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

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

Open PDF

Attendance

Council / Members (9)

Jamie Finch

Don McQuilliams

Ashwin Manoharan* (Unexcused Absence)

Anne Newcomb

Tom Anderson

Prajakta Ghatpande

Ashwin Kannan

Janet Wall

Joy Lewis

Staff (4)

Stacy Vynne McKinstry, Sustainability Manager

David Reedy, Sustainability Coordinator

Andrea Snyder, Deputy City Administrator

Susie Monsell, Budget Manager

Excused

Nancy Davidson

Recommendations & actions (4)

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

The minutes were approved as presented by unanimous consent.
Board Member NEWCOMB requested that the SPP address lifecycle costs of products and services as well as to encourage staff to consider upstream and downstream impacts of procurement.
Board members FINCH and LEWIS recommended that staff consider economic value statements or means to prioritize criteria and goals when making purchases.
Board member LEWIS also recommended that staff consider end of life disposal of products and an ongoing monitoring system to ensure that guidance is being followed.