City Council Special Meeting · Monday, August 5, 2019 · City Council Digest

2. AGENDA ITEMS

The purpose of this special meeting is to allow the City Council to recess into Executive Session to discuss collective bargaining per RCW 42.30.140(4). The item is expected to take approximately 15 minutes. Please note, Executive Sessions are closed to the public. Action is anticipated to occur during the Aug. 5 Regular Council meeting

▶ Watch from 36:14

3419 segments .txt ↗

0:25 ↗ good evening and welcome to the mystic

0:28 ↗ West City Council regular meeting this

0:30 ↗ Monday August 5th the first order of

0:33 ↗ business today is the Pledge of

0:35 ↗ Allegiance and anybody who'd like to

0:37 ↗ join the Council on the Pledge of

0:38 ↗ Allegiance it's nice to see that we have

1:01 ↗ some audience and staff members tonight

1:03 ↗ and this really gorgeous summer evening

1:05 ↗ and you chose to spend your time with us

1:07 ↗ thank you very much the first item under

1:10 ↗ special business is a certificate of

1:12 ↗ appreciation that I'd like to hand out

1:14 ↗ this evening

1:24 ↗ I think for most everyone here tonight

1:28 ↗ you know that we have a retirement of

1:32 ↗ sorts happening City Administrator moon

1:34 ↗ who has been with the city for five

1:36 ↗ years is moving off for a wonderful

1:39 ↗ family experience and I wanted to take a

1:42 ↗ few moments and thank her for the

1:44 ↗ service for what she has done for the

1:45 ↗ city of Issaquah Emily hates this stuff

1:48 ↗ so don't look at her face because she

1:49 ↗ doesn't like it when people talk about

1:51 ↗ her I think the city administrators job

1:54 ↗ might be one of the hardest jobs out

1:56 ↗ there they have a huge responsibility in

1:59 ↗ dealing not only with managing a very

2:01 ↗ law large and strong and talented

2:04 ↗ professional team but they also work

2:06 ↗ with an elected body and we can be like

2:08 ↗ a herd of cats sometimes so it's two

2:11 ↗ very different feelings besides that

2:13 ↗ they're a face out in the community who

2:15 ↗ is helping to channel the voice and the

2:17 ↗ community needs into everything that we

2:19 ↗ do at a really high level I've gotten to

2:22 ↗ work with Emily much closer over this

2:24 ↗ last year-and-a-half as mayor and I will

2:26 ↗ tell you that she is an amazing public

2:28 ↗ servant it is public service first it

2:30 ↗ shows in everything that she does I

2:32 ↗ haven't met anyone or worked with anyone

2:34 ↗ who's worked this hard before I wish I

2:36 ↗ could show you all of the hours that she

2:38 ↗ puts in but at least council president

2:40 ↗ Mart's had the opportunity of seeing a

2:41 ↗ couple of her time sheets

2:42 ↗ it's an incredible heavy lift and she

2:45 ↗ did it this last year and a half when we

2:47 ↗ were not even completely stopped so she

2:49 ↗ took a lot a large body of work on those

2:52 ↗ very broad shoulders of her and as a

2:55 ↗ mayor and for our community I'm really

2:57 ↗ grateful for what she did so I'd like to

2:59 ↗ call her up here today and thank her in

3:01 ↗ front of you for her service and know

3:04 ↗ let her know that we wish her very well

3:06 ↗ on her next adventure which is a much

3:08 ↗ bigger playground than ours

3:09 ↗ and we can

3:14 ↗ so I have a certificate of appreciation

3:16 ↗ this evening for Emily I'm sure when her

3:19 ↗ family returns from their fantastic

3:21 ↗ adventure there will be a city or a

3:23 ↗ County or some other public agency who

3:25 ↗ will benefit from her public service I'm

3:27 ↗ just glad we got to have her for five

3:29 ↗ years

3:29 ↗ thank you next on our agenda this

3:56 ↗ evening is ID zero five one three a

4:00 ↗ regional Coalition for housing program

4:02 ↗ update

4:04 ↗ there will be no council action this

4:06 ↗ evening this is an informational update

4:07 ↗ and I'd like to invite City

4:09 ↗ Administrator Emily moon to come up and

4:11 ↗ make the presentation Thank You Emily

4:13 ↗ great thank you

4:15 ↗ tonight I will be giving just a simply

4:18 ↗ brief update on recent executive board

4:21 ↗ actions from the arch executive board

4:24 ↗ council will receive more information in

4:27 ↗ September when staff returns to give a

4:29 ↗ presentation about a new revenue source

4:32 ↗ at the state legislature recently

4:35 ↗ adopted and that is specific to

4:38 ↗ providing additional affordable housing

4:40 ↗ or supporting affordable housing

4:42 ↗ programs and also staff will be back in

4:45 ↗ front of you in October to discuss the

4:48 ↗ mayor's preliminary budget and within it

4:50 ↗ some recommendations concerning arch but

4:53 ↗ tonight I want to give a very brief

4:55 ↗ status update and an early opportunity

4:58 ↗ to highlight future council

5:00 ↗ conversations related to arch so it's

5:04 ↗ council is where and as we have

5:06 ↗ discussed here in this forum and through

5:09 ↗ the city's website arch executive board

5:13 ↗ commissioned a report of the home

5:14 ↗ ownership program in December of 2018

5:18 ↗ and that report was received by the

5:20 ↗ board in

5:22 ↗ mid 2019 that report gave us some really

5:27 ↗ great information it reconfirmed that

5:30 ↗ arches doing many the right things many

5:33 ↗ best practices but also helped to

5:36 ↗ underscore some of the issues that arch

5:38 ↗ has been facing in particular arch and

5:41 ↗ the homeownership program has

5:43 ↗ experienced some serious compliance

5:45 ↗ issues it's only affected a small

5:48 ↗ portion of the portfolio but wherever

5:51 ↗ there are violations and wherever the

5:53 ↗ program is not working

5:55 ↗ according to design that's an issue and

5:58 ↗ one that the Executive Board has taken

6:00 ↗ action to resolve one of the things that

6:05 ↗ the report pointed out to us is that the

6:08 ↗ program has grown significantly over the

6:10 ↗ decades and those issues are likely to

6:15 ↗ get worse over time as the gap and

6:18 ↗ affordability increases and as

6:21 ↗ additional units become part of the

6:23 ↗ portfolio so the consultant recommended

6:27 ↗ some changes to current policies and

6:30 ↗ also to staffing level of arch in order

6:33 ↗ to curb the tide on gradual loss of

6:36 ↗ affordability and an increase in any

6:40 ↗ compliance issues so the board has

6:43 ↗ looked at all of those recommendations

6:45 ↗ is already making some changes to

6:46 ↗ practices and program policies including

6:50 ↗ updating our resale formula looking at

6:52 ↗ language that would give us stronger

6:56 ↗ abilities in the case of anticipated

6:58 ↗ foreclosures stronger monitoring and

7:01 ↗ compliance procedures which would be

7:04 ↗ staff lead and therefore all of those

7:09 ↗ new activities or enhanced activities

7:11 ↗ will require more staffing capacity so

7:16 ↗ with that the Arts Executive Board

7:18 ↗ recently approved a transfer from the

7:22 ↗ reserve fund and the city of Kirkland

7:25 ↗ committed funds if they're needed to

7:28 ↗ provide to limited term positions for

7:31 ↗ the remainder of this year and

7:32 ↗ throughout 2020 or until the point in

7:34 ↗ time

7:35 ↗ when municipalities have adopted their

7:38 ↗ 2020 budget and are providing any

7:40 ↗ additional funding the first position is

7:43 ↗ a housing program and Minister

7:45 ↗ administrator and that person would be

7:48 ↗ responsible for administering the whole

7:51 ↗ homeownership program this would put one

7:54 ↗ individual in a position to really track

7:57 ↗ the performance of the portfolio

7:59 ↗ established some program metrics and

8:02 ↗ work on legal frameworks that are

8:05 ↗ lacking right now are just not

8:07 ↗ standardized second position would be an

8:11 ↗ associate planner that would serve as

8:13 ↗ the lead in monitoring and compliance

8:15 ↗ for our rental projects arches rental

8:19 ↗ projects at that portion of the

8:21 ↗ portfolio and the most recent years has

8:23 ↗ grown more substantially than the

8:26 ↗ homeownership program and that is one

8:29 ↗ that we have been watching for some time

8:31 ↗ and been aware that we'll need some

8:34 ↗ augmented staffing capacity so the 2020

8:39 ↗ arch budget hasn't been approved yet by

8:41 ↗ the board we would anticipate doing so

8:44 ↗ sometime this fall but as we look to add

8:50 ↗ some staffing capacity on a temporary

8:52 ↗ basis we I'm anticipating the Executive

8:55 ↗ Board will want to make a recommendation

8:56 ↗ to make those positions permanent and

9:00 ↗ the board is also going to be

9:02 ↗ contemplating potential funding sources

9:05 ↗ for those two positions and possibly a

9:07 ↗ third two of the things that the board

9:10 ↗ has been discussing recently are house

9:13 ↗ bill 1406 which is that new enabling

9:16 ↗ legislation that would allow the city to

9:18 ↗ retain part of the sales tax that

9:21 ↗ currently is remitted to the state be a

9:23 ↗ tax credit that we could leverage in

9:26 ↗ order to fulfill some of our affordable

9:29 ↗ housing goals the second mechanism would

9:33 ↗ be implementing some new program fees

9:35 ↗ which are typical across affordable

9:37 ↗ housing programs in the United States

9:40 ↗ and which arch for the most part lacks

9:46 ↗ I'm anticipating at this point in time

9:49 ↗ that the mayor's preliminary 2020 budget

9:51 ↗ will include a recommendation to add an

9:55 ↗ increase to the city's share of the

9:58 ↗ administrative feet to arch that's the

10:01 ↗ smaller component of our arch budget

10:03 ↗ each year anticipating that increase

10:06 ↗ might be about twenty five thousand

10:09 ↗ dollars that's our proportional share of

10:12 ↗ those three anticipated regular

10:15 ↗ full-time positions the second piece of

10:18 ↗ our budget is typically our Housing

10:20 ↗ Trust Fund contribution and as staff

10:23 ↗ will present to you in September with

10:27 ↗ hospital 1406 passage we believe that

10:31 ↗ would be a good source of funding to

10:33 ↗ both help provide the additional funding

10:35 ↗ for the administrative fee and for the

10:37 ↗ Housing Trust Fund contribution the

10:40 ↗ estimated value of that sales tax credit

10:42 ↗ revenue to the city is a hundred and

10:45 ↗ twenty five thousand dollars so we will

10:49 ↗ be back in September and October to talk

10:52 ↗ a little bit more about that state

10:55 ↗ legislative action and to secure

10:59 ↗ concurrence on how to take advantage of

11:02 ↗ it and then in October to present the

11:05 ↗ proposed budget along the way I

11:07 ↗ anticipate staff will continue to

11:10 ↗ provide you with an update on the

11:13 ↗ executive board actions and what was

11:15 ↗ included in their recommended budget for

11:17 ↗ 2020 with that that's all I have for

11:21 ↗ tonight thank you there are any

11:23 ↗ questions not seeing any questions thank

11:27 ↗ you very much the next item on the

11:29 ↗ agenda this evening is ID zero five one

11:32 ↗ five new Parkway Northwest maple to

11:35 ↗ sunset update and section or 4f youth

11:38 ↗ and I'd like to invite senior engineer

11:40 ↗ John Mortensen to make a presentation

11:42 ↗ hey John

12:06 ↗ good evening I'm John Mortensen with the

12:09 ↗ Public Works engineering department

12:11 ↗ tonight I'm here to talk about the

12:13 ↗ Newport Way maple to sunset project I'll

12:16 ↗ be providing a brief project update and

12:19 ↗ discussing a potential section for

12:22 ↗ effuse so the the project Newport Way

12:28 ↗ maple to sunset as the name would

12:30 ↗ indicate it's a long Newports way and it

12:33 ↗ begins at maple which is where Target

12:36 ↗ and Trader Joe's is that and it goes to

12:39 ↗ sunset project will build roundabouts at

12:42 ↗ juniper Holly and dogwood

12:45 ↗ it'll add pedestrian facilities there'll

12:48 ↗ be a sidewalk on one side a shared use

12:51 ↗ path on the other

12:52 ↗ it'll add bike lanes landscaping make

12:56 ↗ modifications to the two traffic signals

12:58 ↗ on both ends of the project and upgrade

13:01 ↗ utilities and underground overhead

13:04 ↗ utilities a little background on the

13:07 ↗ project funding the city has a design

13:10 ↗ grant for 1.2 million dollars which were

13:14 ↗ using to currently designed the project

13:18 ↗ back in 2016 the city was and washed-out

13:23 ↗ worked together to repurpose and unspent

13:27 ↗ earmark from the southeast bypass

13:29 ↗ project and the amount was about 3.6

13:32 ↗ million dollars and fast forward to 2019

13:36 ↗ the city has until the end of the

13:38 ↗ current federal fiscal year which ends

13:41 ↗ on September 30th to have these funds

13:44 ↗ get obligated in order to have them not

13:47 ↗ lapse in if that were to happen the city

13:49 ↗ would lose these federal funds the plan

13:52 ↗ is to obligate 1.2 million to the design

13:56 ↗ phase and fully fund the design and with

14:00 ↗ the remaining 2.4 million dollars it

14:03 ↗ will be obligated to an early

14:05 ↗ right-of-way acquisition project an

14:08 ↗ early right-of-way acquisition project

14:10 ↗ is where you use money to acquire

14:13 ↗ right-of-way earlier than you normally

14:15 ↗ would in a proud

14:17 ↗ and for the early right-of-way

14:19 ↗ acquisition city staff work to identify

14:21 ↗ up to 11 parcels that would be good

14:25 ↗ candidates for right-of-way acquisition

14:27 ↗ and one of the parcels is the parcel

14:31 ↗ with Issaquah Valley Elementary that

14:34 ↗ school has a playground and a ball field

14:38 ↗ that might be considered a recreational

14:40 ↗ facility the so about section 4 F use

14:43 ↗ the US Department of Transportation Act

14:46 ↗ of 1966 section 4 F provided for a

14:50 ↗ consideration of park recreational lands

14:53 ↗ wildlife and waterfowl refuges and

14:55 ↗ historic sites during transportation

14:57 ↗ planning section 4 F applies to projects

15:01 ↗ that receive federal funds through the

15:03 ↗ US Department of Transportation which

15:05 ↗ Newport waive does as I mentioned one of

15:10 ↗ the properties the Issaquah Valley

15:13 ↗ Elementary has a ball field and we're

15:15 ↗ targeting that is a potential

15:18 ↗ right-of-way acquisition and in our

15:22 ↗ discussions with washed-out they said

15:24 ↗ this could be considered a for a

15:27 ↗ facility or might not and due to the

15:29 ↗ time constraint we're under they

15:31 ↗ recommended that we treat it as a

15:33 ↗ section 4 F property rather than

15:36 ↗ determining if it met the criteria as a

15:39 ↗ potential section 4 F property the

15:42 ↗ federal highway administration must

15:44 ↗ determine that the city's use of the

15:46 ↗ property would have a de minimis impact

15:48 ↗ de minimis impact is one that will not

15:51 ↗ adversely affect the features or

15:53 ↗ attributes of the section 4f property as

15:56 ↗ part of the process a page for FHWA to

15:59 ↗ make the determination the city is

16:02 ↗ required to discuss the use of section 4

16:04 ↗ F at a city council meeting which is why

16:06 ↗ I'm here tonight the city is confident

16:09 ↗ that the acquisition of the right-of-way

16:11 ↗ from in Valley Elementary will not

16:14 ↗ adversely affect the features attributes

16:16 ↗ and activities that qualify the resource

16:19 ↗ for section 4f protection last week city

16:23 ↗ staff met with s qua School District

16:25 ↗ staff and discussed the

16:29 ↗ right-of-way acquisition and in regards

16:32 ↗ to the section 4f protection for the

16:35 ↗ ball field and there were no concerns

16:40 ↗ raised during the meeting and the school

16:43 ↗ district is preparing the letters that

16:45 ↗ will state that the project will not

16:49 ↗ adversely affect the features attributes

16:53 ↗ and activities that qualify the resource

16:55 ↗ for 4f protection the next steps in the

16:58 ↗ process are once we have the letter from

17:01 ↗ the school district we have a section

17:05 ↗ for F de minimis checklist that's been

17:07 ↗ prepared and we'll be submitting those

17:09 ↗ to wash dot we will be given this to

17:12 ↗ FHWA for approval once that is approved

17:17 ↗ the city will submit the paperwork to

17:21 ↗ get our National Environmental Policy

17:23 ↗ Act or NEPA approval for the

17:26 ↗ right-of-way acquisition which will

17:28 ↗ allow us to obligate the funds before

17:30 ↗ they lapse and I forgot to so I just I

17:38 ↗ meant to show you guys here's where the

17:40 ↗ you can look at the map you can see the

17:42 ↗ ball field and you can see the

17:44 ↗ roundabout at Holly along with the

17:47 ↗ right-of-way that we are looking to

17:48 ↗ acquire and with that we can have

17:51 ↗ discussion or questions thank you John

17:54 ↗ are there any questions councilmember

17:56 ↗ Walsh thank you so to clarify what

18:02 ↗ you're looking to do is acquire some of

18:06 ↗ the land from Eska Valley Elementary in

18:10 ↗ order to have what you need to build the

18:13 ↗ roundabouts not that you're looking to

18:14 ↗ acquire all of the ball field and that

18:17 ↗ is correct

18:18 ↗ okay Thank You councilmember winter

18:20 ↗ Stein that was my question as well David

18:23 ↗ could you just just give us some numbers

18:26 ↗ like I'm looking at the diagram so how

18:29 ↗ much of this land it's yeah the total

18:34 ↗ sorry

18:36 ↗ so the total between the 11 parcels

18:39 ↗ we're looking to acquire about one acre

18:42 ↗ and of the about a half acre is at its

18:46 ↗ quali Elementary so it's about half of

18:48 ↗ what we're looking to acquire for the

18:51 ↗ early acquisition okay in this diagram

18:53 ↗ what are the boundaries of the

18:58 ↗ acquisition so it says the mm there's

19:01 ↗ some one line that's meant in 2011

19:03 ↗ proposed rrow and it go back to the

19:12 ↗ microphone so I pointed to where the new

19:15 ↗ right-of-way line will be and then in

19:19 ↗ red is the current right-of-way line

19:23 ↗ okay so it's labeled the 2011 proposed

19:28 ↗ rrow on that chart yes thank you any

19:33 ↗ other questions councilmember hunt comes

19:36 ↗ memory fence president Mertz um I I

19:39 ↗ didn't really understand the statements

19:43 ↗ that were made about the classification

19:46 ↗ as a 4f property so if so you said that

19:51 ↗ that the washed-out advised listen needs

19:56 ↗ to treat it as a fourth property rather

19:58 ↗ than determinate if it fits the criteria

19:59 ↗ or not so if it didn't fit the criteria

20:01 ↗ what's the impact so if it doesn't fit

20:04 ↗ the criteria then we would not need to

20:07 ↗ discuss the section 4f use and do the de

20:11 ↗ minimus checklist and FHWA would not

20:13 ↗ need to make a determination and we'd be

20:16 ↗ able to obligate the funds the risk to

20:18 ↗ doing that is we submit all of our

20:20 ↗ paperwork for approval and we would get

20:23 ↗ denied and not be able to obligate the

20:25 ↗ funds so this is just playing it on the

20:28 ↗ safe side thank you um come to memory so

20:32 ↗ not so much interested in well I'm very

20:35 ↗ interested in the 4f and this particular

20:37 ↗ parcel but I'm more interested in the

20:39 ↗ 3-point whatever million dollars in

20:41 ↗ federal funds that was originally

20:43 ↗ earmarked for the bypass

20:45 ↗ so if we don't do anything along this

20:51 ↗ stretch road what happens to them that

20:54 ↗ was federal funds that we would be

20:56 ↗ granted so we're getting spending money

20:57 ↗ on design and we're going to be spending

21:00 ↗ money on right away acquisition and what

21:05 ↗ happens and what's the timeline

21:08 ↗ Sheldon then with the Department of

21:10 ↗ Public Works engineering the funds that

21:13 ↗ were earmarked and repurposed from the

21:17 ↗ bypass the 3.6 million dollars if we do

21:21 ↗ not use them on this project they go

21:23 ↗ back to the federal government we're not

21:25 ↗ allowed to use them on another project

21:27 ↗ did you explain why Sheldon Washington

21:31 ↗ and FHWA have said that these funds

21:36 ↗ could only be repurposed to one other

21:38 ↗ project and are not allowed to be

21:40 ↗ repurposed to any other project once

21:42 ↗ they were repurposed they were

21:43 ↗ repurposed back in 2016 which is when we

21:46 ↗ had notification that they were made

21:49 ↗ available slightly different direction

21:55 ↗ okay so that was very interesting too

21:57 ↗ okay so let me help me along here with

21:59 ↗ the question no my question is really

22:01 ↗ about is this a grant and we can acquire

22:05 ↗ right away and we can do design work

22:07 ↗ along Newports way and if we never build

22:09 ↗ out that designed work that's all good

22:13 ↗ and well or is there some stipulation

22:16 ↗ that we have to actually if we do right

22:19 ↗ away acquisition and we do design work

22:20 ↗ with the federal money we actually have

22:22 ↗ to do something okay I'm sorry I missed

22:24 ↗ the first question that he just repeated

22:26 ↗ that that is similar to rules that we've

22:30 ↗ discussed in other forums about federal

22:32 ↗ money made available during the design

22:34 ↗ and rightaway phases and in our CW's not

22:39 ↗ excuse me the federal CFR's it states

22:42 ↗ that once you've gotten substantially

22:45 ↗ complete through the right away phase

22:46 ↗ using federal money you have about

22:49 ↗ twenty more years before there's a time

22:51 ↗ frame in which FHWA has to make a

22:54 ↗ decision on whether or not

22:55 ↗ those funds are repayable or not to back

22:59 ↗ to the federal government if you don't

23:00 ↗ proceed with construction it's not hard

23:03 ↗ and fast FHWA hasn't made a specific

23:06 ↗ ruling like they did on the design money

23:07 ↗ which said you had ten years I believe

23:10 ↗ it was if to proceed to the next phase

23:12 ↗ which was right away acquisition or

23:14 ↗ construction so does that answer your

23:16 ↗ question great thanks Sheldon how's the

23:19 ↗ present Marx so if I'm hearing correct

23:23 ↗ we will have documentation from the

23:27 ↗ district that they are not opposed to

23:30 ↗ this activity prior to having to make

23:34 ↗ any formal decision as a council body

23:37 ↗ correct all right thank you other

23:40 ↗ questions there's a couple come okay

23:43 ↗ great that's it thank you very much John

23:47 ↗ next item on the agenda this evening is

23:49 ↗ audience comments and this is your time

23:51 ↗ to address your council on your mayor

23:52 ↗ the guidelines for public participation

23:55 ↗ will be displayed on the screen please

23:58 ↗ limit your comments to five minutes if

24:01 ↗ you signed up you will be called first

24:03 ↗ but if you did not sign up I will ask to

24:05 ↗ see if anybody else would like to speak

24:07 ↗ if you're here as part of representing a

24:10 ↗ group please identify which group if

24:12 ↗ you're a spokesperson and if you are

24:15 ↗ listening this evening and you want to

24:17 ↗ let the council know that you are in

24:18 ↗ support of any of the comments that you

24:20 ↗ hear from anybody who talks with council

24:22 ↗ this evening please raise your hand so

24:24 ↗ they get an understanding of the level

24:25 ↗ of support tisha has anyone signed up to

24:28 ↗ speak this evening yes Larry Franks

24:40 ↗ good evening mayor Polly the council

24:44 ↗ members and city staff my name is larry

24:47 ↗ franks i reside at two four zero zero

24:49 ↗ one south east one hundred and third

24:51 ↗ Street here in Issaquah Washington and I

24:54 ↗ also represent the Friends of the Salmon

24:57 ↗ Hatchery that will come up later as fish

25:00 ↗ we think it's cute so my goal in the

25:03 ↗ next four minutes is to share the 40

25:06 ↗ million years of history of salmon in

25:10 ↗ the the Pacific Northwest so the oldest

25:14 ↗ fossil remains that we know of are from

25:16 ↗ 40 million years ago the modern versions

25:19 ↗ that we see here now we have coho and

25:22 ↗ chinook that come to the Issaquah area

25:25 ↗ roughly 4 million years old

25:28 ↗ they've been very resilient in the past

25:31 ↗ what they've done in response to ice

25:33 ↗ ages so imagine 12,000 years ago we were

25:37 ↗ covered with 3,000 feet of ice right

25:41 ↗ here where we stand and how the salmon

25:44 ↗ responded to that is as the ice moved

25:46 ↗ south they move south so 12,000 years

25:50 ↗ ago our salmon were thriving down in

25:53 ↗ Mexico what's happening now through

25:56 ↗ global warming first normal now man in

26:01 ↗ cars a man caused is driving them north

26:05 ↗ so hypothetical question what happens to

26:08 ↗ these fish if there's no place north for

26:11 ↗ them to go to think about the Arctic

26:13 ↗ refuge and the pressure that that it's

26:16 ↗ under ice age is also periodically cut

26:20 ↗ off access to the sea and that's led us

26:23 ↗ to having the kokanee population so

26:26 ↗ these are landlocked sockeye salmon that

26:29 ↗ basically oops found out that they could

26:31 ↗ no longer get to the ocean so they

26:33 ↗ stopped at the at the lake fast forward

26:37 ↗ a little bit to our area there's no

26:41 ↗ historical record of an adverse fish

26:44 ↗ fish that made it out to the ocean

26:46 ↗ from Issaquah Creek at all the records

26:50 ↗ for other rivers close to us in the Lake

26:52 ↗ Washington watershed so Cedar River

26:55 ↗ White River are very erratic but there

26:58 ↗ were chum and chinook that came from

27:02 ↗ those rivers the the whole Lake

27:06 ↗ Washington basin was majorly replumbed

27:09 ↗ in 1917 when the the Chintan locks went

27:14 ↗ in that's also what enabled the Iroquois

27:17 ↗ hatchery which came in 1937 that started

27:21 ↗ by trying to raise sockeye which are

27:25 ↗ famous for needing lakes as part of

27:28 ↗ their environment and Chinook the

27:32 ↗ Chinook were brought here from the Cedar

27:34 ↗ River it turns out that at the time we

27:36 ↗ didn't know that Chuck I have a virus

27:40 ↗ basically that flares up if you confine

27:44 ↗ them if you try to raise them in a

27:46 ↗ hatchery so those died out but the

27:50 ↗ shouldn't stayed healthy

27:52 ↗ we added coho a little bit later

27:56 ↗ historically kokanee were abundant and

27:58 ↗ is a quat Creek in fact in the the 70s

28:02 ↗ the Department of Fisheries policy was

28:04 ↗ to let the co can you come up they go

28:07 ↗ into the spawning pond the pond would be

28:10 ↗ drained and fish would be killed the

28:12 ↗ fear then was that they were a disease

28:15 ↗ vector that we would catch stuff the

28:17 ↗ hatchery fish would catch stuff from the

28:20 ↗ wild fish it turns out the risk was

28:22 ↗ actually in the other direction

28:26 ↗ elsewhere in the state the Columbia

28:28 ↗ River used to regularly produce 15

28:31 ↗ million fish a year in the 1920s

28:34 ↗ forecast this year is for 1.3 million

28:37 ↗ and we're not even close to that in

28:41 ↗ terms of Salmon Hatchery is recently as

28:44 ↗ 2007 we had seven we had 13,000 fish

28:48 ↗ returned last year we had less than 2000

28:52 ↗ and we're

28:53 ↗ running below that forecast now we're in

28:56 ↗ trouble

28:56 ↗ lesson learned overall the Chinook were

28:59 ↗ declared in danger in 1999 all Chinook

29:03 ↗ in Puget Sound and they have not been

29:07 ↗ recovered whatever it is that we're

29:09 ↗ doing we're not doing it right so what

29:12 ↗ do we do in the future so one of the

29:14 ↗ initiatives that fish is looking at now

29:17 ↗ is various science that as we discover

29:21 ↗ them we're going to be bringing them to

29:23 ↗ city of Issaquah other elected officials

29:25 ↗ to act on to try to save these fish we

29:29 ↗ have a an elected officials Day coming

29:32 ↗ up on October 1st all of you are elected

29:35 ↗ we have a number of RSVPs we're going to

29:38 ↗ be sharing some of the things that can

29:40 ↗ be done to help out these fish I have a

29:44 ↗ closing quote I hear the the bet you

29:46 ↗ have your closing quote you do governor

29:52 ↗ of Washington saying we are presently

29:56 ↗ faced with a desperate situation on

29:58 ↗ salmon the ugly truth is if we continue

30:01 ↗ as we have been doing for the last few

30:04 ↗ years our salmon stocks are doomed to

30:08 ↗ extinction was this Inslee in 2019 no

30:12 ↗ this was Albert Rossellini in 1963 thank

30:17 ↗ you very much Larry

30:19 ↗ has anyone else signed up this evening

30:21 ↗ yes Elizabeth my pen hello my name is

30:28 ↗ Elizabeth Moran I live at 100 big bear

30:31 ↗ place Northwest in Issaquah and tonight

30:36 ↗ I'm here representing the East Side

30:39 ↗ interfaith social concerns council which

30:42 ↗ is partnering with arch and some other

30:46 ↗ partners to put on a workshop for faith

30:53 ↗ communities and municipalities across

30:56 ↗ East King County on October 12th we'll

31:02 ↗ be gathering

31:03 ↗ hearing stories of successful affordable

31:07 ↗ housing built by faith communities or

31:11 ↗ through their partners on their land and

31:15 ↗ also hearing some stories faith

31:19 ↗ communities who tried to do affordable

31:23 ↗ housing and ran into some kind of

31:25 ↗ roadblock and we would love to have as

31:28 ↗ many of you elected and people from the

31:34 ↗ public and faith community members as

31:37 ↗ would like to come come to this workshop

31:40 ↗ we'll start at 9:00 a.m. on October 12th

31:44 ↗ at st. Luke's Lutheran Church in on

31:48 ↗ Bellevue way Arch has done a lot in this

31:54 ↗ area and I'm was glad to hear the update

31:58 ↗ I hope that you have a chance to meet

32:03 ↗ Lindsey masters who's the new the new

32:06 ↗ Arthur and I just think there's so much

32:13 ↗ more that we really need to do on

32:16 ↗ affordable housing I hope that people

32:19 ↗ will find some new innovative ideas and

32:23 ↗ we will have someone there who will

32:26 ↗ address the legislative changes that

32:29 ↗ have opened some possibilities so if you

32:32 ↗ want to learn more about the legislative

32:34 ↗ changes what the faith community is

32:37 ↗ doing and meet with legislators from

32:41 ↗ across East King County and maybe come

32:44 ↗ up with some really great ideas of yours

32:46 ↗ that you can share with us we would love

32:49 ↗ to see you thank you very much thank you

32:51 ↗ Elizabeth

32:52 ↗ this is there anyone else who is signed

32:54 ↗ up no is there anyone else that would

32:56 ↗ like to address Council this evening not

33:00 ↗ seeing any hands second call anyone else

33:03 ↗ would like to address Council this

33:04 ↗ evening in a last call for audience

33:07 ↗ comments thank you all for coming this

33:09 ↗ evening and to our two speakers for

33:11 ↗ talking about two very important issues

33:13 ↗ the 40 million year history of

33:15 ↗ in our area and our need for

33:16 ↗ partnerships for affordable housing

33:18 ↗ thank you for coming this evening the

33:24 ↗ next item on the agenda is committee and

33:26 ↗ regional reports and we will start with

33:27 ↗ councilmember Walsh no report at this

33:30 ↗ time Thank You Q councilmember hunt

33:32 ↗ thank you madam mayor I have three

33:33 ↗ reports this evening the first one is

33:35 ↗ from the Huayra eight water resource

33:38 ↗ inventory area eight salmon recovery

33:40 ↗ council salmon recovery council met on

33:42 ↗ July 18th and we approved the 2020

33:47 ↗ Huayra

33:47 ↗ eight budget and work plan and we also

33:50 ↗ approved our 2020 legislative priorities

33:54 ↗ we also had a presentation from the King

33:58 ↗ County Conservation Futures tax and

34:01 ↗ parks levy grant recommendations about

34:03 ↗ the work that they will do with the

34:05 ↗ funds from that tax and parks levy grant

34:10 ↗ and then my second regional report is

34:13 ↗ that from the cascade water lines board

34:15 ↗ cascade water Alliance board met on July

34:20 ↗ 24th and we had a action item to approve

34:25 ↗ the resolution authorizing additional

34:27 ↗ utility services related to wastewater

34:29 ↗ this is the item that has been discussed

34:31 ↗ that good of the order a few times by

34:33 ↗ Mayor Polly so we did approve that and

34:37 ↗ it was unanimous and this has to do with

34:40 ↗ waste water sewage septage collection

34:43 ↗ with limitations on activities and

34:45 ↗ authorization to charge for such

34:47 ↗ services on behalf of the cascade water

34:49 ↗ alliance or cities that are members of

34:52 ↗ cascade water lanes and then we also had

34:58 ↗ we also authorized a contract for Lake

35:00 ↗ Tapps water quality monitoring services

35:02 ↗ and my last committee report is that the

35:06 ↗ council and inshore Committee met on

35:07 ↗ August 1st and we had two items the

35:11 ↗ first one is a b-78 to two amendments

35:14 ↗ Issaquah municipal code 12.05 related to

35:17 ↗ sidewalk use district and this was this

35:21 ↗ is on our consent agenda for this

35:23 ↗ evening and the land and shore committee

35:25 ↗ recommended unanimously that it be

35:28 ↗ and our second item was single-family

35:30 ↗ neighborhood framework this was a

35:32 ↗ discussion item and we discussed the

35:36 ↗ reasons why we might consider changing

35:40 ↗ the some of the uses in the

35:43 ↗ single-family neighborhood zone and this

35:46 ↗ will be coming back to council at a

35:49 ↗ future date in the work session format

35:51 ↗ so next we will see this we will all see

35:52 ↗ it together and this was the last

35:54 ↗ meeting of the council and in short

35:56 ↗ committee so those that remaining item

35:59 ↗ will next be seen at the full council in

36:01 ↗ a work session that concludes my report

36:03 ↗ Thank You councilmember hunt

36:05 ↗ councilmember Wray thank you Mary Polly

36:07 ↗ the services and Safety Committee will

36:09 ↗ be meeting on August 13th at 6:30 here

36:12 ↗ in Council Chambers at this time we have

36:14 ↗ a single agenda item the preliminary

36:16 ↗ agenda will include agenda bill 77 90

36:19 ↗ million impact fees or transportation

36:22 ↗ fire police bike / ped and general

36:25 ↗ government buildings and that concludes

36:28 ↗ my report this evening Thank You

36:29 ↗ councilmember a councilmember winter

36:31 ↗ Stein thank you the council

36:33 ↗ Infrastructure Committee did not meet in

36:35 ↗ July and we're not likely to meet in

36:37 ↗ August the growth management policy

36:39 ↗ board did not meet in August and our

36:41 ↗ next scheduled meeting is planned for

36:43 ↗ the first Thursday in September that

36:45 ↗ concludes my report

36:46 ↗ Thank You councilmember Bernstein

36:47 ↗ councilmember Goodman no report Thank

36:49 ↗ You deputy council president petites no

36:52 ↗ report this evening thank you thank you

36:54 ↗ kills president Mertz thank you madam

36:56 ↗ mayor the Sun City's public public

36:59 ↗ issues committee will not be meeting in

37:01 ↗ the month of August because many

37:03 ↗ organizations slow down in August not us

37:06 ↗ but I have just forwarded on to my

37:10 ↗ fellow council members a draft vision

37:13 ↗ 2050 SC a statement of guiding

37:15 ↗ principles which just came out on Friday

37:18 ↗ I would ask that my fellow council

37:21 ↗ members take a look at it and that at

37:23 ↗ our next council meeting for the good of

37:25 ↗ the order I will ask for feedback that I

37:28 ↗ can share

37:30 ↗ it's unfortunate SCA was saying if we

37:32 ↗ wanted written feedback to go into the

37:34 ↗ packet for the September 11th meeting

37:37 ↗ that they would want it by about a week

37:39 ↗ from now but it doesn't don't worry

37:41 ↗ about that it's fine in most cities I

37:43 ↗ believe will be providing their feedback

37:45 ↗ as part of these September 11th meeting

37:47 ↗ to go towards possible direction by the

37:52 ↗ sca Board to be taken between then and

37:54 ↗ when feedback is due which is about two

37:57 ↗ weeks after that so please take a look

37:58 ↗ and I will be asking about it at the

38:01 ↗ next for good of the order related topic

38:05 ↗ growth management policy Council met on

38:09 ↗ July 24th we talked about a bunch of

38:12 ↗ stuff but a vision 2050 public review

38:16 ↗ draft there was a general letter of

38:20 ↗ principles that came out from GMP C we

38:24 ↗ did not take a position on it as an SCA

38:27 ↗ caucus because SCA hadn't taken position

38:29 ↗ but I believe that the principles that

38:31 ↗ were in there were all in alignment with

38:34 ↗ what we as a city have been pushing for

38:36 ↗ so I did not oppose the effort to do

38:40 ↗ that but there s but the county will be

38:44 ↗ getting more formal feedback from SCA

38:47 ↗ next month with that confusing report

38:52 ↗ that concludes my report marks for the

38:56 ↗ mayor's report this evening I have a

38:57 ↗ couple of items earlier this evening at

38:59 ↗ 6:30 p.m. an executive session was held

39:01 ↗ to discuss collective bargaining for RC

39:04 ↗ W 42.3 0.14 o paren for Perine action

39:08 ↗ will be taken under tonight's consent

39:10 ↗ calendar there will be another executive

39:12 ↗ session this evening to just discuss

39:14 ↗ applicant for public employee per RC W

39:18 ↗ 42.3 0.11 o / n 1 / ng this item is

39:22 ↗ expected to last 15 minutes and no

39:24 ↗ action is anticipated to follow an open

39:26 ↗ session I did want to provide a city

39:29 ↗ administrator recruitment update as you

39:33 ↗ all know City Administrator moon will be

39:35 ↗ having her last day in the office with

39:36 ↗ us on Wednesday this Wednesday August

39:38 ↗ 7th and I have been managing a

39:40 ↗ recruitment process through these last

39:42 ↗ few months to find our next city

39:44 ↗ administrator tonight I would like

39:46 ↗ to provide the counsel in our community

39:47 ↗ with an update on July 25th we invited

39:50 ↗ two finalists wally bob quits and marty

39:52 ↗ wine to the city to attend staff and

39:55 ↗ public forums i will be posting a

39:57 ↗ summary of all the feedback I got from

39:59 ↗ that event and want to let all of those

40:01 ↗ that participated I want to tell you how

40:04 ↗ much I appreciate the time that everyone

40:07 ↗ took to engage and the very thoughtful

40:09 ↗ comments that I received I'm still

40:11 ↗ continuing on my due diligence work for

40:13 ↗ this hire and I will be bringing council

40:15 ↗ up to date on what I'm learning and

40:17 ↗ hopeful to have an appointment for

40:20 ↗ council consideration of confirmation in

40:22 ↗ the next few weeks and that is it for

40:25 ↗ the mayor's report moving on to the

40:28 ↗ consent calendar the consent calendar

40:30 ↗ was distributed to council in advance

40:32 ↗ and if authorized the items on the

40:34 ↗ consent calendar will be considered

40:35 ↗ together and approved in one motion have

40:38 ↗ the payables and payroll been reviewed

40:40 ↗ yes thank you does any councilmember

40:43 ↗ desire to remove any item from the

40:44 ↗ consent calendar and consider it under

40:46 ↗ regular business seeing none is there a

40:51 ↗ motion mayor I move we adopt consent

40:54 ↗ calendar is listed in tonight's meeting

40:56 ↗ agenda second it's been moved and

40:59 ↗ seconded all those in favor signify by

41:01 ↗ saying aye aye those opposed that passes

41:06 ↗ unanimously we have several items under

41:08 ↗ regular business this evening the first

41:10 ↗ is a b7 287 city council rules of

41:13 ↗ procedure and the action for this

41:15 ↗ evening would be to adopt the ordinance

41:17 ↗ and approve the resolution this item was

41:20 ↗ considered by the council ad hoc

41:21 ↗ committee and was last discussed by the

41:23 ↗ full council at the July 23rd council

41:26 ↗ committee of the whole

41:29 ↗ we'll have city clerk Tina Eggers make a

41:32 ↗ presentation this evening hi thank you

41:35 ↗ happy to be back just to give you a

41:39 ↗ reminder of where we've been so you've

41:41 ↗ been working on your rules of procedure

41:43 ↗ this year and you referred it on to ad

41:47 ↗ hoc ad hoc has done its work we returned

41:51 ↗ at the qaol meeting of July 23rd and we

41:53 ↗ are at the finish line

41:57 ↗ recent direction that was provided at

42:00 ↗ the cow meeting was to have section 4.0

42:04 ↗ nine committee regional reports reflect

42:06 ↗ current practice and that study sessions

42:09 ↗ that are housed under section 5.0 four

42:12 ↗ include a rotating councilmember to

42:14 ↗ serve as chair providing a presiding

42:16 ↗ officer that that schedule of the

42:20 ↗ rotating councilmember would be

42:21 ↗ developed by the city clerk and

42:23 ↗ confirmed by the council president there

42:26 ↗ was some language requested for

42:28 ↗ clarifying the chairs role and standing

42:32 ↗ meetings for study sessions were

42:33 ↗ identified to be the second and fourth

42:35 ↗ Tuesday of each month those changes were

42:38 ↗ formalized in the final document that's

42:40 ↗ in your packet and is ready for adoption

42:44 ↗ there's two items for action that are

42:47 ↗ being sought this evening the approval

42:50 ↗ of a resolution adopts the rules of

42:52 ↗ procedure and the adoption of the

42:55 ↗ ordinance repeals a chapter within the

42:57 ↗ IMC and then amends chapter 2.06 of the

43:02 ↗ IMC adoption would then have the study

43:07 ↗ session model be effective September 1

43:08 ↗ the goal remains the same that it's a

43:11 ↗ consistent legislative process and these

43:13 ↗ are items that were flagged earlier this

43:16 ↗ year by you to be transparent credible

43:18 ↗ participatory efficient and compliant

43:21 ↗ with that it provides for maximized

43:24 ↗ counsel touch points with all seven

43:26 ↗ council members a streamlined

43:28 ↗ legislative process clear and consistent

43:31 ↗ public input opportunities improved

43:34 ↗ timing for the work items and

43:36 ↗ flexibility and effective use of staff

43:39 ↗ and council resources the format for

43:43 ↗ this model is similar to your work

43:45 ↗ sessions council would be seated on the

43:48 ↗ floor tables with staff this it would be

43:51 ↗ limited to mid and high level policy

43:54 ↗ items you would see them in your packet

43:56 ↗ with ID memos this provides for

43:59 ↗ discussion and direction opportunity for

44:02 ↗ public input and rotating council member

44:06 ↗ to serve as chair when I look at a

44:09 ↗ proposed schedule for that

44:11 ↗ rotating councilmember 2019 through

44:16 ↗ December this would be a model that

44:20 ↗ would work well we're also looking to

44:22 ↗ align it so that the leadership meeting

44:25 ↗ that occurs the week before is is also

44:29 ↗ assigned to that person who would be

44:31 ↗ chairing there are some modifications to

44:35 ↗ the leadership schedule that we need to

44:37 ↗ occur and of course as a clerk I wanted

44:40 ↗ to make those in the footnote noted so

44:44 ↗ that if you approve the rules of

44:46 ↗ procedure this evening that I've got a

44:48 ↗ schedule to move forward with and then

44:54 ↗ what we're doing internally in order to

44:56 ↗ move the study session deployment ahead

44:59 ↗ so you've seen us make some changes to

45:03 ↗ the planning calendar and we've done

45:05 ↗ some low mid and high categories we've

45:09 ↗ also pivoted so that more items are on

45:12 ↗ your consent that there are less

45:14 ↗ referrals and then as we look at sort of

45:17 ↗ the for internal categories sort of the

45:21 ↗ stages of various work plan items when

45:25 ↗ we're informing we will be doing that

45:28 ↗ under council meetings under

45:29 ↗ informational updates you may see that

45:32 ↗ through emails or through web links when

45:36 ↗ you're shaping or reviewing those items

45:38 ↗ that are mid-to-high would be occurring

45:41 ↗ at study sessions and occasionally to

45:44 ↗ allow for some flexibility you might see

45:46 ↗ that at an ad hoc or some of that

45:49 ↗ reviewing and shaping at a council

45:51 ↗ meeting ultimately any action that you

45:53 ↗ take would occur at a council meeting so

45:56 ↗ again as we are deploying this

45:59 ↗ internally we are refining our tools and

46:02 ↗ templates we're working on a standard

46:04 ↗ staff report we're providing some

46:07 ↗ presentation templates we're offering

46:10 ↗ some initial training to staff that's

46:11 ↗ actually scheduled for August 26 and

46:14 ↗ then we'll package up some additional

46:16 ↗ training as we move forward other

46:19 ↗ enhancements and next steps you'll see

46:22 ↗ that are

46:23 ↗ starting in September would have public

46:29 ↗ input identified on the agendas and our

46:32 ↗ agendas will also an offer link back to

46:34 ↗ communicate with Council to submit their

46:37 ↗ feedback to you website calendar

46:40 ↗ enhancements that we're looking for when

46:41 ↗ we launched the website will be agenda

46:45 ↗ topics will be included on our calendar

46:47 ↗ once published we'll have an engagement

46:51 ↗ landing page of course continue to

46:53 ↗ review monitor and adjust and we will be

46:57 ↗ returning to you in the summer to have a

47:01 ↗ check-in meeting on this transition

47:03 ↗ tonight's action would be to approve the

47:06 ↗ resolution and adopt an ordinance unless

47:09 ↗ you had questions or desired further

47:12 ↗ amendments thank you

47:15 ↗ Thank You Tina questions oh come on

47:22 ↗ we've worked on this for years there's

47:23 ↗ gotta be questions Thank You

47:25 ↗ councilmember hunt you outlines a number

47:29 ↗ of the reasons that we're switching to

47:33 ↗ the study session format from the

47:35 ↗ committee's and so I wondered what is

47:37 ↗ the timeline look like for Council to

47:40 ↗ have the possibility of revisiting those

47:42 ↗ and seeing how we're doing in terms of

47:44 ↗ making those changes and achieving those

47:48 ↗ goals or or not so that would be our

47:52 ↗ summer check-in with you unless there

47:54 ↗ was a direction to provide that at a

47:56 ↗ different time okay yeah I am just

47:59 ↗ interested in making sure that we do

48:00 ↗ have that check-in and revisit and that

48:02 ↗ it's deliberate Thank You councilmember

48:05 ↗ winter Stein and councilmember Walsh

48:09 ↗ Tina I appreciate some of the

48:11 ↗ enhancements that I heard tonight I

48:13 ↗ think for the first time especially

48:16 ↗ having the agenda items topics actually

48:19 ↗ on the calendar and making it much

48:21 ↗ easier for somebody with a single click

48:23 ↗ to perhaps engage and send us a message

48:25 ↗ those are very nice and improvements

48:27 ↗ thinking Thank You councilmember Walsh

48:32 ↗ thank you so we've heard from some

48:35 ↗ new members that they have then they

48:38 ↗ might not understand what this change

48:41 ↗ means for them and their ability to

48:42 ↗ interact with council and so I'm

48:45 ↗ wondering when so obviously the website

48:48 ↗ relaunch is later and so we need to look

48:51 ↗ at what's happening now how will we

48:54 ↗ communicate that particularly on the

48:56 ↗ website or maybe in other mediums to let

48:59 ↗ people know that if they want to follow

49:00 ↗ something from the early stages of

49:03 ↗ development when they should come in and

49:05 ↗ interact certainly we're already finding

49:08 ↗ that it's easier to communicate that

49:09 ↗ information we're doing it by phone or

49:11 ↗ doing it through email and we're doing

49:13 ↗ it on the landing pages of our major

49:16 ↗ project pages so we have a water page at

49:20 ↗ the talks about fluoride I chatted with

49:23 ↗ communications staff and they said this

49:26 ↗ was so much easier to be able to

49:28 ↗ articulate counsels touch points under

49:31 ↗ this new process than previous so some

49:34 ↗ of those things are already underway and

49:36 ↗ we expect that to continue we will

49:39 ↗ modify our calendar as quickly as we can

49:42 ↗ after adoption some things needed action

49:46 ↗ to be taken before every could go

49:47 ↗ implement and so so far what we're

49:51 ↗ finding is we're on track to to inform

49:55 ↗ the public and we'll continue to do that

49:58 ↗ councilmember e so a little bit of a

50:01 ↗ different tact one of the things that

50:03 ↗ we've done for a long time with the

50:05 ↗ Infrastructure Committee was to receive

50:08 ↗ updates from public works on major

50:11 ↗ initiatives going on within the city and

50:13 ↗ then just this year thank you jeff

50:15 ↗ Watling we started doing something

50:17 ↗ similar within services and safety

50:19 ↗ around parks and other non public works

50:23 ↗ related projects where do we envision

50:25 ↗ those updates would occur in the new

50:27 ↗ model under the new model you have an

50:30 ↗ informational update section that would

50:32 ↗ be added to your council meetings you

50:35 ↗ saw a couple this evening under special

50:37 ↗ business so it would have a dedicated

50:39 ↗ slot on your agenda for that so we're

50:43 ↗ going to see how that works and how you

50:45 ↗ like that

50:47 ↗ another Avenue would be through email

50:50 ↗ and you have seen some of those

50:53 ↗ informational type reports come out say

50:55 ↗ from the police chief on crime stats and

50:59 ↗ I think engineering had a couple updates

51:01 ↗ for you two by email so we would

51:03 ↗ continue to do those Thanks

51:07 ↗ and I cannae prep your question a little

51:10 ↗ bit I think what you're getting at is

51:12 ↗ that those were extremely useful to

51:14 ↗ council because it was a broad list of

51:16 ↗ all projects going on and that the

51:19 ↗ public also got the opportunity to hear

51:21 ↗ it so we need to find a way to fit that

51:24 ↗ in so that you are feeling like we're

51:26 ↗ getting the same sort of touch and I

51:28 ↗ think it was an opportunity to have a

51:30 ↗ discussion about the projects in a in a

51:32 ↗ very high-level sense but I think mostly

51:34 ↗ it was an opportunity for the public to

51:36 ↗ have visibility into those in a public

51:39 ↗ forum and that's really important to me

51:41 ↗ that we maintain that in some some

51:44 ↗ fashion so I prefer the updates to the

51:47 ↗ emails because those tend to be limited

51:49 ↗ an audience so as we move forward that

51:51 ↗ would be my preference okay I hear you

51:54 ↗ that's a great point

51:55 ↗ councilmember interesting I was gonna

51:57 ↗ make a motion let me do a quick check-in

52:00 ↗ is there anyone who hasn't commented

52:02 ↗ that would like to make a comment

52:03 ↗ otherwise we're gonna go to a motion

52:04 ↗ awesome Thank You councilmember we're

52:06 ↗ interesting I move that we approve

52:09 ↗ resolution number two zero one nine -

52:11 ↗ ten ten adopting City Council rules of

52:15 ↗ procedure and adopt ordinance number

52:18 ↗ twenty-eight seventy four point two

52:21 ↗ eight seventy four repealing chapter 2.0

52:25 ↗ for council meetings in a and amending

52:28 ↗ chapter 2.06 of the Issaquah Municipal

52:31 ↗ Code including retitling chapter two

52:33 ↗ zero six it's been moved and seconded is

52:38 ↗ there further any further council

52:39 ↗ discussion deputy council president

52:43 ↗ booties so I didn't know question

52:46 ↗ earlier but just this has been a long

52:49 ↗ road and a lot of really I

52:51 ↗ a lot of really great thought process

52:55 ↗ around how we're going to move forward I

52:57 ↗ am interested to experience what it'll

53:01 ↗ be like to have the study sessions and

53:04 ↗ also the rotating chairs and just see

53:08 ↗ how that how that works out but I'm it's

53:12 ↗ a lot of hard work and I'm glad to see

53:14 ↗ it thank you

53:15 ↗ any other comments or discussion counts

53:18 ↗ more interesting just in summary it is

53:21 ↗ difficult to change what's been

53:23 ↗ institutionalized for perhaps decades

53:25 ↗ and that has had our specialized council

53:28 ↗ committees and now folding them into one

53:31 ↗ committee of the whole

53:32 ↗ we're now as you said earlier and Thank

53:34 ↗ You Tina for your report all seven of us

53:36 ↗ get to be part of the formation of all

53:39 ↗ significant policy matters for us to

53:43 ↗ decide and so I think it's a step for

53:47 ↗ the kit

53:48 ↗ the council and for the city I I think

53:52 ↗ it helps quite a bit we've seen quite a

53:53 ↗ bit you've showed it here tonight Tina

53:55 ↗ as well that mayor Paula you and your

53:58 ↗ staff have clear are clearly preparing

54:02 ↗ for this that gives me a lot more

54:04 ↗ confidence I know that you have been

54:06 ↗ rolling some of these new practices out

54:09 ↗ and that's exactly I think what it takes

54:12 ↗ to make something new like this this

54:14 ↗ type of institutional change successful

54:16 ↗ long term so I appreciate very much the

54:17 ↗ preparation work in the way that you've

54:19 ↗ kept us all informed I am optimistic

54:22 ↗ because there are many models of many

54:25 ↗ cities all around us that are very

54:26 ↗ successful at completing their

54:29 ↗ legislative agenda using study sessions

54:32 ↗ as we are now so thanks to you Tina and

54:35 ↗ the members of your staff and who all

54:38 ↗ have Shepherd this through through

54:40 ↗ tonight thank you thanks any other

54:42 ↗ comments that counts president Mertz

54:45 ↗ I'll be supporting this this evening I

54:49 ↗ will be watching to see how it works out

54:53 ↗ I think that the committee structure in

54:58 ↗ the nine and a half years that I've been

55:01 ↗ part of it I've seen tremendous

55:03 ↗ tremendous work come out of Landon Shore

55:05 ↗ and services and safety and

55:08 ↗ infrastructure and we have built at

55:11 ↗ times a reservoir of talent in those

55:15 ↗ committees and gone into a depth and I

55:18 ↗ think I think in an example of this one

55:22 ↗ of the finest hours was services and

55:24 ↗ safety in addressing the Senior Center

55:27 ↗ when things were at their worst and it

55:29 ↗ allowed us to have just many many many

55:33 ↗ hours of committee meetings to first

55:37 ↗ address community concerns and then to

55:40 ↗ shape a new policy so I will be

55:46 ↗ enthusiastic to see how this new system

55:48 ↗ works and my hope is that we will

55:51 ↗ continue to be able to provide the same

55:54 ↗ level of rigor and depth to our

55:59 ↗ consultative activities going forward

56:02 ↗ thank you Thank You counselor

56:04 ↗ anyone else would like to make comments

56:07 ↗ thank you all if there's no further

56:10 ↗ discussion all those in favor of

56:11 ↗ approving resolution number 2000 2019 -

56:15 ↗ ten adopting City Council rules of

56:18 ↗ procedure and adopt ordinance number two

56:20 ↗ 874 repealing chapter 2.0 for council

56:24 ↗ meetings and amending chapter 2.06 of

56:27 ↗ the Issaquah Municipal Code including

56:28 ↗ retitling chapter 2.9 at 6 has been

56:32 ↗ moved and seconded all those in favor

56:34 ↗ say aye

56:35 ↗ aye as opposed the passes unanimously

56:39 ↗ I was also want to extend a real note of

56:44 ↗ appreciation to council this is

56:45 ↗ something I have heard about for the

56:48 ↗ seven years that I've been serving the

56:50 ↗ city and it is a big

56:52 ↗ lift with a lot of difficult questions

56:55 ↗ and a bit of courage to try things out

56:59 ↗ to see if you get the outcomes that you

57:01 ↗ all desire so I think it's a great best

57:03 ↗ practice and I think you now have the

57:05 ↗ opportunity to continue to monitor and

57:08 ↗ decide on its effectiveness and adopt

57:10 ↗ your rules annually and I think that's

57:12 ↗ awesome or biannually can't remember the

57:14 ↗ exact frequency but I think it's really

57:16 ↗ great and I'm very proud of the team and

57:18 ↗ all of the work that you have done thank

57:20 ↗ you very much for doing that

57:21 ↗ next project under regular business is a

57:24 ↗ b7 804 confluence park turf and

57:28 ↗ irrigation project Council will be

57:30 ↗ considering awarding the bid and

57:31 ↗ allocating the funding this is the first

57:33 ↗ time that this item has been before

57:35 ↗ council and I'd like to ask Parks

57:37 ↗ director Jeff Watling to make a

57:38 ↗ presentation Thank You mayor good

57:42 ↗ evening council jeff Watling Parks and

57:43 ↗ Recreation Director seeking this bid

57:47 ↗ award tonight for this work to be

57:49 ↗ completed at confluence park this is a

57:52 ↗ maintenance project that seeks to

57:53 ↗ install irrigation and improve the

57:56 ↗ existing lawn areas within the park as

58:00 ↗ planned through the master plan of

58:03 ↗ confluence park that park had always

58:06 ↗ been envisioned and has been visioned

58:08 ↗ envisioned to support a variety of

58:10 ↗ active and passive recreational uses on

58:13 ↗ those lawn areas the current condition

58:16 ↗ of relatively patchy grass uneven bumpy

58:21 ↗ ground doesn't necessarily support that

58:23 ↗ variety of use those variety of uses are

58:26 ↗ anything from scheduled community events

58:29 ↗ to unscheduled family picnics the city

58:35 ↗ sought and was awarded a state grant

58:38 ↗ through the Department of Commerce

58:40 ↗ $200,000 to help fund this work that was

58:43 ↗ awarded last year given the the bid

58:46 ↗ market the rising costs of landscape

58:49 ↗ work we created multiple bid schedules

58:53 ↗ or bid alternates to provide us with

58:55 ↗ some increasing flexibility based on

58:59 ↗ that available budget and as the the

59:01 ↗ bids came in bids were opened in the

59:04 ↗ middle of last month on July 18th

59:06 ↗ two bids were received green slate

59:10 ↗ landscaping being the apparent low

59:12 ↗ bidder given their bid prices that they

59:16 ↗ provided and the project budget staff is

59:21 ↗ recommending that we award the base bid

59:24 ↗ of this work and bid alternate or

59:27 ↗ scheduled D of the work what schedule D

59:31 ↗ is would be utilizing sod for some of

59:35 ↗ the areas nearest the picnic shelter

59:39 ↗ some of those those high use areas with

59:42 ↗ the inclusion of a recommended 10%

59:46 ↗ contingency those to the base bid

59:50 ↗ contingency and schedule D would bring

59:54 ↗ the project cost to just over four

59:57 ↗ hundred and ninety thousand dollars

59:59 ↗ looking at what funds we have available

1:00:02 ↗ within that project budget that's a gap

1:00:05 ↗ of approximately one hundred and sixty

1:00:07 ↗ five thousand dollars to fully fund this

1:00:09 ↗ work parks Finance and Administration

1:00:13 ↗ recommend that a hundred and seventy

1:00:15 ↗ thousand dollars of already budgeted

1:00:18 ↗ 2019 parks capital dollars be

1:00:21 ↗ reallocated from the 2019 east sunset

1:00:26 ↗ way trailhead project as you recall with

1:00:30 ↗ the east sunset trailhead project this

1:00:33 ↗ 2019 work for that project was completed

1:00:36 ↗ and it was completed through an

1:00:38 ↗ innovative partnership with State

1:00:40 ↗ Department of Natural Resources DNR

1:00:43 ↗ through that partnership this critical

1:00:46 ↗ acquisition that completed that

1:00:48 ↗ connection from the trailhead up onto

1:00:51 ↗ West Tiger was completed with the city

1:00:55 ↗ contributing only two hundred and eighty

1:00:57 ↗ two thousand dollars for that work far

1:01:00 ↗ less than what we anticipated had we

1:01:02 ↗ have done that acquisition on our own

1:01:05 ↗ the planned trailhead enhancements are

1:01:09 ↗ being designed currently and we're

1:01:11 ↗ partnering with DNR and Washington

1:01:13 ↗ trails Association on that work that

1:01:15 ↗ work will be completed this fall

1:01:18 ↗ with DNR funds through that partnership

1:01:21 ↗ so all of that to say within that

1:01:24 ↗ project there's a remaining one hundred

1:01:26 ↗ and ninety eight thousand dollars

1:01:27 ↗ budgeted for the east sunset trailhead

1:01:29 ↗ that's now uh none obligated so again

1:01:34 ↗ it's our recommendation to take a

1:01:35 ↗ hundred and seventy thousand of that and

1:01:37 ↗ reallocate that to the confluence turf

1:01:40 ↗ and irrigation project this in turn

1:01:43 ↗ would complete both of these critical

1:01:45 ↗ high priority projects east sunset

1:01:48 ↗ trailhead acquisition and the confluence

1:01:51 ↗ tur project to be completed this year I

1:01:53 ↗ would note really in alignment with the

1:01:56 ↗ park strategic plan both of these

1:01:58 ↗ projects really seek to to complete one

1:02:02 ↗ of the highest priorities the park

1:02:03 ↗ strategic plan and that is to improve

1:02:05 ↗ the performance of our existing city

1:02:07 ↗ park spaces work schedule what we

1:02:12 ↗ anticipate is to begin this work the

1:02:14 ↗ week of August 26 of the tail end of

1:02:16 ↗ August looking to complete the work

1:02:19 ↗ around middle of October Jennifer Fink

1:02:22 ↗ with the Park Planning Group will be

1:02:25 ↗ project manager on this work and with

1:02:29 ↗ that recommend that we award the bid and

1:02:31 ↗ as outlined in the agenda bill it's the

1:02:34 ↗ end of the staff report thank you Jeff

1:02:36 ↗ are there any questions councilmember

1:02:37 ↗ winters time followed by councilmember

1:02:39 ↗ hammer a couple questions Jeff that

1:02:41 ↗ schedule you just outlined I know

1:02:43 ↗ there's gonna be a good number of events

1:02:44 ↗ at the park this summer I'm assuming

1:02:46 ↗ there's no conflict there's not we've

1:02:49 ↗ worked very closely with downtown in

1:02:51 ↗ school association and their confluence

1:02:53 ↗ jazz confluence blues event that is

1:02:57 ↗ Sunday August 25th okay

1:03:00 ↗ good timing then you know I'm real

1:03:03 ↗ visual when it comes to things in our

1:03:05 ↗ packet we have a map it's got a little

1:03:08 ↗ it's kind of took me a while to figure

1:03:10 ↗ out that was sod the word saw it in some

1:03:12 ↗ funny-looking brackets but what I don't

1:03:15 ↗ have in the information in front of me

1:03:17 ↗ is much information beyond what you just

1:03:20 ↗ said and the words in the packet about

1:03:23 ↗ what's in the base bid

1:03:25 ↗ it says turf improvements and irrigation

1:03:28 ↗ system installation in the Tholian

1:03:29 ↗ derson homestead and civil madeline

1:03:31 ↗ green extension of plumbing for

1:03:34 ↗ installation of a new drinking fountain

1:03:36 ↗ bark around trees and hydro seed what's

1:03:40 ↗ unclear to me what do you mean by turf

1:03:42 ↗ improvements and acumen let me let me

1:03:45 ↗ let me back up just a second completely

1:03:47 ↗ aware when it was bare dirt before it

1:03:49 ↗ was hide receded the first time right

1:03:50 ↗ where that that's actually the word Sode

1:03:52 ↗ Sode some brackets on each side I

1:03:56 ↗ discovered I think that's the case right

1:03:59 ↗ before that was hydro seated before a

1:04:00 ↗ lot of was seat I mean it was very clear

1:04:01 ↗ that ground was very bumpy very rocky ax

1:04:04 ↗ that what are we doing and and so it's

1:04:07 ↗ unfortunate we haven't having to go back

1:04:09 ↗ and do that but I know for a fact as a

1:04:12 ↗ user and saw what happened when it was

1:04:13 ↗ put in the condition of that is

1:04:16 ↗ substandard again it's very unfortunate

1:04:18 ↗ so when you say when it says turf

1:04:21 ↗ improvements can you can you give us

1:04:23 ↗ with words and perhaps pointing on this

1:04:24 ↗ map what we're talking about doing yes

1:04:26 ↗ absolutely and I will make a first

1:04:29 ↗ effort at this and I'm Jennifer Fink

1:04:30 ↗ come up if the questions get a little

1:04:32 ↗ more technical this green area

1:04:33 ↗ identifies the the scope of the project

1:04:36 ↗ and so along with adding irrigation we

1:04:39 ↗ will be removing the that top layer of

1:04:43 ↗ grass and organics replacing with some

1:04:49 ↗ topsoil and creating a far more usable

1:04:54 ↗ long space that the end result would

1:04:57 ↗ look very much similar more similar to

1:04:59 ↗ say the community lawn in front of the

1:05:01 ↗ community center okay and it's just okay

1:05:06 ↗ things so that's all of it that's I

1:05:08 ↗ think that's just about everything isn't

1:05:09 ↗ it so he's episod there that's the

1:05:12 ↗ entire green space primarily there are

1:05:15 ↗ some spaces there's trees there yeah

1:05:17 ↗ trees there are some spaces on the other

1:05:20 ↗ side of these trail areas that would

1:05:22 ↗ remain sort of that more natural turf

1:05:27 ↗ okay and it's not any and where will the

1:05:31 ↗ irrigation go

1:05:34 ↗ all of this lawn area would be irrigated

1:05:36 ↗ the green area identified okay

1:05:40 ↗ okay all of it okay all right and then I

1:05:46 ↗ have a couple questions about the

1:05:48 ↗ southeast the other project can little

1:05:52 ↗ uma look at my notes not southeast the

1:05:55 ↗ sunset kyani sunset trailhead project

1:05:57 ↗ and I did send you an email earlier and

1:05:59 ↗ I get your did get your response I was

1:06:00 ↗ wondering about I don't know if we've

1:06:02 ↗ had and the fact that it's this far and

1:06:06 ↗ you said it yourself we had I don't know

1:06:09 ↗ very low if you saw my email or Emily's

1:06:11 ↗ uh Jeff's response so I so my question

1:06:15 ↗ was because in we have a sin the 2019

1:06:19 ↗ budget we explicitly have a line item

1:06:22 ↗ for parks capital for 480 and for that

1:06:26 ↗ southeast sunset trailhead and so from a

1:06:31 ↗ maybe I'm learning something about the

1:06:33 ↗ budgeting process right now but but it

1:06:35 ↗ was like I'm not sure where the

1:06:37 ↗ boundaries are and it's apparently not a

1:06:39 ↗ you're telling me it's not at the

1:06:40 ↗ project level because we are not this

1:06:42 ↗ packet does not include a budget

1:06:44 ↗ amendment to take money from that

1:06:46 ↗ project and move it to this one and

1:06:49 ↗ Emily you're nodding your head could you

1:06:51 ↗ just say a few words of clarification

1:06:54 ↗ council has authority to set the

1:06:57 ↗ appropriation limit for the fund you've

1:07:00 ↗ authorized both of those capital

1:07:02 ↗ projects yes with a particular budget

1:07:06 ↗ but you you've given the city the

1:07:08 ↗ budgetary authority within the capital

1:07:10 ↗ fund for that whole amount so we're

1:07:14 ↗ providing notice that were intent is to

1:07:17 ↗ move between those two projects and

1:07:20 ↗ through taking this action tonight

1:07:22 ↗ you're signaling that that is okay so

1:07:28 ↗ we're don't need a separate motion to

1:07:29 ↗ actually make the transfer of funds or

1:07:31 ↗ to change an appropriation because you

1:07:34 ↗ approve it fun level okay so we did the

1:07:37 ↗ appropriation of that those type of

1:07:38 ↗ funds in the budget and it's just now

1:07:41 ↗ moving between projects and then my last

1:07:42 ↗ question is

1:07:44 ↗ Jeff you talked about the improvements

1:07:46 ↗ and even says in the packet improvements

1:07:48 ↗ are being addressed through DNR funding

1:07:51 ↗ you mentioned a little bit about this so

1:07:53 ↗ we partnered with them to acquire the

1:07:57 ↗ land now there's a improvements and just

1:08:00 ↗ they are paying for all of them so

1:08:02 ↗ there's not going to be any other

1:08:04 ↗ improvements planned for that project

1:08:07 ↗ even has nothing to do with confluence

1:08:09 ↗ but there's nothing but the monies are

1:08:10 ↗ kind of tied together there's nothing

1:08:13 ↗ else planned that we foresee they're

1:08:15 ↗ gonna complete all the improvements and

1:08:17 ↗ southeast sunset trailhead within the

1:08:20 ↗ 2019 plan priorities for east sunset

1:08:24 ↗ trailhead yes that would complete that

1:08:27 ↗ work and what we're anticipating what

1:08:29 ↗ you'll see notice we're doing this fall

1:08:31 ↗ is designing some safer and actually

1:08:35 ↗ separated trails coming from the from

1:08:37 ↗ the parking lot the sunset trailhead

1:08:40 ↗ parking lot traversing up the hill we

1:08:43 ↗ would were looking at designing and

1:08:45 ↗ installing a separated bike trail and a

1:08:49 ↗ separated pedestrian trail to create a

1:08:51 ↗ much safer experience coming out of that

1:08:53 ↗ trailhead so that'll be completed with

1:08:55 ↗ DNR funding in a partnership with us

1:08:57 ↗ Washington Trails Association is another

1:09:00 ↗ party that's partnering with us on the

1:09:02 ↗ design work for that okay and just the

1:09:04 ↗ numbers as I've worked him out it was

1:09:06 ↗ originally 484 that one we spent 280 on

1:09:09 ↗ the land you said leaving a balance of

1:09:10 ↗ 200 we'd be shifting 170 over to

1:09:13 ↗ confluence so there's still 30,000 of on

1:09:17 ↗ obligated funds between these two

1:09:19 ↗ projects okay thank you thank you

1:09:21 ↗ I have councilmember hunt next so you

1:09:24 ↗ mentioned that in the parks plan one of

1:09:26 ↗ the core principles is taking care of

1:09:28 ↗ our of the parks assets that we have and

1:09:31 ↗ so to that end I am interested in

1:09:34 ↗ getting a better handle on maintenance

1:09:35 ↗ and maintenance costs and the schedules

1:09:38 ↗ and so I wondered if you could talk

1:09:39 ↗ about for our future planning when we

1:09:42 ↗ would expect to need to put in new side

1:09:45 ↗ again or take care of the lawn and see

1:09:47 ↗ new

1:09:48 ↗ maintenance on the irrigation that's

1:09:51 ↗ going in or the grass that's and the

1:09:53 ↗ improvements that are being put in like

1:09:55 ↗ any a grass area we'd be mowing it so

1:09:58 ↗ we're currently mowing it we wouldn't

1:09:59 ↗ anticipate needing to replace the Assad

1:10:02 ↗ we do anticipate when you irrigate

1:10:05 ↗ there's an additional cost for water

1:10:07 ↗ that's been rolled in and will be

1:10:12 ↗ identified within our 2020 budget

1:10:17 ↗ request within the utilities budget as

1:10:20 ↗ we've been preparing those requests to

1:10:24 ↗ the mayor we yeah how long do we expect

1:10:33 ↗ the improvements to last do they last

1:10:36 ↗ sure great question I in terms of the

1:10:39 ↗ infrastructure we're talking about

1:10:41 ↗ irrigation and controls this would be a

1:10:46 ↗ 20 to 30 year or longer irrigation

1:10:51 ↗ system that we'd be putting in so long

1:10:54 ↗ life Thank You councilmember hunt

1:10:56 ↗ councilmember Goodman thank you so I

1:10:58 ↗ just have one clarifying question so map

1:11:02 ↗ up there Paul was talking about the

1:11:06 ↗ parentheses and sod so it's a little bit

1:11:10 ↗ confusing I just want to clarify so it

1:11:12 ↗ looks like there's a black line that's

1:11:14 ↗ drawn right above the words sod and so

1:11:18 ↗ we don't talk about it it almost looks

1:11:20 ↗ like only the sod is going in below that

1:11:24 ↗ black line correct so the base bid

1:11:27 ↗ assumed all of this would be Hydra

1:11:30 ↗ seated in and so what you're seeing from

1:11:32 ↗ that black line and then sorry it's not

1:11:34 ↗ specific enough everything south of that

1:11:37 ↗ black line will be sod so that's that's

1:11:40 ↗ bid alternate D the rest of it would be

1:11:44 ↗ Hydra seated in okay thank you

1:11:47 ↗ yep any other questions

1:11:52 ↗ is anybody prepared to make a motion

1:11:54 ↗ council piss oh sorry councilmember

1:11:56 ↗ winter Stein yeah I'm sorry for the less

1:11:58 ↗ last night

1:11:59 ↗ Jeff I'm given the math I just shared

1:12:06 ↗ with you

1:12:07 ↗ why didn't you consider any of these

1:12:09 ↗ other schedules schedules a B or even

1:12:14 ↗ see I mean I see the numbers in the

1:12:17 ↗ packet

1:12:18 ↗ the engineers estimates and what they

1:12:19 ↗ came in at but did you give any

1:12:21 ↗ consideration we did we did given the

1:12:26 ↗ the base bid and the significant

1:12:30 ↗ increase that those proposals came in at

1:12:35 ↗ given our balancing many many priorities

1:12:40 ↗ and limited funding that we have with

1:12:42 ↗ the city we felt that the base the

1:12:47 ↗ combination of the base bid and schedule

1:12:49 ↗ D really focused on the highest and top

1:12:52 ↗ priority for this project and that was

1:12:55 ↗ focusing on irrigating and increasing

1:12:58 ↗ functionality of the the lawn areas some

1:13:02 ↗ of those other bid alternates from

1:13:04 ↗ lighting I think the other one is

1:13:06 ↗ concrete curb edging would be nice to

1:13:11 ↗ have but added a significant cost and

1:13:16 ↗ did not feel like adding any of those

1:13:18 ↗ would necessarily we would be able to

1:13:21 ↗ just reallocate funding already budgeted

1:13:24 ↗ within the 2019 capital budget to do

1:13:27 ↗ that we would need to be seeking

1:13:28 ↗ additional funding yes and and Schedule

1:13:33 ↗ C and people don't have the benefit that

1:13:35 ↗ I have looking at a covered installation

1:13:39 ↗ of a conduit system to allow for

1:13:41 ↗ additional path lights to be installed

1:13:44 ↗ extending the existing system to Rainier

1:13:46 ↗ trail and Margaret's meadow parking lot

1:13:48 ↗ so that light I there's lots of dark

1:13:53 ↗ hours around here lighting is good and

1:13:57 ↗ it seems just within the budget that we

1:13:58 ↗ were working with the available funds

1:14:01 ↗ those improvements could have been

1:14:04 ↗ covered with our available funds thank

1:14:08 ↗ you are there any other questions or

1:14:09 ↗ comments before

1:14:11 ↗ looking for a motion that's a president

1:14:13 ↗ Mertz mayor I moved to award the

1:14:17 ↗ construction contract for the base bid

1:14:20 ↗ and Schedule D 2 green slate landscaping

1:14:23 ↗ incorporated in the amount of four

1:14:25 ↗ hundred fifty one thousand five hundred

1:14:26 ↗ sixty two dollars and one cent including

1:14:29 ↗ sales tax and authorize the allocation

1:14:32 ↗ of a hundred and seventy thousand

1:14:33 ↗ dollars in budgeted capital funds thirty

1:14:36 ↗ thousand in King County parks levy funds

1:14:38 ↗ and hundred and forty thousand dollars

1:14:39 ↗ in park mitigation funds the

1:14:42 ↗ construction of the confluence park turf

1:14:44 ↗ and irrigation improvement project

1:14:45 ↗ second it's been moved and seconded is

1:14:48 ↗ there any further discussion seeing none

1:14:53 ↗ I'll call for the vote all in favor say

1:14:54 ↗ aye

1:14:55 ↗ Hey as opposed it carries unanimously

1:14:58 ↗ thank you Jeff thank you

1:15:00 ↗ next item on our regular business agenda

1:15:03 ↗ is a b7 8:05 the 2019 comprehensive

1:15:07 ↗ solid waste management plan the request

1:15:10 ↗ of council this evening is to adopt the

1:15:12 ↗ ordinance council has received an

1:15:15 ↗ informational presentation on this item

1:15:17 ↗ at the October 2018 work session and I'd

1:15:20 ↗ like to ask resource conservation

1:15:22 ↗ coordinator micah bond Kowski to make a

1:15:24 ↗ presentation actually I'm just gonna add

1:15:26 ↗ something in this is King County's

1:15:28 ↗ comprehensive solid waste management

1:15:30 ↗ plan not the city of Itzik was this in

1:15:33 ↗ case it wasn't clear

1:15:34 ↗ hello councilmembers residents Micah

1:15:37 ↗ bankowski's with the Office of

1:15:39 ↗ Sustainability thanks for having me here

1:15:41 ↗ tonight tonight King County solid waste

1:15:46 ↗ division director Pat McLaughlin will be

1:15:47 ↗ presenting to you on the final 2019 King

1:15:50 ↗ County comprehensive solid waste

1:15:51 ↗ management plan and you are being asked

1:15:55 ↗ to adopt the plan as the city plan first

1:15:59 ↗ off I want to thank the county staff

1:16:01 ↗ that are here tonight and all the others

1:16:03 ↗ that have been working to bring this

1:16:05 ↗ final plan together for the last more

1:16:07 ↗ than a decade the city has been a part

1:16:12 ↗ of all the discussions and drafts that

1:16:13 ↗ have gone forward along the way through

1:16:15 ↗ participation in the municipal solid

1:16:16 ↗ waste management advisory committee and

1:16:19 ↗ through other forums like the sound

1:16:21 ↗ Cities Association Public Interest

1:16:23 ↗ Committee

1:16:24 ↗ and others before director McGlothlin

1:16:27 ↗ begins I wanted to briefly go over some

1:16:29 ↗ of the more recent background of the

1:16:31 ↗ process of moving this plan forward

1:16:33 ↗ toward adoption some of this will be

1:16:35 ↗ covered in the king county presentation

1:16:37 ↗ as well so the city as along with 37

1:16:43 ↗ other cities in King County as part of

1:16:44 ↗ an interlocal agreement that was

1:16:46 ↗ extended and amended in 2013 and runs

1:16:49 ↗ through 2040 the extension allowed King

1:16:53 ↗ County to issue longer term bonds and

1:16:55 ↗ more favorable rates for capital

1:16:56 ↗ improvements such as transfer station

1:16:58 ↗ improvements and facility updates and

1:17:01 ↗ this also allows for better planning for

1:17:04 ↗ post landfill closure options as part of

1:17:08 ↗ this interlocal agreement the city

1:17:09 ↗ directs all of its garbage tonnage to

1:17:11 ↗ the King County regional system the

1:17:14 ↗ recycling and composting that are part

1:17:17 ↗ of our solid waste system are dealt with

1:17:19 ↗ separately in our solid waste contract

1:17:21 ↗ the last comprehensive plan adoption was

1:17:24 ↗ in 2001 and the city again has had an

1:17:27 ↗ advisory role in the drafting process of

1:17:29 ↗ this plan since about 6 years after that

1:17:33 ↗ plan ended the 2018 draft and the

1:17:37 ↗ environmental impact statement for the

1:17:39 ↗ 2019 plan had a thorough public input

1:17:42 ↗ period including an open house at the

1:17:44 ↗ King County Public Library Services

1:17:45 ↗ Center in February of 2018 and the

1:17:49 ↗ administration took part in the public

1:17:52 ↗ comment process by expressing concern

1:17:54 ↗ that the plan listed three future

1:17:56 ↗ disposal options but did not select one

1:17:59 ↗ of those disposal options as the

1:18:01 ↗ preferred alternative despite what we

1:18:05 ↗ felt was expansion at Cedar Hills being

1:18:07 ↗ the most viable and cost-effective and

1:18:10 ↗ lowest carbon footprint near-term option

1:18:12 ↗ for disposal the comments also

1:18:15 ↗ reaffirmed the importance of maintaining

1:18:17 ↗ the 70 percent recycling rate goal that

1:18:20 ↗ the county had had in previous plans

1:18:21 ↗ both comments have been addressed in

1:18:23 ↗ this final plan and director McLaughlin

1:18:26 ↗ will address them in his presentation

1:18:28 ↗ Council received a presentation from

1:18:31 ↗ King County last October 23rd and the

1:18:33 ↗ plan was adopted with some changes by

1:18:35 ↗ the King County Council on April 20

1:18:37 ↗ fourth of 2019 cities have until

1:18:40 ↗ September 16th to act which is a hundred

1:18:43 ↗ and twenty days from receipt of the

1:18:45 ↗ final draft after which the Department

1:18:48 ↗ of Ecology has 45 days to finalize the

1:18:50 ↗ adoption of the plan for King County in

1:18:55 ↗ order for the plan to take effect per

1:18:57 ↗ the interlocal agreement cities

1:18:58 ↗ representing 75% of the population must

1:19:01 ↗ act in the affirmative

1:19:02 ↗ his acuario of the population of those

1:19:05 ↗ inner local cities with these cities

1:19:08 ↗ already adopting the plan and adoption

1:19:13 ↗ pending in the second column of cities

1:19:15 ↗ the adoption is at seventy four point

1:19:18 ↗ six percent and it may have changed

1:19:20 ↗ since I last got this information but

1:19:21 ↗ probably close and with this part

1:19:25 ↗ representing three percent an

1:19:26 ↗ affirmative adoption vote would push it

1:19:28 ↗ over the line as it were making adoption

1:19:31 ↗ kind of eminent the options tonight that

1:19:36 ↗ are going to be discussed are adopt the

1:19:39 ↗ ordinance in 2001 the city adopted the

1:19:42 ↗ comprehensive solid waste management

1:19:43 ↗ plan by ordinance for this reason it

1:19:46 ↗ will take an ordinance to repeal the

1:19:48 ↗ previous adopted plan and adopt the 2019

1:19:50 ↗ plan as the city comprehensive solid

1:19:52 ↗ waste management plan if the city adopts

1:19:55 ↗ the plan we're committing to making a

1:19:57 ↗ reasonable good faith effort to

1:19:58 ↗ implement the policies goals and actions

1:20:01 ↗ that are in the plan however there are

1:20:04 ↗ no specific legal requirements or other

1:20:06 ↗ penalties if is equal or unwilling to

1:20:09 ↗ achieve any of the policy's goals or

1:20:11 ↗ actions in the plan in the 2001

1:20:14 ↗ ordinance the city also included

1:20:16 ↗ language that's noted in your agenda

1:20:17 ↗ bill specified in RCW seven zero point

1:20:21 ↗ nine five point one six zero that

1:20:23 ↗ maintains the city's right to set

1:20:25 ↗ service levels well there are no

1:20:27 ↗ mandates in the 2019 plan that would

1:20:29 ↗ impact current city service levels the

1:20:32 ↗ administration felt it prudent to

1:20:33 ↗ maintain this language in the 2019

1:20:35 ↗ adoption ordinance the city has a

1:20:38 ↗ history of using our service level

1:20:40 ↗ setting to incentivize increased

1:20:43 ↗ diversion increased recycling and

1:20:45 ↗ increased composting and we'd like to

1:20:47 ↗ keep that option open in the future

1:20:50 ↗ another option would be the no action

1:20:52 ↗ alternative council could choose to take

1:20:55 ↗ no action at this time if 75% of the

1:20:59 ↗ cities affirm the plan per the

1:21:01 ↗ interlocal it would still become the

1:21:02 ↗ plan of the city and the county 1 City

1:21:06 ↗ Duval has chosen to do this so far this

1:21:09 ↗ would also be seen as a strong message

1:21:10 ↗ to King County and other cities the

1:21:13 ↗ Issaquah disagrees with one or more of

1:21:15 ↗ the provisions in the plan and it would

1:21:17 ↗ be important to articulate these reasons

1:21:19 ↗ to the county and cities the city would

1:21:22 ↗ continue to use the system and operate

1:21:24 ↗ by the interlocal agreement another

1:21:27 ↗ option would be to vote down adoption of

1:21:30 ↗ the plan and that would be seen as an

1:21:31 ↗ even stronger message of disagreement

1:21:33 ↗ and would have similar results

1:21:36 ↗ ie if 75% of the population voted the

1:21:40 ↗ plan and it would still become the

1:21:41 ↗ acting plan of the city again it would

1:21:45 ↗ also require discussions with the county

1:21:47 ↗ and other cities about the points and

1:21:49 ↗ that the city disagrees with in the plan

1:21:52 ↗ if there's any questions now I can take

1:21:54 ↗ them but I'd recommend we turn it over

1:21:56 ↗ to director McLaughlin and he can maybe

1:21:58 ↗ answer some of his presentation yes

1:22:00 ↗ counsel my remarks I had a question

1:22:01 ↗ about something that you said you

1:22:03 ↗ reference on cities Association I'm

1:22:05 ↗ sorry what was some cities I don't leave

1:22:06 ↗ Sound city's Association has taken a

1:22:08 ↗ position on this they haven't taken a

1:22:10 ↗ position but parts of the Comprehensive

1:22:13 ↗ Plan drafts over the last decade have

1:22:15 ↗ been discussed at sound cities in the

1:22:18 ↗ past okay I just want to make very very

1:22:20 ↗ clear that some cities has been updated

1:22:23 ↗ on this subject over the course of the

1:22:25 ↗ last year but has not taken a position

1:22:27 ↗ on that correct okay thank you are there

1:22:29 ↗ any other questions for Micah or would

1:22:32 ↗ we like to bring up the King County

1:22:34 ↗ Council reps now and have them talk okay

1:22:36 ↗ it looks like we're bringing King County

1:22:38 ↗ on Thank You Micah you can't go anywhere

1:22:42 ↗ nobody may have City questions as well

1:22:49 ↗ thank you it started in the back there

1:22:53 ↗ we go good evening for the record my

1:23:00 ↗ name is Pat McLaughlin it's my honor to

1:23:01 ↗ serve as King County's director of solid

1:23:03 ↗ waste it appreciate the opportunity to

1:23:05 ↗ be before your council this evening and

1:23:07 ↗ talk about a body of work that's been

1:23:10 ↗ underway for several years actually our

1:23:13 ↗ comprehensive plan guides the framework

1:23:17 ↗ for our long-range planning it's

1:23:19 ↗ intended to look out six to twenty years

1:23:22 ↗ and help us make big decisions to reach

1:23:25 ↗ important destinations and yet we find

1:23:29 ↗ ourselves relying on a plan that was

1:23:33 ↗ developed back in 2001 and as it turns

1:23:36 ↗ out we are at a intersection in our

1:23:39 ↗ regional system where we have some very

1:23:42 ↗ significant decisions to be made and

1:23:44 ↗ recognize that we need modern updated

1:23:48 ↗ policy framework to inform those

1:23:50 ↗ decisions and so for the last few years

1:23:52 ↗ we've been working extensively with our

1:23:56 ↗ regional partners which includes both of

1:24:00 ↗ course our cities as well as our haulers

1:24:03 ↗ and and other interested partners in in

1:24:06 ↗ this regional area to help inform what

1:24:08 ↗ those policy boundaries should be and

1:24:13 ↗ it's really reflected here in the

1:24:16 ↗ presentation I'm going to talk about

1:24:17 ↗ tonight just by way of brief background

1:24:20 ↗ our regional system is really quite

1:24:23 ↗ large one of the largest in the u.s.

1:24:26 ↗ actually just given the size of King

1:24:30 ↗ County it covers over 2,000 square miles

1:24:32 ↗ and serves not just 37 cities but of

1:24:36 ↗ course the unincorporated areas of King

1:24:39 ↗ County as well and that represents in

1:24:42 ↗ total over a million and a half

1:24:43 ↗ residents and last year almost a million

1:24:46 ↗ tons of garbage so there's a lot of

1:24:48 ↗ material to be managed the good news is

1:24:51 ↗ there's more recyclables that are

1:24:53 ↗ generated in this region than garbage

1:24:56 ↗ but nonetheless we do have to manage

1:24:59 ↗ that waste in a responsible

1:25:02 ↗ 'we both environmentally and fiscally

1:25:04 ↗ and that's what we want to talk about

1:25:06 ↗ tonight although the plan is quite broad

1:25:09 ↗ in terms of the material it covers this

1:25:12 ↗ evening

1:25:13 ↗ I suggest we at least begin a focus in

1:25:16 ↗ three key areas and I'm happy to go

1:25:19 ↗ beyond these areas but the areas of

1:25:22 ↗ disposal transfer and recycling really

1:25:25 ↗ represent where some of the most

1:25:26 ↗ critical decision points that we're

1:25:29 ↗ facing in our region and represent

1:25:32 ↗ significant updates within the plan

1:25:35 ↗ itself

1:25:36 ↗ beginning with disposal one of the

1:25:39 ↗ fundamental responsibilities the county

1:25:41 ↗ has in the relationship that Myka had

1:25:44 ↗ mentioned we have interlocal agreements

1:25:46 ↗ with the city of it's a quad and the

1:25:49 ↗ fundamental responsibility we have is to

1:25:52 ↗ transfer and manage that waste and

1:25:54 ↗ dispose of it in an environmentally and

1:25:56 ↗ fiscally responsible way and for over 50

1:26:00 ↗ years we've been doing that locally at

1:26:03 ↗ the Cedar Hills Regional Landfill and

1:26:05 ↗ yet we're finding now that we're

1:26:08 ↗ reaching the end of the road we opened

1:26:11 ↗ our last cell as it currently stands

1:26:14 ↗ what we call area 8 just about two and a

1:26:17 ↗ half three weeks ago started putting

1:26:19 ↗ waste in it that cell will last until

1:26:21 ↗ about 2025 we can go back over a couple

1:26:26 ↗ of the older cells at the landfill gain

1:26:29 ↗ a couple more years but essentially

1:26:32 ↗ that's the end of the road for the Cedar

1:26:34 ↗ Hills region landfill unless we build

1:26:38 ↗ additional capacity and we looked at

1:26:41 ↗ different options adding what would be a

1:26:44 ↗ final cell we also looked at the

1:26:47 ↗ alternatives of waste export and waste

1:26:49 ↗ to energy which by the way both work and

1:26:53 ↗ we couldn't always say that but of

1:26:55 ↗ course waste export has been a Chosen

1:26:59 ↗ solution for the City of Seattle who

1:27:01 ↗ runs their own waste extra waste

1:27:05 ↗ management program County of Snohomish

1:27:08 ↗ does a similar approach there are some

1:27:11 ↗ constraints on the railways it there is

1:27:14 ↗ an additional expense

1:27:15 ↗ to move that waste a few hundred miles

1:27:17 ↗ away but it does work wasted energy

1:27:20 ↗ similarly works it's been proven even in

1:27:24 ↗ the more recent years through successful

1:27:27 ↗ demonstration projects and full-scale

1:27:29 ↗ operations such as in West Palm Beach

1:27:31 ↗ Florida but at a significant expense and

1:27:35 ↗ so what was not reflected as mica

1:27:39 ↗ correctly pointed out and as even your

1:27:42 ↗ City pointed out in its comments in a

1:27:44 ↗ draft version of this comprehensive plan

1:27:46 ↗ a choice between waste export waste

1:27:50 ↗ energy and cedar hills was not made

1:27:53 ↗ until this final plan and in the final

1:27:55 ↗ plan after acknowledging both the

1:27:58 ↗ environmental the financial and the

1:28:01 ↗ overall risk elements associated with

1:28:03 ↗ each of those three disposal choices we

1:28:06 ↗ have identified that maximizing the

1:28:08 ↗ remaining capacity at cedar hills is in

1:28:10 ↗ the best interest of our regional system

1:28:12 ↗ it allows us to continue to manage our

1:28:16 ↗ waste locally we can do so at the least

1:28:20 ↗ financial cost to our ratepayers

1:28:23 ↗ it has the least environmental impacts

1:28:26 ↗ as well particularly as we measure

1:28:28 ↗ greenhouse gas emissions and I think

1:28:32 ↗ this is equally important it provides us

1:28:35 ↗ an adequate runway to plan for what's

1:28:38 ↗ next because in order to build this

1:28:41 ↗ final sell and it's a little hard to see

1:28:44 ↗ here on this particular picture my

1:28:46 ↗ apologies for that but in the upper

1:28:47 ↗ right corner of this image which is the

1:28:50 ↗ Cedar Hills Regional Landfill our

1:28:52 ↗ buildings those buildings are on prime

1:28:56 ↗ real estate in terms of where garbage

1:28:58 ↗ could go and so this plan calls for

1:29:01 ↗ those buildings to be relocated

1:29:03 ↗ elsewhere on the property so that we

1:29:06 ↗ could design and build what we would

1:29:09 ↗ call area 9 an area 9 could be

1:29:12 ↗ sufficient based on our forecast to

1:29:14 ↗ provide local disposal capacity through

1:29:17 ↗ about 2040 there's a lot of variables

1:29:19 ↗ that come into play both economically

1:29:22 ↗ recycling wise and other but for

1:29:26 ↗ planning purposes too about 24

1:29:29 ↗ what that also does is give us a

1:29:32 ↗ planning runway because that will be the

1:29:34 ↗ final sell we the boundaries of Cedar

1:29:36 ↗ Hills are finite there are no other

1:29:39 ↗ locations to be developed all the green

1:29:41 ↗ space that you see is representative of

1:29:44 ↗ closed landfill cells and so we really

1:29:47 ↗ can't go anywhere else and we're going

1:29:49 ↗ to need another disposal alternative so

1:29:53 ↗ we have to continue to evaluate waste to

1:29:55 ↗ energy waste export or any other

1:29:58 ↗ evolving an emerging technology that may

1:30:01 ↗ come about in the years to come so the

1:30:04 ↗ other thing that this plan calls for is

1:30:06 ↗ to keep planning well we believe the the

1:30:10 ↗ sound approach is to develop this final

1:30:13 ↗ cell to ensure no gap in capacity

1:30:16 ↗ especially since we're less than 10

1:30:18 ↗ years away from running out of capacity

1:30:19 ↗ we don't have time to waste so we have

1:30:24 ↗ to keep planning though because I think

1:30:26 ↗ the worst thing that could happen is

1:30:27 ↗ that we do run out of time and have to

1:30:30 ↗ remove options from the table because we

1:30:32 ↗ don't have enough time to implement them

1:30:34 ↗ and this cell in addition to the

1:30:37 ↗ financial and environmental benefits

1:30:38 ↗ gives us that planning runway

1:30:40 ↗ so whatever the region selects as the

1:30:44 ↗ next disposal option will have a viable

1:30:48 ↗ ability to actually implement it so that

1:30:51 ↗ is the first significant policy choice

1:30:55 ↗ represented in this plan the second is

1:30:58 ↗ around transfer you know again a

1:31:02 ↗ fundamental role that we play is

1:31:04 ↗ providing your regional haulers a

1:31:07 ↗ convenient and logistically sound place

1:31:10 ↗ for them to unload their collection

1:31:13 ↗ vehicles and get back out and complete

1:31:15 ↗ their routes and we've done a

1:31:19 ↗ significant effort over the past several

1:31:21 ↗ years in modernizing these transfer

1:31:23 ↗ stations we're in the process of

1:31:25 ↗ designing a new replacement station for

1:31:28 ↗ our 1960s era facility in Algona we most

1:31:32 ↗ recently opened our factorio station

1:31:35 ↗ that's what's pictured on your screen

1:31:37 ↗ here when we upgrade these facilities

1:31:40 ↗ and we're almost done doing

1:31:42 ↗ there are several significant benefits

1:31:44 ↗ that come to play one is much better

1:31:47 ↗ service levels for the customers we can

1:31:48 ↗ get them in and out safer and faster we

1:31:52 ↗ can offer a more expansive service

1:31:55 ↗ arrangement here at factorio a very busy

1:31:58 ↗ station we didn't have any recycling

1:32:00 ↗ options available to our customers until

1:32:03 ↗ we open this station you imagine over 50

1:32:06 ↗ years of service and no recycling

1:32:07 ↗ options available well that's the same

1:32:10 ↗ type of scenario we're faced in the

1:32:13 ↗ Northeast which is a very busy station

1:32:15 ↗ as well it's called our Houghton station

1:32:17 ↗ that's hosted by the city of Kirkland

1:32:20 ↗ we have limited recycling it's a 1960s

1:32:23 ↗ era station which really looks like a

1:32:25 ↗ carport

1:32:26 ↗ it's an open-air station not enclosed

1:32:29 ↗ like this facility is the challenge with

1:32:31 ↗ the older stations it used to be we

1:32:33 ↗ could barely get the the collection

1:32:35 ↗ vehicles in we actually had to raise the

1:32:37 ↗ roof at Houghton just to accommodate the

1:32:40 ↗ larger vehicles but it is more difficult

1:32:42 ↗ to control noise odor and dust in an

1:32:45 ↗ open-air facility you can imagine that

1:32:47 ↗ so we're not able to offer the wide

1:32:52 ↗ range of services or the environmental

1:32:55 ↗ mitigation that comes with a modern

1:32:58 ↗ facility compaction of waste at the

1:33:01 ↗ facility at a station such as factorio

1:33:05 ↗ we're able to compact and consolidate

1:33:07 ↗ that waste into trailers reducing the

1:33:11 ↗ outbound traffic by 1/3 and that's a

1:33:14 ↗ benefit not just to the environment but

1:33:16 ↗ to the local community in terms of

1:33:19 ↗ transportation

1:33:20 ↗ so in Houghton in the Kirkland Redman

1:33:26 ↗ and Woodinville service area they're

1:33:29 ↗ paying the same price everybody else is

1:33:31 ↗ and yet getting substantially less and

1:33:33 ↗ one of the significant themes that we

1:33:36 ↗ heard in our planning process for this

1:33:38 ↗ comprehensive plan was we have to

1:33:40 ↗ address the inequities of that part of

1:33:43 ↗ our regional system so this plan calls

1:33:45 ↗ for the siting and replacement of the

1:33:48 ↗ Houghton transfer station to address

1:33:51 ↗ those inequities and to help ensure that

1:33:53 ↗ we can continue

1:33:54 ↗ to progress in our environmental and

1:33:56 ↗ service goals the third area that I want

1:34:01 ↗ to touch on this evening is about our

1:34:03 ↗ environmental goals and and that with

1:34:05 ↗ respect to recycling

1:34:06 ↗ you know this region has a phenomenal

1:34:09 ↗ track record in terms of recycling I

1:34:11 ↗ mentioned in my opening comments

1:34:13 ↗ nearly a million tons of garbage were

1:34:16 ↗ disposed of last year but nearly 1.3

1:34:19 ↗ million tons of recyclables were

1:34:22 ↗ recovered and put back into the economy

1:34:24 ↗ that's a great great achievement our

1:34:26 ↗ recycling rates regionally across King

1:34:30 ↗ County is about 54 percent that's a

1:34:34 ↗ nearly twice that of the national

1:34:36 ↗ average and it's reflective of the

1:34:38 ↗ commitment of the people who live in

1:34:40 ↗ this fine region but there's so much

1:34:42 ↗ more we can do and we have a vision and

1:34:45 ↗ a plan that's reflected within this

1:34:47 ↗ comprehensive plan to get our recycling

1:34:50 ↗ rates to 70 percent and within this plan

1:34:53 ↗ is articulated the steps that would

1:34:55 ↗ progressively allow all of our

1:34:57 ↗ communities to get there but the

1:34:59 ↗ challenge is today in a regional system

1:35:02 ↗ that's comprised of 37 cities and in an

1:35:05 ↗ unincorporated area we have 38 different

1:35:07 ↗ ways to recycle so depending on where

1:35:10 ↗ you live work and play the recycling

1:35:11 ↗ rules are different and that's confusing

1:35:13 ↗ that confusion breeds contamination in

1:35:17 ↗ the recycle stream that contamination D

1:35:20 ↗ values those recyclable materials often

1:35:23 ↗ making them waste so we need to remove

1:35:28 ↗ that confusion and the way to do that is

1:35:31 ↗ to get on the same page right and have a

1:35:33 ↗ standard way of recycling and so the

1:35:37 ↗ plan as written continues to provide

1:35:40 ↗ cities the individual opportunity to

1:35:43 ↗ select the recycling programs and

1:35:45 ↗ techniques that they want but the

1:35:48 ↗ challenge is if we continue on that path

1:35:49 ↗ we probably won't rise much above our 54

1:35:53 ↗ percent recycling rate so the county has

1:35:55 ↗ accepted an action within this plan to

1:35:58 ↗ work with the cities and its own

1:36:01 ↗ unincorporated areas to harmonize our

1:36:03 ↗ approaches to recycling and we believe

1:36:05 ↗ if we do that

1:36:07 ↗ we can reach a 70% recycling rate and we

1:36:11 ↗ can even look in the fine city of

1:36:14 ↗ Issaquah to see I've just got some stats

1:36:17 ↗ here your own single family recycling

1:36:20 ↗ rate is at 58% which is very admirable

1:36:23 ↗ right multifamily is at 26% now that's

1:36:29 ↗ of course you know half of what you're

1:36:32 ↗ doing in single family but comparatively

1:36:35 ↗ still a pretty good number right in this

1:36:38 ↗ plan we identify very specific actions

1:36:42 ↗ that you can consider to drive both of

1:36:44 ↗ those numbers up along with the county

1:36:47 ↗ and along with your sister cities and so

1:36:49 ↗ we're really encouraged by the work

1:36:54 ↗ that's that's been underway to identify

1:36:57 ↗ those strategies and bring us to the

1:36:59 ↗ next level of recycling in the in King

1:37:01 ↗ County mica covered this process pretty

1:37:05 ↗ well so I won't spend too much time on

1:37:07 ↗ it but this plan only gets adopted if

1:37:09 ↗ our cities say it's a good plan it's

1:37:11 ↗ gone through our county council process

1:37:13 ↗ even before that it went through the

1:37:15 ↗ regional policy committee here in King

1:37:17 ↗ County and it's now up to the cities

1:37:20 ↗ it's in their hands we have had a very

1:37:22 ↗ strong and favorable response rate and

1:37:25 ↗ although the plan doesn't require a

1:37:29 ↗ hundred percent response it's certainly

1:37:31 ↗ my personal hope that a hundred percent

1:37:34 ↗ of the cities would take action to

1:37:37 ↗ support this plan and represent that it

1:37:40 ↗ is consistent with their own vision for

1:37:42 ↗ how we manage waste and recyclables in

1:37:45 ↗ this region we have until the 16th of

1:37:48 ↗ September and that's really dictated by

1:37:50 ↗ err in a local agreements so we'll look

1:37:52 ↗ at the cities who have opted to take

1:37:54 ↗ action and providing that those cities

1:37:57 ↗ who have acted in support of the plan

1:37:59 ↗ represent at least 75% of the population

1:38:01 ↗ of those cities taking any action then

1:38:05 ↗ the plan will pass and it's looking very

1:38:07 ↗ positive that that's going to be the

1:38:08 ↗ case my hope tonight is that by being

1:38:10 ↗ here sharing this information and

1:38:12 ↗ answering the your forthcoming questions

1:38:14 ↗ that I can certainly inform your own

1:38:16 ↗ decision and and perhaps even persuade

1:38:18 ↗ you to be a part

1:38:19 ↗ of those supporting cities so with that

1:38:23 ↗ I'd be happy to answer any questions

1:38:24 ↗ that you may have Thank You Pat and

1:38:27 ↗ before we go to questions I just wanted

1:38:29 ↗ to thank you for the tour that your

1:38:32 ↗ group provided for councilmember hunt

1:38:35 ↗ and myself earlier this year we were

1:38:37 ↗ able to go to the facility with one of

1:38:39 ↗ our local students who was shadowing for

1:38:41 ↗ the day and get a look at more than just

1:38:44 ↗ the pictures actually seeing the

1:38:45 ↗ operation and it was a very good tour

1:38:47 ↗ and I would recommend it to any of our

1:38:49 ↗ council members who are also interested

1:38:50 ↗ in doing it or other high school interns

1:38:53 ↗ who are doing shadows we would we would

1:38:54 ↗ be happy to host that we do over 85

1:38:57 ↗ tours a year and I did neglect to say

1:38:59 ↗ and I know you know this but I just I

1:39:01 ↗ must say this that you know this has

1:39:05 ↗ been a very transparent and an engaging

1:39:10 ↗ process with our cities we learned a lot

1:39:13 ↗ through our advisory committee

1:39:15 ↗ specifically our what we call our em

1:39:18 ↗ swag advisory committee which is

1:39:19 ↗ comprised of the cities themselves a

1:39:22 ↗ very important part we have two advisory

1:39:24 ↗ committees you are well represented and

1:39:26 ↗ have been for as long as I've not been

1:39:29 ↗ with the county that long in terms of

1:39:31 ↗ County years but as long as I've been

1:39:33 ↗ there mike has been there I think right

1:39:37 ↗ I think probably and he's probably been

1:39:38 ↗ there a lot longer I just want you to

1:39:40 ↗ know what you already do know you have

1:39:42 ↗ an amazing ambassador at the table so as

1:39:45 ↗ we have come forward and in kind of full

1:39:48 ↗ confidence in this plan it's

1:39:50 ↗ representative of the values and

1:39:52 ↗ interests of your city and it's been

1:39:53 ↗ really an honor to work with mica in

1:39:56 ↗ that in that process so thank you for

1:39:58 ↗ letting him be a part of this process in

1:40:02 ↗ such a important way thank you the

1:40:05 ↗ council questions councilmember Walsh

1:40:10 ↗ thank you so this is a huge plan 403

1:40:16 ↗ pages yeah got through as much of it as

1:40:19 ↗ I could

1:40:20 ↗ focusing on section six which talks

1:40:23 ↗ about the disposal

1:40:27 ↗ or beyond 2028 and so that this plan is

1:40:34 ↗ not only looking at today forward

1:40:38 ↗ through that horizon of 2028 but also

1:40:41 ↗ selecting what we will choose after that

1:40:44 ↗ point and so my understanding from your

1:40:47 ↗ presentation and reading over this plan

1:40:50 ↗ is that then we're not just looking at

1:40:55 ↗ continuing Cedar Hills Roo 2028 but also

1:41:00 ↗ beyond that scope

1:41:03 ↗ that's correct this plan has a 20-year

1:41:06 ↗ outlook so it gets us to about 2040 in

1:41:09 ↗ terms of disposal and it also calls for

1:41:15 ↗ us to continue the planning really the

1:41:17 ↗ comprehensive plans are meant to be at

1:41:20 ↗ least reviewed every six years

1:41:22 ↗ so this calls within the next five years

1:41:25 ↗ after adoption to produce a companying

1:41:31 ↗ plan that will inform that kind of post

1:41:34 ↗ 2040 option but the choices that we

1:41:37 ↗ you've heard me talk about tonight of

1:41:40 ↗ expanding capacity at Cedar Hills

1:41:42 ↗ carries us to about 2040 and so that is

1:41:48 ↗ accomplished not only through the

1:41:54 ↗ current use that area eight cell eight

1:41:57 ↗ is the one that you're newly expanding

1:42:00 ↗ yes it also includes moving the

1:42:03 ↗ buildings and opening up area nine which

1:42:06 ↗ would take you through 2040 and then it

1:42:09 ↗ also includes raising the ceiling on how

1:42:15 ↗ high those existing cells can go which

1:42:19 ↗ it sounds like cells one through four

1:42:21 ↗ can be raised from eight hundred feet to

1:42:25 ↗ 833 feet no you were you were right on

1:42:29 ↗ the money

1:42:29 ↗ up until the when we think about the

1:42:31 ↗ other cells they really it's not

1:42:35 ↗ feasible to go back and put more waste

1:42:38 ↗ on the earliest cells one

1:42:41 ↗ through say four areas five and six can

1:42:47 ↗ have a modest top left and we will do

1:42:50 ↗ that in in the kind of the 2026 2027

1:42:55 ↗ period once the area eight fills will go

1:42:57 ↗ back to five and six and before we go to

1:42:59 ↗ nine so the only areas where we're gonna

1:43:01 ↗ put waste as we go forward is we're

1:43:03 ↗ gonna there'll be a small top on seven

1:43:07 ↗ will fill eight will go back to five six

1:43:11 ↗ will do nine and we might be able to go

1:43:14 ↗ back to seven and eight a couple of

1:43:15 ↗ times will just kind of stay in that

1:43:17 ↗ range so rereading this section it says

1:43:21 ↗ you'll be able to develop new cells

1:43:24 ↗ within the existing footprint of the

1:43:26 ↗ landfill so that's talking about cells

1:43:29 ↗ eight and nine it's really referring to

1:43:31 ↗ nine okay and those will be permitted up

1:43:35 ↗ to eight hundred and thirty feet tall

1:43:39 ↗ whereas the cells five six and seven

1:43:43 ↗ which were part of the settlement

1:43:45 ↗ agreement are capped at 788 feet you

1:43:49 ↗ have read your plan well yes ma'am I

1:43:51 ↗ have because there are a lot of

1:43:53 ↗ community members absolutely are very

1:43:57 ↗ concerned this idea we this plan

1:44:01 ↗ specifically affirms the county's

1:44:04 ↗ commitment to honor that settlement

1:44:07 ↗ agreement which limits the heights of

1:44:11 ↗ five six and seven to seven hundred and

1:44:13 ↗ eighty eight feet there are some

1:44:17 ↗ possible exceptions that are noted

1:44:19 ↗ within the settlement agreement itself

1:44:22 ↗ but but effectively we have planned to

1:44:26 ↗ continue honoring that settlement

1:44:28 ↗ agreement we always have and we don't

1:44:29 ↗ have any intention and we don't see any

1:44:31 ↗ need to specifically violate that

1:44:38 ↗ anything else comes my wash not right

1:44:41 ↗ now okay

1:44:42 ↗ deputy council president batiste thank

1:44:45 ↗ you madam era thing thank you for your

1:44:47 ↗ presentation this evening the so it is

1:44:50 ↗ my understanding that with the focus

1:44:53 ↗ being continuing with the Cedar Hills

1:44:58 ↗ landfill that this is a planning time

1:45:01 ↗ and that you'll be looking at other

1:45:06 ↗ options for the future one of those

1:45:10 ↗ being the waste-to-energy I just had a

1:45:13 ↗ question the it looks like there's a

1:45:16 ↗ consultant contract that is scheduled

1:45:19 ↗ for completion on waste-to-energy by

1:45:21 ↗ October 2019 just wondering about the

1:45:26 ↗ timing as the vote is coming in

1:45:28 ↗ September and this this overview won't

1:45:33 ↗ be done until October correct I can

1:45:36 ↗ appreciate the the confusion there so we

1:45:40 ↗ in 2017 hired consulting firm to study

1:45:46 ↗ the feasibility of wasting energy and

1:45:50 ↗ help inform even as aspects of waste

1:45:53 ↗ export to inform this plan the study

1:45:59 ↗ that's underway now is building upon

1:46:02 ↗ that knowledge because really what we

1:46:03 ↗ learned in 2017 study his waste energy

1:46:06 ↗ actually is a viable alternative it does

1:46:10 ↗ work it's scalable the technology is

1:46:13 ↗ stabilized but what we also learn is

1:46:18 ↗ well a few things one is it's very

1:46:20 ↗ expensive a fair amount of about up to

1:46:26 ↗ 40 acres would be needed it would be the

1:46:29 ↗ largest plant in the world to handle

1:46:32 ↗ King County's waste and we also kind of

1:46:40 ↗ wrestled with this what about the

1:46:41 ↗ remaining capacity of Cedar Hill should

1:46:43 ↗ we should we maximize that but we at

1:46:45 ↗ least learned it is viable right and

1:46:48 ↗ scalable

1:46:49 ↗ but it did not ultimately make sense to

1:46:52 ↗ actually try and pursue it because we

1:46:54 ↗ didn't think we could have it in place

1:46:56 ↗ by the time we needed it so this current

1:47:00 ↗ study that's underway that will be done

1:47:02 ↗ in October is building upon that because

1:47:04 ↗ we do see waste export remaining as that

1:47:08 ↗ viable alternative and that may be the

1:47:11 ↗ right solution to take us from 2040 and

1:47:14 ↗ beyond but we need to further so we've

1:47:16 ↗ asked this consulting firm to further

1:47:20 ↗ inform what that would look like

1:47:22 ↗ and how we would take it to those next

1:47:24 ↗ steps so what that study is going to do

1:47:28 ↗ is inform this planning process that

1:47:31 ↗ needs to continue over the next five

1:47:33 ↗ years okay thank you and another

1:47:38 ↗ question that I had you you talked about

1:47:40 ↗ our differing recycling methods and

1:47:44 ↗ plans around harmonizing those can could

1:47:48 ↗ you be a little more specific about what

1:47:51 ↗ what would actually be happening and

1:47:53 ↗ what what is in play to actually start

1:47:57 ↗ to focus on that great great question so

1:48:00 ↗ in the plan itself you'll see a roadmap

1:48:03 ↗ to 70 percent and it's incremental steps

1:48:06 ↗ that will take us from where we are to

1:48:10 ↗ where we want to be and in that roadmap

1:48:12 ↗ you'll also see how each of those

1:48:14 ↗ specific actions whether they're focused

1:48:16 ↗ on the single-family sector the

1:48:20 ↗ multifamily sector or sector or even in

1:48:22 ↗ the commercial sector

1:48:23 ↗ what percentage of gain in terms of

1:48:27 ↗ recycling does each individual step get

1:48:31 ↗ us you'll see that there's no home runs

1:48:33 ↗ there's not one big day we'll just do

1:48:35 ↗ this and we will get fifteen or twenty

1:48:38 ↗ percent gain nope

1:48:39 ↗ there's a lot of very small incremental

1:48:42 ↗ gains that we can get and examples would

1:48:45 ↗ be the frequency of collection most

1:48:48 ↗ commonly we have weekly garbage

1:48:51 ↗ collection and every other week

1:48:54 ↗ recycling collection however

1:48:58 ↗ most of what is being disposed of is

1:49:00 ↗ actually recyclable when I say most as

1:49:04 ↗ it turns out about 70% of what is

1:49:07 ↗ disposed of could be recycled so if you

1:49:10 ↗ flip your collection service and you did

1:49:13 ↗ recycling every week and garbage every

1:49:17 ↗ other week you would actually see some

1:49:20 ↗ of the most substantial gains the city

1:49:22 ↗ of Renton has recently done this and

1:49:24 ↗ seen fairly substantial gains in their

1:49:27 ↗ recycling rates and that's an example of

1:49:29 ↗ one of the steps that can be taken there

1:49:32 ↗ are other steps such as bans and

1:49:34 ↗ mandates not exciting words to to move

1:49:39 ↗ forward on but to actually ban certain

1:49:42 ↗ materials from being put into the

1:49:46 ↗ recycling cart such as single use bags

1:49:49 ↗ and shredded paper and the sort and

1:49:51 ↗ getting those into other recycling

1:49:54 ↗ channels so there's bans and mandates

1:49:56 ↗ there's service changes that can be made

1:49:58 ↗ in a variety of programs like that and

1:50:00 ↗ again none of them by themselves will

1:50:04 ↗ make a substantial gain but collectively

1:50:07 ↗ they can move the needle thank you

1:50:12 ↗ questions

1:50:14 ↗ that's member hunt this may be a

1:50:17 ↗ question for mica I'm wondering what

1:50:20 ↗ what the city is doing to make sure that

1:50:23 ↗ people know how to recycle it's

1:50:26 ↗ something that I hear a lot about from

1:50:28 ↗ members of the community that the that

1:50:31 ↗ it can be confusing or that it's

1:50:33 ↗ difficult to know what can be recycled

1:50:34 ↗ or how to set out the recycling and I

1:50:37 ↗ know for me too I learned not not right

1:50:41 ↗ when I moved it to go out but later on

1:50:42 ↗ that you put the recyclables loose in

1:50:44 ↗ the cart for instance and that they also

1:50:46 ↗ don't like to have those loose plastic

1:50:48 ↗ bags because they cause problems on that

1:50:49 ↗ on the equipment at the recycling

1:50:52 ↗ facilities so I just wondered what we

1:50:54 ↗ can do and what we're doing already to

1:50:56 ↗ make sure that people understand what

1:50:58 ↗ can be recycled for our area yeah

1:51:01 ↗ absolutely so we have a couple different

1:51:03 ↗ campaigns going and have had for several

1:51:06 ↗ years as Pat noted our multifamily

1:51:09 ↗ recycling rate is only

1:51:11 ↗ 4% versus our single family which is

1:51:13 ↗ around 60 now

1:51:15 ↗ and so we've been focusing the last

1:51:18 ↗ couple years a lot of attention on the

1:51:19 ↗ multifamily properties and we've had I

1:51:21 ↗ don't know off the top of my head how

1:51:23 ↗ many properties have participated but

1:51:25 ↗ Recology has summer staff that go out

1:51:28 ↗ and do door-to-door education at

1:51:29 ↗ multifamily properties with the

1:51:31 ↗ cooperation of the property manager and

1:51:33 ↗ those property managers are eligible for

1:51:36 ↗ a discount on their service up to a

1:51:39 ↗ hundred and fifty dollars which is

1:51:42 ↗ helpful to them and then the residents

1:51:44 ↗ are supplied a tote bag so that they can

1:51:47 ↗ take their loose recycling out and empty

1:51:49 ↗ it rather than putting it in plastic

1:51:51 ↗ bags and on the tote bag is educational

1:51:54 ↗ messaging on what can and can't be put

1:51:56 ↗ in there right now we're focusing a lot

1:51:58 ↗ because of the contamination issues on

1:52:00 ↗ pushing out the empty clean and dry

1:52:02 ↗ message on most of the social media or

1:52:06 ↗ other campaigns that we do in the city

1:52:08 ↗ through the communications office we've

1:52:13 ↗ also been doing a lot of commercial

1:52:14 ↗ outreach especially to large property

1:52:17 ↗ managed areas where there's not as much

1:52:19 ↗ of an incentive for the commercial

1:52:21 ↗ business owner to divert more because

1:52:24 ↗ they're not paying the garbage bill they

1:52:25 ↗ pay a flat rate for their rental and

1:52:27 ↗ that includes garbage and recycling

1:52:29 ↗ service so we're trying to get past some

1:52:32 ↗ of those barriers through just doing

1:52:34 ↗ direct outreach and working with those

1:52:37 ↗ businesses we also have a really robust

1:52:40 ↗ program in the Ezek law school district

1:52:43 ↗ and we work with them a lot on messaging

1:52:46 ↗ and building up those little recyclers

1:52:48 ↗ and little stewards who go home and tell

1:52:51 ↗ their parents what to put where I'm sure

1:52:53 ↗ some of you have experienced that

1:52:54 ↗ they're really good at it so those are

1:52:57 ↗ just some examples of the programs that

1:53:00 ↗ we're working on right now and I will

1:53:04 ↗ say in terms of some of the mandates

1:53:06 ↗ that Pat mentioned our polystyrene

1:53:09 ↗ packaging ban in the city did cause a

1:53:11 ↗ bump in our commercial diversion rate

1:53:14 ↗ just by increasing the amount of food

1:53:16 ↗ waste that was being composted by

1:53:18 ↗ restaurants in Issaquah and we're still

1:53:20 ↗ the only city in the King County system

1:53:21 ↗ that has that ordinance so

1:53:24 ↗ other cities have asked about it several

1:53:26 ↗ times but nobody else has gotten it

1:53:28 ↗ across the finish line so that's another

1:53:29 ↗ one of those potential options to get to

1:53:32 ↗ 70% there's no questions for either mica

1:53:38 ↗ or path okay thank you both do I have

1:53:47 ↗ anyone interested in making a motion

1:53:50 ↗ that's a member ray make a motion move

1:53:54 ↗ to adopt ordinance number 28 75 adopting

1:53:58 ↗ the final 2019 comprehensive saw the

1:54:00 ↗ waste management plan prepared by King

1:54:02 ↗ County as an update to the 20 2001

1:54:05 ↗ comprehensive solid waste management

1:54:07 ↗ plan adopted by ordinance number 2 3 3 3

1:54:10 ↗ second it's been moved and seconded is

1:54:14 ↗ there additional counsel discussion

1:54:16 ↗ Elson president works so regretfully I'm

1:54:21 ↗ going to oppose this motion I think that

1:54:24 ↗ this is an extraordinarily complicated

1:54:26 ↗ subject and there are many ways to view

1:54:29 ↗ what to do with the waste stream and

1:54:31 ↗ it's not obvious that taking as a whole

1:54:35 ↗ there's a there's a clear answer in

1:54:38 ↗ every situation but I think you have to

1:54:40 ↗ look hard at the fact that in Germany

1:54:43 ↗ and Sweden and Norway and the

1:54:45 ↗ Netherlands and Belgium this has become

1:54:47 ↗ the de facto standard for dealing with

1:54:50 ↗ waste and the reason that it has I

1:54:51 ↗ believe is because one of the lenses we

1:54:55 ↗ can view waste is around carbon

1:54:57 ↗ generation and I think that if you

1:55:00 ↗ believe that global warming is the

1:55:02 ↗ preeminent threat to civilization I

1:55:05 ↗ think you have to say the carbon

1:55:07 ↗ generation is the is the lens through

1:55:10 ↗ which these decisions have to be made

1:55:12 ↗ and in both the direct measurement even

1:55:16 ↗ if you even if you capture first of all

1:55:19 ↗ we're not capturing the methane that's

1:55:21 ↗ coming out of landfills even if you

1:55:23 ↗ capture the methane the carbon

1:55:25 ↗ difference between landfills and

1:55:27 ↗ incinerators incineration is much better

1:55:30 ↗ from a carbon standpoint and so while

1:55:33 ↗ there are challenges associated with

1:55:36 ↗ with incineration and I agree that the

1:55:39 ↗ King County has an extraordinarily

1:55:40 ↗ extraordinary waste stream I think that

1:55:43 ↗ it's sensible to look at what other

1:55:46 ↗ countries are doing particularly

1:55:48 ↗ countries that are more ecologically

1:55:52 ↗ focused than ours and they have been

1:55:54 ↗ moving towards incineration and actually

1:55:56 ↗ councilmember Walsh kind of made the

1:56:00 ↗ critical point for me because I was fine

1:56:02 ↗ with this as a stopgap measure but

1:56:04 ↗ looking at the looking at the report

1:56:07 ↗ beyond 2028 I can't conscious the idea

1:56:09 ↗ that we're going to take this off the

1:56:10 ↗ table for another 20 years and stuff

1:56:13 ↗ this waste down the throats of

1:56:15 ↗ unincorporated King County for another

1:56:16 ↗ 20 years so I'm not I'm not willing to

1:56:19 ↗ support that tonight Thanks Thank You

1:56:21 ↗ council president Mertz are there

1:56:23 ↗ comments counsel my role I am also not

1:56:26 ↗ supporting this and I would encourage my

1:56:30 ↗ other council members to please think

1:56:33 ↗ think about the message that we can send

1:56:36 ↗ to King County looking at the idea of

1:56:41 ↗ [Music]

1:56:43 ↗ expanding the Cedar Hills landfill

1:56:47 ↗ beyond the existing areas and adding in

1:56:53 ↗ fact to areas and expanding the heights

1:56:56 ↗ that we can go to just in order to not

1:57:01 ↗ have to look at these other very viable

1:57:06 ↗ options I think is is a problem and it's

1:57:12 ↗ something that we as one of the more

1:57:15 ↗ local cities to this area need to be

1:57:19 ↗ very aware of and so I'm not going to be

1:57:24 ↗ supporting this tonight Thank You

1:57:27 ↗ councilmember Walsh other council

1:57:28 ↗ members

1:57:29 ↗ that's member winter Stein followed by

1:57:32 ↗ councilmember hunt well I'm hearing some

1:57:36 ↗ real conflicting information even in

1:57:39 ↗ tonight's report especially about

1:57:40 ↗ Heights and even the verbal report we

1:57:42 ↗ got this evening how that there are

1:57:45 ↗ permitted height requirements

1:57:47 ↗ and that they're not going to violate

1:57:48 ↗ those terms I'm confused about the kind

1:57:51 ↗ the claims about increased height also I

1:57:55 ↗ heard quite a bit about within the next

1:57:59 ↗ five years taking another look

1:58:01 ↗ especially waste-to-energy and that this

1:58:03 ↗ is not a set in stone 20-year plan do

1:58:07 ↗ nothing again so I actually heard

1:58:10 ↗ testimony that directly conflicts with a

1:58:13 ↗ couple comments I've heard up here in

1:58:14 ↗ the day so I'm I'm a little bit confused

1:58:16 ↗ about that i confused on why there is

1:58:20 ↗ such a conflict so if anybody can

1:58:22 ↗ clarify for that for me I'd appreciate

1:58:25 ↗ it

1:58:26 ↗ quite a bit I do appreciate the report

1:58:29 ↗ that we do have that's in the packet I

1:58:31 ↗ have the advantage if you're not looking

1:58:32 ↗ at it within the packet there is the the

1:58:37 ↗ there is the report that begins it's

1:58:41 ↗ called the planning for the regional

1:58:42 ↗ future of regional waste management and

1:58:46 ↗ I it is it's fairly comprehensive it

1:58:49 ↗ addressed water quality air quality odor

1:58:52 ↗ control bird management other things it

1:58:56 ↗ and and actually it's very educational

1:58:59 ↗ to me as well I don't have the same lack

1:59:07 ↗ of confidence that the alternatives

1:59:08 ↗ weren't adequately considered so I'll

1:59:12 ↗ say that as a positive I am confident

1:59:14 ↗ that the alternatives were adequately

1:59:16 ↗ considered and that there's a lot of

1:59:19 ↗ different ways you have to make a

1:59:20 ↗ complex decision about this sometimes

1:59:23 ↗ it's a business decision and I think

1:59:25 ↗ there's a very key element I think you

1:59:26 ↗ talk about you talk about carbon dioxide

1:59:30 ↗ released in the atmosphere you talk

1:59:31 ↗ about impact to the environment and

1:59:33 ↗ those factors have been weighed in this

1:59:34 ↗ decision that's being the preferred

1:59:37 ↗ option and it's one that our mayor's

1:59:40 ↗ office and the mayor wrote a letter in

1:59:42 ↗ support of before a preferred

1:59:43 ↗ alternative was selected by the county I

1:59:46 ↗ do agree with that because I and and you

1:59:49 ↗ know I wish our recycling rates were

1:59:51 ↗ higher I wish that the amount of

1:59:53 ↗ disposal was less

1:59:55 ↗ and I think that's every one of us

1:59:57 ↗ individually including our households

1:59:59 ↗ that have to take some responsibility

2:00:00 ↗ for those actions but I don't have the

2:00:03 ↗ same confusion that I've heard up here

2:00:06 ↗ and I'm going to be supporting the plan

2:00:07 ↗ as presented Thank You councilmember

2:00:09 ↗ we're just saying

2:00:10 ↗ councilmember hunt so I I also feel that

2:00:16 ↗ there's been some conflicting

2:00:18 ↗ information or conflicting viewpoints

2:00:21 ↗ brought up in this conversation and so I

2:00:24 ↗ wondered if we could get clarity because

2:00:26 ↗ I we didn't talk very much in this

2:00:30 ↗ presentation today about the comparison

2:00:32 ↗ of carbon emissions or carbon footprint

2:00:35 ↗ of the waste to energy versus the

2:00:39 ↗ landfill but I do recall in an earlier

2:00:41 ↗ presentation seeing that table and as I

2:00:44 ↗ recall it was preferred from that

2:00:47 ↗ analysis that for the carbon footprint

2:00:49 ↗ it was preferred to expanse landfill at

2:00:52 ↗ least of the time frame though we were

2:00:53 ↗ being considered so since there's some

2:00:57 ↗ differences of opinion I wondered if we

2:00:59 ↗ could at least confirm that that was the

2:01:02 ↗ information we've been presented with is

2:01:03 ↗ that it is the carbon the preferred

2:01:08 ↗ climate action or you know climate

2:01:10 ↗ change reducing method by the analysis

2:01:13 ↗ that has been provided to us thank you

2:01:16 ↗ pat so the way we measure the

2:01:21 ↗ environment Olymp acts of these choices

2:01:22 ↗ is we look at what our regulatory models

2:01:25 ↗ require of us our regulator is the

2:01:28 ↗ Environmental Protection Agency the EPA

2:01:30 ↗ they offer two models from which we can

2:01:34 ↗ assess waste export waste energy and see

2:01:40 ↗ the landfilling and in each of those

2:01:44 ↗ cases whether you use what's called the

2:01:46 ↗ warm model which is really the best

2:01:49 ↗ model for comparing and its purpose is

2:01:52 ↗ to compare disposal alternatives the

2:01:55 ↗ emissions associated with

2:01:58 ↗ waste-to-energy are about a hundred

2:02:00 ↗ times that than landfilling and the

2:02:05 ↗ reason is because waste-to-energy

2:02:09 ↗ while it has benefits you are creating

2:02:12 ↗ energy and that's good right

2:02:14 ↗ you are incinerating waste there is an

2:02:17 ↗ incineration a burn process and an

2:02:20 ↗ inevitable part of that is an emission

2:02:22 ↗ of greenhouse gases a significant

2:02:27 ↗ emission and so there is a specific

2:02:30 ↗ table and I regret I can't cite the the

2:02:33 ↗ page but it's in chapter 6 of of the

2:02:37 ↗ comprehensive plan and it shows what

2:02:38 ↗ those comparative numbers are and

2:02:41 ↗ whether you measure it under the warm

2:02:43 ↗ model or in our annual reporting tool

2:02:46 ↗ which both numbers are there is a

2:02:49 ↗ substantial emission disadvantage

2:02:54 ↗ associated with waste-to-energy and

2:02:56 ↗ that's just because your burning

2:02:58 ↗ material will get Myka to look that up I

2:03:01 ↗ also can tell you the page page 162 62

2:03:05 ↗ thank you in our packet its page 4 73

2:03:08 ↗ out of 496 early queue I wanted to do

2:03:15 ↗ two things here I wanted to make sure

2:03:17 ↗ that councilmember hunt got the full

2:03:19 ↗ answer but I also want to come back to

2:03:21 ↗ councilmember winter Stein at one point

2:03:23 ↗ and get a little clarification on what

2:03:25 ↗ exactly it is that you would like to

2:03:28 ↗ rephrase your question of what you think

2:03:31 ↗ the conflicting information was so we

2:03:32 ↗ can have King County and the city

2:03:34 ↗ address that I saw did you get a

2:03:36 ↗ complete answer to your question I did

2:03:38 ↗ council member wash also is showing me

2:03:41 ↗ the table so so this is what I recall

2:03:43 ↗ seeing earlier which is as was also

2:03:47 ↗ stated that the waste energy facility

2:03:49 ↗ does have the higher

2:03:52 ↗ emissions and that is what I recall and

2:03:57 ↗ that is still the information that's

2:03:58 ↗ being presented to us and I haven't seen

2:04:01 ↗ contrary okay anyway Thank You

2:04:04 ↗ councilmember inter saying you had said

2:04:06 ↗ well you'd seen the same day I'm sorry

2:04:07 ↗ okay yes and and and just in the

2:04:09 ↗ comments this evening and it's in the

2:04:10 ↗ packet this as well as far as the height

2:04:13 ↗ I mean I've heard that there's a there's

2:04:15 ↗ a settlement there's an agreement and

2:04:18 ↗ they're sticking within that so I'm

2:04:19 ↗ confused by a hearing that we're gonna

2:04:22 ↗ go above that could you provide a little

2:04:26 ↗ bit more information about the history

2:04:27 ↗ of the height limits and I think the

2:04:30 ↗ information is is being received of

2:04:32 ↗ different ways thank you we entered into

2:04:35 ↗ a settlement the county entered into a

2:04:37 ↗ settlement about 1999 with a few

2:04:41 ↗ thousand neighbors around the landfill

2:04:44 ↗ one specific element and I think a very

2:04:47 ↗ important element of that settlement

2:04:49 ↗ agreement calls for a limitation of

2:04:53 ↗ heighth and when we talk about height

2:04:54 ↗ we're talking about height above sea

2:04:56 ↗ level and it says that the heights of

2:05:00 ↗ areas five six and seven will not exceed

2:05:04 ↗ 788 feet it goes on to say that there

2:05:07 ↗ may be some circumstances where that may

2:05:09 ↗ not be possible and setting that aside

2:05:11 ↗ right I'm not changing what that says

2:05:13 ↗ it's it could be some circumstances

2:05:15 ↗ where it's not possible in all of our

2:05:17 ↗ planning assumptions here we have

2:05:19 ↗ assumed that areas five six and seven

2:05:21 ↗ will remain as 788 feet we we have not

2:05:26 ↗ assumed that those are going to go any

2:05:28 ↗ higher than what the settlement

2:05:29 ↗ agreement calls for it's the the reason

2:05:34 ↗ we're able to get us additional capacity

2:05:36 ↗ whether or not we use it by giving us

2:05:40 ↗ capacity it gives us the choice

2:05:43 ↗ developing area nine could allow us to

2:05:46 ↗ use it to 2040 it doesn't require us to

2:05:48 ↗ use it but it gives us that ability so

2:05:52 ↗ nothing in this plan prevents us as a

2:05:55 ↗ region to implement another alternative

2:05:59 ↗ before 2040 if we want to do that right

2:06:03 ↗ the region decide

2:06:05 ↗ these choices and they decided through a

2:06:08 ↗ rate process right today we have 37

2:06:11 ↗ cities in an unincorporated area to pay

2:06:14 ↗ for transfer stations and disposal

2:06:17 ↗ solutions we can choose you know I think

2:06:21 ↗ we should choose developing this

2:06:23 ↗ capacity so we have it we don't have to

2:06:26 ↗ use all of the capacity and some would

2:06:28 ↗ argue and I would even argue that we

2:06:31 ↗ should have some reserve capacity so

2:06:34 ↗ that when we transfer to the next long

2:06:36 ↗ term and the true long term disposal

2:06:39 ↗ option that we still have local reserve

2:06:42 ↗ capacity at Cedar Hills so even I

2:06:44 ↗ wouldn't necessarily be promoting let's

2:06:47 ↗ fill area 9 to its brim to be very

2:06:51 ↗ powerful and important I think to retain

2:06:53 ↗ some reserve capacity so I think it's

2:06:55 ↗ also important to realize it ok a not

2:06:59 ↗ planning don't need to go above 788 just

2:07:02 ↗ as a settlement agreement calls and

2:07:05 ↗ nothing prevents the region from

2:07:08 ↗ implementing another alternative when

2:07:11 ↗ they want to do that this does not force

2:07:13 ↗ us to fill area 9 to its capacity it

2:07:17 ↗ simply ensures there'll be no gap in

2:07:20 ↗ capacity is that clarify your question

2:07:25 ↗ Paul on information on height yeah it's

2:07:29 ↗ what I heard before okay and cuz we're

2:07:32 ↗ all just on your hand yeah just to

2:07:34 ↗ clarify it wasn't saying that there was

2:07:36 ↗ going to be an increase on the existing

2:07:40 ↗ areas of cells five six or seven which

2:07:44 ↗ have the settlement agreement but rather

2:07:47 ↗ what it states in the plan is that

2:07:51 ↗ they'll develop new cells within the

2:07:54 ↗ existing footprint of the landfill and

2:07:55 ↗ increase the height from the permitted

2:07:57 ↗ eight hundred feet up to eight hundred

2:07:59 ↗ and thirty feet only to the extent that

2:08:02 ↗ such activity would be consistent with

2:08:03 ↗ the terms of the settlement agreement so

2:08:06 ↗ this is stating that cells

2:08:10 ↗ eight and nine which are the new cells

2:08:14 ↗ within the existing footprint of the

2:08:16 ↗ landfill could go up to eight hundred

2:08:19 ↗ and thirty feet which from my

2:08:22 ↗ perspective is not something that the

2:08:27 ↗ neighbors around there are looking

2:08:30 ↗ forward to and also you know it pulls it

2:08:36 ↗ some of the ideas of okay well neighbors

2:08:40 ↗ were told that Cedar Hills landfill

2:08:43 ↗ would be completely filled up and has

2:08:46 ↗ been extended several times and so we're

2:08:49 ↗ looking at cells eight and nine

2:08:51 ↗ continuing to be an extension of that

2:08:53 ↗ and the extension into those areas is

2:08:59 ↗ going to be at a higher level than the

2:09:02 ↗ existing ones which are regulated by the

2:09:04 ↗ settlement agreement Thank You

2:09:08 ↗ councillor president Mertz two things

2:09:11 ↗ first on a hundred page 163 of the

2:09:15 ↗ report in regards to waste energy

2:09:17 ↗ facility it the quote is this option is

2:09:20 ↗ not recommended as the next disposal

2:09:22 ↗ option after 2028 for several reasons so

2:09:26 ↗ while it is certainly impossible that

2:09:28 ↗ anybody can go back and look at anything

2:09:30 ↗ this report says not to do it

2:09:33 ↗ secondly can we please bring up this

2:09:35 ↗ table 6.1 that we've been discussing

2:09:37 ↗ that's part of the packet put it up on

2:09:39 ↗ the overhead thank you

2:09:49 ↗ the packet got closed yeah get the

2:09:53 ↗ expert to put it up on the overhead

2:09:55 ↗ Thank You Catherine of Arts if I can

2:09:59 ↗ address your comment because I think it

2:10:01 ↗ is you make a very important point this

2:10:03 ↗ plan is all about addressing what do we

2:10:06 ↗ do in 2028 because we've got 20 we've

2:10:09 ↗ got a but until 2028 covered so the

2:10:13 ↗ context of not recommending

2:10:15 ↗ waste-to-energy in 2028 is because it's

2:10:19 ↗ recommending we begin the new cell in

2:10:22 ↗ 2028 right it's not trying it's not

2:10:25 ↗ intended to eliminate it from its future

2:10:27 ↗ its intended to identify what's the next

2:10:30 ↗ best solution beyond our current

2:10:33 ↗ capacity

2:10:45 ↗ can you you might be able to tear and

2:10:47 ↗ sell their ego page yeah well is sorry

2:10:52 ↗ it was yeah that's right of the yes of

2:10:55 ↗ the plant there we go mmm-hmm

2:10:58 ↗ see you were you referring to the warm

2:11:00 ↗ model can you walk me through the warm

2:11:02 ↗ model numbers sure so the warm model

2:11:05 ↗ when we just is the second column I'm

2:11:09 ↗ sorry the second row it's a life cycle

2:11:11 ↗ analysis and it's the most generally

2:11:15 ↗ accepted again in in our regional system

2:11:18 ↗ and are in the US under our regulatory

2:11:20 ↗ model and so you'll see there's actually

2:11:24 ↗ the option of further developed Cedar

2:11:27 ↗ Hills compared to waste export and then

2:11:30 ↗ compared to a waste energy facility in

2:11:33 ↗ the first in all three the measures are

2:11:36 ↗ in metric ton equivalents of co2 okay

2:11:40 ↗ it's the measuring the co2 emissions and

2:11:43 ↗ in the first two you'll see it's

2:11:46 ↗ actually a negative number and in the

2:11:51 ↗ third it's a positive number the reason

2:11:53 ↗ is in fact we do collect landfill gas we

2:11:58 ↗ don't just collect it we used to destroy

2:12:02 ↗ it through flares we now transport it to

2:12:08 ↗ a refinery on-site operated by bio

2:12:12 ↗ energy of Washington and in fact between

2:12:16 ↗ bio energy of Washington who purchases

2:12:20 ↗ that gas from us and the Puget Sound

2:12:23 ↗ Energy company that purchases the

2:12:25 ↗ environmental attributes they buy that

2:12:27 ↗ landfill gas and environmental

2:12:29 ↗ attributes last year to the tune of

2:12:30 ↗ about eight million dollars so it's a

2:12:33 ↗ real molecule that's being collected out

2:12:35 ↗ of our landfill and ultimately sold and

2:12:39 ↗ because of that and because they're you

2:12:42 ↗ know it's it's not going in to the

2:12:44 ↗ atmosphere at least a majority of it we

2:12:47 ↗ estimate about a ninety ninety-five

2:12:50 ↗ percent effective rate of landfill gas

2:12:54 ↗ capture particularly at cedar hills it

2:12:57 ↗ actually has

2:13:00 ↗ a-and you look at the environmental

2:13:02 ↗ attributes associated with that

2:13:04 ↗ renewable energy right we have a

2:13:06 ↗ positive impact in terms of greenhouse

2:13:08 ↗ gases it's to a lesser effect at an out

2:13:12 ↗ of County landfill and that's because

2:13:13 ↗ the way we're operating Cedar Hills is

2:13:17 ↗ not normal

2:13:18 ↗ it's really a above and beyond standard

2:13:21 ↗ industry standard practices we take it

2:13:23 ↗ to a much more extreme level to the

2:13:26 ↗ benefit of the environment

2:13:28 ↗ it still has a reduction of greenhouse

2:13:31 ↗ gases because even at those landfills

2:13:34 ↗ they're capturing and creating renewable

2:13:37 ↗ energy however out of waste energy

2:13:40 ↗ facility as I mentioned it is

2:13:42 ↗ incineration and when you burn anything

2:13:45 ↗ there are emissions associated with it

2:13:48 ↗ now I want you to know that the numbers

2:13:51 ↗ that you see in a rain it's a range of

2:13:53 ↗ anywhere between twelve thousand to

2:13:56 ↗ eighty thousand metric ton equivalents

2:13:57 ↗ in this case those are not the county

2:14:00 ↗ numbers because we hired national

2:14:04 ↗ experts to study the waste energy model

2:14:06 ↗ because we know landfilling really well

2:14:08 ↗ we even know a little bit about waste

2:14:10 ↗ export because of our local experience

2:14:13 ↗ we we knew very little about waste

2:14:16 ↗ export or wasted energy so we hired the

2:14:18 ↗ national experts we hired the company

2:14:20 ↗ that built and consulted on the most

2:14:23 ↗ recent modern plant in West Palm Beach

2:14:25 ↗ Florida and they gave us these numbers

2:14:28 ↗ right I think it's important to know

2:14:31 ↗ these are not the counting numbers per

2:14:32 ↗ se we and we subscribe to them but we're

2:14:35 ↗ not the ones that calculate it and these

2:14:37 ↗ came from the regional experts in terms

2:14:39 ↗ of what the emissions are and you can

2:14:45 ↗ the third row is called annual

2:14:47 ↗ greenhouse gas emissions we actually

2:14:49 ↗ produce a report we're required to as is

2:14:52 ↗ every landfill in in the nation in terms

2:14:56 ↗ of what happened what is estimated to

2:14:58 ↗ have happened in any given year this

2:15:00 ↗ does not take into account the lifecycle

2:15:03 ↗ process in terms of capturing and of

2:15:05 ↗ that renewable energy and again if you

2:15:08 ↗ look at the actual

2:15:09 ↗ kind of production levels 91 thousand

2:15:13 ↗ metric ton equivalents estimated of

2:15:15 ↗ emissions associated with Cedar Hills

2:15:17 ↗ about the same associated with waste

2:15:20 ↗ export and then about 1.2 million metric

2:15:25 ↗ ton equivalents associated with a waste

2:15:27 ↗ energy and again it's just by the nature

2:15:29 ↗ of the incineration this is not a

2:15:31 ↗ singular decision there's not just an

2:15:33 ↗ environmental decision it's not just a

2:15:35 ↗ financial decision it's not just a

2:15:37 ↗ siting decision it's you know these are

2:15:40 ↗ individual elements have to be

2:15:41 ↗ considered it's not a reason to do it or

2:15:44 ↗ not to not do it it's just something

2:15:45 ↗ that's got to be factored in what's the

2:15:48 ↗ president Moritz did you have some

2:15:49 ↗ additional questions on the table other

2:15:54 ↗ council member comments and questions

2:15:57 ↗ we've got a motion on the table moved

2:15:59 ↗ and seconded but this is your

2:16:01 ↗ opportunity to dig in deeper with each

2:16:03 ↗ other and with the staff that is here to

2:16:05 ↗ get your questions answered any other

2:16:07 ↗ questions okay and going to question so

2:16:17 ↗ if you look at where incinerators are

2:16:21 ↗ being built in Europe the argument is

2:16:23 ↗ that incinerators have a smaller carbon

2:16:25 ↗ footprint

2:16:26 ↗ I am admittedly not an expert thank you

2:16:29 ↗ for clarifying these numbers that's all

2:16:33 ↗ I can say and I can say that I believe

2:16:36 ↗ the Scandinavian countries have a

2:16:38 ↗ stronger commitment to environmental

2:16:40 ↗ sustainability than the u.s. does in

2:16:42 ↗ general and it matters a great deal to

2:16:45 ↗ me I don't I'm not ready today to say

2:16:47 ↗ that we should move to incineration but

2:16:49 ↗ I'm not ready to say today that beyond

2:16:51 ↗ 2028 we should not move to incineration

2:16:54 ↗ i I think that I haven't been convinced

2:16:56 ↗ on that and I wish this report didn't

2:16:58 ↗ lay out that path because I believe it

2:17:00 ↗ will as a region closed the conversation

2:17:02 ↗ about incineration so that's why I'm

2:17:04 ↗ gonna continue to oppose it this evening

2:17:06 ↗ Thank You council president Mertz would

2:17:08 ↗ anybody else like to speak before I call

2:17:10 ↗ for the vote

2:17:11 ↗ I thought it since a counts by

2:17:13 ↗ councilmember Goodman

2:17:15 ↗ I'm gonna oppose as well I was living in

2:17:18 ↗ the area for 15 plus years when all the

2:17:24 ↗ largest conscious of controversy took

2:17:26 ↗ place and the settlement came about and

2:17:31 ↗ I know that communities in that area

2:17:34 ↗ have struggled a bit with landfill and

2:17:40 ↗ I'm just concerned that that area of the

2:17:45 ↗ county does not get heard as loudly as

2:17:48 ↗ other areas of the county and I also

2:17:52 ↗ know that the county represent County

2:17:54 ↗ Council representatives opposed the plan

2:17:57 ↗ the ones the ones who represent this

2:18:01 ↗ area the two of them represent this area

2:18:03 ↗ so I am going to oppose it as well and

2:18:07 ↗ stand with the folks who live down there

2:18:09 ↗ and council members who voted against it

2:18:12 ↗ Thank You councilmember Goodman any

2:18:14 ↗ other comments deputy council president

2:18:16 ↗ parties so I I can completely understand

2:18:20 ↗ that this is a very complex issue and

2:18:24 ↗ but I I have to say after hearing our

2:18:30 ↗ neighbors about this area and just have

2:18:35 ↗ a long history of a lot of people that I

2:18:38 ↗ that I know in that area residents in

2:18:41 ↗ that area that have that have really

2:18:43 ↗ struggled and I and I feel like this is

2:18:46 ↗ such a long-term decision where you know

2:18:51 ↗ one of the questions that I had asked

2:18:53 ↗ was that we there's a new report coming

2:18:56 ↗ out about one of the options the waste

2:19:01 ↗ energy but yet that's coming out a month

2:19:03 ↗ after after this very very important

2:19:08 ↗ long term vote and those those reasons

2:19:12 ↗ make me uncomfortable

2:19:15 ↗ I I wish that there could have been

2:19:18 ↗ more of a roadmap presented and I think

2:19:22 ↗ that if we were having to look at the

2:19:25 ↗ landfill as maybe and we talked about

2:19:30 ↗ like a reserve that kind of thing but

2:19:32 ↗ there was more of a roadmap in terms of

2:19:35 ↗ we're going to do this this and this and

2:19:37 ↗ then these options are going to be

2:19:39 ↗ further evaluated but this is this is

2:19:42 ↗ such an incredibly long-term decision to

2:19:45 ↗ just expand the landfill and that makes

2:19:51 ↗ me uncomfortable I'm in a vote against

2:19:54 ↗ this Thank You councilmember hunt

2:19:57 ↗ followed by councilmember Rea I have a

2:19:59 ↗ quick question so I think that in the

2:20:03 ↗ information that was presented earlier

2:20:05 ↗ on if the council were to not approve

2:20:09 ↗ then the direction was that it would be

2:20:12 ↗ best if we could clearly articulate what

2:20:15 ↗ we would like to see difference and so

2:20:18 ↗ I'm just wondering if I if we are

2:20:21 ↗ because it sounds like there's a number

2:20:23 ↗ of concerns and so I'm wondering if we

2:20:25 ↗ are clearly articulating those and if

2:20:27 ↗ not if we should formalize that and some

2:20:30 ↗ way I'm gonna sue Administrator moon

2:20:32 ↗ talk about options because there's

2:20:34 ↗ definitely a way to be able to express

2:20:36 ↗ the concerns that have been listed

2:20:38 ↗ tonight mr. moon sure so I think Michael

2:20:43 ↗ lead out some basic options that you

2:20:46 ↗ have as you vote I think another option

2:20:48 ↗ that perhaps wasn't listed on the slide

2:20:50 ↗ is that counsel could direct staff to

2:20:53 ↗ write a letter that helps express some

2:20:57 ↗ of the thoughts concerns comments that

2:20:59 ↗ you have brought forward tonight and we

2:21:04 ↗ would also again repeat whatever the

2:21:06 ↗ vote was that you end up taking this

2:21:08 ↗ evening but that would be another avenue

2:21:12 ↗ for you to utilize to express some of

2:21:15 ↗ your ongoing concerns the council member

2:21:19 ↗ right so I think I heard things a bit

2:21:23 ↗ differently than some of my my

2:21:25 ↗ colleagues that's what I heard

2:21:28 ↗ Pat say about the plan was part of the

2:21:31 ↗ plan is we're gonna keep planning and

2:21:33 ↗ this isn't a forever plan this isn't

2:21:36 ↗ even if for 40 years plan this is a

2:21:38 ↗ five-year plan and then we're coming

2:21:41 ↗ back to it and we're gonna look at the

2:21:43 ↗ options and and in the reality of it is

2:21:45 ↗ we have we have to keep planning because

2:21:50 ↗ any direction we go

2:21:52 ↗ be it the expansion of Cedar Hills or

2:21:55 ↗ exporting or waste energy is going to

2:21:58 ↗ take time to implement and I think that

2:22:01 ↗ the approach that's outlined in this

2:22:03 ↗ plan lays that out and so from where I'm

2:22:07 ↗ sitting I think we need to to continue

2:22:09 ↗ with the Cedar Hills because that's what

2:22:11 ↗ we've got

2:22:12 ↗ I think presentation really laid out the

2:22:16 ↗ fact that we're building that capacities

2:22:19 ↗ we don't have to use it but we're

2:22:21 ↗ building it so if we need it it's there

2:22:23 ↗ I understand

2:22:26 ↗ council president Mart's is concerned

2:22:28 ↗ about the greenhouse gases but then

2:22:30 ↗ again I look at the data that's being

2:22:32 ↗ presented here and it is showing exactly

2:22:35 ↗ the opposite where the environmental

2:22:37 ↗ impact is less doing landfill than it is

2:22:40 ↗ doing waste energy so I don't know that

2:22:43 ↗ that's a significant thing and then I

2:22:45 ↗ can't really help but look at this table

2:22:47 ↗ at the top line and say you know we also

2:22:50 ↗ have to be fiscally prudent and there is

2:22:54 ↗ a cost to these different options and so

2:22:57 ↗ from where I sit and the way I look at

2:22:59 ↗ this very complex problem is we are on

2:23:05 ↗ the right track with the plan that's

2:23:07 ↗ been presented by King County thank you

2:23:09 ↗ any other comments councilmember winters

2:23:11 ↗ time followed by councilmember hen okay

2:23:13 ↗ thank you actually have a question Pat

2:23:15 ↗ if you may I'm paid on slide five of

2:23:19 ↗ your presentation it does talk about the

2:23:21 ↗ next plan update will identify host

2:23:25 ↗ Cedar Hills disposable method

2:23:27 ↗ sub-bullets start discussion well before

2:23:29 ↗ the five-year update cycle and then you

2:23:31 ↗ list them options waste energy waste

2:23:34 ↗ export by rail other emerging

2:23:36 ↗ technologies now I'm I

2:23:37 ↗ familiar with long-range planning and I

2:23:40 ↗ know that so for example I'm part of the

2:23:43 ↗ formation of vision 2050 and I know long

2:23:46 ↗ before 2050 there's going to be an

2:23:48 ↗ update to that probably inside about 10

2:23:50 ↗ years so this idea of plan long but then

2:23:53 ↗ the cycle shorter that is so when I read

2:23:56 ↗ that when I listen to you and I heard a

2:23:57 ↗ slight well that's what I assumed you

2:23:58 ↗ were doing here a matter of fact you

2:23:59 ↗ said it sounds like there is an update

2:24:01 ↗ in about five years tell us about that

2:24:03 ↗ update because my takeaway was that this

2:24:08 ↗ plan if not comprehensively we'll

2:24:12 ↗ receive some update in a five-year cycle

2:24:15 ↗ and that I thought you said between then

2:24:18 ↗ and now you will be studying these other

2:24:21 ↗ alternatives I took that to mean that in

2:24:26 ↗ this update in about five years

2:24:28 ↗ there could be revisions to this plan to

2:24:31 ↗ reflect what happens during this study

2:24:34 ↗ that's the great question so speaking

2:24:38 ↗ specifically to that as soon as this is

2:24:39 ↗ adopted because it's not adopted yet and

2:24:41 ↗ in fact the cities will take action then

2:24:44 ↗ the State Department of Ecology takes

2:24:46 ↗ action so we've got a couple of months

2:24:47 ↗ ahead of us but as soon as it's adopted

2:24:49 ↗ we have to take the next steps in the

2:24:52 ↗ plan my council the King County Council

2:24:55 ↗ has directed me to bring them a plan for

2:24:59 ↗ that plan for me to articulate

2:25:02 ↗ specifically how am I going to engage

2:25:04 ↗ our regional stakeholders to identify

2:25:08 ↗ and assess and ultimately select these

2:25:12 ↗ options that we're talking about the

2:25:14 ↗ ones that we know of as export and waste

2:25:17 ↗ energy and probably something else and

2:25:20 ↗ so I have to deliver that plan in 2021

2:25:23 ↗ to our King County Council that's kind

2:25:25 ↗ of the plan for the plan you know this

2:25:28 ↗ is a this is a very challenging task for

2:25:33 ↗ us to take on and we do have to be very

2:25:37 ↗ sensitive to our neighbors around our

2:25:39 ↗ facilities not just the neighbors around

2:25:42 ↗ our our landfill but you know we have

2:25:45 ↗ 1.5 million users of the system that we

2:25:49 ↗ have to be responsible to

2:25:51 ↗ you know not not 4,000 but 1.5 million

2:25:54 ↗ that we have to address financial

2:25:57 ↗ environmental and service aspects to so

2:26:01 ↗ we are going to benefit from this

2:26:05 ↗ October study that's coming in on

2:26:07 ↗ waste-to-energy we will use our advisory

2:26:11 ↗ committees again that that micah is

2:26:13 ↗ actively participating in we'll be back

2:26:16 ↗ at the regional city councils to engage

2:26:20 ↗ and and benefit from their input because

2:26:24 ↗ whatever we choose be it waste to energy

2:26:27 ↗ waste export or something else the other

2:26:31 ↗ decision that has to be made in this

2:26:32 ↗ next five-year period is who's a part of

2:26:35 ↗ that system as you as council member

2:26:39 ↗ pointed out the top line is one of the

2:26:42 ↗ other elements you know how much are we

2:26:44 ↗ willing to pay to do what's best for our

2:26:47 ↗ region and who's going to be a part of

2:26:49 ↗ that we are not limited to this regional

2:26:52 ↗ system as we know it today today we know

2:26:54 ↗ it is 37 cities in the unincorporated

2:26:56 ↗ area is it going to be 37 cities is it

2:27:00 ↗ going to be 47 is it going to be 12 we

2:27:04 ↗ need to know that when we're choosing

2:27:05 ↗ this next solution the financial

2:27:09 ↗ estimates that you see here are assuming

2:27:12 ↗ that there are 37 cities that want to be

2:27:14 ↗ a part of that particular system and I

2:27:18 ↗ don't know that that that's going to be

2:27:20 ↗ true maybe we're going to have more and

2:27:22 ↗ maybe we're going to have less and so

2:27:24 ↗ part of the plan is not just well what

2:27:25 ↗ is the best regional system but what's

2:27:28 ↗ the region what's the regional system

2:27:29 ↗ comprised of in that scenario so we will

2:27:33 ↗ have that over the next five years I

2:27:37 ↗ think if I'm tracking correctly its

2:27:39 ↗ councilmember hunt I appreciate all the

2:27:44 ↗ thoughtful comments that have been made

2:27:46 ↗ in the different perspectives I

2:27:48 ↗ going to be in support of the plan and

2:27:52 ↗ my reasons are that I know that our

2:27:55 ↗ community does care a lot about climate

2:27:57 ↗ change and I absolutely do believe that

2:28:01 ↗ climate change is an existential threat

2:28:03 ↗ and that it's very important it's

2:28:05 ↗ something that we should do what we can

2:28:07 ↗ as a city to to address and I also think

2:28:12 ↗ we should continue to revisit other

2:28:14 ↗ technologies and they may change over

2:28:17 ↗ time and get better over time as

2:28:18 ↗ technologies do and I also think we

2:28:21 ↗ should absolutely be continuing to look

2:28:24 ↗ at the region at what other countries in

2:28:27 ↗ the world are doing and we should make

2:28:29 ↗ sure that we are using best practices

2:28:31 ↗ but I also think that on council we are

2:28:34 ↗ often presented with information and we

2:28:36 ↗ have to make the best decisions we can

2:28:39 ↗ with the information we have at the time

2:28:41 ↗ and I see this table and I find it very

2:28:44 ↗ compelling

2:28:46 ↗ so specifically to me the the lifecycle

2:28:49 ↗ greenhouse gas emissions that says that

2:28:51 ↗ it's negative 134 thousand metric ton

2:28:56 ↗ equivalents for the further developed

2:28:58 ↗ cedar hills options versus a positive of

2:29:02 ↗ 12,000 to 80,000 metric ton equivalents

2:29:07 ↗ I find that large negative number very

2:29:09 ↗ compelling and that's the information

2:29:11 ↗ that we have and then also the annual

2:29:15 ↗ greenhouse gas emissions is lower for

2:29:17 ↗ further developed cedar hills in the

2:29:19 ↗ information that we have so I I think we

2:29:25 ↗ were presented with data to support that

2:29:27 ↗ this plan is laying the path forward

2:29:28 ↗ that will produce the lowest greenhouse

2:29:30 ↗ gas emissions and I also think it is a

2:29:33 ↗ plan and there there should absolutely

2:29:36 ↗ be revisited in the future but based on

2:29:39 ↗ the information provided I'm in support

2:29:40 ↗ oh great night anybody else who would

2:29:47 ↗ like to provide comments or discussion

2:29:49 ↗ with your fellow council members or to

2:29:52 ↗ ask for any clarifications from staff

2:29:54 ↗ president Mertz just as an example of

2:29:57 ↗ how complicated of a topic this is so

2:30:00 ↗ I'm looking at an article from Professor

2:30:04 ↗ a chemical engineering professor at the

2:30:06 ↗ University of Manchester is published

2:30:08 ↗ and what I believe to be a peer-reviewed

2:30:10 ↗ journal and and the conclusion was there

2:30:14 ↗ was the waste incineration offers

2:30:16 ↗ significant savings of greenhouse gases

2:30:18 ↗ compared to disposal by landfill and

2:30:21 ↗ they compared landfills with biogas

2:30:24 ↗ recovery with both systems co generating

2:30:27 ↗ heat and electricity I'm not trying to

2:30:28 ↗ put one paper against another table I'm

2:30:31 ↗ just saying it is a complicated topic

2:30:32 ↗ and I'm not ready to close out that

2:30:34 ↗ topic

2:30:35 ↗ I really feel the language that I quoted

2:30:38 ↗ from page 163 of the report is to will

2:30:43 ↗ foreclose without with all due respect

2:30:46 ↗ to the possibility of course the the

2:30:50 ↗ region could revisit it but I just think

2:30:52 ↗ it's premature to talk about the

2:30:55 ↗ solution beyond 2028 that just I just

2:30:58 ↗ wanted to reiterate that it's a it's not

2:31:00 ↗ a it's not a resolved scientific issue

2:31:04 ↗ any other comments before we go to the

2:31:07 ↗ vote councillor president - yeah I've

2:31:11 ↗ got just saying that Oh

2:31:14 ↗ if the council wishes to have additional

2:31:17 ↗ information provided it's really up to

2:31:18 ↗ you to ask questions and I'll I'll have

2:31:21 ↗ people answer so I usually don't go back

2:31:24 ↗ and they'll snap it's time to interject

2:31:26 ↗ so what are your thoughts we take some

2:31:29 ↗ additional information all the question

2:31:33 ↗ all the question okay you ready for the

2:31:36 ↗ vote okay all right

2:31:40 ↗ if there's no further discussion all

2:31:42 ↗ those in favor of adopting ordinance

2:31:45 ↗ number two 875 adopting the final 2019

2:31:49 ↗ comprehensive solid waste management

2:31:50 ↗ plan prepared by King County as an

2:31:53 ↗ update to the 2001 comprehensive solid

2:31:56 ↗ waste management plan adopted by

2:31:58 ↗ ordinance number two three three three

2:32:00 ↗ it

2:32:01 ↗ it's been moved and seconded and all

2:32:03 ↗ those in favor signify by saying aye aye

2:32:05 ↗ I have hands as well please thank you

2:32:08 ↗ all those in opposition signify by

2:32:10 ↗ saying aye nay okay all those opposed if

2:32:18 ↗ I see your hands

2:32:19 ↗ thank you the motion favorite fails four

2:32:22 ↗ to three

2:32:24 ↗ with beautiful three to four and then

2:32:30 ↗ I'd also like to put the option on the

2:32:31 ↗ table too that the city administrator

2:32:33 ↗ mentioned you've had a great discussion

2:32:34 ↗ tonight there are a lot of varying

2:32:36 ↗ reasons why the eggs are in favor or

2:32:39 ↗ oppose and if you would like to have the

2:32:42 ↗ administration prepare a letter for the

2:32:44 ↗ council to then to King County to

2:32:46 ↗ provide some context around the vote

2:32:48 ↗ this evening is that something you'd

2:32:50 ↗ like to do and I'm seeing heads not

2:32:52 ↗ thank you very much thank you for your

2:32:55 ↗ presentation this evening the next item

2:32:58 ↗ on the agenda is good of the order do

2:33:00 ↗ council members have anything for good

2:33:01 ↗ of the order that's the president Mart's

2:33:04 ↗ and deputy counsel present parties so I

2:33:07 ↗ just want to comment on the special

2:33:11 ↗ presentation we had earlier this evening

2:33:13 ↗ you know there's there's two kinds of

2:33:16 ↗ leadership

2:33:17 ↗ there's the leadership that sort of

2:33:19 ↗ methodically planned out and and people

2:33:22 ↗ marshal their resources towards a

2:33:23 ↗ certain goal and they accomplished that

2:33:25 ↗ goal and then there's a second kind of

2:33:26 ↗ leadership that where people find

2:33:29 ↗ themselves in situations and sort of

2:33:30 ↗ have to have to sum up you know the

2:33:33 ↗ plans kind of go out the window and

2:33:35 ↗ they're just sort of history calls upon

2:33:37 ↗ them to at that moment and they rise up

2:33:40 ↗ to that occasion and City Administrator

2:33:42 ↗ moon was absolutely that latter category

2:33:45 ↗ she's a consummate professional I'm

2:33:47 ↗ quite confident it she has a master plan

2:33:49 ↗ and it didn't involve being City

2:33:51 ↗ Administrator a year and a half ago but

2:33:54 ↗ nonetheless she rolled up her sleeves

2:33:55 ↗ she saw us through you know several of

2:33:59 ↗ the most important issues that have come

2:34:01 ↗ our way in the last well in the decade

2:34:03 ↗ that I've been involved closing out the

2:34:04 ↗ moratorium adoption of the strategic

2:34:06 ↗ plan restructuring of the finance

2:34:08 ↗ department in the budget process and so

2:34:11 ↗ though she was only our she's been here

2:34:13 ↗ for five

2:34:14 ↗ though she was only a city administrator

2:34:15 ↗ for a year and a half when history

2:34:17 ↗ called she responded magnificently and I

2:34:19 ↗ want to thank her so much for her

2:34:20 ↗ service here thank you

2:34:23 ↗ difficult present petites just to follow

2:34:26 ↗ up on our special presentation I just

2:34:28 ↗ wanted to to also say I just it's been

2:34:32 ↗ really amazing to to see the transition

2:34:36 ↗ that we've gone through and all of the

2:34:39 ↗ different complicated things that the

2:34:42 ↗ city administrator and specifically

2:34:45 ↗ Emily needed to to manage and it's just

2:34:50 ↗ been an absolute pleasure to work with

2:34:52 ↗ you and you are such an amazing hard

2:34:55 ↗ worker and just the communication and

2:34:59 ↗ and everything that that we needed from

2:35:02 ↗ the council perspective as we're going

2:35:06 ↗ through our recruitment effort and being

2:35:10 ↗ asked to talk about what does the city

2:35:13 ↗ administrator do it's been interesting

2:35:16 ↗ to think about that because it really is

2:35:18 ↗ such a complicated everything under the

2:35:21 ↗ Sun type of job and we're going to miss

2:35:25 ↗ you very much there are huge shoes to

2:35:27 ↗ fill and very excited for your new

2:35:30 ↗ adventure

2:35:33 ↗ that's my good man count some we're just

2:35:35 ↗ saying I'll be short I'll +1 to all that

2:35:38 ↗ and I will just say I hope you have the

2:35:40 ↗ best year of your life it's never

2:35:44 ↗ equally short you're going to be missed

2:35:45 ↗ and and still thank you for recruiting

2:35:53 ↗ and bringing Andrea on I'm glad that

2:35:56 ↗ we're gonna have some continuity going

2:35:58 ↗ forward Mayor Polly I know that you're

2:36:00 ↗ putting your heart and soul into the

2:36:02 ↗ replacement effort as well but there

2:36:04 ↗ will be no replacing and I to have a

2:36:08 ↗ blast

2:36:08 ↗ have fun I know you will I can't hear

2:36:10 ↗ about it thanks great comments anything

2:36:14 ↗ else for good of the order because I'm

2:36:15 ↗ just gonna

2:36:16 ↗ it's a little bit and just also say that

2:36:19 ↗ only having 18 months of mayoral

2:36:22 ↗ experience and working with Emily in

2:36:25 ↗ that role for 18 months I am amazed many

2:36:28 ↗ of the things that we got accomplished

2:36:30 ↗ in a short period of time because of her

2:36:33 ↗ ability to really push and drive hard on

2:36:36 ↗ certain projects especially the

2:36:38 ↗ strategic plan an overview and overhaul

2:36:41 ↗ of our financial systems and the way we

2:36:43 ↗ do that work there is a lot that

2:36:46 ↗ happened in a really short period of

2:36:47 ↗ time so I have no doubt that she has

2:36:50 ↗ built up a wonderful resume of

2:36:51 ↗ accomplishments that she will be able to

2:36:53 ↗ share if she chooses not to become a

2:36:56 ↗ goat herder or farmer in Argentina so

2:36:58 ↗ awesome thank you very much I do have

2:37:03 ↗ some other items for a good of the order

2:37:05 ↗ it's mostly about upcoming meetings but

2:37:07 ↗ I would like to go through those if

2:37:08 ↗ there's nothing else to add on August 12

2:37:11 ↗ we will be having a special council

2:37:13 ↗ meeting at 5:30 and the potential items

2:37:15 ↗ that include an executive session and

2:37:18 ↗ potentially a city administrator

2:37:19 ↗ appointment on August 12

2:37:22 ↗ council committee work session is at

2:37:24 ↗ 6:30 that evening and the potential

2:37:26 ↗ agenda items are the 2019 shoreline

2:37:28 ↗ master program periodic update

2:37:30 ↗ fluoridation policy discussion water

2:37:33 ↗ treatment plant and vision 2050 regional

2:37:35 ↗ growth strategy a whole bunch of small

2:37:37 ↗ things those are all big big complicated

2:37:40 ↗ items August 14th a special council

2:37:43 ↗ committee work session 6:30 p.m. the

2:37:45 ↗ proposed 2020 budget financial forecast

2:37:48 ↗ and that's an awful lot of work to do in

2:37:51 ↗ the summer a little more than we

2:37:53 ↗ normally take on we are still cancelling

2:37:55 ↗ at this point in time the August 19th

2:37:57 ↗ regular council meeting looking into

2:38:00 ↗ September at the regular council meeting

2:38:02 ↗ on September 3rd some potential agenda

2:38:04 ↗ items are the intent to adopt a sales

2:38:07 ↗ and use tax for affordable housing

2:38:09 ↗ national Community Survey results in an

2:38:12 ↗ update on fire services and facility

2:38:14 ↗ needs we do have an executive session

2:38:18 ↗ this evening

2:38:19 ↗ so as earlier announced there will be

2:38:21 ↗ executive session to discuss

2:38:23 ↗ qualifications of an applicant for

2:38:25 ↗ public employment / RCW 42.3 0.11 o / n

2:38:29 ↗ mon / ng this item is expected to last

2:38:31 ↗ 15 minutes and no action is expected to

2:38:34 ↗ follow an open session will now recess

2:38:36 ↗ into executive session at 9:39

2:38:53 ↗ 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 (7)

Mariah Bettise (arrived at 6:32 PM) Mary Lou Pauly, Mayor

Stacy Goodman

Victoria Hunt

Tola Marts

Chris Reh

Lindsey Walsh

Paul Winterstein