Environmental Board · Wednesday, May 10, 2023 · City Council Digest

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of April 12, 2023

packet pp.3–4

Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 04-12-23 Environmental Board Minutes Page [1] CITY OF ISSAQUAH Environmental Board 6:30 PM Tibbetts Manor, 750 17th Ave. April 12, 2023 MINUTES NW, Issaquah

4. AGENDA ITEMS

Board Member Introductions

Information · Stacy Vynne McKinstry, Sustainability Manager and Board Liaison

▶ Watch from 8:02

Board Chair and Vice Chair Elections

Action · Jamie Finch, Board Chair · packet pp.5–57

▶ Watch from 13:02 Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

Draft CIP: Focus on Environment MAY 10, 2023 ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD

Capital Improvement Plan Criteria Review (D)

Andrea Snyder, Deputy City Administrator · packet pp.59–67

Topics: Budget

▶ Watch from 18:02 Open packet at p.59 ↗

Staff report:

Office of Sustainability 130 E Sunset Way | P.O. Box 1307 Issaquah, WA 98027 issaquahwa.gov

Sustainable Purchasing Policy

Discussion · David Reedy, Sustainability Coordinator

Topics: Climate

▶ Watch from 23:02

5. REPORTS

Climate Action Plan Update

packet pp.69–75

Topics: Climate

Previously discussed: City Council Regular Meeting · Dec 6, 2021

Open packet at p.69 ↗

Staff report:

Update the City Council on implementation of the Climate Action Plan. Staff last provided an implementation update to Council in October 2022.

6. OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS

Board Schedule

packet pp.77–80

Open packet at p.77 ↗

Staff report:

additional offerings under the Community Energy Efficient Program grant;

3882 segments .txt ↗

0:02 ↗ foreign

0:11 ↗ welcome to the May 10th meeting of the

0:13 ↗ spa environmental board I'm Jamie Finch

0:15 ↗ and I'll be your chair tonight

0:17 ↗ um due to the hybrid nature of this

0:19 ↗ meeting we will have some members

0:20 ↗ attending and personalized by computer

0:22 ↗ or phone for those that are attending

0:24 ↗ remotely please make sure that you're

0:26 ↗ muted if you're not speaking raise

0:29 ↗ would like to speak or message Stacy

0:32 ↗ will do our best

0:34 ↗ and if we fail to recognize you just

0:37 ↗ unmute and start talking so that we do

0:39 ↗ happen to mess you up on the screen

0:42 ↗ um for those attending in person as we

0:45 ↗ always do actually this is probably good

0:47 ↗ with some new members

0:48 ↗ um one if someone in person has a desire

0:51 ↗ to speak just tip your name card like

0:53 ↗ this and then I'll call on you

0:56 ↗ um coming in order generally of their

1:00 ↗ hand us that's your liberal or in-person

1:03 ↗ raising period so

1:05 ↗ um let's see anything else on that I

1:08 ↗ think on on topics of note we'll um try

1:12 ↗ to summarize

1:13 ↗ the general consensus

1:16 ↗ topic and then

1:18 ↗ disagreement or additions to

1:21 ↗ the summary

1:25 ↗ about reading notes I think uh from

1:28 ↗ there Stacy you want to take us through

1:30 ↗ 10 minutes

1:32 ↗ uh Tommy Anderson yeah

1:37 ↗ Jamie James

1:47 ↗ here great thanks session

1:50 ↗ uh Ashwin manaharan

1:54 ↗ Don McWilliams

1:56 ↗ and Newcomb here Janet wall here

2:02 ↗ welcome to praj and Ashland the first uh

2:07 ↗ oh enjoy yeah

2:11 ↗ welcome to your first uh environment

2:14 ↗ we'll be excited to have you

2:16 ↗ um I think from there we will go through

2:20 ↗ minutes did anyone have any comments on

2:22 ↗ the minutes

2:23 ↗ that were included it

2:30 ↗ during the none those are approved as

2:33 ↗ presented and then I think from there

2:36 ↗ we'll move into public comment I know we

2:37 ↗ have

2:38 ↗ at least one person that would like to

2:40 ↗ speak Connie and then may have others so

2:43 ↗ I'll just go through some quick

2:44 ↗ guidelines

2:45 ↗ if remote please raise your virtual hand

2:48 ↗ and indicate your desire to speak

2:50 ↗ uh if you're on the phone press star

2:51 ↗ three please try to limit your comment

2:54 ↗ five minutes obviously it's been a

2:56 ↗ really important part of the process and

2:58 ↗ we value like joining us here so I think

3:02 ↗ from there Stacy I'll let you run

3:04 ↗ through public comment I think I know we

3:06 ↗ have one person but you know if there's

3:08 ↗ any others yep we received some uh

3:10 ↗ written comments from coming Rush on cfp

3:12 ↗ criteria

3:14 ↗ and I believe that she would like to

3:15 ↗ speak

3:16 ↗ um I don't believe our other public have

3:18 ↗ indicated interests me

3:20 ↗ is there in the talk

3:23 ↗ um

3:24 ↗ so

3:25 ↗ I don't exactly know where to go

3:27 ↗ apparently you've come up here

3:33 ↗ and

3:35 ↗ face the camera you can face

3:40 ↗ really how exciting uh Connie merch the

3:45 ↗ van squawk and

3:47 ↗ I guess my theme for the since the last

3:51 ↗ meeting has been

3:54 ↗ generally

3:55 ↗ reuse buildings

3:58 ↗ and

4:01 ↗ the question of

4:04 ↗ the climate and

4:06 ↗ environmental decision making that comes

4:10 ↗ with whether to tear something down and

4:14 ↗ build something new or reuse the

4:16 ↗ building and make it as efficient as

4:19 ↗ possible I was at the council Retreat

4:22 ↗ and one council member

4:24 ↗ said very plainly that it was better for

4:28 ↗ the environment to tear the buildings

4:29 ↗ down because the new buildings were more

4:32 ↗ efficient I think he was talking about

4:34 ↗ housing

4:35 ↗ and

4:37 ↗ um

4:38 ↗ then I was talking to a historical

4:41 ↗ preservationist for King County

4:43 ↗ who lost it at that concept absolutely

4:47 ↗ not that's crazy talk

4:50 ↗ so uh in our CIP

4:55 ↗ you have the list of projects that you

4:58 ↗ were provided and then simultaneously

5:00 ↗ for city council they are discussing

5:04 ↗ um basically moving a fire station over

5:07 ↗ to the state park into critical area

5:11 ↗ buffer whether to lease a used building

5:14 ↗ build a new building

5:17 ↗ and um those things are going into this

5:20 ↗ CIP that the Committees are discussing

5:23 ↗ that I can see looks like the council is

5:25 ↗ going to make a decision and then it's

5:27 ↗ going to be put into the CIP so I I'm

5:31 ↗ having a hard time

5:32 ↗ understanding the Environmental

5:35 ↗ criteria and how they affect some of the

5:38 ↗ projects that the city is looking at as

5:41 ↗ the environmental standard for that

5:43 ↗ those that big huge and those are big is

5:47 ↗ that it's uh the buildings are lead

5:49 ↗ Platinum

5:51 ↗ so the question is can you make a used

5:53 ↗ building lead platinum or do you have to

5:56 ↗ start a new and I don't really

5:58 ↗ understand any of this and so that's why

6:00 ↗ I started sending you a little bit of

6:02 ↗ information because

6:04 ↗ it seems like we should be making

6:05 ↗ educated decisions when you're talking

6:08 ↗ up tearing down and reusing buildings

6:10 ↗ Etc and then another one of these

6:12 ↗ projects is our historic eckhouse and

6:15 ↗ Confluence Park which the original

6:17 ↗ decision was made to basically tear down

6:20 ↗ all but one wall and make a Christmas

6:22 ↗ Christmas shelter picnic another picnic

6:24 ↗ shelter but now that has seemingly

6:28 ↗ changed so it's not what's written in

6:31 ↗ your CIP it has changed yet again and so

6:34 ↗ it looks like they're going to

6:37 ↗ um make a a plaza and a shelter in the

6:40 ↗ back and it's on future date restore the

6:42 ↗ building so my concern with that is yeah

6:46 ↗ yeah historic that's good environmental

6:49 ↗ we want to make it great but the CIP

6:52 ↗ that you're looking at may or may not

6:54 ↗ have accurate descriptions of all the

6:56 ↗ projects

6:58 ↗ for your decision making and so feeding

7:02 ↗ all of this confusion into your brains

7:06 ↗ may help get all the confusion out of my

7:09 ↗ brain into people who've been actually

7:12 ↗ opine intelligently on whether we want

7:16 ↗ to reuse when you want to actually build

7:19 ↗ and how these criteria should be

7:21 ↗ reflected in our Capital Improvement

7:23 ↗ plans and

7:25 ↗ future Capital Improvement and

7:29 ↗ items so I'm not sure if that was at all

7:33 ↗ coherent so not if you get a gist of

7:37 ↗ anything that I am saying okay awesome

7:40 ↗ thank you sorry you had to my brain

7:51 ↗ I'll find that I don't think no no yeah

7:54 ↗ no public online no one else has

7:55 ↗ indicated

7:57 ↗ all right well then I think we will

8:00 ↗ conclude public comment and move into

8:02 ↗ our agenda items uh and the first one

8:05 ↗ being board member introductions

8:08 ↗ great so with three new board members as

8:11 ↗ we did last year we wanted to just do a

8:13 ↗ quick around the table introduction just

8:16 ↗ very quick uh background your interest

8:19 ↗ areas and how long you've been um

8:23 ↗ we can start with and

8:27 ↗ hey so companies in Newcomb I've been on

8:31 ↗ the board since it started and just

8:35 ↗ really enjoying it I've lived in

8:37 ↗ Issaquah since 1984. and and I've been

8:41 ↗ active with the issaquahics trails club

8:43 ↗ with calm and currently the president

8:47 ↗ and she's really passionate about

8:50 ↗ climate change

8:51 ↗ helping out with that

8:54 ↗ welcome man nice to meet you too

8:59 ↗ welcome welcome

9:03 ↗ um hi everybody I am praj my name is

9:10 ↗ area for like 18 years

9:14 ↗ um I am an environmental engineer by

9:16 ↗ education and now I'm a business manager

9:19 ↗ by occupation I have experience in

9:22 ↗ environmental Consulting as well as

9:24 ↗ software Consulting I am passionate

9:27 ↗ about Environmental Education and

9:29 ↗ sustainability primarily

9:31 ↗ um I did learn quite a bit of you know

9:33 ↗ just on the side stem fair events

9:36 ↗ environmental booths sustainability

9:38 ↗ goods for kids education in schools

9:42 ↗ um I was a chair in Discovery for like

9:45 ↗ four or five years so we ran

9:47 ↗ environmental booths or environmental

9:49 ↗ activities birthday activities and I I

9:51 ↗ really enjoy doing that actually doing

9:53 ↗ their

9:55 ↗ then I'm really excited to be a part of

9:57 ↗ the environment to board and actually do

9:59 ↗ something you know to be an active

10:02 ↗ participant or something which means

10:04 ↗ so thank you for that

10:08 ↗ I'm Jamie I've been in Issaquah four

10:11 ↗ years and I've spent a part of the

10:13 ↗ environmental board since it started as

10:15 ↗ well

10:16 ↗ um it has been a great I didn't have a

10:20 ↗ lot of background in any of these topics

10:22 ↗ before the Environmental Group so it's

10:24 ↗ been great I've certainly had passion

10:25 ↗ but I didn't have a lot of background or

10:28 ↗ knowledge so it's been cool to learn

10:30 ↗ both the natural environment side of

10:31 ↗ things this client climate side of

10:33 ↗ things I think I'm particularly passing

10:35 ↗ on the climate side but also

10:38 ↗ um

10:38 ↗ really been a lot of seeing the kind of

10:41 ↗ history of of conservation around this

10:45 ↗ quality kind of goes into our DNA so

10:46 ↗ that was what originally inspired me to

10:48 ↗ get involved so

10:50 ↗ um I I now actually work in

10:53 ↗ fairly recently in climate Tech so I've

10:55 ↗ been able to figure out a way to move my

10:57 ↗ occupation a little bit closer to what

10:59 ↗ I'm doing here and what I'm passionate

11:00 ↗ about so that's been

11:02 ↗ a great uh

11:07 ↗ so yeah great uh welcome everyone

11:11 ↗ foreign

11:14 ↗ also since it started my education is

11:17 ↗ environmental science I worked in

11:18 ↗ forestry storm water water quality over

11:22 ↗ the years I currently worked for a

11:24 ↗ neighborhood municipality and I live

11:27 ↗ just outside of Issaquah see my address

11:30 ↗ it's in Preston

11:31 ↗ um

11:32 ↗ yeah my

11:34 ↗ Sports has been great

11:36 ↗ really impressed with

11:37 ↗ how Forward Thinking is about

11:40 ↗ tomorrow so it's great to see

11:48 ↗ since 79 and professionally I'm a

11:52 ↗ medical device software engineer but I'm

11:55 ↗ retired and so I can turn my attention

11:57 ↗ to other things like be on an

12:00 ↗ environmental board

12:02 ↗ so I I've been involved with the school

12:04 ↗ Ops Trails club with Ann as a unborn

12:08 ↗ passport members like leader and uh

12:12 ↗ things like that is quite History Museum

12:15 ↗ as well I have a family history in the

12:17 ↗ area so that's a thing of interest to me

12:20 ↗ so how that couples in here with the

12:22 ↗ board when we talk about uh the the CIP

12:24 ↗ and and other things well the local

12:28 ↗ history is a cultural resource that

12:32 ↗ enriches our our life here in the oldest

12:35 ↗ qua so that's something that is of

12:37 ↗ interest to me the interconnecting of

12:39 ↗ regional trails to the trails of these

12:42 ↗ fly Alps is an amenity that also

12:45 ↗ enriches our life for everyone who lives

12:48 ↗ here and those are some of the aspects

12:51 ↗ that I I am particularly passionate

12:54 ↗ about

12:57 ↗ uh good evening I'm Joy I have been in

13:00 ↗ Issaquah since 2012 and was in Sammamish

13:02 ↗ for a bit before that before I was in

13:05 ↗ Redmond and uh by way of Washington DC

13:07 ↗ uh where I went to school and I would

13:09 ↗ say my passion is regarding water my

13:12 ↗ thesis was in environmental security

13:14 ↗ regarding how climate change impacts the

13:17 ↗ security of the nation-state and I may

13:21 ↗ be familiar because I've served the last

13:22 ↗ eight years on the planning policy

13:24 ↗ commission and I also served three years

13:26 ↗ on the ubdc and I'm proud that I was a

13:29 ↗ part of both the sun setting of the

13:31 ↗ rivers and streams and the formation of

13:33 ↗ this board as well as the climate action

13:34 ↗ plan

13:37 ↗ Janet wall I'm a retired fishery

13:40 ↗ biologist I worked for a number of years

13:43 ↗ with the national fishery service

13:46 ↗ most of it for the Observer program

13:49 ↗ putting observers out on vessels fishing

13:52 ↗ 200 miles

13:55 ↗ and um

13:58 ↗ when I came to this guava well I've been

14:01 ↗ a member of the river and streams

14:06 ↗ of this

14:09 ↗ and I also do a lot of restoration

14:12 ↗ around the city especially getting rid

14:15 ↗ of tansy ragmart

14:17 ↗ and uh working on restoring our local

14:20 ↗ park

14:25 ↗ okay so introduce yourself later

14:27 ↗ all right um Ashlyn do you want to go

14:30 ↗ ahead

14:30 ↗ of yourself

14:34 ↗ yeah so my name is Ashwin I've lived in

14:36 ↗ the Issaquah area for 16 years since I

14:39 ↗ was born I'm very passionate about

14:41 ↗ sustainability and environmental law and

14:43 ↗ I can't wait to meet and work with

14:45 ↗ everyone

14:49 ↗ I'm sashlin

14:51 ↗ um and I think most of you know me Stacy

14:52 ↗ that my history the city's

14:54 ↗ sustainability manager primarily focused

14:57 ↗ on employing the climate action plan and

14:59 ↗ then also the staff liaison to the board

15:03 ↗ um

15:04 ↗ very quick background I've worked for

15:06 ↗ the state and salmon recovery for about

15:08 ↗ the last 10 years to declare my

15:09 ↗ adaptation and work previously and have

15:13 ↗ been living in Issaquah just across from

15:16 ↗ Tibbetts for about the last six years

15:20 ↗ uh my name is David Reedy I'm the

15:23 ↗ sustainability coordinator new to the

15:25 ↗ city I started at the beginning of

15:27 ↗ January

15:28 ↗ um so Stacy on the board or with the

15:31 ↗ board and then um implementing the

15:33 ↗ climate action plan my focus is

15:36 ↗ generally on more of the municipal

15:38 ↗ operations

15:40 ↗ um projects and work that we're doing my

15:43 ↗ background is on a smattering of

15:45 ↗ Environmental

15:46 ↗ areas including Environmental Education

15:49 ↗ some solar Urban sustainability work so

15:53 ↗ kind of done a little mix of

15:55 ↗ many things

15:58 ↗ um and I have one question for board

16:00 ↗ members but we're handing it back over

16:02 ↗ to Jamie last year there was interest in

16:04 ↗ developing a roster that included phone

16:06 ↗ numbers that was only shared in the

16:08 ↗ environmental board

16:10 ↗ um so I think there's interest in doing

16:12 ↗ that again if anyone has any concerns

16:15 ↗ with their phone number being included

16:17 ↗ on that and I think just let me know

16:19 ↗ otherwise I'll plan to distribute

16:22 ↗ and I'll send out a reminder

16:27 ↗ thank you Stacey

16:29 ↗ all right with that I think we will move

16:31 ↗ to our next agenda item which is the

16:35 ↗ board chair and vice chair elections and

16:37 ↗ just give everyone a sense of how this

16:39 ↗ will work I will first call for

16:41 ↗ nominations

16:42 ↗ um

16:43 ↗ once everyone has that had a chance I

16:46 ↗ will close nominations uh if there are

16:49 ↗ multiple candidates there will be a

16:51 ↗ discussion period

16:53 ↗ um and then a vote there's only one

16:55 ↗ nominee that person by default will be

16:58 ↗ we won't go through it a voting process

17:00 ↗ that person by default will be elected

17:04 ↗ um

17:05 ↗ and then yes there's a vote obviously

17:07 ↗ the one that sees the majority of the

17:10 ↗ votes will be elected and I think

17:12 ↗ abstaining like typically would would be

17:14 ↗ a actually I don't know if that

17:17 ↗ I don't know if that applies here

17:20 ↗ um I think one thing to clarify if

17:21 ↗ there's more than one candidate and you

17:23 ↗ want to vote for someone there's

17:25 ↗ multiple people that are in that

17:28 ↗ election you have to say no to the

17:31 ↗ people that are not uh but that's

17:34 ↗ actually you have to say no to the other

17:36 ↗ people and yes it's only your candidate

17:40 ↗ so

17:41 ↗ um I think with that I don't know if

17:43 ↗ Stacy doesn't

17:44 ↗ any before we go into

17:46 ↗ um I think first we will go any

17:48 ↗ nominations for chair so floor's open

17:52 ↗ please indicated

17:53 ↗ activation

17:58 ↗ I can't remember what you guys said

18:00 ↗ about if you wanted to carry on or not

18:05 ↗ I don't see if there's any volunteers

18:11 ↗ how about you Jamie

18:13 ↗ I think that's what we both talked about

18:16 ↗ you're happy either way yeah

18:20 ↗ I nominate um

18:23 ↗ I nominate Jamie

18:26 ↗ Mr chair

18:28 ↗ I

18:31 ↗ thought this is something they only do

18:32 ↗ once a year

18:35 ↗ is there a second

18:37 ↗ that

18:41 ↗ second instance I'm trying to check

18:46 ↗ I actually don't know if you need to

18:47 ↗ know a second

18:52 ↗ I don't think we actually need a second

18:53 ↗ but

18:54 ↗ have a second if you need to see that we

18:57 ↗ have that any other nominations

19:04 ↗ that I guess

19:07 ↗ thank you

19:11 ↗ um

19:12 ↗ next up we will have any nominations for

19:15 ↗ the vice chair position

19:22 ↗ I nominate Julie I am a non-voting

19:26 ↗ member so I don't believe I can hold the

19:27 ↗ position okay I'm I'm honored

19:33 ↗ um

19:42 ↗ any other nominations

19:51 ↗ together again

19:55 ↗ all right well I think uh

19:58 ↗ that will end that agenda item and now

20:01 ↗ unless they see that anything else

20:03 ↗ needed there no okay

20:07 ↗ so the next item that we have is the

20:09 ↗ capital Improvement plan criteria review

20:13 ↗ um presented by Andrea

20:17 ↗ thank you very much

20:19 ↗ me pull up

20:21 ↗ presentation real quick

20:25 ↗ I need to work

20:31 ↗ as I hold my breath and wonder why we're

20:33 ↗ just seeing a blank screen

20:37 ↗ just signed off oh my god of course he

20:40 ↗ did

20:42 ↗ let me give it one old additional

20:52 ↗ oh

21:00 ↗ you can say it worked on my screen

21:01 ↗ before

21:06 ↗ it it works for me so interesting

21:11 ↗ okay we'll we'll roll with that thank

21:13 ↗ you David yeah I don't no it's gone yeah

21:18 ↗ I'm sorry I stopped sharing

21:20 ↗ it because you're doing this okay well

21:24 ↗ fine thank you so much because

21:26 ↗ apparently my computer's rebelling too

21:28 ↗ many too many meetings and presentations

21:30 ↗ it's a Smalling arrest

21:33 ↗ um but I'm Andrea Snyder I am the deputy

21:36 ↗ City administrator uh with me here is

21:39 ↗ Susie monsell our budget manager

21:41 ↗ uh you all had the opportunity to do

21:43 ↗ some introduction so let me spend a

21:45 ↗ little bit more time introducing myself

21:47 ↗ uh I've been with uh the city for a

21:50 ↗ total of nine years now I've been in

21:52 ↗ this world for four years and some of my

21:55 ↗ responsibilities include

21:57 ↗ um oversight of long uh term Capital

22:01 ↗ planning so infrastructure planning and

22:05 ↗ um and the city as you know has a

22:07 ↗ strategic plan that has a couple of

22:09 ↗ goals one of those goals is

22:11 ↗ transportation and mobility and another

22:12 ↗ goal is infrastructure and I oversee

22:15 ↗ those two goals I also have

22:17 ↗ responsibilities overseeing Public Works

22:19 ↗ and Community planning and development

22:22 ↗ I started off the city uh in Economic

22:25 ↗ Development and

22:27 ↗ um but have since changed roles so

22:29 ↗ that's that's some of my background uh

22:31 ↗ Susie's been with us slightly less time

22:34 ↗ four years four years

22:37 ↗ uh and and is our budget manager

22:40 ↗ extraordinaire and helped build this CIP

22:42 ↗ or Capital Improvement plan

22:45 ↗ where are we all having difficulties

22:47 ↗ nope you're gonna be good

22:53 ↗ there we are great okay thank you for

22:57 ↗ that

22:58 ↗ um so

22:59 ↗ we're here tonight to discuss the CIP

23:01 ↗ which is our Capital Improvement plan

23:03 ↗ that is our infrastructure plan of what

23:06 ↗ types of infrastructure the city is

23:08 ↗ going to be building and prioritizing

23:10 ↗ designing over the next six years so

23:13 ↗ this takes us from 2024 to 2029.

23:17 ↗ and the last that we talked

23:20 ↗ um with this board was actually a part

23:22 ↗ of a board Summit we had four Boards of

23:25 ↗ the city advisory boards come together

23:27 ↗ back in February uh that included the

23:30 ↗ equity Board of course the environmental

23:32 ↗ board the transportation Advisory Board

23:34 ↗ and uh the uh Park Board and we talked

23:39 ↗ about what criteria we wanted to use to

23:42 ↗ evaluate projects that would go into the

23:45 ↗ CIP the city had criteria before but we

23:48 ↗ know we wanted to make some changes and

23:50 ↗ so that was the last time we all talked

23:52 ↗ you're going to hear me reference

23:53 ↗ um those meetings and the feedback that

23:55 ↗ was provided at that time so welcome to

23:57 ↗ the new members if I get ahead of you

23:59 ↗ and you don't know what I'm talking

24:00 ↗ about with acronyms or you're like I

24:02 ↗ wasn't at that meeting what are you say

24:04 ↗ just please raise your hand or flip your

24:06 ↗ placard or whatever let me know um if

24:08 ↗ you have questions as we move along in

24:10 ↗ the presentation

24:11 ↗ great next slide please thank you so

24:15 ↗ topics we'll be covering today first

24:17 ↗ um I'm going to go over what types of

24:19 ↗ feedback we're looking from you today

24:20 ↗ hopefully you had a chance to review

24:22 ↗ that in your packet in advance of today

24:24 ↗ if not we'll go over that so you know

24:26 ↗ kind of what questions you might have

24:28 ↗ along the way what we're asking of you

24:29 ↗ and then um we'll go into a little bit

24:32 ↗ more background on the CIP or Capital

24:34 ↗ Improvement plan process and how we got

24:36 ↗ here today and then I'm going to give an

24:39 ↗ overview of what is in the CIP and how

24:43 ↗ it

24:44 ↗ um those projects kind of measured up

24:46 ↗ against especially the environmental

24:48 ↗ benefits and climate resiliency criteria

24:51 ↗ that we have

24:52 ↗ then I look for your feedback and

24:54 ↗ discussion we can also talk about next

24:56 ↗ steps and where this goes from here

24:58 ↗ so that's uh the agenda for this evening

25:00 ↗ the purpose of the direction needed what

25:03 ↗ we're hoping to get from you tonight is

25:04 ↗ feedback on how the criteria will apply

25:07 ↗ so we have these new criteria you really

25:09 ↗ helped shape the criteria especially the

25:12 ↗ environmental benefit and climate

25:14 ↗ resiliency criteria so in looking at all

25:17 ↗ of that were there any surprises for

25:19 ↗ what is within that six-year plan

25:22 ↗ um were the criteria applied correctly

25:24 ↗ or did we miss something big we're going

25:26 ↗ to be talking about uh interpretations

25:29 ↗ of the criteria and we want to know you

25:31 ↗ know are we doing it right what did we

25:33 ↗ miss give us feedback and then if we

25:36 ↗ were to use this same criteria again

25:37 ↗ especially focusing on the climate

25:40 ↗ resiliency and environmental benefit

25:41 ↗ criteria what changes should we consider

25:45 ↗ if we were to do this again in the

25:46 ↗ future

25:47 ↗ so that's the general uh general

25:50 ↗ direction and feedback we'd like from

25:52 ↗ you tonight

25:54 ↗ thank you so as we begin this background

25:57 ↗ and overview of the CIP just a reminder

26:00 ↗ the cfp is a planning document it's not

26:02 ↗ a budget and so

26:05 ↗ um and so what that means is that it's

26:07 ↗ still subject to changes

26:09 ↗ um it's we try to assign some dollar

26:12 ↗ figures to it we try to figure out where

26:13 ↗ the revenue is going to come from to pay

26:15 ↗ for all of it but it's still very much

26:17 ↗ just a plan and we'll talk a little bit

26:20 ↗ more about that in the next slide

26:24 ↗ so this graphic which some of you may

26:26 ↗ remember from our February meeting

26:29 ↗ really talks about the capital planning

26:32 ↗ process as a funnel and so we start with

26:36 ↗ this 20-year or plus picture of this

26:39 ↗ Grand Master plans we have a Mobility

26:41 ↗ master plan which talks about how we're

26:43 ↗ going to be planning for transportation

26:45 ↗ in the future we have our icap of

26:47 ↗ particular interest to this group who

26:49 ↗ helped us form our Issaquah climate

26:51 ↗ action plan and so these larger big

26:54 ↗ picture plans they set the vision they

26:55 ↗ set policy and they also typically

26:58 ↗ suggest infrastructure that we should be

27:01 ↗ building and so the icap mentions types

27:03 ↗ of infrastructure Investments and how we

27:05 ↗ should think about our infrastructure

27:06 ↗ the um other examples of this are a park

27:09 ↗ strategic plan which tell us where

27:11 ↗ should we be focusing our our um

27:13 ↗ investments in Parks right so we get

27:16 ↗ these we do these big Master plans we

27:19 ↗ have a lot of community involvement in

27:21 ↗ forming those and we set the vision and

27:23 ↗ there's tons and tons of projects that

27:25 ↗ we suggest in these plans the next step

27:27 ↗ is the step that we're in right now

27:29 ↗ which is this middle trapezoid of a

27:32 ↗ light green color six-year CIP so we

27:36 ↗ take the information that we got from

27:37 ↗ all those different Master plans across

27:39 ↗ the city and we figure out what are we

27:41 ↗ going to do over the next six years

27:43 ↗ um because we can't do it all at once

27:45 ↗ unfortunately

27:46 ↗ and so

27:48 ↗ um so we go through a prioritization

27:49 ↗ process and say okay what what can we

27:51 ↗ realistically accomplish what should we

27:53 ↗ accomplish that's where we use those

27:55 ↗ criteria that we're going to discuss

27:56 ↗ more in depth in a little bit

27:59 ↗ um and come up with a plan

28:01 ↗ then we use that plan as we go further

28:06 ↗ down in this funnel to figure out which

28:08 ↗ of those projects can we realistically

28:10 ↗ do within our two-year budget our budget

28:13 ↗ covers two years and so we at that time

28:16 ↗ we have a better idea of what our

28:18 ↗ revenues are going to be we have a

28:20 ↗ better idea of what our staffing

28:21 ↗ capacity is going to be and what we can

28:23 ↗ realistically accomplish so we take that

28:25 ↗ plan and the budget is helping us put it

28:27 ↗ more into action and Implement

28:30 ↗ um the the sixth year CIP and then we

28:33 ↗ get to that funded Capital project where

28:36 ↗ we can now begin to do the work and add

28:38 ↗ it to our work plans once that budget's

28:40 ↗ adopted so again we're in that middle

28:42 ↗ box on this graphic right here that's

28:45 ↗ the stuff that we're in so as we talk

28:47 ↗ about criteria as we talk about how to

28:50 ↗ make sure that we are thinking about our

28:53 ↗ environmental values uh this is one step

28:56 ↗ in the process this is not the whole

28:59 ↗ process right tonight is just one step

29:02 ↗ the forming of the CIP is one step we

29:04 ↗ want to be thinking about environmental

29:06 ↗ sustainability every step of the way

29:09 ↗ um as we go through this funnel in this

29:11 ↗ process

29:13 ↗ um I may have missed this but I just

29:16 ↗ wanted to check when you talk about

29:17 ↗ environmental benefits or climate

29:20 ↗ resiliency

29:22 ↗ um are those actually you know any kind

29:25 ↗ of carbon credits or like incentives

29:28 ↗ given to the development projects or are

29:30 ↗ these planning and policy changes we are

29:35 ↗ um these are more policy changes and

29:37 ↗ we're going to get more into definitions

29:39 ↗ of what we mean by that in a little bit

29:42 ↗ um we also uh have more of that

29:44 ↗ information in the packet that was

29:46 ↗ prepared tonight but we'll be we'll be

29:47 ↗ talking that about that a little bit

29:49 ↗ more and this is all related to we talk

29:51 ↗ about Capital planning it means our

29:53 ↗ infrastructure so it means building a

29:56 ↗ road

29:57 ↗ uh fixing a bridge uh uh maintaining a

30:01 ↗ new uh maintaining a path on a or a

30:05 ↗ trails in a park it means building a new

30:08 ↗ fire station so we talk about Capital

30:10 ↗ assets Capital planning that's what

30:12 ↗ we're referring to not programs not

30:14 ↗ Services we're really talking about

30:17 ↗ infrastructure so these are actually all

30:20 ↗ City projects so that is correct not

30:22 ↗ private development projects yep good

30:25 ↗ questions good questions and we had a

30:27 ↗ question for you and you can cover this

30:29 ↗ later if you're going to get into this

30:31 ↗ um we've talked a lot about the criteria

30:33 ↗ for the CIP

30:35 ↗ I don't know if we've talked as much as

30:37 ↗ how that gets applied to what ends up in

30:39 ↗ a two-year budget yeah so that can

30:43 ↗ either be now or if you plan to get

30:44 ↗ there would be interested in how

30:47 ↗ one thing to be in the CIP which is a

30:49 ↗ planning document another what actually

30:50 ↗ ends up in the budget so be curious how

30:54 ↗ City sees kind of these criteria being

30:56 ↗ used as part of that kind of promotion

30:58 ↗ to the actual budget yeah uh the the

31:02 ↗ answer uh is not really

31:05 ↗ um so so we use the criteria for the CIP

31:09 ↗ and then in the in the CIP if you were

31:11 ↗ to read it you would see that it says

31:13 ↗ okay in 2023 we're going to design this

31:17 ↗ park or in 2023 we're going to build

31:20 ↗ this sidewalk

31:22 ↗ and uh and it'll say you know 20 or 2024

31:27 ↗ will do those things and then we go to

31:29 ↗ form the budget we see it in the CIP

31:31 ↗ lined up for those years and we go okay

31:34 ↗ um we anticipated having

31:36 ↗ a certain amount of Revenue do we still

31:38 ↗ have that same amount of Revenue uh if

31:41 ↗ so then sometimes there is a direct

31:43 ↗ translation that we take it out of the

31:46 ↗ year that it's planned for in the cop

31:48 ↗ and we just put it right into the budget

31:50 ↗ um Susie loves those days when it's all

31:52 ↗ that easy uh it gets a little bit more

31:55 ↗ complicated when something else happens

31:56 ↗ let's take Northwest Sammamish

31:58 ↗ non-motorized improvements it's a bike

31:59 ↗ lane and pedestrian

32:02 ↗ um a facility that's going to happen on

32:03 ↗ Northwest Sammamish Road South of uh

32:06 ↗ self and

32:08 ↗ west of the park the state park

32:11 ↗ so what if we suddenly we may have that

32:15 ↗ planned for later years to build that

32:16 ↗ out unless it's just an example but what

32:19 ↗ if we competed for a grant we weren't

32:21 ↗ sure we were going to get it and all of

32:23 ↗ a sudden we have 10 million dollars

32:25 ↗ burning a hole in our pocket uh to help

32:28 ↗ us construct this well we might just

32:30 ↗ move it up instead of having it planned

32:32 ↗ for later years we might move it up

32:33 ↗ because we got we got the money now so

32:35 ↗ let's go right

32:37 ↗ um so there's different conditions that

32:40 ↗ affect what gets put how things move

32:44 ↗ from the CIP to the budget and it's

32:46 ↗ usually resource based

32:49 ↗ so whether we have the staff to do it

32:51 ↗ whether the global supply chain is

32:54 ↗ working in our favor whether

32:56 ↗ um whether we have the money to do it

32:58 ↗ so is it correct to say that like the

33:01 ↗ CIP which uses the criteria is kind of

33:03 ↗ the menu and then the reality of the

33:05 ↗ situation is then what you used to it's

33:08 ↗ still something that scmcip most like is

33:12 ↗ some anything that ever end up in the

33:13 ↗ budget that wasn't in the six year CIP

33:15 ↗ yes and those are usually under

33:19 ↗ um under I don't want to say extreme

33:22 ↗ circumstances but something could happen

33:24 ↗ that we haven't identified one of those

33:26 ↗ things could be all of a sudden a tree

33:29 ↗ fell on City Hall and now we need a new

33:32 ↗ roof for City Hall that wasn't in our

33:34 ↗ plan

33:35 ↗ but we certainly need a new roof so

33:37 ↗ we've got to pay

33:39 ↗ a paper or we could have a lot of the

33:42 ↗ community come to us and say you really

33:44 ↗ need to put in a new uh controlled

33:47 ↗ traffic intersection up at Providence

33:49 ↗ Point maybe that wasn't in our plan but

33:52 ↗ we had a lot of the community come to us

33:53 ↗ and say that's important you better put

33:55 ↗ that in your budget this year whether or

33:57 ↗ not it's in your six year plan or not

33:59 ↗ and so uh so we respond to those things

34:01 ↗ as well so sometimes things do get put

34:03 ↗ into the budget that we haven't put into

34:05 ↗ the plan that we maybe hadn't

34:06 ↗ anticipated and it's usually as a result

34:08 ↗ of uh Community input or something

34:13 ↗ urgent

34:14 ↗ we couldn't plan for it

34:17 ↗ one thought to add to that as well as a

34:20 ↗ plus one that we we do update the CIP

34:23 ↗ every other year so we alternate years

34:26 ↗ now where we build the CIP and then we

34:28 ↗ build a biennial budget so as we get new

34:31 ↗ information the CIP will always be based

34:33 ↗ on the best information that we have at

34:35 ↗ that moment

34:36 ↗ but as we get that new information as

34:38 ↗ time goes on we do update the CIP as

34:41 ↗ well so we really pay special attention

34:43 ↗ within the CIP to those early years in

34:45 ↗ particular because we know that that

34:47 ↗ will feed in to the next budget that we

34:49 ↗ build but we know that by the time we

34:51 ↗ get to you know the third fourth year

34:53 ↗ within the CIP we'll have another CIP

34:55 ↗ update by the time we get there before

34:57 ↗ it gets into a budget

34:59 ↗ it's a great plan it is a sixth a great

35:01 ↗ point it is a six-year plan that we

35:03 ↗ update every two years

35:06 ↗ so

35:08 ↗ any other questions about how a project

35:11 ↗ goes from concept to action Yes actually

35:14 ↗ I wanted to make a comma and see if you

35:16 ↗ wanted to cheers to it and to say that I

35:18 ↗ like to think of this sip as a living

35:20 ↗ and breathing document that's constantly

35:21 ↗ kind of molding we go back to it often

35:24 ↗ we're heading back to it so thinking

35:26 ↗ about it as a planning document that's

35:27 ↗ not very stagnant very fluid I think

35:30 ↗ might help thinking about yeah yeah I I

35:33 ↗ would say that's fair we have other

35:34 ↗ plans that we don't update with that

35:36 ↗ frequency right this is this is one that

35:38 ↗ we're constantly trying to

35:40 ↗ um trying to update and make sure that

35:42 ↗ we're planning for the right things

35:47 ↗ slide please thank you Stacy

35:50 ↗ uh so

35:52 ↗ as Susie said we do update this plan

35:55 ↗ every two years and so this year

35:58 ↗ um we have been thinking about this

36:00 ↗ update a little bit differently because

36:02 ↗ a lot of things have changed in the past

36:03 ↗ two years

36:05 ↗ um one of the things that have changed

36:07 ↗ uh that is of interest to the story we

36:10 ↗ now have the icap it's the climate

36:12 ↗ action plan that wasn't that didn't

36:14 ↗ fully exist the last time that we

36:16 ↗ updated the CIP so you're going to see a

36:18 ↗ lot of projects in the CIP that actually

36:21 ↗ help Implement icap and that refer to

36:24 ↗ icap and so that's a big change

36:27 ↗ um we also had the Capital Finance

36:29 ↗ Community task force Jamie knows this

36:32 ↗ task force very well because he helps

36:34 ↗ chair the task force and that was a task

36:36 ↗ force that was comprised of volunteers

36:38 ↗ like yourself some from City boards and

36:41 ↗ commission and some um just community

36:43 ↗ members at large who are appointed by

36:45 ↗ the mayor and that task force met and

36:48 ↗ took a look at our infrastructure needs

36:49 ↗ across the city so all types of

36:52 ↗ infrastructure whether it was facilities

36:54 ↗ Parks Transportation Etc and looked at

36:57 ↗ our the city's finances and how we raise

36:59 ↗ revenue and they came up with uh many

37:02 ↗ recommendations on what the city should

37:05 ↗ focus on moving forward how we should

37:07 ↗ make these Investments what we should be

37:09 ↗ thinking about so the Capital Finance

37:11 ↗ Community task force came out with many

37:13 ↗ recommendations uh these are just very

37:16 ↗ small number of the recommendations that

37:19 ↗ um

37:20 ↗ we weighed very heavily when we looked

37:24 ↗ at the CIP and drafted the CIP so they

37:26 ↗ recommended that the city do more to

37:28 ↗ invest in infrastructure overall and

37:31 ↗ that we would need to pursue new

37:33 ↗ revenues to make those investments in

37:35 ↗ infrastructure I felt like we weren't

37:37 ↗ really keeping up with our

37:38 ↗ infrastructure Investments with the

37:40 ↗ needs of the community and they felt

37:42 ↗ like we

37:43 ↗ um we needed to get more Revenue in

37:46 ↗ order to make those Investments that we

37:48 ↗ didn't have the revenue on hand we

37:49 ↗ couldn't just cut a program really

37:51 ↗ easily and invest that into something

37:53 ↗ else

37:55 ↗ the task force also stated that mobility

37:58 ↗ and transportation was the first

38:00 ↗ priority so as you look across these

38:03 ↗ types of infrastructure we have Parks

38:05 ↗ Trails Transportation

38:08 ↗ facilities

38:09 ↗ sewer water that um that Transportation

38:14 ↗ Mobility was really the first priority

38:15 ↗ and the first thing we should focus on

38:16 ↗ because every couple years we do these

38:19 ↗ Community surveys and the community has

38:21 ↗ said every year that transportation is

38:22 ↗ the number one thing that we need to be

38:24 ↗ improving in the city so that was

38:26 ↗ something that they had stated was the

38:28 ↗ first priority that we should try to

38:29 ↗ affect first

38:30 ↗ question and you had mentioned

38:34 ↗ um the the group said we needed more

38:37 ↗ infrastructure what kind of

38:39 ↗ infrastructure were they referring to

38:41 ↗ yeah uh so really in general it was all

38:46 ↗ types so this in the back of the CIP

38:49 ↗ there is a list of unfunded projects so

38:53 ↗ you know we had these Master plans that

38:56 ↗ suggest all these different types of

38:57 ↗ infrastructure when I say different

38:59 ↗ types the main categories are

39:01 ↗ transportation

39:03 ↗ Park and trail

39:05 ↗ uh facility so brick and mortar

39:08 ↗ buildings the city operates out of

39:10 ↗ um and Susie what am I forgetting

39:13 ↗ utilities

39:15 ↗ yes I.T and then utilities so water and

39:19 ↗ sewer and storm water

39:21 ↗ so those are the major types of

39:23 ↗ infrastructure the city builds and

39:24 ↗ provides

39:26 ↗ so

39:27 ↗ um

39:28 ↗ then

39:30 ↗ also the task force said that while

39:33 ↗ Transportation might be the first

39:35 ↗ priority of things that we should pay

39:36 ↗ attention to first when we're making

39:38 ↗ more infrastructure Investments parks

39:40 ↗ and trails and facilities are also

39:42 ↗ really important

39:43 ↗ and they wanted us to find

39:46 ↗ um to have the ability to invest more in

39:48 ↗ those types of infrastructure does that

39:50 ↗ answer your question and

39:51 ↗ okay yeah and I'll have more comments

39:53 ↗ about it later great great

39:56 ↗ okay so

39:58 ↗ um so that's some of the recommendations

40:00 ↗ there's many more uh if you have

40:02 ↗ questions and want to see that I'm happy

40:03 ↗ to connect you with their document but

40:05 ↗ we really took those things to heart

40:07 ↗ when we drafted this new CIP

40:10 ↗ um other changes since uh the last CIP

40:13 ↗ was adopted we also have new and

40:14 ↗ improved criteria and part of the reason

40:16 ↗ was well we have icap we have an Engaged

40:19 ↗ environmental board we need to be

40:20 ↗ rethinking some of the environmental

40:21 ↗ criteria we had in the past

40:23 ↗ uh we also have a new Equity board that

40:26 ↗ we did not have at all at the last CIP

40:28 ↗ update and we have an equity framework

40:30 ↗ for the city and so we wanted to be able

40:32 ↗ to include a new Equity criteria because

40:34 ↗ we hadn't considered that in the past

40:37 ↗ and we wanted to really raise the bar on

40:40 ↗ ourselves and before when we would use

40:43 ↗ criteria and evaluate our projects

40:44 ↗ against that criteria we would check the

40:46 ↗ box yes or no right does this does this

40:49 ↗ address anything for the environment yes

40:51 ↗ or no does this

40:53 ↗ um relate back to some of the community

40:55 ↗ priorities yes or no and what we wanted

40:58 ↗ to do is provide a little bit more

41:00 ↗ nuance and account for that nuance and

41:02 ↗ say but does this really further our

41:05 ↗ goals in this area or you know is it

41:07 ↗ detrimental to our girls so we have some

41:09 ↗ gradation there which is this red yellow

41:11 ↗ and green grading which you're going to

41:13 ↗ see in a little bit we're going to talk

41:14 ↗ a lot about that

41:15 ↗ um more it's also again linked to in

41:18 ↗ your packets the definitions of all the

41:20 ↗ criteria and these thresholds that what

41:22 ↗ defines red yellow and green

41:24 ↗ um all of that is an attachment in your

41:26 ↗ packet hopefully you've been able to

41:27 ↗ take a look at that

41:28 ↗ so this minute changes since the last AP

41:30 ↗ that we wanted to incorporate with this

41:32 ↗ update

41:34 ↗ it's just one question on the so

41:37 ↗ presumably like the next two years are

41:38 ↗ informed by what we think we'll have to

41:40 ↗ spend in the budget pretty closely our

41:42 ↗ years three through six

41:45 ↗ close are those like I know it's not a

41:48 ↗ commitment but are those close to what

41:49 ↗ we would expect or are they just kind of

41:52 ↗ whatever the projects when we schedule

41:53 ↗ them they like happen to yeah like is

41:56 ↗ that gonna do we think that we're gonna

41:58 ↗ be able to do all those or is that kind

41:59 ↗ of kind of we parked them out there

42:01 ↗ there's a couple of answers to that and

42:03 ↗ before Lucy let's see First Disney has

42:06 ↗ has uh it's there's some complicated

42:08 ↗ answers I think because it would be

42:10 ↗ great it would make it so much easier if

42:12 ↗ we could predict the future and

42:14 ↗ understand well we think we're going to

42:15 ↗ have this revenue and that Revenue the

42:17 ↗ world is unpredictable it's a little bit

42:19 ↗ more predictable next year than it is

42:21 ↗ four years out right and so

42:24 ↗ um so you've tried to make

42:27 ↗ um the first three years of the CIP

42:29 ↗ pretty true to reality

42:32 ↗ like really our best guesses with

42:34 ↗ Revenue right yes

42:37 ↗ um so for those first three years in

42:39 ↗ particular since they do tend to feed

42:41 ↗ into this next budget that we'll build

42:43 ↗ um you'll notice they are going to be

42:45 ↗ balanced between revenue and

42:47 ↗ expenditures

42:48 ↗ um once we get further out than that

42:51 ↗ the revenue picture gets a little

42:52 ↗ fuzzier but at the same time we also

42:54 ↗ want to make sure that we can fund the

42:56 ↗ things that we're anticipating within

42:58 ↗ those first three years and then when we

43:00 ↗ get to that next CIP update we'll take

43:02 ↗ another look at what available revenues

43:04 ↗ we have at that point and then program

43:06 ↗ that out for some projects we do well

43:09 ↗ for a lot of projects we have costs

43:11 ↗ anticipated in those final three years

43:13 ↗ without an identified Revenue source

43:15 ↗ that is uh it's a bit more aspirational

43:18 ↗ as we get further out but especially

43:21 ↗ those first three years we've done uh

43:24 ↗ quite a bit of work to make sure that

43:25 ↗ those are as realistic as possible based

43:28 ↗ on the revenue forecast we're looking at

43:31 ↗ and and the costs so we do try to adjust

43:34 ↗ for inflation of course inflation

43:36 ↗ changes and the past years have shown

43:39 ↗ that really well uh so and Global Supply

43:42 ↗ Chain is still something that we battle

43:44 ↗ with and trying to come up with

43:47 ↗ predictable costs

43:53 ↗ so we've been talking about the new

43:55 ↗ criteria uh here they are uh so some of

43:59 ↗ these were similar to what we've used in

44:02 ↗ the past but we've done a lot of

44:03 ↗ tweaking of them uh

44:06 ↗ refining of them so one of the criteria

44:10 ↗ legal mandate is it a legal mandate or

44:12 ↗ does it address life and safety concerns

44:14 ↗ is it a community priority as in

44:17 ↗ um is it within adopted plans that the

44:19 ↗ community has already informed us about

44:21 ↗ right is it in icamp is it in our Master

44:24 ↗ Mobility plan is it in our water systems

44:26 ↗ plan

44:28 ↗ um

44:28 ↗ does it contribute to overall community

44:30 ↗ livability and quality of life and this

44:33 ↗ was a criteria that we changed

44:34 ↗ significantly thanks to that board

44:36 ↗ Summit we had back in February the

44:38 ↗ boards came together and they said well

44:39 ↗ wait none of these criteria really

44:41 ↗ address overall why we all live here

44:42 ↗ which is the high quality of life

44:44 ↗ wanting to maintain that and so we tried

44:46 ↗ to address that with this change in

44:48 ↗ criteria another one is climate

44:50 ↗ resiliency or environmental benefit and

44:52 ↗ that was something that we heard from

44:54 ↗ this board last time uh that maybe we

44:56 ↗ should split this into two because what

44:58 ↗ may be good for climate may have

45:00 ↗ different impacts on habitat and how do

45:02 ↗ we incorporate all these concepts of

45:04 ↗ environmental sustainability into one

45:06 ↗ criteria it's incredibly complex

45:09 ↗ and uh

45:11 ↗ I hear you applying this criteria is

45:13 ↗ incredibly complex

45:15 ↗ um but we we wanted to keep it one

45:17 ↗ criteria because we also heard at the

45:19 ↗ same time that we don't want to have too

45:21 ↗ many criteria and so if we split things

45:24 ↗ apart and uh too much then we have so

45:27 ↗ many criteria it becomes a little bit

45:29 ↗ unwieldy so we've tried to really Define

45:31 ↗ that and address that in our definitions

45:33 ↗ again more of this stuff can be found in

45:35 ↗ your packet so I don't want to go too

45:37 ↗ much into depth of how that's defined

45:39 ↗ um but we we will actually talk a little

45:43 ↗ bit more about it later

45:44 ↗ um we also have an ability to deliver a

45:47 ↗ project so not just uh do we have fun

45:50 ↗ before it do we think we're going to get

45:51 ↗ a grant for it do we have the staff to

45:53 ↗ do this job but also how much control do

45:55 ↗ we have over the project

45:57 ↗ um if we want to build a sidewalk do we

46:00 ↗ have the right-of-way to build the

46:02 ↗ sidewalk in

46:03 ↗ or do we need to work with uh 22

46:06 ↗ Property Owners to acquire a

46:08 ↗ right-of-way uh so how how much in

46:10 ↗ control are we can we really deliver

46:12 ↗ this project in the timeline that we

46:14 ↗ think we will

46:16 ↗ um and then replacement or Capital

46:18 ↗ maintenance of existing infrastructure

46:20 ↗ we've also really heard from our city

46:21 ↗ council and others that we need to do a

46:24 ↗ better job investing and maintaining the

46:26 ↗ assets that we have assets again meaning

46:28 ↗ things like roads sidewalks Parks Etc

46:34 ↗ um that new Equity criteria we talked

46:36 ↗ about uh we heard a lot from the boards

46:39 ↗ uh in February and

46:42 ↗ um in terms of how we should Define this

46:44 ↗ and we have aligned that criteria better

46:46 ↗ with our Equity framework that the

46:48 ↗ equity board helped us develop and then

46:50 ↗ we have this other criteria

46:52 ↗ long-standing commitment this so

46:54 ↗ something that our Council really wanted

46:55 ↗ us to add to the criteria and they said

46:57 ↗ you know if we had if we made this

46:59 ↗ commitment a long time ago

47:02 ↗ um that we're going to provide a certain

47:03 ↗ type of infrastructure in a certain

47:05 ↗ neighborhood we want to make sure that

47:07 ↗ that doesn't get lost as we rethink our

47:09 ↗ CIP that we want to make good on our

47:11 ↗ commitments we've made in the past

47:12 ↗ and so they wanted that added but they

47:14 ↗ weren't they weren't able to Define

47:17 ↗ exactly what projects fit that so we're

47:19 ↗ still going through a process with them

47:21 ↗ to figure out exactly what that means so

47:23 ↗ when we took a look at all these

47:25 ↗ criteria plus the task force

47:27 ↗ recommendations we talked about earlier

47:29 ↗ uh and use those to form the CIP we had

47:32 ↗ project managers submit their requests

47:35 ↗ to include their project and they

47:36 ↗ self-graded against these criteria and

47:39 ↗ then we had our finance staff take a

47:41 ↗ look and and keep our project managers

47:44 ↗ honest right so everybody wants their

47:46 ↗ project to be included so let's make

47:48 ↗ sure that we're applying those criteria

47:50 ↗ consistently across the organization

47:52 ↗ that these self-scoring so it was a

47:55 ↗ check on the self scoring just to make

47:57 ↗ sure we're applying it consistently that

47:59 ↗ those scores made sense

48:02 ↗ so that's how we used these criteria and

48:06 ↗ um in general the process that we used

48:08 ↗ to use them to evaluate projects that

48:11 ↗ are in the CIP any questions on criteria

48:16 ↗ um so not on criteria I have a general

48:18 ↗ question so when we talk about six years

48:20 ↗ 20 years right like so which is the

48:23 ↗ first year of CIP when does it begin

48:26 ↗ actually yeah this CIP that we're

48:28 ↗ talking about now this proposed CIP

48:30 ↗ begins next year okay

48:35 ↗ because otherwise it's always a moving

48:37 ↗ Target right

48:39 ↗ yeah it begins next year

48:42 ↗ okay so Sophie 2024 to 2029 there it is

48:47 ↗ um so an overview in general themes

48:50 ↗ within the CIP there are Susie how many

48:52 ↗ projects within the CIP the six year

48:54 ↗ window of the CIP

48:56 ↗ 136 136 so we're not going to go over

48:59 ↗ 136 projects today what we are going to

49:03 ↗ talk about are themes General themes

49:05 ↗ throughout right so

49:08 ↗ um in general uh there's more funding

49:11 ↗ for maintenance programs than in the

49:13 ↗ past we've heard that a lot from our

49:15 ↗ city council in our community we need to

49:16 ↗ do a better job of maintaining what we

49:18 ↗ have

49:19 ↗ also

49:21 ↗ um the CIP responds to feedback like I

49:23 ↗ was saying from the task force and

49:25 ↗ others to make more investments in our

49:26 ↗ infrastructure we also have heard

49:29 ↗ feedback that we need to make sure it's

49:30 ↗ realistic that we can actually

49:31 ↗ accomplish what we say we're going to do

49:33 ↗ that we shouldn't be overly optimistic

49:36 ↗ and biting off more than what we can

49:37 ↗ chew

49:40 ↗ um and the way that we do that is by

49:42 ↗ asking for more resources to make sure

49:45 ↗ that we can we can do what we say we're

49:48 ↗ going to do we heard uh the task force

49:51 ↗ day we should be making more Investments

49:52 ↗ That means that we're going to need more

49:54 ↗ resources to make those Investments and

49:57 ↗ so the CIP anticipates new revenues for

50:01 ↗ transportation

50:02 ↗ also for Public Safety facilities and

50:06 ↗ parks and trails over the next six years

50:09 ↗ and so the first thing that we're

50:10 ↗ talking about right now is I think

50:13 ↗ um is is for transportation just like

50:16 ↗ the task force recommended uh we are

50:20 ↗ talking about we're proposing uh

50:22 ↗ Transportation sales tax so that sales

50:26 ↗ tax that it's 0.1

50:29 ↗ on all Goods

50:31 ↗ and that sales tax applies to and that

50:34 ↗ would be

50:36 ↗ um earmarks just for transportation

50:37 ↗ projects within the city so that's the

50:39 ↗ first thing that we're asking Council to

50:41 ↗ consider in terms of new revenues also

50:44 ↗ in the CIP you'll see a proposal parks

50:47 ↗ and trails a lot of parks and trails

50:48 ↗ projects are pushed out to some of the

50:50 ↗ later years in 2027 2028 you'll see a

50:54 ↗ lot more of those projects

50:56 ↗ um and that's because we're anticipating

50:57 ↗ another Revenue conversation trying to

51:00 ↗ find a new Revenue to be earmarked for

51:03 ↗ parks and trails projects that was

51:05 ↗ another recommendation from the task

51:07 ↗ force that we're trying to implement so

51:10 ↗ this this VIP does ask for more

51:12 ↗ resources and more revenues

51:15 ↗ we're having a conversation about Public

51:18 ↗ Safety uh related facilities as well the

51:21 ↗ city council I think that was mentioned

51:22 ↗ earlier in public comment

51:24 ↗ um that's a conversation that we're

51:25 ↗ having right now with public Council and

51:27 ↗ we're just trying to figure out

51:29 ↗ um what kind of Concepts and options we

51:32 ↗ should continue on for

51:35 ↗ um

51:36 ↗ for public discussion

51:39 ↗ next slide please

51:42 ↗ so focusing out of all those 120

51:46 ↗ somethings 36 projects uh focusing on

51:51 ↗ what is in there that this group May

51:53 ↗ particularly have interest in things

51:56 ↗ that help implement icap or the Issaquah

51:58 ↗ climate action plan so in the CIP we are

52:03 ↗ pleased to include more EV charging

52:05 ↗ infrastructure than we've had before and

52:07 ↗ that's for both the city fleet and

52:09 ↗ public use

52:12 ↗ uh it also plans for Energy Efficiency

52:14 ↗ upgrades to existing buildings renewable

52:17 ↗ energy for municipal buildings and other

52:19 ↗ types of infrastructure

52:21 ↗ uh the pool roof and ceiling replacement

52:24 ↗ is also considered to be something

52:26 ↗ that's eye Capital Eye capulated because

52:28 ↗ it increases the Energy Efficiency of

52:30 ↗ the pool uh it includes new insulation

52:34 ↗ and

52:35 ↗ um HVAC replacement program a lot of our

52:38 ↗ hvacs are very old very Antiquated

52:41 ↗ um the one at City Hall is held together

52:43 ↗ uh pretty literally with duct tape and

52:47 ↗ um paper clips and so that is not very

52:50 ↗ energy efficient and our um and then it

52:55 ↗ also contemplates a centralized

52:56 ↗ alternative fueling station

52:58 ↗ so Stacy has their work cut out for her

53:01 ↗ over the next six years

53:03 ↗ it's just dated and many of our other

53:06 ↗ staff but um these are some of the most

53:08 ↗ directly icap related projects that we

53:10 ↗ have and um of course rated pretty high

53:13 ↗ on our uh climate resiliency and

53:15 ↗ environmental also climate resiliency

53:18 ↗ and environmental benefit criteria

53:23 ↗ station

53:26 ↗ do you want to talk about that sure it's

53:28 ↗ a concept but the idea would be to

53:31 ↗ partner with particularly looking at

53:34 ↗ other public entities like the school

53:36 ↗ districts

53:37 ↗ important to attack County library

53:39 ↗ system based here other public entities

53:41 ↗ that have large fleets and invest

53:44 ↗ together in fast Chargers

53:47 ↗ other alternative fueling and finding a

53:51 ↗ centralized location where all of our

53:52 ↗ fleets could go instead of the city

53:55 ↗ purchasing a bunch of fast chargers for

53:57 ↗ police Fleet in the future the school

54:00 ↗ district investing in their own just

54:01 ↗ trying to

54:02 ↗ pull those resources

54:07 ↗ pretty exciting set

54:12 ↗ I'm ready whenever great okay so uh

54:15 ↗ climate resiliency and environmental

54:17 ↗ benefit Criterion

54:19 ↗ um so I talked a little bit before about

54:21 ↗ green yellow red so here's what the

54:25 ↗ green threshold and I think that you'll

54:27 ↗ find we have a pretty high threshold

54:29 ↗ we've set for ourselves a high standard

54:31 ↗ we've set for ourselves and we try to be

54:35 ↗ really

54:36 ↗ um thoughtful and how we applied those

54:38 ↗ towards our projects so in order to get

54:41 ↗ a score of Green

54:43 ↗ the project is required to prevent or

54:47 ↗ correct detrimental impact to vital

54:50 ↗ habitat ecosystem natural resource

54:53 ↗ or the project prevents or corrects

54:56 ↗ issaquest contributions to climate

54:58 ↗ change

55:00 ↗ so that's what's required for a project

55:01 ↗ to score Green

55:04 ↗ and what we found again I'm talking

55:06 ↗ about themes here not going over every

55:08 ↗ single project but 28 of all the

55:11 ↗ projects within that six year period

55:14 ↗ um score Green uh and the bulk of those

55:18 ↗ were really facility projects and also

55:20 ↗ storm water projects those had the

55:22 ↗ highest scores when it came to the

55:23 ↗ environmental criteria

55:25 ↗ uh many of the projects that scored

55:28 ↗ green were also very high for Community

55:29 ↗ priority and that's because they were

55:31 ↗ found in multiple plans so maybe they

55:34 ↗ were identified in the icat maybe it was

55:37 ↗ also identified in a storm water plan or

55:40 ↗ also identified in

55:43 ↗ um

55:44 ↗ in master Mobility plan for example so

55:48 ↗ we see these projects kind of pop up in

55:50 ↗ different places and that also means

55:51 ↗ that we're coordinating our priorities

55:53 ↗ right we're not just thinking about

55:55 ↗ Transportation we're thinking about

55:57 ↗ transportation and the environment at

55:59 ↗ the same time as an example

56:03 ↗ foreign

56:06 ↗ to score yellow the project reduces a

56:11 ↗ detrimental impact or provides a benefit

56:13 ↗ vital to a benefit to vital habitat

56:17 ↗ ecosystem or natural resources or the

56:19 ↗ project has some positive effects on

56:22 ↗ issaquah's contributions to climate

56:24 ↗ change even at the potential risk of

56:26 ↗ minor minor negative benefits mine are

56:29 ↗ negative benefits minor negative impacts

56:31 ↗ I think

56:32 ↗ the habitat ecosystem or natural

56:34 ↗ resources and so this is this is very

56:37 ↗ wordy and it's very jumbly and it's our

56:39 ↗ attempt to try to address when maybe one

56:41 ↗ part of a project can have invite and

56:43 ↗ have benefits in one area of the

56:46 ↗ environment but maybe have some other

56:47 ↗ impacts in another area so we really try

56:50 ↗ to be thoughtful and considerate the

56:52 ↗ whole of of how we apply these and it is

56:55 ↗ much more of an art than a science uh

56:59 ↗ because

57:00 ↗ um I will take

57:03 ↗ for example

57:05 ↗ um one of the projects that we're

57:07 ↗ working on is a crossing of i-90. and we

57:11 ↗ think that this Crossing of I-90 is

57:12 ↗ important we want to pair that Crossing

57:14 ↗ of I-90 a new Crossing of I-90 with a

57:17 ↗ light rail station

57:19 ↗ so how how would we score that against

57:22 ↗ these environmental criteria on the one

57:24 ↗ hand Light Rail station is going to be

57:27 ↗ huge in terms of you know sov single

57:30 ↗ occupant vehicle impacts on the

57:32 ↗ environment and Emissions greenhouse

57:33 ↗ gases uh there's there's almost nothing

57:37 ↗ better we can do than to get more trans

57:38 ↗ in it right uh

57:41 ↗ and so uh so that is really great but at

57:44 ↗ the same time we would also be pairing

57:47 ↗ it with a Crossing that would add

57:50 ↗ additional Lanes

57:52 ↗ um for cars in a supply so how do you

57:54 ↗ how do you compare those two

57:56 ↗ um it will also have pedestrian uh

57:58 ↗ benefits and bicycle impacts and new

58:00 ↗ connections to Transit those are all

58:01 ↗ those are all great but it might be made

58:03 ↗ out of concrete and concrete is

58:05 ↗ incredibly

58:07 ↗ um resource and energy

58:10 ↗ um uh you know requires a lot of energy

58:13 ↗ to produce concrete right and so how do

58:15 ↗ you weigh all of these things with one

58:17 ↗ project it gets really complicated so we

58:20 ↗ try to think about all these things when

58:21 ↗ we score something green and yellow Etc

58:25 ↗ um and so we try to think about it it is

58:28 ↗ more of an art than a science and how we

58:30 ↗ apply it and that's one of the reasons

58:31 ↗ why we're here today and asking you all

58:33 ↗ did did we apply these criteria

58:35 ↗ correctly what else should we be

58:36 ↗ thinking about

58:38 ↗ um what's what's the feedback that you

58:40 ↗ might have on how we would apply uh such

58:43 ↗ criteria

58:45 ↗ so um within the yellow projects that

58:48 ↗ scored yellow 47 of all the projects and

58:50 ↗ programs in the six-year plan scored at

58:53 ↗ yellow

58:54 ↗ um and many of those were transportation

58:56 ↗ in parks and transportation because uh

59:00 ↗ similar to the example I just provided

59:02 ↗ there's some great things that we're

59:04 ↗ doing for reducing uh emissions vehicle

59:08 ↗ emissions but also it might include a

59:10 ↗ turn lane or something else

59:13 ↗ um that uh that may facilitate cars that

59:16 ↗ also might reduce idling of cars and

59:18 ↗ traffic so you know we try to weigh all

59:20 ↗ these things uh together so a lot of

59:22 ↗ those projects from Transportation

59:24 ↗ scored yellow and also some parks

59:26 ↗ projects for the yellow as well

59:29 ↗ Henry we did have a question oh I'm

59:31 ↗ sorry yes oh so I'm here just I'm just

59:34 ↗ curious and this is actually as soon as

59:37 ↗ you started talking I released it

59:38 ↗ because that was the question it's quite

59:40 ↗ related to what you were saying you know

59:41 ↗ what all goes into deciding the criteria

59:44 ↗ but I would just curious specifically

59:46 ↗ when you say contributions to climate

59:49 ↗ change right what all or what are the

59:52 ↗ basic primary categories going to it one

59:54 ↗ thing I can think of is greenhouse gases

59:56 ↗ accounting

59:58 ↗ um or is it like you know actual

1:00:00 ↗ quantity Quantified pollution reduction

1:00:03 ↗ you look at like water noise or what

1:00:06 ↗ goes into it yeah great question

1:00:10 ↗ um when we put projects into the CIP

1:00:12 ↗ many of them they're all at different

1:00:15 ↗ phases right so some of them are at the

1:00:17 ↗ concept phase and that they still need

1:00:19 ↗ to be designed and it's actually uh an

1:00:23 ↗ expense we need to plan for something

1:00:25 ↗ like the project I just described the

1:00:28 ↗ crossing paired with the Light Rail

1:00:29 ↗ station that that's a very large project

1:00:33 ↗ for the city we're just at the very

1:00:36 ↗ beginning planning stages of that

1:00:39 ↗ project we can't possibly

1:00:41 ↗ calculate uh the climate impacts of the

1:00:45 ↗ volume of concrete that's going to be

1:00:47 ↗ required to build a project that hasn't

1:00:49 ↗ been designed so this is more

1:00:51 ↗ qualitative exactly that's exactly right

1:00:54 ↗ because each project is at these

1:00:56 ↗ different phases

1:00:57 ↗ um but we have to just kind of look at

1:00:59 ↗ these as themes in general uh if we try

1:01:02 ↗ to break it down every single element of

1:01:04 ↗ every single project uh we would never

1:01:06 ↗ form the plan that would be a full-time

1:01:09 ↗ job for all of us and so we have to look

1:01:12 ↗ at these things kind of from a bit of a

1:01:14 ↗ distance also knowing that

1:01:16 ↗ um remembering that funnel

1:01:17 ↗ we have different stages which we need

1:01:20 ↗ to apply our values for environmental

1:01:22 ↗ sustainability apply our values for

1:01:23 ↗ Equity

1:01:24 ↗ Etc so putting into the CIP is not the

1:01:27 ↗ only place where we do that but yes it

1:01:30 ↗ is more from uh from a qualitative uh

1:01:33 ↗ perspective

1:01:36 ↗ I I was going to ask about the same

1:01:38 ↗ thing actually because I think

1:01:40 ↗ what I

1:01:41 ↗ am hearing as it might be is it more of

1:01:43 ↗ outcomes than the embody emissions for a

1:01:47 ↗ project that we're trying to measure

1:01:48 ↗ with the

1:01:51 ↗ list the criteria criteria or is it at

1:01:55 ↗ the point that we have a scoped out

1:01:56 ↗ project related incorporate body

1:01:58 ↗ divisions of concrete materials used so

1:02:02 ↗ then I that was my question because I

1:02:04 ↗ think you could change a lot of the

1:02:05 ↗ ratings here depending on what our

1:02:07 ↗ answer to how our body and Emissions are

1:02:09 ↗ are Incorporated yeah well I would love

1:02:11 ↗ to ask the group what do you think I

1:02:14 ↗ think this is our first time using these

1:02:16 ↗ criteria and it's our first time trying

1:02:18 ↗ to take it all into account so we um

1:02:21 ↗ depending on the project and what phase

1:02:23 ↗ of the project is within the CIP whether

1:02:25 ↗ it's just design or whether it actually

1:02:27 ↗ is implementation

1:02:29 ↗ um we've tried to take it

1:02:31 ↗ all into account but I think we have

1:02:33 ↗ been more focused on outcomes

1:02:35 ↗ um especially as it relates to our our

1:02:37 ↗ climate goals for example or other goals

1:02:39 ↗ that we've stated so um but I would love

1:02:42 ↗ to hear from this group whether you want

1:02:43 ↗ us to focus on you know one aspect over

1:02:45 ↗ another that would be very helpful

1:02:49 ↗ is that something we'll do at the end

1:02:53 ↗ yeah we have a discussion portion yeah

1:02:56 ↗ sure so that would be helpful yeah thank

1:02:59 ↗ you

1:03:01 ↗ yep I'm curious uh what role goes into

1:03:04 ↗ the evaluation of actual people power so

1:03:07 ↗ the project that you mentioned is a good

1:03:08 ↗ example so uh just the the

1:03:11 ↗ administrative cost of trying to plan

1:03:14 ↗ our planning right has an actual tool

1:03:17 ↗ besides the actual dollar amount so uh

1:03:19 ↗ and the last term Olympia deny our

1:03:21 ↗ request to fund

1:03:23 ↗ um just the idea of looking at it right

1:03:25 ↗ so then needing to get those Revenue

1:03:27 ↗ sources to even look at the pre-planning

1:03:29 ↗ of the planning so when you're actually

1:03:32 ↗ going into this grading how much are you

1:03:34 ↗ evaluating things like even just the

1:03:36 ↗ people power that it's going to take to

1:03:38 ↗ then say we didn't get this funding from

1:03:40 ↗ Olympia we still want to do what I think

1:03:42 ↗ we used to all call the lid right the

1:03:44 ↗ concept that we're still very much want

1:03:45 ↗ of the lid to say how do we then move to

1:03:48 ↗ our next steps how much of that

1:03:49 ↗ evaluation and nitty-gritty kind of goes

1:03:51 ↗ into the scoring

1:03:54 ↗ um I don't know that people power people

1:03:56 ↗ power goes into the scoring in two ways

1:03:59 ↗ um but it's well it's really all related

1:04:01 ↗ to the ability to deliver the project

1:04:04 ↗ and so we look at do we have just the

1:04:07 ↗ Staffing capacity to to do the project

1:04:09 ↗ that's part of the ability to deliver

1:04:11 ↗ the project criteria

1:04:13 ↗ um another one is funding and so I think

1:04:15 ↗ you're asking a couple of questions in

1:04:17 ↗ one Joy

1:04:18 ↗ um which is another question you might

1:04:21 ↗ be asking is how do we account for that

1:04:22 ↗ people cost the staff cost into some of

1:04:26 ↗ the project costs that we see in the CIP

1:04:27 ↗ is that also part of your question yeah

1:04:30 ↗ because I think your example right now

1:04:31 ↗ of using the crossing or the lid is a

1:04:34 ↗ good example of something as opposed to

1:04:36 ↗ a different Transportation project that

1:04:39 ↗ is a little bit more straightforward

1:04:40 ↗ right there's a lot of nuanced levels to

1:04:41 ↗ that so does that then get factored into

1:04:44 ↗ how we're doing that scored as for

1:04:46 ↗ instance that would have a much larger

1:04:48 ↗ cost because we're still planning the

1:04:49 ↗ planning of the plan to be honest right

1:04:52 ↗ so then obviously that's exponentially

1:04:54 ↗ bigger so then does that end up about

1:04:56 ↗ I'm wondering how much you're kind of

1:04:58 ↗ running down into resource yeah yeah

1:05:02 ↗ um Alex expensive a project is just on

1:05:06 ↗ its own does not affect the score

1:05:09 ↗ so so there may be a ton of people costs

1:05:12 ↗ what does affect the score is our

1:05:15 ↗ ability to pay for it but knowing that

1:05:17 ↗ some projects are just going to be more

1:05:19 ↗ expensive than others right

1:05:21 ↗ um but Susie do you want to talk about

1:05:23 ↗ how we account for project costs within

1:05:26 ↗ the project budget assigned in the CIP

1:05:29 ↗ sure

1:05:31 ↗ um so at the moment we do not include

1:05:34 ↗ staff costs in the project budget itself

1:05:37 ↗ we are very much working toward that as

1:05:40 ↗ we want to be able to demonstrate

1:05:42 ↗ the total cost of a project not simply

1:05:45 ↗ how much it costs to construct something

1:05:47 ↗ or even how much it costs to plan for it

1:05:49 ↗ and then construct it but we also want

1:05:51 ↗ to make sure

1:05:52 ↗ um when we're talking about how much it

1:05:54 ↗ costs to deliver a project that we're

1:05:56 ↗ also taking into account staff time so

1:05:58 ↗ that gets a little tricky on the

1:06:00 ↗ mechanics the way we currently budget

1:06:01 ↗ staff time but it's certainly something

1:06:02 ↗ that we're working towards for our next

1:06:04 ↗ budget update which will be um we'll

1:06:07 ↗ develop it next year for 2025 2026. so

1:06:12 ↗ it gets tricky to because at some point

1:06:14 ↗ you know we have a number of project

1:06:15 ↗ managers that will work on a dozen

1:06:17 ↗ projects at once well hopefully not

1:06:19 ↗ quite that many but quite a few projects

1:06:21 ↗ at once

1:06:22 ↗ um and they may be working on projects

1:06:24 ↗ that are funded by a lot of different

1:06:26 ↗ sources they could be working on a

1:06:27 ↗ utility project and they could be

1:06:29 ↗ working on a transportation project so

1:06:31 ↗ breaking apart their time on how much

1:06:34 ↗ time they spend on each project even

1:06:36 ↗ before the project starts it's a little

1:06:38 ↗ tricky to anticipate ahead of time so

1:06:40 ↗ those are the pieces that we need to

1:06:41 ↗ give a little more thought and attention

1:06:43 ↗ to make sure that it's accurate and it's

1:06:45 ↗ meaningful the way that we're

1:06:46 ↗ anticipating those costs

1:06:48 ↗ that you're doing that's an important

1:06:51 ↗ part of especially when we have an idea

1:06:54 ↗ of what what actually is this going to

1:06:55 ↗ take to be able to do and how a

1:06:57 ↗ realistic idea of when we place this

1:06:58 ↗ important of projects to be able to look

1:06:59 ↗ at a whole picture absolutely thank you

1:07:06 ↗ great okay and so red

1:07:09 ↗ um so red means if a project scored red

1:07:12 ↗ the project would have no discernible or

1:07:15 ↗ direct environmental impact or possibly

1:07:18 ↗ that would have negative environmental

1:07:20 ↗ impacts including impacts on habitat

1:07:22 ↗ climate

1:07:23 ↗ and so we found that uh 25 of the

1:07:26 ↗ projects and programs within the

1:07:27 ↗ six-year plan scored red

1:07:30 ↗ um but that is a pretty wide definition

1:07:33 ↗ of what can be read it could be

1:07:36 ↗ detrimental or it could have no impact

1:07:38 ↗ so when we think about what what

1:07:41 ↗ our standard is for scoring green or

1:07:45 ↗ yellow it's pretty high because it's all

1:07:47 ↗ environmental uh positive impacts and

1:07:51 ↗ red means no or negative impact so 25 of

1:07:55 ↗ the projects programs in the six-year

1:07:56 ↗ plan scored red most of these uh scored

1:08:00 ↗ Green in replacement and capital

1:08:02 ↗ maintenance uh so and most of them uh

1:08:06 ↗ were seen as having no environmental

1:08:10 ↗ impact not a negative one so a great

1:08:13 ↗ example of this is Reservoir maintenance

1:08:16 ↗ so we uh we own and operate a number of

1:08:18 ↗ reservoirs to be able to deliver clean

1:08:20 ↗ Quality Water to your faucets and if we

1:08:24 ↗ have to do Reservoir maintenance that

1:08:25 ↗ means we have to maybe clear out the

1:08:27 ↗ liner put in a new liner uh do some

1:08:29 ↗ repainting rust prevention

1:08:32 ↗ how do we score that with these

1:08:35 ↗ environmental criteria it's not really

1:08:38 ↗ positive it's not really negative we

1:08:42 ↗ something we have to do

1:08:44 ↗ um so that's what we found for the

1:08:46 ↗ projects that scored red a lot of them

1:08:48 ↗ are related to maintenance

1:08:50 ↗ um and and also we didn't feel how to

1:08:53 ↗ direct uh negative environmental impact

1:09:00 ↗ next great so

1:09:03 ↗ um

1:09:05 ↗ process and next steps so we started uh

1:09:09 ↗ as this chart shows with the boards

1:09:11 ↗ refining the criteria that happened in

1:09:15 ↗ February and uh then we have this draft

1:09:18 ↗ this proposed CIP we're asking for your

1:09:21 ↗ feedback tonight how do you feel like

1:09:23 ↗ we've done in terms of applying these

1:09:25 ↗ criteria any other feedback you have for

1:09:27 ↗ us for a future and how we should

1:09:28 ↗ consider applying these criteria we have

1:09:31 ↗ also as of last night started uh on that

1:09:35 ↗ third Arrow of this process of meeting

1:09:37 ↗ with Council committees so our city

1:09:39 ↗ council has a number of subcommittees

1:09:41 ↗ three subcommittees each one of those

1:09:43 ↗ subcommittees is assigned sections of

1:09:45 ↗ the CIP to review the mobility and

1:09:48 ↗ infrastructure committee met last night

1:09:51 ↗ uh and started to provide feedback on

1:09:53 ↗ these things

1:09:55 ↗ um and so we have provided board

1:09:57 ↗ feedback to the council committees uh

1:10:00 ↗ then the council committees continue to

1:10:02 ↗ discuss

1:10:03 ↗ um throughout the rest of this month

1:10:05 ↗ and we'll come together on June 12th uh

1:10:10 ↗ that says Cal Means Committee of the

1:10:13 ↗ whole

1:10:14 ↗ um we're not getting together at

1:10:15 ↗ Pickering barn and having a uh

1:10:19 ↗ some sort of milking event

1:10:24 ↗ um Committee of the whole to discuss the

1:10:26 ↗ entire CIP so those different committees

1:10:28 ↗ that talked about different portions

1:10:30 ↗ will then get together and talk about

1:10:31 ↗ the whole thing

1:10:32 ↗ and then we hope for Council adoption by

1:10:35 ↗ July 1st the reason for that July 1st

1:10:37 ↗ deadline is the state has requirements

1:10:40 ↗ for our tip or Transportation

1:10:43 ↗ Improvement plan which is a component of

1:10:46 ↗ our CIP Capital Improvement plan so

1:10:49 ↗ State requires us to adopt that tip by

1:10:51 ↗ July 1st so we're hoping to see the

1:10:53 ↗ whole thing done by then

1:10:55 ↗ so that's where we are in the process

1:10:58 ↗ um what I am hoping to have for me

1:11:00 ↗ tonight uh thank you if there's any

1:11:02 ↗ additional questions but also feedback

1:11:05 ↗ I'd love to take that feedback and

1:11:07 ↗ convey that uh forward Safety Services

1:11:09 ↗ and Parks committee meets next week I'm

1:11:12 ↗ about to finish off those materials

1:11:14 ↗ pending your feedback tonight I want to

1:11:15 ↗ incorporate

1:11:16 ↗ um and just continue to use take your

1:11:19 ↗ feedback and make sure that that's

1:11:20 ↗ conveyed to council we have two options

1:11:22 ↗ to do that one is I could just take

1:11:25 ↗ notes in what you have what you convey

1:11:27 ↗ to me this evening another if there's

1:11:29 ↗ things that you feel particularly strong

1:11:30 ↗ about that you want to convey to council

1:11:32 ↗ directly you can also write Council a

1:11:34 ↗ letter or an email from the board as a

1:11:36 ↗ whole so I'll leave that to you to

1:11:38 ↗ decide how best you want to convey your

1:11:40 ↗ feedback if it's just as easy for you

1:11:42 ↗ I'm happy to collect it and provide it

1:11:44 ↗ to council myself that's what the other

1:11:46 ↗ boards have opted to do

1:11:49 ↗ so any questions before we continue to

1:11:52 ↗ the discussion section

1:11:56 ↗ no no comment

1:12:00 ↗ comment a question

1:12:09 ↗ so here's a list of active projects and

1:12:13 ↗ with the color coding and all that so

1:12:15 ↗ was this was this gleaned from a larger

1:12:18 ↗ list that then was pared down to this

1:12:21 ↗ using that color coding and then so what

1:12:25 ↗ what is the algorithm that is used to

1:12:27 ↗ discern which go it would just go out

1:12:30 ↗ yeah well I wish we had an out

1:12:39 ↗ have to apologize you have a bunch of

1:12:41 ↗ attachments to your packet tonight and

1:12:43 ↗ the reason for that is that when we had

1:12:45 ↗ started preparing these materials and we

1:12:47 ↗ started

1:12:48 ↗ um making the rounds to the boards we

1:12:50 ↗ didn't actually have a full CIP yet

1:12:53 ↗ um the CIP just got released last week

1:12:56 ↗ last week

1:12:59 ↗ uh wow okay last week feels like it's

1:13:02 ↗ been longer I guess but yes last just

1:13:04 ↗ last week and so what you have in your

1:13:06 ↗ packet are a bunch of

1:13:09 ↗ um

1:13:10 ↗ uh information that is also within the

1:13:14 ↗ larger CIP so in your packet there's one

1:13:18 ↗ document that talks about active

1:13:20 ↗ projects that means 20 24 through 2029

1:13:26 ↗ and then there's out your projects that

1:13:28 ↗ are 20 30 plus so we also include those

1:13:31 ↗ in our CIP because we don't want to lose

1:13:33 ↗ sight of these projects that we plan for

1:13:34 ↗ the future

1:13:36 ↗ um

1:13:36 ↗ so I think your question was

1:13:40 ↗ how do we decide what projects go into

1:13:42 ↗ the 2024 through 2029 versus these out

1:13:46 ↗ years yeah and in part we use those

1:13:51 ↗ criteria

1:13:52 ↗ that we've just been talking about

1:13:54 ↗ so we apply some of those criteria

1:13:56 ↗ including ability to deliver the project

1:13:58 ↗ how much of a priority is this you know

1:14:01 ↗ do do we have the funding Etc

1:14:04 ↗ um where does this project stand in the

1:14:06 ↗ sequence of other projects and projects

1:14:08 ↗ uh

1:14:10 ↗ have to come first before we can do

1:14:12 ↗ something else right so that's that's

1:14:14 ↗ how we decide what goes into the

1:14:16 ↗ six-year plan

1:14:18 ↗ and and both of those lists were

1:14:20 ↗ included in your packet tonight of

1:14:22 ↗ what's within the six years and then

1:14:24 ↗ what's beyond the six years that are in

1:14:26 ↗ the CIP that proposing

1:14:29 ↗ so it's a manual Google like I said it's

1:14:33 ↗ more of an art than a science so humans

1:14:35 ↗ had to go through all this and kind of

1:14:37 ↗ uh pick and choose it well because of

1:14:39 ↗ this we're going to do this year or that

1:14:42 ↗ one can go down here very subjectively

1:14:47 ↗ versus an objective criteria like well

1:14:50 ↗ okay we're going to score these colors

1:14:52 ↗ like this and this one is going to be

1:14:54 ↗ more important than that one though and

1:14:56 ↗ and then do a spreadsheet yes

1:15:00 ↗ yeah that's that's correct

1:15:02 ↗ um we heard some feedback from our

1:15:04 ↗ boards that they

1:15:06 ↗ um wanted to see more of a numerical

1:15:07 ↗ process

1:15:09 ↗ um and and we did shy away from that and

1:15:12 ↗ I think it's because it's really

1:15:14 ↗ difficult to have uh something that can

1:15:19 ↗ be numerical and consistent and I'll

1:15:21 ↗ give you an example of uh the black

1:15:24 ↗ nugget retaining wall

1:15:25 ↗ so is everybody familiar with black

1:15:28 ↗ Nugget Road and that giant wall that's

1:15:30 ↗ behind Fred Meyer right

1:15:32 ↗ um so city owns that piece of

1:15:34 ↗ infrastructure

1:15:35 ↗ we have to maintain that infrastructure

1:15:38 ↗ um we have a criteria for Life Safety

1:15:41 ↗ and

1:15:42 ↗ five years ago

1:15:44 ↗ we had no concerns about life safety

1:15:46 ↗ like yeah we need to make sure that the

1:15:48 ↗ wall is structurally sound but repairs

1:15:52 ↗ were not

1:15:53 ↗ um that urgent ten years from now if we

1:15:55 ↗ don't do anything it's going to be a

1:15:57 ↗ significant Life Safety concern and so

1:16:00 ↗ even within the six-year time frame that

1:16:03 ↗ we have for the CIP some things may

1:16:05 ↗ fluctuate in terms of scores for

1:16:07 ↗ Community priority Life Safety Etc

1:16:11 ↗ um and it also May fluctuate outside of

1:16:13 ↗ those six years so how do you assign a

1:16:15 ↗ numerical value to something that

1:16:17 ↗ slippery

1:16:19 ↗ um it's it's very challenging and so

1:16:22 ↗ that's why I say we've thought about

1:16:24 ↗ trying to have something that's a bit

1:16:25 ↗ more mathematical a bit more

1:16:27 ↗ quantitative and it was very it's very

1:16:30 ↗ challenging for us to do that and to

1:16:31 ↗ have a consistent Logic for every

1:16:34 ↗ project it's really we we feel that it

1:16:36 ↗ is more of an art uh than it is an exact

1:16:40 ↗ science

1:16:43 ↗ yep

1:16:45 ↗ question I'd love for you to to go off

1:16:47 ↗ of that to talk about the evolution of

1:16:49 ↗ this red light green light grading

1:16:51 ↗ system yeah um as I enjoyed it initially

1:16:54 ↗ right I think it's a really um a really

1:16:56 ↗ positive and has a lot of great

1:16:58 ↗ potential right for thinking about how

1:17:00 ↗ we're moving a lot of pieces as we're

1:17:03 ↗ evaluating these projects

1:17:04 ↗ um I'm curious about what the evolution

1:17:06 ↗ is of it next right it's a good starter

1:17:08 ↗ but I can imagine staff is like this is

1:17:10 ↗ where we're beginning and where it's

1:17:11 ↗ going I think um I was disappointed when

1:17:13 ↗ I started trying to click on it realized

1:17:15 ↗ that there was no links to anything

1:17:17 ↗ right to be able to better understand

1:17:19 ↗ um an example might be repairing a storm

1:17:21 ↗ water drain is given a green but right

1:17:24 ↗ now we're still in the process of

1:17:25 ↗ outdating of using an outdated storm

1:17:28 ↗ water surface water Master water plan

1:17:29 ↗ we're still working on that so I know

1:17:32 ↗ that there's not going to be an actual

1:17:34 ↗ drain going in that's going to be using

1:17:36 ↗ best technology it's actually going to

1:17:38 ↗ be filtering the chemical runoff from

1:17:39 ↗ the right so I know that actually maybe

1:17:41 ↗ that shouldn't be great at the green

1:17:43 ↗ because I know other parts of things

1:17:44 ↗ that are going going on because we have

1:17:46 ↗ other things in place so the green to me

1:17:50 ↗ a little less green than maybe it should

1:17:52 ↗ have been right but I didn't have that

1:17:54 ↗ information because right now you're

1:17:55 ↗ giving me a graded color coding system

1:17:57 ↗ rather than being able to say actually

1:17:59 ↗ we're putting in new tech for this

1:18:01 ↗ without getting into a granularity of a

1:18:02 ↗ project I don't have the granularity of

1:18:05 ↗ why it's being graded how it is if that

1:18:07 ↗ makes sense so I'm curious if you could

1:18:09 ↗ speak to the evolution of where you guys

1:18:11 ↗ want to go right we've started this

1:18:13 ↗ you're pulling in a lot of these awesome

1:18:14 ↗ pieces that we have that we know these

1:18:16 ↗ lenses and filters right

1:18:18 ↗ um and so I'm curious if you guys ever

1:18:20 ↗ have a little information on where it is

1:18:21 ↗ that you want this piece to go that is

1:18:24 ↗ precisely my question for you all this

1:18:26 ↗ evening you you tell us

1:18:28 ↗ uh we want we want to hear that feedback

1:18:30 ↗ we know we have

1:18:32 ↗ um the council set goals for the CIP uh

1:18:35 ↗ one of those goals was to try to make it

1:18:37 ↗ more uh understandable to members of the

1:18:40 ↗ public we are not just stopping at this

1:18:42 ↗ document that we have prepared we once

1:18:45 ↗ it's adopted we're going to translate

1:18:46 ↗ into more of an interactive tool is that

1:18:49 ↗ right Susie yeah we're working on um

1:18:51 ↗ right now it's pretty static in the

1:18:54 ↗ sense that it is just a document

1:18:57 ↗ um that is uh on our website but we have

1:19:01 ↗ some tools at our disposal that can make

1:19:03 ↗ it a bit more interactive where you're

1:19:04 ↗ able to click through on projects

1:19:05 ↗ potentially even starting from a map

1:19:07 ↗ view and clicking through on a map to

1:19:09 ↗ certain projects

1:19:11 ↗ um but it gives different options to

1:19:13 ↗ look at different projects in different

1:19:14 ↗ ways where it's not just this is the

1:19:16 ↗ order that we're giving them to you this

1:19:18 ↗ is the information provided but you can

1:19:20 ↗ kind of manipulate things around to get

1:19:21 ↗ a better understanding of how things

1:19:23 ↗ might fit together in the larger scheme

1:19:25 ↗ of the overall CIP

1:19:27 ↗ so so I'm going to put that question

1:19:30 ↗ back on you is that's really the point

1:19:33 ↗ of where we're here in this process is

1:19:34 ↗ to ask you okay we're trying this new

1:19:36 ↗ criteria out we're trying this red

1:19:38 ↗ yellow green how's it working what

1:19:39 ↗ should we consider for the future so you

1:19:42 ↗ tell us we'd love to hear your ideas

1:19:46 ↗ and go ahead

1:19:50 ↗ um so kind of going back to what Connie

1:19:53 ↗ had brought up about the buildings so as

1:19:57 ↗ um from what I've heard the city is

1:19:59 ↗ going to do a study to see

1:20:02 ↗ um which buildings the city needs to

1:20:05 ↗ keep in which they might be able to let

1:20:06 ↗ go of and

1:20:09 ↗ um so

1:20:10 ↗ as that happens before building anything

1:20:14 ↗ new

1:20:15 ↗ uh would looking at the feasibility of

1:20:19 ↗ using an existing building rather than

1:20:21 ↗ building a new one whether it be

1:20:23 ↗ something in the city is letting go of

1:20:26 ↗ or something that a business had to let

1:20:29 ↗ go of because

1:20:30 ↗ um they're going out of business or they

1:20:34 ↗ um

1:20:35 ↗ their employees are working from home

1:20:38 ↗ you know because I don't know how it's

1:20:40 ↗ happening in Issaquah but all over King

1:20:42 ↗ County there's all a lot of vacant

1:20:45 ↗ buildings so

1:20:47 ↗ is the city looking utilizing those

1:20:49 ↗ buildings before they build anything new

1:20:53 ↗ so

1:20:54 ↗ let me back up a little bit more and

1:20:56 ↗ provide more context to this

1:20:58 ↗ conversation

1:21:00 ↗ um one of the things that we are talking

1:21:02 ↗ with city council about right now is we

1:21:04 ↗ have identified some significant

1:21:07 ↗ facility needs one is we know we need a

1:21:10 ↗ new fire station

1:21:12 ↗ um fire station 71 is plainly it's the

1:21:15 ↗ one on Sunset that's our downtown fire

1:21:17 ↗ station

1:21:19 ↗ um it is not big enough to house the

1:21:21 ↗ ladder trucks that we needed to house

1:21:24 ↗ and we don't feel like even the property

1:21:27 ↗ is big enough for that there's also

1:21:29 ↗ concerns that he said fire and rescue

1:21:31 ↗ has raised about

1:21:32 ↗ um call response time and other things

1:21:35 ↗ for North Issaquah especially some of

1:21:37 ↗ the retirement neighborhoods in North

1:21:38 ↗ Issaquah so we're working with Eastside

1:21:40 ↗ fire and rescue and all of that

1:21:42 ↗ um so that's a public safety need in

1:21:46 ↗ addition our Municipal Court is uh in my

1:21:49 ↗ humble opinion uh past obsolescence and

1:21:53 ↗ has some significant

1:21:55 ↗ um uh

1:21:57 ↗ Justice concerns as significant

1:22:00 ↗ um uh Safety and Security concerns for

1:22:03 ↗ the people going to the municipal court

1:22:06 ↗ and our employees at the municipal court

1:22:07 ↗ so it does not meet modern standards for

1:22:10 ↗ Municipal Court it was also built as a

1:22:12 ↗ fire station in like 1965. so there's

1:22:14 ↗ there are things that we can't do with

1:22:16 ↗ these structures to to actually make

1:22:20 ↗ them work for the uses we have we just

1:22:23 ↗ the construction itself

1:22:25 ↗ um and you know thick cement walls and

1:22:28 ↗ things are preventing us from

1:22:29 ↗ repurposing these buildings for the uses

1:22:31 ↗ that we need them to do so we have some

1:22:33 ↗ of these significant needs meanwhile ipd

1:22:35 ↗ is operating at the same square feet it

1:22:37 ↗ has since they moved into that building

1:22:38 ↗ we had a population of like 13 000 they

1:22:41 ↗ haven't

1:22:42 ↗ they

1:22:43 ↗ we are now 41 000.

1:22:46 ↗ um so we have we have a lot of issues

1:22:48 ↗ with some of our facilities so we're

1:22:50 ↗ working with city council right now

1:22:51 ↗ figuring out okay what do we do about it

1:22:52 ↗ and our main options are to lease space

1:22:57 ↗ uh build space or buy space those are

1:23:01 ↗ the main options and so we're looking at

1:23:04 ↗ that Council has established a number of

1:23:05 ↗ goals to evaluate those options

1:23:08 ↗ um I am not the project manager on that

1:23:11 ↗ project so I'm not remembering what the

1:23:12 ↗ environmental related goals if any there

1:23:15 ↗ are but this is something that we need

1:23:17 ↗ to talk a lot more about Council I think

1:23:20 ↗ um has straight away uh it seems like

1:23:23 ↗ they're stirring away from leasing

1:23:24 ↗ because this across been around for 130

1:23:26 ↗ plus years we're going to continue to be

1:23:28 ↗ around for 130 years generally leasing

1:23:30 ↗ is not the best way to spend public

1:23:32 ↗ dollars on an ongoing entity so

1:23:35 ↗ um so we're examining

1:23:36 ↗ buying and renovating and we're

1:23:38 ↗ examining building and we're looking at

1:23:41 ↗ it from lots of different perspectives

1:23:43 ↗ um I think the question that's raised is

1:23:45 ↗ how are you really looking at it from an

1:23:47 ↗ environmental perspective and what are

1:23:49 ↗ the considerations related to that and I

1:23:51 ↗ think we have not uh analyzed those

1:23:55 ↗ options deeply Accord against

1:23:57 ↗ environmental criteria at this point in

1:23:59 ↗ the process we're still just trying to

1:24:00 ↗ figure out what information do we need

1:24:02 ↗ to analyze these two basic options for

1:24:06 ↗ council's consideration

1:24:12 ↗ all of our questions

1:24:15 ↗ so maybe we can pop over to the next

1:24:18 ↗ time

1:24:21 ↗ yeah so feedback comments

1:24:25 ↗ love to hear your thoughts

1:24:28 ↗ um go ahead if you want okay so I just

1:24:32 ↗ had a question and you know going back

1:24:34 ↗ to the same question which is the

1:24:36 ↗ important question most of the people

1:24:37 ↗ here brought it up

1:24:39 ↗ what is the criteria actual you know

1:24:42 ↗ criteria going and deciding if a project

1:24:45 ↗ is ready alone right

1:24:48 ↗ like what where what feedback you need

1:24:51 ↗ from us so there I would like to

1:24:54 ↗ personally I would like to take a closer

1:24:56 ↗ look at the projects and I I did not I

1:24:59 ↗ just glanced at it

1:25:01 ↗ um and you know which one are listed as

1:25:03 ↗ red yellow and green and then think

1:25:05 ↗ about it a little bit and I don't know

1:25:07 ↗ if other people have suggestions on it

1:25:10 ↗ there are bunch of numerical

1:25:13 ↗ spreadsheets and you know criteria is

1:25:15 ↗ available for different calculations of

1:25:18 ↗ environmental cost versus benefit ratio

1:25:21 ↗ but as you pointed out rightly it may

1:25:24 ↗ not be consistent it may not be accurate

1:25:27 ↗ and it would be a huge effort for your

1:25:30 ↗ purpose so it kind of you know beats the

1:25:33 ↗ main purpose I agree with that

1:25:36 ↗ um but at the top of my head besides

1:25:38 ↗ Greenhouse accounting and you know

1:25:40 ↗ actually getting some numbers or

1:25:44 ↗ estimating what the pollution rates are

1:25:47 ↗ or maybe actually

1:25:49 ↗ um you know classifying different

1:25:51 ↗ projects under different categories

1:25:53 ↗ right because you know which is what

1:25:55 ↗ probably I'm guessing your criteria is

1:25:58 ↗ transportation projects will be you know

1:26:01 ↗ not necessarily green or you know things

1:26:04 ↗ like that so personally I think I need

1:26:07 ↗ to look I would like to look at a closer

1:26:09 ↗ look and maybe

1:26:10 ↗ then I may have some feedback but I

1:26:12 ↗ don't know if that is an option to do

1:26:14 ↗ that later

1:26:16 ↗ well I I think in terms of timing uh

1:26:20 ↗ it's

1:26:21 ↗ um our next stop are the council

1:26:24 ↗ committees and so we had not anticipated

1:26:26 ↗ coming back to this body and having

1:26:30 ↗ another conversation about how the

1:26:32 ↗ criteria applied to projects we were

1:26:34 ↗ hoping to have that conversation today

1:26:36 ↗ um so but I would say as

1:26:39 ↗ um as you are a Community member Council

1:26:43 ↗ wants to hear from you at any time so if

1:26:46 ↗ you wanted to go back and and take a

1:26:48 ↗ look at the projects and take the time

1:26:51 ↗ after having this meeting and you say

1:26:52 ↗ you know I think we should be thinking

1:26:54 ↗ about it and this way and I have the

1:26:55 ↗ feed that feedback please email city

1:26:59 ↗ council uh email me

1:27:02 ↗ um or provide provide those comments

1:27:04 ↗ because we always want to hear them so

1:27:06 ↗ while we're not contemplating another

1:27:08 ↗ meeting to talk about this we still

1:27:11 ↗ plenty of time to hear your feedback and

1:27:13 ↗ incorporate that feedback into this

1:27:15 ↗ process yeah I think I would like to

1:27:17 ↗ personally I would like to do that you

1:27:18 ↗ know I can

1:27:26 ↗ yeah yeah wonderful and I I do want to

1:27:28 ↗ make sure that that's that's shared with

1:27:30 ↗ city council as well because they are

1:27:31 ↗ the ultimate decision makers right

1:27:33 ↗ they're the ones who are going to be

1:27:34 ↗ adopting that

1:27:36 ↗ um and so we're moving on to like the

1:27:38 ↗ council portion of this process so what

1:27:41 ↗ feedback you have I definitely want to

1:27:43 ↗ make sure it goes directly to them

1:27:45 ↗ thank you

1:27:47 ↗ welcome

1:27:48 ↗ um first of all great job this is a very

1:27:51 ↗ aggressive CIP list there's some really

1:27:54 ↗ cool projects on here I

1:27:56 ↗ props to you and your staff for getting

1:27:57 ↗ to this plan and for using this new

1:28:00 ↗ criteria to get it into a format that

1:28:02 ↗ you can use

1:28:04 ↗ um I'll give you feedback on one of the

1:28:05 ↗ criteria and it's the red one and I

1:28:07 ↗ struggled with this at our last session

1:28:09 ↗ too the difference between no impact

1:28:13 ↗ negative impact in all the categories it

1:28:15 ↗ seems very different

1:28:17 ↗ Give an example a sewer a sewer lift

1:28:19 ↗ station

1:28:20 ↗ you Market as as having red to community

1:28:23 ↗ value

1:28:26 ↗ if you run into failure and fails

1:28:29 ↗ now it is a very very high priority

1:28:31 ↗ Indie pad yeah so how do you split that

1:28:35 ↗ difference so consider the red category

1:28:37 ↗ it's probably not gonna happen for this

1:28:39 ↗ time around but next time around think

1:28:41 ↗ about it how can you better reflect that

1:28:43 ↗ yeah I I love that example

1:28:48 ↗ um and it's something we have struggled

1:28:50 ↗ with frankly uh they'll give you another

1:28:53 ↗ example

1:28:55 ↗ um how I raised this question in the

1:28:57 ↗ equity board last week uh to get a green

1:29:01 ↗ and Equity uh we have to be correcting a

1:29:04 ↗ historic ROM

1:29:06 ↗ for a group that maybe is underserved

1:29:10 ↗ and

1:29:12 ↗ um and if we look at something like the

1:29:15 ↗ pool if we don't maintain the pool the

1:29:17 ↗ pool is used by everybody so it's not

1:29:19 ↗ targeted for one specific part of the

1:29:22 ↗ community right and so we didn't rate

1:29:25 ↗ that green inequity but if the pool were

1:29:28 ↗ to not be maintained if the pool were to

1:29:30 ↗ collapse tomorrow

1:29:33 ↗ heaven forbid

1:29:34 ↗ um

1:29:35 ↗ then who's that going to impact the most

1:29:37 ↗ from our neglect will be impacted the

1:29:39 ↗ most right and so our criteria doesn't

1:29:42 ↗ really capture that or doesn't really

1:29:43 ↗ capture

1:29:44 ↗ sewer doesn't seem like it's high

1:29:47 ↗ necessarily high on a community priority

1:29:48 ↗ it might just be in our Sewer Master

1:29:50 ↗ Plan but nobody else is thinking about

1:29:51 ↗ sewer because fortunately you don't have

1:29:53 ↗ to think about sewer because we we do

1:29:55 ↗ all the worrying for you

1:29:57 ↗ um but but you know uh I shouldn't say

1:30:00 ↗ nobody but I worry some people worry

1:30:02 ↗ some people worry but uh you know so the

1:30:06 ↗ so so how do we capture that in terms of

1:30:09 ↗ our criteria while also making sure that

1:30:11 ↗ we're not diluting the Criterion and

1:30:13 ↗ scoring everything green because

1:30:14 ↗ everything is you know important and if

1:30:17 ↗ it all collapses that's going to be a

1:30:18 ↗ problem so but it's very complex and I

1:30:21 ↗ guess my point is I just want to make

1:30:23 ↗ sure that you and the staff at as well

1:30:25 ↗ are thinking just like you're thinking

1:30:26 ↗ and going Beyond just a

1:30:29 ↗ the quick red yellow green

1:30:31 ↗ check box

1:30:33 ↗ do you have

1:30:35 ↗ um I think I also heard you say that red

1:30:38 ↗ across the Chris here are are different

1:30:41 ↗ did you say that no I didn't see Brad

1:30:43 ↗ across different most of what I saw when

1:30:45 ↗ I was perusing your list was it had

1:30:48 ↗ little to no impact okay okay that's

1:30:50 ↗ what I got Adam

1:30:52 ↗ yeah and you would like us to rethink

1:30:54 ↗ how we if there's an actual negative

1:30:56 ↗ impact there

1:30:58 ↗ somehow indicate that okay maybe a new

1:31:00 ↗ category like

1:31:02 ↗ um gray or something black

1:31:08 ↗ I appreciate that thank you

1:31:11 ↗ okay uh my feedback is to tell you that

1:31:13 ↗ I think that uh the red light green

1:31:15 ↗ light is doing you a disservice for this

1:31:17 ↗ very purpose when we see red I think

1:31:19 ↗ there's a natural indication when you

1:31:21 ↗ give us information for us to go oh well

1:31:24 ↗ should we be having less red projects

1:31:25 ↗ rather than going yeah some of these

1:31:27 ↗ aren't going to be able to fit certain

1:31:28 ↗ lenses but they're necessary for the

1:31:30 ↗ general well-functioning of our

1:31:32 ↗ infrastructure right so I think that

1:31:34 ↗ when you label it red you're diving into

1:31:36 ↗ some connotations that I don't know that

1:31:38 ↗ you need to right so I would rethink I

1:31:41 ↗ think this is a great place to start I

1:31:43 ↗ think it needs to evolve I don't want to

1:31:45 ↗ see a granularity of project but I do

1:31:48 ↗ think being able to click on that red

1:31:49 ↗ and say oh is this a no impact or not

1:31:51 ↗ you know what I mean even if you stuck

1:31:52 ↗ with it being able to have just that

1:31:54 ↗ next step level because you're asking us

1:31:56 ↗ to give feedback from our lens of the

1:31:59 ↗ environmental board but I really don't

1:32:00 ↗ have enough information on these

1:32:02 ↗ projects to be able to do that even at a

1:32:04 ↗ high level right obviously Everyone

1:32:06 ↗ likes green right so it's it's a helpful

1:32:09 ↗ thing but it's also not super helpful

1:32:11 ↗ for the board to be able to come and

1:32:13 ↗ tell you I think the priorities ought to

1:32:15 ↗ be this right even without getting

1:32:17 ↗ interested in nitty-gritty you're still

1:32:19 ↗ going to want to have feedback from your

1:32:20 ↗ boards telling you we like this

1:32:22 ↗ direction to council right that's their

1:32:23 ↗ whole point is to be able to advise but

1:32:24 ↗ we can't really do that because we don't

1:32:26 ↗ really know anything other than most

1:32:28 ↗ people are going to be anti-red and

1:32:30 ↗ pro-green right so I would rethink that

1:32:33 ↗ I think might be a better way and even

1:32:34 ↗ doing a different color coding system

1:32:36 ↗ might enable the public to rethink how

1:32:39 ↗ we're approaching something like the

1:32:41 ↗ example of the retaining wall right we

1:32:44 ↗ would look at this all the time right

1:32:46 ↗ and we would go well the environment we

1:32:48 ↗ had an engineer sign up on it it's okay

1:32:50 ↗ this year so we're not going to worry

1:32:51 ↗ about it right does that mean it's not

1:32:54 ↗ being looked at and not being addressed

1:32:55 ↗ no right we've been looking at that

1:32:57 ↗ monstrosity of a wall wanting to do

1:32:59 ↗ something about it and the city goes I

1:33:01 ↗ mean why are we going to broke what's

1:33:02 ↗ not fixed you know what isn't really

1:33:04 ↗ fixable right now because it's going to

1:33:05 ↗ be a massive project right so there's

1:33:08 ↗ also other factors in playroom for that

1:33:09 ↗ wall right we want want someone to come

1:33:12 ↗ in take that land develop it we've had a

1:33:14 ↗ lot of different ideas over the years

1:33:16 ↗ about a partner who would then help

1:33:17 ↗ mitigate that cost right so there's a

1:33:19 ↗ reason that we don't say this is just an

1:33:21 ↗ eyesore and we're worried at some point

1:33:23 ↗ it will fail we are worried at some

1:33:24 ↗ point it's going to fail that's why we

1:33:25 ↗ do our due diligence we make sure

1:33:27 ↗ there's not going to be a landslide

1:33:28 ↗ right so again classifying that as a red

1:33:32 ↗ that makes people upset like what is

1:33:35 ↗ going on right you know so I just think

1:33:36 ↗ that this is a good place to start and I

1:33:39 ↗ think without getting into a granularity

1:33:40 ↗ of project which we want to avoid we

1:33:43 ↗ could still give more information for

1:33:45 ↗ the next iteration so my comments are

1:33:47 ↗ all about how we evolve this system and

1:33:50 ↗ using these different lenses rather than

1:33:52 ↗ what we want to do right now for this

1:33:54 ↗ that makes that hurt

1:33:56 ↗ I have one comment that's related to

1:33:59 ↗ that and a few other ones I think what

1:34:01 ↗ is easy for someone to understand is a

1:34:03 ↗ plus

1:34:04 ↗ no impact negative yeah because we put

1:34:07 ↗ it in a color system

1:34:10 ↗ someone can't tell if red means bad or

1:34:13 ↗ red means nothing and I think that's my

1:34:15 ↗ base and it's not just our criteria here

1:34:17 ↗ I think it's like Don said I think it's

1:34:19 ↗ consistent I think it's consistent like

1:34:21 ↗ problematic and that you can't tell

1:34:22 ↗ what's a negative impact versus no

1:34:24 ↗ impact I mean

1:34:25 ↗ I think the joyous point if you don't

1:34:28 ↗ know because you don't know what was

1:34:30 ↗ went into that it's very hard to tell

1:34:32 ↗ and there is a very big difference

1:34:33 ↗ between no impact and negative impact so

1:34:35 ↗ that I think is the biggest feedback I

1:34:37 ↗ would have on the scoring criteria is

1:34:40 ↗ that I think it makes more sense whether

1:34:42 ↗ it could be red yellow green but yellow

1:34:43 ↗ is is neutral and red is negative or

1:34:46 ↗ some other system that makes it clear

1:34:48 ↗ what is a positive and what is a

1:34:50 ↗ negative and what is neutral

1:34:53 ↗ um so that would be one piece of

1:34:55 ↗ feedback I think

1:34:57 ↗ the other piece of feedback on just the

1:34:59 ↗ the scoring system is what I hope it

1:35:02 ↗ doesn't become as like

1:35:04 ↗ City staff puts together the list of

1:35:06 ↗ things they want to do and we just score

1:35:07 ↗ it and then it just it's just a scoring

1:35:10 ↗ of something that we were going to do

1:35:11 ↗ anyways and I think the question

1:35:13 ↗ and I don't think we can really decide

1:35:15 ↗ that here but I think how Council house

1:35:18 ↗ staff is going to actually incorporate

1:35:20 ↗ this and I see how like an actual

1:35:22 ↗ algorithm would be really challenging

1:35:23 ↗ but I think the process at least of how

1:35:25 ↗ okay we're looking at the next three

1:35:27 ↗ years and there's 15 Reds of a given

1:35:31 ↗ type of criteria is that how is that

1:35:34 ↗ going to inform a conversation I do

1:35:36 ↗ think some of that might be solved just

1:35:38 ↗ by how this ends up getting presented

1:35:40 ↗ because I think it's really hard at the

1:35:41 ↗ project level to like pull out and say

1:35:43 ↗ how do we make sure that we're not

1:35:45 ↗ impacting one type of criteria super

1:35:47 ↗ negatively over the next three years how

1:35:49 ↗ do we make sure that we're getting

1:35:50 ↗ insights out of going through that

1:35:52 ↗ scoring process so that's one other area

1:35:55 ↗ that would be interested in kind of yeah

1:35:57 ↗ I'm sure it'll kind of come out in some

1:35:58 ↗ ways in the council process but would

1:36:01 ↗ also be interested in how staff ends up

1:36:03 ↗ using that and things about the process

1:36:06 ↗ um

1:36:07 ↗ I think

1:36:09 ↗ um

1:36:11 ↗ my

1:36:12 ↗ biggest feedback related to the

1:36:14 ↗ environmental criteria is and this is

1:36:17 ↗ part of the reason I think we had the

1:36:18 ↗ feedback that why natural environment

1:36:21 ↗ and climate may be needed to be

1:36:23 ↗ separated I think you could argue almost

1:36:26 ↗ every project that's an infrastructure

1:36:28 ↗ project is going to have a negative net

1:36:30 ↗ carbon impact if you do the full

1:36:32 ↗ accounting and I don't know

1:36:34 ↗ if we want to include all of that in but

1:36:38 ↗ that's that's I think the reality is

1:36:39 ↗ very few of the projects are going to

1:36:41 ↗ have other than maybe some of the

1:36:42 ↗ transportation classes there's some that

1:36:44 ↗ will like some of the things that are in

1:36:46 ↗ the itap but a lot of the infrastructure

1:36:47 ↗ projects will if you actually did the

1:36:49 ↗ full accounting for a project we'll have

1:36:51 ↗ negative sorry we'll have positive net

1:36:55 ↗ emissions so

1:36:57 ↗ I don't know that we want every project

1:36:59 ↗ that end up read because of that so I

1:37:01 ↗ don't know what the right answer is but

1:37:03 ↗ I think right now our criteria actually

1:37:05 ↗ isn't capturing that major

1:37:07 ↗ infrastructure projects have a negative

1:37:10 ↗ emissions impact that I I think maybe a

1:37:13 ↗ staff or not maybe they aren't thinking

1:37:16 ↗ about that and maybe we don't want them

1:37:18 ↗ to think about that but I think that

1:37:19 ↗ should be a decision that's made that

1:37:20 ↗ it's we're focusing on outcomes because

1:37:23 ↗ otherwise right now I think we have a

1:37:25 ↗ overly Rosy picture of of of that

1:37:28 ↗ criteria because it doesn't take that

1:37:30 ↗ end of it now so

1:37:32 ↗ yeah I don't I don't know the right

1:37:34 ↗ answer as to how that is but I think

1:37:35 ↗ that's one problem with the current

1:37:37 ↗ system and part of the reason we suggest

1:37:39 ↗ to that is it

1:37:41 ↗ and I don't know if Ann I thought you

1:37:43 ↗ might be going there with some of the

1:37:44 ↗ questions you're asking earlier as well

1:37:46 ↗ but uh that was that was the one thing

1:37:48 ↗ that jumped out at me is there was a lot

1:37:50 ↗ of things that seemed that would

1:37:51 ↗ ultimately be negative from a climate

1:37:53 ↗ perspective and then I think how do you

1:37:55 ↗ then some things will have some of the

1:37:57 ↗ projects will have positive

1:37:59 ↗ environmental benefit negative

1:38:01 ↗ like greenhouse gas

1:38:03 ↗ impact so

1:38:05 ↗ I think that's where it's it's really

1:38:07 ↗ challenging because those two actually

1:38:09 ↗ could be conflicting and often I think

1:38:11 ↗ there's some multiple occasions in here

1:38:13 ↗ that they are

1:38:14 ↗ they argue so

1:38:15 ↗ I don't have a solution I think it's a

1:38:17 ↗ hard problem

1:38:18 ↗ um and I think everything that's been

1:38:20 ↗ done is is a

1:38:22 ↗ a good step in the right direction I

1:38:23 ↗ think that

1:38:24 ↗ though that is a big big weakness in our

1:38:27 ↗ current okay environmental criteria

1:38:31 ↗ um one other question slash comment

1:38:33 ↗ I know like something like Fleet

1:38:36 ↗ purchase would typically be an operating

1:38:38 ↗ expense is that correct

1:38:41 ↗ and you should ask we had this we had a

1:38:43 ↗ whole conversation about this

1:38:45 ↗ um so I think how we're treating Fleet

1:38:47 ↗ and Susie tell me if I'm wrong uh is if

1:38:51 ↗ we're buying something new

1:38:53 ↗ then it might go into the CIP it's a

1:38:56 ↗ replacement of equipment

1:38:58 ↗ um then it might not

1:38:59 ↗ is that right uh in this CIP we made the

1:39:03 ↗ decision the policy decision to not

1:39:04 ↗ include any Fleet projects

1:39:06 ↗ um we included some fleet infrastructure

1:39:09 ↗ um I mean I think there was a lift

1:39:11 ↗ project in there adding another lift

1:39:13 ↗ um we're in the process of uh looking at

1:39:17 ↗ how we pay for our Fleet costs and how

1:39:20 ↗ we anticipate what that model looks like

1:39:22 ↗ in terms of how law the life cycle of

1:39:25 ↗ vehicles and replacement schedules that

1:39:27 ↗ is anticipated to go to council sometime

1:39:29 ↗ this year I believe it's been in the

1:39:31 ↗ works for a while something we've wanted

1:39:33 ↗ to do for a long time

1:39:35 ↗ um but when we do Implement that we've

1:39:38 ↗ held off on putting this in the CIP with

1:39:41 ↗ the idea that since this is going to

1:39:42 ↗ council soon anyway we want to have that

1:39:44 ↗ discussion with them and then

1:39:45 ↗ incorporate that feedback into our next

1:39:48 ↗ steps with Fleet

1:39:51 ↗ um so with this CIP we cut them out the

1:39:54 ↗ plan is moving forward

1:39:55 ↗ very much what Andrea just said where

1:39:58 ↗ The Replacements are considered an

1:40:00 ↗ operating cost we already own that

1:40:03 ↗ um those Vehicles so it's more when we

1:40:05 ↗ replace them trying to spread out those

1:40:07 ↗ costs so it's not just you know we

1:40:09 ↗ bought five police vehicles in one year

1:40:11 ↗ um 10 years from now we have to buy five

1:40:13 ↗ more

1:40:14 ↗ um and it's that big increase cost so we

1:40:16 ↗ try to find a way to spread those out

1:40:17 ↗ but when we have new vehicles that are

1:40:20 ↗ not just Replacements of vehicles that

1:40:21 ↗ we already have those would be ones we

1:40:24 ↗ would plan to include in the CIP

1:40:26 ↗ so it sounds like part of the reason I

1:40:28 ↗ ask is our next

1:40:29 ↗ our next data sustainable purchasing

1:40:31 ↗ because if this is it if CIP is going to

1:40:35 ↗ cover anything that's not the actual

1:40:38 ↗ replacement of Fleet it seems like the

1:40:40 ↗ sustainable purchasing policy is what

1:40:42 ↗ would ultimately be used in replacement

1:40:44 ↗ of fleet vehicles

1:40:46 ↗ and so I do think

1:40:48 ↗ which will we don't I don't need to give

1:40:49 ↗ you feedback on that yet but I do think

1:40:51 ↗ that those types of things where there's

1:40:52 ↗ more pressure or there's more at stake

1:40:55 ↗ and a purchasing decision you may end up

1:40:57 ↗ needing more rigor and like what if it's

1:41:00 ↗ not being governed my criteria that's in

1:41:01 ↗ the CIP sounds like it's going to be

1:41:03 ↗ maybe the sustainable purchasing policy

1:41:05 ↗ that it needs to come out in so yeah and

1:41:09 ↗ that's one reason

1:41:10 ↗ sorry that is um so that's one of the

1:41:14 ↗ reasons we also held off on putting it

1:41:15 ↗ in the CIP as well was we wanted the

1:41:17 ↗ discussions like the one you're about to

1:41:19 ↗ have to inform that discussion with

1:41:21 ↗ Council on our longer term um Fleet

1:41:24 ↗ plans

1:41:25 ↗ um because that's going to feed into how

1:41:27 ↗ we do all of our Fleet purchases over

1:41:29 ↗ the coming you know the next CIP

1:41:31 ↗ iteration

1:41:33 ↗ it's easy I was just gonna there's been

1:41:37 ↗ a lot of great comments and feedback on

1:41:38 ↗ the CIP and thinking about how some of

1:41:41 ↗ those comments could

1:41:44 ↗ um come at a different stage in a

1:41:46 ↗ project which relates to where might we

1:41:48 ↗ incorporate

1:41:49 ↗ into a sustainable purchasing policy

1:41:51 ↗ we're going to talk to you sometime this

1:41:54 ↗ year probably about a Greek

1:41:55 ↗ infrastructure policy or are there other

1:41:57 ↗ policies do all the devices on because

1:42:00 ↗ we will continue to have projects in the

1:42:02 ↗ CIP that are show up as read for the

1:42:04 ↗ environment so where what are other

1:42:06 ↗ avenues we can use to make sure that

1:42:09 ↗ we're either incorporating

1:42:11 ↗ repurchasing or tracking of greenhouse

1:42:14 ↗ gas emissions and body permissions

1:42:17 ↗ just to keep thinking about that and

1:42:19 ↗ Advising us

1:42:21 ↗ ladies

1:42:26 ↗ um as a comment on the um on the chart I

1:42:29 ↗ would love to add a a column that

1:42:31 ↗ actually would direct each project to

1:42:34 ↗ the policy that's addressing whether

1:42:36 ↗ that be from the tip the icap or whether

1:42:38 ↗ it be from the pump plan

1:42:39 ↗ um generally being able to communicate

1:42:41 ↗ data you're trying to get to a purpose

1:42:43 ↗ right so I think that it would be

1:42:44 ↗ helpful to be able to say

1:42:46 ↗ um this is you know this addresses it

1:42:48 ↗ that's right this policy right and so um

1:42:50 ↗ similar into the way that we look at the

1:42:52 ↗ comp plan and we look at how our

1:42:53 ↗ policies are all blending together I

1:42:55 ↗ think it would be really interesting to

1:42:56 ↗ be able to actually just have a column

1:42:58 ↗ that talks about oh and this is

1:42:59 ↗ addressing this policy right I love

1:43:01 ↗ policies that end up intermeshing

1:43:03 ↗ together right and kind of bringing

1:43:05 ↗ other ones into the Consciousness and

1:43:06 ↗ into the conversation

1:43:08 ↗ um and how you're classifying each one

1:43:10 ↗ again for the policy that it's

1:43:11 ↗ addressing I think is interesting

1:43:13 ↗ because then you can kind of look at

1:43:14 ↗ saying well are the majority of our

1:43:16 ↗ projects addressing which policies and

1:43:19 ↗ maybe where do we need to realign our

1:43:20 ↗ resources because some things aren't

1:43:22 ↗ happening with the expectations that

1:43:24 ↗ this amount of the pie is going to

1:43:25 ↗ infrastructure sure this amount applies

1:43:26 ↗ going to this right we might have a more

1:43:28 ↗ interesting view of it if we kind of

1:43:29 ↗ know what pieces are coming together

1:43:31 ↗ from our different policy discussions so

1:43:33 ↗ that when we come back and we reformat

1:43:36 ↗ our policy we're able to say how are we

1:43:38 ↗ doing in practice foreign

1:43:45 ↗ this is one of the hazards of um

1:43:49 ↗ uh of the timing of when we have some of

1:43:51 ↗ these discussions so we did have a

1:43:55 ↗ um in the actual CIP document which

1:43:58 ↗ understanding is not in your materials

1:44:00 ↗ yet tonight

1:44:01 ↗ um as we were in the process of forming

1:44:03 ↗ that we do have some

1:44:06 ↗ um connection to the Strategic the city

1:44:09 ↗ strategic plan so

1:44:11 ↗ um in particular the goals of things

1:44:13 ↗ like Mobility versus growth and

1:44:15 ↗ development environmental stewardship

1:44:18 ↗ um all of these are defined in our

1:44:19 ↗ city-wide strategic plan so we do for

1:44:22 ↗ every project that's in the six-year CIP

1:44:25 ↗ the active projects we ask project

1:44:27 ↗ managers to also say to what extent what

1:44:30 ↗ percent of the project is it addressing

1:44:33 ↗ those goals so there is there's a table

1:44:36 ↗ on in case you want to look at it later

1:44:38 ↗ page 29 of the document of the actual

1:44:41 ↗ CIP where at least we do the percentages

1:44:43 ↗ within each year

1:44:44 ↗ um we do have the information also on

1:44:47 ↗ the project pages

1:44:50 ↗ um So within the document there'll be a

1:44:52 ↗ page for every project where we give a

1:44:53 ↗ little bit of summary justification

1:44:55 ↗ there is a field in there for which

1:44:57 ↗ strategic plan goal IT addresses

1:45:00 ↗ um to your point as well um we also have

1:45:02 ↗ a table in there looking at what other

1:45:05 ↗ City Planning documents there's another

1:45:07 ↗ kind of Matrix style table looking at

1:45:10 ↗ for every project was this project

1:45:12 ↗ identified in icap was it identified in

1:45:15 ↗ the mobility master plan that said those

1:45:18 ↗ aren't merged together right that's I

1:45:20 ↗ love that document I am when I'm a

1:45:22 ↗ document youth on that so what I'm

1:45:23 ↗ saying is I think it would be

1:45:24 ↗ interesting to see when you are building

1:45:26 ↗ out this framework for the next

1:45:28 ↗ iteration well what is it that you're

1:45:29 ↗ hoping to do right and so what kind of

1:45:31 ↗ information can we give to be able to

1:45:32 ↗ build other

1:45:34 ↗ um to better inform our decisions if

1:45:35 ↗ that makes sense right I know that

1:45:37 ↗ there's these little pieces out there so

1:45:38 ↗ how do we add those in to be able to

1:45:40 ↗ better say oh and how do we what are we

1:45:42 ↗ doing with this right where is it that

1:45:44 ↗ we're going right I think it would be

1:45:45 ↗ foolish to say oh well we have a city

1:45:46 ↗ goal of having this many this many green

1:45:48 ↗ right so instead how are we actually

1:45:50 ↗ using our resources to get to where we

1:45:52 ↗ all want to go

1:45:53 ↗ great thank you thank you

1:45:56 ↗ all right well I think unless anything

1:45:58 ↗ oh Tom okay this might be our last

1:46:01 ↗ comment here because we do need to

1:46:04 ↗ okay first just a little uh cosmetic

1:46:08 ↗ thing not all humans uh see color is the

1:46:11 ↗ same

1:46:12 ↗ and the

1:46:14 ↗ particularly man there's certain the

1:46:16 ↗ category of man who have trouble with

1:46:18 ↗ seeing color anyway these pastels which

1:46:22 ↗ are very similar to one another uh blend

1:46:24 ↗ together for me and a certain percentage

1:46:27 ↗ so uh high contrast colors is a thing

1:46:33 ↗ is for people like me to make it a

1:46:37 ↗ little more easy to see what's what so

1:46:40 ↗ just a cosmetic thing I as an engineer I

1:46:44 ↗ just you know I really I just can't

1:46:46 ↗ stand to have things subjected they they

1:46:49 ↗ have to be objective

1:46:51 ↗ so what can we do but I know it's a

1:46:54 ↗ difficult problem but so here's an idea

1:46:56 ↗ for a while that uh adding a column that

1:46:59 ↗ allows you to identify the selection

1:47:03 ↗ rationale you know so why did why was

1:47:05 ↗ this particular thing included in well

1:47:07 ↗ there was some reason that you decided

1:47:10 ↗ that was it maybe you just maybe you

1:47:12 ↗ have a rule that says well anything

1:47:14 ↗ that's a legal mandate and the community

1:47:16 ↗ priority and we have the ability to

1:47:19 ↗ deliver we want those in okay so there's

1:47:21 ↗ a rationale maybe you'd give a code to

1:47:24 ↗ that one that in there and you can sort

1:47:26 ↗ by that and see oh yeah those are all

1:47:28 ↗ good things that we could do it those

1:47:30 ↗ are in by default and then you go to the

1:47:33 ↗ next category and fill out based on some

1:47:37 ↗ other selection criteria selection

1:47:40 ↗ rationale and and maybe uh after you do

1:47:43 ↗ that some number of times you end up

1:47:46 ↗ with some things at the bottom that

1:47:47 ↗ don't fit into those nice categories and

1:47:50 ↗ so you uh you know are you arguing about

1:47:52 ↗ them for a while and still come up with

1:47:54 ↗ something to say about

1:47:56 ↗ so I don't know it would help me in

1:47:59 ↗ looking at a

1:48:01 ↗ the chart as it is with its colors there

1:48:04 ↗ that I can hardly see I mean I can't

1:48:05 ↗ discern what the pattern is whereas if I

1:48:09 ↗ can assign some rationales that would

1:48:11 ↗ identified it were based on those

1:48:14 ↗ criteria the color coding that would

1:48:16 ↗ help me discern what it is and it's like

1:48:19 ↗ well is that a good rule to apply for

1:48:21 ↗ the selection or do I disagree with it

1:48:24 ↗ that would that would be easier for me

1:48:27 ↗ to Grapple with it anyway so that's my

1:48:30 ↗ suggestion

1:48:31 ↗ uh thank you for that

1:48:34 ↗ um it also became clear with the colors

1:48:37 ↗ weren't the best the most accessible way

1:48:40 ↗ to provide this information the document

1:48:43 ↗ online and maybe we can use you as a

1:48:45 ↗ test subject to see if this works for

1:48:47 ↗ you we added uh patterns within the

1:48:50 ↗ cells to try to be able to better

1:48:51 ↗ discern

1:48:53 ↗ um so if if you have trouble seeing

1:48:55 ↗ colors and different colors Discerning

1:48:57 ↗ from them we added patterns to try to

1:48:59 ↗ display that information to make it more

1:49:01 ↗ accessible for people who have problems

1:49:02 ↗ with color so I'd love to see if that

1:49:04 ↗ works for you or if we need to change

1:49:06 ↗ the pattern because we we do want you to

1:49:08 ↗ be able to see it

1:49:10 ↗ um so so maybe what we can do uh Thomas

1:49:13 ↗ send you that link and you tell us do

1:49:17 ↗ those patterns work or do we need to

1:49:18 ↗ rethink something that's much more

1:49:21 ↗ um yeah well I'd be happy to do that but

1:49:24 ↗ keep in mind that not all humans are the

1:49:26 ↗ same so I have a particular flavor of

1:49:28 ↗ color blindness but there are various

1:49:31 ↗ flavors so so the pattern thing is is

1:49:33 ↗ probably a good idea

1:49:35 ↗ um but uh yeah I'd be happy to stay

1:49:39 ↗ and thank you for your other comments

1:49:40 ↗ too I just thought I'd I'd jump on that

1:49:42 ↗ because we wanted to see if if it's at

1:49:44 ↗ all if the pattern works and so

1:49:48 ↗ um yeah because if we want to find what

1:49:50 ↗ does right or as many as people as

1:49:52 ↗ possible

1:49:55 ↗ I just want to say quickly

1:49:57 ↗ um you guys clearly are putting a lot of

1:49:59 ↗ thought into this and it's much

1:50:01 ↗ appreciated and I love that you have

1:50:03 ↗ parks and trails up there as you're you

1:50:06 ↗ know top priorities

1:50:09 ↗ yeah thank you yeah thank you great job

1:50:12 ↗ thank you and thank you for the

1:50:15 ↗ wonderful feedback tonight one final

1:50:16 ↗ question before Stacy and David give us

1:50:18 ↗ the hug to get out of here because I

1:50:19 ↗ know we've taken up more time than uh

1:50:21 ↗ they had planned for but um

1:50:24 ↗ Stacy if States

1:50:26 ↗ Susie has been taking a large volume of

1:50:30 ↗ notes on the feedback that you've

1:50:31 ↗ provided uh is it all right if we take

1:50:34 ↗ these and summarize them and pass them

1:50:35 ↗ on Day Council would you prefer to send

1:50:37 ↗ your own letter to council how would you

1:50:39 ↗ like your feedback to be communicated to

1:50:41 ↗ council

1:50:42 ↗ I think both of you guys saw

1:50:45 ↗ okay okay perfect

1:50:59 ↗ you can talk right here not is whether

1:51:02 ↗ we want to take a look at it prior like

1:51:04 ↗ what was put together prior to it going

1:51:05 ↗ to council

1:51:06 ↗ um just to make sure that it

1:51:10 ↗ is very good yeah if that's possible

1:51:13 ↗ yeah we've done that before sending out

1:51:15 ↗ to the board and then people can respond

1:51:17 ↗ directly to me with any corrections or

1:51:20 ↗ revisions I I think that's helpful

1:51:21 ↗ because I always want to make sure that

1:51:23 ↗ we're reflecting accurately your

1:51:24 ↗ feedback

1:51:25 ↗ right I don't want to put it through my

1:51:27 ↗ filter I wanted to be

1:51:29 ↗ um what you had said so

1:51:31 ↗ okay great great thank you all so much

1:51:34 ↗ great discussion tonight

1:51:36 ↗ and we are running about 20 minutes

1:51:39 ↗ behind

1:51:42 ↗ and the question is

1:51:43 ↗ we were to run 20 minutes over is that a

1:51:45 ↗ problem for anyone

1:51:50 ↗ okay

1:51:53 ↗ appreciate it

1:51:55 ↗ anytime there's CIP or title 18.

1:52:01 ↗ um all right well with that we will hop

1:52:03 ↗ straight into the next item which is

1:52:04 ↗ sustainable purchasing policy okay

1:52:07 ↗ sounds good and I will try and give you

1:52:10 ↗ a thorough but but

1:52:14 ↗ um efficient there we go presentation on

1:52:18 ↗ this

1:52:19 ↗ um so this was something that I had

1:52:22 ↗ um brought I had mentioned to the board

1:52:25 ↗ um a few months ago but we're we're a

1:52:27 ↗ little farther in the process now so

1:52:29 ↗ this is me uh giving more of an update

1:52:31 ↗ on what we're looking at doing

1:52:33 ↗ um as well as asking for a little bit of

1:52:36 ↗ feedback and thoughts as we move forward

1:52:38 ↗ in this process

1:52:41 ↗ so the

1:52:42 ↗ sustainable purchasing policy as a

1:52:45 ↗ little bit of a background is

1:52:46 ↗ specifically identified in the it's a

1:52:49 ↗ book climate action plan

1:52:51 ↗ um and the idea around it is that the

1:52:53 ↗ products and services the city purchases

1:52:56 ↗ inherently have social environmental and

1:52:59 ↗ economic impacts both at their time of

1:53:02 ↗ purchase and throughout the life cycle

1:53:04 ↗ of that material that service that thing

1:53:08 ↗ we purchase right

1:53:11 ↗ um and so many different peer uh

1:53:14 ↗ jurisdictions governments have

1:53:15 ↗ implemented a sustainable purchasing

1:53:18 ↗ policies environmentally preferred

1:53:20 ↗ purchasing policies Etc which is meant

1:53:23 ↗ to provide guidelines and support to

1:53:25 ↗ City staff

1:53:27 ↗ to try and direct purchasing towards

1:53:30 ↗ more environmentally friendly more

1:53:33 ↗ um socially beneficial products and

1:53:36 ↗ services as opposed to

1:53:38 ↗ um you know something that might be bad

1:53:41 ↗ for the environment like Styrofoam cups

1:53:43 ↗ or something along those lines

1:53:45 ↗ there are many peer governments that

1:53:47 ↗ have sustainable purchasing policies

1:53:49 ↗ they are generally larger

1:53:52 ↗ um than Issaquah so King County Seattle

1:53:55 ↗ San Francisco uh Portland OR all kind of

1:53:58 ↗ examples of major cities that have these

1:54:01 ↗ there are also examples of smaller

1:54:03 ↗ jurisdictions like Shoreline

1:54:06 ↗ um that also have them but I will note

1:54:08 ↗ that it's less common to see a

1:54:10 ↗ sustainable purchasing policy in a

1:54:12 ↗ smaller City and thinking about for

1:54:14 ↗ instance our East Side cities over uh in

1:54:17 ↗ this area

1:54:18 ↗ there aren't sustainable purchasing

1:54:21 ↗ policies among East Side cities around

1:54:24 ↗ our size in this area so

1:54:26 ↗ this is a process of kind of taking what

1:54:30 ↗ some of these other jurisdictions are

1:54:31 ↗ doing and thinking about what is the

1:54:32 ↗ right uh policy for us at Issaquah when

1:54:35 ↗ we are smaller when we have fewer staff

1:54:38 ↗ members Etc who can really be focused on

1:54:40 ↗ this

1:54:42 ↗ the current stage of this process is

1:54:45 ↗ what I've called phase one but um it's

1:54:48 ↗ really kind of this information

1:54:49 ↗ gathering stage so I've been talking to

1:54:52 ↗ peer jurisdictions I've gone to the

1:54:54 ↗ equity board and now I'm here at the

1:54:55 ↗ environmental board

1:54:57 ↗ um I've talked to outside experts

1:54:59 ↗ um so for instance the Harvard Kennedy

1:55:01 ↗ government performance lab they have a

1:55:03 ↗ procurement Excellence Network

1:55:06 ↗ um and then I've done kind of

1:55:07 ↗ conversations one-on-one conversations

1:55:09 ↗ with staff across the city ranging from

1:55:12 ↗ police and

1:55:15 ↗ um planning to Public Works and Parks

1:55:18 ↗ really to try and get a broad sense of

1:55:22 ↗ what are we purchasing and what are the

1:55:25 ↗ opportunities challenges concerns Etc in

1:55:29 ↗ the development of a sustainable

1:55:31 ↗ purchasing policy that really would

1:55:32 ↗ touch on All City purchasing

1:55:36 ↗ The Next Step I'm I'm wrapping up uh

1:55:39 ↗ Outreach this month and then the goal is

1:55:43 ↗ to develop a draft policy in early

1:55:46 ↗ summer

1:55:47 ↗ yeah good question yes

1:55:50 ↗ um purchasing purchasing just is that

1:55:54 ↗ capital projects

1:55:56 ↗ excluded operating projects only what it

1:55:59 ↗ is about a scope that you guys have and

1:56:01 ↗ maybe this is something we need to get

1:56:02 ↗ feedback on but this is something that I

1:56:04 ↗ would love some feedback on

1:56:05 ↗ um I think generally this would

1:56:10 ↗ so um here I'm gonna just go to the next

1:56:13 ↗ slide later no no this this is the

1:56:15 ↗ perfect moment to talk about this so

1:56:18 ↗ generally this uh policy is going to be

1:56:21 ↗ based more in guidance versus specific

1:56:24 ↗ requirements on any folks and that is

1:56:27 ↗ for a number of reasons I'll get to in

1:56:29 ↗ my next slide but um because it is more

1:56:32 ↗ guidance it will likely impact capital

1:56:36 ↗ projects and operating projects and

1:56:39 ↗ things from you know buying materials

1:56:42 ↗ for an event to uh to bigger capital

1:56:45 ↗ projects that being said

1:56:48 ↗ capital projects and and different

1:56:50 ↗ projects across the city have a lot of

1:56:52 ↗ different requirements and how they can

1:56:54 ↗ operate right so the way this policy

1:56:56 ↗ might intersect with those

1:56:59 ↗ uh purchases those procurements those

1:57:01 ↗ contracts Etc will be different so for

1:57:05 ↗ instance when uh bullet flies here when

1:57:07 ↗ we're we're talking about what it might

1:57:09 ↗ include

1:57:10 ↗ uh for capital projects for instance it

1:57:13 ↗ might be some model language that can be

1:57:16 ↗ concluded into rfps

1:57:18 ↗ um and contracts around uh environmental

1:57:21 ↗ and social criteria or ideas that we

1:57:25 ↗ want

1:57:26 ↗ um contractors to to think about or use

1:57:29 ↗ when they're they're working with the

1:57:31 ↗ city

1:57:31 ↗ when it comes to uh something like

1:57:35 ↗ um purchasing new I.T equipment it might

1:57:39 ↗ be something more along the lines of hey

1:57:41 ↗ let's look at third party certifications

1:57:43 ↗ for energy efficient I.T equipment so

1:57:46 ↗ that we're we're really making sure that

1:57:48 ↗ we're reducing our energy

1:57:50 ↗ um energy consumption at the city does

1:57:52 ↗ that help answer your question yeah that

1:57:54 ↗ helps thank you

1:57:55 ↗ so here's a kind of a number of

1:57:57 ↗ different things that we're we're

1:57:59 ↗ thinking about kind of including into

1:58:01 ↗ this policy and that are really pulled

1:58:03 ↗ from other policies across the region

1:58:05 ↗ and the country

1:58:07 ↗ um and I I folded the second one the

1:58:09 ↗ criteria to assess environmental and

1:58:11 ↗ social practices partially just because

1:58:13 ↗ that's really one of the the cruxes of

1:58:15 ↗ this is really

1:58:17 ↗ identifying some criteria that will help

1:58:20 ↗ a city staff member who is making any

1:58:24 ↗ purchase and again the our city

1:58:26 ↗ purchases a wide range of things so some

1:58:29 ↗ criteria to help that City staff member

1:58:32 ↗ say what can I look for when I'm

1:58:34 ↗ thinking about

1:58:36 ↗ um working with a service provider what

1:58:38 ↗ can I look for when I'm making some sort

1:58:41 ↗ of city purchase

1:58:43 ↗ moving on to kind of what is not going

1:58:46 ↗ to be the policy

1:58:48 ↗ um we it we want to make sure that it is

1:58:52 ↗ not an inflexible policy so we want it

1:58:54 ↗ to be flexible and that's for for many

1:58:56 ↗ reasons and part of that is because our

1:58:58 ↗ information on what is good and bad

1:59:00 ↗ changes right so one thing that we

1:59:03 ↗ thought might be a great purchase

1:59:05 ↗ um

1:59:06 ↗ you know new information might come out

1:59:08 ↗ and we it is no longer the right thing

1:59:10 ↗ to purchase another thing that was

1:59:12 ↗ raised by uh some peer jurisdictions is

1:59:14 ↗ that with supply chain issues

1:59:16 ↗ um the right thing to purchase suddenly

1:59:19 ↗ might become murky if that thing has to

1:59:21 ↗ be shipped from

1:59:23 ↗ um very far overseas to come to the city

1:59:25 ↗ whereas maybe there is a another option

1:59:27 ↗ that is uh actually more environmentally

1:59:30 ↗ friendly than that right so

1:59:31 ↗ the idea is to really keep this as a

1:59:34 ↗ flexible policy that is meant to guide

1:59:36 ↗ and support staff in making the best

1:59:39 ↗ decisions that they can when uh engaging

1:59:42 ↗ in purchasing at the city

1:59:45 ↗ so the policy the the timeline that

1:59:48 ↗ we're working off here again we're in

1:59:49 ↗ kind of this phase one I will be

1:59:51 ↗ drafting the policy in early summer

1:59:54 ↗ um again in close concert with uh the

1:59:58 ↗ finance department as well as

2:00:01 ↗ specifically some departments that will

2:00:03 ↗ be most impacted by this policy

2:00:07 ↗ um and then uh in phase three I'm going

2:00:09 ↗ to go back out to all the folks that

2:00:11 ↗ I've talked to before I will come back

2:00:12 ↗ to you at the environmental board

2:00:15 ↗ um and uh the the equity board if they

2:00:18 ↗ would like to say hey here's the policy

2:00:20 ↗ that we have drafted how did we do what

2:00:23 ↗ can we change here what uh what are the

2:00:26 ↗ updates that we can make to make sure

2:00:27 ↗ that it really does reflect uh what the

2:00:30 ↗ city needs and what we're trying to aim

2:00:32 ↗ for

2:00:34 ↗ um

2:00:34 ↗ so that's kind of that that input phase

2:00:36 ↗ and then phase four is uh adoption and

2:00:41 ↗ um

2:00:42 ↗ uh it's a little unclear right now we're

2:00:44 ↗ in conversations about exactly what that

2:00:46 ↗ adoption might look like whether that is

2:00:48 ↗ part of the financial management policy

2:00:50 ↗ whether it is referenced in the

2:00:52 ↗ financial management policy but um we

2:00:55 ↗ are aiming to get it uh adopted and

2:00:58 ↗ implemented by the end of the year that

2:01:01 ↗ being said the implementation timeline

2:01:02 ↗ for this is many many years uh forward

2:01:05 ↗ right since a lot of this is based on

2:01:07 ↗ guidance and education and support for

2:01:10 ↗ City staff in purchasing that is not all

2:01:12 ↗ going to change at once and so in this

2:01:14 ↗ same process in addition to drafting a

2:01:17 ↗ sustainable purchasing policy I will be

2:01:18 ↗ drafting kind of an implementation plan

2:01:21 ↗ of action strategies and efforts that we

2:01:23 ↗ can do such as providing contract

2:01:26 ↗ template language Etc that uh can best

2:01:29 ↗ support staff moving forward

2:01:33 ↗ so on to questions

2:01:36 ↗ um I have these three main questions

2:01:39 ↗ um that I am seeking feedback on and the

2:01:43 ↗ the general idea is to again right now

2:01:46 ↗ we're in the uh information gathering

2:01:48 ↗ stage so

2:01:50 ↗ um I'm looking for guidance and

2:01:52 ↗ direction as I before I even draft the

2:01:55 ↗ policy so that I can then come back to

2:01:57 ↗ the the board and say Here's how I took

2:01:59 ↗ your perspectives here's how I took uh

2:02:02 ↗ your concerns and then we can kind of

2:02:04 ↗ keep moving from that point

2:02:07 ↗ um so at this point I'd love to just

2:02:10 ↗ open it up to the board and hear any

2:02:13 ↗ questions

2:02:14 ↗ or any thoughts I think you're already

2:02:17 ↗ probably thinking of this but um looking

2:02:19 ↗ at both upstream and downstream effects

2:02:22 ↗ of

2:02:23 ↗ whatever it is purchasing

2:02:29 ↗ excellent

2:02:31 ↗ David I like where you're going with

2:02:33 ↗ this I think you're doing your research

2:02:35 ↗ you're going to find out where these

2:02:36 ↗ other larger entities live in this great

2:02:39 ↗ size of this well I would ask that

2:02:41 ↗ before you put something in writing and

2:02:43 ↗ it becomes a policy make sure you Circle

2:02:46 ↗ back with all of your operations

2:02:48 ↗ divisions

2:02:49 ↗ make sure it's going to work for you

2:02:50 ↗ then yes

2:02:55 ↗ yes

2:03:05 ↗ quality

2:03:07 ↗ yes so on both of that that is

2:03:11 ↗ absolutely something that we're looking

2:03:12 ↗ to to incorporate and that's something

2:03:14 ↗ that that that's great to kind of hear

2:03:17 ↗ that that's important

2:03:18 ↗ um and it's part of that that's kind of

2:03:19 ↗ thinking around some of the life cycle

2:03:20 ↗ costs analysis of a of a purchase right

2:03:24 ↗ so what is the impact now but not just

2:03:26 ↗ the impacts now but how long will it

2:03:28 ↗ last and that can hopefully provide more

2:03:32 ↗ um encouragement and support for

2:03:34 ↗ something that might be more expensive

2:03:35 ↗ right at the the Forefront but less

2:03:37 ↗ expensive in the long run right

2:03:39 ↗ um Dawn to your point absolutely

2:03:42 ↗ um we have heard uh just as an example

2:03:44 ↗ I've heard from our Public Works team

2:03:48 ↗ um

2:03:48 ↗ that they are interested and excited

2:03:51 ↗ about this but have some some very uh

2:03:54 ↗ valid concerns and want to just make

2:03:56 ↗ sure that we we do this correct right so

2:03:58 ↗ we are uh I was just talking with one of

2:04:01 ↗ them today we are going to make sure

2:04:02 ↗ that after the drafting phase and in the

2:04:05 ↗ drafting phase even working very closely

2:04:07 ↗ with some of these teams to make sure

2:04:09 ↗ that um

2:04:11 ↗ we first off we don't do anything that

2:04:13 ↗ we can't do

2:04:15 ↗ um and then second off make sure that we

2:04:17 ↗ do uh what what is going to work for

2:04:19 ↗ those departments so great that is that

2:04:22 ↗ is great feedback

2:04:25 ↗ um I have two or four points so I'm

2:04:26 ↗ going to go through a real quick

2:04:28 ↗ um to help out with time um I would love

2:04:30 ↗ to Loop in the economic Vitality

2:04:31 ↗ commission I didn't see them mentioned

2:04:33 ↗ as being um somebody who would get

2:04:35 ↗ played off of

2:04:36 ↗ um I think it's an interesting idea to

2:04:38 ↗ talk about the policy including an

2:04:39 ↗ economic value statement

2:04:41 ↗ so for instance I don't shop at Dollar

2:04:43 ↗ Tree because it helps perpetuate severe

2:04:45 ↗ inequality in our systems I would rather

2:04:47 ↗ pay a little more for my gift bag and

2:04:49 ↗ the City of Issaquah needs to then

2:04:51 ↗ decide are we going to decide that what

2:04:53 ↗ is the trade-off right if if fixing our

2:04:56 ↗ issues with our long debt to the

2:04:59 ↗ environment were easy we would have

2:05:01 ↗ already done them so there's going to be

2:05:03 ↗ a trade-off and so there needs to be

2:05:04 ↗ some type of policy that includes our

2:05:06 ↗ economic value statement are we going to

2:05:08 ↗ actually say it's okay that this costs

2:05:09 ↗ more because this is what's more

2:05:11 ↗ important to us

2:05:12 ↗ um and if not that we need to be able to

2:05:13 ↗ say when is time and efficiency and

2:05:15 ↗ money more important to us than the

2:05:17 ↗ detrimental costs that we're doing on

2:05:18 ↗ the other side of it um and be more

2:05:20 ↗ transparent about that

2:05:22 ↗ um just what are our priorities with it

2:05:24 ↗ um I think that we need to have an

2:05:25 ↗ ongoing monitoring system once you've

2:05:28 ↗ gotten in as a vendor and you've already

2:05:29 ↗ done something how do we have it double

2:05:31 ↗ check that that is still staying the

2:05:33 ↗ case right that how they presented

2:05:35 ↗ something continues to be as it was

2:05:37 ↗ agreed upon is something that isn't

2:05:39 ↗ included right now

2:05:41 ↗ um and I want to include something that

2:05:43 ↗ this policy shouldn't be is a loophole

2:05:45 ↗ to bypass environmental concerns right

2:05:47 ↗ we have a lot of things to say what this

2:05:48 ↗ policy shouldn't be these things it also

2:05:50 ↗ shouldn't be a Gateway for us saying

2:05:52 ↗ this is too hard right we know that this

2:05:55 ↗ policy is going to be hard it is going

2:05:56 ↗ to be taxing and it was actually one of

2:05:58 ↗ the things that was originally mandated

2:06:00 ↗ when we created this board was to say

2:06:02 ↗ this is something that we expected from

2:06:04 ↗ our city as the next level and iteration

2:06:07 ↗ of this and so we do need to hold our

2:06:09 ↗ departments accountable to it

2:06:11 ↗ um so good luck with okay David

2:06:14 ↗ um I'm curious you also on page 71

2:06:16 ↗ listed some information about for

2:06:18 ↗ instance like water that had been saved

2:06:20 ↗ right you gave us some information about

2:06:22 ↗ specifically that and it would be great

2:06:24 ↗ to then have that in comparison to well

2:06:26 ↗ what is actually used by you know the

2:06:28 ↗ municipality building you know and

2:06:30 ↗ administrative buildings right it's hard

2:06:31 ↗ to give that quantifiable amount like if

2:06:33 ↗ you're a climate pledge Arena you're

2:06:35 ↗ filling up your reusable water bottle

2:06:36 ↗ each little machine will tell you this

2:06:38 ↗ is how many bottles I have subverted by

2:06:40 ↗ you using me instead so when you tell me

2:06:42 ↗ this is how much has been saved well I

2:06:44 ↗ don't really know compared to what

2:06:46 ↗ Public Works use is this a little is

2:06:47 ↗ this a lot so if I could have a little

2:06:49 ↗ bit of a qualifier with those numbers

2:06:50 ↗ would be really helpful

2:06:52 ↗ um I'm curious too

2:06:54 ↗ um uh we have uh different points too

2:06:57 ↗ about how purchasing can change as far

2:07:00 ↗ as

2:07:01 ↗ there was a note that we had about

2:07:03 ↗ decommissioning the current EV charging

2:07:06 ↗ right now at City Hall Northwest so we

2:07:08 ↗ have this effectively condemned building

2:07:10 ↗ right nobody's using it for any sort of

2:07:12 ↗ purpose but what's nice about EV

2:07:13 ↗ charging is that it's actually a mobile

2:07:15 ↗ type of infrastructure so even if it was

2:07:18 ↗ foreseeable for the next two years we

2:07:20 ↗ could invest in charging and have that

2:07:22 ↗ be a hub for charging it's a prime

2:07:24 ↗ location when you think about

2:07:26 ↗ um all the corporate offices that are

2:07:27 ↗ right there

2:07:28 ↗ um the Community Food Center that is

2:07:31 ↗ there right without without brand

2:07:33 ↗ dropping it's approximately to the 90

2:07:35 ↗ right being able to look at things of

2:07:37 ↗ saying hey we may have a long-term use

2:07:39 ↗ for City Hall Northwest that isn't this

2:07:41 ↗ but for the short term we could actually

2:07:43 ↗ put into practice using this as an

2:07:45 ↗ electric vehicle charging Hub right now

2:07:47 ↗ it's just being used as a parking lot

2:07:49 ↗ for vehicles how do we actually change

2:07:51 ↗ and bring our community in and so I

2:07:53 ↗ think that's an interesting thing when

2:07:54 ↗ we talk about our policies of how do we

2:07:56 ↗ make them a little more fluid how does

2:07:58 ↗ this work for us right now but we're

2:08:00 ↗ then able to to change it because those

2:08:02 ↗ Chargers can then be moved to another

2:08:03 ↗ location when it doesn't suit us or we

2:08:06 ↗ find that maybe people are using it at

2:08:07 ↗ that location or something like that

2:08:10 ↗ um I'd like to also see a discussion

2:08:11 ↗ about

2:08:12 ↗ um we on page 73 you talk about a

2:08:14 ↗ discussion about what's been addressed

2:08:16 ↗ and excluded from title 18.

2:08:18 ↗ um it's it's interesting to think about

2:08:20 ↗ the type of analysis that this board

2:08:22 ↗ should be doing for these things right

2:08:24 ↗ so I would love to see the environmental

2:08:26 ↗ board we had a point Stacy had one of um

2:08:28 ↗ of telling us Governor Stacy

2:08:30 ↗ uh tell us I was telling us

2:08:33 ↗ um you know what things are we missing

2:08:35 ↗ from our sixth from our six year plan

2:08:37 ↗ right now right and so the question is

2:08:40 ↗ to say well what are our immediate goals

2:08:43 ↗ as an environmental board that we want

2:08:44 ↗ to advise the Council on of saying this

2:08:46 ↗ isn't being addressed right and so for

2:08:48 ↗ instance

2:08:50 ↗ um I'm sorry not to interrupts just to

2:08:52 ↗ be yeah careful here I think right now

2:08:55 ↗ you're talking about the update on the

2:08:57 ↗ Issaquah climate action plan is that

2:08:59 ↗ right oh I'm sorry I thought you were

2:09:01 ↗ adding that in but you're right I did

2:09:03 ↗ pre-sport on that that's no problem I

2:09:05 ↗ just wanted to make sure that um I'm I'm

2:09:09 ↗ segmenting the comments into the right

2:09:12 ↗ uh mindset for me so I appreciate that

2:09:14 ↗ thank you do you want to finish that

2:09:17 ↗ thought um no I will continue it when we

2:09:19 ↗ go back to it okay

2:09:23 ↗ great are there any other comments on

2:09:26 ↗ the sustainable question yes yes

2:09:31 ↗ I think this is great so one of the

2:09:33 ↗ things which you know I wanted to check

2:09:35 ↗ was I can see the

2:09:39 ↗ um finances will be one of the limiting

2:09:41 ↗ factors or one of the main hurdles you

2:09:44 ↗ know to impose the policy

2:09:46 ↗ um

2:09:47 ↗ um while you were talking to the other

2:09:49 ↗ staff or other departments have you

2:09:51 ↗ noticed any other limitation because

2:09:53 ↗ sometimes you know the cities will have

2:09:54 ↗ contracts with certain you know

2:09:56 ↗ companies or are there any you know

2:09:59 ↗ operation herders besides finances you

2:10:02 ↗ have come across

2:10:04 ↗ yeah so that's a great uh great question

2:10:08 ↗ concern around Finance is one of the

2:10:12 ↗ major ones

2:10:13 ↗ um there's a number of

2:10:16 ↗ um

2:10:16 ↗ I would say operational concerns so one

2:10:19 ↗ of them is saying if I put into effect a

2:10:22 ↗ policy we get a policy that says make

2:10:25 ↗ sure you consider XYZ when you're making

2:10:27 ↗ a purchase

2:10:29 ↗ um I've heard significant concern around

2:10:33 ↗ well I don't have time for that or

2:10:36 ↗ um where do I even start to look at that

2:10:39 ↗ and so that kind of gets into what I had

2:10:41 ↗ talked about earlier around an

2:10:42 ↗ implementation

2:10:44 ↗ plan and action steps around how can I

2:10:49 ↗ and our team and our our purchasing team

2:10:52 ↗ support staff so that

2:10:55 ↗ um it almost becomes less scary to to

2:10:58 ↗ start thinking about uh applying some of

2:11:01 ↗ these criteria right

2:11:03 ↗ um I think one of the other major

2:11:06 ↗ concerns that I've heard from folks is a

2:11:08 ↗ concern around timing so making sure

2:11:11 ↗ that

2:11:13 ↗ pursuing uh

2:11:15 ↗ products and services that might be more

2:11:17 ↗ environmentally friendly do not uh delay

2:11:20 ↗ the delivery of uh projects or or tasks

2:11:25 ↗ services that that department is needs

2:11:29 ↗ to do right so if something that we're

2:11:31 ↗ trying to purchase if the best way to

2:11:33 ↗ get it it just takes that much longer

2:11:36 ↗ the concern that was raised was

2:11:39 ↗ um you know that might be a barrier

2:11:42 ↗ because we need it now right we need it

2:11:44 ↗ tomorrow to address

2:11:46 ↗ whatever the problem might be

2:11:50 ↗ and then I I think the last one is is

2:11:52 ↗ just kind of a general some concern

2:11:56 ↗ around like

2:11:58 ↗ uh

2:12:00 ↗ the the laws and legal regulations

2:12:03 ↗ around kind of what we can and need to

2:12:06 ↗ do and so there are kind of some

2:12:07 ↗ especially some

2:12:09 ↗ um purchases the city makes where it's

2:12:11 ↗ going to be kind of hard to figure out

2:12:12 ↗ exactly how we can make them more

2:12:14 ↗ environmentally friendly or really

2:12:16 ↗ consider the environmental and social

2:12:17 ↗ criteria and that's kind of where the

2:12:19 ↗ the long implementation timeline comes

2:12:23 ↗ and just one more comment Tom and I

2:12:25 ↗ think um Joy kind of touched on that uh

2:12:29 ↗ what she said was ongoing monetary right

2:12:31 ↗ so if the vendors are actually doing

2:12:34 ↗ what they're supposed to do but the

2:12:35 ↗ other side of that is on our side

2:12:37 ↗ especially for a lot of sustainable

2:12:40 ↗ products so there will be these paper

2:12:42 ↗ straws right and the minute you put it

2:12:45 ↗ like you keep it for two minutes and

2:12:47 ↗ that's it like you know it starts

2:12:49 ↗ dissolving in your drink so it's of no

2:12:52 ↗ use so

2:12:53 ↗ we want to get it but at the same time

2:12:56 ↗ you know at the end of the day you want

2:12:57 ↗ to make sure it is actually usable for

2:12:59 ↗ the product right I'm sure it is

2:13:02 ↗ included but some of these sustainable

2:13:04 ↗ products that's what I have a problem

2:13:05 ↗ with if I have a bio bag and if I have

2:13:08 ↗ to double bag it because it's breaking

2:13:10 ↗ before I pick it up it's of no use right

2:13:13 ↗ it means I'm essentially using two bags

2:13:15 ↗ that's probably my carbon footprint or

2:13:18 ↗ whatever the negative impact is going to

2:13:19 ↗ be the same if I use I don't know if

2:13:22 ↗ it's the same but if it's not it's not

2:13:24 ↗ what it's supposed to be so that concept

2:13:27 ↗ needs to be you know going into the

2:13:29 ↗ implementation part of it somewhere and

2:13:32 ↗ that needs to be trapped somewhere yeah

2:13:34 ↗ so that I mean that's a great point and

2:13:36 ↗ I I'm gonna try and keep my responses a

2:13:38 ↗ little appreciate but um uh to that

2:13:41 ↗ point um that is speaks a little bit to

2:13:44 ↗ why we're generally going to try and

2:13:45 ↗ keep this as guidance right so that

2:13:47 ↗ right if a purchase if we make a

2:13:50 ↗ purchase and uh because of the

2:13:52 ↗ environmental criteria and it really

2:13:53 ↗ does not work for uh the

2:13:57 ↗ goals of that purchase

2:14:00 ↗ um we don't want to require that

2:14:01 ↗ purchase moving forward right we want to

2:14:03 ↗ be able to kind of hear that didn't work

2:14:05 ↗ let's look for something else right

2:14:07 ↗ um and then when we we talk about

2:14:09 ↗ monitoring

2:14:10 ↗ um it this isn't going to end up with

2:14:14 ↗ like um right now at least this is not

2:14:16 ↗ ending up with any sort of certification

2:14:18 ↗ system or anything for businesses

2:14:21 ↗ um at least from us and so what will be

2:14:23 ↗ required is kind of that the due

2:14:26 ↗ diligence within the city to check kind

2:14:29 ↗ of how City departments and staff are

2:14:32 ↗ implementing the guidance and using the

2:14:34 ↗ guidance and again because it's guidance

2:14:37 ↗ and not as much requirements we're in

2:14:39 ↗ conversations and we are exploring kind

2:14:42 ↗ of how we can do that without adding

2:14:44 ↗ significant

2:14:46 ↗ um uh administrative hurdles to any to

2:14:50 ↗ to different purchasing right and and so

2:14:52 ↗ one of the things to think about is that

2:14:54 ↗ we're making a ten dollar purchase for

2:14:56 ↗ food or something what what is the the

2:14:59 ↗ requirement to monitor whether or not

2:15:01 ↗ they they use the sustainable purchasing

2:15:04 ↗ policy versus

2:15:06 ↗ um a project that might be five thousand

2:15:07 ↗ dollars or fifty thousand dollars right

2:15:09 ↗ so kind of really thinking through how

2:15:12 ↗ do we put in a monitoring policy into

2:15:13 ↗ place to then make sure that this uh

2:15:16 ↗ does get implemented uh with the spirit

2:15:20 ↗ of this which is to improve our city

2:15:22 ↗ purchasing I'm going to jump in on that

2:15:23 ↗ you can put it back on the vendor right

2:15:25 ↗ it

2:15:25 ↗ is it possible

2:15:27 ↗ quality sources to double check it it

2:15:28 ↗ could just be that rather than only

2:15:29 ↗ having them say yes we adhere to this

2:15:31 ↗ policy when they put their RFP in it

2:15:33 ↗ could actually be that every time that

2:15:34 ↗ you put in a purchase order for instance

2:15:36 ↗ the vendor needs to say yes we still

2:15:38 ↗ adhere to these particular policies

2:15:40 ↗ right of whether that be that we're

2:15:42 ↗ supporting you know local black owned

2:15:43 ↗ businesses or whatever the policies are

2:15:45 ↗ that Issaquah has for purchasing you can

2:15:47 ↗ put that back on the vendor it doesn't

2:15:48 ↗ need to be us doing a double check but

2:15:50 ↗ what it does is it makes the vendor go

2:15:52 ↗ back and adhere to our policies rather

2:15:54 ↗ than at the one time they may sign up I

2:15:57 ↗ don't know that's the intent I think

2:15:58 ↗ it's a bad area

2:16:00 ↗ I think this is an internal policy

2:16:02 ↗ directing staff to hey if you're going

2:16:04 ↗ to purchase stuff here's X Y and Z we'd

2:16:07 ↗ like to look at before you just go out

2:16:09 ↗ and buy here an example

2:16:12 ↗ chainsaws uh lot all gas equipment for

2:16:16 ↗ that matter it's incredibly

2:16:19 ↗ horrible to the environment the electric

2:16:21 ↗ versions are great to a certain extent

2:16:23 ↗ small chainsaw worked wonderful a large

2:16:25 ↗ chainsaw horrible

2:16:27 ↗ they just don't have the power so that's

2:16:30 ↗ the kind of guidance you need to give to

2:16:31 ↗ staff when you're going to go buy

2:16:33 ↗ something I want you to look at

2:16:34 ↗ something that's going to be

2:16:35 ↗ environmentally

2:16:37 ↗ analysis and use your best judge what

2:16:39 ↗ friends are you're going to put

2:16:40 ↗ parameters around staff of this that

2:16:42 ↗ says you have to buy this this and this

2:16:44 ↗ well I mean there's currently

2:16:45 ↗ municipalities that will only allow for

2:16:47 ↗ instance like made in USA right and so

2:16:49 ↗ what they do is that they go back and

2:16:51 ↗ they say to their vendors you have to

2:16:53 ↗ still certify to us regularly that

2:16:55 ↗ you're still sourcing the way that you

2:16:56 ↗ did when we originally did our

2:16:58 ↗ purchasing so but I don't think that's

2:16:59 ↗ what they're

2:17:02 ↗ is that part of it yeah so um

2:17:05 ↗ there are likely going to be some social

2:17:09 ↗ criteria around thinking through

2:17:13 ↗ um right are we trying to support local

2:17:16 ↗ businesses Etc

2:17:18 ↗ um however this is not intended to be a

2:17:24 ↗ policy where we are

2:17:26 ↗ um

2:17:28 ↗ most purchasing that is going to be

2:17:30 ↗ affected by this policy won't

2:17:32 ↗ necessarily have that level of agreement

2:17:34 ↗ with specific uh companies to then kind

2:17:38 ↗ of uh put it on them it'll be more on

2:17:41 ↗ the staff because they will be expected

2:17:44 ↗ to do the due diligence of is this

2:17:46 ↗ product

2:17:48 ↗ um

2:17:49 ↗ you know meeting meeting XYZ criteria

2:17:51 ↗ when it comes to

2:17:53 ↗ some things like contracts and rfps

2:17:56 ↗ that's when thinking through how can we

2:17:59 ↗ adjust those RFP that RFP language in

2:18:02 ↗ those contract language I think that's

2:18:04 ↗ probably more where we will see

2:18:07 ↗ something where staff can then say hey

2:18:09 ↗ we put this into the contract are you

2:18:12 ↗ doing this the way that you said uh you

2:18:14 ↗ said you were going to and so then they

2:18:17 ↗ there's more ability to kind of put that

2:18:19 ↗ on the company versus on the staff thank

2:18:23 ↗ you does that answer the question that

2:18:24 ↗ helps out

2:18:26 ↗ which

2:18:28 ↗ these change the way they do things

2:18:31 ↗ right and so that's kind of the sub goal

2:18:34 ↗ of this right is if you have a lot of

2:18:37 ↗ cities doing this you can then improve

2:18:39 ↗ the marketplace for sustainable products

2:18:41 ↗ and I just want to say I used my bamboo

2:18:44 ↗ Fork I stopped by the PCC Deli where

2:18:47 ↗ again and use my band before how to work

2:18:50 ↗ it worked great excellent I think using

2:18:53 ↗ them I from now on I don't get any

2:18:55 ↗ plastic you know when I stop at the

2:18:56 ↗ tablet

2:18:57 ↗ great

2:18:58 ↗ I had a couple of final comments unless

2:19:01 ↗ as anyone else said we've had any um I

2:19:03 ↗ do think we should make sure that we're

2:19:05 ↗ clear on what the priorities within

2:19:06 ↗ sustainability are what the purchasing

2:19:08 ↗ plan

2:19:09 ↗ um I don't know what those should be but

2:19:11 ↗ I think like staff needs to it can't be

2:19:14 ↗ generally sustainability I think we need

2:19:16 ↗ to be really specific and that may

2:19:17 ↗ change over time I think one thing we

2:19:19 ↗ may want to about is

2:19:21 ↗ priorities within sustainable purchasing

2:19:23 ↗ will probably adjust as we go along and

2:19:26 ↗ so is there some Cadence that this is

2:19:29 ↗ being updated and like I think your

2:19:31 ↗ implementation plan is super important

2:19:34 ↗ and I would I'm glad you guys are

2:19:35 ↗ thinking about that that way because I

2:19:37 ↗ think

2:19:37 ↗ how you can provide staff best practices

2:19:40 ↗ and ensure that's being kept up to date

2:19:42 ↗ in addition to what the policy looks

2:19:44 ↗ like but just the materials that they

2:19:45 ↗ have and the tools they have to actually

2:19:47 ↗ make decisions and make it easy as

2:19:49 ↗ possible

2:19:51 ↗ seems like the way that like that'll be

2:19:53 ↗ the most critical part of this I would

2:19:55 ↗ think and so I'm glad that part of it I

2:19:57 ↗ hope we don't gloss over in later

2:19:59 ↗ conversations because I actually think

2:20:00 ↗ that that may be more important than

2:20:03 ↗ what we actually put in this initial

2:20:04 ↗ purchasing plan

2:20:06 ↗ um I think

2:20:08 ↗ one question I have is are there certain

2:20:10 ↗ things like Fleet that we should have

2:20:13 ↗ more specific guidance around

2:20:15 ↗ um I think Fleet is one construction

2:20:18 ↗ materials may be another they're I don't

2:20:21 ↗ know what there may be other ones but

2:20:23 ↗ where I think this is generally going to

2:20:25 ↗ be a overarching policy there I wonder

2:20:28 ↗ if there are certain cases where we

2:20:30 ↗ should be putting more specific guidance

2:20:32 ↗ or expectations in place

2:20:36 ↗ um and then I think the only other thing

2:20:38 ↗ is I'm just curious if there's any tools

2:20:40 ↗ out there that help score products and I

2:20:44 ↗ think there are things for consumers I

2:20:46 ↗ don't know that

2:20:47 ↗ but for big decisions or certain types

2:20:49 ↗ of decisions are there any tools out

2:20:51 ↗ there that staff should have that would

2:20:53 ↗ help them make smarter decisions yeah

2:20:55 ↗ like for example carbon accounting on

2:20:58 ↗ certain types of products I don't know

2:21:00 ↗ if that exists but would be interested

2:21:02 ↗ if that did exist in being a researcher

2:21:04 ↗ staff

2:21:05 ↗ yes quick responses

2:21:07 ↗ um some of that the to your last Point

2:21:10 ↗ um that's where I think we're looking at

2:21:11 ↗ like third party certifications and

2:21:13 ↗ other tools developed by other

2:21:14 ↗ jurisdictions to kind of best support

2:21:17 ↗ staff in that way

2:21:19 ↗ um and then when it comes so Shoreline

2:21:21 ↗ for example has a whole section on there

2:21:23 ↗ is for free and Fleet right and so we

2:21:27 ↗ are possibly going to do something like

2:21:30 ↗ that I that might not be in iteration

2:21:34 ↗ one maybe it gets in an update

2:21:36 ↗ um maybe it does show up in in iteration

2:21:38 ↗ one so some of that is likely to be

2:21:41 ↗ worked out and I think there's not too

2:21:43 ↗ many areas where there will be a lot of

2:21:44 ↗ specifics but green Fleet for instance

2:21:46 ↗ is one of those and then um it and

2:21:49 ↗ office supplies or some of the other

2:21:50 ↗ ones that have more

2:21:53 ↗ it can be a little clearer like what

2:21:55 ↗ third-party certifications might be

2:21:57 ↗ needed or or kind of some uh requirement

2:21:59 ↗ or some more specific guidance that can

2:22:02 ↗ be used versus General criteria and then

2:22:04 ↗ to your last Point

2:22:06 ↗ um General criteria versus being clear

2:22:08 ↗ what that means

2:22:09 ↗ um yes absolutely agree and we do hope

2:22:12 ↗ to kind of as as many other uh

2:22:15 ↗ jurisdictions do really lay out like

2:22:17 ↗ sustainability for this means

2:22:20 ↗ um reducing waste and reducing energy

2:22:22 ↗ consumption and using non-toxic

2:22:25 ↗ chemicals in cleaners and

2:22:29 ↗ etc etc right yeah I think the one thing

2:22:31 ↗ I would add on

2:22:32 ↗ should those be ranked because

2:22:33 ↗ ultimately there's going to be have to

2:22:34 ↗ be trade-offs and what what decisions

2:22:37 ↗ what we'll pay for for versus what we

2:22:40 ↗ want and so I do think something that

2:22:41 ↗ helps quantify or bring

2:22:45 ↗ people and that that's why we're saying

2:22:47 ↗ that might change I don't know it might

2:22:49 ↗ change and I also add on end of life

2:22:51 ↗ doesn't we think about what we're

2:22:52 ↗ replacing and where it's going and how

2:22:54 ↗ it's being processed right if we're

2:22:55 ↗ replacing all the carpet in here is it

2:22:57 ↗ all going to the landfill

2:22:58 ↗ um how easy is it within the building

2:22:59 ↗ when your Cat5 cable breaks to not just

2:23:01 ↗ throw it away rather than yes we recycle

2:23:03 ↗ because once a month there's a thing how

2:23:05 ↗ easy is it for an employee to be able to

2:23:07 ↗ actually make the correct Choice with

2:23:08 ↗ that broken Cat5 cable right so how does

2:23:11 ↗ our policy actually address the end of

2:23:12 ↗ life for the things that we're replacing

2:23:14 ↗ to is an interesting one

2:23:17 ↗ yeah that does exist in some policy so

2:23:20 ↗ I'll look to see if we can get that into

2:23:21 ↗ this one as well

2:23:23 ↗ any

2:23:27 ↗ any other comments from David

2:23:32 ↗ all right well I think thank you David

2:23:35 ↗ um thank you with that we'll move on to

2:23:38 ↗ reports

2:23:40 ↗ um Stacy I believe you have some some

2:23:42 ↗ updates for us yeah um

2:23:44 ↗ and see me uh

2:23:47 ↗ I just wanted to highlight we included

2:23:49 ↗ the written report on icap

2:23:52 ↗ implementation that went to council uh

2:23:55 ↗ last month I believe

2:23:58 ↗ um and just wanted to highlight a few

2:24:00 ↗ items in there

2:24:01 ↗ um or that have happened since reducing

2:24:03 ↗ that report

2:24:05 ↗ um first one was that through our Energy

2:24:07 ↗ Smart East Side partnership I can't

2:24:10 ↗ remember if I had shared this before but

2:24:11 ↗ we did secure a million dollar Commerce

2:24:14 ↗ Grant that's going to expand our single

2:24:16 ↗ family low-income installations for heat

2:24:19 ↗ pumps affordable housing installations

2:24:22 ↗ we're going to start exploring

2:24:24 ↗ installations in single-family rental

2:24:26 ↗ housing and then also look at Workforce

2:24:31 ↗ Development programs and explore the

2:24:33 ↗ option for long buy Downs so that's a

2:24:35 ↗ two-year grant that will start

2:24:40 ↗ um and then we've also expanded our

2:24:42 ↗ partnership with King County Housing

2:24:43 ↗ Authority to single-family households

2:24:46 ↗ where they're taking referrals now from

2:24:48 ↗ the cities for weatherization and

2:24:50 ↗ defense installations that's part of our

2:24:54 ↗ Energy Smart boost program that also

2:24:56 ↗ launched a couple

2:24:59 ↗ weeks of installations for low-income

2:25:01 ↗ households

2:25:04 ↗ um EV charger installation just a couple

2:25:06 ↗ updates there we did activate the new

2:25:10 ↗ charger at the community center the

2:25:12 ↗ highlands ones those are replacement

2:25:15 ↗ Chargers we've been waiting on couple

2:25:17 ↗ parts for them but those should be

2:25:19 ↗ activated next week and then we do have

2:25:21 ↗ our Fleet Chargers in that will also be

2:25:24 ↗ activated next week we're planning our

2:25:28 ↗ phase two sites already and we'll be

2:25:31 ↗ going out with some installers in the

2:25:32 ↗ next few weeks to look at where we'd be

2:25:34 ↗ putting in some additional

2:25:38 ↗ uh the last thing I'll just highlight is

2:25:41 ↗ we are waiting on Final Notice from the

2:25:45 ↗ Greek Building Council on our lead for

2:25:47 ↗ City certification we do expect to

2:25:49 ↗ receive that in the next few weeks and

2:25:51 ↗ we'll be planning some kind of

2:25:53 ↗ Celebration probably mid-summer so we'll

2:25:56 ↗ keep you all updated on that

2:25:58 ↗ support in that collaboration

2:26:02 ↗ any and I'm sure you had a couple

2:26:04 ↗ comments questions

2:26:06 ↗ um on the report I would love to see

2:26:08 ↗ City Hall Northwest be thought about as

2:26:10 ↗ a temporary and temporary meeting in the

2:26:12 ↗ next couple years used site I think that

2:26:15 ↗ it's a prime location that can be

2:26:16 ↗ heavily used

2:26:18 ↗ um and then when it's decided what that

2:26:20 ↗ land is going to be done with then it's

2:26:21 ↗ easy to be able to pick up those charges

2:26:23 ↗ and put them at a different receiving

2:26:25 ↗ site

2:26:26 ↗ um I also think it's interesting to

2:26:27 ↗ think about this board giving comments

2:26:29 ↗ to the council and to the administration

2:26:31 ↗ in terms of what has been addressed what

2:26:33 ↗ has been excluded from Title 18 in a

2:26:35 ↗ similar way there was a question tonight

2:26:37 ↗ asking what are we missing from our

2:26:39 ↗ six-year comp plan that wasn't really

2:26:41 ↗ addressed by the sport tonight and being

2:26:43 ↗ able to identify gaps to say especially

2:26:45 ↗ for things that have a very tight time

2:26:47 ↗ frame for instance the increasing

2:26:49 ↗ temperature of Lake Sammamish what are

2:26:51 ↗ we doing to be able to keep waterways

2:26:53 ↗ cool there's a variety of things that

2:26:55 ↗ are relatively low cost for us to be

2:26:57 ↗ able to be making an impact pretty

2:26:59 ↗ quickly in the next couple years and so

2:27:01 ↗ having the board be to discuss and give

2:27:03 ↗ recommendations on what still needs to

2:27:05 ↗ be done kind of that concept of the

2:27:07 ↗ garage or the Whiteboard I think it's an

2:27:09 ↗ important thing

2:27:11 ↗ yeah and just real

2:27:13 ↗ um read for a sponsor guy in the city

2:27:14 ↗ hall Northwest if it's a charging Hab

2:27:16 ↗ really interesting concept there's a lot

2:27:18 ↗ up in the air with that building I'm

2:27:20 ↗ sure you're aware of it I think we'll

2:27:22 ↗ have better understanding of that over

2:27:24 ↗ the next few months

2:27:26 ↗ so we'll definitely keep that in mind

2:27:28 ↗ and if not there are there other good

2:27:30 ↗ locations that the city

2:27:34 ↗ and then the one over by PCC yeah the

2:27:38 ↗ old

2:27:42 ↗ then I have just a few updates

2:27:44 ↗ um go through quickly thank you all for

2:27:46 ↗ staying late

2:27:47 ↗ um recruitment update so if folks may

2:27:49 ↗ have noticed we still have to

2:27:51 ↗ um open positions and we've been doing a

2:27:53 ↗ lot of Outreach we have two excellent

2:27:57 ↗ individuals that we do plan to uh We've

2:28:00 ↗ made some recommendations to have added

2:28:02 ↗ to the environmental board

2:28:04 ↗ um one thing I did want to just know is

2:28:06 ↗ we've really struggled this year for

2:28:08 ↗ some reason to find Issaquah residents

2:28:10 ↗ to join the board and there is a

2:28:12 ↗ requirement in our

2:28:15 ↗ rules

2:28:17 ↗ um and that's despite a lot of Outreach

2:28:19 ↗ one-on-one personal contacts that we've

2:28:22 ↗ we've worked with the two individuals

2:28:25 ↗ that we have made Advance forward with

2:28:28 ↗ the recommendation one does own a

2:28:30 ↗ business in the city and one works for a

2:28:32 ↗ non-profit that is based in Issaquah and

2:28:34 ↗ as their work is focused in this Supply

2:28:36 ↗ so we've been exploring the opportunity

2:28:39 ↗ or option of opening up the residency

2:28:42 ↗ requirements that would be inclusive of

2:28:45 ↗ students within School the School

2:28:47 ↗ District employees of a local non-profit

2:28:50 ↗ or those that are a business owner

2:28:55 ↗ um so that's not to say we won't focus

2:28:57 ↗ our efforts in future years on Issaquah

2:29:00 ↗ residents but at this time we are

2:29:02 ↗ looking at opening up the current

2:29:04 ↗ requirement to bring to additional

2:29:07 ↗ individuals onto the board so feel free

2:29:09 ↗ to reach out to me with any questions

2:29:19 ↗ um and then uh just uh two more quick

2:29:21 ↗ items wanted to follow up on our read

2:29:23 ↗ plus meeting and the media that we had

2:29:26 ↗ with Recology and we did Advance the

2:29:28 ↗ recommendation from the environmental

2:29:30 ↗ board to sign the request pledge she did

2:29:32 ↗ sign that pledge

2:29:34 ↗ um we submitted that onto King County

2:29:37 ↗ um within the recommendation from the

2:29:40 ↗ environmental board we also Advanced the

2:29:43 ↗ interests for the city to explore

2:29:45 ↗ ordinances or stronger requirements for

2:29:48 ↗ recycling and composting particularly at

2:29:50 ↗ multi-family and um in commercial

2:29:54 ↗ buildings I've had some conversation

2:29:56 ↗ with our Public Works team and we have a

2:30:00 ↗ lot of capacity this year now to do

2:30:03 ↗ Outreach and education with businesses

2:30:06 ↗ and multi-family through Recology we

2:30:08 ↗ have several ways

2:30:10 ↗ Consultants on board and so what we are

2:30:14 ↗ looking at right now is allowing that

2:30:17 ↗ Outreach and education to take place

2:30:19 ↗ this year and see what kind of impacts

2:30:21 ↗ we can make at the same time also

2:30:24 ↗ starting to look at what types of

2:30:26 ↗ ordinances other cities have in place

2:30:29 ↗ um we're requiring composting and

2:30:31 ↗ recycling at those building types

2:30:34 ↗ um and kind of reevaluating where we are

2:30:37 ↗ over the next several months there was

2:30:39 ↗ also interest from the board on more

2:30:41 ↗ free Granite reporting term Recology and

2:30:43 ↗ where we are on our diversion rates and

2:30:46 ↗ that's something that we'll be able to

2:30:47 ↗ provide

2:30:52 ↗ any questions on that or unless

2:30:55 ↗ um we did schedule a Recology tour I

2:30:57 ↗ just sent out a calendar invite so folks

2:30:59 ↗ had that if they're interested in

2:31:01 ↗ attending and then just prior to the

2:31:04 ↗ meeting I sent out a couple dates that

2:31:06 ↗ folks can register on their own if they

2:31:08 ↗ want to do a Cedar Grove tour we'll be

2:31:11 ↗ sending out a survey to them our board

2:31:13 ↗ to see who's planning to participate see

2:31:15 ↗ if we beat our Quorum or not and then

2:31:18 ↗ also if you are a participant if there's

2:31:20 ↗ an interesting so please be on the

2:31:24 ↗ lookout for our survey

2:31:28 ↗ so I'll pause on the three plus

2:31:31 ↗ follow-up see if there's questions on

2:31:32 ↗ that and just wanted to highlight our

2:31:35 ↗ next meeting

2:31:39 ↗ excuse me just one question do we have

2:31:42 ↗ to register I thought the Cedar Grove

2:31:44 ↗ email said YouTube

2:31:46 ↗ there is yeah that's through Cedar Grove

2:31:49 ↗ because you have to there's a waiver

2:31:51 ↗ attached to it

2:31:53 ↗ um so there is a link if you don't have

2:31:55 ↗ Recology we did not have to they all

2:31:57 ↗ have to wait or something

2:32:01 ↗ and then finally just to highlight our

2:32:03 ↗ next meeting we will have Tisha here

2:32:05 ↗ from the clerk's office to provide an

2:32:07 ↗ over open government training I know

2:32:09 ↗ manipi went through that last year we do

2:32:11 ↗ have new members it's always good to do

2:32:13 ↗ fresher she will do that

2:32:16 ↗ um and then we'll have an update on the

2:32:18 ↗ city's uh newly planned shuttle service

2:32:21 ↗ from our transportation coordinator

2:32:23 ↗ we're also hoping

2:32:25 ↗ um to be able to bring to you uh update

2:32:28 ↗ on the climate vulnerability

2:32:29 ↗ vulnerability policies and then there's

2:32:32 ↗ a few other

2:32:33 ↗ a bit tentative at this time acting

2:32:37 ↗ another full agenda in June

2:32:44 ↗ thanks

2:32:45 ↗ anything else

2:32:47 ↗ anyone else

2:32:49 ↗ all right thank you everyone for

2:32:51 ↗ returning okay

2:32:54 ↗ thank you

Approved minutes

The minutes PDF below is the canonical record. Structured parsing of attendance and motions for this body's minutes format is not yet implemented — open the PDF for the full content.

Open PDF