City Council Special Meeting · Monday, December 3, 2018 · City Council Digest

2680 segments .txt ↗

0:25 ↗ I'd like to call to order the December 31st, 2018 City Council regular

0:31 ↗ meeting. I'd like to welcome everybody for coming tonight. We have a very

0:37 ↗ large crowd, one of the largest I've seen in quite a long time.

0:43 ↗ I'd like to let everybody know that Council Members Ramos and Ray are

0:48 ↗ excused this evening. So our sitting council is made up of five Council

0:54 ↗ Members. And any of those of you here tonight who would like to

1:00 ↗ join the Council and myself in the Pledge of Allegiance, please stand. I

1:05 ↗ pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, the Republic

1:11 ↗ for which it stands, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all,

1:18 ↗ Before I move into audience comments, I wanted to apologize that we can't fit you

1:23 ↗ all in better. We did decide to put out fewer chairs and if you are

1:28 ↗ in need of a chair this evening, Please let us know and we'll make sure

1:33 ↗ that you're seated. But we wanted to make sure as many of those who are

1:37 ↗ interested in coming tonight could fit into our council chambers. So thank you for being

1:41 ↗ patient. Also if you, and it's tempting when you're here with your neighbors and friends

1:45 ↗ to have conversations. It can be very hard for council to hear. If you do

1:49 ↗ want to have a conversation, if you could move outside of the council chambers and

1:53 ↗ come back in after, that would be great. So the first item this evening will

1:57 ↗ be audience comments and this is your opportunity to address your council. The guidelines for

2:02 ↗ public participation, if you have not done this before, are posted up on the overhead

2:06 ↗ near the lectern. Please limit your comments to three minutes. There was a sign-up list

2:11 ↗ and those who signed up will be called up first and if you did not

2:15 ↗ sign up, I will give an opportunity for you to also come and address the

2:20 ↗ council before closing this portion of the meeting. If you are here as part of

2:24 ↗ a group and based on the green in the audience, I assume there's at least

2:29 ↗ one group here, and you have an identified spokesperson, please identify yourself as such for

2:33 ↗ which group you're speaking. And anyone in the audience this evening who hears comments from

2:38 ↗ any of our speakers and wishes to show support, please indicate by raising your hand

2:42 ↗ so that the Council gets a good understanding of which items you support, which points

2:47 ↗ you support on any of the topics that you hear at audience comments. There's also

2:52 ↗ a public hearing this evening. AB 7610 is our proposed 2019 budget. If you'd like

2:57 ↗ to make comments on this topic, you'll have another opportunity, you'll have an opportunity later

3:03 ↗ in the meeting. So you can take your choice. You can address the council during

3:09 ↗ audience comments or you can wait and address the council about the budget during the

3:15 ↗ public hearing. And Tisha, has anyone signed up to speak this evening? Yes. Ken Eastman

3:20 ↗ followed by Kristi True and Susan Schaaf. It would be great to, I think we

3:25 ↗ have a lot of speakers this evening, if you hear your name called, if you

3:29 ↗ could move over sort of where Ken is standing near the lectern, that would be

3:34 ↗ great. Just so we can keep everybody moving through. Ken. Good evening, Mayor Pauley, City

3:40 ↗ Council members, and City staff. My name is Ken Easeman. I reside at 2473

3:45 ↗ Northwest Stony Creek Drive, and I'm representing the Save Cougar Mountain organization tonight. After

3:51 ↗ learning of the Bergsma Agenda Bill, I cannot tell you how excited we all

3:57 ↗ are. This initiative speaks volumes to the vision and the values of our community.

4:03 ↗ In a region of soulless cities with urban and suburban sprawl, Our city

4:09 ↗ has shown that it cares enough to protect what makes us special. Our creekside properties,

4:15 ↗ Old Town, Lake Sammamish, and our Issaquah Alps. Some would say that we live in

4:20 ↗ a Northwest paradise, and I'd have to agree. And we are so proud that we

4:26 ↗ live in a community where our civic leaders are working so hard to keep our

4:32 ↗ Issaquah special. Our mayor, city council, and city staff are to be commended.

4:38 ↗ Once the Bergsma property is protected, this corner of Cougar Mountain will

4:44 ↗ remain wild and natural forever. It will provide habitat for nature and

4:50 ↗ recreational opportunities for our residents. As I look out in the audience,

4:56 ↗ I see the beneficiaries of this fine effort, from older citizens who

5:02 ↗ are wise enough to understand its value, to the youngsters that will

5:07 ↗ be able to enjoy this property. over their long lives and their

5:13 ↗ children's children's lives. What an impressive legacy for our city council and for our

5:19 ↗ administration. This is a bold and courageous project led by a partnership of citizens,

5:25 ↗ multiple government entities and nonprofits, all working together towards a noble goal. All of

5:31 ↗ the pieces have fallen in place. At a cost to the city of 35

5:37 ↗ cents to the dollar, this is a deal that's too good to pass up.

5:43 ↗ We surely had some great negotiators working for us. And this is what we've all

5:48 ↗ been working towards for so long. I mean, look at this audience. This is truly

5:53 ↗ democracy in action. I want to offer our thanks to all that have been so

5:59 ↗ instrumental in getting us to this point. And I want to thank the City Council

6:04 ↗ in advance for their support of this agenda bill. Thanks. Thank you, Ken. Kristi? And

6:09 ↗ almost every single hand in the packed house was raised. Thank you. Good evening.

6:15 ↗ My name is Kristy True. I'm the director of King County's Department of Natural Resources

6:20 ↗ and Parks. And I'm here tonight to support the acquisition of the Berksma property. We

6:25 ↗ are very excited to be a partner with the City of Issaquah and the Trust

6:30 ↗ for Public Lands to do the acquisition of this property. I think you're aware that

6:35 ↗ part of our commitment is to do acquisition on one of the parcels that's under

6:40 ↗ consideration. But we also want to support the City and the Trust for Public Lands

6:45 ↗ in any kind of grant applications or the conservation futures tax application that we expect

6:50 ↗ the City to put forward. This is especially good time to do that as a

6:56 ↗ result of King County Executive Constantine's Land Conservation Initiative. There will be much more money

7:01 ↗ available in 2019. So we think it's really timely and important. And these are the

7:07 ↗ kinds of projects that the executive anticipated would be coming forward as part of the

7:12 ↗ next phase of our conservation futures application. I also wanted to address a question I

7:18 ↗ heard earlier about a map that's on our website about equity lands. These are lands

7:23 ↗ that we have identified in parts of King County where there really are no parks

7:28 ↗ or green space in those communities. So we've identified those properties so when they're applying

7:34 ↗ for grants in those particular communities, the match is waived. So it's really a different,

7:39 ↗ they still have to go through the entire process, but those are very specific conditions

7:45 ↗ for lands in those areas. We do expect that this acquisition, this application will be

7:50 ↗ very competitive. So we're really excited to be working forward with you and also just

7:56 ↗ want to again say that we support the acquisition of the Bergsma property. Thank you,

8:01 ↗ Christy. Thank you. Lots of hands, lots of signs. Tisha, who is third

8:07 ↗ on your list? Next we have Susan followed by John McDuff followed

8:13 ↗ by Susan Neville. I'm sorry, first we have Susan Schaaf. Oh, she

8:18 ↗ would like to switch to talk at the budget. So then we

8:24 ↗ have John McDuff followed by Susan Neville followed by Gary Campin. Good

8:30 ↗ evening. I'm here this evening to support the passage of Agenda Bill

8:36 ↗ 7708, the Burksmont Property Acquisition. I'm here for two reasons. First, because

8:42 ↗ I, oh, excuse me. I'm John Macduff. I live at 620 Southeast. Oh, that was

8:47 ↗ my bad. I didn't make any, I didn't, you didn't catch it. Okay, name and

8:52 ↗ address. I'm slipping. I'm so fascinated with what you're saying. Okay, name and address. I

8:58 ↗ live at 620 Southeast Butch Street here in Old Town. And, okay, I'm here for

9:03 ↗ two reasons. First, because I think it's the right thing to do. And second,

9:09 ↗ as the current president of the Issaquah Environmental Council, I'm here

9:15 ↗ because they asked me to come and show their support also.

9:21 ↗ Thank you. Thank you. Hands are raised. Susan. I'm Susan Neville

9:26 ↗ at 2825 Northwest Pinecone Drive. I'm from Save Cougar Mountain. Thank

9:32 ↗ you for the opportunity to be here tonight. It's been a

9:37 ↗ long two years, but we're very happy, I hope. Since Ken

9:43 ↗ Koningsmark cannot be here tonight, he asked me to publicly share his comments

9:49 ↗ with you. Ken is a board member of Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust,

9:55 ↗ King County Conservation Futures Oversight Committee, and the Issaquah Alps Club.

10:02 ↗ Ken states, "I can't commend enough the partners who have worked so long and so

10:08 ↗ hard to create the proposal before you tonight. This is the one chance we've been

10:13 ↗ waiting for to save this crucial parcel for the public and now it's up to

10:19 ↗ you to step up and do the right thing and vote in support of this

10:24 ↗ proposal. We are fortunate that this timing coincides perfectly with the launch of King County's

10:30 ↗ Visionary Land Conservation Initiative. which seeks to support exactly this type of

10:36 ↗ conservation project. Your yes vote will carry on the 40-year multi-partner effort

10:41 ↗ to preserve the Issaquah Alps, build the mountains to Sound Greenway, and

10:47 ↗ to keep Issaquah green, livable, and connected to its environment. You will

10:53 ↗ leave a legacy for the future that clearly shows even as central Issaquah redevelops

10:58 ↗ and grows, this city and its people remain directly linked to the hills and

11:04 ↗ forests that surround us. This is a big, bold proposal for a small city

11:10 ↗ like Issaquah, and that may make some of you very nervous. But I can

11:16 ↗ remind you that Issaquah has always led this region in bold ideas. by

11:21 ↗ creating the first two urban villages in Highlands and Talis and all

11:27 ↗ the while preserving 80% of the land, to creating innovative TDR projects

11:33 ↗ that saved Park Point and the Mitchell Hill Forest, to wise planning

11:38 ↗ in the forward-looking Central Issaquah Plan, and now today to the much-needed

11:44 ↗ and much-desired proposal to preserve the Berksma property. and directly connect this

11:50 ↗ property to the Issaquah Valley floor, the transit center to over 3,000 acres, and 30

11:55 ↗ plus miles of trails in Cougar Mountain. A famous quote says, "Be bold and mighty

12:01 ↗ forces will come to your aid." This is a time to be bold, to support

12:07 ↗ the desires of the citizens of Issaquah, to leave a legacy for the future that

12:12 ↗ keeps us connected to the mountains and forest, and to vote yes on this proposal.

12:18 ↗ Be bold, have courage, vote yes. Thank you. -

12:24 ↗ Thank you Susan. Significant support from the audience. Gary,

12:30 ↗ up next. - Thank you. Gary Campen, 12601 SE

12:35 ↗ 75th Place, New Castle. I'm a president of New

12:41 ↗ Castle Trails. We're in favor of expanding Cougar Mountain Park. We're trying to expand

12:47 ↗ our side. We've been working with the Save D'Elia Wall Group and the cities of

12:52 ↗ Renton and Newcastle from the start, and we've been friends and allies of the Isco-Alps

12:58 ↗ Trails Club since our founding in 1994. Anything that expands the park is good for

13:03 ↗ all of us. When I moved to the area in 1980, Newcastle was mostly

13:09 ↗ cow pastures. Now it's a city of nearly 12,000 people, all connected by a

13:14 ↗ trail system to Cougar Mountain. The park is a tremendous recreational asset, getting heavy

13:20 ↗ use. Newcastle Trails and the Coal Creek YMCA both use it for trail walks.

13:26 ↗ and we've supported Volksmarches of over 200 people in the park by two local

13:32 ↗ groups, the Interlochen Trailblazers and the Northwest Striders. I've enjoyed the park since 1980,

13:37 ↗ and I've seen only a fraction of its treasures, natural, historic, and scenic. For

13:43 ↗ a good survey of its wonders, check Eva Lundahl's trail book on our website.

13:49 ↗ It will amaze you. The bus connection is a great asset. It'll

13:55 ↗ make the park more accessible, more widely accessible, and it'll get folks out of

14:00 ↗ their cars. The proposed acquisition is strategic. It will expand this wonderful park and

14:06 ↗ make it more accessible. Seize the opportunity. Thank you. Thank you.

14:12 ↗ lots of hands in the air tisha who are our next three speakers this evening

14:18 ↗ next we have uh kevin emma and grace coming up together followed by kay heinz

14:23 ↗ and julie clark

14:33 ↗ Good evening, my name is Kevin Kincaid. We reside, this is Emma and this is

14:38 ↗ Grace. We reside at 1801 Atta Cordes Avenue, northeast of Renton. We are residents of

14:42 ↗ Renton as of three years ago, we moved to this area and prior to that

14:46 ↗ we lived in the Sumner area for about 15 years. And before relocating, I took

14:51 ↗ many things into consideration, one of which was access to recreation and Kruger Mountain played

14:55 ↗ a huge part in that relocation for us. Emma and Grace would like to have

14:59 ↗ a few moments. We can lower that microphone down,

15:05 ↗ which will allow everybody to hear them better. Thank you. Microphone check.

15:11 ↗ It's called the Green Stuff and Cougar Mountain and all the moths

15:17 ↗ and the animals, and I like to hike there because it's very

15:22 ↗ pretty and it's a good place to relax. It's a

15:28 ↗ fun place to calm down because it's super pretty with all the moss and the

15:34 ↗ trees and I feel relaxed when I'm walking on all the trails. Thank you. Well,

15:40 ↗ thank you to Emma and Grace and maybe to Kevin as well, but I think

15:46 ↗ Emma and Grace sort of stole the show. Lots of hands up in support on

15:51 ↗ that one. Kay. I think that says it all. We can go home.

15:57 ↗ My name is Kaye Haynes, 2830 Northwest Pinecone Drive in Issaquah. And first

16:03 ↗ of all, I want to thank the City Council. You have been gracious

16:09 ↗ and courteous and willing to hear us for so many months, a couple

16:14 ↗ of years now, and we do appreciate it sincerely. We know that you

16:20 ↗ have many needs to balance in the city and we respect and appreciate that. So

16:25 ↗ I just want to summarize some of the more compelling reasons out of the 582

16:31 ↗ reasons. I want to pick seven for why this proposal should be approved. First of

16:36 ↗ all, the issue of stewardship. We have been gifted here with the most extraordinary rare

16:42 ↗ topography in an urban setting. It's just unlike most places that I have seen in

16:47 ↗ the region. What we have with the forested slopes of the Alps is completely unique

16:52 ↗ and all too easy to chip away at until it's gone, and we feel the

16:58 ↗ Bergsma property is pivotal in this. Second is the question of timing. This opportunity

17:03 ↗ will not come again. Development won't wait, and in the future structures can't be unbuilt

17:09 ↗ and giant trees can't be restored. There's a very real time frame here and a

17:15 ↗ very real opportunity. If we miss it, it's simply gone forever. Third is that this

17:21 ↗ is a legacy for our children. and grandchildren and beyond. What do we want

17:27 ↗ them to have in 10 years, in 50 years? A few more houses or an

17:33 ↗ extraordinary public space to be enjoyed by the entire community in perpetuity. The

17:39 ↗ property location number four is unique. It offers connectivity from the valley floor to the

17:44 ↗ rest of Cougar Mountain and it lies near the Issaquah Transit Center. This makes Cougar

17:50 ↗ accessible to folks using public transit and reduces car traffic to hiking and open space.

17:56 ↗ Fifth, this is the expressed priority of area residents and your constituents to

18:02 ↗ preserve forested slopes on open space. Our strategic plan reflects that and thousands

18:08 ↗ of area residents have signed on to that, as you know. Six

18:13 ↗ is the whole question of partnerships and funding availability. It feels as though all the

18:19 ↗ pieces of an enormous puzzle have kind of clicked together in a very serendipitous way,

18:25 ↗ in ways we never dreamed possible. in a very timely way, including the generosity of

18:29 ↗ the Trust for Public Land and the timely appearance of increased funding capacity of the

18:34 ↗ Conservation Futures Program. The list of partners is long, the property is well admired and

18:39 ↗ supported by the county, and Issaquah has a reputation as a strong and responsible partner

18:43 ↗ in turn. And the last thing I want to say is I want to mention

18:48 ↗ that aside from these partners, you also have the community as a partner. We understand

18:53 ↗ that if this agenda bill is approved tonight, it is the first step in a

18:59 ↗ longer process. We want the Council to know that we would not simply celebrate and

19:04 ↗ go home. But as a community, there are many of us who will be there

19:10 ↗ in whatever ways the Council needs us to support you along the way. Thank you

19:16 ↗ so much. Thank you, Kay. Big all hands up, signs up. Julie. Thank you.

19:22 ↗ Good evening, Mayor Pauley and council members and city staff.

19:27 ↗ Tonight marks a very important point for Issaquah and its

19:33 ↗ many partners. Partnerships with the communities within Issaquah, residents of

19:38 ↗ Tallis, Newport Way, Montreux, Squawk Mountain, the Highlands, Old Town,

19:44 ↗ the Valley Floor. Partnerships with Issaquah Alps and Trails Club.

19:50 ↗ Eastside Autobahn, Issaquah Environmental Council, Save Lake Sammamish, and Mountains

19:56 ↗ to Sound Greenway. Partnerships with King County Council members. Representatives

20:01 ↗ from Save Cougar Mountain have personally met with Kathy Lambert,

20:07 ↗ Reagan Dunn, Rod Dembowski, Dave Upthegrove, Claudia Balducci, Jean Cole-Wells,

20:13 ↗ and their staff. each of whom have expressed enthusiasm

20:18 ↗ and support of this initiative to come up with solutions to save the Berkshire

20:24 ↗ property for open space. We have met with Bob Burns, Lauren Smith and Katie

20:30 ↗ Terry from King County Executive Offices to discuss the potential acquisition of the Berkshire

20:36 ↗ property through a partnership between the City of Issaquah and King County Land Conservation

20:42 ↗ Initiative. We received a warm welcome and they expressed support of finding

20:48 ↗ a way to participate in the process. Partnerships with the state. We have met

20:53 ↗ with Senator Mullet and following our conversation he expressed support of the initiative and

20:59 ↗ he asked his aide to look for various grants which would be available for

21:05 ↗ Issaquah to apply for. I share this information with you tonight so

21:11 ↗ that you understand that we know that this is a big decision. But we, the

21:17 ↗ City of Issaquah, are not making this decision alone. There are organizations and thousands of

21:23 ↗ people here with you to help along the way. Please make the right choice for

21:29 ↗ Issaquah and save Cougar Mountain. Thank you. Thank you, Julie. significant

21:34 ↗ support from the audience uh tisha our next three speakers we

21:40 ↗ have doug mcclelland followed by edwin erickson and bruce semple thank

21:46 ↗ you good evening doug good evening Hi, I'm Doug McClelland. I live

21:52 ↗ at 9525 300th Place SE, Issaquah, WA, and I'm representing the Mountain to Sound Greenway

21:57 ↗ Trust. And you received a letter from John Hoekstra that carries many of the points

22:03 ↗ you've already seen today, but I wanted to share something more personal. I've worked for

22:08 ↗ almost 40 years for the Department of Natural Resources and I've worked here in this,

22:13 ↗ I live in Issaquah area. So I've worked and been involved with the Issaquah City

22:18 ↗ Council, the Mayor, the Parks Directors from Rowan Hines all the way to today, from

22:23 ↗ Carrie Anderson to today, from Leon Koss and everyone else involved. And there isn't a

22:28 ↗ single city that I've worked with that hasn't stepped up more than Issaquah. Issaquah did

22:33 ↗ the original acquisition of properties at High Point that would have been condominiums that now

22:39 ↗ is the gateway to the tradition plateau. You did the Mitchell Hill Transfer of Development

22:44 ↗ Rights project, the first one in King County to transfer development rights to take more

22:49 ↗ density into the city and conserve lands that was right outside your city. Park Point,

22:54 ↗ a piece of property that worked for a really, really long time, the city took

22:59 ↗ a direct role and involvement in that. And then my personal friend that I got

23:04 ↗ to hire with your parks director, Margaret McLeod, worked for so many years to save

23:09 ↗ so much land along Issaquah Creek. And this is another big landmark project. It takes

23:14 ↗ more money than you probably were planning on getting yourself signed up to right away,

23:19 ↗ and that can be scary at times. But with this crowd and with the partnerships

23:25 ↗ involved and with the support of organizations like the Mountain to Sound Greenway Trust, you

23:30 ↗ can make it happen. And I just think the connection from downtown in the valley

23:35 ↗ up to Cougar Mountain will be incredibly valuable to this generation and future generations. And

23:39 ↗ the Mountain of Sound Greenway Trust is here to work with you on that and

23:44 ↗ very supportive of what this council's done and the council been doing for decades and

23:48 ↗ the mayor and the parks department and your staff. Matt Meckler with your parks department

23:53 ↗ received a John Ellis award at the Greenway dinner last Wednesday. One of your staff

23:58 ↗ people doing amazing things in that Greenway was recognized in that area. So I just

24:03 ↗ want to thank you for what you do and let you know this is a

24:07 ↗ good thing you're supporting. Thank you, Doug, but you stole my

24:13 ↗ thunder. Matt Meckler was in my report later, now everybody

24:19 ↗ knows. Edwin. Oh, Edwin would like to speak before the

24:25 ↗ budget. Bruce Semple. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor Pawley, City

24:30 ↗ Council members, and City staff. It's nice to be down

24:36 ↗ here on such a festive occasion. We've brought a representative

24:42 ↗ sample of Timber Ridge's body strength down here tonight as a symbol

24:48 ↗ of our overall support for the acquisition of the 46-acre Bergsma property.

24:54 ↗ We're all very aware of the myriad environmental benefits of forested open

25:00 ↗ spaces and parklands. Additionally, and most importantly for us now at our

25:06 ↗ tender age, are the proven health-giving benefits of such spaces.

25:12 ↗ not only for our bodies but also for our minds and spirits. So

25:17 ↗ this acquisition is of immense value for us and of course for everyone

25:23 ↗ now and into the future. We are therefore most grateful to our City

25:29 ↗ Council and representatives for pursuing this acquisition and wholeheartedly endorse your approval of

25:34 ↗ AB 7708 tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Bruce. Lots of support. Tisha, the

25:40 ↗ next three. Stephen Cobert and Rich Hill. Thanks. I'm Stephen Cobert, 5710, 143rd

25:46 ↗ place in Bellevue. Tonight the City of Issaquah will have the opportunity to save

25:52 ↗ a prominent wild area that lies immediately adjacent to this great city. The Bergsma-Windward

25:58 ↗ property is a beautiful and wild place that has been enjoyed by hikers for

26:04 ↗ years. Contained within this property are beautiful virgin forests that are a true rarity

26:10 ↗ in the Puget Sound area. It's an amazing and dramatic backdrop for a

26:16 ↗ city that prides itself in being a gateway to the Issaquah Alps. With high density

26:21 ↗ development going in along Newport Way, saving these last remaining wild spaces becomes even more

26:26 ↗ important. This wild area is especially important because of accessibility to public transportation and an

26:31 ↗ easy walking distance from future high density residential developments. The public support for keeping this

26:37 ↗ property wild has been amazing. Support has been broad-based and sustained for years. How often

26:41 ↗ does the City of Issaquah get to vote on an issue with such broad support

26:45 ↗ from the community and essentially no opposition? A no vote would create a prominent and

26:49 ↗ permanent eyesore on the landscape. A yes vote would be truly a vote for the

26:53 ↗ will of the people. This is a one-shot deal. A yes vote would ensure

26:59 ↗ that this outstanding wild land be enjoyed for generations. This seems like an

27:04 ↗ expensive purchase now, but the long-term benefits will be priceless. Thank you. Thank

27:10 ↗ you, Stephen. And lots of support. Rich Hill. Good evening

27:16 ↗ members of the Council. My name is Rich Hill. I'm counsel for Resmark and

27:22 ↗ I'm here tonight to speak to agenda item 8D. My address is 701 Fifth

27:27 ↗ Avenue. As I'm sure you all know, Resmark is with very close coordination with

27:33 ↗ the City and its expert engineering consultants in the process of stabilizing the Talus

27:39 ↗ Parcel 9 slope. The stabilization project from the beginning included a four-wall

27:44 ↗ design. The fourth wall has been designed with tiebacks that are partially

27:50 ↗ located under city right-of-way. Resmark's engineers have confirmed that these tiebacks can

27:56 ↗ be installed safely without creating the risk of liability to the city.

28:02 ↗ The engineering designs have been submitted to the city for third-party review

28:07 ↗ by the city's expert engineering consultants. However, without submitting the design

28:13 ↗ for review to the city's experts, the administration recommends an agenda item

28:19 ↗ 8D, denial of this design. Resmark respectfully asked the council instead to

28:24 ↗ remand this matter to staff and the city's expert engineering consultants so

28:30 ↗ that the questions that have been raised by staff can be fully

28:36 ↗ reviewed and evaluated by the experts. Staff's recommendation that this request

28:42 ↗ be denied without due consideration of its merits will unnecessarily delay

28:48 ↗ completion of this very important slope stabilization project. The concerns raised

28:54 ↗ by staff can be resolved by sound engineering design. Resmark therefore

29:00 ↗ respectfully asks that this matter be remanded to staff for further

29:06 ↗ study. I have submitted a letter to the council which you may have received, hopefully,

29:11 ↗ that more fully sets forth the facts and the background of this case. I've brought

29:16 ↗ hard copies with me. With the mayor's approval, I'll submit them to the city clerk.

29:21 ↗ Thank you, Rich. That is the end of the list of speakers who signed

29:27 ↗ up to address this evening. So I'm just going to ask for additional speakers. Those

29:31 ↗ that would like to speak on Cougar Mountain, it would be great if you have

29:36 ↗ additional and new information. I don't think there's much doubt about the amount of support

29:40 ↗ in the room for it. So just coming up and saying you support it, that's

29:44 ↗ probably not necessary. But if you have additional information, we've had almost a dozen speakers

29:49 ↗ speak tonight already. And if you are here to speak about the Sycamore sewer and

29:53 ↗ the 2019 budget, I just want to remind you that there will be an opportunity

29:58 ↗ to speak during the public hearing for that section. Is there anyone else who would

30:02 ↗ like to address council this evening? Mr. Kepler? Yeah. Good evening. I'll try not

30:08 ↗ to repeat what's already been said, but I think there's some people that need

30:14 ↗ to be addressed with this. I've been working on Cougar Mountain in this area

30:20 ↗ for decades, literally. Name and address. Did you do that? 255 Southeast Andrews. Thank

30:25 ↗ you. Excuse me. But I've been talking to, especially a little over

30:31 ↗ a year ago with TPL about this Bergsma property. And about almost exactly

30:37 ↗ a year and one week ago at the Greenway dinner last year, I

30:43 ↗ saw Richard who's with the TPL and has done a lot of work

30:49 ↗ and he was introducing and bringing around Sam back there, hidden, who was

30:55 ↗ the new guy. And he ended up getting, some would have thought, stuck

31:00 ↗ with trying to deal with this age-old problem of acquiring the Berkshire property

31:06 ↗ for a public park. and he's done an outstanding job and it's been really

31:12 ↗ great working with him. Just the TPL is such an important thing. When we went

31:18 ↗ broke in 1990, the Issaquah Ops Trails Club, doing them five day march, We

31:24 ↗ got to the fire, the fire, fire boats and Jim Ellis and all those and

31:29 ↗ some big time public officials to greet us at Elliott Bay. And we were broke

31:34 ↗ and it was obvious that this whole Mountain Sound Greenway thing was a lot bigger

31:38 ↗ than the Inns and Co-ops Trails Club. And that's what started. How did they get

31:43 ↗ started? TPL provided office space and staffing so the Mountain Sound Greenway could get started.

31:49 ↗ also many other parcels that they've been involved with. King County, what a great

31:55 ↗ partner. Think of what they've done just for the watershed of Lake Sammamish, Tibbetts

32:01 ↗ Creek, lakes in Issaquah Creek, the different forks. Huge acquisitions on both the east

32:07 ↗ and west side of Squawk, 3,000 acres on Cougar, Taylor Mountain Forest at the

32:13 ↗ headwaters of Issaquah Creek, goes on and on. Now, one thing almost to talk

32:19 ↗ to the audience more than the council, they're only going to rescue this from immediate

32:24 ↗ development. Our job is to make sure that we get

32:30 ↗ it together. David, you have to address the council. Yes.

32:35 ↗ Thanks. They know this, but we need to pull off

32:41 ↗ the actual saving of this using a lot of voters

32:47 ↗ and a lot of work. Thank you. Thank you, David.

32:52 ↗ Who next?

32:59 ↗ Good evening City Council and Mayor. Thank you for having this issue brought before.

33:05 ↗ Name and address. Okay, nobody else. Forget it. When you come up, it's name

33:11 ↗ and address first. Geraldine Carey, 955 17th Avenue, Northwest Issaquah. Thank you Geraldine. I've

33:16 ↗ been coming up here with all the other people for two years to support

33:22 ↗ this project. I am one. Together, all of us, one, made a huge group.

33:28 ↗ And we are one, and I'm very proud of them. I'm here to

33:34 ↗ say here's my $100 to support the acquisition of the project. It's made out to

33:39 ↗ the city for the acquisition. It's not to be used for anything else except the

33:45 ↗ acquisition. I want to give it to you tonight to say this is a good

33:51 ↗ project. This is a good investment. Take it and run with it. Everybody else support

33:56 ↗ this acquisition. Thank you. Thank you, Geraldine. Lots of support for that. Would

34:02 ↗ anyone else like to address Council this evening on

34:08 ↗ this issue or-- Mr. Wagner. Good evening, Council and

34:13 ↗ Mayor. 360 Northwest Dogwood Street, Apartment K204. Been a

34:19 ↗ resident of Issaquah off and on my whole life.

34:25 ↗ I remember when I was a kid listening to

34:30 ↗ the coyotes in the woods and hunting, and it

34:36 ↗ was a wonderful place to grow up, still is.

34:42 ↗ All I'm going to say about the Greenway now is I'm in full support.

34:48 ↗ Count me in. Send me in, Coach, because I'll help them do the job.

34:54 ↗ I'm here tonight for another reason. I'm here to thank you and tell two

35:00 ↗ stories. The first story I want to tell is in 1980, some of you

35:06 ↗ are too young to remember that date, I was in

35:11 ↗ Illinois serving with the Illinois National Guard and I had a part-time job

35:17 ↗ and I was driving a bus and they sent me one evening in

35:23 ↗ the fall of 1980 out to pick up a candidate. His name was

35:29 ↗ George H.W. Bush and he rode on my bus back to Springfield.

35:35 ↗ And what I want to tell you about that wonderful man, not just because he

35:41 ↗ was a candidate and a president, he was a veteran. He flew 58 missions in

35:47 ↗ a TBM Avenger. There's going to be a bunch of people in this room who

35:53 ↗ haven't got a clue what a TBM Avenger is. Google it. Shot down, lost two

35:59 ↗ of his crew members, rescued by a submarine, and then went on to a distinguished

36:05 ↗ career. That night, in the front seat of the bus, all he did was talk

36:10 ↗ to me about bus driving and things that were going on. He had no interest

36:16 ↗ in politics, and I know his aides were a little frustrated with that, but I

36:21 ↗ can tell you it was an honor and a privilege, and thank God he survived

36:26 ↗ that bus trip to go on to become the President of the United States. The

36:32 ↗ other story I want to tell you is that in April, April, in October

36:38 ↗ of this year, I had the honor and the privilege of laying a wreath

36:44 ↗ at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. And I was not dry that day.

36:50 ↗ I want to give you some numbers for Puget Sound Honor Flight, for the

36:56 ↗ number of veterans that we have carried back since 2013 to see the memorials.

37:02 ↗ Cold War veterans, four. Korean War, 262. Vietnam veterans, 41. World War

37:07 ↗ II, 701. For a total of 1,008 veterans that have left from this

37:13 ↗ part, and I see the red light, from this part of the state

37:19 ↗ to go back to see the memorials built in their honor. Thank you.

37:25 ↗ Thank you for all your work, Dave. Lots of hands of support.

37:31 ↗ Anyone else wishing to address their council this evening on any of the

37:37 ↗ topics we heard or anything new? Second call. Third call. Anyone wishing... Ah,

37:42 ↗ see Steve. Under the wire. Steve Pereira, Old Town about 10 years. So

37:48 ↗ just in brief, thanks to the city and the staff for... Your address

37:54 ↗ actually then. I always get it with Old Town. Okay, fine. Okay. So...

38:00 ↗ I think the city and the staff do a great job with the turkey trot

38:05 ↗ and I just wanted to thank the community for helping reach out to the community.

38:09 ↗ That was a good thing that you guys all do and get together on so

38:13 ↗ thanks for that. So just in brief, a couple blurb highlights. Yes, on the Bergsma,

38:18 ↗ I personally would like to see you use current fund balances to do that as

38:22 ↗ a preferred method. I think it is a unique opportunity going forward but that'll be

38:27 ↗ a discussion a little bit further but that was my own perspective. On the budget

38:32 ↗ just briefly touching I know I've talked about the dog park and I do disagree

38:37 ↗ with the dog park and I haven't reviewed the final budget But as we keep

38:41 ↗ growing we built this vision it's gonna be harder to keep the things that are

38:46 ↗ unique to is a quad and we have this is an example of I think

38:50 ↗ where we can better use funds and it's gonna be harder as we grow bigger

38:55 ↗ to keep those things that are unique and special about his quality like birds my

38:59 ↗ property and Old Town and any numbers that folks would add it's harder to keep

39:04 ↗ the vision when we start out with the idea of there's not a dog park

39:08 ↗ and then we put a four to a hundred thousand dollar fund kind of earmarked

39:12 ↗ towards the end and now it's going to two hundred thousand dollars and i heard

39:15 ↗ staff talking about maybe we could add other dog parks to other parts of the

39:19 ↗ city i don't see what we're gaining because it's harder to not expand and do

39:23 ↗ the things without losing the things that are especially unique That's kind of the vision

39:27 ↗ that I would like all of you to hold on to is what are the

39:31 ↗ things as we grow bigger? I don't want to look 20 years down the road

39:34 ↗ and say we've become like is a qua or we become like Bellevue or Redmond

39:38 ↗ or Kirkland But I'd like them to say I wish we remained or the special

39:42 ↗ things that kept us unique What made us like is why I wish we had

39:46 ↗ done this that we those other things going to attract people to move and live

39:49 ↗ here Please keep that vision going forward. Thank you. Thank you Steve hands of support

39:53 ↗ in the audience. I Is there anyone else who would like to

39:59 ↗ address the council? Second call. Last call for anyone who

40:04 ↗ would like to address the council. One more in the

40:10 ↗ back. Come on up. Keith Rossman, 7831 116th Avenue SE,

40:15 ↗ Newcastle. I don't know if this is out of my

40:21 ↗ domain. I don't really care. Cougar Mountain is my stomping

40:26 ↗ grounds and the adjacent areas. And it's time that Issaquah and

40:32 ↗ other locales do not replicate the mistakes of California, which is imploding from

40:38 ↗ excess development. Keep that in mind. Thank you. Hands of support. Is there

40:43 ↗ anyone else who would like to address Council? You know, it's a crowded

40:49 ↗ room. It takes a little bit of time to get up here. Second

40:54 ↗ call. Last call for anyone who would like to address Council during audience

41:00 ↗ comments. Sorry, did I miss Julian? Julian, would you like to come

41:06 ↗ up and address the council? Thank you, Tisha. Julian Midlill, 11 Sunset Court, Northwest

41:12 ↗ Issaquah, Washington. I just wanted to say that I'll be living with this decision

41:17 ↗ that's made tonight for however long I'll be living in Issaquah for, which will

41:23 ↗ probably be a long time. I've lived here for 10 years and we've really

41:29 ↗ appreciated the nature that's been in this town. and as well as the Old

41:35 ↗ Town. So any work and all the work that you've done is greatly appreciated by

41:40 ↗ me and the rest of the community. Thank you. Thank you, Julian. Lots of hands

41:46 ↗ of support. Okay, we're gonna try this one more time. Would anyone else like to

41:51 ↗ address council this evening? Second call. Third call and last call for anyone wishing to

41:56 ↗ address Council during audience comments. Okay, I think we have it. We're going to be

42:01 ↗ finishing, close with audience comments and we're going to be moving to Committee and Regional

42:06 ↗ Reports. And we'll be starting with Council Member Hunt this evening. Thank you. Thank you,

42:10 ↗ Madam Mayor. I have a very brief report. The Cascade Water Alliance December 6th Resource

42:15 ↗ Management Committee meeting has been canceled and the December 19th Board Meeting of the Cascade

42:20 ↗ Water Alliance has also been canceled. This concludes my report. Thank you. Council Member Winterstein.

42:25 ↗ Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'm going to use some of Council Member Hunt's minutes. I

42:30 ↗ report it's regarding the meeting of the Puget Sound Regional Council's Growth Management Policy Board.

42:36 ↗ We held our meeting, a special meeting, last Thursday, November 29th at PSRC headquarters in

42:41 ↗ Seattle. I've often talked about the work we're doing to update something known as Vision

42:47 ↗ 2050, and I want to offer a real brief kind of explanation of what PSRC

42:53 ↗ Vision is. And so I've pulled this from a background document. Between now and the

42:58 ↗ year 2050, the central Puget Sound region is expected to grow by an additional 1.8

43:04 ↗ million residents and 830,000 households. A critical issue will continue to be

43:10 ↗ providing adequate housing for all segments of the region's population. Meeting the housing

43:16 ↗ needs of all types of households at the range of income levels is

43:21 ↗ integral to creating a region that is livable for all residents, economically prosperous

43:27 ↗ and environmentally sustainable. Volatility in the housing market since Vision 2040 was adopted

43:33 ↗ in 2008 underscores many of the challenges ahead. From the precipitous drop in housing prices

43:39 ↗ and foreclosures of the Great Recession to the current housing market, the current economic upswing

43:44 ↗ and job growth that has led to historic increases in rents and home prices, the

43:50 ↗ region's housing market has experienced great highs and lows that have benefited some and created

43:56 ↗ exasperated hardship and inequities for others. Vision 2050 planning process is an opportunity

44:01 ↗ to raise awareness of the regional housing issues and to identify coordinated strategies,

44:07 ↗ policies, and actions to ensure that the region's housing needs are met. So

44:13 ↗ that's what we're working on. And on this meeting, we focused on two chapters of

44:19 ↗ the regional growth strategy, which is part of vision. We discussed potential updates to the

44:25 ↗ development patterns and environment chapters. And just as a summary regarding development patterns, almost all

44:30 ↗ of our conversation was about the future handling of

44:36 ↗ transit-oriented development, or more specifically, development

44:42 ↗ densities centered around transit stations. And I

44:47 ↗ would say there's a very unanimous feeling among the GMPB.

44:53 ↗ Everybody spoke from the city to from Seattle, Bremerton, Kitsap

44:59 ↗ County, Pierce County, Everett, and other East King County representatives

45:05 ↗ as well, that going forward, there should be planned growth

45:11 ↗ around these transit stations, which could in the future look something like

45:17 ↗ creating what's known as a new regional geography and the multi-county planning

45:23 ↗ policies be given direction to actually make allocations of population around these

45:28 ↗ transit stations. So I think that is something that the PSRC is going to be

45:33 ↗ looking at as a potential update to vision. The other item we talked about was

45:37 ↗ the environment. We focused on water quality and that there are some gaps in the

45:42 ↗ additional current plan that we could address. Now, I will say that water quality is

45:46 ↗ handled by our State Department of Ecology, Department of Health, and other agencies. So it's

45:51 ↗ very important that we stay in our lane here. But there are still things that

45:56 ↗ you can do with planning and growth to help restore and recover the health

46:01 ↗ of Puget Sound, to reduce stormwater pollution, to reduce the use of toxic products.

46:07 ↗ And I think that the conversation that evolved out of this discussion is that

46:13 ↗ to take, we asked the PSRC to take a look at creating watershed solutions level

46:19 ↗ planning that would be cross jurisdiction within a watershed and there's there is belief in

46:23 ↗ that there is science too to help with the planning process for the growth that's

46:28 ↗ coming if we did it at a watershed level to help protect water quality And

46:32 ↗ then the last thing along those lines was climate change. And in addition to what's

46:38 ↗ already in the Vision 2040 plan for reducing greenhouse gas emissions within the four-county region,

46:44 ↗ they've identified a number of areas where we could take further action and further reduce.

46:50 ↗ So, for example, just to achieve the transit-oriented development goals that have already been identified,

46:55 ↗ we could reduce carbon emissions by another 2 to 4%. If we create more transportation

47:01 ↗ choices and that more people can work at home and more people had options to

47:07 ↗ walk to transit centers, that we could reduce carbon emission by another 10 to 12

47:12 ↗ percent. The road usage charge, one thing that the state, and I know the mayor

47:17 ↗ is involved with as well, potential user fees to change behavior could also reduce carbon

47:22 ↗ emissions by another 5 percent. And then technology, such as more vehicle electrifying and more

47:28 ↗ and faster recharge stations could reduce carbon emissions by another 20 to 40 percent. And

47:34 ↗ so these are all areas that the GMPP and PSRC will be looking at for

47:40 ↗ potential updates to the regional growth strategy within Vision 2050. That concludes my report.

47:46 ↗ Thank you, Council Member Winterstein. Council Member Goodman. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Fortunately, I have

47:51 ↗ a lot of minutes to donate to Council Member Winterstein. Land and Shore Committee meets

47:56 ↗ this Thursday, December 6th at 6:30 p.m. here in Council Chambers. On the agenda, Agenda

48:02 ↗ Bill 7329, Agreement for Dedication of Land Agenda Bill 7683, amendments to

48:07 ↗ the Issaquah Municipal Code regarding community facilities standards regarding public buildings. And

48:13 ↗ Agenda Bill 7680, amendments to Central Standards Table 4.3a regarding the level

48:19 ↗ of review of permit applications. The Eastside Fire and Rescue Board will meet

48:25 ↗ December 13th at 4 p.m. at headquarters on Newport Way, and I do not have

48:31 ↗ the agenda yet. That's my report. Thank you, Council Member Goodman. Deputy Council President Batiste.

48:37 ↗ Thank you, Madam Mayor. Two updates on upcoming regional board meetings.

48:43 ↗ The Eastside Human Services Forum Annual Meeting will be held Tuesday

48:49 ↗ from 3:00 to 5:00 this week in Kirkland. They'll be talking

48:55 ↗ about the 2018 accomplishments, reviewing the 2019 work plan, and electing

49:01 ↗ expiring board seats. The Economic Development District Board, PSRC, is meeting on December 5th

49:07 ↗ in Seattle from 1 to 3. And at that meeting, they'll be discussing an analysis

49:13 ↗ of four key economic sectors in Washington State, energy, water, agriculture, and building materials, and

49:19 ↗ having a discussion around how the region can leverage a green economy based on a

49:25 ↗ better understanding of those sectors. And that concludes my report. Thank you. Council President Martz.

49:31 ↗ Thank you, Madam Mayor. The King County Growth Management Policy Council, GMPC, met last Thursday,

49:36 ↗ November 29th. We had one item on the agenda, which was a presentation on the

49:42 ↗ Regional Affordable Housing Task Force. uh conversation was sort of led by County Council member

49:47 ↗ balducci uh the first thing that we discussed was a question that I had that

49:52 ↗ it turns out everybody else had too which was what's the difference between that and

49:57 ↗ one table and so the answer is that one table is more focused specifically on

50:01 ↗ homelessness while the affordable housing task force is actually focused on affordable housing So that

50:07 ↗ helped. Currently about 2,500 new affordable homes are produced per year. The goal

50:12 ↗ from the task force would potentially be 44,000 in the next five years.

50:18 ↗ That's 8,800 per year. That's a lot more than 2,500. We talked about

50:24 ↗ why a number that was such a stretch goal and Councilmember Balducci said, because we

50:29 ↗ need to start with what's needed. And we need to understand it may well be

50:34 ↗ that we can hit that number. But if we don't understand what's needed out there,

50:38 ↗ we don't understand how far we are from the mark, which seemed like a reasonable

50:42 ↗ answer. so there is a proposal out there to have a gmpc

50:48 ↗ subgroup specific to affordable housing we talked about its constitution it would

50:54 ↗ be electeds and staff and other partners in the affordable housing space

51:00 ↗ would be both informational and deliberative We talked about they have a stated

51:06 ↗ focus on less than 50% AMI, which I said, okay, for Issaquah, that isn't necessarily,

51:12 ↗ we have sort of a different demographic. And the point was that it was monies

51:17 ↗ would be spent to subsidize at below 50%, but that the target focus for policy

51:23 ↗ development would be all affordable housing. But it's just that they would try to focus

51:29 ↗ their monies on the below 50% AMI. Then so so the PICC membership through

51:35 ↗ our chair The chair of our caucus talked about we will be going back to

51:40 ↗ pick to discuss recommendations Of approval to the King County Council whether we support that

51:45 ↗ we're going to be discussing Potentially recommending a menu of options for cities to address

51:50 ↗ their areas of greatest need I think is it was ahead of the game because

51:55 ↗ the work that we did on the moratorium And then finally, we had basically said,

52:00 ↗ we like the idea of this new Committee of Growth Management Planning Council. Not sure

52:06 ↗ who would be appointed to it. It's going to be a big body. It wouldn't

52:12 ↗ necessarily be co-management. Co-staffed by the same people that are on GMPC, but it is

52:17 ↗ something that we're going to take that back Which leads to we're taking it back

52:21 ↗ to my other item for this evening Which is the Sound Cities Association Public Issues

52:26 ↗ Committee, which will be meeting I don't have the date in front of me, but

52:31 ↗ it's the second Wednesday in December. I apologize. The agenda is a couple of housekeeping

52:35 ↗ pieces and then this Regional Affordable Housing Task Force. So it was good to be

52:40 ↗ on both bodies. And I will let my fellow council members know how that conversation

52:44 ↗ goes. That concludes my report. Thank you. Moving on now to the mayor's report for

52:49 ↗ this evening. There was an executive session held earlier this evening at 6.15 p.m., a

52:53 ↗ special meeting to hold uh sorry earlier this evening at 6 15 p.m there was

52:59 ↗ a special meeting to hold an executive session to discuss property acquisition per rcw 42.30.110

53:05 ↗ per n1 per nb we will be taking action on this item later this evening

53:11 ↗ i am waiting for my uh deputy clerk to put up a few slides i

53:17 ↗ have a few community items that i'd like to share with you this evening

53:24 ↗ First, Rose Finnegan, one of our community members, passed away peacefully the morning of

53:30 ↗ November 16, 2018. She was an amazing woman and a public servant to Issaquah.

53:36 ↗ Last year under Mayor Butler, he proclaimed October 17, 2017 as Rose Finnegan Day

53:41 ↗ for the many contributions she has made to our community. For more than 20

53:47 ↗ years, she served as head nurse at the Echo Glen School serving at-risk youth,

53:53 ↗ She was the founding mother of Life Enrichment Options since its inception in 1988. In

53:59 ↗ 2003, she was the driving force behind the first adult family home in Issaquah for

54:05 ↗ people with developmental disabilities, aptly named the Rose House. In her career, Rose received numerous

54:11 ↗ awards for her devotion, including being elected to the Issaquah Hall of Fame in 2002,

54:17 ↗ named the Issaquah Lions Club Citizen of the Year in 2003, received the Arc of

54:23 ↗ Washington Award, and was elected to the Carroll College Alumni Hall of Fame in 2010.

54:28 ↗ These are just a few of the impacts she's had on our city. We and

54:33 ↗ the citizens of the community will miss Rose and her inspirational work within the City

54:37 ↗ of Issaquah. at mountains to sound greenway trust annual dinner

54:43 ↗ and meeting on november 28th matt mackler the city's parks operations supervisor received the jim

54:49 ↗ ellis spirit award the award recognizes matt's years of partnered work with mountains to sound

54:55 ↗ greenway trust and a number of our city's parks and open space lands the award

55:01 ↗ stated in recognition of matt's true collaborative spirit positive energy and enthusiasm as a respected

55:07 ↗ agency representative His commitment to ecological restoration and preservation of wildlife habitat and

55:13 ↗ his steadfast stewardship of public lands throughout the Iskwet Basin. We're very proud

55:18 ↗ of Matt. A news item about our Parks and Recreation Department. We

55:24 ↗ have a new registration system. Last week we launched the new and improved online registration

55:29 ↗ system for parks and recreation activities. Our new system features a more user-friendly registration experience

55:34 ↗ online, in person, and over the phone. Customers will also enjoy enhanced access and control

55:40 ↗ of their accounts and payments. Once a new account is created, users will be able

55:45 ↗ to view all programs, manage payment options, add family members, register for programs, and frequently

55:50 ↗ asked questions in the structural video can be found online at our website. And my

55:56 ↗ last item tonight is about a current council vacancy that we have. Because of Council

56:01 ↗ Member Ramos' successful run for State Representative, we will have a vacancy on City Council

56:06 ↗ as of January 1st, 2019. Looks like we have a lot of candidates in the

56:11 ↗ room waiting to put their hand up. We are seeking qualified candidates to fill this

56:17 ↗ vacancy. Applications are due by 10 a.m. January 8th. Applicants will be able to provide

56:22 ↗ a 10-minute presentation to City Council on January 14th and attend a meet and greet

56:28 ↗ with Council and community members on January 22nd. City Council expects to fill this vacancy

56:33 ↗ February 5th. And to find out more about applying, please visit our website or contact

56:38 ↗ the City Clerk's office. Next, we'll be moving to the consent calendar. The consent calendar

56:44 ↗ was distributed to Council in advance. If authorized, the items on the consent calendar will

56:50 ↗ be considered together and approved in one motion. Have the payables and payroll been reviewed?

56:56 ↗ Yes. Thank you. Does any Councilmember desire to remove any item from the consent calendar

57:01 ↗ and consider it under regular business? We need a motion. Madam Mayor, I move that

57:07 ↗ we adopt the consent agenda as listed in this evening's published agenda. Second. It's

57:13 ↗ been moved and seconded. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye.

57:19 ↗ Those opposed? That carries unanimously. The next item on the agenda is public

57:24 ↗ hearing. AB 7610, the proposed 2019 budget. We will be conducting a public

57:30 ↗ hearing and we'll also, council will also be considering adopting an ordinance. The

57:36 ↗ public hearing on the preliminary budget was conducted on November 5th and tonight

59:35 ↗ The general fund includes $52.8 million in revenue and $53

59:40 ↗ million in expenditures. And the general fund, over half of

59:46 ↗ that is coming from personnel. The general fund includes a

59:51 ↗ balanced budget with spending of a little over $200,000 in

59:57 ↗ one-time expenditures. And I'll go over that in just a

1:00:02 ↗ minute. There was, during deliberations, council had some slight modifications

1:00:08 ↗ to the reoccurring base budget. One of those was

1:00:13 ↗ adjustments to the base budget. These adjustments are ongoing revenue

1:00:19 ↗ supported adjustments. Council deliberations resulted in supportive transition of the

1:00:25 ↗ city senior center from interim to city operations. So staff

1:00:31 ↗ adjusted revenues and expenditures according to the administration's recommendations.

1:00:37 ↗ This included the addition of two FTEs. It increases operations programs,

1:00:42 ↗ volunteering, partnerships, and rentals, and this improves the cost recovery performance

1:00:48 ↗ for the senior center. A second been slight minor modification was

1:00:53 ↗ in the ARCH Trust Fund contribution that the city contributes every

1:00:59 ↗ year. We increased it to the minimum contribution. requested in

1:01:04 ↗ the partnership. And so we offset that with some miscellaneous expenditures in the

1:01:10 ↗ base budget. The senior center operations were added to the recurring base budget

1:01:16 ↗ and to create the needed budget capacity, staff identified one-time authorizations, well, some

1:01:22 ↗ reauthorizations from 2018 to be removed from the base budget and are identified

1:01:27 ↗ as funded through the fund balance, which I'll go over here.

1:01:33 ↗ In a second. So the second type of modification made to

1:01:39 ↗ the budget with council deliberations with some one-time adjustments. These included

1:01:45 ↗ increasing the award to Village Theater in the Community Fund by

1:01:51 ↗ $12.5 million to total $25,000. $12.5 million. $12.5 thousand. to

1:01:57 ↗ 25,000. Staff also recognized an adjustment for

1:02:02 ↗ the capacity to senior center in some

1:02:07 ↗ development services, professional services relating to the

1:02:13 ↗ chapter 18 code review and this will

1:02:19 ↗ partner with the Green Necklace and Central Issaquah Code

1:02:25 ↗ Update, which staff will be returning to council in

1:02:31 ↗ early 2019 for an update. Also, 30,000 in expenditures

1:02:36 ↗ for interns was added to the budget as requested

1:02:42 ↗ by council. The 2019 general fund balance is expected

1:02:48 ↗ to be 23.2 million and 43.5% in reserve.

1:02:53 ↗ I'm just making a note that this might be

1:02:59 ↗ a slight difference from what you've seen because this

1:03:04 ↗ accounts for about 81,000 or under 100,000 in restricted

1:03:10 ↗ reserves. The budget process for 2019 included some preliminary

1:03:15 ↗ budget presentation, council workshops, two public hearings, tonight is

1:03:21 ↗ the final public hearing, and the council work session.

1:03:27 ↗ And tonight, staff recommends closing the public hearing, tonight's

1:03:33 ↗ second and final public hearing, and adoption of the

1:03:39 ↗ 2019 budget and 2019 salary ordinance. Thank you. Thank

1:03:45 ↗ you, Kristina. Does Council have any questions for Kristina?

1:03:50 ↗ None. If there are no questions, I just would like

1:03:56 ↗ to remind anyone who would like to provide some comments during the public hearing that

1:04:02 ↗ the Guidelines for Citizens' Comments, which are again posted up on the overhead, apply for

1:04:07 ↗ those also under public hearing. So please remember when you come to the microphone to

1:04:13 ↗ state your name and address. I'm now opening the public hearing at 8:04. And Tisha,

1:04:18 ↗ who is the first person signed up? Ted Gamlin.

1:04:26 ↗ Yeah, my name is Ted Gamlin. I live in 4117, 221st Place

1:04:32 ↗ in Providence Point in Issaquah, and I'm chair of the Government Affairs

1:04:37 ↗ Committee of Providence Point, and the reason I'm here is I just

1:04:43 ↗ want to be sure that you folks don't lose sight of the

1:04:49 ↗ funding, the signalization project for the 43rd Way. This is a

1:04:55 ↗ problem that's been with us since we were incorporated into the city of Issaquah.

1:05:01 ↗ We have about two accidents a year there at that intersection. We've had the

1:05:06 ↗ second one just a month ago, so I think we're okay at least until

1:05:12 ↗ January. And... I know that some of our committee members have

1:05:18 ↗ been watching the proceedings for the budget on TV, and what we've

1:05:23 ↗ decided is that you folks are awfully hardworking and doing the budgeting

1:05:29 ↗ conscientiously. It's very time consuming and takes a lot of energy, and

1:05:34 ↗ we thank you very much for your efforts. We do realize that

1:05:40 ↗ the signalization project is listed as unfunded, but we hope that that can

1:05:46 ↗ be sorted out as things happen down the course of the year. It's

1:05:51 ↗ going to be particularly complicated when they start building the schools up on

1:05:57 ↗ just above us. As a personal matter, my address is changing tomorrow.

1:06:03 ↗ It's going to be 100 Timber Ridge. And one thing about Timber Ridge is,

1:06:08 ↗ well, I noticed that you folks have been talking about acquiring the Bergsma property.

1:06:14 ↗ When I first heard that, I was really excited by that project.

1:06:20 ↗ I discovered that when I first moved here more than 10 years

1:06:26 ↗ ago, and I use the little pocket park on the north side

1:06:31 ↗ of the Tallis development to bring my family, children and grandchildren, and

1:06:37 ↗ there are three trails emanating from that park that connect to various

1:06:43 ↗ trails, the King County trail system and Newport Way and up above. And

1:06:49 ↗ I was always very sad that that was going to be developed someday and the

1:06:54 ↗ fact that it might be recovered by the city to me is absolutely great and

1:07:00 ↗ I thank you all for finding the matching funding to push that through. Thank you,

1:07:06 ↗ Ted. Can we call up the next three, Tisha? Yes, we have Susan Shaw followed

1:07:12 ↗ by Rowan Hines and Edwin Erickson.

1:07:18 ↗ Oh, no, I think you're fine. But thank you for checking,

1:07:24 ↗ Susan. Susan and I were talking today about this evening's meeting

1:07:29 ↗ and about the opportunity for comments. Yes. I'm Susan Schrader-Schof. I

1:07:35 ↗ live at 381 SE Crystal Creek Circle. I am not the

1:07:41 ↗ designated spokesperson for the entire Sycamore community. It's very diverse. I

1:07:46 ↗ have one comment, though. from consideration. What I've heard this evening is there

1:07:52 ↗ are so many occasions and there's a long history in Issaquah of thinking out of

1:07:58 ↗ the box, especially on environmental issues. To the extent, and I think Mary Lou's going

1:08:04 ↗ to be speaking about this later, if there is a research or any kind of

1:08:09 ↗ assessments that are going to be performed for the I don't even know what

1:08:15 ↗ we are calling it, the sewer, the move from septic to sewer, whatever this project

1:08:21 ↗ is being known for. However, one component is the investment in technology that we may

1:08:27 ↗ be asked to hook up to and an understanding of how much it's going to

1:08:33 ↗ cost. And I know that the council is going to be reviewing this in much

1:08:38 ↗ greater detail in the next year. I asked for one line item. in

1:08:44 ↗ the assessment and thinking out of the box. The Bill and

1:08:50 ↗ Melinda Gates Foundation, as reported by the Wall Street Journal not

1:08:56 ↗ even a month ago, is investing millions, and I think it

1:09:01 ↗ was over 100 million, in this very issue of seeking out

1:09:07 ↗ sewer septic technologies that are environmentally friendly and preserve water.

1:09:13 ↗ Wow. And there are neighbors. So as an assessment, let's

1:09:19 ↗ consider contacting the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Whomever is

1:09:24 ↗ selected to do this research assessment, whatever may be done,

1:09:30 ↗ include that. as part of their action plan to contact the

1:09:35 ↗ Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. They have hired experts that are implementing

1:09:41 ↗ these new technologies in the developing world now. And we may be

1:09:47 ↗ able to find funding, test programs. We may find relief for this

1:09:52 ↗ single homeowner who has the most distressed situation right now of almost

1:09:58 ↗ living in a condemned property. So let's think out

1:10:03 ↗ of the box. All I'm asking is one line

1:10:09 ↗ item to include that in any project assessment or

1:10:15 ↗ review or research. That's it. Thank you. Thank you,

1:10:21 ↗ Susan. Next up is Rowan Hines. Thank you. My

1:10:27 ↗ name is Rowan Hines. My address is 1571 Sycamore

1:10:33 ↗ Drive here in Issaquah. My relationship to the city

1:10:39 ↗ is I'm a former councilman, retired mayor, and a 47-year

1:10:44 ↗ resident of the city. Incidentally, for Mayor Pauly's comment about the city council

1:10:50 ↗ vacancy, it's not well known at this point, but I got my first

1:10:56 ↗ start with the city by filling a vacancy on the city council. That

1:11:02 ↗ was in September of 1979. And interestingly, I was the only applicant. There

1:11:08 ↗ was an election in November of '79, and there were three of us went downtown

1:11:14 ↗ Seattle, filed for the election. I was the only one who went downtown Issaquah City

1:11:19 ↗ Hall and filed for the appointment. I can never explain that. And the rest is

1:11:25 ↗ history. So I do have some familiarity with what you have before you tonight.

1:11:31 ↗ And my concern is the sewer fund as it relates to

1:11:36 ↗ my neighborhood in Sycamore. Last month, our neighborhood attended a city-sponsored

1:11:42 ↗ meeting concerning possible sewering in our neighborhood. I don't remember any

1:11:48 ↗ mention at that time that there was going to be a

1:11:54 ↗ line-item budget for next year on that issue. But I

1:11:59 ↗ do know that you are charged with protecting public health and safety, so

1:12:05 ↗ I don't have a problem with that. About 90% of the residents that

1:12:11 ↗ attended that meeting were not in favor of pursuing any further actions at

1:12:16 ↗ this point. As such, then I have two requests for you.

1:12:22 ↗ One, adding two words to the work plan focus on

1:12:27 ↗ pages 138, 140, and 142 of your budget document. And

1:12:33 ↗ those two words would be if required at the beginning

1:12:38 ↗ of that first sentence applying to the sewers in the

1:12:44 ↗ Sycamore neighborhood. And my reason for asking this, I notice

1:12:49 ↗ on page 144 that wording is added on a work plan

1:12:55 ↗ focus item there. So I would appreciate if you could just add those two

1:13:01 ↗ words to those three pages. Secondly, I would ask if and when any action

1:13:07 ↗ is contemplated on this issue of sewers in Sycamore, that I be given some

1:13:13 ↗ advance notice so that I may perhaps help work that process and minimize issues

1:13:19 ↗ that may come out of that as we go along. Thank you. Thank

1:13:25 ↗ you, Rowan. Edwin? Good evening, Mayor Pauley. This is the City Council. My name is

1:13:31 ↗ Edwin Erickson and my wife's here, Tiffany. We moved to Issaquah about three years ago.

1:13:37 ↗ When I came to Seattle in '96 to go to the University of Washington, I

1:13:43 ↗ drove from Yakima to Seattle. Issaquah was a beauty. I loved Issaquah from day one.

1:13:49 ↗ It took me almost 17 years to finally come here and be a resident. My

1:13:55 ↗ wife and I moved our three kids here three years ago. Now we have four

1:14:01 ↗ children. The first week we were in our house, Myel was like, "Dad, I don't

1:14:06 ↗ know where to play outside." I go, "Why not?" She goes, "Our yard is so

1:14:11 ↗ big and so spacious, I don't know which side to play on." And so that

1:14:15 ↗ is why we moved here. So we are part of this Sycamore neighborhood that is

1:14:20 ↗ vastly opposed to this sewer issue in our neighborhood. We know that this has come

1:14:25 ↗ to light by a certain developer who has come to our neighborhood. And we also

1:14:30 ↗ have a relationship with that developer, with the City Council members staff that was not

1:14:35 ↗ brought to our attention ahead of time. So part of our concern here is this

1:14:40 ↗ was never an issue until this individual moved to our neighborhood. And all of a

1:14:45 ↗ sudden we get someone in our neighborhood who's been surrounded by people living there for

1:14:50 ↗ hundreds of years, and now we want to change. That to us is problematic, and

1:14:55 ↗ it doesn't speak of moving the area of Sycamore into a more advantageous position. So

1:15:01 ↗ we're here to express our concern about the process, what is about to take place

1:15:05 ↗ in our neighborhood, and if we were to have this situation come in, to allow

1:15:10 ↗ sewer to come into the neighborhood of Sycamore, how it's going to greatly change our

1:15:15 ↗ neighborhood. If we wanted to live in the Highlands, we would have bought a house

1:15:19 ↗ in the Highlands. We don't want a neighbor 10 feet from our residence. And if

1:15:24 ↗ you bring sewer into Sycamore, we're going to have another neighborhood that looks just like

1:15:28 ↗ that. So why do we want overdevelopment? And now Front Street is going to be

1:15:32 ↗ even worse than it is now. We all know how terrible Front Street is from

1:15:36 ↗ 4:30 to 7:00 p.m. And you add 20 more, 50 more homes in Sycamore, do

1:15:40 ↗ we really think that's going to be advantageous to our neighborhood? So part of our

1:15:45 ↗ concern is that we can talk about the good and the bad of environmentally healthy

1:15:51 ↗ septic systems, sewer systems, whatever it may be. We are all for a wonderful environment

1:15:56 ↗ that we would love to do our best to have the least economical or environmental

1:16:01 ↗ impact possible. We do everything in our power to teach our kids how to recycle.

1:16:08 ↗ It would be nice if we can preserve, like we're doing here with Save Cougar

1:16:12 ↗ Mountain, some of the beautiful areas that we call Sycamore. And for some of you

1:16:17 ↗ who haven't been to Sycamore, just drive in and you'll feel the beauty. It would

1:16:21 ↗ be a travesty for us to see sewer come into our neighborhood, change the look

1:16:26 ↗ and feel of it, and the love and desire that my kids have to want

1:16:30 ↗ to grow up there. Thank you. Thank you, Edwin. Hands of support in the

1:16:36 ↗ audience. Is there anybody else signed up today? No. Is there

1:16:42 ↗ anyone else who would like to address the council during the

1:16:48 ↗ public hearing on the 2019 proposed budget? Calling once. Second call.

1:16:54 ↗ Anyone else who would like to address the council this evening?

1:16:59 ↗ Come on up. My name is John Meisner. I live at

1:17:05 ↗ 1430 Sycamore Drive, Southeast. My wife Donna's there. I live next

1:17:11 ↗ to Ed and Tiffany. Ed touched on a little bit of

1:17:17 ↗ the problems that go on along the traffic way there. And I

1:17:23 ↗ do think that overdevelopment is something that is of issue here. And

1:17:28 ↗ one of the reasons that we voted for some of the politicians

1:17:34 ↗ in the city here are that they were-- that was part of

1:17:39 ↗ the-- uh, policy that they were looking to try to alleviate. And so, um, I

1:17:44 ↗ voted for, for, for, uh, people that, uh, that supported that. And I felt like,

1:17:50 ↗ uh, I feel like this is kind of going backwards. Uh, I feel like it's

1:17:55 ↗ kind of taking back some of the, some of the talk that we, that we

1:18:00 ↗ had conversations with, uh, um, And I just am very afraid that

1:18:05 ↗ this is going to negatively affect Sycamore, not only

1:18:11 ↗ from a standpoint of the beauty, but as well

1:18:16 ↗ as the costs that we'll all be subject to.

1:18:22 ↗ Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to, and their

1:18:28 ↗ hands up in the audience in support. Is there anyone else who would like

1:18:34 ↗ to speak during the public hearing this evening? Calling for a second time. Calling

1:18:40 ↗ for a third and final time. Would anyone like to address council during the

1:18:46 ↗ public hearing? Seeing none, the public hearing is closed at 8:18. And does the

1:18:52 ↗ council have any questions before I move into the next part of the budget?

1:18:58 ↗ Any questions? So before we move to the approval of the budget ordinance, I did

1:19:04 ↗ want to put some comments in the record. I think it's probably confusing for those

1:19:09 ↗ members of the public who do not live in Sycamore and did not attend the

1:19:14 ↗ open house a few weeks ago to understand maybe the context around why we have

1:19:19 ↗ Sycamore neighborhood here this evening talking about the 2019 budget. So last month the City

1:19:25 ↗ held an open house to assess neighborhood interest in the formation of a local improvement

1:19:31 ↗ district in Sycamore to construct and complete a sanitary sewer system. The open house was

1:19:36 ↗ very well attended and the majority of attendees spoke against a local improvement district option

1:19:42 ↗ to fund a possible sewer expansion. Sycamore is one of our neighborhoods that has a

1:19:47 ↗ mix of both homes on sanitary sewer and the majority of them on septic system.

1:19:53 ↗ We have septic systems in other neighborhoods, but this is the neighborhood in town that

1:19:58 ↗ probably has the most septic systems. It's essential to ensure that wherever a septic system

1:20:03 ↗ exists currently in the city, that we have testing programs that assure our community that

1:20:08 ↗ contaminants from poorly functioning or failing systems are not impacting water quality. in the aquifer

1:20:14 ↗ beneath their town or nearby creeks and water bodies. I've requested funding in the

1:20:20 ↗ 2019 budget for the following items related to Sycamore's potential expansion of sanitary sewer.

1:20:26 ↗ One is to complete the survey of property owners in the Sycamore neighborhood who are

1:20:31 ↗ on septic, but for various reasons were unable to attend the November open house. This

1:20:36 ↗ information will provide council with the data hood on the likelihood of forming a local

1:20:41 ↗ improvement district to fund any possible future improvements. I think what you've heard tonight is

1:20:46 ↗ those that did attend the open house were mostly opposed to this option. To review

1:20:52 ↗ our second item in the budget is to review our current code requirements for septic

1:20:57 ↗ testing to make sure property owners are using current best practices and methods to assess

1:21:02 ↗ system functions so that action can be taken to protect our water resources. Funding is

1:21:08 ↗ also included to research other options other than a local improvement district for funding sanitary

1:21:13 ↗ sewer installations. that allows for those homeowners with functioning systems to plan for sewer connections

1:21:19 ↗ at a time when their current system is no longer meeting performance standards, and they

1:21:25 ↗ are able to financially plan for the costs of connections. There's also funding to perform

1:21:30 ↗ other analysis such as environmental sampling. And lastly, I wanted to provide funds to update

1:21:36 ↗ the previous design and construction costs for a concept plan that was developed over 10

1:21:42 ↗ years ago. So Council will be able to discuss this project and its priority in

1:21:47 ↗ the list of projects in the capital improvement plan. The proposed 2019 budget does not

1:21:52 ↗ include funding for a capital project. Pursuing a capital project would be a future Council

1:21:57 ↗ decision. The only funding proposed for 2019 is for professional services that would help us

1:22:03 ↗ assess options. I believe this work is important and timely. I would also like to

1:22:08 ↗ mention that I and Council members received a letter and comments accusing a City staff

1:22:13 ↗ member or me with having a conflict of interest. And a conflict of interest generally

1:22:18 ↗ applies to decision makers and holds that the decision makers cannot adjudicate their own cause.

1:22:23 ↗ Neither I nor the City employee alleged to have the conflict of interest are the

1:22:29 ↗ decision makers because we have no authority to approve the budget or the provision of

1:22:35 ↗ sanitary sewers to the subdivision. The decision makers in this situation will be the City

1:22:40 ↗ Council. And since you've all received the letter, I just wanted to make sure you

1:22:46 ↗ were clear in understanding how that would work. And is there a motion? Madam Mayor,

1:22:51 ↗ I move to adopt ordinance number 2853. Adopting a revised 2019

1:22:57 ↗ salary schedule for all City employees and amending the salary

1:23:03 ↗ schedules previously adopted and amended by ordinances number 2819, 2828,

1:23:09 ↗ 2829, and 2835. And adopt ordinance number 2854. Adopting the

1:23:15 ↗ 2019 budget and setting forth the estimated revenues and appropriations

1:23:21 ↗ for each separate fund estimating impact on ending fund balances for

1:23:27 ↗ all such funds combined of the city for the fiscal year

1:23:33 ↗ commencing January 1st 2019 second it's been moved and seconded is

1:23:38 ↗ there council discussion council member winter Stein no I was wondering

1:23:44 ↗ if the president was gonna say anything about his letter oh

1:23:50 ↗ good point sure Thank you very much, Paul. So there is

1:23:55 ↗ a letter included with tonight's packet. In it, so let me point

1:24:01 ↗ out a few things in it. So the works, City Council supported

1:24:06 ↗ your people and tools recommendations in full, including adding the following portions

1:24:12 ↗ and technology enhancements to the budget. Building inspector and management analyst, budget

1:24:18 ↗ analyst, maintenance worker, worker parks, human resources analyst, support services, passports,

1:24:23 ↗ fiscal analyst, payroll and benefits, senior IT project manager, IT network

1:24:29 ↗ analyst, maintenance worker, Environmental science assistant, recreation supervisor, recreation specialist, two police

1:24:35 ↗ officer positions as authorized but unfunded, customer relations management system, website update,

1:24:41 ↗ implementation of additional munis system modules for utility billing, payroll and grants,

1:24:46 ↗ enhancements for citywide cybersecurity and end user training to manage security threats,

1:24:52 ↗ network and security device enhancements to keep current with security requirements, backup

1:24:57 ↗ system capability and off-site disaster recovery service, mobile solutions for city

1:25:03 ↗ staff in the field, and new and replacement fleet and equipment.

1:25:09 ↗ In addition to that, as we discussed earlier, there were specific

1:25:15 ↗ budget amendments that were already shown in the presentation. Let me

1:25:20 ↗ primarily address additional direction. which has to do with sort of is

1:25:26 ↗ future looking. Capital projects included in the 2019 budget represent those that were shown as

1:25:32 ↗ funded in the adopted five-year capital improvements plan and reflect new cost estimates, revised project

1:25:37 ↗ scopes, updated revenue sources, and the prioritizations established in the newly adopted parks strategic plan.

1:25:43 ↗ A handful of anticipated and desired 2019 projects remain unfunded. We will review the 2019

1:25:49 ↗ unfunded capital improvement projects in early 2019, and we asked staff to prepare

1:25:55 ↗ funding options for these projects, specifically including Southeast 43rd intersection improvements. We

1:26:00 ↗ discussed a key policy question regarding whether the City Council would continue to explore other

1:26:05 ↗ possible management models for the Senior Center and operate it on a temporary or interim

1:26:11 ↗ basis again in 2019. During final deliberations, Council Members voiced support for a City-run enhanced

1:26:16 ↗ center and directed staff to adjust revenues and expenditures according to Administration's recommendation. Council also

1:26:21 ↗ requested that the operating and management model be assessed and revisited every three or four

1:26:26 ↗ years to determine whether a more cost-effective or advantageous privately operated option is available at

1:26:31 ↗ that time. As part of our review of CityGives, i.e. the way in which the

1:26:37 ↗ City financially partners with nonprofit organizations that provide services to the community, City Council requested

1:26:43 ↗ that we have an opportunity to review the methodologies and constructs that govern the Community

1:26:48 ↗ Fund and Contracts for Services and Sponsorship categories. This review should take place prior to

1:26:53 ↗ next spring so that parameters are established for the 2019 grant application process and the

1:26:58 ↗ development of the 2020 budget. We also ask that $140,000 be added to the 2019

1:27:03 ↗ final budget for costs associated with reforming the Green Necklace and Central Issaquah code integration.

1:27:08 ↗ Again, we discussed that a little bit. In addition, staff was directed to return to

1:27:13 ↗ City Council in December and January with recommendations on how to facilitate this project in

1:27:18 ↗ the 2019 work plan. This may include an additional proposal for consulting services staff and/or

1:27:23 ↗ workplace reprioritization. In closing, I would like to thank you and your staff for preparing

1:27:29 ↗ this full-service budget for 2019. The adopted budget is our roadmap for spending on initiatives,

1:27:34 ↗ projects, services, and personnel. As you described, 2019 will be a momentous year where we

1:27:39 ↗ will adopt a new strategic plan for the City. That community-derived plan will provide guidance

1:27:44 ↗ for operating and capital budget priorities in future years. Thank you. Provides a lot of

1:27:49 ↗ background on the Council deliberations. Is there any... Question my own questions discussion. That's

1:27:55 ↗ my winter saying councilmember hunt. All right. Thank you So you just heard we go

1:28:01 ↗ into quite a bit of detail on these budgets and Thank You councilmember Martz For

1:28:06 ↗ reading that leather. Sorry to put you on the spot But the point I was

1:28:12 ↗ I think it helped me make is that our diligence is complete and thorough and

1:28:18 ↗ And I bring this up because it's with more than a

1:28:24 ↗ little bit of surprise that I hear about a line item

1:28:30 ↗ budget for sewer in Sycamore. Frankly, we never discussed it. It

1:28:35 ↗ wasn't an item that was brought up for deliberation. The sewer

1:28:41 ↗ utility is part of the city. The mayor and her staff have

1:28:47 ↗ the responsibility for their safe operation and their ongoing operation. And I view it

1:28:53 ↗ as a very normal part of course in fulfilling that duty that we make

1:28:59 ↗ assessments to how to create and expand and create a good functioning sewer system

1:29:04 ↗ for everybody's benefit. I think taking a look at an issue and talking to people,

1:29:10 ↗ and I actually admire how the city has evolved over the last few years of

1:29:15 ↗ being proactive and engaging neighborhoods and people on issues before any action is taken. That's

1:29:21 ↗ how the lens that I view as what happened. That November meeting was an opportunity.

1:29:26 ↗ to talk to people and I know that a lot of voices came out very

1:29:31 ↗ clearly against a future development of one. Now if a sewer system, as was said

1:29:36 ↗ already, would be built, that question would come before this council. There are many different

1:29:41 ↗ ways to fund it. Whether there would be a local improvement district is a question

1:29:45 ↗ that would come before the residents of Sycamore. We're a long, long ways away from

1:29:50 ↗ any one of these issues. I also think it's very normal if you're a property

1:29:55 ↗ owner or someone who maybe wants to build that you would inquire and ask about

1:30:00 ↗ the status of something like that. I think that's a pretty normal thing to do.

1:30:04 ↗ I've lived on sewer. I've had a strain field fail. I knew what it was

1:30:09 ↗ like to live through that. I'm also aware of the costs that are associated with

1:30:14 ↗ doing an attachment or getting connected to a system. I am very empathetic about the

1:30:20 ↗ homeowners who own sewer and your responsibilities to have them operate effectively as they're supposed

1:30:26 ↗ to. But I do view what has been done to date and what's

1:30:31 ↗ been outlined in the work plan to be just good stewardship by the

1:30:37 ↗ city of what we do to make sure that our environment, especially when

1:30:43 ↗ it comes to sewage and effective onsite sewage systems, are safe. are working optimally

1:30:48 ↗ and not affecting the environment i view what's been done and what's been only talked

1:30:54 ↗ about for 2019 as like a study and doing that study is at the purview

1:30:59 ↗ of the mayor of inner staff and i don't view that as being harmful and

1:31:04 ↗ we're getting information We're going to learn a little bit more and there will be

1:31:10 ↗ any opportunity to actually come forward and maybe build a system is quite a few

1:31:16 ↗ months or years in front of us, but we're not even considering that question this

1:31:21 ↗ evening. I just wanted to make all those points clear. Thank you. Council Member Hunt.

1:31:27 ↗ Thank you. This was my first year working on the budget and I

1:31:33 ↗ think that the city continues to make efforts to make the budget more understandable. My

1:31:38 ↗ thought working through the process is that there are a lot of departments that are

1:31:43 ↗ changing to meet the growing and continuing evolving needs of the city. I think there's

1:31:49 ↗ a lot of software changes as well, technology changes and as the departments change in

1:31:54 ↗ the future and as the city changes in the future and grows, I think one

1:31:59 ↗ part of that transparency that is important and to make the budget more understandable will

1:32:05 ↗ be to make it very clear how the budget is changing over time and to

1:32:10 ↗ make that very traceable over time. But I do think that the city continues to

1:32:16 ↗ make strides towards having a transparent and understandable budget and so I was appreciative of

1:32:21 ↗ that. Any other comments? Council President Martz. Yeah, I just want to say a particular

1:32:27 ↗ thank you to City Administrator Moon and her staff. We had a transition in financial

1:32:32 ↗ director leadership right smack dab exactly where you wouldn't want it, which is right at

1:32:36 ↗ the beginning of the budget process. And she led her staff in a thoughtful conversation

1:32:41 ↗ with council on this year's budget. And so thank you to her and her staff

1:32:46 ↗ who put so much, so many time and hours both during the day and after

1:32:51 ↗ hours into this budget. Thank you. It's very kind. Are there any other? Oh, Deputy

1:32:56 ↗ Council President Bautista. thank you madam mayor so i was uh supportive of uh the

1:33:02 ↗ the direction that that i felt like we needed uh to head with a focus

1:33:07 ↗ on uh both people and tools i think that um a lot of those a

1:33:12 ↗ lot of those items in terms of staffing and technology uh were critical uh this

1:33:17 ↗ year um and also uh taking getting an opportunity to take a look at the

1:33:23 ↗ city run senior center which i was very supportive of and glad to see that

1:33:28 ↗ we could integrate the green necklace code revisions and have an opportunity to take

1:33:34 ↗ a look at that. But I do understand that we have capital projects that

1:33:40 ↗ are unfunded and I very much look forward to having the discussion in early

1:33:45 ↗ 2019 So we'll have an opportunity to talk about that as well. And also just

1:33:51 ↗ very much looking forward to the fact that with our new strategic plan as we

1:33:56 ↗ head into budget sessions in the future that we will have that strategic plan to

1:34:02 ↗ help guide. Thank you. - Thank you. Any other comments before I reread the motion?

1:34:09 ↗ Okay. If there's no further discussion, all those in favor of adopting

1:34:14 ↗ ordinance number 2853, adopting a revised 2019 salary schedule for all city

1:34:20 ↗ employees and amending the salary schedules previously adopted and amended by ordinance

1:34:26 ↗ numbers, 2819, 2828, 2829, and 2835. And adopting ordinance number 2854,

1:34:31 ↗ adopting the 2019 budget and setting forth the estimated revenues and

1:34:37 ↗ appropriations for each separate fund and estimated impact on ending fund

1:34:43 ↗ balances for all such funds combined of the city for the

1:34:48 ↗ fiscal year commencing January 1st, 2019. Signify by saying aye. -

1:34:54 ↗ Aye. Those opposed? That carries unanimously.

1:35:00 ↗ I did want to actually add a clarification. I don't think I mentioned this earlier

1:35:06 ↗ tonight, but we do have five out of seven council members seated this evening and

1:35:12 ↗ four ordinances to pass. I just want to make sure it's clear that council understands

1:35:17 ↗ that four of five votes are required for passage of ordinances. And we have several

1:35:23 ↗ more of those on our agenda this evening. That was a unanimous vote. We move

1:35:29 ↗ to regular business. First item under irregular business

1:35:34 ↗ is AB 7708, Berkshire property acquisition. This

1:35:40 ↗ is the first time this agenda bill

1:35:45 ↗ is before Council and I'd like to

1:35:50 ↗ invite Parks and Recreation Director Jeff Watling

1:35:56 ↗ to make a presentation. Mayor, Council, thank

1:36:01 ↗ you. Sorry for that. Well, tonight, This agenda

1:36:07 ↗ bill certainly represents a culmination of nearly a year of work and discussion

1:36:13 ↗ on this possible acquisition of the Berksville property. It's a very complex undertaking

1:36:19 ↗ and a very complex agenda bill. I'll do my best to walk through

1:36:25 ↗ the details that are in the agenda bill and certainly as has been

1:36:30 ↗ presented to you in prior executive sessions. The agenda bill requests your

1:36:36 ↗ authorization to acquire the 46-acre Berksville property in partnership with King County and the

1:36:42 ↗ Trust for Public Land. A little bit of background. The Berksville property is, as

1:36:48 ↗ many, if not all, in this room are aware, is located on the northeast

1:36:53 ↗ corner of Cougar Mountain. It has been proposed for development numerous times through the

1:36:59 ↗ years. Most recently, an application in 2017 was submitted for a

1:37:05 ↗ 57-lot residential development. Concerns for that, concerns about the impacts of

1:37:11 ↗ that development environmentally, traffic-wise, neighborhood impacts, visual impacts to the hillside

1:37:17 ↗ were certainly expressed by residents throughout that development review process. In

1:37:23 ↗ January of this year, of 2018, The city approached and kicked

1:37:28 ↗ off work with Trust for Public Land on a partnership to explore

1:37:34 ↗ options to purchase all or some of that property. That work continued

1:37:40 ↗ throughout the year. And again, U.S. Council were updated as we went

1:37:45 ↗ through that process. Why purchase this property? You certainly heard the eloquence of residents.

1:37:51 ↗ They certainly spoke to a number of reasons. I'll touch on a few as identified

1:37:57 ↗ in the agenda bill. This is certainly a priority within a number of our planning

1:38:03 ↗ documents. The comprehensive plan as well as the recently adopted park strategic plan identifies the

1:38:08 ↗ protection and preservation of our forested hillsides that surround Issaquah as a high priority.

1:38:14 ↗ This preservation obviously is done so to produce a number

1:38:20 ↗ of environmental benefits, both for the hillside as well as

1:38:25 ↗ protecting streams and thus the tributaries, creeks and salmon that

1:38:31 ↗ we so appreciate and want to protect in this community.

1:38:40 ↗ It also touches on and we talked about and you heard the priority

1:38:46 ↗ of connectivity and access. Certainly as a priority identified in the park strategic

1:38:51 ↗ plan as well as the recent central Issaquah plan update and the green

1:38:57 ↗ necklace vision. The opportunity to connect the valley floor, in

1:39:03 ↗ particular the Tibbets Valley area of the valley floor up

1:39:09 ↗ into Cougar Mountain can certainly be accomplished with this acquisition.

1:39:15 ↗ This really is a property, when you look at its

1:39:21 ↗ location, really serves as the gateway from the valley floor,

1:39:27 ↗ from our central Issaquah area up into Cougar Mountain. Another

1:39:33 ↗ priority, another Really benefit for this property is the opportunity to expand

1:39:39 ↗ the park area that supports the talus neighborhood That too was identified and we

1:39:45 ↗ heard throughout the park strategic plan process the existing Harvey Manning Park and

1:39:50 ↗ and its size is not one that is completely meeting the needs

1:39:56 ↗ of the Tallis community. We also heard interest in this acquisition would

1:40:01 ↗ also provide the ability to create a pedestrian access from the Tallis

1:40:07 ↗ neighborhood down into the valley floor. So certainly a number of public

1:40:12 ↗ benefits that have been identified in our planning documents.

1:40:24 ↗ Also speaking to the public benefits in August of this year, we

1:40:30 ↗ had a chance to deliberate and discuss with City Council. You all

1:40:35 ↗ adopted Resolution 2018-13 supporting the pursuit of acquisition of this property within

1:40:41 ↗ that resolution. You certainly identified a number of these priorities and benefits

1:40:47 ↗ by which we want to pursue consideration of either, again, a portion

1:40:53 ↗ or a purchase of all of the property. On to negotiations and

1:40:59 ↗ the appraisal process. We identified really early on the delicacy of

1:41:05 ↗ this approach and even pursuing a potential property for this property given that

1:41:10 ↗ it is a site that is in and has a development application in.

1:41:16 ↗ So certainly as staff, as the Parks Department, we work directly with Trust

1:41:22 ↗ for Public Land to certainly establish a differentiation between our role as regulator

1:41:28 ↗ and the work that Development Services Department is doing and the work that

1:41:34 ↗ we were doing in pursuit of considering this acquisition. In that role, in

1:41:40 ↗ that relationship, TPL became our primary voice and negotiator with TPL with the

1:41:46 ↗ proposed seller and developer. I just wanted to certainly make that note and

1:41:52 ↗ recognize the importance of that dual role that we have been playing in

1:41:57 ↗ this effort. So in that work, Trust for Public Lands completed an appraisal

1:42:03 ↗ as well as an appraisal review that was shared with the developer. That

1:42:09 ↗ appraisal for the full 46 acres came back at $10.5 million. Following a

1:42:15 ↗ series of negotiations with the developer, an option to purchase agreement was entered into

1:42:21 ↗ between the developer and TPL for the full 46 acres. The terms of that

1:42:27 ↗ option were for an $11 million purchase with an expiration of that option being

1:42:33 ↗ December 31st of this year and allowing up to 60 days to close the

1:42:38 ↗ purchase. $11 million is a lot

1:42:44 ↗ of money, certainly a lot of money for us to figure out how we were

1:42:49 ↗ going to fund that. As negotiations and that work was going on, another key element

1:42:54 ↗ to this work this past year was really begin to strategize and look at who

1:43:00 ↗ potential funding partners are. That was a work that really took a lot of time

1:43:05 ↗ and a lot of effort throughout this 12 months. It became clear and evident that

1:43:11 ↗ The King County Land Conservation Initiative that Director Christy True mentioned really provided

1:43:17 ↗ and created a strategic timing as that work and that region-wide, that county-wide

1:43:23 ↗ effort was going on as we were pursuing that. So really, in any

1:43:29 ↗ and all of our funding strategies, that really is an anchor for potential

1:43:35 ↗ funding. Back to the proposal though, in this purchase and sale agreement

1:43:41 ↗ and in the partnered effort, we the city would become the owner of

1:43:46 ↗ 33 acres which becomes the easternmost 33 1/2 acres of the property. That property

1:43:52 ↗ that I was just mentioning earlier really connects to the valley floor. Our central

1:43:58 ↗ Issaquah area allows for that gateway into Cougar Mountain Regional Park. The 12 1/2

1:44:04 ↗ acres, which is the western portion of the property, would be owned and managed

1:44:10 ↗ and maintained by King County. We see this 33 1/2 acres as really becoming

1:44:15 ↗ a wonderful extension of Harvey Manning Park. So Harvey Manning Park becomes

1:44:21 ↗ nearly a 35-acre community park and natural resource area. In that sale,

1:44:27 ↗ King County has agreed to purchase the 12.5 acres. The appraisal came

1:44:33 ↗ back at a price of, given its isolated area, given its really

1:44:39 ↗ lack of ability to be developed at a price of $340,000. As

1:44:45 ↗ we agreed on a purchase price of $11 million, given that incremental

1:44:50 ↗ amount over appraised value, King County has agreed to pay an increment

1:44:56 ↗ over that appraised value as we are also doing for the

1:45:02 ↗ 33.5 acres. That leaves certainly a significant portion of

1:45:08 ↗ this property, $10.645 million to be used for the

1:45:14 ↗ 33.5 acre purchase. As I was saying earlier, any type of

1:45:20 ↗ funding strategy for something that's significant is going to take a multi-agency, multi-sourced effort.

1:45:26 ↗ What is spelled out in the agenda bill, and I will make an effort

1:45:31 ↗ to certainly go over here tonight, is to highlight how we see the breakdown

1:45:37 ↗ of that $10.65 million commitment. You'll see in the agenda bill We

1:45:43 ↗ estimate that roughly $6.82 million will be gathered and garnered

1:45:49 ↗ through grants over the next year to three to four

1:45:55 ↗ years. That would leave what we see as the city's

1:46:01 ↗ long-term investment, long-term commitment in this at $3.8275 million dollars.

1:46:07 ↗ What I will try and do next is highlight those five

1:46:13 ↗ funding sources. There's five funding sources, I should say, that make

1:46:18 ↗ up the grants that we see. And as we've talked with

1:46:24 ↗ public agencies and public partners, what grants this property, this acquisition

1:46:29 ↗ feels most strategically positioned to be able to receive. And really,

1:46:35 ↗ in a lot of ways, I'll touch on, I'll start with the large

1:46:41 ↗ one. As I mentioned earlier, the King County Land Conservation Initiative really makes

1:46:46 ↗ up a majority of what we see as the $6.8 million collection of

1:46:52 ↗ grant funding. a little bit on the Land Conservation Initiative. As Director True mentioned, this

1:46:58 ↗ is some work that's been ongoing for, boy, a number of years now in terms

1:47:03 ↗ of the initiative. Just last, earlier this year, in August, King County approved a

1:47:09 ↗ funding source, a funding mechanism for the first couple years of this land

1:47:15 ↗ conservation initiative. As I've highlighted with you before, by increasing the bond capacity

1:47:21 ↗ of the conservation futures tax, King County wants to create a significant

1:47:27 ↗ amount of funding dollars that would go towards these large,

1:47:32 ↗ substantial land acquisitions. In creating that funding source, they've identified

1:47:38 ↗ the existing Conservation Futures Program to be the grant program that these funding,

1:47:44 ↗ these dollars would flow through. This is exhibit C, a slide on exhibit C within

1:47:49 ↗ your agenda bill. This is a portion of a PowerPoint slide provided by King County

1:47:55 ↗ Parks as they've gone around explaining what they see as the schedule for conservation futures

1:48:01 ↗ funding being next year You'll note on the first area

1:48:07 ↗ under early January, you'll see applications for roughly $40

1:48:12 ↗ million. As has been communicated to us, there will be two

1:48:18 ↗ sort of grant application processes going on at the same time. The

1:48:24 ↗ $24 million bond-backed funding that you see up there, that is the

1:48:30 ↗ category by which we would be applying this acquisition for. as

1:48:36 ↗ has been stated before, and certainly as we've worked with the

1:48:42 ↗ county staff and looked at what the criteria of that grant

1:48:47 ↗ program is, this project certainly is a highly, highly, highly competitive

1:48:53 ↗ applicant for that funding. You'll see that in terms of timeline,

1:48:59 ↗ applications will be due in early March. Like other Conservation

1:49:05 ↗ Futures funds, the Conservation Futures Committee, a group of citizens will

1:49:11 ↗ go through their decision-making process, similar to grant processes we do

1:49:17 ↗ ourselves. Those recommendations are then submitted to the executive and council.

1:49:23 ↗ It's anticipated that proceeds from these grant dollars would be available

1:49:29 ↗ towards the latter part of next year. that application

1:49:34 ↗ again and that the timing of that increased

1:49:40 ↗ capacity into and really desire to seed large

1:49:46 ↗ significant Property acquisitions such as Bergsma really becomes a strategic, amazing

1:49:51 ↗ strategic timing given even the opportunity to consider a purchase of

1:49:57 ↗ a property like this for Seattle, for Issaquah to be able

1:50:03 ↗ to do that, forgive me. In our and in that goal

1:50:09 ↗ of receiving and anticipating $6.8 million worth of funding, this application

1:50:14 ↗ request, the King County LCI grant program of 5.3 million, we're

1:50:20 ↗ able to apply up to 50% of what the value is.

1:50:26 ↗ So we would apply for that 50%, that $5.3 million, that

1:50:32 ↗ would represent and does represent 78% of that $6.8 million that

1:50:38 ↗ we are seeking. To seek and to look for the

1:50:44 ↗ remaining $1.5 million in grant funding we anticipate, we really

1:50:49 ↗ see a majority of that happening through state RCO grant

1:50:55 ↗ applications. RCO is the Recreation Conservation Office. They administer a

1:51:01 ↗ number of statewide grants. Some are known

1:51:06 ↗ as WWRP, let's see if I get the acronym right, the

1:51:12 ↗ Washington Wildlife Recreation Program. There's seven grant categories within that area.

1:51:18 ↗ We have already met with our RCO representatives and RCO program

1:51:24 ↗ directors that support King County. We have talked through this perspective

1:51:29 ↗ acquisition and sort of played a what if. Very, very incredibly

1:51:35 ↗ positive support in terms of what this 46-acre purchase represents and how strong

1:51:41 ↗ of a candidate it would be for two of those seven funding sources

1:51:46 ↗ for acquisition. So we would anticipate applying for both of those. One is

1:51:52 ↗ the WWRP local parks category. The other is the WWRP Urban Wildlife

1:51:58 ↗ Habitat Program. We would apply for acquisition funds under both of those

1:52:04 ↗ categories. Another grant program that RCO administers is the Land Water Conservation

1:52:09 ↗ Fund. Again, in our research and our conversations and the groundwork with

1:52:15 ↗ RCO staff and other partners, this is an incredibly strong candidate with

1:52:21 ↗ LWCF funding as well. And so we would be submitting those applications as well.

1:52:27 ↗ The cycle of those applications is another year out, 2020. So in the agenda bill,

1:52:32 ↗ you'll see that we've identified the need to complete and work with the developer on

1:52:38 ↗ a waiver of retroactivity. That's a fancy term for the ability that we can submit

1:52:44 ↗ that waiver to RCO. So when we apply for those grants, it's as if we

1:52:49 ↗ haven't purchased the property yet. So we're able to apply for those as

1:52:55 ↗ if this property is still under threat of development, still has that same

1:53:00 ↗ sense of urgency, and we can let that project compete in that way,

1:53:06 ↗ in that form. So that is certainly something we'll be doing now to

1:53:12 ↗ position ourselves to be able to apply for those funds in total.

1:53:17 ↗ We are likely going to apply for more than $1.5 million,

1:53:23 ↗ even within those three state grants. It could very well be

1:53:28 ↗ that we receive more than $1.5 million in those grants, but

1:53:34 ↗ given at least where we are right now in this process,

1:53:40 ↗ we wanted to... be somewhat conservative in that number. The fifth grant

1:53:45 ↗ source that we see this project really being a strong candidate

1:53:51 ↗ for is also within the Land Conservation Initiative program. King County is

1:53:57 ↗ looking at initiating a carbon credit program. You'll see the fifth bullet down,

1:54:03 ↗ carbon credits for new parks, green spaces. We've met with staff who are

1:54:08 ↗ leading this effort and initiating this effort. Sam Plotkin has joined me in

1:54:14 ↗ a number of those conversations. This 46 acres really represents a terrific opportunity

1:54:20 ↗ to be a candidate for, in essence, creating a bank, if you will,

1:54:26 ↗ that private entities can purchase carbon and carbon credits off of this site.

1:54:31 ↗ Of the five funding sources, we anticipate this is likely the smallest that

1:54:37 ↗ we would net proceeds from, but it certainly appears to

1:54:43 ↗ be an incredibly viable opportunity and one that we would

1:54:48 ↗ want to pursue in that funding strategy. little bit

1:54:54 ↗ on in a particular conservation futures and RCO these are very

1:55:00 ↗ very well established grant grant agencies and grant sources that we're

1:55:05 ↗ relying very heavily on in this funding strategy the good news

1:55:11 ↗ is we are not going into that blind as a city

1:55:16 ↗ we have been Over the years, incredibly successful at receiving Conservation Futures

1:55:22 ↗ funds as well as RCO funds. Just a little bit to highlight

1:55:28 ↗ that, since the initiation of the Conservation Futures program, the city, Conservation

1:55:33 ↗ Futures funds to the city of Issaquah have helped us to purchase

1:55:39 ↗ 108 acres. The city of Issaquah has received a little over $5

1:55:44 ↗ million in CFT funds. Some of the examples of properties that

1:55:50 ↗ have been utilized for that purchase, the Carey Woods, the southwest side

1:55:56 ↗ of Squawk Mountain, those 40 acres were purchased with assistance of CFT

1:56:01 ↗ funds. Sammamish Cove, the 19-acre property. Uh-oh, there goes my voice. Adjoining

1:56:07 ↗ Lake Sammamish State Park was purchased with CFT funds. Ingee Johnson Park,

1:56:13 ↗ just south of us on Front Street, 7.8 acres were purchased. Recently,

1:56:18 ↗ portions of the assemblage of Confluence Park were purchased with CFT funds

1:56:24 ↗ as well. I would say that with the track record,

1:56:30 ↗ the success that the city has had in leveraging those CFT monies with

1:56:35 ↗ our own funds, matching those, and really doing great work, our relationship, our

1:56:41 ↗ track record with the CFT committee, as well as county staff, is very,

1:56:47 ↗ very strong. And I think that's certainly important to note. Within our state

1:56:53 ↗ grants, within the RCO agency, those two, we have as a city been very strategic

1:56:59 ↗ and very successful in receiving some of those grants. I highlighted a couple of the

1:57:05 ↗ grant sources that I'll just touch on in the WWRP local parks category. Recently,

1:57:11 ↗ in 2008, we received, applied for and received a $1 million

1:57:16 ↗ acquisition grant to assist with Confluence Park acquisition for four acres

1:57:22 ↗ within Confluence Park. On the development side of the local park grant,

1:57:28 ↗ we received two separate $500,000 grants for both Central Park Pad 3

1:57:34 ↗ and the synthetic turf project that was done in 2003, and most

1:57:39 ↗ recently, Central Park Pad 1 synthetic turf project just last year, well,

1:57:45 ↗ in 2016, also received $500,000. Within the WWRP Urban Wildlife Habitat grant,

1:57:51 ↗ In 2006, the city received $500,000 also for the McCrary

1:57:56 ↗ Woods acquisition on Squawk Mountain. In 1996, for urban wildlife

1:58:02 ↗ habitat, the city received $230,000 to assist with Issaquah Greenway

1:58:07 ↗ properties, which are just south of us along Issaquah Creek.

1:58:13 ↗ In 2006, Ingee Johnson Park also received Urban Wildlife Habitat

1:58:19 ↗ funds, RCO funds of $450,000. Land Water Conservation Fund, most

1:58:25 ↗ recently, the city applied for and was awarded for Confluence

1:58:31 ↗ Park Phase 1 work, $500,000 in 2011. Again, these

1:58:37 ↗ represent the success, the relationship the city has with those

1:58:43 ↗ agencies that again is instrumental and certainly vital. And as

1:58:49 ↗ we have done the groundwork and exploring these potential grant

1:58:54 ↗ funding sources, Again, they're being done with a degree of confidence and

1:59:00 ↗ understanding of what it takes to see those through. You might also notice, I

1:59:06 ↗ was mentioning those names, these grants, the RCO grants and Conservation Futures grants, in

1:59:12 ↗ a number of cases have been used in the same acquisition strategy. I

1:59:17 ↗ bring that up because what we are considering

1:59:23 ↗ doing with this purchase of Bergsma is similar

1:59:28 ↗ in that it takes multiple funding sources to

1:59:34 ↗ be coupled and to be shared to accomplish

1:59:39 ↗ something of this nature. Forgive me.

1:59:52 ↗ So as highlighted, as I mentioned a little bit earlier, like

1:59:58 ↗ many acquisitions that we've completed here with the City of Issaquah,

2:00:04 ↗ often the partnered funding, the grant funding is provided in the

2:00:10 ↗ form of a reimbursement. The city, in any and all

2:00:15 ↗ of these efforts, needed to expend the money to get

2:00:21 ↗ reimbursed from these grant agencies. This is certainly a similar

2:00:27 ↗ matter here with this purchase at a much bigger scale

2:00:32 ↗ and one that we certainly do not walk into lightly.

2:00:40 ↗ What we anticipate is within three to five years, those grant

2:00:46 ↗ proceeds to be collected. What this will mean at closing, as

2:00:52 ↗ we look at, and as I mentioned earlier, with a late

2:00:57 ↗ February closing of this property, we would need to bring

2:01:03 ↗ a significant amount of city funds to make this happen. As part of the partnership,

2:01:09 ↗ as part of the MOU, the Memorandum of Understanding that you see in the agenda

2:01:14 ↗ bill, Trust for Public Land has agreed to bring $3 million, to provide $3 million

2:01:19 ↗ of interest-free funding, bridge funding for the city at closing. King County would bring,

2:01:25 ↗ as I mentioned earlier, their $355,000. That would leave the

2:01:31 ↗ city needing to fund $7.645 million at closing. Beth Goldberg,

2:01:37 ↗ our finance director, will be coming up to join me shortly

2:01:43 ↗ as I transition slides to walk through some of the funding

2:01:48 ↗ options that we have for considering how to finance that in

2:01:54 ↗ the near term. One more thing I would point out that

2:01:59 ↗ is certainly an important one and done by other conservation agencies

2:02:05 ↗ when Dealing with an acquisition like this of this

2:02:10 ↗ scale and size and timing, it's very often the case

2:02:16 ↗ that when the property is purchased, in the time between

2:02:22 ↗ purchasing the property and waiting for the partnered funding to

2:02:28 ↗ come available, we have to look at how how we

2:02:34 ↗ might need to mitigate that risk in this case of bergsma to

2:02:39 ↗ preserve the opportunity to purchase the whole 46 acres as we consider

2:02:45 ↗ this hard decision of financing this amount of money should for some

2:02:51 ↗ reason the lci funding not become available or not happen

2:02:57 ↗ we would not have any conservation easements on that property. That property

2:03:03 ↗ could, if we needed to mitigate that risk or that investment, sell

2:03:08 ↗ a portion or sell all of the property. I mention that only not

2:03:14 ↗ as a desire or as an interest, but as we sort of look

2:03:20 ↗ at all the timing of the funding and the need for the commitments

2:03:26 ↗ from these partnered agencies as they come in the form of grants, we

2:03:32 ↗ have that option at our disposal. So with that, Beth, I will come

2:03:37 ↗ on up. I'll transition the slides. I'll try.

2:03:54 ↗ Good evening. As Jeff mentioned, I'm Beth Goldberg.

2:04:00 ↗ I'm the Interim Finance Director and I am

2:04:06 ↗ here to talk about Strategies for how to cover

2:04:12 ↗ the seven point six four five million dollars that we would need to bring

2:04:18 ↗ At closing in February should the council decide to proceed with this with this

2:04:23 ↗ transaction I will say at the outset I'm going to give you an overview

2:04:29 ↗ of the options that we are considering would welcome feedback and direction from the

2:04:35 ↗ council about what strategies it would like to see developed. But we are not actually

2:04:41 ↗ asking you all for a decision on this financing strategy tonight. We will be coming

2:04:47 ↗ back to you on January 7th for a decision on the financing strategies, assuming you

2:04:53 ↗ make a decision to go forward with the purchase and sale agreement as Jeff described

2:04:58 ↗ it. This slide here just provides you an outline of the costs that

2:05:04 ↗ Jeff spoke to. The bottom line that I'm going to be speaking about

2:05:10 ↗ here tonight is the $7.645 million that we'll need to bring it close.

2:05:16 ↗ As Jeff mentioned, we are anticipating grant funding to offset these costs so

2:05:22 ↗ that the city's final ongoing costs would be $3.823 million.

2:05:28 ↗ So the question is, how do we come up with that

2:05:33 ↗ cash to bring to close? The fact that we are expecting some

2:05:39 ↗ of this to be covered by grant money does suggest that we need to look

2:05:45 ↗ at a combination of short-term and long-term funding strategies. So among the options that you

2:05:51 ↗ will see here, look at a blending of strategies to match the timing of the

2:05:56 ↗ money. We're also taking into account as we analyze this, the city's other near-term capital

2:06:02 ↗ financing needs. We know that that's something that we're going to be talking with all

2:06:06 ↗ of you about in early January and so want you all to keep that in

2:06:11 ↗ mind as you're thinking about these options. We certainly are as we think about them

2:06:16 ↗ as well. So the four options that we are presenting here are the first one

2:06:21 ↗ is a blend of using fund balance to cover the portion of the financing that

2:06:27 ↗ will be covered by grants and then a bank loan, a bank qualified loan to

2:06:32 ↗ cover the long-term financing needs that 3.823 million. I will say at the outset that

2:06:38 ↗ this is the administration's preferred option. And I will keep reminding you of that throughout

2:06:43 ↗ the presentation, but these other options are viable as well. The other option would be

2:06:48 ↗ to fund this entirely using fund balance, the entire $7.65 million. The third option would

2:06:54 ↗ be to finance it entirely with a bank loan, the entire $7.645 million. And then

2:06:59 ↗ the last option would be to use long-term bonds. And I'll expand on these options

2:07:04 ↗ in a moment. Before going into the options though, I do want

2:07:10 ↗ to give some background about our fund balance situation. Given that you just

2:07:15 ↗ adopted the budget, you are intimately aware of fund balance. The adopted budget

2:07:21 ↗ has an unrestricted fund balance of $23.2 million. As you all know, we have a

2:07:27 ↗ fund balance target of 15 to 20 percent, basically that we won't fall below 15

2:07:32 ↗ to 20 percent of expenditures. So when we're looking at whether fund balance is a

2:07:38 ↗ viable option, we're looking at that excess over and above that 20 percent. So based

2:07:43 ↗ on the budget you adopted tonight, there's about $12.6 million of available fund balance, allowing

2:07:48 ↗ us to still preserve that 20 percent. The second bar is what fund balance would

2:07:53 ↗ look like if you went with option A, option one, sorry, option one, where you'd

2:07:59 ↗ use half of the fund balance to cover the grant portions and then finance the

2:08:05 ↗ rest. If you did that, there would be 7.3%. $3 million of fund balance above

2:08:10 ↗ that 20% available. And again, that would be replenished in later in 2019,

2:08:16 ↗ 2021 when we receive those grant fundings. And then the last bar would

2:08:22 ↗ be if we finance the entire project, the whole 7.645 million using fund

2:08:28 ↗ balance, and that would only leave $3.4 million of fund balance remaining after

2:08:34 ↗ the transaction. Another variable that you will want to consider when making

2:08:40 ↗ a decision about this is the city's debt capacity. Washington state law sets limits

2:08:45 ↗ for how much debt a city can take on. It's tied to our assessed

2:08:51 ↗ property valuation. There's a lot of numbers on these slides. The upshot is we

2:08:57 ↗ have over nearly 96 percent of our debt capacity available we're only we're using less

2:09:03 ↗ than four percent of the debt capacity currently if we were to debt finance this

2:09:09 ↗ the entire 7.65 million it would take that down to about 90 percent If

2:09:14 ↗ we finance less, it would be between there. The main point

2:09:20 ↗ being the city has plenty of debt capacity to accommodate the

2:09:26 ↗ financing of this acquisition. and there would be plenty of room should the council

2:09:32 ↗ decide that it needs to debt finance other things. The main thing is our ability

2:09:37 ↗ to pay and we are not proposing that any taxes would need to be raised

2:09:43 ↗ to support this property acquisition. Now, for the actual options, as I

2:09:48 ↗ mentioned at the outset, this is the administration's preferred option. It would be

2:09:54 ↗ to split the cost half between fund balance, half with a bank qualified

2:10:00 ↗ loan. The debt service on this transaction, it would be a 10-year loan, is

2:10:05 ↗ $454,000 a year. This translates, just to give you all a benchmark of how to

2:10:11 ↗ think about this, of what this would cost the average Issaquah taxpayer, it's about $20

2:10:17 ↗ of debt. equivalent of about $20 of property tax a year. Again, not proposing to

2:10:23 ↗ raise property taxes, but if you were thinking about how much is this costing me

2:10:29 ↗ as a taxpayer, it's about $20 a year for 10 years. The total financing costs

2:10:34 ↗ of this are just under $1 million over the 10 years. And it is, aside

2:10:40 ↗ from fund balances, is actually the lowest cost option. So when thinking about this

2:10:45 ↗ option and among the reasons why the administration is recommending this option is we

2:10:51 ↗ like the combination of fund balance and debt financing. This is an asset that

2:10:57 ↗ is going to benefit residents living in Issaquah today. It's also going to benefit

2:11:03 ↗ residents that will be living here for years and years to come. So this, by

2:11:09 ↗ using fund balance and debt financing, you're spreading the cost among all of the beneficiaries

2:11:14 ↗ that will take advantage of this property. We also like this strategy because it does

2:11:20 ↗ preserve fund balance, which gives us some flexibility and liquidity that we think is an

2:11:26 ↗ important strategy. And then last, A bank qualified loan, not to get too technical here,

2:11:32 ↗ but we would be limited to $10 million of debt if we went with a

2:11:37 ↗ bank qualified loan. This strategy would leave us $6.2 million worth of tax exempt financing

2:11:43 ↗ available to us in 2019 should the council decide it wishes to debt finance other

2:11:48 ↗ capital priorities when we take that up in early next year. I'm going to

2:11:54 ↗ go through these next options pretty quickly. They're in your packet materials. Since they're not

2:11:59 ↗ our preferred option, certainly we could bring this back at the next meeting when we

2:12:05 ↗ have a little bit more time. This strategy, as I mentioned, is entirely using fund

2:12:10 ↗ balance. It's the lowest cost option because the only interest would be foregone interest on

2:12:16 ↗ the amounts that we would be investing, but we're not paying interest on long-term debt.

2:12:22 ↗ um that said there's a cost it depletes our fund balance down to 3.4

2:12:27 ↗ million dollars above that 20 target which is really limiting our flexibility moving forward

2:12:33 ↗ so that's that's the main reason in addition it's not sharing the cost with

2:12:39 ↗ future beneficiaries who will be using this open space should this acquisition go through

2:12:44 ↗ option three would be to entirely fund this with a bank loan Option

2:12:50 ↗ three is a bank loan. Option four is bonds. Bank loans offer a

2:12:56 ↗ slightly lower interest rate. The other advantage that they offer is a slightly

2:13:02 ↗ lower interest rate than bonds. The other advantage that they offer is there's no pre

2:13:07 ↗ penalty for prepayment. So we would have flexibility to prepay for the amounts we would

2:13:13 ↗ recover from bonds. Um, the downside of this is it's it's a little bit more

2:13:18 ↗ expensive than option one. Um, and um, we wouldn't have very much debt capacity left

2:13:24 ↗ under this because we're limited to $10 million under a bank qualified loan. So there

2:13:29 ↗ wouldn't be a lot of wiggle room should the council decide it wishes to debt

2:13:35 ↗ finance other priorities later in the year. And then finally, the last option is to

2:13:41 ↗ go with long-term bonds. This is the most expensive of the options we're considering. Again,

2:13:46 ↗ to use that benchmark, it would be equivalent to about $21 to each taxpayer per

2:13:51 ↗ year for this. The downside with this strategy is you're locked in. If we put

2:13:56 ↗ in prepayments for those grants and we didn't receive the grants, we would still be

2:14:01 ↗ obligated to make those early payments. So there is a little bit of a risk.

2:14:06 ↗ With that the other thing I would mention here is it does take longer to

2:14:11 ↗ issue bonds than it does to issue a bank loan And so we likely wouldn't

2:14:16 ↗ have the cash at the time of closing. We would need to rely on fund

2:14:21 ↗ balance for about a month So anyway, that's option four And then as I mentioned,

2:14:26 ↗ financing schedule, just the main point of this slide is that it takes longer to

2:14:31 ↗ issue bonds than a bank qualified loan. If we went with a bank qualified loan,

2:14:35 ↗ we would have the cash in hand prior to closing on February 20th. If we

2:14:40 ↗ went with bonds, it would take about a month longer, six weeks longer. And so

2:14:45 ↗ we would need fund balance in that interim period of time until we receive the

2:14:50 ↗ proceeds from the bond sale. So as I mentioned, the administration's recommending that

2:14:56 ↗ we go with option one if the council does decide to proceed with this land

2:15:02 ↗ acquisition. We don't need to make a final decision. We don't need you to make

2:15:07 ↗ a final decision until January 7th. But certainly we would welcome any feedback you have

2:15:13 ↗ about preferred options, variations on options that we could develop between now and January 7th

2:15:19 ↗ so that we could bring that back to you for a decision assuming you go

2:15:25 ↗ forward with the purchase and sale agreement. Thank you, Beth. Is Jeff still hanging around

2:15:30 ↗ and do you have anything else to add? Okay, so hang around for questions. So

2:15:36 ↗ thank you so much for hanging around for two and a half hours or two

2:15:40 ↗ hours and 15 minutes. I just want to make sure it's clear to those of

2:15:45 ↗ you who stayed what the rest of our process looks like this evening. The council

2:15:50 ↗ will now have an opportunity to ask questions of staff and we'll take turns

2:15:56 ↗ and see how many questions we have. Expect the council member then to make

2:16:02 ↗ a motion and council will have some time to deliberate and discuss on camera

2:16:08 ↗ before they take a vote. Questions? Okay. I'm gonna go with Council Member Hunt

2:16:13 ↗ and Council President Martz. This is a question for Director Watling.

2:16:19 ↗ How does this property fit into the Green Necklace Plan and the

2:16:25 ↗ Park Strategic Plan? And what's the role of this particular property in

2:16:31 ↗ both of those plans? Yeah, great question. Park Plan first, as we...

2:16:37 ↗ uh did extensive community uh surveys and feedback it certainly fit

2:16:43 ↗ into the plan in multiple forms i think first was this

2:16:49 ↗ decades-long vision and really priority that the cities had for hillside

2:16:54 ↗ acquisitions and purchasing the Issaquah Alps and other areas. It definitely

2:17:00 ↗ was resoundingly reinforced as we went through this plan. As I'm

2:17:06 ↗ looking at the plan, I can actually give you some project

2:17:11 ↗ numbers. We also had a project identified that I

2:17:17 ↗ had mentioned earlier in regards to that connection between

2:17:22 ↗ the valley floor between Tibbets Park and Cougar Mountain

2:17:28 ↗ as well as Tibbets Valley floor to Talus. So

2:17:34 ↗ both of those projects were identified within the plan. If you're familiar with

2:17:39 ↗ the plan, page 49 identifies all of the projects, and I can tell

2:17:45 ↗ you that projects 43 and 44 were the two projects that specifically identified

2:17:51 ↗ this project, along with really the goal and policy of preservation of hillsides.

2:17:57 ↗ Within the green necklace, That also resonated very clearly as we worked with

2:18:03 ↗ the Development Services Department on what that vision was, reinforcing the vision

2:18:08 ↗ of how our green spaces serve Central Issaquah, in particular the Central

2:18:14 ↗ Issaquah Plan. the concept and the reality that we were looking at

2:18:20 ↗ how to create a public park system that supports and surrounds Central

2:18:25 ↗ Issaquah and that really future development area for the city, it adjoins

2:18:31 ↗ and supports our current residents who really surround that central Issaquah

2:18:37 ↗ area. And then lastly, how it also adjoins those two concentric

2:18:43 ↗ circles to the larger concentric circle, the larger necklace, which is

2:18:49 ↗ this public resource land that surrounds the community. As I mentioned

2:18:54 ↗ earlier, this 46 acres with its really geographic location right there at the

2:19:00 ↗ edge of central is a claw and really the gateway into cougar

2:19:06 ↗ mountain one of our 3 Alps. It fits. I can't present marks.

2:19:12 ↗ So I'll follow up on that so I'm looking at page 49.

2:19:17 ↗ 44 Hillside acquisitions it doesn't actually say there's a sp it says

2:19:23 ↗ no locations identified. You said it talked about this specifically but it's

2:19:29 ↗ really hillside acquisitions in general which follows on the general there's a

2:19:35 ↗ general strategy item. A 2.7 for Parkland acquisitions right but it's but

2:19:40 ↗ it's not the specific project right. OK and then the page 54

2:19:46 ↗ is the green necklace and it doesn't look like this is part

2:19:52 ↗ of the green necklace.

2:19:58 ↗ That map identifies current public lands. So given that this isn't an

2:20:04 ↗ existing public land, we certainly didn't want to identify it or market

2:20:10 ↗ on that map. Well, that map does identify proposed major public space

2:20:16 ↗ or connection, right? And as part of that, it identifies a lot

2:20:21 ↗ of areas that are not currently owned by the city. Right.

2:20:27 ↗ That map also is focused on that map happens to be the necklace that's looking

2:20:32 ↗ at the priorities within the central Issaquah area within the central squad plan again, not

2:20:37 ↗ as a not as a Debate, but if you look at chapter 7 of the

2:20:42 ↗ strategic plan that goes in further into the green necklace And talks about some of

2:20:48 ↗ the other themes and goals of the green necklace the introduction really tries to point

2:20:53 ↗ out that that that map that you saw on the prior page that really is

2:20:58 ↗ looking at what the necklace looks like to support Central Issaquah and the Central Issaquah

2:21:03 ↗ plan, there are these concentric circles that also, as we engage with the community, the

2:21:07 ↗ green necklace was really meant not to just serve Central Issaquah, but to be that

2:21:12 ↗ connection out. You mentioned access to talus and item 43 can't you

2:21:18 ↗ access talus right now through big tree Ridge trail and precipice precipice

2:21:24 ↗ trail from where from. Newport Newport from Newport, yes, about about 500

2:21:30 ↗ meters up the road. I don't know I don't know the distance.

2:21:35 ↗ Well, they're there. Okay, so it's roughly 500 meters from from the

2:21:41 ↗ Burma property to the big tree Ridge trailhead. Right From there

2:21:47 ↗ is a trailhead right now right on Newport from which you can

2:21:53 ↗ get to tell us. Yes, correct. Okay So how does that trailhead?

2:21:59 ↗ differ in terms of There's a whole section in here on how

2:22:04 ↗ to quantify project prioritization checklist, right? And it gets at what new acquisitions

2:22:10 ↗ have to do with how to evaluate them, right? And part of it

2:22:16 ↗ has to do with what it changes for access. So what would change

2:22:22 ↗ given that there's a trailhead 500 meters up the road? So it would

2:22:28 ↗ change a number of things. So first it would change a more direct access

2:22:33 ↗ from Tallis down to a portion of town that the Big Bear Trailhead doesn't

2:22:39 ↗ necessarily address and more the Tibbetts area, Tibbetts Valley Park, the commercial, both existing

2:22:45 ↗ and future commercial space in that area. It also becomes a direct connection to

2:22:50 ↗ the Tibbetts Transit Center. which is also, in essence, becomes a default trailhead. So

2:22:56 ↗ in a lot of ways, that access point, we're now not just relying on

2:23:02 ↗ that trailhead off of Newport, but now that transit center could function as a

2:23:08 ↗ trailhead on weekends during the busiest times and for the busiest need. A couple

2:23:13 ↗ of other questions around the CFT funds that you mentioned. One is that you mentioned

2:23:19 ↗ McCary Woods, which I always get a smile from because Maureen was a good friend

2:23:24 ↗ of mine. That was 40 acres and I believe the out-of-pocket expense to the city

2:23:30 ↗ was about $800,000. How is it that we were able to spend $800,000 and get

2:23:35 ↗ 40 acres and we're talking about at a minimum 3.8 million for a comparable size

2:23:41 ↗ parcel? That's a great question. I wasn't here at the time. I could imagine that

2:23:47 ↗ either it was maybe not under the threat of developability at the time. I'm not

2:23:52 ↗ sure what its developable nature is. There's a lot of factors that factor into price

2:23:58 ↗ per acre. In this case, we are... pursuing a acquisition at the highest point of

2:24:03 ↗ proposed development. So big difference. And then the last is the second CFT question, which

2:24:09 ↗ is when you mentioned CFT funds, isn't it also the case that we have to

2:24:14 ↗ be careful with CFT funds because the King County Equity Initiative specifically targets the use

2:24:20 ↗ CFT funds towards equity situations and that's that map that we heard reference to earlier

2:24:26 ↗ that does not include really any place east of Lake Washington right it's all historically

2:24:32 ↗ underserved areas north in Seattle and north and south of Seattle right so the access

2:24:38 ↗ to CFT funds seems like as the county moves towards this new land processes is

2:24:44 ↗ going to leave us disadvantaged for CFT funds No, and as Christy True had

2:24:50 ↗ mentioned in her public comment, not necessarily. In fact, not at all. The map,

2:24:55 ↗ the equity map is a new initiative as part of LCI that the county

2:25:01 ↗ looked at allowing for those cities, those small areas that were identified as equity

2:25:07 ↗ in need, could be eligible to apply for grants and not have to come

2:25:13 ↗ up with the local match. In this case, as we are

2:25:18 ↗ already pursuing our funding strategy and should we choose to proceed

2:25:24 ↗ with this purchase, we would be presenting an application into that

2:25:29 ↗ CFT fund with a 50% match in place. So it would

2:25:35 ↗ have no bearing on eligibility or lack of eligibility for this

2:25:40 ↗ project. Okay, thank you. Yep. Any questions? Let's see,

2:25:46 ↗ I've got, I'm going to go to Deputy Council President Bautiste first

2:25:52 ↗ and then to Council Member Hunt. Thank you for the presentation, Jeff.

2:25:58 ↗ Could you, from a connection standpoint, could you just tell me a

2:26:03 ↗ little bit more about Harvey Manning Park and the Cougar Mountain Regional

2:26:09 ↗ Wildland area? Sure, in terms-- Connection points, so is that, I guess,

2:26:15 ↗ just trying to better understand how this

2:26:20 ↗ acquisition impacts those two parks. See if

2:26:26 ↗ I can maybe visually reflect that.

2:26:33 ↗ So a little context for this map the the southern portion where you're

2:26:39 ↗ seeing the smaller residential lots That's the what would be the northern edge

2:26:45 ↗ of talus the talus neighborhood Harvey Manning Park And sorry for my chicken

2:26:50 ↗ scratch. That's my handwriting apologize Harvey Manning Park is the existing park I don't

2:26:56 ↗ have exact acreage, one acre and a half-ish that supports the

2:27:02 ↗ Tallis neighborhood. This property allows for, as I was saying earlier,

2:27:08 ↗ that connection down to the valley floor, Tibbetts Valley Park and

2:27:13 ↗ the transit center that I was mentioning earlier. It's located right

2:27:19 ↗ in this area. The 12.5 acres that you see in blue that

2:27:25 ↗ would identify the property that King County would be purchasing. There is a significant size

2:27:31 ↗ ravine that actually separates the 12.5 acres from the 33 acres. Harvey Manning Park certainly

2:27:36 ↗ is a trailhead that could then go into, so the Cougar Mountain Park area, the

2:27:42 ↗ King County managed Cougar Mountain Park, regional park, is really west of

2:27:48 ↗ that 12.5 acres. The trailhead on Newport that was mentioned

2:27:54 ↗ earlier sits to the north along Newport on the other

2:27:59 ↗ side of that ravine that Council President March had mentioned

2:28:05 ↗ in terms of that trailhead. Thank you. Council Member Hunt.

2:28:11 ↗ So a quick question about the trailhead location. Could you explain if the

2:28:17 ↗ property were to be acquired where the where you as parks director would

2:28:23 ↗ envision the trailhead being in relation particularly to the transit center? Could you

2:28:28 ↗ describe that or point it out on the map? Absolutely. Point out

2:28:34 ↗ where the transit center is? Transit center is where you would envision access

2:28:40 ↗ through the property. You bet. So forgive me as I venture over here.

2:28:46 ↗ Don't talk because we won't be able to hear you. Okay. I'll point

2:28:52 ↗ and then I'll come back and talk. Thank you. So those awkward

2:28:58 ↗ hands were trying to demonstrate the transit center where that's located. This 33

2:29:04 ↗ acre piece and really this, let me get my directions, this sort of

2:29:10 ↗ south eastern side really becomes the point with which we could create a

2:29:16 ↗ much more direct trail access up from the the Transit Center and and really

2:29:21 ↗ from the valley floor and eventually central Issaquah up into into Cougar Mountain. And I

2:29:27 ↗ have a follow-up question to Council President Martz question regarding the parks plan and forested

2:29:33 ↗ hillsides not specifically calling out this property. Within the city limits are there other Issaquah

2:29:39 ↗ Alps forested hillside properties of this size that are undeveloped open space and currently privately

2:29:45 ↗ owned? From what we

2:29:51 ↗ can tell on the the the Issaquah

2:29:57 ↗ Alps facing slopes Within Issaquah, this would

2:30:02 ↗ represent the largest remaining privately held property

2:30:08 ↗ More questions remember winter Steiner Goodman checking

2:30:14 ↗ in remember interesting. All right. Thank you.

2:30:20 ↗ It's impossible to argue against the value

2:30:26 ↗ of this land into the city as

2:30:31 ↗ a park there's it's I do appreciate all

2:30:37 ↗ the comments that came earlier and agree that

2:30:42 ↗ the benefits but also the opportunity to avoid

2:30:48 ↗ another outcome is are are very Stark And though,

2:30:54 ↗ as I said earlier in the evening, I talked about the need to find housing

2:30:59 ↗ for a lot more people coming here, hillsides in Issaquah, something like this as almost

2:31:05 ↗ a keystone property as this appears to be, I think is worthy of our consideration

2:31:10 ↗ even to kind of take it off the market for development. Jeff, there's been

2:31:16 ↗ a lot of numbers kicked around this evening, lots of them, right? So I

2:31:22 ↗ want to summarize it really quick and then I'm going to get to a

2:31:28 ↗ couple of pointed questions. Those 46 acres are being offered for $11 million.

2:31:34 ↗ County is indicated and we're going to consider an MOU with them in

2:31:39 ↗ this tonight possibly to buy those western 12 and a half acres and

2:31:45 ↗ that leaves those 33 and a half for us, which the price to

2:31:51 ↗ us would be roughly $10.6 million. We heard earlier from Finance that

2:31:56 ↗ we'll get the Trust for Public Land in their generosity is offered

2:32:02 ↗ an interest-free bridge loan of $3 million to reduce the amount of

2:32:08 ↗ cash that we have to come up at closing, but still we

2:32:13 ↗ would be obligated to repay the $3 million. This is a $10.6

2:32:19 ↗ million acquisition consideration by the city. extremely unprecedented at the price.

2:32:25 ↗ There may be something else in the history, but not in my seven

2:32:30 ↗ years of sitting here. And we also heard this evening that based upon,

2:32:36 ↗ the Finance Director kept saying fund balance, and if you were confused by

2:32:42 ↗ that, if you're not familiar like we are, cash on hand. So she

2:32:47 ↗ talked quite a bit about the cash on hand that we have.

2:32:53 ↗ And so I'm gonna use that phrase instead of fund balance. That between the cash

2:32:59 ↗ on hand, and she also talked about what type of debt we would qualify for,

2:33:04 ↗ we have enough of a line of credit. Between cash on hand and our available

2:33:10 ↗ line of credit, we have access to money to do this. And remarkably, with

2:33:16 ↗ only perhaps minimally impacting, well, let's say the signalization on 43rd for Providence

2:33:21 ↗ Point, which by the way, however, it does impact it. We also heard

2:33:27 ↗ during the budget this evening about all the new positions we just authorized,

2:33:32 ↗ but there also were two requests for public safety for police positions that

2:33:38 ↗ are not funded in this budget. that to use our cash on

2:33:44 ↗ hand and perhaps to make loan payments using our cash flow

2:33:50 ↗ takes away from our ability to hire additional people. The cost

2:33:55 ↗ to us to do this, to use this funding has a

2:34:01 ↗ direct impact on other things that are also important to the

2:34:07 ↗ city, such as hiring police officers. That, it's really, if someone asked me,

2:34:13 ↗ "Hey, should we get a 46-acre park?" I'd say yes. Councilmember Winterstein, is this a

2:34:18 ↗ teeing up questions? I'm getting to my point. Thank you. I have the floor. I'm

2:34:23 ↗ not yielding the floor yet. Because I think my, what I'm trying to get to

2:34:29 ↗ the point is that this is a very big ask. And if you said it's

2:34:34 ↗ 10.6 and that was it, I would say no. Sorry, it's too big. If you

2:34:40 ↗ said eight, I'd say it's too big. If you said five, I'd say it's too

2:34:45 ↗ big. As a matter of fact, when we were first considering this, I was thinking,

2:34:50 ↗ boy, maybe two, maybe three. Now, by the math that you've come up with, you

2:34:55 ↗ think long-term, if everything works out okay, it would be 3.8 to us. So I

2:34:59 ↗ sit here and go, okay, that's beyond my stretch number. I think it's a keystone

2:35:05 ↗ property. I think we're in a very unique situation that maybe we can get our

2:35:10 ↗ hands on this. But I see a risk between 3.8 and 10.6. And there are,

2:35:16 ↗ you have identified, I think, five potential funding sources for us to cover that gap.

2:35:21 ↗ To or to actually receive some back the biggest one which is that land, you

2:35:26 ↗ know conservation initiative or LCI now I think there was an individual here this evening.

2:35:32 ↗ I don't know if The woman from King County from LCI program is still here,

2:35:37 ↗ but I did very much appreciate Her presence because Things like this have to go

2:35:42 ↗ through they have to go through people they have to go through a process right

2:35:47 ↗ and so there has to be County staff that are like the idea. But then

2:35:53 ↗ it has to go to the advisory committee. Now we haven't heard a lot about

2:35:59 ↗ the advisory committee, but could you, I'm gonna ask you a couple questions about these

2:36:04 ↗ funders because in my mind, I'm gonna based upon how well you convince me that

2:36:10 ↗ we actually have a chance to get this money, how strongly I believe we can

2:36:15 ↗ actually get it down to 3.8 million. That's gonna be a key factor in my

2:36:20 ↗ decision. So this big one, LCI, is the biggest one of all. I know where

2:36:25 ↗ the money comes from. I know it's about, it's borrowing money against future property taxes

2:36:29 ↗ that the county's gonna collect. I think it's a wonderful program and I'm grateful that

2:36:34 ↗ it's available to us. So the We understand that

2:36:40 ↗ the county staff has to have some support for what we're doing. I

2:36:46 ↗ think that's been represented very well here today. Tell me about the advisory

2:36:52 ↗ committee that would be receiving our application. When would this take place? And

2:36:57 ↗ of the advisory committee that you think that would be involved with reviewing

2:37:03 ↗ this, how familiar are they with this potential acquisition? That's my first

2:37:09 ↗ question. Okay. So we work with the committee on an annual basis for our

2:37:15 ↗ applications, for a number of things. I know the committee has, as they come

2:37:21 ↗ out every year and tour prospective sites, they have seen this site, they're aware

2:37:27 ↗ of the site, they're aware of Bergsma as a property. So it is not

2:37:33 ↗ a, it would It would not be an application that would be a new site

2:37:38 ↗ for them. So when would the question be in front of them? When would

2:37:44 ↗ they be considering our application? So as I had identified earlier, applications will be

2:37:50 ↗ filled out this first quarter. They'll be due March 6th of next year.

2:37:56 ↗ Okay, okay, so we're just about three months away from applications are due and so

2:38:01 ↗ you've had some contact there's some familiarity with the Advisory Committee You know with this

2:38:06 ↗ parcel land is there gonna be any change on that committee? Do we know is

2:38:11 ↗ there any like? Reappointments or changes, you know people turnover is is a risk to

2:38:16 ↗ two issues like this is the same be the same committee No turnover, okay All

2:38:21 ↗ right. And I will say, I think there was a public comment tonight, which I

2:38:27 ↗ really appreciated. I appreciated the words that were brought forward by one of those existing

2:38:33 ↗ committee members who spoke, you know, very glowingly about what this opportunity represents. And that

2:38:39 ↗ was very meaningful to me. Thank you for those words. It helps me quite a

2:38:45 ↗ bit to know that there's a committee that's familiar, the ones that are going to

2:38:50 ↗ assess our application are still going to be there, and at least one member there

2:38:55 ↗ has willingly, openly expressed their strong support for this project. Now, they've got to go

2:38:59 ↗ through the process, and we have to respect that. I've got that. Now, after that,

2:39:04 ↗ however, they're just making a recommendation, right? And that recommendation is going to... King

2:39:10 ↗ County Council. Then it goes to the County Council. I would need to... Okay. And

2:39:16 ↗ so in what timeframe would the King County Council be assessing that? So they're looking

2:39:22 ↗ at reviewing those applications, at least how county has spelled it out right now, July

2:39:28 ↗ 1st. They would be reviewing those applications and making decisions. I would need to phone

2:39:34 ↗ a friend and ask Kirstie True if there was any other details on that process.

2:39:43 ↗ Sorry, Christy. Thank you. With respect to that process, the committee's

2:39:48 ↗ recommendation is very heavily weighted. And as far as I know,

2:39:54 ↗ I cannot think of a time when the executive and the

2:40:00 ↗ council have not supported the advisory committee's recommendations. So I think once

2:40:06 ↗ that goes through that you're in really solid ground there. And I would say Jeff

2:40:11 ↗ is correct that this is going to be a very highly competitive application. And because

2:40:16 ↗ there's so much more money that's going to be available this next year, we're really

2:40:21 ↗ going to be looking for especially city projects to be coming through the doors that

2:40:27 ↗ March 6th application deadline nears. Okay. And still on that same topic, then what are

2:40:32 ↗ the key criteria that are going to be considered for these funds, and

2:40:38 ↗ how do we line up? How will this application score, Jeff? How do

2:40:44 ↗ you think, based upon what you know, how will this do? Do you

2:40:50 ↗ have those criteria? I have... as county has submitted or provided in this PowerPoint

2:40:56 ↗ presentation, what looks to be considerations for those bond projects. I'm not sure if they

2:41:01 ↗ finalized criteria, but they certainly, this project falls right in line with that. I'm not

2:41:06 ↗ an odds maker and I'm not going to try and be that, but certainly when

2:41:11 ↗ you look at, is it an acquisition that can occur in late 19 or sooner?

2:41:16 ↗ In that case, it's already happened. I think we meet that in spades.

2:41:22 ↗ That's certainly the second bullet. Is it highly likely to happen, to

2:41:28 ↗ be successful? Yes. Is the match secured? Yes, absolutely. That match would

2:41:34 ↗ already be underway. Before you go off that one, Jeff, I'm sorry.

2:41:39 ↗ If we would be asking for $5.327 million, could you explain that?

2:41:45 ↗ How is the match there? If... Do you explain that

2:41:51 ↗ for me? Because we were getting a bridge loan of three million. I just didn't

2:41:57 ↗ understand how there'd be a match. Yeah, well, I think in terms of completing the

2:42:03 ↗ transaction and that that transaction's already would have occurred as we're submitting this application, as

2:42:08 ↗ we are presenting our funding strategy, I think Go ahead, Kristi. Yeah, I would just

2:42:14 ↗ say this is not an unusual situation actually for these kinds of acquisitions, especially on

2:42:20 ↗ large parcels where there are several different funds that are coming together. And certainly, you

2:42:26 ↗ know, the city's interest and what it's willing to put forward as match as well

2:42:31 ↗ as the commitment for the additional grant. funds. I mean, we're all in on helping

2:42:37 ↗ the city to identify those other grants and support those grant sources. So I think

2:42:42 ↗ it's, I'm very optimistic that these various sources will be able to come together and

2:42:48 ↗ having the 5 million roughly from CFT is going to be very, very attractive. to

2:42:53 ↗ the other grant funds, particularly the state grant funds. They're going to look at what's

2:42:57 ↗ already been assembled and a commitment from CFT and view that very positively because everybody

2:43:02 ↗ wants to then kind of be the next chunk of money to come in to

2:43:07 ↗ make it a final deal. Yeah, I appreciate that. So clearly here we're talking about,

2:43:11 ↗ you know, certain basic terms. I'm sure there's others very critical about the property and

2:43:16 ↗ its attributes as well. We're not seeing any of those. But I do appreciate

2:43:22 ↗ that answer quite a bit. I think I just learned that from a matching

2:43:28 ↗ perspective, just our plan to apply for those other funds from the state RCO

2:43:34 ↗ office and perhaps the county carbon credit program is sufficient per this application to

2:43:40 ↗ qualify as this 50% match that's required. Okay. Okay. And the reason

2:43:46 ↗ about my question too, so it would probably be in front of the county council

2:43:50 ↗ before the end of the year. That's what we anticipate. Okay. It'd be

2:43:56 ↗ part of a supplemental towards the maybe fourth quarter. Okay. And that's

2:44:02 ↗ pretty critical as well. There are four county council seats that are

2:44:08 ↗ up for election in 2019. And I think I heard during audience

2:44:14 ↗ comments earlier today, All four, three or maybe all four of those up for reelection

2:44:20 ↗ were at least, were visited and had offered their verbal support in recognition for this

2:44:25 ↗ program. So in my mind, I puzzled this together that we have a staff person

2:44:31 ↗ in yourself who's familiar with this, who's providing some coaching through the process. We had

2:44:36 ↗ an advisory committee that's largely aware of this. already that as currently in panel would

2:44:42 ↗ be those that are evaluating our application. And we have terms of criteria that at

2:44:47 ↗ least at this level, not at the technical, maybe the land itself that we're seeing,

2:44:53 ↗ but in terms of the timing and the funding and the match, those are real

2:44:58 ↗ critical things. Those criteria, it looks like we line up with very well.

2:45:04 ↗ We know finally there's going to be county council members that approve

2:45:09 ↗ or deny the application from the advisory committee. Those are the points

2:45:15 ↗ I'm trying to make very, very clear because I will tell you

2:45:21 ↗ that that assessment is, I consider a positive one. And so I

2:45:26 ↗ appreciate that. We seem to have a very good sense of the players involved, the

2:45:32 ↗ timings involved, and the timing and when these things are gonna happen. I will say

2:45:38 ↗ also, I really appreciated earlier the bringing up of the equity portion of that. And

2:45:44 ↗ it's good to know about that program. But just to get clarification about that

2:45:50 ↗ as well, that the lands already identified perhaps for this equity, whatever you want

2:45:56 ↗ to call it, they don't really have any more points. They just don't have

2:46:01 ↗ the burden of having to come up with the match funds. So It's not

2:46:07 ↗ like they would score and be more competitive than us, but they just,

2:46:13 ↗ because of their location, don't have the match requirement. - That's correct. -

2:46:18 ↗ Okay, all right, that helps pretty good. I do have some additional questions

2:46:24 ↗ about the other funding sources, but for the moment, I'm glad to yield

2:46:30 ↗ the floor to others who may have some questions. - More questions? Looks

2:46:35 ↗ like you're on, Councilmember Winterson. - Okay. Thank you. Jeff, I

2:46:41 ↗ appreciate it earlier. Fantastic. I had asked Jeff,

2:46:47 ↗ I said, obviously the LCI, we know them,

2:46:52 ↗ they know us. And I asked Jeff to help me with this. What

2:46:58 ↗ about that other $1.5 million in your plan? How much risk is associated with those?

2:47:04 ↗ And one way to assess that is to understand, have we applied for monies from

2:47:09 ↗ these organizations before? And if so, how did we do? So you've partially answered that.

2:47:15 ↗ You talked about when it comes to the Wildlife and Recreation Program, local parks acquisition

2:47:21 ↗ program, fund or whatever it's called. In the past, we've received a million

2:47:27 ↗ dollars for money related to Confluence Park, about $500,000 for Central Park, and

2:47:33 ↗ I think there was another $500,000 in there for Central Park as well.

2:47:38 ↗ So those are wins. But Jeff, just a little, so We probably haven't

2:47:44 ↗ figured it out yet, but it would be probably an ask around those

2:47:50 ↗ same amounts around half a million, 500,000 for that. What do you see

2:47:56 ↗ are the risks and our challenges for that fund, the local parks acquisition?

2:48:02 ↗ Specifically local parks acquisition? I think similar risks as to

2:48:07 ↗ the LCI program exist, perhaps on a recognizing that we

2:48:13 ↗ are competing at a state level for those grants. But

2:48:19 ↗ as I said, we will work very closely with RCO

2:48:25 ↗ staff Once the application materials are posted, those aren't yet, as

2:48:31 ↗ I said earlier, we'd be submitting a waiver of retroactivity once

2:48:36 ↗ we understand what the grant is, once we understand what the

2:48:42 ↗ grant maximum is, once we begin to understand what portion typically in

2:48:48 ↗ the local parks fund itself a certain percentage has to go towards acquisition

2:48:54 ↗ so that bodes very well and that we would we would be submitting

2:48:59 ↗ an app an acquisition grant for local parks it's hard to it's hard

2:49:05 ↗ to quantify or or nail down what those risks are until we begin to understand

2:49:11 ↗ what the actual application materials are what would be the time frame for that what

2:49:16 ↗ year would we do that that would be a 2020 application process okay and and

2:49:22 ↗ you talked about where we've been successful um do we have examples of grant

2:49:28 ↗ applications to this fund for local parks acquisition where we haven't been successful uh

2:49:33 ↗ i would need to research that um we haven't we haven't submitted in my

2:49:39 ↗ time Okay. The other fund was the Urban Wildlife Habitat. You talked about a couple

2:49:44 ↗ wins. I was trying to catch all of those. I think it would have been

2:49:49 ↗ great to see them on a slide, but I was trying to catch them anyway.

2:49:53 ↗ You talked about a couple from 2006. McCary Woods, Inge Johnson, there was maybe another

2:49:59 ↗ one in there, but they all seem to go back quite a ways. Now that

2:50:04 ↗ seems to be one where maybe our odds aren't as good. It's been a long

2:50:10 ↗ time. the people involved with that decision-making? I don't know. These are the questions. Help

2:50:16 ↗ me understand kind of the people in the process and, you know, what are the

2:50:21 ↗ risks for us as relates to applying for an urban wildlife habitat grant? So the

2:50:26 ↗ same RCO office administers both grants, so it wouldn't be a different group of players

2:50:32 ↗ per se. I could certainly confirm this, but My guess is the city has not

2:50:38 ↗ applied for urban wildlife habitat in In that period of time. I'm given some of

2:50:43 ↗ the turnover that happened within the department and and other things and Urban Wildlife

2:50:49 ↗ Habitat is actually a, in my assessment, this project, given its

2:50:55 ↗ size, given the urban setting, that grant is specifically, we'd be

2:51:01 ↗ competing for candidate projects that have to be of a size

2:51:07 ↗ and a scale such as this in an urban area. That's

2:51:13 ↗ a pretty small field. Again, I can't Vegas doesn't have odds,

2:51:18 ↗ but this would be a really strong candidate within that applicant pool.

2:51:24 ↗ Okay, so this one's a little bit different compared to the local

2:51:30 ↗ parks acquisition in that we don't have current experience with that. We

2:51:35 ↗ have... I professionally have experience applying in Sammamish, the Beaver Lake Preserve, I'll be

2:51:41 ↗ specific, right north of Beaver Lake Park. That was one of the city's first

2:51:47 ↗ successful grant acquisitions, and that was Urban Wildlife Habitat grant process that I led.

2:51:54 ↗ Okay, and then for the last, well, the second to last one, the Land, Water,

2:51:58 ↗ Conservation Fund, I only caught the one in 2011. You said we got about a

2:52:03 ↗ half a million for Confluence Park. Were there others? Do you know of other applications

2:52:07 ↗ where we haven't been successful? I do not know. No. do you do you think

2:52:13 ↗ we've was that there's there only been one if we had other applications in that

2:52:17 ↗ area i would need to confirm that i'm not certain in your professional experience have

2:52:22 ↗ you been there into that one before i sure have yes in the city of

2:52:27 ↗ kent where i recently was lake meridian park dock replacement we were successful in receiving

2:52:31 ↗ lwcf funds okay okay and then the last one i wanted to ask about was

2:52:36 ↗ the carbon credit program sounds like that's brand new So that one

2:52:42 ↗ is just, we don't have any information. We know based upon the

2:52:47 ↗ description of that fund that it's something we might have a

2:52:53 ↗ good application for but we have no experience with the people in the process and

2:52:59 ↗ the decision making there yeah that's a that's different that's not an application program that's

2:53:04 ↗ a credit program that as staff is beginning to prepare that and see what that

2:53:10 ↗ looks like we've been meeting with them they are very excited about again 46 acres

2:53:16 ↗ of treed, heavily wooded, forested hillside in an urban

2:53:21 ↗ area. I think it's an immensely strong candidate to

2:53:27 ↗ allow interested private sector to purchase carbon credits, to purchase mitigation

2:53:33 ↗ credits off of that property. That with these other grants, we would already

2:53:39 ↗ have conservation easements on that site. It is a new program and it's

2:53:44 ↗ one that we would follow and want this property, should we proceed with

2:53:50 ↗ it, to be considered. As I mentioned earlier, when you look proportionally at

2:53:56 ↗ this funding strategy, 78% of these funding sources come from

2:54:02 ↗ the LCI application. Of the remaining 22%, I would certainly

2:54:08 ↗ say that the carbon program is the smallest portion that

2:54:14 ↗ we would anticipate of receiving funds, but we feel like

2:54:19 ↗ it's such a... the site is such a strong candidate, it would

2:54:25 ↗ be worth pursuing that funding source. I want to point out one thing

2:54:31 ↗ because this is a great conversation and I just want to emphasize as

2:54:37 ↗ your staff representative that we were asked to pursue a scenario for consideration

2:54:42 ↗ of what it would take to purchase this property. and asked to

2:54:48 ↗ do so in a really complex situation. A development application is

2:54:53 ↗ in. What is before you is through a lot of hard

2:54:59 ↗ work, our best option. And I don't mean to say that as a

2:55:05 ↗ threat. I'm just saying as staff, we did our darndest to see what a scenario

2:55:11 ↗ would look like to even consider purchase of this property. It is ambitious. It's going

2:55:16 ↗ to require a lot of funding sources to make happen should we consider to proceed

2:55:22 ↗ with this. Should we not consider to proceed with this? We again desired to

2:55:28 ↗ do our work on your behalf to see what it would take to purchase

2:55:34 ↗ this property. Questions? If there are no additional questions, would someone care to make

2:55:40 ↗ a motion? Council Member Hunt. Actually, before you make a motion, I just want

2:55:46 ↗ to clarify an earlier comment that I made. I did mention earlier that when Council

2:55:52 ↗ is voting tonight and we are short staffed a little bit with five out of

2:55:56 ↗ seven if they're voting on an ordinance they needed to have four council members to

2:56:00 ↗ vote in favor for an ordinance to pass this is not an ordinance this vote

2:56:04 ↗ requires three council members out of five in order to pass so the way we're

2:56:08 ↗ going to proceed is we'll have a motion Council will have time to talk amongst

2:56:13 ↗ themselves and deliberate where they are on the issue and talk to how they're going

2:56:18 ↗ to vote. And then I'll call for the vote when their deliberations are complete. Is

2:56:24 ↗ there a motion? - Ms. Member Hunt. - I move to authorize the mayor

2:56:30 ↗ to enter into and execute all necessary documents to acquire the 46-acre site on Cougar

2:56:35 ↗ Mountain known as the Bergsma property in the amount of $11 million in partnership with

2:56:40 ↗ the Trust for Public Lands in King County and direct the administration to draft an

2:56:45 ↗ agenda bill with a recommended financing option to come before the full council for decision

2:56:50 ↗ at the January 7th, 2019 council meeting. - Is there a second? - Second. It's

2:56:56 ↗ been moved and seconded. Discussion? Council Member Hunt. Issaquah thrives as a welcoming community, creating

2:57:01 ↗ a sustainable legacy that honors our rich history and passion for the natural environment. This

2:57:06 ↗ will probably sound familiar to some of you in the audience and definitely will sound

2:57:12 ↗ familiar to all of us up on the dais because that is the vision that's

2:57:17 ↗ put forward in our draft strategic plan. And I think that this vision speaks to

2:57:23 ↗ three main reasons why I believe we should go forward with the acquisition this evening.

2:57:28 ↗ And that is for our history as a city that has valued conservation in the

2:57:34 ↗ past, our current population, our current communities, passion for the natural environment and our nature

2:57:39 ↗ as a welcoming city that will soon be welcoming more residents and wants to provide

2:57:45 ↗ a sustainable legacy for people that will be coming to Issaquah in the future and

2:57:50 ↗ for our children that live in Issaquah today. In terms of history, this parcel,

2:57:56 ↗ as was shown on the map, it fits between Harvey Manning Park and the Cougar

2:58:01 ↗ Mountain Regional Wildland Park. It fits like a puzzle piece that completes this network of

2:58:07 ↗ green spaces. Harvey Manning was a naturalist. He wrote hiking guides He was a

2:58:13 ↗ strong proponent of making sure that people were able to enjoy nature and I think

2:58:19 ↗ that it's a it's a fitting continuation of our history that we are considering adding

2:58:25 ↗ this parcel which is adjacent to Harvey Manning Park at this time and Harvey Manning

2:58:31 ↗ Park is connects with talus and That it would connect talus down to the valley

2:58:36 ↗ floor and it really fits like this puzzle piece that makes up the existing

2:58:42 ↗ forested hillsides. I also think that we, in our recent history, have direction

2:58:48 ↗ from past council in terms of those things that we need to value

2:58:54 ↗ and preserve going forward. In the early 1990s and 1993 to be exact,

2:58:59 ↗ there was the Treasurer's List and this is an appendix a land use appendix that

2:59:05 ↗ is referred to in our comprehensive plan of the city. And in this treasurer's list,

2:59:10 ↗ there are a number of different important things that the community valued at that time

2:59:15 ↗ and that the community, I believe, still values today and will continue to value into

2:59:20 ↗ the future. It includes the Issaquah Alps in their natural state, it's very clear, and

2:59:25 ↗ it includes things like wildland for wildlife as well as the clouds and mists that

2:59:30 ↗ float down over the Issaquah Alps. And I think that this is a very creative

2:59:35 ↗ document for city planning, but at the same time it requires us to be creative

2:59:39 ↗ in terms of how do we actually preserve these treasures. And I think that we

2:59:43 ↗ should do everything to preserve them and nothing to diminish them as we go forward.

2:59:47 ↗ And we should use that guidance from past councils about what our community values. Present

2:59:53 ↗ day, we definitely have a community that feels strongly that this is an important, that

2:59:59 ↗ the natural spaces and having access to open spaces is important. I think one of

3:00:04 ↗ the biggest issues at stake here is the view shed. I think everyone in Issaquah

3:00:10 ↗ really values the views and having views of beautiful forested hillsides and the serenity and

3:00:16 ↗ the peace that comes from that. I will say that I recently struck up a

3:00:22 ↗ conversation with somebody at the gas station Blues and he was he had lived in

3:00:26 ↗ Issaquah a long time and I had never met him before and we struck up

3:00:31 ↗ a conversation because he was talking about how beautiful the light was at the sunset

3:00:35 ↗ and I think that this is something that the community really values and it's something

3:00:40 ↗ that unites us as a community and and it's something that everyone values in a

3:00:44 ↗ different way, but I think a lot of people, whether or not you choose to

3:00:48 ↗ mountain bike or choose to hike, everybody can enjoy looking up at the mountainsides and

3:00:53 ↗ the beauty that they provide. Then also access. I recall being on the Planning Policy

3:00:59 ↗ Commission and looking at some of these maps of the green necklace and the open

3:01:04 ↗ space. I recall there being fuzzy lines and fuzzy dotted lines and some arrows. I

3:01:09 ↗ think that part of that green necklace vision is really that as we go forward,

3:01:15 ↗ if we are able to make these connections, we will make those connections. This is

3:01:20 ↗ one of those connections. I distinctly recall there being some, room for making sure that

3:01:26 ↗ we can connect those open spaces like the Cougar Mountain Regional Wildland Park to the

3:01:32 ↗ valley floor and I think that this as an access point for people on the

3:01:38 ↗ valley floor to go into the urban areas is truly unique and really important. I

3:01:43 ↗ also I walked with my family from yesterday night from the

3:01:49 ↗ transit center to the precipice trail. I just checked on Google Maps too,

3:01:55 ↗ it's about half a mile. With my daughter who's four years old, she

3:02:01 ↗ was taking notes. So it took us about 19 minutes. I don't think it would

3:02:05 ↗ take that long if you were going without a four-year-old. But I thought for families,

3:02:09 ↗ this is actually a really important thing. There's also a small parking lot there, but

3:02:13 ↗ this is the transit center. So this is a major hub for transit. And I

3:02:17 ↗ think that in terms of having that transit center right there, having an access point,

3:02:21 ↗ directly next to the transit center, that took us the time it took to cross

3:02:26 ↗ the street. I think that took about three minutes, but again, you could probably get

3:02:31 ↗ there faster if you didn't have a four-year-old. I do think actually this makes a

3:02:36 ↗ huge difference in terms of having access to that trail. I think that having the

3:02:41 ↗ green necklace connected to these other hiking trails is so important and this is truly

3:02:46 ↗ a unique opportunity to realize that part of the vision. And then lastly, for

3:02:52 ↗ our future as a growing city, as a welcoming city, we will shortly be a

3:02:57 ↗ city, most likely we will shortly be a city of 50,000 people. As was stated

3:03:02 ↗ earlier, the region is expected to grow by 1.8 million by 2050. And as we

3:03:08 ↗ welcome more people, in particular also to the transit-oriented development that will be right next

3:03:13 ↗ to this next to this access point. I think that we need to make sure

3:03:19 ↗ that they continue to enjoy the quality of life that we enjoy and they continue

3:03:24 ↗ to enjoy the beautiful forested hillsides and the beautiful views. So many people here spoke

3:03:30 ↗ today about how important it is for their children to continue to enjoy hiking and

3:03:35 ↗ that connection with nature. I think it's very important today and will continue to be

3:03:40 ↗ just that important and more important as we welcome more people to the community who

3:03:46 ↗ will also want to and should be able to access nature and the hiking trails.

3:03:53 ↗ And I also lastly wanted to thank so much Christy True for coming this evening

3:03:57 ↗ and giving us more information. And for our partners, there has been a lot of

3:04:02 ↗ discussion today about the funding and we will have more opportunities to discuss the specifics

3:04:06 ↗ around the funding and also to reach out to the community and make sure that

3:04:11 ↗ the community understands the funding, that funding doesn't need to be decided tonight. But I

3:04:15 ↗ do appreciate all the information that was put forward. And I really appreciate all of

3:04:20 ↗ our partners, Trust for Public Lands, King County. And I know that there's a lot

3:04:25 ↗ of complexity that has gone into this. At the same time, I think that the

3:04:31 ↗ true beauty of this deal is in its simplicity. This is open space. It will

3:04:37 ↗ be open space for the future and it will be forested hillside for people to

3:04:43 ↗ enjoy today and for the future of Issaquah to enjoy. So for our history

3:04:48 ↗ as a city that has valued conservation and for our current population and

3:04:54 ↗ our current community that so values nature and for our future as a

3:04:59 ↗ welcoming city that we want to provide a sustainable legacy for, I strongly

3:05:05 ↗ and unequivocally think that we should support this open space acquisition this evening.

3:05:11 ↗ Thank you, Council Member Hunt. Council Member Goodman. Thank you. I want

3:05:16 ↗ to thank Council Member Hunt for making the motion and for all of the work

3:05:22 ↗ that she's done on this topic. In addition to all the other people who have

3:05:27 ↗ worked so hard for nearly two years, the 2,600 people who have signed on for

3:05:32 ↗ their support of this, and to the staff and all of our hope to be

3:05:38 ↗ funding partners and potential funding partners. And I'm not going to repeat what

3:05:43 ↗ Councilmember Hunt said, although I will say that I agree with every single

3:05:49 ↗ word that she said. We heard tonight from Doug McClellan, somebody who is familiar

3:05:55 ↗ and worked with the City of Issaquah for decades, and from a couple of other

3:06:00 ↗ folks as well, that Issaquah has been a leader in land preservation for decades and

3:06:06 ↗ decades, and that this is another landmark project that we have in front of us,

3:06:11 ↗ and that I believe that we have an opportunity, an extraordinary opportunity tonight

3:06:17 ↗ to exert and exhibit our fine leadership again with this proposed acquisition. We

3:06:23 ↗ also heard tonight that this is bold. I don't know how many times

3:06:29 ↗ we heard the word bold. Bold, bold, bold. This is big. This is

3:06:35 ↗ courageous, and we need to have courage. And I don't disagree with that. It is

3:06:40 ↗ a big project. It is a significant project. It is a significant amount of money.

3:06:45 ↗ And as we heard, and I think nobody would disagree up here, regardless of what

3:06:50 ↗ your opinions are, that there is risk. There is risk with the acquisition of property

3:06:55 ↗ with the money that we're talking about that potentially we may not get

3:07:01 ↗ all of the funds for it. Luckily, we are healthy in our funds,

3:07:07 ↗ and I think we can be creative, and I also have great confidence

3:07:13 ↗ in the ability of our staff to seek grant funding. We've been very

3:07:19 ↗ successful, as you've heard tonight. That's just not people blowing smoke. That's fact. Over many

3:07:24 ↗ decades we've been very, very successful. Part of that is because of our city staff

3:07:29 ↗ and part of that is because we have people who have worked in our community

3:07:34 ↗ for a long time who have been our advocates and have worked with our funding

3:07:38 ↗ partners and have terrific reputations. And some of those people spoke tonight and some of

3:07:43 ↗ those people are part of the Save Cougar Mountain who are now getting their feet

3:07:48 ↗ wet and have gotten their feet wet and learn what it takes to

3:07:54 ↗ bring a lot of people together and support a project. One of the

3:08:00 ↗ reasons that I believe we have over 2,600 names in support of this

3:08:05 ↗ project is because it is seen as a regional amenity. fortunately or unfortunately, it is

3:08:11 ↗ in our city limits. And so where we find ourselves as being, we find ourselves

3:08:16 ↗ needing to be leaders in this effort because we need to be the leader both

3:08:21 ↗ in our efforts to seek funding partners and also to sort of put our money

3:08:27 ↗ where our mouth is because we need to be the leader because it is in

3:08:32 ↗ our jurisdiction. And that was part of the reason for the resolution in August. And

3:08:37 ↗ I do believe today that we need to continue to show that we are willing

3:08:43 ↗ to put our money where our mouth is in order for us to get others

3:08:49 ↗ in the region to support us. This is a regional, will be a regional amenity,

3:08:55 ↗ and the region will support it. And I believe our partners, both King County and

3:09:01 ↗ the state, will support it because it is seen as a regional amenity.

3:09:06 ↗ So I'm very supportive of this, very excited that we're here tonight. And I couldn't

3:09:12 ↗ be more proud of all of the people who have worked so very, very hard

3:09:18 ↗ to bring us to this point where we are tonight. And as Council Member Hunt

3:09:24 ↗ said, we will be talking about this again in early January and talking about more

3:09:30 ↗ details about funding. So very supportive. Thank you, Council Member Goodman. Oh, Deputy Council President

3:09:36 ↗ Patis. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I have a lot of thoughts about

3:09:42 ↗ this. It's been a long hard road and this is such

3:09:47 ↗ a unique and amazing opportunity, yet a difficult decision based on

3:09:53 ↗ the cost. Issaquah is known for its beautiful mountains, lakes, rivers,

3:09:58 ↗ and streams, and its trails. When I'm out talking with community

3:10:04 ↗ members, that's what I hear the most about. Our residents and

3:10:10 ↗ surrounding neighbors love to come to Issaquah for a lot of different

3:10:15 ↗ reasons. It's a great city, it has great schools, but predominantly what

3:10:21 ↗ I hear about is the people in Issaquah love the environmental piece

3:10:27 ↗ of what we offer as a city and they don't want to

3:10:32 ↗ lose that. We're growing and we're going to continue to grow. And right now

3:10:38 ↗ we have a really unique opportunity that may not come around again. And through hard

3:10:44 ↗ work and partnership development, we may be able to preserve 46 acres on Cougar Mountain.

3:10:49 ↗ And we've heard from the community to me and both here and when I've been

3:10:55 ↗ out in the community loud and clear that this is incredibly important and this is

3:11:00 ↗ all incredibly positive. However, this acquisition comes at a really great cost, as you've

3:11:06 ↗ heard tonight. And as I look across all of the elements of our city

3:11:12 ↗ government that have funding needs, especially in the areas of capital projects, this makes

3:11:18 ↗ the decision really difficult. Issaquah has a longstanding history of open space acquisitions and

3:11:24 ↗ partnership development. And I've been listening very carefully as we've talked about all

3:11:30 ↗ the hard work that has gone into not only the partnership development, but all

3:11:36 ↗ of the funding strategies and all the hard work that has been done. And

3:11:42 ↗ very key to me, we talked about, you know, worst case scenario and what

3:11:48 ↗ would the risk mitigation be. if all of these pieces didn't come together. So I've

3:11:53 ↗ listened very, very carefully to all of this and this is, I think, one of

3:11:59 ↗ the greatest things that maybe I've gotten to vote on. Definitely it is the greatest

3:12:04 ↗ thing that I've gotten to vote on and that has brought me to a yes

3:12:10 ↗ vote. tonight, I'll be supporting this agenda bill and I'm proud to

3:12:15 ↗ vote to preserve open space and all the connectivity that this is going

3:12:21 ↗ to give in terms of the green necklace. This is a legacy.

3:12:27 ↗ for our children and I think it's going to have a monumental impact on

3:12:33 ↗ our city and as we look into the future and we get to look

3:12:39 ↗ at, hopefully look at a forested hillside, I think that we'll always remember that.

3:12:45 ↗ I wanted to really thank all of the active and vocal community members all the

3:12:51 ↗ hard work that has been done and the trust for public land king county

3:12:57 ↗ council members, the administration, Jeff and everybody in the Parks Department.

3:13:03 ↗ This has just been a complicated process to put together and

3:13:08 ↗ I do really feel like this is just a one-time, very

3:13:14 ↗ unique opportunity and that's why it was important to me. at

3:13:20 ↗ a lot of sleepless nights over this, including one last night. I was

3:13:26 ↗ up until about 2 o'clock in the morning. But I wanted to hear

3:13:32 ↗ from everybody this evening, and those are my thoughts. Thank you, Council Member

3:13:37 ↗ Batiste. More comments? Council President Martz. So, unfortunately, I'm going to have to

3:13:43 ↗ oppose this measure this evening. Next week, we're going to get... the as

3:13:49 ↗ part of the strategic plan we're going to get a look at the 22 objectives

3:13:54 ↗ and 80 plus action items and we're going to talk about the fact that those

3:13:59 ↗ are our 5 year goals and that we're not going to have enough money to

3:14:04 ↗ do all of those things. and whatever we think we can get done in the

3:14:09 ↗ next five years, we're going to be able to get less of it done if

3:14:15 ↗ this winds up being even 3.8, much less $10.6 million. It is true that strategic

3:14:20 ↗ land acquisitions is one of the elements in our strategic plan. There are 21 others.

3:14:26 ↗ Additionally, We talked a little bit about the park plan. This is real, this park

3:14:30 ↗ strategic plan is really near and dear to my heart. We spent so much time

3:14:35 ↗ with this. We had an initial version, we didn't like it. We went back, we

3:14:39 ↗ got a better one. There's 51 items in here that relate to our city. And

3:14:44 ↗ I don't know exactly how much it costs, but I know there's $40 million in

3:14:48 ↗ parks and recreation projects in the central capital improvement

3:14:54 ↗ plan. Sorry, too many CIPs. There's $475

3:14:59 ↗ million in transportation projects in the capital improvement plan. The challenges

3:15:05 ↗ in front of us are staggering and they dwarf the monies that we have left

3:15:11 ↗ over in the ending fund balance right now, which is sort of greasing the skids

3:15:17 ↗ on this a little bit. And so I think this is an important project. I

3:15:23 ↗ believe I've been consistent in my concern around the cost for this project. I told

3:15:29 ↗ folks in front of you August 6th that the money mattered to me, the dollar

3:15:34 ↗ amount mattered to me. And I have said numerous times that my biggest concern was

3:15:39 ↗ that we would have a project in front of us that would require us to

3:15:44 ↗ take a substantial risk on the dollars coming in. I thank Jeff and the staff.

3:15:49 ↗ They've done a great job in discussing that risk and quantifying that risk. And I

3:15:54 ↗ appreciate that that's gotten a majority of my fellow council members to yes on this.

3:15:59 ↗ However, I just feel the magnitude when I think of that $40 million that's in

3:16:04 ↗ this plan. And, you know, it may well be that, yep, number 43 does show

3:16:09 ↗ an arrow going from Talis down to the valley but there's 50 other parts to

3:16:14 ↗ this plan and I think that our city deserves a discussion of the prioritization of

3:16:18 ↗ those 51 elements and of the 475 million dollars in transportation infrastructure that we have

3:16:23 ↗ in front of us so for those reasons I'm going to be a no this

3:16:28 ↗ evening thank you thank you council president councilmember winterstein yeah uh thank you I APPRECIATED

3:16:32 ↗ THE COMMENTS EARLIER. I LOVE THE COMMENTS ABOUT THE PAST, THE PRESENT AND THE FUTURE

3:16:37 ↗ FROM COUNCILMEMBER HUMDAY. I THINK THAT WAS A VERY GOOD NARRATIVE AND I'M GOING TO

3:16:41 ↗ GO BACK AND LISTEN TO IT AGAIN LATER ON. IT WAS SO WELL TOLD. I

3:16:46 ↗ said this earlier, this has always felt like a keystone opportunity to me. I've been

3:16:51 ↗ driving up and down or walking or riding up and down Newport Way since 1984.

3:16:56 ↗ And I tell you, it wasn't until a couple of years ago that I realized

3:17:02 ↗ that something could even happen to that land. I always wondered who owned that. And

3:17:07 ↗ what a amazing thought to think we actually have an opportunity to preserve it. But

3:17:12 ↗ as my colleague, Council Member Martz, I think properly points out, we have

3:17:18 ↗ to weigh it against other commitments and other duties and obligations that we

3:17:23 ↗ have to our citizens. This represents one very, very important element, and I

3:17:29 ↗ acknowledge that and actually and I accept that. At the same

3:17:35 ↗ time, I think due to some very good financial discipline by the city over the

3:17:40 ↗ years, you saw what our finances looked like. I think we also have a fairly

3:17:46 ↗ good economy here right now. And when those things come together at the same time,

3:17:52 ↗ when an opportunity like this in front of us, to me, this has the feeling

3:17:58 ↗ of a very unique opportunity that we should not miss. And I

3:18:04 ↗ was very clear earlier that getting this was

3:18:09 ↗ important, but the financial side is equally important.

3:18:15 ↗ From what I heard earlier this evening, I

3:18:20 ↗ feel pretty good about you know, the first 5.2 million, you

3:18:26 ↗ know, that we're going to go after. I feel not quite so good about

3:18:31 ↗ the next one and a half million. We heard about where the city has

3:18:37 ↗ had recent success and other sources where the city hasn't had any recent success.

3:18:43 ↗ And so now I was hoping to come in this evening and just

3:18:49 ↗ be blown away about all the potential opportunities for grant funding. I'm not

3:18:54 ↗ quite there, but now that I've had a chance to think about this,

3:19:00 ↗ for the reasons that have been articulated by Vicky and others up here this

3:19:06 ↗ evening, and what I've always felt about this, that I'm going to vote in

3:19:12 ↗ favor of this tonight. And I haven't asked for everybody wearing a green shirt.

3:19:18 ↗ Our work isn't done. right we've uh jeff has done a great job but

3:19:24 ↗ all of you and and boy you've pounded some great pavement and done and you've

3:19:28 ↗ done some heavy lifts and i i'm just very impressed i'm just I was, it

3:19:34 ↗ was thrilling to hear all that you have done and accomplished. And we have more

3:19:39 ↗ to do. And I would ask, and we were challenged by David Kapler earlier this

3:19:45 ↗ evening. He said that himself. We've got more to do to help make this happen.

3:19:50 ↗ Not only acquire it, but also to preserve it and make it a place that

3:19:55 ↗ truly does become part of the fabric of the DNA here in Issaquah. And so

3:20:01 ↗ that's my ask. Actually, I would love it if Save Cougar Mountain group representatives come

3:20:06 ↗ back in the future and ask us what can we do or what army do

3:20:12 ↗ we need to assign or how's it going over there or we heard about another

3:20:17 ↗ funding source. This is all complex stuff, but it does take a community to do

3:20:21 ↗ challenging projects like this. I've appreciated your dedication. I've never had so many sets of

3:20:26 ↗ eyes looking at me at one time in this room. And I know I can

3:20:30 ↗ feel your passion. I can feel your energy. I want to grab that. I want

3:20:34 ↗ to bottle that up, and I want to make it part of the success of

3:20:38 ↗ this going forward. Thank you. So before I call for the vote, I just wanted

3:20:43 ↗ to let everybody know because you've been so patient, three hours and 20 minutes in,

3:20:48 ↗ restraining yourselves. I can tell there is a lot of excitement in the room. What

3:20:54 ↗ I'm going to do is read through the motion again and call for the vote

3:20:58 ↗ and then I'll call for a 10-minute recess so you can be as loud as

3:21:02 ↗ you want and hug as many people as you want. So if there's no further

3:21:07 ↗ discussion, all those in favor of authorizing the mayor to enter into and execute all

3:21:11 ↗ necessary documents to acquire the 46-acre site on Cougar Mountain, known as the Bergsma property,

3:21:17 ↗ in the amount of $11 million in partnership with the Trust for Public Land and

3:21:22 ↗ King County, and directing the administration to draft an agenda bill with a recommended financing

3:21:28 ↗ option to come before the full council for the decision at the January 7th, 2019

3:21:34 ↗ council meeting, signify by saying aye.

3:21:36 ↗ Those

3:22:03 ↗ opposed?

3:22:29 ↗ Nay.

3:22:55 ↗ Motion

3:23:22 ↗ carries

3:23:48 ↗ 5

3:24:14 ↗ to

3:24:41 ↗ 1

3:25:07 ↗ and

3:25:33 ↗ we'll

3:26:00 ↗ take

3:26:26 ↗ a

3:26:52 ↗ 10-minute

3:27:19 ↗ recess.

3:27:45 ↗ 4

3:28:11 ↗ to

3:28:38 ↗ 1

3:29:04 ↗ and

3:29:30 ↗ we'll

3:29:57 ↗ take

3:30:23 ↗ a

3:30:49 ↗ 10-minute

3:31:16 ↗ recess.

3:31:43 ↗ And we are back from our recess. The next item under regular business this

3:31:49 ↗ evening is AB 7689, amending IMC 3.63, school impact fees to allow flexibility in

3:31:55 ↗ adopting the fees. This item is coming out of the council services and safety

3:32:00 ↗ committee. And I'd like to invite policy planning manager Trish Heinenen to make a

3:32:06 ↗ presentation. Hi, Trish. Hi, thank you, Madam Mayor. I'm presenting part of these together

3:32:12 ↗ because One of them came from the other one, so they're connected sort of as

3:32:18 ↗ cousins, but I know you'll be deliberating them individually. But most of this is together

3:32:24 ↗ sort of comparing and contrasting. We've been doing impact fees since 1995 because growth management

3:32:30 ↗ allowed us to. We've been doing them every year until 2016 was the last year

3:32:36 ↗ that impact It only took us one night to do them. In 2017, you expressed

3:32:41 ↗ some concern that the district was discounting the fee by what you thought was you

3:32:46 ↗ didn't completely understand why they were taking that extra discount from King County what King

3:32:52 ↗ County was allocating so you asked that we work on this more this year and

3:32:57 ↗ so that's what we've been doing this year you also had a meeting with the

3:33:02 ↗ district where you talked about the fees and how they were calculated and we had

3:33:08 ↗ several several meetings with services and then also with you to try to explain, to

3:33:13 ↗ have the school board and the school district explain how they're doing their discounting, how

3:33:19 ↗ they're doing their calculation, and how that fits into their six-year capital plan. As I

3:33:25 ↗ said, there's two agenda bills before you. The first one is one that was asked

3:33:30 ↗ for in one of the first services meetings, and that is if we did want

3:33:36 ↗ to have a higher or lower impact fee then set by the school district six-year

3:33:42 ↗ capital plan, could we do that right now? And the answer from the attorney was

3:33:47 ↗ no, you need to change the code to allow the flexibility. And so that's where

3:33:52 ↗ the new agenda bill for flexibility came, to just allow us to do that. We

3:33:57 ↗ don't have to adopt a higher or lower, but this gives us the tool to

3:34:01 ↗ do that if we choose to. The second agenda bill is the same old, same

3:34:06 ↗ old that actually sets the new fee for January of next year. And so... With

3:34:11 ↗ that, that's all I have. I think that's all I have. Oh, we have the

3:34:16 ↗ new fee. Well, no, because that's the second one. We're not doing that one yet.

3:34:20 ↗ So the first one before you is just to allow the flexibility for the city

3:34:24 ↗ of Issaquah to adopt a school impact fee that's higher or lower than what is

3:34:29 ↗ set in the school district's capital facility six-year plan. That's what's before you tonight. Thank

3:34:33 ↗ you, Trish. This evening, Deputy Council President Batiste is standing in for the

3:34:39 ↗ committee chair that was reviewing this item. And did you have some

3:34:45 ↗ opening comments? Sure. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So I'm going to give

3:34:51 ↗ a little bit more of an overview. So AB 7689, which is

3:34:56 ↗ amending the impact fees to allow flexibility in adopting the fees, This

3:35:02 ↗ AB provides an amendment to the IMC that would provide the City Council with the

3:35:08 ↗ flexibility to set school impact fees higher or lower than proposed by the Issaquah School

3:35:14 ↗ District in their capital facilities plan. It gives Council the option to set the fee

3:35:20 ↗ above or below and what had been talked about was in order to ensure that

3:35:25 ↗ such fees reflect a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements reasonably related to

3:35:31 ↗ new development in the city. This AB is followed by another AB, which we've talked

3:35:36 ↗ about, that would actually be a vote on changing the impact fees. So this first

3:35:42 ↗ one is only on the flexibility. The committee had asked for a clarification to be

3:35:48 ↗ made to Section 2 of the ordinance, which has to do with fee calculations and

3:35:53 ↗ the application fee, to clarify that there are different school impact fees for single-family and

3:35:59 ↗ multi-family developments, and the added language is as follows. The fee shall be uniform for

3:36:04 ↗ each single family type and multi-family type of new development occurring within the boundaries

3:36:10 ↗ of the City of Issaquah. The Services and Safety Committee unanimously recommended adoption of

3:36:16 ↗ the proposed ordinance with the change noted above. Thank you. Were there any questions

3:36:21 ↗ for staff? I did forget to ask that. Any questions for staff on this?

3:36:27 ↗ Is there a motion? Yes. I would move to adopt ordinance

3:36:33 ↗ number 2855 amending IMC 3.63 to allow more flexibility to set school

3:36:39 ↗ impact fees differently than proposed in the school district's capital facilities six-year

3:36:45 ↗ plan. Is there a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded.

3:36:50 ↗ I do want to remind the council, we'll have a discussion next, but I do

3:36:56 ↗ want to remind you that because this is an ordinance and there are five of

3:37:02 ↗ you tonight, it does take four of you to pass the ordinance. Discussion? Council Member

3:37:07 ↗ Hunt? Okay. Council Member Hunt. I am in support of this this evening because I

3:37:13 ↗ think that This particular change allows us the flexibility to change the

3:37:19 ↗ impact fees. And as our city grows and as the needs of

3:37:25 ↗ our city grows, I think that having that flexibility is in the

3:37:30 ↗ best interest of our community. So I am in support. Thank you.

3:37:36 ↗ Any other discussion? Deputy Council President Patis. So I would be in

3:37:42 ↗ support of... of this going forward. We've talked

3:37:47 ↗ about this over two different years. This has come through

3:37:53 ↗ services and safety several different times and I think it's a continuing question.

3:37:59 ↗ So what we talked about in committee was two things and one was

3:38:04 ↗ allowing this flexibility which needed to be done if the impact fees were

3:38:10 ↗ going to be changed. But in regard to this first AB, I

3:38:16 ↗ think allowing that flexibility not only now but into the

3:38:22 ↗ future is important. Thank you. Councilmember Winterstein? I'd actually, I

3:38:27 ↗ want to make an amendment to the motion and I'll

3:38:33 ↗ say, I'll make the amendment and then have a few

3:38:38 ↗ comments. I would move that we alter the language in

3:38:44 ↗ paragraph 3.63.070 paragraph B and change the

3:38:50 ↗ phrase system improvements to school facilities and

3:38:55 ↗ further make the same change in paragraph

3:39:00 ↗ 3.63.080 paragraph A change the phrase system

3:39:06 ↗ improvements to school facilities. Is there a

3:39:11 ↗ second? second it moved in second councilmember winterstein i appreciate it just

3:39:17 ↗ a clarification the uh when i first read this bill i was in the imc

3:39:22 ↗ and even the summary in the on the bill itself i was alarmed because my

3:39:28 ↗ mind went to a different place for what system improvements may mean or not and

3:39:34 ↗ it and i read it many times i realized oh my gosh this seems to

3:39:40 ↗ extend to even those type of improvements that we have responsibility for such as police

3:39:46 ↗ and parks and others that we collect impact fees i had a conversation uh with

3:39:51 ↗ the um the count city count um legal counsel and the um and then you

3:39:57 ↗ know he thank you jim for providing the definition and then a proposed that proposed

3:40:02 ↗ alternative language I do agree that I think it makes the language more clear and

3:40:08 ↗ less ambiguous and people are less likely to make the mistake and interpretation that I

3:40:14 ↗ was making, which and so that's the only purpose for this proposed change. It makes

3:40:20 ↗ the language is very consistent with the other parts of the entire portion of the

3:40:26 ↗ IMC. Is there questions or discussions on the amendment to the motion? Council Member Goodman.

3:40:31 ↗ Thank you. Is there a definition of system improvements and school facility somewhere? Is

3:40:37 ↗ it in here? I didn't see it. It's not in the bill, but Jim provided

3:40:42 ↗ it in an email that I think you were CC'd onto. So sorry I didn't

3:40:48 ↗ provide that or have that for me right in front of me right now. Sorry.

3:40:53 ↗ That was my same question. I didn't have that definition. Jim, let me try to

3:40:58 ↗ dig it up. It's defined in the RCWs. That's where it comes from. I think

3:41:03 ↗ Jim would like to provide some information. The term system improvements is defined in

3:41:09 ↗ the RCW. It's not defined in the code. The term school facilities is defined

3:41:15 ↗ in the code and So that's why I'm suggesting that the

3:41:21 ↗ definition of system improvements in the RCW is for schools school facilities and

3:41:27 ↗ school facilities are defined in the city code. So it was okay to

3:41:33 ↗ make the change in the language. It really means the same thing. It

3:41:39 ↗ just clarifies it. I guess my question would be whether I think Steve

3:41:45 ↗ Crawford's here from the school district if he has any concerned

3:41:50 ↗ about okay thanks is there any other discussion um

3:41:56 ↗ i'm gonna actually have the um deputy clerk read

3:42:02 ↗ the movement to amend uh the amendment reads as

3:42:08 ↗ follows amend 3.63.070b by deleting system improvements and replacing

3:42:14 ↗ it with school facilities and the same in imc

3:42:20 ↗ 3.63.080a That's correct, Council Member Winterstein. All those in favor,

3:42:26 ↗ say aye. Aye. Opposed? That carries unanimously. Is there any other further

3:42:32 ↗ discussion or amendments? Not seeing any. All those in favor of adopting

3:42:38 ↗ ordinance number 2855, amending IMC 3.63 to allow more flexibility to set

3:42:44 ↗ school impact fees differently than proposed in the school district's capital facility

3:42:50 ↗ six-year plan, signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? that carries five

3:42:56 ↗ and oh five oh the next item on our agenda this evening is ab7640

3:43:02 ↗ amending school impact fees also coming out of council services and safety committee and

3:43:07 ↗ trish can continue with her presentation okay um the change to the This agenda

3:43:13 ↗ bill was actually to set the fees, and the Services Committee voted

3:43:19 ↗ two to one to have the higher fee put in the ordinance

3:43:24 ↗ with only the 50% discount that's the school district and the King

3:43:30 ↗ County requirement, not the additional 10% that's in the six-year capital plan

3:43:35 ↗ of the school district. So I haven't read how much more the...

3:43:41 ↗ the fees in your ordinance are than what is proposed by the Issaquah School District.

3:43:48 ↗ We also got a letter at that last services meeting and the attorney was asked

3:43:53 ↗ if that changed any of what he believed was already told to you all. His

3:43:59 ↗ legal advice and he responded to you all that nothing had changed. It was all

3:44:04 ↗ the same as was in his memo from last year. So those were the only

3:44:10 ↗ two things that happened at the last services meeting.

3:44:16 ↗ For this agenda bill, I believe Deputy Council President Batiste is standing in for

3:44:22 ↗ the Committee Chair for Services. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So I'm going to give

3:44:28 ↗ you an overview once again. And so we have a really good understanding of

3:44:34 ↗ this. This has been something we've been talking about for a couple of years.

3:44:40 ↗ The school impact fees and the additional discount from the Issaquah School District, as I've

3:44:46 ↗ said, has been discussed at length over the last two years. The discounted amount of

3:44:51 ↗ the fee includes the legal amount of the discount that is built into the calculation

3:44:57 ↗ from King County. However, the district often makes additional discounts. So this came before services

3:45:03 ↗ and safety last year prior to the council vote. And then that came... Then that

3:45:08 ↗ was voted on and then in April of 2018, the city council and the school

3:45:14 ↗ district had a special meeting with this topic on the agenda. Then council

3:45:20 ↗ and at that time council had expressed their concerns regarding

3:45:25 ↗ the district's policy to discount the impacts from new development.

3:45:31 ↗ For 2019, the proposed fees, they still incorporated discount. However,

3:45:36 ↗ the discount had been reduced from 70% to 60% for

3:45:42 ↗ 2019. The 2019 fees has been before services and

3:45:48 ↗ safety over the last several months, several different committee meetings on

3:45:53 ↗ this. and has included much deliberation and also presentations from the Issaquah School District, which

3:45:59 ↗ thank you for being at so many of those meetings. As you can see from

3:46:05 ↗ the agenda bill, services had many questions surrounding the 2019 fees. In our last committee

3:46:11 ↗ meeting in November, the committee received a letter from the school board as was just

3:46:16 ↗ mentioned. We were able to ask final questions and also ask for some clarifications from

3:46:22 ↗ the city attorney. AB 7640 now comes forward 3-0. In the committee

3:46:28 ↗ meeting, I had abstained from voting, asking for additional clarification surrounding several

3:46:33 ↗ different topics that we had discussed in committee. There were a few

3:46:39 ↗ areas that seemed to be a little gray, and I had asked

3:46:45 ↗ for additional information from the city attorney, which we've now received.

3:46:51 ↗ So this the committee is now recommending the adoption of the ordinance

3:46:56 ↗ to increase the school impact fees as identified in the Issaquah School

3:47:02 ↗ District's 2018 capital facilities plan except only applying the 50% discount required

3:47:08 ↗ by the King County formula which you can see the numbers that

3:47:13 ↗ are proposed by the Services Committee there on the screen. Thank you.

3:47:19 ↗ Is there a motion by Councilmember Hunt? I would move to adopt

3:47:25 ↗ ordinance number 2856 amending subsection 3.6 3.100 a of the Issaquah municipal

3:47:31 ↗ code to revise the amount of the school impact fee imposed by

3:47:36 ↗ the city. Second. It's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion?

3:47:44 ↗ Council President Martz, did I see Council Member Hunt after? So I'm going to oppose

3:47:49 ↗ this measure. I think that it's been well established that the Issaquah School District is

3:47:54 ↗ one of the most fiscally prudent districts in the state. They consistently do more with

3:48:00 ↗ less. They build their schools at cost less per pupil than at other schools. I

3:48:05 ↗ didn't oppose the earlier measure because I think it's fine that we want to be

3:48:11 ↗ able to, at some future date, if there were a school board that had funding

3:48:17 ↗ that we thought was out of whack, we could do that. But this is their

3:48:22 ↗ schools, their facilities, their funding formula. This is a minuscule portion of the overall funding,

3:48:28 ↗ but it does relate to their funding. ongoing relationship with Olympia and legislative issues

3:48:34 ↗ and so at this time because I I believe that there there's no

3:48:39 ↗ evidence that they're not a well-run district that knows how to manage their

3:48:45 ↗ growth I would oppose our uh moving away from their recommendation thank you

3:48:51 ↗ council member Hunt thank you um I I I think that this is

3:48:56 ↗ a complicated issue and I respect Council Member Martz's points as well as I definitely

3:49:02 ↗ respect as well the partnership with the school district and that the school district has

3:49:08 ↗ come before our Services and Safety Committee many times to speak to our committee. And

3:49:14 ↗ I think that they, I really appreciated that partnership and I appreciated the information that

3:49:20 ↗ was provided. for me i think that because we on council make a lot of

3:49:26 ↗ decisions that affect land use and that affect development and affect the rate of growth

3:49:31 ↗ in the city and the way that the city grows and this in turn affects

3:49:36 ↗ the need for schools as well as a number of other services i think because

3:49:41 ↗ we are making those sorts of decisions and because two we have the ability to

3:49:45 ↗ set the the impact fees i think that as we've heard there's a

3:49:51 ↗ growing need for for schools and um i believe that the growth should

3:49:57 ↗ to the extent possible pay for growth um and so i do

3:50:03 ↗ approve of not allowing an additional discount and so i am support

3:50:08 ↗ am in support of not allowing that additional discount for the city

3:50:14 ↗ and i i think that as the city grows and as more

3:50:20 ↗ development comes in that growth should provide for the future needs of

3:50:25 ↗ those schools and that's why i'm in support Thank you. Other

3:50:31 ↗ council members? Council Member Goodman. Thank you. I'm going to

3:50:37 ↗ support the Service and Safety Committee's recommendation. You know, one

3:50:42 ↗ of the, very simply, I was surprised at the rationale

3:50:48 ↗ that was given why the why the extra discount and the

3:50:54 ↗ district's rationale was to lessen the cost of housing development in their district boundaries

3:51:00 ↗ in order to keep home developers actively building in the district. I don't know

3:51:06 ↗ that we need any extra incentive, particularly in the city of Issaquah. I don't

3:51:12 ↗ think getting extra housing right now is something that our community expects us to

3:51:18 ↗ try to be encouraging especially then just get discounting fees and like Councilmember

3:51:23 ↗ Hunt said I think our community does expect if we've heard many many times

3:51:29 ↗ that to a large the largest extent possible try to have development pay for

3:51:35 ↗ itself which can't completely pay for itself that's illegal but it I just think

3:51:41 ↗ that the rationale here is a little bit inconsistent with what our community expects

3:51:46 ↗ right now their deputy council president Patis So this has been

3:51:52 ↗ an ongoing topic of conversation. I've sat on services and

3:51:58 ↗ safety last year when this had come up and then

3:52:03 ↗ services and safety this year as we had discussed this

3:52:09 ↗ and seemed meeting after meeting. And one of the stumbling

3:52:14 ↗ blocks for me in regard to this has been that I want

3:52:20 ↗ to make sure that the city is being a really good partner to the Issaquah

3:52:26 ↗ School District and for all the reasons that Council Member Martz had talked about.

3:52:32 ↗ and and i think that that's critically important and that was a stumbling block for

3:52:37 ↗ me but as i've thought about this more and more and how much we've now

3:52:42 ↗ talked about this we talked about this last year we had a special meeting about

3:52:48 ↗ it and then it's come forward into several different services and safety committee meetings this

3:52:53 ↗ year. So I think that we definitely have given the school board an opportunity to

3:52:59 ↗ come and talk about any impact this would have. I know that question has been

3:53:05 ↗ asked. I've asked that question a few times and so I very much appreciate the

3:53:11 ↗ school board coming and working through all of this with us. That's been very important

3:53:17 ↗ to me. So, but we have had many opportunities to talk about this and many

3:53:23 ↗ touch points. And I do understand the complexity for the school district because different cities

3:53:28 ↗ as we just talked about and as Council Member Goodman had just brought up, different

3:53:34 ↗ cities have different needs. But this is something that has been coming forward. It does

3:53:40 ↗ not sound like that this makes a notable change in terms of the budget or

3:53:46 ↗ process. That was what I think I had heard during the committee meetings. And I

3:53:51 ↗ wanted to make sure we had an opportunity to ask those questions because again, I

3:53:57 ↗ do really value the partnership and I want to make sure that that the school

3:54:03 ↗ district had an opportunity to talk to us about that. I do think what it

3:54:08 ↗ comes down to is that there's a funding source, a small one that's been untapped

3:54:14 ↗ and it's critically important to have development pay for the impact. that it's having so

3:54:20 ↗ I'll be supporting this measure. Thank you. Council Member Winterstein. Yeah, I'm going to oppose

3:54:26 ↗ the measure. I think an increase from 8,700 to 15, almost 3,000 is very significant.

3:54:32 ↗ of course that will just drive up prices of houses anyway. And if you

3:54:38 ↗ want to kind of discourage growth, then yeah, you drive up prices. I'm not

3:54:44 ↗ sure that that's our intent here, but I hope that it's not. The idea

3:54:50 ↗ of, you know, growth, you know, paying for its impact, absolutely, I

3:54:56 ↗ subscribe to that. I think this is a very significant increase already,

3:55:02 ↗ and I'm going to kind of defer to the comprehensive judgment that

3:55:07 ↗ the school district applied for their entire district in coming up with

3:55:13 ↗ this number and oppose the ordinance as currently worded. is

3:55:19 ↗ there any other discussion hearing none i'll call for the vote um all

3:55:25 ↗ those in favor of adopting ordinance number 2856 amending subsection 3.63.100 per n

3:55:31 ↗ a of the issaquah municipal code to revise the amount of the school

3:55:37 ↗ impact fee imposed by the city signify by saying aye aye aye opposed

3:55:43 ↗ no i understand that fails three to two it required four votes to

3:55:49 ↗ pass The next item on

3:55:55 ↗ the agenda is AB 7687, Request for

3:56:00 ↗ Right-of-Way Encumbrance, TALIS Parcel 9. This item

3:56:06 ↗ is coming out of the Council Infrastructure

3:56:11 ↗ Committee, and I'd like to invite Economic

3:56:17 ↗ and Development Services Director Keith Niven to

3:56:22 ↗ make a presentation. Thank you, Madam Mayor,

3:56:28 ↗ City Council. Keith Niven, Director of Economic

3:56:33 ↗ Development and Development Services. So, Agenda Bill

3:56:39 ↗ 7687 is a request to encumber both public right-of-way and

3:56:44 ↗ city property with wall tiebacks by a property developer. And the administration

3:56:50 ↗ is recommending denial on this request. But because use of city right-of-way

3:56:56 ↗ and city property is a City Council decision, the property owner asked

3:57:02 ↗ for us to forward this forward to the City Council

3:57:08 ↗ for a decision even though the administration is not supporting it. So

3:57:14 ↗ to get you oriented, this is SR 900 down here. West is

3:57:20 ↗ to the left. As you go up Talus Drive, Talus Drive

3:57:25 ↗ T's into Shangri-La and Parcel 9 sits basically just west of the

3:57:31 ↗ T intersection. The request for the encumbrance tiebacks are actually up here

3:57:36 ↗ on the south and west ends, which is actually Shangri-La as it

3:57:42 ↗ bends around the property is called Foothills Drive. So you're going to

3:57:48 ↗ see a reference to Foothills Drive. That's the extension. This road as

3:57:53 ↗ it goes up to parcels seven and eight which is the very top of talus.

3:57:59 ↗ So Here's a section of the roadway. I couldn't couldn't put all this on one

3:58:04 ↗ graphic So I apologize first I'm going to show you the right-of-way and what what

3:58:09 ↗ utilities are in that right-of-way and then I'm going to show you a where the

3:58:14 ↗ requests for the tie backs are. So this is, as I mentioned, this is Foothills

3:58:20 ↗ Drive as it heads up to Parcels 7 and 8. And this is, I think

3:58:25 ↗ it's called Stony Creek. This goes over to the bridges in Tallis. And then right

3:58:31 ↗ here is the city's water reservoir. And as you can see, we

3:58:36 ↗ have water lines, sewer lines, storm lines. And what this graphic

3:58:42 ↗ doesn't show in the eastern portion of the right-of-way, there's also

3:58:48 ↗ dry utilities. So gas, power, and Comcast are all within the

3:58:53 ↗ right-of-way. of Foothills Drive. So here's the exhibit that shows the tiebacks.

3:58:59 ↗ As you can see, so the wall, the proposed wall runs along here.

3:59:05 ↗ It's in parcel nine. And all these lines that extend back through

3:59:11 ↗ the right-of-way and actually beyond the right-of-way are the wall tiebacks. So as

3:59:17 ↗ you can see, they basically encumber all of the right-of-way for this entire

3:59:23 ↗ length. They also extend onto city property, which is the green.

3:59:28 ↗ And they also are proposing to extend them onto

3:59:34 ↗ this parcel on the south side of Stony Creek.

3:59:40 ↗ And this is HOA property. So they'd have to get, so before we could

3:59:45 ↗ approve this permit, they have to get your approval to go on city property

3:59:51 ↗ and city right of way. They'd also have to get the HOA to agree

3:59:57 ↗ to these encumbrances on HOA property. So as you can see, and if you

4:00:03 ↗ go think back to that previous slide, the water line runs in here, the sewer

4:00:09 ↗ line runs in here, the storm line runs in here, and then the private utilities

4:00:14 ↗ are basically in the outer five feet. There was, as, so Mr. Hill testified to

4:00:20 ↗ this earlier and he provided a letter. I don't know if it was the same

4:00:25 ↗ letter because I didn't get a copy of what was submitted tonight. I apologize. But

4:00:31 ↗ basically what they're asking for, and I wanted to make sure that you recognize that

4:00:36 ↗ we did get this letter on Friday. The request was to require further consideration of

4:00:42 ↗ the request for the encumbrance. It identified a joint interest of

4:00:48 ↗ stabilization and expediency, identifying that you have to design a wall

4:00:53 ↗ that doesn't have the tiebacks will take more time. There is

4:00:59 ↗ a situation where staff did approve a small wall with tiebacks

4:01:05 ↗ as part of the original grading plan for parcel 9. They

4:01:11 ↗ identified that as a precedent. We don't believe that set precedent. And we can

4:01:17 ↗ get into that if you would like to. Contrary to, I think, the comment

4:01:22 ↗ that Mr. Hill provided earlier, I don't think you can say there's no

4:01:28 ↗ risk. Basically, there are going to be private structures within the right-of-way, as

4:01:33 ↗ was identified in his letter from 1130. The risks are very low, but

4:01:39 ↗ there are risks because there are private structures within the right-of-way. So I'm

4:01:45 ↗ going to stop talking and see if I don't know if Council Member Hunt wants

4:01:50 ↗ to say anything from committee since I think she's sitting in for Council Member Ramos.

4:01:55 ↗ We're missing a lot of chairs today. So Council Member Hunt, did you have some

4:02:00 ↗ comments you wanted to share from committee? Yes. So at

4:02:06 ↗ committee, the committee's recommendation was unanimous and it was to

4:02:11 ↗ adhere to the recommendation of the administration. The committee discussed

4:02:17 ↗ that the city's past policy and practice in terms of

4:02:22 ↗ what has been done previously, that this denial would be

4:02:28 ↗ in line with that and then also the that if the

4:02:34 ↗ city didn't denied this um then we would also not have the additional

4:02:40 ↗ liability or the additional risk associated with having structural elements in our city's

4:02:46 ↗ right-of-way so i think those were the two main reasons discussed by the

4:02:51 ↗ committee and the reason for the unanimous recommendation to go with the administration's

4:02:57 ↗ denial recommendation thank you are there any questions Councilmember Wintersong.

4:03:03 ↗ Thank you Keith. Couple questions. First of all, what's that bottom chart? I don't

4:03:08 ↗ think I have that in the packet. The green bars on the bottom there.

4:03:14 ↗ What is that? This chart? Yeah. So this is an exhibit showing the actual

4:03:20 ↗ wall itself in profile. Does that make sense? All right. Okay. Okay. Actually, I

4:03:25 ↗ was so focused on the upper part of that that I was missing that.

4:03:31 ↗ Okay. So the from the upper part, that looks a little bit different than

4:03:37 ↗ the picture I have in my packet. So this is a little bit different because

4:03:43 ↗ the clarity was better. This was provided by the applicant for infrastructure. So I substituted

4:03:48 ↗ this for tonight because it's a better clarity. It should be the same graphic as

4:03:54 ↗ what was in the previous infrastructure presentation but this shows up better on our screen

4:03:59 ↗ than the previous one did so I just did a swap. Okay the version I

4:04:03 ↗ have in front of me has some information I can't see up there I want

4:04:08 ↗ to ask you about it. Okay. It's got four highlights it says tie back depth

4:04:12 ↗ CB and then it has 17.5 for another one at 18.8 three another one

4:04:18 ↗ at nineteen point six two and another one at twenty four point seven nine

4:04:24 ↗ so those I'm interpreting to be that where the depth of that tie back

4:04:29 ↗ would be relative to the road surface yes and those those tie backs are

4:04:35 ↗ going in at a slant and So they are actually, they are higher,

4:04:41 ↗ closer to the wall. - So what are those depths? At the least

4:04:46 ↗ depth or average depth or maximum depth? - So where are you reading

4:04:52 ↗ that? - Well, no, okay, I get they're angled into the ground, right?

4:04:57 ↗ - They're angled, yes. - So these depth numbers on this chart, 17.54,

4:05:03 ↗ is that, where is that measurement taken? - I believe that those are

4:05:09 ↗ at the, East property at the east right away edge. Okay,

4:05:14 ↗ so I don't know about Depths for dry and white you wet

4:05:20 ↗ utilities. Yes, that seems pretty deep to me What is what's the

4:05:26 ↗ proximity of where the normal utilities would go compared to these steps?

4:05:31 ↗ So it's gonna vary but there's approximately 10 feet of Delta between

4:05:37 ↗ the 17 feet and where the wet utilities are and So, you

4:05:43 ↗ know, the question is, so here's, I'm not sure what kind of rationale you're

4:05:49 ↗ going through in your head, Councilmember, but let me say this. What happens is,

4:05:54 ↗ so those tiebacks are a tensioned member, And they're actually kind of, they

4:06:00 ↗ go back into actually a solid surface. So they're going back until they find like

4:06:06 ↗ bedrock, right? But also they rely on the weight of the film material that's on

4:06:12 ↗ top of them. And so part of the concern that we have is let's assume

4:06:17 ↗ you had to excavate out a water line or a sewer line because it had

4:06:22 ↗ a problem. So you're now excavating down to where there's only 10 feet potentially of

4:06:26 ↗ fill left on top of that tieback. What we don't know is what happens, is

4:06:32 ↗ there going to be enough resistance to keep that tieback in place or is

4:06:38 ↗ that tieback going to lose its stability and potentially want to basically look like

4:06:43 ↗ a bungee cord and come back and hit the wall? And if that happens,

4:06:49 ↗ what happens to the stability of the wall? And as you can see, they're

4:06:54 ↗ planning to build residences along this is this is the outline

4:07:00 ↗ of their land plan and if they can stabilize their property they're going to want

4:07:06 ↗ to pursue the land plan that they have already approved you can see the proximity

4:07:12 ↗ of houses to that wall and the concern that we have is is

4:07:17 ↗ I don't disagree with Mr. Hill that the risk of hitting one of those

4:07:23 ↗ tiebacks is very low, but there's a risk there. And what this property owner

4:07:29 ↗ hasn't done is demonstrated to us that they cannot pursue a different wall design

4:07:34 ↗ that doesn't include tiebacks. And it seems like before they ask us to burden

4:07:40 ↗ our property, that we would ask them to explore other design solutions.

4:07:47 ↗ Understood. And since you mentioned it, you're wondering what my train of thought would be.

4:07:52 ↗ Yes. You actually gave me the words for that. You said, I think you were

4:07:58 ↗ speculating whether or not there would be risk if we go just dig down and

4:08:03 ↗ are just 10 feet above those bungee cords. It seems to me there should be

4:08:09 ↗ an engineering answer. to that scenario rather than just speculation? Can't there be

4:08:15 ↗ an engineering answer other than we're just thinking it might be a problem? So

4:08:20 ↗ you're at the infrastructure committee, your director of engineering identified a scenario that isn't

4:08:26 ↗ planned for. What if you have a water leak? And what if that water

4:08:32 ↗ leak then compromises a bed beyond just the pipe bed? So you can't-- so

4:08:38 ↗ the risk that's there So you're dealing with wet infrastructure that generally

4:08:44 ↗ behaves a certain way, but we're in a situation with property that's

4:08:50 ↗ been moving and there's a level of risk there that the administration

4:08:56 ↗ wasn't willing to feel a comfort with to recommend approval for this,

4:09:02 ↗ which is why we recommended denial. So is there engineering that can

4:09:08 ↗ be done? Absolutely. You know, when you're dealing with stuff under the surface of the

4:09:13 ↗ ground, what you'll find is every geotech says... We think it could be this, but

4:09:18 ↗ there's a chance it might not be. So... All right, just one last question. My

4:09:24 ↗ recollection is that the actual very upper or western edge of the slide is basically

4:09:30 ↗ at the edge of that road. And so if those tiebacks go all the way

4:09:35 ↗ into bedrock further west of that, then it's actually tying back into a surface that

4:09:41 ↗ did not move? It's our opinion that it's our geotech's opinion

4:09:47 ↗ that this property west of Foothills Drive is not moving. In the

4:09:52 ↗ land that did move, however, the edge of it was right there

4:09:58 ↗ at the eastern edge of the roadway, right? This was the headscarf.

4:10:03 ↗ The headscarf of the slide was east of Foothills Drive. Any additional

4:10:09 ↗ questions? And we've had a motion. I'm forgetting. We had a motion?

4:10:14 ↗ Okay, let's go for a motion. Okay. I move to

4:10:20 ↗ deny the request by Oratalis 90 to place wall tiebacks within public right-of-way

4:10:26 ↗ and into city-owned property on Foothills Drive, Northwest. Oh, thank you. Is there

4:10:32 ↗ a second? It's been moved and seconded. Further council discussion? Councilmember Winterstein? So

4:10:38 ↗ if this was denied, what alternatives does the applicant have? Their first

4:10:44 ↗ choice would be to design a different wall that doesn't require

4:10:49 ↗ tiebacks. And you think that such a design exists out there?

4:10:55 ↗ I know it does. The question is, is it economically feasible

4:11:01 ↗ for them to pursue that wall? And we don't have an

4:11:06 ↗ answer to that. Because you could do a casket-in-place concrete wall,

4:11:12 ↗ for example. Okay, thank you, Keith. Are there any other questions?

4:11:19 ↗ Seeing none, all those in favor of denying the request by Oratelus 90 to

4:11:25 ↗ place wall tiebacks within public right of way and into city-owned property on Foothills

4:11:31 ↗ Drive Northwest signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? That passes unanimously. Next and last

4:11:36 ↗ item on our agenda this evening is good of the order. Do council members

4:11:42 ↗ have anything for good of the order? Deputy Council President Patis.

4:11:48 ↗ I have two things for good of the order because I forgot

4:11:54 ↗ to say them earlier. So I had failed to say that our

4:12:00 ↗ services and safety next meeting is December 11th, 2018, 6:30 in council

4:12:05 ↗ chambers. And I also failed to say one, One particular thing when we

4:12:11 ↗ were going through a budget deliberation and that was that I wanted to

4:12:17 ↗ echo something that Council President Martz said in terms of this has been,

4:12:22 ↗ we had difficulty in terms of transition and I really wanted to thank

4:12:28 ↗ Emily and the Mayor and everyone on the finance team and everyone who

4:12:34 ↗ did really, really hard work to get the budget together thank you very nice

4:12:40 ↗ anybody else for good of the order that's all president martz i'll mention while i

4:12:46 ↗ think we're waiting on one more late breaking item i'll just mention i want to

4:12:51 ↗ thank council member hunt who through the luck of the draw got every single item

4:12:56 ↗ this evening with it with an assist from council deputy president batiste but thank you

4:13:00 ↗ you had and they weren't they weren't all light subjects either they weren't like pro

4:13:05 ↗ forma kind of things they were at very heavy duty and thank you so much

4:13:09 ↗ for uh providing that leadership thank you i have a couple little items for good

4:13:14 ↗ of the order and then we will be revisiting ab7640 tonight because as the motion

4:13:18 ↗ was denied There is some further action that you'll have to take this evening on

4:13:23 ↗ that. The good of the order items, December 10th, there'll be a Council special meeting,

4:13:27 ↗ executive session at 5:45 p.m. in the Cougar Room to discuss a labor item. on

4:13:32 ↗ december 10th there will also be a council work session and potential items for that

4:13:37 ↗ include the citywide strategic plan update water system plan and title 18 and green necklace

4:13:42 ↗ resourcing plan on december 11th right and early we will have legislative breakfast at 7

4:13:47 ↗ 30 a.m at tibbets creek manor And depending on our last work item,

4:13:53 ↗ there is the potential to cancel the December 17th regular council

4:13:59 ↗ meeting. We have approved the budget this evening. We may have

4:14:04 ↗ no outstanding business, but I believe we need to get through

4:14:10 ↗ our work on AB 7640 to know that that's the case.

4:14:16 ↗ So do we have a... We're going to take a five-minute

4:14:21 ↗ break. Okay. Thanks.

4:19:57 ↗ let's give the audience a break keith so we are back

4:20:03 ↗ on air and back in session and um we are going

4:20:09 ↗ back to um the motion for agenda bill should i get

4:20:15 ↗ the right one 7640 The vote was 3 to 2, which failed,

4:20:21 ↗ and I'm looking to see if anybody is looking to reconsider their vote on

4:20:27 ↗ that ordinance. Council President Martz. Madam Mayor, as one of the prevailers, I move

4:20:33 ↗ to reconsider my vote on ordinance number 2856, amending school impact fees. The vote

4:20:38 ↗ is on whether the vote... Sorry, is there a second? It can be seconded

4:20:44 ↗ by anybody. It can be anybody. Second. Second. it's been moved and seconded

4:20:50 ↗ the vote is on whether or not the vote is to be reconsidered on ordinance

4:20:56 ↗ number 2856 the motion to reconsider ordinance 2856 has been moved and seconded is there

4:21:02 ↗ any council discussion uh well just could we could the re for the record could

4:21:07 ↗ we have somebody explain what we're voting to do um uh if you vote to

4:21:13 ↗ reconsider the vote on the ordinance it will put the ordinance back before you for

4:21:19 ↗ a vote as if it wasn't adopted So it can be open for

4:21:25 ↗ amendment or a different vote outcome or the same vote outcome. Just

4:21:31 ↗ to provide some transparency in the failure of the original motion. Currently,

4:21:36 ↗ there would be no increase in school impact fees in 2019 over

4:21:42 ↗ 2018 unless the council decides to reconsider the motion. Thank you. Is

4:21:48 ↗ there any discussion? All those in favor of

4:21:53 ↗ reconsidering Ordinance 2856 signify by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed? That passes unanimously. The motion

4:21:59 ↗ to reconsider is approved and the ordinance is now before the Council for a vote.

4:22:05 ↗ Madam Mayor, I move to amend Ordinance number 2856 to replace the proposed fees with

4:22:11 ↗ the school district's proposed 2019 impact fees as follows: Number one, $15,276

4:22:17 ↗ per single-family residential unit and $4,399 per multi-family residential unit. Second.

4:22:23 ↗ It's been moved and seconded. The motion is to amend the

4:22:29 ↗ ordinance to include the school district's proposed 2019 fees and is

4:22:35 ↗ there any council discussion? if there's no

4:22:40 ↗ further discussion all those in favor of amending the ordinance to include the school district's

4:22:45 ↗ proposed 2019 fees of fifteen thousand two hundred and seventy six dollars per single family

4:22:50 ↗ and three thousand three hundred and ninety nine dollars for multi-family residential unit signify by

4:22:55 ↗ saying that should have been four thousand three hundred and ninety nine for multifamily that's

4:23:00 ↗ a typo Okay, I will reread that. All those in favor

4:23:06 ↗ of amending the ordinance to include the school district's proposed 2019

4:23:12 ↗ fees of $15,276 per single family and $4,399 per multifamily residential

4:23:18 ↗ unit signify by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed? That passes unanimously.

4:23:23 ↗ The main motion to adopt ordinance number 2856 is now back

4:23:29 ↗ before the council. so just go to the

4:23:35 ↗ vote um the motion to adopt ordinance number 2856 amending subsection 3.63.100 per n a

4:23:40 ↗ of the iskwa municipal code to revise the amount of the school impact fee imposed

4:23:46 ↗ by the city as amended has been moved and seconded is there any council discussion

4:23:54 ↗ If there's no further discussion, all those in favor of adopting ordinance number 2856,

4:24:00 ↗ amending subsection 3.63.100 of the Issaquah Municipal Code to revise the amount of the

4:24:06 ↗ school impact fee imposed by the city as amended, signify by saying aye. -

4:24:12 ↗ Aye. - Those opposed? That passes unanimously. - Thank you, Council President Martz.

4:24:19 ↗ uh on the agenda there is no executive session and the next

4:24:25 ↗ item is a german there being no further business the meeting is

4:24:31 ↗ adjourned at 11 25. awesome thank you

Approved minutes

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

Open PDF

Attendance

Council / Members (5)

Mariah Bettise

Stacy Goodman

Victoria Hunt

Tola Marts

Paul Winterstein

Excused

Bill Ramos

Chris Reh