41 ↗ or I think another way to put it is

1:13:45 ↗ enough ability within the project to

1:13:47 ↗ mitigate um any concerns as we go

1:13:50 ↗ through uh that engagement process and

1:13:53 ↗ that design project process.

1:13:56 ↗ >> Got it. Any other questions before we

1:13:58 ↗ move to public comment?

1:14:01 ↗ No. Okay. All right. So then uh the

1:14:04 ↗ committee will now accept public

1:14:05 ↗ comments about this agenda item. As

1:14:07 ↗ stated earlier, comments can be made in

1:14:09 ↗ person or virtually. Those who have

1:14:11 ↗ signed up in advance will be called

1:14:12 ↗ first. If you're joining with us

1:14:13 ↗ virtually and would like to make

1:14:15 ↗ comments, please raise your virtual hand

1:14:16 ↗ or send the host a chat message. If

1:14:18 ↗ you're on the phone, press star three.

1:14:20 ↗ If you've joined by computer or

1:14:22 ↗ smartphone, look for the hand icon. If

1:14:24 ↗ you're on the room and did not sign up,

1:14:25 ↗ there will be an opportunity for you to

1:14:27 ↗ raise your hand if you'd like to speak

1:14:28 ↗ before I close this portion of the

1:14:30 ↗ meeting. So, clerk, has anyone signed up

1:14:32 ↗ to speak or indicated a desire to speak

1:14:34 ↗ this evening?

1:14:36 ↗ >> Not yet, sure. We do have a few virtual

1:14:39 ↗ attendees. I do not see any virtual

1:14:41 ↗ hands at this time.

1:14:43 ↗ >> Okay. Um, if there's anyone in the room

1:14:46 ↗ who would like to speak, I believe so.

1:14:48 ↗ Yes. Okay, great. Um, so just for the

1:14:50 ↗ inerson attendees, be sure to step up to

1:14:52 ↗ the lectern and turn on the button on

1:14:54 ↗ the microphone, which will display a red

1:14:55 ↗ light. state your name and uh your

1:14:58 ↗ address or relationship to the city and

1:15:02 ↗ thank you for sharing your input once

1:15:03 ↗ you're ready.

1:15:09 ↗ Hi, good evening. Uh my name is Steve

1:15:12 ↗ Perura. I've lived in Oldtown for about

1:15:13 ↗ 17 years. Uh and I drop by every once in

1:15:16 ↗ a while to say hi and show my

1:15:18 ↗ appreciation. So, thank you. Uh I guess

1:15:20 ↗ a personal shout out. What's the saying?

1:15:22 ↗ No good deed goes unpunished. those

1:15:24 ↗ council member Adair goes from well

1:15:26 ↗ serving park board member to the chair

1:15:28 ↗ of the committee. Uh well done to you.

1:15:30 ↗ Thank you. Uh give a quick shout out to

1:15:32 ↗ Eric as well. Thank you for your

1:15:35 ↗ volunteering to run for city council. Uh

1:15:39 ↗ so I want to share some thoughts and

1:15:44 ↗ I don't like being up here probably at

1:15:46 ↗ all but just in general I don't like

1:15:48 ↗ speaking about what I'm against. I like

1:15:49 ↗ speaking about what I'm for. But this

1:15:52 ↗ proposed park bond measure just really

1:15:56 ↗ bothers me on it's a cumulative effect

1:15:59 ↗ rather than individual particular

1:16:00 ↗ projects

1:16:02 ↗ that don't seem to make sense to me.

1:16:05 ↗ There doesn't seem to be a lot of

1:16:09 ↗ sense, at least from my perspective,

1:16:11 ↗ from what things are really or truly a

1:16:14 ↗ priority, what we're most need of that

1:16:16 ↗ are that a park bond that we pay for the

1:16:19 ↗ next 20 years aren't going to take away

1:16:21 ↗ or put responsibilities on future

1:16:24 ↗ operations, park budgets that we truly

1:16:27 ↗ need and require today. uh and are going

1:16:32 ↗ to limit our our future bonding capacity

1:16:34 ↗ in future years. If we do them today,

1:16:36 ↗ we're not going to have that capacity 5

1:16:38 ↗ years down the road. Uh likely. Uh

1:16:43 ↗ so those are kind of my back stops, my

1:16:46 ↗ kind of not red lines, but I'm also

1:16:49 ↗ borrowing from the vantage of what are

1:16:50 ↗ the things that are community feedback.

1:16:54 ↗ I'm just trying to give a sense of not

1:16:55 ↗ threatening, but a sense of how strongly

1:16:58 ↗ I disagree with these and my willingness

1:17:00 ↗ to work to

1:17:02 ↗ not oppose but not see past this item.

1:17:06 ↗ And my level is pretty strong. And I'm

1:17:08 ↗ not again, I'm not threatening. I'm just

1:17:09 ↗ one person. I'm just trying to share

1:17:11 ↗ feedback. So, without further ado, uh I

1:17:16 ↗ don't see the concerns or the the need

1:17:18 ↗ to build pickle ball courts and sports

1:17:21 ↗ field facilities. are going to run down

1:17:23 ↗ before we get any replacing before we

1:17:25 ↗ pay for them. Uh that doesn't make any

1:17:27 ↗ sense to me. Uh I know Isqu being a

1:17:32 ↗ trail head city, there's lots of trails.

1:17:35 ↗ I don't see that it's a pressing issue

1:17:37 ↗ that new trail systems at this point in

1:17:41 ↗ time that we can't go another five or 10

1:17:43 ↗ years without them. Uh and that are also

1:17:46 ↗ going to add to future years operations

1:17:48 ↗ costs.

1:17:50 ↗ Uh

1:17:53 ↗ I'm vehemently opposed to the dog park.

1:17:55 ↗ I think there are a lot more people

1:17:56 ↗ needs that are way above a park

1:18:00 ↗ need for for dogs or pets. Uh

1:18:07 ↗ those are kind cumulative high level

1:18:11 ↗ values want to talk a little bit about

1:18:13 ↗ from the perspective of good projects.

1:18:16 ↗ The e house is one of the things that

1:18:18 ↗ I'm strongly

1:18:20 ↗ um support. I would have liked to see it

1:18:22 ↗ approved previously by the ARPA funding

1:18:24 ↗ process which would have at least paid

1:18:25 ↗ for part of that. That didn't happen.

1:18:27 ↗ I'm not trying to do spill milk over the

1:18:30 ↗ bridge but uh would have liked to see

1:18:32 ↗ that have already happened. Um,

1:18:37 ↗ another reason I guess I'm against the

1:18:40 ↗ the trails is also I know I saw some

1:18:42 ↗ recent news articles that were

1:18:45 ↗ representing some cut state funding for

1:18:47 ↗ parks from commi commissioner public

1:18:50 ↗ lands commissioner

1:18:52 ↗ Mr. Up the Grove if I'm pronouncing that

1:18:54 ↗ correctly. Uh, that could impact parks

1:18:59 ↗ that we connect to or trails we connect

1:19:01 ↗ to if they're coming down. I'm not sure

1:19:03 ↗ we should be adding connections that

1:19:05 ↗ might lose funding from where those

1:19:08 ↗ trail heads would connect to. Uh

1:19:11 ↗ I like let's say the the

1:19:15 ↗ uh Hilltop Park Loop better connections

1:19:18 ↗ within the community within the park

1:19:20 ↗ system. I think that's a good example of

1:19:21 ↗ something. Um

1:19:25 ↗ what am I saying or not saying? Uh oh.

1:19:28 ↗ The uh Tibbitz Valley Park. I do think

1:19:32 ↗ it serves a strong ecological function

1:19:34 ↗ today that we risk losing by

1:19:38 ↗ uh

1:19:40 ↗ putting artificial turf in. I think that

1:19:43 ↗ needs to be better understood. I think

1:19:44 ↗ the project list overall needs more time

1:19:47 ↗ to try threshing out before it goes any

1:19:49 ↗ further forward. Uh

1:19:56 ↗ we're just not at the point that

1:20:00 ↗ regardless of my thoughts, I think that

1:20:02 ↗ we're ready for a p for a public

1:20:04 ↗ discussion and a public vote near that

1:20:06 ↗ point. At this point, I think the city

1:20:08 ↗ has done well and shout out to Jeff,

1:20:12 ↗ he does say funds are competitive based

1:20:15 ↗ for grants and city has always done well

1:20:18 ↗ at getting those grants approved. Again,

1:20:21 ↗ no nothing's guaranteed, but just a good

1:20:24 ↗ example. Thank you. Thank you for your

1:20:27 ↗ comments. Is there anyone else in the

1:20:28 ↗ room who would like to speak?

1:20:31 ↗ Yes.

1:20:33 ↗ Please state your name. Relationship to

1:20:35 ↗ the city. Speak clearly. try and keep it

1:20:37 ↗ within five minutes.

1:20:38 ↗ >> Um, my name is Dian Perea and I live um

1:20:41 ↗ in the Isakqua Highlands.

1:20:43 ↗ >> Um, I

1:20:46 ↗ um get really excited when I think about

1:20:48 ↗ anything that encourages families and

1:20:51 ↗ communities to unite and I've heard that

1:20:55 ↗ word community used a lot of times

1:20:57 ↗ today. Um, if any of you have been at a

1:21:01 ↗ pickle ball event or

1:21:04 ↗ hung out near one, um, you will see

1:21:07 ↗ many, many communities brought together.

1:21:09 ↗ I have played with 12year-old kids. I

1:21:12 ↗ have played with eight-year-olds, seven

1:21:14 ↗ year olds, and I have played with even

1:21:17 ↗ people older than me [laughter]

1:21:19 ↗ in their 80s and 90s. Um, talk about

1:21:23 ↗ community of culture. I have played with

1:21:26 ↗ people who we we don't share a language

1:21:29 ↗ but we share a game and we share a

1:21:31 ↗ passion and we can share a laugh and we

1:21:34 ↗ can share a teaching of one another. So

1:21:37 ↗ uh I encourage that. I also come from

1:21:39 ↗ the idea that the more parks the better.

1:21:42 ↗ Um, I would like to see more

1:21:44 ↗ forestdriven parks because,

1:21:48 ↗ um, if you want to make families and

1:21:50 ↗ people happy, you take them to the

1:21:51 ↗ beach, the forest um, and you watch the

1:21:55 ↗ joy. But anyway, back to the pickle ball

1:21:58 ↗ courts. I'm here to encourage that um,

1:22:01 ↗ you really embrace and look at um, add

1:22:04 ↗ adding some in the highlands and taking

1:22:08 ↗ care of the ones that already exist.

1:22:12 ↗ Thank you for your comments. Uh, is

1:22:14 ↗ there anyone else in the room who would

1:22:15 ↗ like to speak? Yes,

1:22:23 ↗ >> I think this is on already. It's red.

1:22:26 ↗ >> I'm Penny's story and I live in Isiqua

1:22:28 ↗ Highlands.

1:22:29 ↗ Um, I would like to say I'm also in

1:22:32 ↗ support of the pickleball courts. And I

1:22:35 ↗ think that if we have designated

1:22:38 ↗ pickleball courts, separating the tennis

1:22:40 ↗ and the pickle ball is pretty important

1:22:43 ↗ because pickle ball does draw the

1:22:46 ↗ community together. As Deianne did say,

1:22:49 ↗ it draws people of all ages and all

1:22:53 ↗ abilities. and you just come and rack up

1:22:56 ↗ your paddle and you play with the next

1:22:59 ↗ people in line and everybody is very

1:23:02 ↗ willing. we only play to 11 points and

1:23:05 ↗ they're willing to meet new people and

1:23:07 ↗ play people of different abilities where

1:23:10 ↗ I'm also a tennis player so I'm not

1:23:13 ↗ saying that tennis is not necessary but

1:23:16 ↗ um tennis you come with your partner or

1:23:19 ↗ with your four people and you stick with

1:23:21 ↗ your four people for the hour and a half

1:23:23 ↗ that you play it's a totally different

1:23:26 ↗ environment [clears throat]

1:23:27 ↗ but I think if we want people especially

1:23:29 ↗ up in the highlands or tippets we want

1:23:32 ↗ to bring a community together. It's

1:23:34 ↗ really pickle ball that does that. We've

1:23:36 ↗ seen it happen. We saw it on Mercer

1:23:39 ↗ Island and then I know Kirkland is doing

1:23:41 ↗ it now. Belle's done it and I think it

1:23:44 ↗ would really enhance what the Highlands

1:23:47 ↗ has to offer.

1:23:50 ↗ >> Thank you.

1:23:51 ↗ Uh, anyone else in the room like to

1:23:53 ↗ speak?

1:23:56 ↗ >> Hey, hey, Chairman Adair.

1:23:58 ↗ Congratulations, Council Member Boyd,

1:24:00 ↗ Council Member Nichols. I'm Jeff Newell.

1:24:02 ↗ I'm South Lake Samish. I'm also on the

1:24:03 ↗ park board. Uh I represent a majority of

1:24:06 ↗ the board if not all uh in favor of

1:24:09 ↗ this. Um the main reasons are just like

1:24:12 ↗ why I like being on the park board is

1:24:14 ↗ the the park board touches every aspect.

1:24:16 ↗ There's very few things in Isiqua that

1:24:18 ↗ touch just about every community, every

1:24:20 ↗ aspect, uh every demographic, every age

1:24:23 ↗ group. Uh and I think this renewal

1:24:26 ↗ perfectly hits all those as well.

1:24:28 ↗ whether you love pickle ball, whether

1:24:30 ↗ you're a hiker, whether you're a dog

1:24:32 ↗ enthusiast, uh or I'd say the most

1:24:35 ↗ biased interest for me is as a former

1:24:37 ↗ soccer coach, softball coach, uh 90% of

1:24:40 ↗ my co-workers play cricket. Um

1:24:43 ↗ converting those the elementary schools

1:24:45 ↗ to turf is going to release a huge

1:24:47 ↗ burden and and allow a lot more

1:24:49 ↗ organizations to take advantage of what

1:24:52 ↗ is so the scheduling is a nightmare for

1:24:54 ↗ all those sports in Isiqua. I think we

1:24:56 ↗ all know that. Um that's just a a good

1:24:58 ↗ example I think of how many different

1:25:00 ↗ aspects and it can raise some revenue um

1:25:03 ↗ for this. So I just want to make sure

1:25:04 ↗ that that we were uh on the record uh

1:25:07 ↗ and I and um with I think the broadbased

1:25:10 ↗ nature of this proposal um the amount of

1:25:13 ↗ different groups it'll fit uh from a

1:25:15 ↗ diversity standpoint. And then you know

1:25:17 ↗ last but not least we've seen in our

1:25:20 ↗ area uh and others uh the toughness of

1:25:23 ↗ getting new levies, new bonds approved.

1:25:26 ↗ this is just a renewal. And I think if

1:25:28 ↗ it's uh if it's well

1:25:31 ↗ illustrated that way and well publicized

1:25:33 ↗ that this is something that's ongoing

1:25:35 ↗ and we just want to continue to do it, I

1:25:37 ↗ think it'll get broad support from the

1:25:38 ↗ community. Time will tell obviously on

1:25:40 ↗ that and it'll take some effort. Uh but

1:25:43 ↗ uh I think that's a really encouraging

1:25:44 ↗ part of this that we don't need to raise

1:25:46 ↗ additional funds to do any of this.

1:25:50 ↗ Thank you.

1:25:52 ↗ >> Thank you.

1:25:54 ↗ Anyone else in the room would like to

1:25:55 ↗ speak?

1:25:57 ↗ No, I'm not seeing any hands. Uh, clerk,

1:25:59 ↗ anyone else online who would like to

1:26:00 ↗ speak?

1:26:05 ↗ >> Not at this time, chair.

1:26:06 ↗ >> Okay. Uh, then as a reminder, written

1:26:09 ↗ comments can be submitted at any time to

1:26:11 ↗ city council at isiqua.gov.

1:26:14 ↗ Uh, the committee will now deliberate.

1:26:16 ↗ So any

1:26:19 ↗ deliberation or recommendations at this

1:26:20 ↗ time?

1:26:24 ↗ Council member Boy, you're going council

1:26:27 ↗ member Nichols.

1:26:35 ↗ >> All right. Well, first of all, I started

1:26:36 ↗ to say this ring questions, but once

1:26:37 ↗ again, thank you for all the wonderful

1:26:38 ↗ work that's gone into this these

1:26:40 ↗ proposals. Um, both staff, um, Jeff on

1:26:44 ↗ the Thank you also to the the uh the

1:26:46 ↗ parks board and your representation of

1:26:47 ↗ them tonight here. Um,

1:26:51 ↗ one of the things that I will say I

1:26:53 ↗ personally love about Isco most are our

1:26:54 ↗ parks, um, our trails, our connection to

1:26:57 ↗ nature, our ability to get involved in

1:26:59 ↗ sports. I think that's a big part of why

1:27:00 ↗ many of us moved here made that

1:27:02 ↗ decision. Uh, and it's a big part of why

1:27:04 ↗ many of us that have spent their lives

1:27:05 ↗ here have never considered other places.

1:27:08 ↗ Uh, I will say after tonight, uh, I am

1:27:10 ↗ also going to learn to play pickle ball.

1:27:12 ↗ So, thank you for that that advice. Um,

1:27:16 ↗ that's it.

1:27:18 ↗ >> [laughter]

1:27:19 ↗ >> Thank you. Um,

1:27:21 ↗ I also want to say I really appreciate

1:27:23 ↗ the administration taking the feedback

1:27:24 ↗ to give us more insight into the the

1:27:26 ↗ vision behind this and also to

1:27:28 ↗ potentially give us some more options. I

1:27:30 ↗ really think our community can and will

1:27:33 ↗ get behind any of these bond options

1:27:35 ↗ that were presented tonight. Um, and

1:27:37 ↗ that they're all good and reasonable

1:27:38 ↗ packages that clearly serve well

1:27:41 ↗ doumented known needs and that will

1:27:42 ↗ serve our community very well in the

1:27:44 ↗ future.

1:27:45 ↗ I do just want to quickly double check,

1:27:47 ↗ double click on the math though there

1:27:49 ↗ because the difference between the the

1:27:51 ↗ the recommended level and the bookend

1:27:53 ↗ that was presented is is it's only about

1:27:55 ↗ $6.50 a month. Uh it's also lower than

1:27:58 ↗ any of the other regional levies that we

1:28:00 ↗ looked at tonight um between the highest

1:28:02 ↗ and lowest cost packages. So I don't

1:28:04 ↗ want the council to yet be constrained

1:28:06 ↗ by that alone. Um I personally would

1:28:09 ↗ want to give the community more

1:28:10 ↗ opportunity to weigh in on the best best

1:28:12 ↗ mix. Um, and I think that once this gets

1:28:16 ↗ more publicized, the community will

1:28:18 ↗ weigh in and we'll have more opinions

1:28:19 ↗ about what it will best get be most get

1:28:21 ↗ behind. Um, so like I said, I'm I'm

1:28:24 ↗ confident that any of these that can

1:28:25 ↗ come before us, I will vote for, but I I

1:28:27 ↗ want to be honest that I don't yet know

1:28:29 ↗ what the best options we should be

1:28:30 ↗ voting for are. Um, should it be adding

1:28:33 ↗ those known pool improvements above and

1:28:35 ↗ beyond the administration's base

1:28:37 ↗ proposal? I I really don't know. um

1:28:39 ↗ picker and barn park improvements that

1:28:41 ↗ could help our beloved far farmers

1:28:42 ↗ market. Also don't know there. Um so for

1:28:46 ↗ now at least my only real feedback is

1:28:48 ↗ beyond saying that this is a wonderful

1:28:50 ↗ set of proposals that I I'm sure our

1:28:52 ↗ community will love for many decades in

1:28:55 ↗ the future is to keep advancing as many

1:28:57 ↗ options as we feasibly can. Um and

1:29:00 ↗ honestly wait to see who shows up and

1:29:02 ↗ supports what. Um that's not of course

1:29:05 ↗ not all that we should be basing our

1:29:06 ↗ decisions on ever. Um, but I I think we

1:29:09 ↗ owe these options a little more time to

1:29:11 ↗ sit with the public and to see who will

1:29:13 ↗ come out of the woodwork to either

1:29:14 ↗ advise or indicate they'll help because

1:29:17 ↗ these are bonds that have a high

1:29:19 ↗ threshold and they will need community

1:29:20 ↗ help. Uh, as you mentioned, they will

1:29:23 ↗ need that community bond committee to

1:29:25 ↗ form and to work hard to get these

1:29:27 ↗ passed. So, I'd like to give the

1:29:29 ↗ community a bit more time to weigh in

1:29:31 ↗ with what direction they want, see who

1:29:33 ↗ will come out and show up and indicate

1:29:36 ↗ that they'll have the passion to push

1:29:37 ↗ this bond over the finish line. So,

1:29:39 ↗ really, my only feedback is to keep

1:29:41 ↗ these three options available for the

1:29:42 ↗ full council to decide on. Um, I don't

1:29:45 ↗ think we need more options. I think

1:29:46 ↗ these are you've you've given a good and

1:29:48 ↗ reasonable set of bookends um out of the

1:29:50 ↗ many thousands of combinations that

1:29:52 ↗ could be out there. Of course, there's,

1:29:53 ↗ you know, there's there's many other

1:29:55 ↗ ways to slice this as well, but I think

1:29:56 ↗ these these are are a very thoughtful

1:29:58 ↗ presentation of a couple different good

1:30:00 ↗ mixes. Um, I don't yet know where I

1:30:02 ↗ would land. Um, but I would like to see,

1:30:05 ↗ again, knowing that we will need

1:30:07 ↗ community support and that the

1:30:08 ↗ difference between the lowest and

1:30:10 ↗ highest cost versions of these is fairly

1:30:12 ↗ minor. I want to see who will support it

1:30:14 ↗ with what enthusiasm that we can count

1:30:16 ↗ on when we we need that community group

1:30:18 ↗ to form and help us or help help the

1:30:20 ↗ community get this over the line in

1:30:21 ↗ November.

1:30:25 ↗ Thank Katherine Boy.

1:30:31 ↗ >> Thank you uh I'll echo uh for all your

1:30:34 ↗ work in presenting this and yeah getting

1:30:36 ↗ at answering the questions that were

1:30:37 ↗ raised uh before I was appointed. Um, I

1:30:42 ↗ uh read through the park strategic plan

1:30:45 ↗ to just help better inform myself on the

1:30:49 ↗ community need um where the long-term

1:30:51 ↗ vision is. And so I know that whatever's

1:30:55 ↗ uh we go out to bond for if that's what

1:30:58 ↗ we choose to do. Um there are things we

1:31:01 ↗ can do beyond just that action. Um, but

1:31:05 ↗ I uh [snorts]

1:31:08 ↗ my particular neighborhood I really do

1:31:10 ↗ see as and it's identified within the

1:31:12 ↗ park strategic plan as uh a geographical

1:31:15 ↗ um I know there's a trail gap

1:31:17 ↗ specifically identified. Um so whether

1:31:19 ↗ it's plugging into the more a more

1:31:21 ↗ connected network or or a park itself

1:31:24 ↗ there. Um, I know, you know, we're

1:31:27 ↗ working under a crunch timeline if this

1:31:29 ↗ is the timeline that we're pursuing and

1:31:30 ↗ that might not be the right fit for

1:31:33 ↗ that. Um, but I would at least want to

1:31:36 ↗ further entertain and explore and I'll

1:31:38 ↗ agree with council member Nichols here

1:31:40 ↗ on further getting the community input

1:31:43 ↗ on that because North isqua uh, as well

1:31:46 ↗ as the central Isiqua regional growth

1:31:48 ↗ area has come up many times. And so, um,

1:31:51 ↗ I've uh, I think I've emailed this

1:31:54 ↗ before. or at least in writing and prep

1:31:56 ↗ for our uh council retreat. Uh just

1:31:58 ↗ getting a um a map of the proposed

1:32:02 ↗ projects. I'm definitely a visual

1:32:04 ↗ learner. Um hopefully that'll help out

1:32:05 ↗ other council members as well. But maybe

1:32:08 ↗ even layer and this is a bit new of a

1:32:10 ↗ request. So, uh, layering it with

1:32:13 ↗ the maps existing in the plan of those

1:32:16 ↗ trail gaps, um, the the gaps that are

1:32:20 ↗ identified, um, highlighting, you know,

1:32:22 ↗ the areas that are

1:32:25 ↗ at more of a geographical disadvantage

1:32:28 ↗ in their access to parks. Um,

1:32:31 ↗ but yeah, this is, I think, one of our

1:32:35 ↗ park system is one of the things that

1:32:36 ↗ sets the city apart from other neighbors

1:32:38 ↗ in the region. Um, and so

1:32:42 ↗ whatever direction we go, I know it can

1:32:44 ↗ only serve to better our residents

1:32:46 ↗ experience here and visitors, but um, so

1:32:52 ↗ I I'm looking forward to talking about

1:32:54 ↗ this more.

1:32:57 ↗ >> Thank you both. Uh, yeah, so you know,

1:33:00 ↗ my comments echo that. One, I' I'm very

1:33:02 ↗ impressive work here on all this and

1:33:04 ↗ really clarifying a lot of the questions

1:33:06 ↗ from before and I especially enjoyed

1:33:08 ↗ kind of highlighting, you know, the

1:33:10 ↗ vision and how this relates to the park

1:33:11 ↗ plan more in, you know, more specific

1:33:13 ↗ terms. Um, you know, I would say, you

1:33:16 ↗ know, on my own personal side, and this

1:33:18 ↗ also comes from having spent more time

1:33:21 ↗ with it to a large extent from my parks

1:33:23 ↗ board experience, a lot of this feels

1:33:24 ↗ this feels very right to me. This feels

1:33:28 ↗ like the correct plan. and these feel

1:33:29 ↗ like the correct projects. Uh on my own

1:33:32 ↗ personal, you know, opinion of it, um I

1:33:35 ↗ have, you know, I do think the city

1:33:38 ↗ highly values its parks and if there's

1:33:39 ↗ one thing the city would be willing to

1:33:41 ↗ support is parks. I equally just in

1:33:44 ↗ terms of my own financial sense feel

1:33:45 ↗ that asking beyond a renewal at this

1:33:49 ↗ point in the larger political landscape

1:33:53 ↗ I feel even though the city highly

1:33:56 ↗ supports parks is risky so to speak even

1:33:59 ↗ though there have obviously been a lot

1:34:00 ↗ of successes I feel that's risky as well

1:34:02 ↗ as can potentially limits our future for

1:34:05 ↗ like saying other issues other taxing

1:34:07 ↗ things that may come up beyond part the

1:34:10 ↗ park system so but that's a person my

1:34:12 ↗ you know my personal opinion that I feel

1:34:13 ↗ that this fits this obviously other

1:34:15 ↗ council members I respect those points

1:34:16 ↗ that continuing to have these options

1:34:18 ↗ and I agree continuing to have some of

1:34:20 ↗ these sessions especially as this starts

1:34:21 ↗ to hit the public more to make sure

1:34:23 ↗ we're you know giving them what they

1:34:25 ↗ want and that the public fully supports

1:34:27 ↗ it. So um you know to the you know

1:34:30 ↗ direction needed I would say obviously

1:34:33 ↗ there there is support for the eighth

1:34:35 ↗ sense but that we should keep the

1:34:36 ↗ options open at least at for the retreat

1:34:38 ↗ to show them what these are. Um I think

1:34:40 ↗ also your you know the examples of other

1:34:43 ↗ um you know uh measures is help very

1:34:46 ↗ helpful to illustrate that um and you

1:34:50 ↗ know if there's a way to present it you

1:34:52 ↗ know like as you've done is like here

1:34:53 ↗ are you know what you guys have proposed

1:34:55 ↗ but you know keeping some options open

1:34:57 ↗ as you engage with the public so that if

1:34:59 ↗ the public really is demanding something

1:35:01 ↗ it can come up. Um, you know, I would

1:35:05 ↗ say as a personal side, I've always felt

1:35:07 ↗ the pool one has always been a thing

1:35:09 ↗ that the pool feels like its own project

1:35:11 ↗ in and of itself, its own measure, its

1:35:13 ↗ own vote, you know, has always felt to

1:35:15 ↗ me like that is something that needs to

1:35:17 ↗ be its own uh job, you know, is the pool

1:35:21 ↗ beyond being bundled with a bunch of

1:35:23 ↗ other things because it has so many

1:35:24 ↗ factors at play. But that's, you know,

1:35:27 ↗ where I feel on that stuff. Um, but

1:35:29 ↗ yeah, I think this all is really great.

1:35:32 ↗ this has fine-tuned it very well.

1:35:35 ↗ Options should still be on the table um

1:35:38 ↗ as we continue on especially for the

1:35:39 ↗ retreat um and then go from there. Does

1:35:42 ↗ that feel like that clarifies a lot of

1:35:43 ↗ what you guys have said I would think?

1:35:50 ↗ >> Yeah, I mean uh what I heard out of that

1:35:52 ↗ and maybe we can be a little bit more

1:35:53 ↗ explicit is to keep I would like to keep

1:35:56 ↗ all three of these options on the table.

1:35:57 ↗ I'm not sure what the best date for that

1:35:58 ↗ is. Um you we've got you said you'll be

1:36:01 ↗ discussing this at the retreat. I'm not

1:36:02 ↗ sure what degree we'll be discussing

1:36:04 ↗ them. You've also got further touch

1:36:05 ↗ points with our with parks board. Um I

1:36:10 ↗ would like to at least my my if if we

1:36:13 ↗ vote otherwise we just can express this.

1:36:15 ↗ Um my my desire would be to see all of

1:36:19 ↗ these at least go to council with enough

1:36:21 ↗ opportunity to see who else from the

1:36:23 ↗ community will be get behind these. I

1:36:25 ↗ would be really interested to see if

1:36:26 ↗ this gets publicized a little bit more

1:36:28 ↗ who will show up and indicate that they

1:36:29 ↗ will come out and support it in in mass

1:36:31 ↗ or not. Um and that that could be

1:36:34 ↗ informative to us to help understand

1:36:37 ↗ uh the the realm of possibilities that

1:36:39 ↗ are out there.

1:36:45 ↗ This is a bit of an aside, but I know we

1:36:46 ↗ heard from uh at last the public comment

1:36:49 ↗ in the council meeting about a new um

1:36:51 ↗ community newspaper that's coming

1:36:53 ↗ online. And so um but that won't happen

1:36:55 ↗ until next month. And just yeah uh the

1:36:58 ↗ more more time the community has to hear

1:37:01 ↗ about this and be better informed and

1:37:03 ↗ weigh in. Um, I know I [clears throat]

1:37:05 ↗ mean I was looking within the parks plan

1:37:07 ↗ of what was informing uh the different

1:37:09 ↗ focus groups that you know at athletic

1:37:11 ↗ fields came up and that and the

1:37:13 ↗ difficulties in scheduling and just

1:37:14 ↗ access for that. Um

1:37:21 ↗ yeah. Um

1:37:24 ↗ I

1:37:26 ↗ would agree with keeping the three

1:37:28 ↗ options on the table

1:37:31 ↗ for more airtime.

1:37:35 ↗ >> Great. Do you feel you have uh all the

1:37:37 ↗ direction you are needing at this time?

1:37:39 ↗ >> Yeah. Helpful. Let me repeat what I'm

1:37:41 ↗ hearing in terms of maybe preparation

1:37:42 ↗ for retreat conversation is u probably

1:37:45 ↗ not all of this information but making

1:37:47 ↗ sure council's aware of all of this but

1:37:50 ↗ focusing it sounds like on um that table

1:37:55 ↗ of of optional scenarios of of levy

1:37:58 ↗ rates and providing opportunity for

1:38:02 ↗ conversation uh with the rest of the

1:38:03 ↗ council on that. um showing not only the

1:38:07 ↗ list of projects we're recommending in

1:38:09 ↗ the 8 cent levy, but also having a map,

1:38:12 ↗ providing a a a map that shows

1:38:14 ↗ geographically where those projects

1:38:16 ↗ would be within town. Um highlighting

1:38:19 ↗ also the um other recent King County

1:38:23 ↗ wide park measures uh that happened.

1:38:26 ↗ Sounds like those are sort of the areas

1:38:28 ↗ of focus that you want us to uh to

1:38:31 ↗ spotlight or at least highlight to set

1:38:33 ↗ up the conversation um at the retreat.

1:38:35 ↗ Does that sound accurate?

1:38:37 ↗ >> Yeah. I'd say also some level of you

1:38:40 ↗ know or at least maybe the plan of how

1:38:41 ↗ the community engagement is going to be

1:38:44 ↗ on getting their input on this.

1:38:46 ↗ Obviously, you know, it's a time crunch,

1:38:47 ↗ but how that seems to be a big point is

1:38:49 ↗ what does the community think of this as

1:38:52 ↗ we're getting, you know, closer. it

1:38:54 ↗ seems to be like how how we're going to

1:38:56 ↗ get that support

1:38:58 ↗ >> and no thank you for that and that was

1:39:00 ↗ going to be my

1:39:02 ↗ next comment question is um we are in a

1:39:07 ↗ time crunch right and so I want to make

1:39:09 ↗ sure as we work with administration and

1:39:13 ↗ we build what that might look like we're

1:39:15 ↗ also being super super realistic in

1:39:17 ↗ terms of when decisions need to be made

1:39:21 ↗ um um and I understand and respect

1:39:24 ↗ Right. Some some of these decisions are

1:39:25 ↗ going to feel like we're making them in

1:39:27 ↗ a not fully informed fashion, but we'll

1:39:32 ↗ we'll try and build some scenarios or

1:39:34 ↗ some models of what we feel like

1:39:36 ↗ community outreach could be in the next

1:39:38 ↗ couple of weeks.

1:39:43 ↗ >> If I can just make one more comment to

1:39:44 ↗ me. I it within the proposed plans. I

1:39:47 ↗ think no matter I

1:39:49 ↗ uh vibrancy is one of the core tenants

1:39:51 ↗ of the strategic plan and I really do

1:39:53 ↗ see that and you highlighted it in the

1:39:55 ↗ slideshow but as I was reading through

1:39:57 ↗ the proposal I think no matter what we

1:39:59 ↗ do it really is serving to enhance that

1:40:01 ↗ vibr aspect. Um and so I really

1:40:05 ↗ appreciate that.

1:40:05 ↗ >> Awesome. Thank you.

1:40:11 ↗ >> No that seems that seems to be correct.

1:40:14 ↗ Fantastic.

1:40:16 ↗ All right. Uh we now move to

1:40:19 ↗ announcements. Do fellow committee

1:40:20 ↗ members have any announcements to make?

1:40:24 ↗ No announcements. Okay. Well then, oh

1:40:27 ↗ yes, I think uh just announcing wherever

1:40:31 ↗ we possibly can uh the uh sound transit

1:40:34 ↗ board meeting that is coming up on

1:40:35 ↗ Thursday and looking for active part

1:40:37 ↗ public particip public participation.

1:40:39 ↗ Um, please reach out to city council or

1:40:42 ↗ your administration if you're interested

1:40:43 ↗ in learning how to participate there as

1:40:45 ↗ well.

1:40:46 ↗ >> Fantastic. All right. So, the next

1:40:48 ↗ committee meeting date is June 16th,

1:40:51 ↗ 2026.

1:40:52 ↗ And then there being no further

1:40:54 ↗ business, the meeting is adjourned at

1:40:55 ↗ 8:11 p.m.

Minutes for this meeting haven't been published yet. Council and committee minutes are approved at the next meeting and embedded as a consent-calendar attachment in that meeting's agenda packet — they will appear here once that next packet is processed.