Equity Board · Wednesday, April 8, 2026 · City Council Digest

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of October 2025 Meeting

packet pp.3–5

▶ Watch from 5:36 Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 10-22-25 Equity Board Minutes Page [0000] CITY OF ISSAQUAH Equity Board 6:00 PM Steelhead Room, 235 1st Ave. October 22, 2025 MINUTES SE, Issaquah

Minutes of February 2026 Meeting

packet pp.7–8

▶ Watch from 9:32 Open packet at p.7 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES b) 02-04-26 Equity Board Minutes Page [0000] CITY OF ISSAQUAH Equity Board 6:00 PM Steelhead Room, 235 1st Ave. February 4, 2026 MINUTES SE, Issaquah

4. CHAIR REPORT

Opening Question

Lesley Millender-Irwin, Equity Board Chair

5. AGENDA ITEMS

Equity Impact Assessment - Community Engagement Plan (D)

30 min · Gillian Straub, Management Analyst · packet pp.9–62

Topics: Equity

▶ Watch from 13:28 Open packet at p.9 ↗

Staff report:

Equity Visioning and Goal Setting: Community Engagement APRIL 8, 2026| EQUITY BOARD GILLIAN STRAUB, MANAGEMENT ANALYST

Parks Rules and Regulations

Discussion · 30 min · Dale Markey-Crimp, Assistant to the City Administrator · packet pp.63–106

Topics: Parks

▶ Watch from 48:19 Open packet at p.63 ↗

Staff report:

The Administration recommends: 1. Review of the current Park Rules and Regulations within the IMC compared to recently updated Redmond Municipal Code – Parks Chapter, identifying gaps and/or other rules that should be part of a more complete set of Park Rules and Regulations. 2. Providing feedback on current plan for further community input and feedback in the development of this work.

2025 Year End Report

Action · 10 min · Dale Markey-Crimp, Assistant to the City Administrator · packet pp.107–109

▶ Watch from 1:23:10 Open packet at p.107 ↗

Staff report:

Created in 2021, the Issaquah Equity Board advises the Mayor, City Council, and City departments on policies, plans, regulations, and programs related to equity. The Board’s purpose is to support and amplify the voices of diverse communities within Issaquah by providing feedback and advising on city business and processes. In 2025, the Board continued supporting the City in embedding equity into decision-making, uplifting community voices and perspectives, and strengthening belonging across Issaquah.

2026 Work Plan

Action · 10 min · Dale Markey-Crimp, Assistant to the City Administrator · packet pp.111–113

▶ Watch from 1:34:47 Open packet at p.111 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVED: [Month Day] REVISED: [Month Day]

Subcommittee Work Approach

10 min · Dale Markey-Crimp, Assistant to the City Administrator

▶ Watch from 1:46:24

3049 segments .txt ↗

0:02 ↗ school.

0:04 ↗ Yay.

0:05 ↗ >> Good evening everyone.

0:07 ↗ >> Good evening. Welcome to the April 8,

0:10 ↗ 2026 equity board meeting. So, we at the

0:15 ↗ beginning part of our agenda would like

0:16 ↗ to call to order.

0:20 ↗ Uh yes, sorry. Roll call. No worries.

0:22 ↗ >> Getting back into it. Um, okay.

0:28 ↗ Heather, Preppy

0:30 ↗ >> here,

0:30 ↗ >> Varnica, Caric, Leslie

0:34 ↗ >> here. Lorna here. Uh, Chris

0:38 ↗ >> here.

0:39 ↗ >> Awesome. And we can hear you just fine.

0:41 ↗ Chris, can you hear us? Okay.

0:42 ↗ >> Yeah, I can hear you. Great.

0:44 ↗ >> Great. Um, Oscar, I believe, has an

0:47 ↗ excused absence. And then Juan.

0:49 ↗ >> Okay,

0:51 ↗ >> perfect. And just for the minutes, we

0:53 ↗ are starting our meeting this evening at

0:55 ↗ 6:05 p.m.

0:59 ↗ >> And I'm here.

1:02 ↗ Yes, Kelly.

1:05 ↗ I'll run through the the alternate.

1:19 ↗ Yes.

1:21 ↗ Okay, thank you Jillian. And um do we

1:23 ↗ have any public comments for this

1:26 ↗ evening? I see we have several members

1:27 ↗ of the public and commissions.

1:32 ↗ >> Thank you. Good to see you.

1:34 ↗ >> So we are um open and welcoming public

1:37 ↗ comments this evening from our members

1:38 ↗ of the public.

1:42 ↗ >> So we have

1:44 ↗ >> Yeah, we have two invitation and Serena

1:46 ↗ is going to do the first one. So

1:48 ↗ >> okay,

1:49 ↗ >> yes. Good.

1:50 ↗ >> Okay. I've never done this before, so

1:54 ↗ >> um so uh I'm coming from the garage. Um

1:59 ↗ my name is Serena. I'm the program

2:00 ↗ manager there at the garage um which is

2:03 ↗ a teen center nonprofit dropin center um

2:07 ↗ after school program. And um we are

2:12 ↗ hosting co-hosting with the Isquappa

2:14 ↗ High community a uh community panel um

2:18 ↗ that's going to be uh I believe four or

2:21 ↗ five teens

2:23 ↗ um talking about the topic of trusting

2:26 ↗ teens. And I can hand I only have five

2:28 ↗ of these but I can more

2:30 ↗ >> pass these out.

2:32 ↗ um and they're going to talk about um

2:38 ↗ their experiences and perspectives on

2:42 ↗ being a teen and um

2:46 ↗ >> answering questions like

2:48 ↗ have you ever felt your opinions or

2:52 ↗ perspectives minimized because of your

2:54 ↗ age? Um so really talking about like

2:59 ↗ what their experience is with adults and

3:02 ↗ things they wish um adults knew um about

3:05 ↗ their um yeah and we'd love it if you

3:09 ↗ could come. It's free to come um it's

3:12 ↗ right here at the garage which is right

3:14 ↗ next to the steelhead room. Uh it's

3:16 ↗ going to be next Monday uh from 6:00 to

3:20 ↗ 7:30 p.m. Uh if you want to drop by and

3:23 ↗ say hi. I think for some are also gonna

3:26 ↗ provide snacks, too. So,

3:28 ↗ >> thanks.

3:29 ↗ >> I think it'll be a good good way for you

3:31 ↗ to hear from uh our young

3:33 ↗ >> like young people

3:34 ↗ >> in the community.

3:37 ↗ >> Fantastic. Thank you.

3:38 ↗ >> Yeah.

3:40 ↗ >> So, we thought this would be a great

3:43 ↗ community

3:44 ↗ exercise for

3:47 ↗ community. I remember you are the second

3:50 ↗ program for May 2nd. I'm over

3:54 ↗ My

3:57 ↗ at May 2nd, we have a

4:03 ↗ called the Mona Foundation uh which is

4:07 ↗ an international organization that

4:10 ↗ supports uh education of girls all

4:13 ↗ across the world.

4:14 ↗ >> Oh, sure.

4:15 ↗ >> And um it's it's a it's a great program.

4:18 ↗ So in chat

4:25 ↗ we still

4:28 ↗ >> yeah he said that's a wonderful

4:30 ↗ experience for re

4:32 ↗ projects around the world supporting the

4:33 ↗ education of women

4:36 ↗ and many champions around the world and

4:37 ↗ the speakers were veterating and

4:40 ↗ experienced to share and learn from that

4:46 ↗ >> ex Microsoft person that uh is expanding

4:51 ↗ to education and uh

4:55 ↗ >> nonprofit. Yes.

4:58 ↗ >> Wonderful. Thank you for your time.

5:00 ↗ >> Thank you. We appreciate all the work

5:02 ↗ that the Banana um uh community does

5:05 ↗ here in Isla and also the great work of

5:07 ↗ the uh garage. So, thank you for uh

5:10 ↗ sharing this information and also your

5:12 ↗ time and bringing these great community

5:14 ↗ events to us. terrible.

5:16 ↗ >> Thank you. Good to see you.

5:23 ↗ >> The next item on our agenda, this

5:26 ↗ evening.

5:30 ↗ >> Good night.

5:31 ↗ >> Thank you.

5:34 ↗ >> The next business item on our agenda

5:36 ↗ this evening is the approval of minutes

5:38 ↗ from October 2025 and also February 2026

5:43 ↗ of the Flying Board. So, if you want to

5:45 ↗ take a look at the minutes that are, I

5:48 ↗ believe, included in your meeting

5:50 ↗ package this evening

5:52 ↗ and let us know if there are any uh

5:55 ↗ changes, corrections to the minutes.

6:30 ↗ Okay. Does anyone would anyone like to

6:33 ↗ make a motion to approve amendments of

6:35 ↗ the October 2025 and February 2026

6:38 ↗ equity board meeting as written? So, do

6:42 ↗ we have a first?

6:45 ↗ >> I can be up first. in terms

6:52 ↗ all in favor.

6:55 ↗ >> I

6:57 ↗ salude meeting minutes are approved.

7:01 ↗ Thank you very much everyone.

7:06 ↗ So we are now at the chair report and um

7:10 ↗ opening question. My goodness, I had two

7:12 ↗ questions and I I think I just figured

7:14 ↗ out which one I want to ask. So, here's

7:16 ↗ the question for this evening. What is

7:19 ↗ something that felt absorbent over the

7:21 ↗ winter that you are excited to see come

7:23 ↗ back to life in the community or in your

7:27 ↗ life?

7:28 ↗ So, one more time, what is something

7:30 ↗ that felt dormant over winter that are

7:32 ↗ you that you are excited to see come

7:34 ↗ back to life in the community or enjoy

7:38 ↗ little springy everything that's

7:39 ↗ blooming around us. though

7:42 ↗ the inspiration for tonight's question.

7:46 ↗ >> So, who would like to go first?

7:48 ↗ >> We got Chris up.

7:51 ↗ >> Hi, Chris.

7:52 ↗ >> Hi. I get off. Um, super excited to go

7:56 ↗ back outside and um do like some walks

8:00 ↗ and trails and all that fun stuff. Um, I

8:04 ↗ know a lot of folks like to go when it's

8:06 ↗ rainy. Not a fan personally. I like to

8:08 ↗ go when it's sunny outside.

8:11 ↗ Uh, so yeah, I'm excited about that. And

8:13 ↗ seeing everyone else out, too. As soon

8:16 ↗ as it gets sunny, you kind of feel

8:18 ↗ everyone's on their bikes, everyone's

8:20 ↗ walking around. So, I love that.

8:24 ↗ >> Absolutely.

8:25 ↗ >> Thanks, Chris.

8:28 ↗ >> You'd like to go next,

8:35 ↗ >> please.

8:36 ↗ >> Yeah. um seeing the cherry blossoms. Um

8:39 ↗ like they're beautiful, but my husband

8:42 ↗ will major and so it's just like it's

8:44 ↗ really fun to see his enthusiasm with

8:46 ↗ all the photos he takes everywhere. So

8:49 ↗ it's just like the reminder of

8:50 ↗ springtime.

8:52 ↗ >> Absolutely.

8:53 ↗ I think there might be a running thing

8:55 ↗ because uh I'm a native Californian and

8:58 ↗ my goodness, this weather has been just

9:00 ↗ a bear this year. So I'll go next. Um I

9:03 ↗ would say just getting outdoors. I've

9:05 ↗ been plotting my um my garden. Uh bought

9:09 ↗ a whole bunch of garden stuff and it was

9:11 ↗ able to open up boxes and get potting

9:13 ↗ soil and just play in the soil. So, just

9:16 ↗ seeing all of the beautiful stuff around

9:18 ↗ me and things are blooming. Um we're

9:21 ↗ going to have vegetables. It might be

9:22 ↗ three tomatoes and one onion, but we're

9:24 ↗ going to have vegetables this spring and

9:26 ↗ summer. So, I'm pretty excited.

9:29 ↗ So, you like to go next?

9:30 ↗ >> I'm good.

9:32 ↗ um

9:33 ↗ uh gardening. I you know I Steve does

9:36 ↗ the digging, I do the pruning which I

9:38 ↗ love because it's just like shaping and

9:41 ↗ it's beautiful.

9:42 ↗ >> Yeah, it's very fun.

9:43 ↗ >> Fantastic.

9:46 ↗ >> You can go next. Lot lot of things.

9:48 ↗ Birds, bees, butterflies, lot days,

9:51 ↗ sunshine.

9:54 ↗ >> Absolutely.

9:56 ↗ >> Um mine's more like in my house. I'm

9:59 ↗ excited to see my plants like bloom like

10:01 ↗ especially my orchids because I was gone

10:03 ↗ for like five weeks and I thought my

10:06 ↗ plants have died but they revived and

10:09 ↗ they're lucky.

10:10 ↗ >> Um and so just seeing the little changes

10:13 ↗ and then outside I just think that it's

10:14 ↗ just always a good it's just a good way

10:16 ↗ to start the season.

10:19 ↗ >> Absolutely.

10:20 ↗ Since you all covered gardening, that is

10:23 ↗ my love too. But I'll talk about um my

10:27 ↗ neighborhood Friday afterwork get

10:29 ↗ together. A culdeac tends to do a bring

10:33 ↗ a chair, bring a drink and a snack and

10:36 ↗ sit on the sidewalk and talk and get

10:39 ↗ together with the culde-sac. and they

10:42 ↗ started the neighbors started it last

10:44 ↗ year and I so love that because I think

10:47 ↗ that's one of the things we need

10:49 ↗ especially postcoid building community

10:52 ↗ and that's one of the reasons I joined

10:54 ↗ this group to figure out how to help our

10:56 ↗ community build community and I love

11:00 ↗ that my street does that and I don't

11:03 ↗ have to do anything for it and I just

11:05 ↗ hope all other culde-sacs and

11:07 ↗ neighborhoods have something like this

11:09 ↗ to bond and build relationships with

11:12 ↗ each other.

11:14 ↗ >> Absolutely. I have to say that Wara is

11:17 ↗ my garden inspiration. Uh my husband and

11:20 ↗ I went and dropped some items off last

11:22 ↗ year and she was good enough to show us

11:25 ↗ her beautiful garden. And what she

11:27 ↗ doesn't know, I was basically taking so

11:29 ↗ many mental notes of all the things that

11:31 ↗ I did wrong last year in my garden that

11:34 ↗ she showed me how to fix. So I'll have

11:36 ↗ to keep you updated on if I buy it this

11:38 ↗ year.

11:42 ↗ Do you have anyone else that would like

11:44 ↗ to and again let me repeat the question.

11:47 ↗ What is something that felt dormant over

11:48 ↗ the winter that you were excited to see

11:50 ↗ come back to life in the community or in

11:52 ↗ your life

11:55 ↗ to Yeah. Hey everyone, Jillian St. I

11:57 ↗ know it's been a minute. So, um

12:01 ↗ uh I feel like I'm feeling much more

12:03 ↗ creative this spring. Like I used to do

12:04 ↗ a lot of watercolor painting and stuff

12:06 ↗ like that and I haven't done as much of

12:07 ↗ it recently. But I feel like I'm doing a

12:09 ↗ lot more of that and like oil pastels

12:11 ↗ and stuff at home and it's just been

12:12 ↗ really nice to like walk around the

12:14 ↗ neighborhood, see the flowers, feel

12:16 ↗ like, oh, I can like take a photo or go

12:18 ↗ out there and like paint or draw that

12:20 ↗ and that's been really great.

12:22 ↗ >> So thanks.

12:25 ↗ >> Hi, I'm Andrea Leonard. I'm the deputy

12:27 ↗ city administrator and um since I love

12:32 ↗ plants but everybody has covered that a

12:34 ↗ lot. Um I happened to be on a meeting

12:38 ↗ today and somebody's background was like

12:40 ↗ a beautiful mountain and lake and

12:43 ↗ instantly I was just thinking how nice

12:45 ↗ it would be to be out on the water. That

12:47 ↗ is something I do not do in the winter.

12:49 ↗ Uh but would love I'm looking forward to

12:52 ↗ more sunny days and warming up enough to

12:54 ↗ get out there on the water. Be fun. Here

12:57 ↗ here anyone online would like to uh

13:00 ↗ share with us on the opening question

13:10 ↗ once going twice. Don't be shy.

13:14 ↗ >> I heard you.

13:16 ↗ >> Yeah, you did. Thanks, Chris.

13:19 ↗ >> Okay. Well, thank you all for sharing um

13:22 ↗ on the the opening question. And

13:23 ↗ apparently we're all going to be

13:24 ↗ outside. So love it. Okay, so it looks

13:28 ↗ like our first business agenda item uh

13:30 ↗ this evening is the equity impact

13:32 ↗ assessment community engagement plan. So

13:34 ↗ I'm going to hand that over to Jillian.

13:37 ↗ >> Yeah. Hi everyone. So um like to talk a

13:41 ↗ little bit about some of the work that

13:43 ↗ I've come to equity board uh a couple of

13:45 ↗ times over the past year or so. Um we're

13:48 ↗ in the phase now where we're designing

13:50 ↗ the community engagement plan. So, we

13:51 ↗ wanted to bring that forward for all of

13:53 ↗ you. So, um I'll be doing a little bit

13:55 ↗ of presenting, but Andrea Leonard, our

13:57 ↗ deputy city administrator, will also be

13:59 ↗ um providing a little bit of the

14:00 ↗ background for this work um and here to

14:03 ↗ answer any questions. So, if I go ahead

14:05 ↗ and share my screen, we can go ahead and

14:07 ↗ get started.

14:18 ↗ >> I think that'll work for now. Just let

14:20 ↗ me know if you need to spam any chair or

14:21 ↗ anything because they go after this.

14:24 ↗ >> Yes.

14:25 ↗ >> So, like I said, we'll cover a little

14:26 ↗ bit of background on the overall

14:28 ↗ project. Then we'll I'll present the the

14:30 ↗ proposed community engagement plan. Then

14:32 ↗ I have three uh questions for all of you

14:34 ↗ tonight. So, first, are the goals for

14:36 ↗ the community engagement plan

14:38 ↗ appropriate and are they aligned with

14:39 ↗ the desired outcome from the engagement?

14:42 ↗ Um, are the proposed engagement methods

14:44 ↗ and groups the right one for the

14:45 ↗ project? and basically was missing um

14:48 ↗ from the table and from these

14:49 ↗ conversations. And then is there support

14:51 ↗ for equity board involvement as

14:53 ↗ proposed? So there are a few um steps

14:55 ↗ along the way where I'd like to see the

14:56 ↗ equity board involved. I want to make

14:58 ↗ sure that those are the right points.

15:01 ↗ >> All right. So I'll go ahead and hand it

15:04 ↗ off to Andrea.

15:05 ↗ So part of the background is kind of how

15:08 ↗ we got here. Uh so of course the equity

15:12 ↗ board created in 2021, one of the many

15:15 ↗ city advisory boards and commissions. Um

15:19 ↗ after the board was formed, uh we made

15:23 ↗ the equity framework and it was piloted

15:25 ↗ with different departments, a lot of

15:27 ↗ presentations to the equity board trying

15:28 ↗ to use the framework and think about

15:30 ↗ what's the next step of that. I know

15:32 ↗ there's more work that this group is

15:33 ↗ wanting to do on that this year. Um, and

15:37 ↗ we, you know, we didn't want to stop

15:39 ↗ there with the equity framework. I think

15:41 ↗ we're just keeping, uh, on the progress

15:43 ↗ of this work. And so, part of, uh, the

15:47 ↗ history is 2024, we had a strategic plan

15:49 ↗ update. And one of the outcomes of that

15:52 ↗ strategic plan was a need for an equity

15:55 ↗ operational plan. We're going to talk

15:57 ↗ more about how that plan fits in with

16:00 ↗ other city plans and other work and the

16:02 ↗ work that the equity board does in a

16:03 ↗ little bit. Um, and uh, also in the

16:08 ↗ budget, we have $50,000 for professional

16:11 ↗ services to help us start that plan.

16:14 ↗ It's going to be multi-phases,

16:16 ↗ and Jillian's going to go over that in a

16:18 ↗ little bit. So, we put out the RFP, the

16:21 ↗ request for proposals um, for equity

16:24 ↗ visioning and program evaluation.

16:27 ↗ And so, those are kind of the two first

16:29 ↗ phases we're hoping to accomplish with

16:31 ↗ that funding.

16:34 ↗ and uh we have selected a finalist to do

16:38 ↗ that work. And so we're excited to move

16:41 ↗ forward as part of that. Before we um

16:44 ↗ fully get them under contract, we wanted

16:46 ↗ to flesh out the community engagement

16:47 ↗ plan a little bit in case we needed to

16:49 ↗ add some tasks to their contract. And so

16:52 ↗ that's why we're we're kind of waiting

16:54 ↗ to finalize the contract until after

16:56 ↗ this discussion.

16:58 ↗ So that brings us to what part of what

17:02 ↗ is this and how does this fit in with

17:05 ↗ other things. I think as we look at

17:07 ↗ trying to form what are our equity goals

17:10 ↗ or kind of a loose vision for equity and

17:13 ↗ this upon how we deliver services as a

17:16 ↗ city government. So this isn't

17:17 ↗ necessarily equity goals that we would

17:20 ↗ like to see within the community but how

17:22 ↗ we as a city deliver services in an

17:25 ↗ equitable manner. um that's the guidance

17:28 ↗ that we're looking for. So we want to

17:29 ↗ establish those goals and then figure

17:31 ↗ out okay how do we get there? Where are

17:33 ↗ the gaps? That's the essence of this

17:35 ↗ work and that's going to form a plan

17:38 ↗ really. And so as we look at how does

17:40 ↗ that fit in to all the other work that

17:42 ↗ the city does, we have of course our

17:45 ↗ comprehensive plan that is our

17:48 ↗ overarching plan that governs really all

17:50 ↗ of the work that we do.

17:53 ↗ The comprehensive plan itself has vision

17:55 ↗ goals in many different areas like

17:58 ↗ growth and development, like

18:00 ↗ transportation, and like equity. You'll

18:02 ↗ see in a little bit. So, um, what we're

18:06 ↗ working towards is the creation of

18:08 ↗ essentially an equity plan in the same

18:11 ↗ way that we have the Isiqua climate

18:14 ↗ action plan that the environmental board

18:16 ↗ stewards. Uh the same way we have a

18:19 ↗ mobility action plan the way that the

18:22 ↗ transportation advisory board stewards,

18:25 ↗ we're looking to uh step by step create

18:29 ↗ a plan for the equity board that you can

18:32 ↗ help steward and that will form the

18:35 ↗ basis of your work plan for years to

18:37 ↗ come. And so that's how this work kind

18:41 ↗ of fits in to the other city plans

18:44 ↗ within the comprehensive plan. As you

18:46 ↗ can see from this diagram, we have a lot

18:47 ↗ of functional plans. So like I was just

18:50 ↗ saying the the mobility action plan, the

18:53 ↗ IAP, the ESCA climate action plan, etc.

18:55 ↗ So this would be another functional plan

18:57 ↗ just like those other plans that the

19:00 ↗ equity board, you all would help steward

19:03 ↗ and uh inform us in our work as we try

19:06 ↗ to make sure we're making progress.

19:10 ↗ Are there any questions about the what

19:13 ↗ we're working towards in the equity plan

19:15 ↗ and how that would fit in with other

19:16 ↗ city plans?

19:19 ↗ One one of the things that we're looking

19:21 ↗ at is um just like the mobility action

19:25 ↗ plan uh is folded into the comprehensive

19:28 ↗ plan and forms our goals and policies

19:30 ↗ and actions within the comprehensive

19:32 ↗ plan under transportation.

19:34 ↗ So would the equity plan under our

19:36 ↗ equity uh uh goals. And so this is what

19:40 ↗ we have so far. I don't intend for any

19:43 ↗ of you to read all of that text on this

19:45 ↗ slide. But what is important to take

19:47 ↗ away from this slide is that um in the

19:49 ↗ comp plan we do attempt to address

19:51 ↗ equity and this is how we address it. uh

19:55 ↗ the guiding principle equity to ensure

19:58 ↗ that isqua services and uh outstanding

20:01 ↗ quality of life are accessible to

20:03 ↗ everyone. That feels maybe a little

20:06 ↗ outdated when we talk about what does

20:08 ↗ equity mean and what do we want equity

20:10 ↗ to look like in the city? How we deliver

20:14 ↗ services based on that. So what we're

20:16 ↗ hoping to do through this process as we

20:18 ↗ think about what we do some community

20:21 ↗ engagement establish what do we what are

20:24 ↗ our equity goals those equity goals are

20:26 ↗ going to supplant this language we're

20:28 ↗ going to replace this language because

20:30 ↗ we feel that this is um out ofd

20:34 ↗ um there and needing some revision

20:41 ↗ any questions so far if not I'm going to

20:43 ↗ turn it over to Jillian

20:46 ↗ off to.

20:47 ↗ >> All right, this slide is just a reminder

20:49 ↗ what was in that request for or the RFP

20:51 ↗ for um equity visioning and goal setting

20:54 ↗ and that tool development. This came to

20:56 ↗ the equity board in the fall of last

20:58 ↗ year for refinement. I'll just go over

21:00 ↗ the outcomes of both phases, but I'm

21:02 ↗ happy to answer any other questions as

21:03 ↗ well. So the outcome of phase one, which

21:06 ↗ is really that staff developed and staff

21:09 ↗ um kind of carried out community

21:11 ↗ engagement plan, is to have

21:13 ↗ comprehensive and community driven a

21:15 ↗ comprehensive and communitydriven equity

21:16 ↗ vision and goals. We're hoping that

21:18 ↗ those equity goals are broad enough to

21:20 ↗ encompass multiple lines of city

21:22 ↗ service, but specific enough to guide

21:24 ↗ some kind of evaluation in phase two. So

21:28 ↗ phase two is the development of the

21:30 ↗ equity evaluation tool by the consultant

21:33 ↗ and the outcome of that is that we have

21:35 ↗ a program evaluation tool that can be

21:37 ↗ used by a across a broad array of city

21:40 ↗ programs by staff. So there are multiple

21:42 ↗ parts to this building staff capacity to

21:44 ↗ use a tool like this um creating a tool

21:47 ↗ adapting it. Um but that's really what

21:48 ↗ we're looking at in phases one and two

21:51 ↗ with this RFP. Like Andrea mentioned

21:53 ↗ we're building towards that equity

21:54 ↗ action plan. That's a future phase of

21:57 ↗ work that'll be addressed in a in a

21:58 ↗ future budget.

22:02 ↗ So, if there are any questions about

22:03 ↗ that, I'm going to transition into the

22:05 ↗ community engagement itself. I know that

22:07 ↗ I feel like I've brought the the RFP to

22:09 ↗ you all at least once or twice. Um, so

22:13 ↗ taking that um the outcome of phase one

22:15 ↗ again at the bottom of the screen, we

22:17 ↗ thought really deliberately about what

22:18 ↗ the community engagement plan should do

22:21 ↗ and came up with two core goals. First,

22:23 ↗ that basically we have enough and

22:25 ↗ diverse community input to shape the

22:27 ↗ city's high level equity goals. And

22:29 ↗ second, that the decision makers, in

22:32 ↗ this case, our city council, honor the

22:34 ↗ community input that's been um that's

22:36 ↗ been requested and the community work

22:38 ↗ that's gone into developing this vision

22:40 ↗ and goals.

22:46 ↗ So as we move through this, this is just

22:48 ↗ a helpful way to think about as staff

22:51 ↗ requests feedback from the community,

22:53 ↗ what we are basically promising to use

22:55 ↗ that feedback for. So it's a way to keep

22:56 ↗ us accountable um as they seek seek

22:59 ↗ feedback. I won't spend a lot of time

23:01 ↗ here um but happy to answer any

23:03 ↗ questions about it. And now let's talk

23:05 ↗ about the different phases of the

23:06 ↗ community engagement plan. So tasks one

23:08 ↗ and two um are basically getting

23:11 ↗ feedback on the plan itself. So, we're

23:13 ↗ here before you tonight to get some

23:14 ↗ community input on the community

23:16 ↗ engagement plan. We'll then take it to

23:19 ↗ the services, safety, and park city

23:20 ↗ council committee to get their feedback

23:22 ↗ as well so that our elected leadership

23:24 ↗ is brought into this process from the

23:26 ↗ beginning. They haven't heard about this

23:28 ↗ project since it was approved as part of

23:29 ↗ the budget and we've had quite a bit of

23:31 ↗ turnover on our city council. So, it'll

23:33 ↗ be a good opportunity to overview the

23:34 ↗ entire project and get any specific

23:37 ↗ input on the community engagement plan

23:38 ↗ as well and then really um hit the

23:41 ↗ ground on the next couple of phases of

23:43 ↗ work.

23:46 ↗ >> So, the next uh three tasks are really

23:48 ↗ receiving community feedback. So, there

23:50 ↗ are kind of three main ways we think

23:51 ↗ about getting this feedback. The first

23:53 ↗ is a survey of the public. So this is

23:56 ↗ kind of designed to be really broad to

23:58 ↗ be sent out to a variety of groups

24:00 ↗ including isqua's board and commission

24:02 ↗ has neighborhood groups kind of known

24:05 ↗ contacts throughout the city where we

24:07 ↗ can broadly share a really highlevel

24:09 ↗ five minute style survey about equity

24:11 ↗ and city services.

24:14 ↗ Um we intend to have this um shared via

24:17 ↗ posters as well. Um and the survey

24:20 ↗ itself will be translatable via the the

24:23 ↗ forum cabinet.

24:27 ↗ >> Um and then we also want to do a little

24:31 ↗ bit of out a fair bit of outreach to

24:33 ↗ faith and cultural groups. So this is

24:35 ↗ basically trying to get those who have

24:36 ↗ been underrepresented in civic processes

24:38 ↗ before brought in. So this is a little

24:40 ↗ bit more time inensive. This is personal

24:42 ↗ in-person outreach to see if these

24:44 ↗ groups would be willing to take the

24:46 ↗ survey, if they'd maybe be more

24:47 ↗ comfortable focus grouping the survey to

24:49 ↗ make sure that those um responses are

24:52 ↗ are captured and to identify some folks

24:55 ↗ from those communities who can serve in

24:57 ↗ the community workshop to actually

24:58 ↗ develop the vision and goals to make

25:00 ↗ sure that those perspectives are

25:03 ↗ represented um in the vision and goals.

25:06 ↗ So, some of the groups we're thinking

25:07 ↗ about reaching out to are based on

25:08 ↗ islaw's demographics. So, we're thinking

25:11 ↗ about the Hindu community, Chinese

25:13 ↗ Americans, uh, Korean-Americans, the

25:15 ↗ Russian and Ukrainian communities, and

25:17 ↗ the Hispanic community here in Isiqua.

25:19 ↗ You don't have a comprehensive list of

25:21 ↗ all the organizations in your in your

25:24 ↗ packet today, but this is a place where

25:25 ↗ I'd welcome some feedback. If there are

25:27 ↗ any organizations or groups that you

25:29 ↗ think that we should be reaching out to,

25:30 ↗ I'd really welcome that feedback.

25:33 ↗ So then we also want to offer some

25:35 ↗ tableabling at community events to get

25:36 ↗ some folks who who aren't going to scan

25:38 ↗ the QR code and take a survey. Um but

25:40 ↗ we're thinking kind of towards the end

25:41 ↗ of June or beginning of July around

25:44 ↗ things like concerts in the green

25:46 ↗ concert in the green or the farmers

25:48 ↗ market or the wagon decorating that kind

25:50 ↗ of a thing. pull a few questions from

25:52 ↗ the survey to kind of mirror in this

25:55 ↗ in-person opportunity for feedback.

25:58 ↗ Something interactive like dot voting

25:59 ↗ that kind of invites people in and it's

26:01 ↗ a pretty low barrier way to provide some

26:03 ↗ feedback on again equity and municipal

26:05 ↗ services here in Isiqua.

26:10 ↗ >> So with that at that point we are we're

26:12 ↗ hoping to have really sufficient

26:13 ↗ community engage engagement to move into

26:15 ↗ developing the vision and goals. So

26:18 ↗ we're planning on a community uh

26:19 ↗ leadership workshop. So this would be

26:21 ↗ non-elected leadership. We're thinking a

26:23 ↗ group of no more than 20 that is

26:25 ↗ representative geographically

26:28 ↗ um racially and culturally and kind of

26:30 ↗ age representation as well. Um to draft

26:34 ↗ the vision and goals from the community

26:36 ↗ engagement gather. This is a place where

26:37 ↗ we want to make sure that the consultant

26:39 ↗ is engaged to kind of get their arms

26:41 ↗ around all the different perspectives in

26:43 ↗ the room and come to consensus on what

26:46 ↗ um those draft goals and vision can be.

26:48 ↗ We think this might be one meeting. It

26:49 ↗ might be two meetings depending on on

26:51 ↗ how the conversation goes. Then we'd

26:54 ↗ bring that draft vision and goals to

26:56 ↗ services, safety, and parks to bring it

26:58 ↗ back to the committee where it started

26:59 ↗ with. Um, and that committee would

27:02 ↗ provide a recommendation on the draft

27:04 ↗ vision and goals to city council. And

27:06 ↗ then this fall, we envision city council

27:08 ↗ adopting that vision and goals.

27:14 ↗ So, this is really just a resource side

27:16 ↗ to pull out basically where I'm seeking

27:18 ↗ equity board feedback. So, part of it is

27:21 ↗ tonight um or really you can email me

27:23 ↗ the next couple of weeks any groups you

27:24 ↗ think of that um that I should be

27:28 ↗ reaching out to some for some of that

27:29 ↗ more personal in-person outreach to get

27:31 ↗ feedback. Um I'd like to see if possible

27:35 ↗ a couple of board members assist with

27:37 ↗ tableabling at events this summer. And

27:39 ↗ then I'd also like to see a member of

27:41 ↗ the equity board on that workshop of

27:43 ↗ non-elected community leadership. I

27:45 ↗ think you all have a kind of interesting

27:47 ↗ role in between being city staff um but

27:50 ↗ being a member of the community who's

27:51 ↗ plugged in and kind of understands um a

27:53 ↗ little bit of how these things kind of

27:55 ↗ work on the city level as well.

28:00 ↗ >> Okay. How about it?

28:03 ↗ >> So, here are our questions for tonight.

28:06 ↗ And I think let's start um let's start

28:09 ↗ with the first one. Um are the goals for

28:11 ↗ the community engagement appropriate and

28:12 ↗ are they aligned with the desire?

28:14 ↗ Actually, let me pause and see if you

28:15 ↗ all have any questions about the plan

28:16 ↗ itself before we dive into to your

28:18 ↗ feedback.

28:23 ↗ >> No questions for me. I think it was

28:24 ↗ incredibly comprehensive from my

28:26 ↗ standpoint. Very clear.

28:30 ↗ >> Okay. happy to answer answer any

28:31 ↗ questions as they come up, but let's go

28:33 ↗ back to the goals of the plan and make

28:35 ↗ sure that they're kind of hitting what

28:36 ↗ we want them to. So, these are the goals

28:39 ↗ and outcomes. Basically, do they match?

28:41 ↗ Are the goals going to get us the

28:43 ↗ outcome is really what I'm asking here.

28:46 ↗ >> Can you tell me what does sufficient

28:48 ↗ mean?

28:50 ↗ >> That's a good question. I don't think we

28:52 ↗ have like an exact number or like

28:59 ↗ I think it's a little bit based on

29:00 ↗ isqua's demographics right making sure

29:03 ↗ that

29:03 ↗ >> approximately how many

29:06 ↗ people

29:07 ↗ >> are you hoping to engage with and do you

29:10 ↗ have an idea of what your diversity

29:15 ↗ goals are in collecting the data. So for

29:18 ↗ example, if our community is

29:21 ↗ approximately 70%

29:23 ↗ people global and data born and 30% that

29:27 ↗ are not are you what kind of demographic

29:30 ↗ questions are you going to ask so then

29:31 ↗ we can then use that data to disagregate

29:35 ↗ the information and ensure that the data

29:37 ↗ truly reflects the community that we're

29:40 ↗ engaged.

29:42 ↗ >> Okay, thank you for that clarification.

29:44 ↗ So this is something we thought a lot

29:45 ↗ about. Um, we haven't like designed this

29:47 ↗ survey yet, but when we were thinking

29:48 ↗ about how to make sure we get, you know,

29:50 ↗ sufficient sufficient and representative

29:53 ↗ community engagement, we thought about

29:54 ↗ if asking demographic questions might

29:56 ↗ turn some people off um kind of in

29:59 ↗ today's day and age if that might be an

30:00 ↗ issue. So, we landed on the survey kind

30:04 ↗ of having all of the um the the

30:07 ↗ functional questions at the top and then

30:09 ↗ having a select list of um of

30:12 ↗ demographic questions um I believe

30:15 ↗ around race, neighborhood, and kind of

30:17 ↗ age group. Um those are the three we

30:20 ↗ landed on. If you think there are other

30:21 ↗ demographics that meaningfully like

30:24 ↗ ensure that we're representative

30:27 ↗ um in collecting this information, I'd

30:29 ↗ be curious to hear that.

30:33 ↗ I'm wondering if one of the ideas is

30:36 ↗ instead of making the

30:39 ↗ the survey translatable to actually have

30:43 ↗ the survey

30:45 ↗ in different languages and so it saves

30:49 ↗ out automatically. And that in itself

30:52 ↗ would be an easy way to collect some

30:55 ↗ information

30:56 ↗ >> and then making it friendly because

30:58 ↗ sometimes survey questions don't

31:00 ↗ translate very

31:02 ↗ >> yeah that's a good idea. I'll ask our

31:04 ↗ comm's team if like we can see on the

31:06 ↗ back end like right now what it does is

31:08 ↗ basically like when you scan the QR code

31:10 ↗ to take the survey you can pick which

31:12 ↗ language you want it in and I'll see

31:14 ↗ whether or not that data is collected on

31:16 ↗ our end or if we should have like

31:18 ↗ essentially separate QR codes for

31:20 ↗ different languages to to address that

31:25 ↗ but I'm hearing that language is

31:26 ↗ important

31:30 ↗ >> so one one thing I'm thinking about So,

31:36 ↗ and Kelly, you probably know more about

31:37 ↗ this, but so when I think about

31:39 ↗ community engagement,

31:41 ↗ when you're trying to track who said

31:44 ↗ what, it's really important to associate

31:48 ↗ a comment with who said it

31:51 ↗ >> because there's a risk of

31:56 ↗ my diplomatic filters are failing me.

31:59 ↗ But like, so say

32:02 ↗ an older white male says something about

32:06 ↗ teenage girls and maybe they're making a

32:09 ↗ recommendation about something like

32:10 ↗ that.

32:12 ↗ >> To me, that might have less credibility

32:16 ↗ to that comment because it's not by that

32:19 ↗ a person of that group saying it about

32:21 ↗ what they need. So I think especially so

32:25 ↗ if you're in mixed groups, right, and

32:27 ↗ not in affinity based groups, it might

32:29 ↗ be important to take note of who is

32:31 ↗ saying what and

32:35 ↗ somehow weighing a little bit more by

32:38 ↗ that credibility factor. And so I think

32:40 ↗ that that can be a tricky dimension. And

32:42 ↗ so I think with surveys that that's kind

32:45 ↗ of why you want some demographic

32:47 ↗ characteristics on the surveys, but also

32:49 ↗ when you have the the community

32:52 ↗ engagement. So that group of like 20

32:53 ↗ people, right? Yeah.

32:55 ↗ >> Trying to make sure you're associating

32:58 ↗ some comments have more validity that

33:00 ↗ comes from members of the group talking

33:02 ↗ about themselves from the high from

33:04 ↗ their own experience versus someone. So

33:07 ↗ yeah, was trying to think about being

33:09 ↗ careful

33:10 ↗ your 50 dang comments on unfair.

33:14 ↗ >> I think that's a note that we can also

33:16 ↗ leave for our consultants to think

33:17 ↗ about. I think they're pretty

33:18 ↗ experienced since I did this and I think

33:21 ↗ they'll be able to handle that. Yeah, if

33:23 ↗ they're in if they're in the rooms

33:24 ↗ especially. But if they're on the

33:28 ↗ >> Yeah.

33:31 ↗ >> And they are in for the community in

33:34 ↗ correct

33:36 ↗ >> for the um so the community workshop

33:39 ↗ >> for the workshop.

33:40 ↗ >> Yes.

33:42 ↗ >> But the tableabling event won't

33:44 ↗ necessarily have them right

33:46 ↗ >> supporting to be part of the other day.

33:50 ↗ >> Right. What's um interesting about

33:52 ↗ tableabling events is like at the

33:54 ↗ culture fest we pretty much did like

33:57 ↗ board driven tools and resources. We

33:59 ↗ didn't have a table um cloth and we just

34:02 ↗ borrowed something from um the city just

34:05 ↗ like ad hoc. And so I guess if you're

34:08 ↗ ask is for equity board members to be

34:10 ↗ there and participate in volunteers,

34:12 ↗ what tools and resources are there uh

34:14 ↗ for us because we brought all of our

34:16 ↗ stuff together.

34:17 ↗ >> Yeah. To do it. So that was a little bit

34:20 ↗ of an issue for participation. So

34:22 ↗ there's something to be mindful of. The

34:24 ↗ other piece is I noted that you said

34:26 ↗ Asian-Americans as a demographic profile

34:29 ↗ and are you considering also non like

34:32 ↗ Asian-Americans as well? um like at your

34:36 ↗ profile of like demographics because I I

34:38 ↗ thought you specified like being like

34:40 ↗ Asian-American like Chinese American,

34:41 ↗ Korean-American that what is

34:43 ↗ >> So I based that off of some of the kind

34:46 ↗ of language info that we have around

34:48 ↗ some of the larger cultural groups here

34:50 ↗ in Isiqua.

34:51 ↗ >> Um and those were the top five or six

34:54 ↗ that that had come up. Okay. I think I

34:57 ↗ would like to recommend making a little

34:58 ↗ bit more comprehensive instead of just

35:00 ↗ very like specific like that because in

35:02 ↗ Isiqua I think that we have a lot of

35:04 ↗ people who are not like um

35:06 ↗ Asian-American or tried to be like um

35:08 ↗ like we have a lot of immigrant

35:09 ↗ communities as well. So those are some

35:11 ↗ things to consider

35:12 ↗ >> um as you try to get a survey from like

35:15 ↗ you know the community and things like

35:16 ↗ that. help me. Can you help me

35:18 ↗ understand? I think I'm missing like how

35:20 ↗ to operationalize that comment. Like

35:22 ↗ what I should, you know what I mean?

35:23 ↗ Like is that like who I should reach out

35:25 ↗ to? Is that

35:27 ↗ >> I think if your demographic profile, you

35:30 ↗ have like your set list of like folks

35:32 ↗ you think you're going to reach out to.

35:33 ↗ I would try to like encompass it to make

35:35 ↗ it a little bit broader because like my

35:37 ↗ neighbors aren't like um they're not

35:40 ↗ Indian-American. they're, you know,

35:42 ↗ they've moved over from a different

35:43 ↗ country and like

35:45 ↗ >> so those are things to consider. I I

35:46 ↗ guess I don't know why the tying of it

35:48 ↗ is very like um

35:51 ↗ >> like first generation that's my first

35:53 ↗ question is like you're looking for

35:54 ↗ first generation feedback but there's

35:56 ↗ more than first second third generation

35:58 ↗ feedback.

35:59 ↗ >> Okay, thank you. Yeah, some of that so

36:01 ↗ just for a little bit of clarity in what

36:03 ↗ I was thinking there. So, um, that's

36:05 ↗ also a little bit based on what cultural

36:07 ↗ groups seem to have a a presence in a

36:09 ↗ squa and have someone that we can maybe

36:11 ↗ reach out to. Um, so that's a little bit

36:14 ↗ of where that was drawn from as well.

36:18 ↗ >> Is there like a list um within like the

36:20 ↗ city that you have like resources or

36:23 ↗ like the certain groups or how did you

36:25 ↗ pull the the groups in like the process?

36:28 ↗ Yeah. So, I pulled the groups from

36:31 ↗ basically scanning our demographics and

36:33 ↗ searching for either for both like faith

36:36 ↗ and cultural and kind of community sort

36:39 ↗ of groups looking on places ranging from

36:42 ↗ Meetup to um like just a variety of

36:46 ↗ places. Um, so

36:54 ↗ >> Jillian, I had a question in regards to

36:57 ↗ something you had mentioned earlier and

36:58 ↗ I think that what makes survey work um a

37:01 ↗ lot easier and um I think more

37:04 ↗ comprehensive is using standardized

37:07 ↗ lists that you already have now. So you

37:08 ↗ have data that you can that you can

37:10 ↗ utilize now. But I'm always concerned

37:13 ↗ when there's the use of I guess a go-to

37:16 ↗ list of um of contacts that we're kind

37:19 ↗ of missing

37:20 ↗ >> the folks that may very well provide

37:22 ↗ some amazing feedback. So um I just want

37:26 ↗ to share my concern that we're really

37:28 ↗ casting a wider net than just what our

37:31 ↗ current resources are. And like for

37:34 ↗ instance um I think about service and

37:36 ↗ charitable organizations. Uh we have the

37:38 ↗ Blue Lodge. They're Masons here in uh

37:41 ↗ Isiqua. Long storyried um uh charitable

37:45 ↗ organization that has um deep roots in

37:48 ↗ this community. So I think reaching out

37:50 ↗ to them would be uh pretty uh um I think

37:54 ↗ would give you some substantial

37:55 ↗ information. Um also um close and near

37:58 ↗ and dear to my heart um senior adult and

38:02 ↗ child focused organizations.

38:04 ↗ >> I think it's very important. I love the

38:06 ↗ infographic of having the child

38:07 ↗ underneath standing on a pedestal even

38:10 ↗ though it's a bit old school in terms of

38:12 ↗ what equity is and it's really access.

38:15 ↗ So, uh adult and child focused uh

38:17 ↗ organizations really should uh be

38:20 ↗ hopefully on the current list if not a

38:22 ↗ developed list. Um also transportation

38:25 ↗ and food uh distribution organizations.

38:28 ↗ Um we have uh several here in uh Isaklaw

38:32 ↗ that I think would be pretty critical.

38:34 ↗ And then also uh recreational

38:36 ↗ organizations

38:38 ↗ um I think they can uh really give a lot

38:40 ↗ of feedback in terms of access in

38:42 ↗ equity. So

38:43 ↗ >> yeah,

38:45 ↗ >> thank you. I think yeah, we were pretty

38:47 ↗ conscious of that. I think the survey of

38:50 ↗ the public is drawing from from our list

38:52 ↗ of groups and orgs that we already know.

38:55 ↗ The outreach to faith and cultural

38:56 ↗ groups is a little bit of us casting a

38:59 ↗ wider net and maybe visiting with some

39:01 ↗ folks who we haven't tapped into as much

39:03 ↗ before, tried to build as much of a

39:04 ↗ relationship with before. Um, so there

39:08 ↗ be a question on if the person is a

39:10 ↗ Isqua resident, is that an requirement?

39:14 ↗ Because

39:15 ↗ >> I think some people have valid feedback

39:18 ↗ because they work with the Isakqua

39:19 ↗ community. Yeah. But they're not

39:21 ↗ necessarily a resident. Is that

39:24 ↗ something you're going to take like

39:26 ↗ you're talking about, you know, first

39:28 ↗ person like who is this person saying

39:30 ↗ this and what is their role within the

39:33 ↗ community?

39:34 ↗ >> Yeah, I think part of that is going to

39:36 ↗ be assessed through that neighborhood

39:37 ↗ question. If you know if they say I

39:40 ↗ don't live in is then we know. Um

39:43 ↗ so I do I'll just chime in too. I do

39:47 ↗ think um we are wanting to know how we

39:49 ↗ deliver services. So this is guidance

39:52 ↗ for how can we deliver services in a

39:55 ↗ more equitable manner. And so I think

39:58 ↗ what we'd be looking at is who are we

40:00 ↗ serving and who can provide input into

40:03 ↗ what they would like to see for those

40:05 ↗ services. We will weigh um is called

40:09 ↗ resident input more heavily because

40:11 ↗ they're the ones who pay the taxes for

40:13 ↗ those services. They're a greater

40:15 ↗ proportion of the people that we serve.

40:18 ↗ Um and they are our bosses. uh really

40:22 ↗ and so so we want to hear from them and

40:24 ↗ we'll prioritize them but I think if

40:26 ↗ there's other voices for example you

40:29 ↗ were mentioning a nonprofit uh

40:32 ↗ organizations that provide services in

40:35 ↗ Isiqua maybe those people aren't

40:37 ↗ residents but they work here they

40:39 ↗ provide services they're part of the

40:40 ↗ isiqua community they have a certain

40:42 ↗ perspective to share so I think it makes

40:44 ↗ sense to to listen to them too of course

40:47 ↗ we want to hear from them

40:48 ↗ >> how many people normally respond on when

40:51 ↗ you do surveys?

40:54 ↗ >> That's a good question. I don't know the

40:55 ↗ answer.

40:55 ↗ >> Varies widely depending on what's the

41:00 ↗ survey for. Um is it is it something

41:04 ↗ that you know we are looking for a lot

41:06 ↗ of people? I think your question of how

41:07 ↗ many people are you looking to respond?

41:09 ↗ I think that's great. I think we need to

41:11 ↗ talk about our targets and how we can uh

41:14 ↗ achieve those targets because this is

41:16 ↗ going to be a big it's it's a big plan.

41:19 ↗ Uh, so I was just wondering because my

41:23 ↗ neighborhood is by Lake Samameish Road

41:26 ↗ and when you were looking for the design

41:28 ↗ for that road between the state park and

41:30 ↗ Timber Lake, um, I know some of the HOA

41:33 ↗ people really amplify that message in

41:36 ↗ Facebook

41:37 ↗ >> and so I'm curious because it's a very

41:40 ↗ limited number of people who live on

41:41 ↗ that side road like what was that a good

41:44 ↗ outcome? What is a good outcome?

41:48 ↗ what does it what it normally look like?

41:51 ↗ So, what would you all like to help?

41:53 ↗ >> Yeah, and I know you're going to discuss

41:55 ↗ it.

41:55 ↗ >> It's a it's a great question. You know,

41:57 ↗ we did things like outreach for our

41:59 ↗ strategic plan. Uh we heard from uh

42:03 ↗ hundreds of people. When we do our

42:05 ↗ community survey on a bianual basis, um

42:08 ↗ it's statistically representative of the

42:10 ↗ Isiqua uh community. And so, I'm

42:14 ↗ forgetting exactly how many that is, but

42:16 ↗ it's 800 people. Thank you, Swondon. I

42:18 ↗ think we need like 700ish to be

42:21 ↗ significant.

42:22 ↗ >> So, obviously these citywide efforts, we

42:24 ↗ look for a higher number than maybe hey,

42:26 ↗ what do you want to see in your

42:27 ↗ neighborhood or on your street? Of

42:29 ↗ course. Um, so I think we need to it's a

42:32 ↗ great point to what are our targets?

42:34 ↗ What are we hoping? You should talk

42:35 ↗ about that.

42:37 ↗ So, one thing I don't know those you or

42:40 ↗ Leslie, but um so this is community

42:43 ↗ feedback, but do we want customer and

42:46 ↗ client feedback? Look, so like the human

42:49 ↗ services commission and all the people

42:51 ↗ they serve like will there be an effort

42:53 ↗ to have surveys reach

42:56 ↗ customers of the city?

42:59 ↗ >> You want me to take that?

43:00 ↗ >> Yeah. Okay. So uh I think uh so yes I

43:07 ↗ think they're folded into this

43:08 ↗ population of people we want to hear

43:09 ↗ from. The first phase of this work as we

43:12 ↗ think about trying to establish some

43:14 ↗ equity goals that's going to form the

43:16 ↗ overall where do we want to head and

43:19 ↗ then the next step is looking into

43:21 ↗ specific lines of service, specific

43:23 ↗ programs and saying okay if this is our

43:26 ↗ goal let's refine that for this specific

43:29 ↗ service or this specific program and

43:32 ↗ then really engage with those people who

43:35 ↗ are receiving those services in terms of

43:37 ↗ how far are we from that? what are some

43:39 ↗ of the things that we can do to fill

43:40 ↗ that gap? And so I think this is not the

43:44 ↗ end of our community engagement on

43:47 ↗ forming the equity plan. This is really

43:48 ↗ the let's let's establish what are our

43:51 ↗ our guideposts, where do we want to go,

43:54 ↗ >> and then we're going to keep diving

43:57 ↗ deeper into how we deliver services,

44:00 ↗ understand what that experience is from

44:02 ↗ those that we serve. That can then form

44:05 ↗ our actions to get to those goals. The

44:08 ↗ first step is let's figure out where we

44:10 ↗ want to head.

44:11 ↗ >> Have you heard of the targeted

44:13 ↗ universalism?

44:14 ↗ It sounds a lot like that. So you're

44:17 ↗ you're using the community phase to get

44:19 ↗ those uh universal goals and then

44:22 ↗ digging in to what what is the gap for

44:25 ↗ different groups within the community.

44:29 ↗ And that's where targeted like you have

44:31 ↗ you have goals for each you're getting

44:33 ↗ goals for you assess the gap for each of

44:35 ↗ those groups from that universal goal.

44:37 ↗ and you designed something very specific

44:40 ↗ >> for most schools. You're interest

44:44 ↗ thank

44:47 ↗ you.

44:50 ↗ >> The other piece of feedback I might so

44:53 ↗ I've done related work at a different

44:55 ↗ level of government and there tends to

44:59 ↗ be confusion over what

45:02 ↗ jurisdiction does what services,

45:04 ↗ provides what services. Um yeah, like

45:08 ↗ for county government it's very murky

45:10 ↗ what the county provides versus cities

45:12 ↗ uh versus state and federal. So there

45:16 ↗ may and hopefully the consultant

45:18 ↗ consultants can help with that like how

45:20 ↗ to clarify what is the city of Isiqua

45:24 ↗ even the school district right it the

45:26 ↗ lines are all blurry for people so if

45:29 ↗ you want something that's a little bit

45:30 ↗ more actionable you might have to

45:32 ↗ clarify what are municipal services.

45:34 ↗ Yeah,

45:35 ↗ >> great point. It's very confusing.

45:46 ↗ >> Okay, I feel like we've kind of been we

45:48 ↗ and out of these questions. So, I think

45:50 ↗ I'll just put these up here and see if

45:52 ↗ there's any other feedback on any of

45:54 ↗ these questions. And Quan, I know you

45:56 ↗ had a question about like what resources

45:59 ↗ we'd have. I think in this case because

46:01 ↗ it's like city programming in kind of a

46:03 ↗ different way, you know, we'd provide

46:05 ↗ the the engagement tool, whatever that

46:08 ↗ is, and just ask for volunteers to show

46:10 ↗ up and and do some of that like, hey, do

46:14 ↗ you want to place a dot on the spectrum

46:16 ↗ from equity to equality or whatever it

46:18 ↗ is? It's Yeah.

46:21 ↗ >> Yeah. I think just from being there or I

46:25 ↗ don't remember what it was, but um

46:28 ↗ there's like this thing about people

46:30 ↗ shying away from doing the engagement

46:33 ↗ because they're so unsure about like

46:36 ↗ being right or wrong and having a

46:39 ↗ conversation. And so there's I don't

46:41 ↗ know how to capture and like make sure

46:43 ↗ people feel like welcomed into doing

46:45 ↗ that this kind of like feedback. Um

46:49 ↗ maybe like a premeating or something if

46:51 ↗ folks are interested to walk through

46:53 ↗ exactly what we're asking possibly.

46:55 ↗ >> Okay.

46:56 ↗ >> Yeah. Um

46:58 ↗ yeah because it does get a little bit

47:00 ↗ like awkward and like some people got

47:02 ↗ it, some people didn't get it and then

47:04 ↗ we had younger um demographics that were

47:07 ↗ like oh I understand this and then um so

47:10 ↗ just within just a conversation itself

47:13 ↗ um takeaway is different

47:16 ↗ like group and people who approached the

47:18 ↗ table.

47:20 ↗ So I guess the question is will there be

47:22 ↗ training for everyone before we are off

47:26 ↗ for tableabling at events like the

47:29 ↗ farmers market and so forth. And I also

47:32 ↗ wonder for the equity board to be

47:35 ↗ involved could they be partnered with

47:38 ↗ city staff?

47:39 ↗ >> Yes.

47:40 ↗ >> At the same time. So it's not just two

47:43 ↗ board members sitting at a table asking

47:46 ↗ but someone from the city in addition to

47:51 ↗ someone in the community which is the

47:53 ↗ board. So I think that a little bit more

47:57 ↗ welcoming so we can do the perspective

48:00 ↗ of people working for the city as well

48:02 ↗ as people who are volunteering and

48:06 ↗ help you know to invite more voices.

48:11 ↗ Yeah, I think that's great. I think we

48:12 ↗ maybe have room to ask our internal

48:14 ↗ staff equity team if anyone wants to to

48:16 ↗ do that and to have like a little bit of

48:17 ↗ a prep meeting so everyone feels like

48:19 ↗ we're comfortable and we know what our

48:20 ↗ roles are and what we're doing. Um, and

48:23 ↗ regardless, I was planning on being

48:25 ↗ there. So, you'll have someone from from

48:27 ↗ staff.

48:33 ↗ um great, but I I wonder how to get to

48:37 ↗ our folks with disabilities

48:39 ↗ and um I was just I wonder if the school

48:43 ↗ district might be the way to

48:46 ↗ reach them because I know there's the

48:49 ↗ schools tend to know who the students

48:51 ↗ are and maybe the parents or other

48:54 ↗ family members can help inform some of

48:58 ↗ their things especially around access

49:00 ↗ and kind of think I I think we knew we

49:03 ↗ had we had a like an ADA plan group um a

49:07 ↗ few years ago that we were planning on

49:08 ↗ reaching out to. Um but Laura, if it's

49:10 ↗ okay, I might follow up with you about

49:12 ↗ who the right contact is.

49:13 ↗ >> So, you will be connecting. We'll talk.

49:16 ↗ >> Okay, sounds good.

49:25 ↗ All right, I'm seeing a lot of Chris, I

49:28 ↗ know we've been talking for a while. any

49:30 ↗ feedback that you want to you want to

49:32 ↗ throw out here?

49:35 ↗ >> Everyone's been kind of saying what I'm

49:36 ↗ thinking, so I'm good right now. Thank

49:38 ↗ you, though.

49:42 ↗ >> Okay, I think the sense I've got I'm

49:45 ↗ just going to run through each of these

49:46 ↗ questions and make sure I've got it

49:47 ↗ right. Okay, so it feels like the goals

49:51 ↗ for community engagement are

49:52 ↗ appropriate, but we need to do a little

49:53 ↗ bit of fine-tuning on what it means to

49:55 ↗ have sufficient community engagement.

49:58 ↗ um the proposed methods and groups, are

50:00 ↗ they the right ones for the project? Um

50:02 ↗ I think we got some suggestions about

50:04 ↗ who else to reach out to and how to be

50:06 ↗ pretty careful about using that

50:08 ↗ feedback, making sure that it's

50:10 ↗ associated to people from the group that

50:12 ↗ is being discussed.

50:14 ↗ Uh and then it sounds like there is

50:16 ↗ support for equity board involvement so

50:18 ↗ long as there's it's not just a like

50:20 ↗ show up. It's a little bit more um a

50:23 ↗ little bit of prep beforehand making

50:24 ↗ sure that city staff is paired with

50:26 ↗ equity board volunteers

50:29 ↗ that kind of capture the conversation

50:31 ↗ and the feedback.

50:32 ↗ >> I think so.

50:34 ↗ >> Okay. And that's all I have for you

50:37 ↗ tonight. Um, so next steps is I'll

50:40 ↗ follow up via email um about the the

50:43 ↗ equity board involvement this summer and

50:45 ↗ just get a little bit of interest from

50:46 ↗ all of you maybe at your your May or

50:49 ↗ June meeting to see who's available. Um,

50:52 ↗ and then I'll also be reaching out

50:55 ↗ towards the end of the summer about an

50:57 ↗ equity board member to serve on the

50:59 ↗ workshop uh group as well. So that might

51:03 ↗ come via email rather than me coming to

51:05 ↗ one of these meetings, but

51:10 ↗ school work.

51:11 ↗ >> Thank you very much, Jillian.

51:13 ↗ >> Fantastic presentation as usual. Thank

51:16 ↗ you very much. Thanks to you both.

51:18 ↗ >> Oh, Jillian gets all the credit. Of

51:20 ↗ course.

51:21 ↗ >> Absolutely.

51:23 ↗ >> All right. So, this is kind of a weird

51:24 ↗ point in the meeting where we're gonna

51:26 ↗ switch. So, I'm gonna let Dale know that

51:28 ↗ I'm done. Yeah.

51:29 ↗ >> Um I think you all need to go into

51:31 ↗ recess. I think we need just like like a

51:34 ↗ brief motion to to do that. Um and then

51:38 ↗ we'll swap and you all will continue

51:40 ↗ with your meeting.

51:41 ↗ >> Okay. So um would anyone like to make a

51:44 ↗ motion for us to adjourn our meeting for

51:48 ↗ 10 minutes?

51:51 ↗ >> Sure.

51:52 ↗ >> I make the motion for us to recess or

51:55 ↗ >> Fantastic. Have a second.

51:58 ↗ >> Second that.

51:59 ↗ >> All right. All in favor? Hi.

52:02 ↗ >> Hi. Hi.

52:04 ↗ >> All right. So, we are officially

52:05 ↗ adjourned for 10 minutes.

52:09 ↗ >> All right.

52:09 ↗ >> Will the recording be turned off?

52:11 ↗ >> Um, it should be

52:15 ↗ I'm a little bit nervous about turning

52:17 ↗ it off because then I don't know how

52:18 ↗ it's all going to knit back together

52:20 ↗ when Dale comes back to turn it on for

52:23 ↗ the meeting. What I can do is I can mute

52:26 ↗ the room and just let her know to unmute

52:29 ↗ it when she comes back in. Does that

52:30 ↗ seem reasonable or should I just stop

52:32 ↗ the recording?

52:33 ↗ >> No, I think stop the recording.

52:35 ↗ >> Okay. I just didn't want to like lose

52:36 ↗ it.

52:36 ↗ >> We can I think we can knit it back

52:38 ↗ together.

52:39 ↗ >> Okay. This morning.

52:41 ↗ >> Yeah. Okay. And if that's not the case,

52:44 ↗ then they can blame me and that's not on

52:47 ↗ you.

52:48 ↗ >> I made sure to to stop the recording

52:50 ↗ right after you said that.

52:51 ↗ >> Good.

52:55 ↗ >> Chris, can you hear us now?

52:57 ↗ >> Sure can.

52:58 ↗ >> Awesome. Hey,

53:00 ↗ >> that's right.

53:03 ↗ >> Okay, fantastic. So, it looks like our

53:05 ↗ next agenda item is parks rules and

53:08 ↗ regulations. I'm going to hand that over

53:10 ↗ to Dale.

53:12 ↗ >> Awesome. Please share my screen.

53:22 ↗ >> As a side note, this this is a bigger

53:24 ↗ screen.

53:24 ↗ >> It is. It's quite sizable

53:28 ↗ >> and it's a very spacious room. It is a

53:31 ↗ little echoey in here which is like less

53:33 ↗ great but we're making it work.

53:35 ↗ >> It's got these multi cameras there.

53:37 ↗ >> I know. Don't you feel a little bit like

53:38 ↗ you're uh being very seen?

53:45 ↗ >> It's not that coldest.

53:47 ↗ >> Great.

53:50 ↗ Okay. Um, I'm really excited to talk to

53:53 ↗ this group in particular about this um,

53:57 ↗ current project that our parks

53:58 ↗ department is working on and that I'm

54:00 ↗ supporting them in their work. Back in

54:03 ↗ early January, though, the story of this

54:05 ↗ starts much earlier as you'll see by the

54:07 ↗ materials in a moment. Um,

54:10 ↗ we really started de some early

54:12 ↗ development of park rules and

54:15 ↗ regulations, something that

54:17 ↗ little known fact but now known by

54:19 ↗ anyone that watches this recording do

54:21 ↗ not explicitly exist here in the city of

54:23 ↗ Isa. So when this went to council, um,

54:26 ↗ council member Nichols explicitly asked

54:28 ↗ for an equity lens to be taken to this

54:30 ↗ process and so I am here bringing this

54:33 ↗ to you, introducing it to you. It's

54:34 ↗ still quite in a nent stage.

54:38 ↗ The purpose of tonight is to get your

54:40 ↗ feedback on the plan to update and

54:42 ↗ consolidate park rules and regulations

54:44 ↗ within the city's municipal code, as

54:47 ↗ well as to gather initial thoughts on

54:49 ↗ key rules to be included in updating the

54:52 ↗ rules and regulations.

54:57 ↗ There are some specific questions we're

54:59 ↗ going to come back to. We're actually

55:00 ↗ going to go through each of these

55:01 ↗ individual questions rather than sort of

55:04 ↗ stopping at the end. I want to answer

55:06 ↗ question one, then I want to give you a

55:08 ↗ little more information. Then I want to

55:09 ↗ answer question two, and then I want to

55:10 ↗ give you a little bit more information.

55:11 ↗ I want to answer question three. So, do

55:13 ↗ you agree with the administration's

55:15 ↗ general direction, which is to

55:17 ↗ consolidate, update, and clarify park

55:18 ↗ rules and regulations within a single

55:20 ↗ chapter of our city code?

55:23 ↗ What topic areas do you believe will be

55:24 ↗ the most high interest for the community

55:27 ↗ in terms of rules and regulations? And

55:29 ↗ do you already have policy perspectives

55:32 ↗ on the position the city should take on

55:34 ↗ these topics?

55:35 ↗ and what if any thoughts do you have

55:37 ↗ about the overarching approach to

55:39 ↗ broader community insight which I'll

55:40 ↗ share a bit about this as well.

55:44 ↗ So we're going to start with this first

55:46 ↗ uh question. Do you agree that that it

55:48 ↗ makes sense for the city to consolidate

55:51 ↗ update and clarify rules and regulations

55:53 ↗ within a single chapter in the municipal

55:55 ↗ code? A little background on this. So

55:58 ↗ the park rules as they exist currently

56:01 ↗ are sort of sprinkled throughout the

56:04 ↗ municipal code. There's a little bit

56:07 ↗ about park rules in terms of land use

56:09 ↗ and acquisition that's in the land use

56:11 ↗ portion of our code. There's a little

56:13 ↗ bit about like don't put trash here in

56:16 ↗ one title. There's an animal control

56:19 ↗ chapter, but there's not a there's not

56:22 ↗ one place. So, if someone were just to

56:24 ↗ Google what are the park rules for the

56:27 ↗ city of Isiqua, you wouldn't find really

56:29 ↗ anything. Um, and there certainly,

56:31 ↗ you'll notice as you move in and out of

56:33 ↗ park space, trail space, they're not

56:35 ↗ posted anywhere because

56:38 ↗ well held secret, they don't exist

56:39 ↗ really. Um, and we certainly don't have

56:42 ↗ any sort of mechanism for enforcing

56:44 ↗ them. And so, why have rules if we also

56:46 ↗ don't have a plan to uphold those rules?

56:48 ↗ Also, the rules that do exist. So the

56:51 ↗ stuff that's in chapter um that's in

56:53 ↗ 9.25 that was last updated in 1985.

56:57 ↗ So

56:59 ↗ you know I wasn't alive then. Um and

57:02 ↗ then the the more recent update in 26

57:05 ↗ was updated in 2000. Still people in

57:07 ↗ this room that weren't alive then. Um so

57:11 ↗ this collection of park rules within the

57:14 ↗ code as it exists. They're simply not

57:15 ↗ complete and they're a bit um like

57:20 ↗ well-aged. What is Leslie? What do you

57:21 ↗ say? 65 and better. They're they're you

57:24 ↗ know 26 years and better. Um also not

57:29 ↗ all the current and emergent issues that

57:31 ↗ we experience in our parks are covered

57:33 ↗ and there's actually no there's no

57:36 ↗ framework for how to address emergent

57:39 ↗ issues. Um, and that's one thing that we

57:41 ↗ would hope to solve in this consolidated

57:43 ↗ chapter is like how do we how do we

57:45 ↗ address things we can't say for sure are

57:47 ↗ going to happen, but we can we know we

57:49 ↗ can anticipate things will change and

57:50 ↗ evolve and um that's made it difficult

57:54 ↗ for us to address um or even enforce

57:58 ↗ current behavior that uh might not be

58:02 ↗ wellreceived. Um I can't even wait till

58:05 ↗ I get into the topics. I have feelings

58:08 ↗ about what everyone's going to talk

58:09 ↗ about, but you know, if someone were to

58:11 ↗ say like dump a bunch of trash in the

58:12 ↗ park, there's no way to enforce that

58:14 ↗ that behavior isn't allowed. Um, and I

58:17 ↗ think that's something that we want to

58:18 ↗ think about. Like there's just no way to

58:21 ↗ stop anyone from doing really anything

58:25 ↗ anything less than a mis a gross

58:27 ↗ misdemeanor. So, anything that's like

58:28 ↗ not against the law law, um, there's no

58:33 ↗ way to say, "Hey, that's not something

58:34 ↗ we do here." the off these shot dogs for

58:37 ↗ example.

58:40 ↗ >> So we have a little bit of an

58:41 ↗ opportunity um to provide a more

58:44 ↗ complete set of rules. Um one thing that

58:46 ↗ is really

58:48 ↗ great is that there are actually a lot

58:50 ↗ of cities in the region right now that

58:51 ↗ have been going through this process

58:52 ↗ over the past three, four, five years.

58:55 ↗ Um the city of Shoreline adopted a a

58:58 ↗ chapter of rules in 2019 um shortly

59:02 ↗ after the city of Redmond did the same.

59:03 ↗ And I know the Redmond's rules were

59:05 ↗ included as an example to look at for

59:07 ↗ this evening. Um, and then the city of

59:09 ↗ Kirkland is I would say in the next two

59:13 ↗ weeks about to adopt a a similar chapter

59:16 ↗ for themselves. So

59:19 ↗ there there's this is a sort of thing

59:20 ↗ that's happening regionally. The good

59:22 ↗ thing about that is that I've been able

59:23 ↗ to talk to those cities about their

59:25 ↗ processes, learn more about the things

59:27 ↗ that they considered, um, which I think

59:30 ↗ has the opportunity to make this a

59:31 ↗ really strong um, set of rules that are

59:34 ↗ really thoughtfully constructed.

59:38 ↗ Um, also

59:40 ↗ this is not just coming from parks. I'm

59:42 ↗ supporting the parks team as they work

59:44 ↗ on this. We're also we've consulted the

59:46 ↗ human services team. Um we're working

59:48 ↗ closely with the police department, with

59:50 ↗ our city attorney. Um so this isn't

59:52 ↗ something that parks is just doing on

59:54 ↗ their own. We want to make sure that

59:55 ↗ this is a really collaboration among

59:57 ↗ departments. Um specifically human

59:59 ↗ services has been a big part of as we've

1:00:01 ↗ thought about sort of the way we want to

1:00:04 ↗ go with this. And then um there's also

1:00:06 ↗ been an opportunity to engage the city's

1:00:08 ↗ boards and commissions in this process.

1:00:10 ↗ So the park board clearly they've

1:00:12 ↗ already they've already had an initial

1:00:14 ↗ touch point here um but also getting to

1:00:16 ↗ engage the equity board this time and to

1:00:18 ↗ come back to the equity board before the

1:00:20 ↗ rules the proposed chapter goes to

1:00:23 ↗ council

1:00:28 ↗ >> analysis. So as part of tonight and I

1:00:31 ↗ promise we're going to get to question

1:00:32 ↗ number one which is just me saying does

1:00:34 ↗ this make sense? Should we do this or if

1:00:36 ↗ we shouldn't why shouldn't we? Um, in

1:00:39 ↗ preparation for tonight, I shared the

1:00:41 ↗ city of Redmond's recently updated parks

1:00:43 ↗ chapter as well as a little bit of a um

1:00:47 ↗ like a crosswalk item of like what does

1:00:50 ↗ our what do we currently have if

1:00:52 ↗ anything, what it what does Redmond have

1:00:55 ↗ and what are the notes um sort of the

1:00:58 ↗ differences between them. Um, one thing

1:01:01 ↗ that I really like about the parks

1:01:03 ↗ chapter um, for the city of Redmond's

1:01:04 ↗ code and that the parks uh, board also

1:01:07 ↗ really appreciated is that one, it's

1:01:10 ↗ consolidated in a single chapter. Two,

1:01:12 ↗ uh, there's a dedicated section for

1:01:14 ↗ definitions.

1:01:16 ↗ Uh, three, there's

1:01:19 ↗ more guidance about rule making long

1:01:21 ↗ term that we I mean we just don't even

1:01:24 ↗ have anything about that. Um, that

1:01:26 ↗ there's a whole framework for

1:01:27 ↗ enforcement. So, not just saying this

1:01:29 ↗ is, you know, this is not something

1:01:32 ↗ that's going to happen in the court part

1:01:33 ↗ our parks, but actually saying how are

1:01:35 ↗ we going to go about enforcing that? Um,

1:01:37 ↗ and Kirkland, I can also Kirkland's

1:01:39 ↗ materials weren't in the packet, but

1:01:41 ↗ have it inside or was doing this project

1:01:43 ↗ in Kirkland and so I recently talked to

1:01:45 ↗ them about their enforcement uh

1:01:49 ↗ framework as well. Um and then just

1:01:51 ↗ having park specific code um around

1:01:54 ↗ fireworks, weapons, tobacco,

1:01:57 ↗ um other things like that. And then also

1:02:00 ↗ I think what you see in Redmond's and is

1:02:02 ↗ true in Kirkland's as well as sort of

1:02:04 ↗ special events permits are sort of

1:02:06 ↗ integrated into this chapter. So there's

1:02:08 ↗ a really a one-stop shop for everything

1:02:11 ↗ that's happening in parks.

1:02:14 ↗ So this

1:02:16 ↗ is the sort of like this is the

1:02:18 ↗ comparison at the high level. So if you

1:02:21 ↗ were to take this back in front and

1:02:22 ↗ really isolate it down, we've got really

1:02:25 ↗ strong code around um land acquisition

1:02:29 ↗ and around how we use our open space. We

1:02:33 ↗ don't really have anything around how

1:02:35 ↗ people behave in those spaces. We don't

1:02:37 ↗ have anything around how people behave

1:02:39 ↗ on trails. Um, for those of you that

1:02:42 ↗ closely followed the ebikes discussion

1:02:44 ↗ while I was on maternity leave, um,

1:02:47 ↗ there's nothing around how fast someone

1:02:49 ↗ is allowed to go on a motorized or

1:02:51 ↗ non-motorized

1:02:53 ↗ wheeled item on our in our parks or on

1:02:56 ↗ our trails, things like that that just

1:02:58 ↗ don't exist anywhere. So, people might

1:03:01 ↗ be acting dangerously. There's no way to

1:03:03 ↗ enforce that. Um, and the Redmond uh

1:03:07 ↗ example, and this is the same with the

1:03:09 ↗ Kirkland, just has stronger trail

1:03:12 ↗ positions. We really don't have anything

1:03:14 ↗ in our code currently about trails. Um,

1:03:18 ↗ and some future proofing against

1:03:20 ↗ emergent issues by creating a a

1:03:22 ↗ framework for consideration.

1:03:24 ↗ So this is sort of what the general

1:03:26 ↗ proposal is is to move towards

1:03:28 ↗ developing an ISPA version of a single

1:03:30 ↗ chapter similar to what Redmond had that

1:03:32 ↗ you saw in your materials for tonight.

1:03:34 ↗ And so question number one is the one

1:03:37 ↗ above the current green box which is

1:03:40 ↗ does this feel like the right direction

1:03:41 ↗ to consolidate update and clarify park

1:03:44 ↗ rules and regulations within a single

1:03:46 ↗ chapter of the code and I open it for

1:03:49 ↗ questions and discussion on this

1:03:51 ↗ question.

1:03:54 ↗ Looks good to me.

1:03:55 ↗ >> I agree.

1:03:56 ↗ >> Yes.

1:03:57 ↗ >> Any descent?

1:03:58 ↗ >> I have a question.

1:04:00 ↗ >> Yes.

1:04:01 ↗ >> Do you want to I

1:04:02 ↗ >> I agree. I just think that um chapter

1:04:05 ↗ codes language is hard to understand

1:04:08 ↗ sometimes if you don't work hard. And so

1:04:10 ↗ I want to be cognizant of the language

1:04:13 ↗ being a code just to prevent any

1:04:16 ↗ barriers from understanding what this

1:04:18 ↗ is. um just because yeah working

1:04:21 ↗ government I found myself constantly

1:04:23 ↗ translating contracts and words into

1:04:27 ↗ layman's terms for our own employees

1:04:28 ↗ because they didn't understand what it

1:04:30 ↗ meant. So those are just I'm in

1:04:33 ↗ agreement just some just reducing

1:04:35 ↗ barriers.

1:04:36 ↗ >> Y

1:04:36 ↗ >> So would you recommend like something

1:04:38 ↗ like a fifth grade reading standard or

1:04:40 ↗ something like that for

1:04:43 ↗ >> I kind of like those things where it's

1:04:44 ↗ like explained to me like I'm five a

1:04:46 ↗ little bit. Yeah. So that's very basic

1:04:48 ↗ to understand. Um and I think especially

1:04:51 ↗ if we're looking at the audience of

1:04:52 ↗ Isiqua, we have such a diverse

1:04:54 ↗ community.

1:04:55 ↗ >> Um and English may not be the first

1:04:57 ↗ language. So something that might be

1:04:59 ↗ easier. Also, I am aware that we have a

1:05:01 ↗ lot of like translation things that we

1:05:02 ↗ are working on as well. So

1:05:04 ↗ >> but I think you're right. The fourth or

1:05:06 ↗ fifth grade level is what we should aim

1:05:08 ↗ for in especially since the parks will

1:05:11 ↗ be used by maybe young children and so

1:05:14 ↗ nothing that is too complex to read

1:05:18 ↗ especially on posted

1:05:19 ↗ >> but also to explain to people who they

1:05:23 ↗ are already having to navigate language

1:05:26 ↗ and culture and learning the new.

1:05:30 ↗ So the thing I wanted to mention was I

1:05:34 ↗ like the idea of having everything

1:05:35 ↗ consolidated into a chapter. It's just

1:05:38 ↗ you know when I think about the topics

1:05:40 ↗ and I I don't I know

1:05:42 ↗ >> yeah we're getting to that

1:05:43 ↗ >> but it seems like some of those topics

1:05:45 ↗ are co-owned by other sections or

1:05:49 ↗ chapters of municipal code. So like

1:05:53 ↗ safety, you know, around firearms or,

1:05:55 ↗ you know, alcohol, open containers, you

1:05:58 ↗ know, speed of motorized vehicles. So

1:06:02 ↗ I'm just wondering if we put it all in

1:06:04 ↗ this parks chapter, if something changes

1:06:07 ↗ in a related

1:06:09 ↗ um article in a different area of city

1:06:13 ↗ code, is it all of a sudden going to be

1:06:15 ↗ really hard to make sure that everything

1:06:17 ↗ is tracking and consistent? I don't know

1:06:19 ↗ if we're opening up that big can of

1:06:21 ↗ words.

1:06:22 ↗ >> That is why we have an excellent uh

1:06:24 ↗ clerk's department that will make sure

1:06:25 ↗ that it's tagged. Okay? So, when it does

1:06:27 ↗ change one place, it will go have to go

1:06:29 ↗ through prosecuting changed elsewhere.

1:06:32 ↗ That's more likely to go one way than

1:06:34 ↗ the other way. So, if it if it gets

1:06:35 ↗ changed within the parks chapter, it

1:06:37 ↗ won't necessarily push out to the

1:06:39 ↗ broader city, but if it does change at a

1:06:42 ↗ at an umbrella level, it'll push it

1:06:45 ↗ would need to be reapproved with an S

1:06:47 ↗ chapter.

1:06:47 ↗ >> Okay. Cool. Yeah. Also, why we have

1:06:50 ↗ police as part of this because a lot of

1:06:52 ↗ that would be around sort of gross

1:06:54 ↗ misdemeanor behavior. If things were to

1:06:56 ↗ change around enforcement or gross

1:06:58 ↗ misdemeanor behavior and those

1:06:59 ↗ misdemeanor are happening in our parks,

1:07:01 ↗ we would see that change happen there as

1:07:03 ↗ well. Yeah. Great.

1:07:06 ↗ >> I think it's uh very smart um of the um

1:07:09 ↗ the city to go in this direction. um

1:07:13 ↗ just based on what I do for a living,

1:07:14 ↗ having to look to many different places

1:07:17 ↗ as opposed to one place that basically

1:07:19 ↗ has all the information that you need in

1:07:21 ↗ terms of rules, enforcement, expectation

1:07:25 ↗ um in one place is very helpful. And I

1:07:27 ↗ also appreciate two things um in terms

1:07:30 ↗ of what Redmond is doing and I hope that

1:07:32 ↗ that's infoted in what the city is

1:07:34 ↗ looking to do which is um the future

1:07:38 ↗ proofing against emergent issues. So

1:07:40 ↗ really that aspect but also the

1:07:42 ↗ anticipation that we are going to have

1:07:45 ↗ challenges and having kind of a forward

1:07:47 ↗ thinking uh process through these rules

1:07:51 ↗ that this is what's going to happen if X

1:07:54 ↗ thing happens.

1:07:55 ↗ >> So I think it's a great approach.

1:07:58 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:07:59 ↗ >> Awesome. Thank you Lesley.

1:08:03 ↗ I think Chris had his hand up a little

1:08:05 ↗ bit, but

1:08:06 ↗ >> Chris, thank you, Quan.

1:08:09 ↗ >> All good. Um, I did I wanted to agree

1:08:12 ↗ about um what y'all were saying about

1:08:14 ↗ the eighth grade reading level. That's

1:08:17 ↗ usually the standard we have um when

1:08:20 ↗ we're communicating across the country

1:08:22 ↗ because we have a lot of managers who

1:08:24 ↗ English isn't their primary language.

1:08:26 ↗ So, um, anything that comes from Costco,

1:08:30 ↗ we we we kind of want it to be at that

1:08:32 ↗ eighth grade reading level. Um, so it's

1:08:34 ↗ inclusive of everyone. So, and we get

1:08:36 ↗ rid of all the jargon and like words

1:08:39 ↗ that, you know, not everyone is familiar

1:08:42 ↗ with.

1:08:45 ↗ >> That's great. Super helpful. Well, very

1:08:49 ↗ much heard. Very much noted.

1:08:52 ↗ >> Awesome.

1:08:54 ↗ Quick minor comment is I don't know

1:08:55 ↗ where this is going to be displayed

1:08:57 ↗ besides in the chapter

1:08:58 ↗ >> that maybe have a QR code that people

1:09:01 ↗ can just use to look it up easily.

1:09:05 ↗ >> People are so good at jumping ahead to

1:09:07 ↗ my next questions.

1:09:10 ↗ That's the problem when I give them at

1:09:11 ↗ the beginning. Um so let's do question

1:09:13 ↗ two and then perfect. I've noted that

1:09:14 ↗ for question number three. Um the next

1:09:17 ↗ little bit I want to the next question

1:09:19 ↗ set I want to answer is what topic areas

1:09:22 ↗ do you think are going to be the most

1:09:23 ↗ high interest

1:09:25 ↗ uh for the community and do you all with

1:09:29 ↗ your equity lens on already have

1:09:31 ↗ perspectives on the position the city

1:09:33 ↗ should take

1:09:36 ↗ the next couple slides are just some of

1:09:37 ↗ the issues we're already thinking about.

1:09:39 ↗ So, some of the issues we're already

1:09:41 ↗ thinking about types of rules to

1:09:42 ↗ consider, and you saw some of these in

1:09:44 ↗ the Redmond um example, uh animals and

1:09:48 ↗ pets,

1:09:50 ↗ parking, um hours of use,

1:09:55 ↗ swimming and access to water,

1:09:59 ↗ waste, litter, um drones,

1:10:04 ↗ well, specifically, I should say drone

1:10:06 ↗ operators because you actually can't

1:10:08 ↗ regulate I'm learning all sorts of

1:10:10 ↗ things. Drone operators,

1:10:13 ↗ >> self-driven drones maybe.

1:10:16 ↗ >> We don't even go there yet. Um,

1:10:19 ↗ amplified music, PA systems,

1:10:22 ↗ interference with park and trail use,

1:10:25 ↗ damage to property, damage to wildlife,

1:10:28 ↗ um, the vegetative kind, but I guess

1:10:31 ↗ also the animal kind. um removal of

1:10:34 ↗ property, dumping in water,

1:10:37 ↗ solicitation,

1:10:38 ↗ um smoking,

1:10:40 ↗ etc. And so I'd love to just open it up

1:10:42 ↗ for topics that you all already think

1:10:45 ↗ from your own experience in Isiqua Parks

1:10:48 ↗ um are going to be high interest or or

1:10:52 ↗ things that you do foresee us as a city

1:10:55 ↗ really there being value to creating

1:10:58 ↗ some clear rules and perspectives that

1:11:00 ↗ you may already have. And then we'll

1:11:02 ↗ talk about enforcement framework

1:11:03 ↗ afterwards.

1:11:04 ↗ >> Where does having large gatherings at

1:11:07 ↗ the park fall?

1:11:10 ↗ >> Because

1:11:12 ↗ I think sometimes people want to have a

1:11:14 ↗ large gathering like

1:11:16 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:11:17 ↗ >> party or like a teenage party or maybe a

1:11:20 ↗ birthday party and

1:11:23 ↗ they're going to bring everything there.

1:11:25 ↗ >> Yep.

1:11:26 ↗ >> And how does that work? And so I think

1:11:29 ↗ having clear cons

1:11:32 ↗ >> directions.

1:11:33 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:11:34 ↗ >> So that other all park users know what

1:11:38 ↗ the rules of engagement or rules for the

1:11:40 ↗ park how to use it.

1:11:42 ↗ >> Yep. That's a great point that's kind of

1:11:45 ↗ hidden right now in a lot of ways like

1:11:48 ↗ within special event permitting. If you

1:11:50 ↗ go that like route um it's not it's not

1:11:53 ↗ clear. It's not

1:11:54 ↗ >> some parks you can rent shelters but

1:11:56 ↗ some parts you can't. But then some

1:11:58 ↗ people like, "Well, why can't we just go

1:12:00 ↗ there and put some tables and set up?"

1:12:02 ↗ >> Yep.

1:12:03 ↗ >> Can you get married there? Can you, you

1:12:05 ↗ know,

1:12:07 ↗ >> Yep.

1:12:16 ↗ I mean, yeah, I think with um like any

1:12:19 ↗ big gatherings and like just in general,

1:12:20 ↗ I think we should really focus on like

1:12:22 ↗ the litter or waste rule and like just

1:12:24 ↗ in general like making sure like you're

1:12:26 ↗ keeping the space um just how it was

1:12:29 ↗ before you even go out there.

1:12:32 ↗ >> I think most all proposals are pretty

1:12:35 ↗ important to keep it there.

1:12:41 ↗ Not sure if you had this in the previous

1:12:43 ↗ slide, but just overall um guidance

1:12:46 ↗ around noise and lighting because a lot

1:12:48 ↗ of people go to parks for quiet and not

1:12:52 ↗ like bright lights everywhere. So,

1:13:00 ↗ >> I don't know if it makes to also

1:13:02 ↗ consider like quiet songs in parks.

1:13:10 ↗ the parks that don't have pickle ball

1:13:12 ↗ more mainable to quiet zones. Yep.

1:13:15 ↗ >> Something about locations for where bike

1:13:18 ↗ bicycling, skateboarding,

1:13:20 ↗ skating, walking, running because as

1:13:23 ↗ someone who walks on trail sometimes

1:13:25 ↗ you're sharing.

1:13:27 ↗ >> But what if it's a space in a park and

1:13:29 ↗ then you're having to deal with people

1:13:33 ↗ doing certain activities in some areas?

1:13:35 ↗ So like areas at that location for where

1:13:39 ↗ striking activities I don't want to be

1:13:41 ↗ like bossing everyone around and how to

1:13:43 ↗ use the park but just to keep people

1:13:46 ↗ safe right now

1:13:50 ↗ just just popped in my head because you

1:13:52 ↗ brought up and I did follow the ebike uh

1:13:55 ↗ saga it was quite uh soap opish

1:13:59 ↗ >> um

1:14:00 ↗ >> are there any considerations about use

1:14:04 ↗ of ebike bikes or other like electronic

1:14:07 ↗ kind of uh um either recreational

1:14:09 ↗ devices on either trails or in parks

1:14:12 ↗ that would have an overlap with wherever

1:14:15 ↗ they're named in the code in here. The

1:14:18 ↗ the the way that um right now at least

1:14:21 ↗ the emerging thing that is being

1:14:23 ↗ considered is not necessarily a

1:14:24 ↗ prohibition on devices because I think

1:14:27 ↗ we can't anticipate all devices.

1:14:29 ↗ >> Sure.

1:14:31 ↗ um as someone for instance who's like

1:14:33 ↗ seen those like delivery robots but I do

1:14:36 ↗ think yeah wild little robots delivering

1:14:39 ↗ food not in my neighborhood but I was in

1:14:41 ↗ San Francisco not too long ago and I was

1:14:43 ↗ like man everything here is autonomous

1:14:45 ↗ at this point

1:14:46 ↗ >> um speed is something that feels very

1:14:51 ↗ important

1:14:52 ↗ >> to define a speed limit on trails

1:14:56 ↗ >> makes sense

1:14:57 ↗ >> yeah because I agree with Lorna you

1:14:59 ↗ don't want to be Dr. or no in this

1:15:00 ↗ scenario, but it's just kind of having

1:15:02 ↗ kind of rules of engagement or play for

1:15:04 ↗ everyone's equal enjoyment of the space.

1:15:07 ↗ >> Yeah. Because that tends to be the issue

1:15:09 ↗ when people bring up the safety issue.

1:15:12 ↗ It's the speed at which some

1:15:15 ↗ vehicles are traveling.

1:15:17 ↗ >> And maybe even something like in these

1:15:19 ↗ areas the a bicycle should be walked

1:15:23 ↗ rather than ridden.

1:15:25 ↗ >> Yep. at being very clear about that

1:15:27 ↗ because sometimes I see people biking

1:15:30 ↗ around across like certain trail heads

1:15:32 ↗ and you're like no I think you should be

1:15:34 ↗ walking your bike

1:15:36 ↗ >> across that. So, yep.

1:15:39 ↗ >> So, rel so some of these topics and I

1:15:42 ↗ think it ties to your next question but

1:15:45 ↗ you know like so controlled substances

1:15:48 ↗ you know I'm thinking there may be like

1:15:50 ↗ a cultural aspect to some of those

1:15:53 ↗ things. Um I mean this is so like I I

1:15:59 ↗ just think you know certain community

1:16:00 ↗ members need to be engaged before some

1:16:04 ↗ code gets written up around um

1:16:06 ↗ >> like so medicable medicinal marijuana

1:16:09 ↗ for example or um

1:16:12 ↗ >> you know I don't think our you know

1:16:14 ↗ indigenous populations here use like

1:16:16 ↗ peyote or you know but you know kind of

1:16:18 ↗ thinking of that and you know which

1:16:20 ↗ communities have uh the rights to do

1:16:22 ↗ certain things I don't know if it's in

1:16:25 ↗ public spaces or whether that should be

1:16:26 ↗ considered or

1:16:28 ↗ >> and then we know and I saw in the

1:16:29 ↗ Redmond code like fishing rights there's

1:16:31 ↗ like a little caveat around fishing

1:16:32 ↗ rights but if there's also

1:16:36 ↗ you know like how how to be

1:16:39 ↗ I think there's an opportunity to write

1:16:41 ↗ that and also be respectful and also

1:16:44 ↗ educate the public on certain

1:16:46 ↗ communities that have the rights to

1:16:48 ↗ fish. Um so that that's an area and then

1:16:52 ↗ I think well the pets you know off leash

1:16:57 ↗ and if you expect if you expect uh pet

1:17:01 ↗ owners to pick up after their pets you

1:17:04 ↗ really can't keep them off leash and you

1:17:06 ↗ know just some of those kind of things.

1:17:08 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:17:09 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:17:14 ↗ So I don't I mean those are the things I

1:17:15 ↗ know but so I think there just needs to

1:17:17 ↗ be some you know diverse

1:17:20 ↗ community perspectives to give feedback

1:17:22 ↗ because I don't know where cultural

1:17:26 ↗ like needs and norms may clash with what

1:17:29 ↗ might be kind of our

1:17:32 ↗ more majority kind of norms of what's

1:17:35 ↗ written in code.

1:17:40 ↗ Do folks feel ready to transition to

1:17:42 ↗ that conversation,

1:17:44 ↗ >> the policy conversation?

1:17:46 ↗ >> Um, engagement

1:17:47 ↗ >> engagement.

1:17:51 ↗ >> Okay, I want to hop to that one. Um, so

1:17:55 ↗ what what thoughts about engagement? Um,

1:17:58 ↗ you know, one thing, so there's

1:18:00 ↗ currently a survey that's live. So

1:18:02 ↗ that's the basel the very very baseline

1:18:03 ↗ has been taken care of. There's a survey

1:18:05 ↗ that's live. There are two artic posted

1:18:07 ↗ up are along some trails in parks.

1:18:11 ↗ They'll be up there for a while. Um but

1:18:14 ↗ we are thinking about other engagement.

1:18:17 ↗ Um knowing that there's not a you know

1:18:21 ↗ we don't have a lot of staff capacity to

1:18:23 ↗ do this long term. We do have a

1:18:25 ↗ conversation set up with Snow Palmy

1:18:26 ↗ Tribe to talk about specifically our

1:18:29 ↗ open space. Um but wanted to get this

1:18:32 ↗ group's thought on broader

1:18:35 ↗ open space, access to water. I'm trying

1:18:37 ↗ to think of the other things to on that

1:18:38 ↗ agenda. Um

1:18:41 ↗ other particular groups that should be

1:18:43 ↗ engaged.

1:18:44 ↗ >> Have you spoken to friends of Lake

1:18:46 ↗ Samish State Park and the Isqua Alps

1:18:48 ↗ groups to get some input from them?

1:18:51 ↗ >> Uh the um Isqua Alps trail club has

1:18:55 ↗ representatives on the park board. So

1:18:57 ↗ they've the friends of lakes. Friends of

1:19:00 ↗ lakes mammish. Yeah, that's a great one.

1:19:09 ↗ Other thoughts

1:19:14 ↗ >> is the capacity to have like a table. I

1:19:17 ↗ feel like there are so many surveys and

1:19:18 ↗ tables going. Yes. But at some local

1:19:21 ↗ parks like or even reaching out to

1:19:23 ↗ people who have emailed regarding the

1:19:25 ↗ use of Confluence Park or some of the

1:19:28 ↗ other parks because you know those

1:19:30 ↗ people

1:19:32 ↗ you already have the data and that

1:19:34 ↗ information of who's been renting out

1:19:36 ↗ spaces and checking in with them to see

1:19:38 ↗ what they

1:19:41 ↗ because they have interest in using

1:19:43 ↗ those spaces and now we're going back to

1:19:45 ↗ them and say we see you're uh

1:19:47 ↗ appreciative and use our case and we

1:19:50 ↗ want to, you know, value your

1:19:53 ↗ involvement in the community and ask you

1:19:55 ↗ for feedback.

1:19:58 ↗ >> I love that and it validates that

1:20:02 ↗ impulse I had. So now I can say someone

1:20:05 ↗ on the equity board said it'll

1:20:09 ↗ get it a little bit further. And then I

1:20:11 ↗ I'm wondering um it's not is it the

1:20:16 ↗ 25th? April 25th sustainability is the

1:20:19 ↗ sustainability fair in the first farmers

1:20:20 ↗ market. And so I can see if we can have

1:20:22 ↗ a table at that. Yeah. Leslie, you

1:20:25 ↗ sounded like you had a thought.

1:20:27 ↗ >> No, no, no. I was just agreeing with

1:20:30 ↗ very much what Laura said. Sorry, need

1:20:33 ↗ to be quiet on that.

1:20:34 ↗ >> No, I love that comment.

1:20:36 ↗ >> Yeah, it's great.

1:20:37 ↗ >> Very similar. Maybe it's already

1:20:38 ↗ captured on what you said, but do we

1:20:40 ↗ know if there's data of that sort for

1:20:43 ↗ all the parks in Isiqua on how it's been

1:20:46 ↗ used over say the last two decades?

1:20:49 ↗ >> Late breaking not yet news is that we

1:20:52 ↗ are looking into acquiring access to

1:20:55 ↗ data that would tell us more about park

1:20:57 ↗ use. Right now, I just had a demo with a

1:21:01 ↗ a vendor

1:21:04 ↗ last oh Monday. Wow, it's been a long

1:21:07 ↗ week. Monday.

1:21:09 ↗ >> Yeah. So, we will have uh we will

1:21:13 ↗ potentially have some of that data very

1:21:15 ↗ soon.

1:21:16 ↗ >> And maybe also relatedly looking

1:21:18 ↗ forwards into the future like how groups

1:21:21 ↗ and people might want to use the park in

1:21:23 ↗ the future maybe for our installation or

1:21:27 ↗ I don't know music or whatever else.

1:21:29 ↗ >> Yep. We won't be able to get this will

1:21:31 ↗ be more about like movement data and it

1:21:33 ↗ will be aggregated and and anonymized

1:21:36 ↗ but I do think there's there's some

1:21:39 ↗ stuff in the works right now um around

1:21:43 ↗ um park use and I think specific

1:21:46 ↗ investments potential investments in

1:21:48 ↗ specific parks um coming up. So

1:21:53 ↗ yes,

1:21:54 ↗ >> isn't um like front street area going to

1:21:56 ↗ be closed on the weekend? And I'm

1:21:58 ↗ wondering as the it's closed to also

1:22:01 ↗ have a booth uh in addition to like

1:22:04 ↗ sometimes at a confluence park and stuff

1:22:05 ↗ because people it's so walkable that

1:22:07 ↗ it's easy for people to just like swing

1:22:09 ↗ by because I know some of the

1:22:10 ↗ restaurants have like their little

1:22:12 ↗ tables out with their menus right now

1:22:13 ↗ because it's all nice and sunny. So just

1:22:16 ↗ wondering if it's be um you know for

1:22:19 ↗ >> for um the city to have something out

1:22:21 ↗ there as well.

1:22:22 ↗ that was that.

1:22:25 ↗ >> So, thinking ahead and I'm trying to

1:22:28 ↗ figure out how this fits in with

1:22:29 ↗ community input, but I I'm so I'm

1:22:32 ↗ thinking about the enforcement side y

1:22:34 ↗ >> of what gets written in code. Yeah.

1:22:36 ↗ because we know certain groups get

1:22:38 ↗ overpoliced, certain groups like to

1:22:40 ↗ police and um

1:22:45 ↗ >> I feel like there we could set the stage

1:22:48 ↗ for a a productive conversation around

1:22:52 ↗ the enforcement side to avoid people

1:22:55 ↗ like I was on the bus this morning and a

1:22:57 ↗ person with the dog came on and someone

1:22:59 ↗ behind him was like are you allowed to

1:23:01 ↗ have that dog? Talk to a driver. Is he

1:23:03 ↗ allowed to have a dog? It was just like

1:23:05 ↗ causing this big ruckus. And I'm like, I

1:23:07 ↗ can imagine something like this just

1:23:09 ↗ creating opportunities for

1:23:12 ↗ just nasty interactions between people.

1:23:16 ↗ And

1:23:18 ↗ so I I don't know, but something around

1:23:20 ↗ like how this would be enforced and what

1:23:22 ↗ are the norms, how to be respectful

1:23:23 ↗ about it.

1:23:24 ↗ >> Yep.

1:23:26 ↗ I had some of the same thoughts when we

1:23:28 ↗ had our our premeating um Caric and I

1:23:30 ↗ with uh Dale and to the policy um

1:23:35 ↗ question I wrote my self a couple of

1:23:38 ↗ notes which is just in terms of equity

1:23:40 ↗ what would be the process to ensure that

1:23:42 ↗ public engagement with park users is

1:23:44 ↗ equitable fair same thing and consistent

1:23:46 ↗ in relation to communication of park

1:23:48 ↗ rules in issuing tickets and violations

1:23:51 ↗ so that was one thing and then I call

1:23:53 ↗ this as a mustave Is there an audit or

1:23:56 ↗ review of this process in the revision

1:23:58 ↗ of the proposed part code? So more kind

1:24:01 ↗ of overall after these rules are

1:24:04 ↗ implemented as a kind of a review or an

1:24:08 ↗ audit process. And that's I think that's

1:24:11 ↗ really what I'm getting at is are we

1:24:13 ↗ looking at the rules as they've been

1:24:16 ↗ implemented in the effects and how

1:24:18 ↗ they're being um I guess how they are

1:24:22 ↗ being um enforced and then what the

1:24:24 ↗ effects of that are.

1:24:26 ↗ >> Um I also made a note to myself. Is

1:24:29 ↗ there a reporting compliance mechanism

1:24:31 ↗ in the park code or another area which

1:24:33 ↗ uh reviews reports on a regular basis?

1:24:36 ↗ mark what regular would be in this case

1:24:39 ↗ on enforcement engagement by park

1:24:41 ↗ personnel and the public and then um

1:24:45 ↗ yeah generally those are the the

1:24:47 ↗ comments I was thinking about which is

1:24:50 ↗ >> I I agree 100% with prey with it which

1:24:53 ↗ is you have certain people that believe

1:24:55 ↗ that they are the police or they are the

1:24:58 ↗ authority when in in reality they are

1:25:01 ↗ not and so I I think we need to have

1:25:06 ↗ I think a strong lens on how these rules

1:25:09 ↗ are being implemented, who's doing it,

1:25:13 ↗ and then also studying the after effects

1:25:15 ↗ of the groups that are basically being

1:25:18 ↗ focused on. And hopefully that's being

1:25:20 ↗ done as fairly and equitably as

1:25:22 ↗ possible.

1:25:23 ↗ >> Really like that.

1:25:25 ↗ >> Yeah. And it it brings us to the the

1:25:28 ↗ part that's not quite in here yet, but a

1:25:30 ↗ conversation and I'd be curious folks

1:25:32 ↗ thought. So one of the questions in the

1:25:33 ↗ survey is around is getting folks

1:25:36 ↗ opinion on how should what should be the

1:25:39 ↗ approach to enforcement like how would

1:25:41 ↗ you like to see rules enforced? Would

1:25:42 ↗ you like to see that done through

1:25:44 ↗ education? Would you like to see that

1:25:46 ↗ done through um some sort of penalty of

1:25:51 ↗ some sort of fine or penalty? Would you

1:25:53 ↗ like to see it done through um it's not

1:25:56 ↗ removal from parks? I'm trying to think

1:25:58 ↗ of the phrasing in there, but one of the

1:26:01 ↗ ways that the way that Kirkland is

1:26:02 ↗ approaching it is around um sort of

1:26:06 ↗ someone that's break that's committing

1:26:08 ↗ civil infractions. they get a verbal

1:26:09 ↗ warning and then they are asked to be to

1:26:12 ↗ not be at that park for I think it's

1:26:14 ↗ seven days and that is the first um sort

1:26:19 ↗ of level and then after that it's a

1:26:21 ↗ longer period of time and a little bit

1:26:23 ↗ of that is based on I believe in their

1:26:25 ↗ framework based on the severity of the

1:26:27 ↗ infraction civil infraction um is it a

1:26:30 ↗ gross misdemeanor um and then

1:26:33 ↗ individuals have the ability to petition

1:26:35 ↗ for that u to be dismissed for that Um,

1:26:39 ↗ again, it's not removal, but I've been

1:26:42 ↗ brain has been in a million places um

1:26:44 ↗ banning Cella essentially from her. And

1:26:46 ↗ so I I talked to um uh our parks ops

1:26:51 ↗ team um because I I was trying to get a

1:26:54 ↗ sense of like

1:26:56 ↗ how burdensome would this be or how many

1:26:59 ↗ people do we think this would actually

1:27:00 ↗ touch? Um, and their feeling was that

1:27:03 ↗ there are a few people that are known to

1:27:06 ↗ them, but that this isn't like you

1:27:08 ↗ wouldn't see dozens and dozens of people

1:27:11 ↗ being banned from parks. Um, and that

1:27:14 ↗ the biggest issues are

1:27:17 ↗ maybe unsurprisingly

1:27:19 ↗ off leash pets. Um, and that if you

1:27:22 ↗ actually look at Ranger Alex's

1:27:24 ↗ log, so he does keep a log of all of his

1:27:27 ↗ interactions with people in the tarps.

1:27:29 ↗ It is like

1:27:31 ↗ pet off leash. 90% of the interactions

1:27:34 ↗ are pet off leash, pet off leash, pet

1:27:36 ↗ off leash. Um, and yet he had no he has

1:27:38 ↗ no or had no recourse of any kind. Um,

1:27:42 ↗ besides saying, "Hey, we don't allow for

1:27:44 ↗ dogs to be off leash. We're opening a a

1:27:47 ↗ new dog off leash park soon. We hope

1:27:49 ↗ that you take your dog over there." Um,

1:27:52 ↗ but no, I guess team to that. Um, and so

1:27:57 ↗ we're considering I I think we're not

1:28:00 ↗ looking to go immediately to like let's

1:28:01 ↗ find someone because that's I don't

1:28:04 ↗ think productive, nor do I think we have

1:28:05 ↗ the staff capacity to like find people

1:28:08 ↗ every time a dog is off leash. But I

1:28:10 ↗ think it's the people that are the

1:28:11 ↗ habitual

1:28:13 ↗ um maybe rule breakers um being able to

1:28:17 ↗ have some sort of thing, some sort of

1:28:19 ↗ stick

1:28:21 ↗ to levy. And that was my next question

1:28:23 ↗ too which is is there enough city

1:28:25 ↗ personnel in terms of park and

1:28:27 ↗ recreation to be in the many places and

1:28:30 ↗ to make appropriate you know engagement.

1:28:33 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:28:33 ↗ >> And the answer is there not to catch

1:28:36 ↗ everyone not to catch everyone breaking

1:28:37 ↗ the rules. I mean not to out myself as a

1:28:40 ↗ rule breaker here on the record. I am a

1:28:43 ↗ live in the city of Seattle. I have a

1:28:45 ↗ dog. I have a park right next to my

1:28:47 ↗ house. I break this rule frequently.

1:28:50 ↗ There's a big sign that says don't do

1:28:52 ↗ this and I do it and I don't do it when

1:28:55 ↗ there are kids in the park. I like very

1:28:57 ↗ specifically do it before there's anyone

1:29:00 ↗ else around. And if a kid enters the

1:29:01 ↗ park with a soccer ball, my dog and I

1:29:03 ↗ leave.

1:29:04 ↗ >> It makes things.

1:29:06 ↗ >> And there are people in my neighborhood

1:29:07 ↗ that don't abide by that. And there are

1:29:08 ↗ people in my neighborhood who have

1:29:09 ↗ gotten caught by animal control and

1:29:11 ↗ fined and the whole the whole uh nine

1:29:14 ↗ yards. Um so it's like, you know, Ranger

1:29:17 ↗ Alex isn't going to be able to be

1:29:18 ↗ everywhere. Sure. But the hope is that

1:29:20 ↗ he's going to be able to engage enough

1:29:22 ↗ and have a little bit of something to

1:29:24 ↗ actually do that maybe change his

1:29:27 ↗ behavior correctly.

1:29:30 ↗ >> Sense.

1:29:30 ↗ >> So that that this is reminding me of

1:29:32 ↗ like not pet owners but other people who

1:29:35 ↗ might be really impacted by this kind of

1:29:38 ↗ rules or maybe unhoused people, tents,

1:29:41 ↗ camping.

1:29:44 ↗ finding them, you know, is not

1:29:48 ↗ >> going to do anyone any good,

1:29:50 ↗ >> right? So, how

1:29:54 ↗ I don't know if this is in the municipal

1:29:56 ↗ code, but what is there to help um make

1:29:59 ↗ sure that folks who can't afford who

1:30:02 ↗ have no options aren't just further

1:30:05 ↗ Yeah.

1:30:06 ↗ >> getting worse off through this kind of

1:30:08 ↗ >> Yeah, we're going to keep, you know,

1:30:10 ↗ human services is a big part of this

1:30:12 ↗ conversation. We're keeping our service

1:30:14 ↗ first approach. Okay, that has been the

1:30:17 ↗ approach so far. It will always be the

1:30:19 ↗ approach around any community members

1:30:21 ↗ who are experiencing homelessness, who

1:30:23 ↗ are unhoused or who just even if given

1:30:26 ↗ the opportunity don't want to move into

1:30:28 ↗ shelter. Um our team is going to

1:30:29 ↗ continue to work with them. So that that

1:30:33 ↗ will be just that will be the approach

1:30:36 ↗ there. Ah,

1:30:37 ↗ >> so maybe not I guess how do you work

1:30:40 ↗ around the fact that they may have

1:30:42 ↗ committed an infraction or whatever and

1:30:45 ↗ it might be what a level three fine or

1:30:48 ↗ something that's

1:30:49 ↗ >> $25 the first time and 50 then 75 like

1:30:52 ↗ how do you

1:30:54 ↗ >> for that not even just for that group I

1:30:57 ↗ would be very I'm going to say it here

1:31:00 ↗ I'd be very as the person that's

1:31:01 ↗ drafting this code be very surprised if

1:31:03 ↗ we go a directionally I'll

1:31:06 ↗ Um I just don't think that that will it

1:31:11 ↗ will get to that point. I think if you

1:31:12 ↗ then say like oh well what if what about

1:31:14 ↗ a person that's taking advantage of this

1:31:16 ↗ I think there like if you are banned

1:31:18 ↗ from a park and then you go to it or if

1:31:20 ↗ you're banned from a parking lot in a

1:31:21 ↗ park and then you go there anyways

1:31:23 ↗ you're then trespassing.

1:31:25 ↗ >> Um and so that is a way to enforce but I

1:31:28 ↗ think we would like to not get to that

1:31:31 ↗ place. We'd like to connect people to

1:31:32 ↗ services who need to go to services, but

1:31:35 ↗ folks that are being bad actors, it also

1:31:36 ↗ a framework like that would also give us

1:31:38 ↗ the opportunity to trespass someone if

1:31:40 ↗ we needed to.

1:31:42 ↗ >> So, I think just going about this

1:31:45 ↗ process and writing out the code in a

1:31:48 ↗ way that's kind of respectful and

1:31:50 ↗ centers on people.

1:31:52 ↗ >> Yeah. And I think gives it gives both

1:31:56 ↗ clarity but also provides some frontline

1:31:59 ↗ discretion

1:32:01 ↗ for our team to make sure that we can

1:32:03 ↗ say like this is someone that needs

1:32:05 ↗ support and help. Um yeah,

1:32:11 ↗ >> you know, so I think going back to the

1:32:12 ↗ community input part, I think if it's

1:32:14 ↗ like something you can like bring to

1:32:16 ↗ like ESU's advisory board or I think the

1:32:19 ↗ highlights board um cuz a lot of members

1:32:22 ↗ there from like sixth grade to like

1:32:24 ↗ seniors are using the parks and many of

1:32:27 ↗ them may not see the surveys or things

1:32:29 ↗ like that, but I'm sure they have a lot

1:32:30 ↗ of input of like they don't know like

1:32:32 ↗ where they can ride their bike or like

1:32:34 ↗ what they can do.

1:32:36 ↗ So

1:32:36 ↗ >> may they've been inviting the very fast

1:32:39 ↗ emotives.

1:32:42 ↗ >> I'm also wondering if you can share this

1:32:44 ↗ with the summer camps and the summer

1:32:46 ↗ counselors. I always find educating kids

1:32:49 ↗ is the best way to educate adults. And

1:32:52 ↗ so I think the most the best way truly

1:32:55 ↗ if you can kind of tell all the kids who

1:32:58 ↗ are using the summer cams this summer

1:33:01 ↗ and just like saying, "Hey kids, you're

1:33:03 ↗ going to the park and by the way, here

1:33:04 ↗ are the rules of the park." You know,

1:33:06 ↗ something because you have so many

1:33:08 ↗ outdoor activities with them and the

1:33:11 ↗ summer camp counselors asking them to do

1:33:13 ↗ surveys that might get feedback for one

1:33:16 ↗ group and education for another group.

1:33:18 ↗ Because to me the key to this being a

1:33:20 ↗ successful and I'm biased here is about

1:33:23 ↗ educating the people about what the

1:33:25 ↗ rules are and I think my bigger wonder

1:33:29 ↗ and worry about this is how once we do

1:33:32 ↗ all of this how are we really sharing

1:33:35 ↗ this message

1:33:36 ↗ >> we're going to have a lot of people when

1:33:38 ↗ they get the rule they just want to know

1:33:40 ↗ what the rules of engagement and how to

1:33:42 ↗ use it and it's not with malice so like

1:33:45 ↗ ready to break I mean some people might

1:33:47 ↗ But I think just making sure that

1:33:49 ↗ everyone knows what rules are so they're

1:33:53 ↗ not caught unaware, especially since

1:33:56 ↗ this is so brand new. And I appreciate

1:33:58 ↗ the fact that Redmond and Kirkland are

1:34:00 ↗ doing the same thing so that it's a

1:34:02 ↗ bigger thing. But I just want to make

1:34:05 ↗ sure that we are being very thoughtful

1:34:07 ↗ on sharing and really pushing the fact

1:34:11 ↗ that this is new and it's happening and

1:34:13 ↗ here are the rules and multiple

1:34:15 ↗ opportunities to share that

1:34:18 ↗ no one's going to stand in front of a

1:34:20 ↗ sign in a park and read when you're at

1:34:21 ↗ the park. Yeah.

1:34:22 ↗ >> Well, let's hope.

1:34:23 ↗ >> Hope you're doing some fun.

1:34:25 ↗ >> Exactly.

1:34:26 ↗ Well, you almost anticipated my last

1:34:29 ↗ slide except that it's missing a little

1:34:31 ↗ bit at the end, which is the part that

1:34:32 ↗ Lauren just just uh asked about. Wow,

1:34:35 ↗ it's really small when it's on the

1:34:37 ↗ screen up there. I apologize. Um, so

1:34:39 ↗ we're in the process of gathering board

1:34:42 ↗ input specifically from this board and

1:34:44 ↗ the park board. And I'd like to add the

1:34:46 ↗ youth advisory board. So, I'll reach out

1:34:47 ↗ to Kathy and Katie um about making sure

1:34:50 ↗ we get input. Also, there's a public

1:34:52 ↗ survey that is running. So, it went out

1:34:54 ↗ in the park bench, which is the park's

1:34:57 ↗ newsletter, but I will also send it to

1:35:00 ↗ this group. Please share it um broadly.

1:35:03 ↗ I'll also follow up with some of the

1:35:04 ↗ groups that we just spoke about this

1:35:07 ↗ evening to make sure that we've got a

1:35:08 ↗ chance to get some more input over the

1:35:10 ↗ course of the next few months.

1:35:12 ↗ >> So, is that a group that self- selects

1:35:13 ↗ to get an email, but it's separate from

1:35:16 ↗ like the general one that the city sends

1:35:18 ↗ out? And I and I cannot tell you exactly

1:35:21 ↗ who opts into that list serve because I

1:35:23 ↗ don't personally know. I don't know if

1:35:25 ↗ it is something like these are email

1:35:27 ↗ contacts that we have in perfect mind

1:35:29 ↗ for anyone that's registered for summer

1:35:31 ↗ camps ever or this is just users of the

1:35:34 ↗ system who have had a touch point with

1:35:36 ↗ us renter folks that have rented you

1:35:38 ↗ know I can't tell you. I'm sure Jeff

1:35:41 ↗ Watling could tell us who's on there.

1:35:43 ↗ >> Is is there a reason why we wouldn't do

1:35:45 ↗ to the general population? You know, the

1:35:47 ↗ reason that this early survey is focused

1:35:50 ↗ on park users is, as I think you

1:35:54 ↗ probably just learned in a presentation

1:35:56 ↗ about community engagement, there's a

1:35:58 ↗ lot of surveying that's happening. Yeah.

1:36:00 ↗ >> Um, and ultimately what comes out of

1:36:03 ↗ this survey is not going to be like

1:36:05 ↗ these are the rules. Um, and so we

1:36:07 ↗ didn't feel like at this stage we really

1:36:09 ↗ needed to to go broad. like if we got,

1:36:12 ↗ you know, 200 responses, that would

1:36:14 ↗ really help narrow the direction of the

1:36:17 ↗ drafting. Um because after this goes

1:36:20 ↗ back to the services, safety and parks

1:36:22 ↗ commission uh or excuse yeah committee

1:36:25 ↗ of the um

1:36:28 ↗ of the city council. Um we will also

1:36:32 ↗ need to start thinking about

1:36:33 ↗ implementation. So the rules once

1:36:35 ↗ they're adopted, we are going to think

1:36:37 ↗ about how are these being shared also.

1:36:39 ↗ Um, and so that will come back to this

1:36:41 ↗ board probably in September.

1:36:44 ↗ So those are kind of the next steps. I

1:36:46 ↗ guess my last question is like any

1:36:50 ↗ little bits and bobs here before we

1:36:53 ↗ switch. I know we're very close to eight

1:36:55 ↗ and I'd like to get uh these last three

1:36:57 ↗ items done

1:37:01 ↗ without keeping you too late into the

1:37:03 ↗ night.

1:37:05 ↗ Okay, awesome. Good stuff. Thank you.

1:37:13 ↗ >> Okay, Leslie, what's next?

1:37:15 ↗ >> Okay, so our next agenda item is the

1:37:18 ↗ 2025 year end reports.

1:37:23 ↗ >> Awesome. Me again.

1:37:24 ↗ >> Yes.

1:37:24 ↗ >> Uh me me and me. Uh we looked at this

1:37:28 ↗ strength report. Gosh,

1:37:30 ↗ was it even this year? I can't even

1:37:32 ↗ remember. January, February. Um I think

1:37:35 ↗ it was January. I think it was our

1:37:36 ↗ January meeting. You all gave some very

1:37:40 ↗ minor tweaks and edits. Um I brought it

1:37:42 ↗ back because the group needs to vote. Um

1:37:45 ↗ everyone here is vote is a voting member

1:37:48 ↗ tonight. You're I mean including Chris.

1:37:51 ↗ Um because we have uh Heather is absent.

1:37:54 ↗ So you're voting on behalf of Heather.

1:37:57 ↗ Um and so I want to uh let Leslie go

1:38:00 ↗ ahead and lead our a and ns and

1:38:04 ↗ absentions here.

1:38:05 ↗ >> Okay. Fantastic. So, can I hear a motion

1:38:08 ↗ to approve the equity board two 2025

1:38:12 ↗ year in report um as reviewed and

1:38:15 ↗ discussed?

1:38:17 ↗ So,

1:38:18 ↗ >> I'll make a good

1:38:20 ↗ >> fantastic. There a second.

1:38:24 ↗ All right. And I forgot to do this and

1:38:25 ↗ it's terrible because I do this for a

1:38:27 ↗ living. Is there any discussion?

1:38:31 ↗ >> Okay. All in favor? I

1:38:34 ↗ >> I

1:38:36 ↗ >> Okay, great. Looks like our motion

1:38:38 ↗ carries.

1:38:38 ↗ >> Okay, motion on that carries. I will

1:38:41 ↗ make sure that that goes into an

1:38:42 ↗ upcoming packet for the city council and

1:38:44 ↗ I will let the board know when it is on

1:38:47 ↗ the schedule to be received.

1:38:49 ↗ >> Fantastic. Thank you.

1:38:52 ↗ >> Another item to vote on.

1:38:54 ↗ >> Yeah, looks like it's the 2026 work

1:38:57 ↗ plan. Back to Dale. So, we discussed

1:39:00 ↗ this work plan again many months ago at

1:39:02 ↗ this point. Um, one of the discussion

1:39:05 ↗ points that I wanted to return to

1:39:06 ↗ because it did not get added to the work

1:39:08 ↗ plan was a discussion of the this group

1:39:11 ↗ was interested um in having the equity

1:39:14 ↗ board provide feedback to the mayor and

1:39:16 ↗ council about the council vacancy

1:39:18 ↗ process. I brought that item to the

1:39:21 ↗ mayor for consideration and he said, "I

1:39:24 ↗ understand there needs to be feedback on

1:39:26 ↗ this. I am not interested right now in

1:39:28 ↗ having the equity board get feedback on

1:39:30 ↗ this particular item. There's other work

1:39:33 ↗ that I want the board to focus on. Um,

1:39:35 ↗ specifically, this group has been really

1:39:37 ↗ focused on a revision of the equity

1:39:39 ↗ framework. Um, the subcommittee is

1:39:43 ↗ making making moves, but that's not over

1:39:46 ↗ the finish line yet. Um, and is pretty

1:39:48 ↗ important work for our internal staff's

1:39:51 ↗ ongoing work. Um and so that is where he

1:39:56 ↗ would like us to continue to focus. Um

1:39:58 ↗ so that was not added to the work. Um if

1:40:01 ↗ you all want to write a letter, if you

1:40:03 ↗ want to talk to him, did you get a

1:40:05 ↗ chance to talk to him?

1:40:05 ↗ >> I talked to him. Okay. Um you are all

1:40:10 ↗ more than welcome as individual

1:40:13 ↗ community members to do so. Um,

1:40:17 ↗ if you as a board want to write a letter

1:40:22 ↗ as a board saying we don't agree and we

1:40:25 ↗ still want to consult on this, you guys

1:40:27 ↗ can write a letter about that, but it's

1:40:29 ↗ not being officially added to the work

1:40:30 ↗ plan from the mayor. So, I will present

1:40:34 ↗ that and that that way Leslie, we can

1:40:36 ↗ open for discussion, but um, I'll let

1:40:38 ↗ you make that. We'll do motion and

1:40:41 ↗ second and then you could discuss. So

1:40:43 ↗ that's that's the only update along with

1:40:45 ↗ the plan. Um work on culturefest was

1:40:50 ↗ added to the plan um per our

1:40:52 ↗ conversation. Um and I have a followup

1:40:55 ↗ item for Leslie uh making sure that uh

1:40:59 ↗ we figure out who potentially from the

1:41:01 ↗ board what one or two people would like

1:41:03 ↗ to participate in the planning group

1:41:05 ↗ that's working on that. And so they've

1:41:06 ↗ started they just had their first

1:41:08 ↗ meeting but they'll be meeting regularly

1:41:10 ↗ between now and the September event. So,

1:41:13 ↗ um, they were very excited to have

1:41:15 ↗ someone from the equity board, uh,

1:41:16 ↗ participate. So,

1:41:18 ↗ >> okay, good stuff.

1:41:19 ↗ >> So, those are the two updates on the

1:41:21 ↗ plan since we last talked to about it.

1:41:24 ↗ >> Good. Thank you, Dale. So, is there a

1:41:26 ↗ motion or can I hear a motion to approve

1:41:28 ↗ the 2026 work plan as previously

1:41:31 ↗ reviewed and modified and discussed this

1:41:34 ↗ evening?

1:41:36 ↗ Motion.

1:41:38 ↗ Is there a second?

1:41:43 ↗ Second.

1:41:45 ↗ >> Thank you. And any discussion?

1:41:48 ↗ >> I have one discussion question. So,

1:41:51 ↗ yeah, I was looking at the minutes from

1:41:56 ↗ >> February maybe. Yeah. And so, just the

1:41:58 ↗ notes from our previous conversation

1:42:00 ↗ there. And so that second item, so you

1:42:03 ↗ the vacancy appointment process and then

1:42:05 ↗ it said the city's approach to

1:42:07 ↗ communication over social media was that

1:42:11 ↗ did that translate into the culture fest

1:42:14 ↗ work item?

1:42:15 ↗ >> It did not. It did not. Um and mostly it

1:42:18 ↗ was I brought it up and it was like I

1:42:21 ↗ really would like us to focus on.

1:42:24 ↗ So just was like where is it going to

1:42:25 ↗ fit in here? I think okay

1:42:28 ↗ >> my idea is similar to what we just

1:42:30 ↗ engaged in which is I would like as we

1:42:32 ↗ talk about individual items that this

1:42:35 ↗ group is consulting on to give feedback

1:42:37 ↗ on communication and engagement. So

1:42:39 ↗ social media is going to have to be part

1:42:40 ↗ of this park's rules roll out.

1:42:44 ↗ I

1:42:45 ↗ that's kind of where things are.

1:42:47 ↗ >> Okay. Okay. That's helpful. I just

1:42:49 ↗ wanted to know what where that landed.

1:42:51 ↗ >> Okay.

1:42:53 ↗ >> Okay. hearing discussion. Let's vote.

1:42:57 ↗ >> I I had a discussion and that is that I

1:43:00 ↗ do think that there are equity issues

1:43:01 ↗ with the way that we are appointing

1:43:04 ↗ within the city council and that um I

1:43:08 ↗ think that it's timelines, it's how we

1:43:10 ↗ do it, it's whether we video it, it's

1:43:13 ↗ it's there's a whole bunch. I am hoping

1:43:18 ↗ as Priy and I briefly talked about that

1:43:21 ↗ it is it is somehow we we put these

1:43:25 ↗ things within the equity framework right

1:43:27 ↗ that these are the this would be the

1:43:29 ↗ type of thing would benefit from it so

1:43:33 ↗ maybe that's the future plan and they

1:43:37 ↗ have a discussion off that too because I

1:43:39 ↗ did put my name in for

1:43:42 ↗ >> number three position I asked if there

1:43:45 ↗ were guidelines lines. There are no

1:43:46 ↗ guidelines. I feel that like um

1:43:51 ↗ the work is important but to have no

1:43:54 ↗ guidelines for what success looks like

1:43:56 ↗ which is it's a continuous conversation

1:43:59 ↗ from the January issue which is the

1:44:01 ↗ timeline. I saw that they extended it.

1:44:03 ↗ They it wasn't brief but there is

1:44:06 ↗ there's no way to determine what is a um

1:44:09 ↗ what does success look like for somebody

1:44:11 ↗ for a candidate. Um also executive

1:44:14 ↗ session what if the qualifications to

1:44:18 ↗ look at to go into the session with zero

1:44:21 ↗ input and no feedback. um about like I

1:44:24 ↗ think 50 or 60% of the folks that

1:44:27 ↗ applied in January were there again

1:44:31 ↗ >> and I watched their video and to me it

1:44:35 ↗ demonstrated that there was no feedback

1:44:37 ↗ and so the candidates kind of had a

1:44:39 ↗ similar focus point and then also it was

1:44:44 ↗ interesting because there was somebody

1:44:46 ↗ who focused more on their time of their

1:44:48 ↗ speech rather than the content of their

1:44:50 ↗ speech.

1:44:52 ↗ Um, so, so to me that just that just

1:44:56 ↗ like tells me as like somebody who went

1:44:57 ↗ through the process, I was a little bit

1:44:59 ↗ confused and I wasn't really sure what I

1:45:01 ↗ was going for and what what is somebody

1:45:03 ↗ envisioning and how you know um, and

1:45:06 ↗ also how people are reached out outside

1:45:08 ↗ of becoming a board member. Are you

1:45:10 ↗ close to somebody on the council and

1:45:11 ↗ they send you a text to like here's all

1:45:13 ↗ this. Um there was one opportunity for

1:45:16 ↗ the open house, but not everybody's

1:45:18 ↗ going to go and make it on a Saturday at

1:45:20 ↗ 11 am. Um so those are just those are

1:45:23 ↗ some things that I definitely think that

1:45:24 ↗ it's work that does need to be reviewed

1:45:26 ↗ and if it can't make it on the 2026 work

1:45:28 ↗ plan, it still needs to be on

1:45:30 ↗ eventually. Um I think it's critical and

1:45:33 ↗ there is still a lack of representation

1:45:37 ↗ in terms of when you talk about equity,

1:45:39 ↗ when you talk about the work that we do.

1:45:41 ↗ I I just don't feel like it's a focus

1:45:42 ↗ and it was important enough to to make

1:45:44 ↗ it through. Um and the other piece was

1:45:47 ↗ there was a group of eight people who um

1:45:51 ↗ applied and only two people moved

1:45:53 ↗ forward which is I don't know the

1:45:54 ↗ assessment. I don't know like there's no

1:45:57 ↗ ballpark into how did you choose this

1:45:59 ↗ except for like the story was

1:46:00 ↗ compelling.

1:46:02 ↗ >> Yep.

1:46:02 ↗ >> So

1:46:03 ↗ >> so transparency is lacking.

1:46:05 ↗ >> Yeah. Um because if I think if people

1:46:07 ↗ were set up to know that um 80% was

1:46:11 ↗ actually your verbal presentation, but

1:46:13 ↗ then you also have no guidelines and

1:46:14 ↗ it's like go with what your heart

1:46:16 ↗ desires. And if you've never gone

1:46:17 ↗ through the process and you have very

1:46:19 ↗ limited like knowledge about how council

1:46:22 ↗ appointments work,

1:46:24 ↗ then you're just set up to fail. And so

1:46:26 ↗ then the end result is that there will

1:46:29 ↗ still be a lack of representation at

1:46:31 ↗ that table. So just thank you for

1:46:34 ↗ sharing your experience

1:46:35 ↗ >> and thank you for sharing. Also in

1:46:38 ↗ addition it's when there's no clear

1:46:41 ↗ guidelines and no metrics that are being

1:46:43 ↗ used to determine who moves forward.

1:46:46 ↗ It's it's impossible to kind of

1:46:49 ↗ determine if there was any bias being

1:46:51 ↗ used. I'm not saying there was, but then

1:46:54 ↗ there's like this cloud of, oh, so and

1:46:57 ↗ so knows X person on the council and

1:46:59 ↗ they could have given them tips and

1:47:01 ↗ tricks to kind of be ahead of someone

1:47:03 ↗ else and and people unconsciously might

1:47:06 ↗ do that, not on purpose. Um, we want to

1:47:09 ↗ always assume like that good intention

1:47:12 ↗ uh from the community members who are

1:47:14 ↗ with us, but it's human nature to kind

1:47:16 ↗ of do that. So it's it the lack of

1:47:20 ↗ transparency prompts those questions

1:47:22 ↗ even if they are not there. I don't know

1:47:25 ↗ if that makes sense.

1:47:26 ↗ >> It does makes complete sense but

1:47:29 ↗ >> I agree 100% just adding to the uh

1:47:33 ↗ discussion.

1:47:34 ↗ Um I see possibly two paths here. I

1:47:38 ↗ think Juan is absolutely correct that

1:47:40 ↗ maybe this is a future work plan item

1:47:44 ↗ which is focusing an equity lens on the

1:47:48 ↗ appointment process and what that looks

1:47:50 ↗ like with clear metrics and a process so

1:47:55 ↗ someone can understand

1:47:57 ↗ what it does look like to be successful

1:47:59 ↗ as a candidate and exactly what that

1:48:01 ↗ looks like. Um I think that given that

1:48:04 ↗ the city I'm sure in good faith wants to

1:48:07 ↗ have the appearance of openness of

1:48:10 ↗ transparency and of inclusiveness in

1:48:12 ↗ this process would be very open by the

1:48:16 ↗ sheer fact that the equity board exists

1:48:19 ↗ for kind of a focus on this particular

1:48:22 ↗ issue. Um I did have issues that I've

1:48:25 ↗ shared with uh many members and also

1:48:27 ↗ Dale on uh this board with respect to

1:48:31 ↗ how the first appointment was handled

1:48:33 ↗ and I don't believe that there was

1:48:36 ↗ intention. I always assume good faith

1:48:38 ↗ because if I can't start from there then

1:48:40 ↗ I don't think I can really have a

1:48:41 ↗ trusting conversation with people that

1:48:43 ↗ need to be engaged. So I think there was

1:48:46 ↗ a second opportunity with the second

1:48:48 ↗ appointment to kind of make right what

1:48:51 ↗ was not entirely clear and there was a

1:48:54 ↗ missed opportunity there. So I think we

1:48:56 ↗ as equity board members are very well

1:48:59 ↗ positioned to bring this conversation to

1:49:02 ↗ the four because I think it's necessary

1:49:04 ↗ to remove any possibility any cloud of

1:49:08 ↗ uh lack of transparency and lack of

1:49:11 ↗ inclusiveness in the individuals that

1:49:13 ↗ are that are that are essentially that

1:49:16 ↗ they're representing us as members of

1:49:19 ↗ this city. So that's one part. The

1:49:21 ↗ second part is a question to everyone

1:49:24 ↗ which is would there would there be any

1:49:27 ↗ I guess any desire to have us either as

1:49:30 ↗ a a board or subcommittee to draft a

1:49:33 ↗ letter to the uh to to the mayor and to

1:49:37 ↗ the council. Um acknowledging that this

1:49:39 ↗ is not part of our our 2026 work plan,

1:49:42 ↗ but what we'd like to see going forward

1:49:44 ↗ in the future. um indicating what our

1:49:47 ↗ concerns are with the current process

1:49:49 ↗ and perhaps offering a plan forward from

1:49:52 ↗ our perspective. So I think that's a a

1:49:56 ↗ talking statement and a question which

1:49:58 ↗ is what do you all think in terms of us

1:50:02 ↗ as a board or as a subcommittee of a

1:50:05 ↗ board I vote for board of writing a

1:50:08 ↗ letter kind of with that framework.

1:50:12 ↗ >> I think that's a great idea. I think

1:50:14 ↗ it's important because as this year

1:50:17 ↗ there is two turnover positions and so

1:50:21 ↗ you know as much as you want things to

1:50:23 ↗ be long term and I know general

1:50:24 ↗ elections are coming up too but like we

1:50:26 ↗ should be prepared for any anytime

1:50:28 ↗ someone leaves a vacancy like midterm.

1:50:31 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:50:31 ↗ >> And how that works. The other barriers

1:50:33 ↗ were finding the link. I had to go

1:50:35 ↗ search through my emails instead of

1:50:37 ↗ going on to the council website and have

1:50:39 ↗ that and be like where do I apply?

1:50:42 ↗ Secondly, I don't think a lot of people

1:50:44 ↗ are set up for success in a way knowing

1:50:46 ↗ that any I do understand that city

1:50:48 ↗ government everything is public

1:50:49 ↗ disclosure like in the public but didn't

1:50:52 ↗ realize it was going to be on the docket

1:50:56 ↗ attached into the like for public

1:50:58 ↗ viewing I guess and so things like that

1:51:00 ↗ maybe like would frame it differently in

1:51:02 ↗ the ways that you submit your items. Um,

1:51:05 ↗ so just there's just a lot of areas that

1:51:07 ↗ um through the experience of like

1:51:09 ↗ wanting to see what that looked like and

1:51:11 ↗ what like success looked like. I did not

1:51:13 ↗ find success as a candidate. So um I

1:51:16 ↗ think that would be a great idea. I'm on

1:51:17 ↗ board to answer your question very well

1:51:20 ↗ very long. I'm in support as well for

1:51:22 ↗ all the reasons stated and in full

1:51:24 ↗ agreement with Juan who brings a very uh

1:51:27 ↗ clear perspective as someone that was

1:51:29 ↗ interested in the process and found it

1:51:32 ↗ wanting for some troublesome and issues

1:51:36 ↗ to be considered in terms of equity that

1:51:39 ↗ can be brought to this process. So I'm

1:51:42 ↗ in agreement. I support

1:51:44 ↗ >> I support too because I do believe our

1:51:46 ↗ board exists to give feedback to city

1:51:50 ↗ council and the mayor regarding

1:51:53 ↗ inequities

1:51:55 ↗ um that we or lack of transparency even

1:51:58 ↗ just things that we feel like not

1:52:00 ↗ everyone in the city the community

1:52:02 ↗ members have access to. So, the lack of

1:52:06 ↗ guidelines concerns me and

1:52:10 ↗ I feel like this is a topic we should be

1:52:12 ↗ talking about because quite honestly,

1:52:14 ↗ it's more important than the park

1:52:16 ↗ guidelines because it really shapes and

1:52:19 ↗ impacts all community members. So if we

1:52:22 ↗ don't have time in a regularly scheduled

1:52:25 ↗ meeting, I hope we can make time at a

1:52:28 ↗ separate special meeting or as a

1:52:31 ↗ subcommittee that many people can join.

1:52:41 ↗ >> Okay.

1:52:42 ↗ >> So are we able to

1:52:46 ↗ >> Well, it brings us to the next topic

1:52:48 ↗ which is around subcommittee work,

1:52:50 ↗ right? because we haven't voted. So we

1:52:52 ↗ are we're so we have a live motion

1:52:56 ↗ that's been discussed

1:52:57 ↗ >> which we can't add to this meeting

1:52:59 ↗ because it's a special thing.

1:53:01 ↗ >> Okay. Okay.

1:53:02 ↗ >> So what I'm going to propose is that we

1:53:05 ↗ make it an agenda item at our May

1:53:07 ↗ meeting right

1:53:10 ↗ >> for the letter to be written.

1:53:12 ↗ >> Okay.

1:53:14 ↗ We can't add a new Yeah. Yeah. Open

1:53:18 ↗ records. Got it. open meeting rather.

1:53:20 ↗ Okay.

1:53:22 ↗ >> But I will add it to our May agenda for

1:53:24 ↗ a letter to be written. But isn't it a

1:53:27 ↗ part of the 2026 work plan?

1:53:30 ↗ >> No. Now we

1:53:33 ↗ >> was

1:53:35 ↗ >> but they took

1:53:36 ↗ >> but this this action. So the the 2020

1:53:40 ↗ work plan there's an action to approve

1:53:43 ↗ or not approve work

1:53:45 ↗ >> which is separate from this newly

1:53:48 ↗ proposed action.

1:53:49 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:53:50 ↗ >> And we can't add that action because

1:53:52 ↗ this is a not regular.

1:53:54 ↗ >> So we cannot approve the work plan. You

1:53:57 ↗ could alote to not approve. It worked

1:53:59 ↗ great.

1:54:01 ↗ >> But it just to make sure I'm following

1:54:04 ↗ what we mentioned at the very beginning

1:54:06 ↗ of the conversation or rather at one

1:54:08 ↗ point of your conversation with Mayor

1:54:10 ↗ Mullet. Um he declined to have the

1:54:13 ↗ equity board add this item to the 2026

1:54:18 ↗ work plan.

1:54:19 ↗ >> Yep. So, if we were to vote on the work

1:54:22 ↗ plan as submitted this evening, we'd be

1:54:25 ↗ able to wrap up that piece of work and

1:54:27 ↗ then have an agenda item in May to talk

1:54:30 ↗ specifically about the drafting of the

1:54:34 ↗ letter from what I'm getting from the

1:54:37 ↗ full equity board. And I foresee

1:54:40 ↗ hopefully within that conversation

1:54:43 ↗ um the recommendation, the suggestion,

1:54:46 ↗ whatever you may want to call it, that

1:54:48 ↗ this item be added to the 2026 work plan

1:54:52 ↗ because we're giving the support for it

1:54:55 ↗ being added to our our work plan.

1:54:57 ↗ >> And let's be very clear, the work plan

1:55:00 ↗ changes all the time. Things get added

1:55:04 ↗ to it. I think you could vote and say we

1:55:08 ↗ don't accept the work plan. That's

1:55:10 ↗ totally an action. I it will eventually

1:55:13 ↗ it'll keep coming back until it gets

1:55:15 ↗ approved at some point. You also can

1:55:18 ↗ vote to approve it and then also we can

1:55:21 ↗ you can spend an agenda item next

1:55:23 ↗ meeting drafting a letter

1:55:27 ↗ saying that you still you heard loud and

1:55:30 ↗ clear that this wasn't getting added and

1:55:32 ↗ you still think that this is a

1:55:33 ↗ problematic. So,

1:55:36 ↗ >> so process.

1:55:37 ↗ >> So, here's So, I'm I'm trying to sort

1:55:40 ↗ through. I did not understand ever that

1:55:43 ↗ when we wrote our work plan that the

1:55:45 ↗ mayor would or the city council would

1:55:47 ↗ not approve an item in it.

1:55:49 ↗ >> Well, you So, you don't write your work

1:55:52 ↗ plan.

1:55:52 ↗ >> You write.

1:55:53 ↗ >> The plan comes from

1:55:56 ↗ >> city council and the mayor.

1:56:00 ↗ >> Um, that's the way this works. It's not

1:56:02 ↗ actually like the board proposes we do

1:56:04 ↗ this. It's the mayor says this is what I

1:56:06 ↗ want you to give me input on this year.

1:56:08 ↗ And so it is a little bit of a going

1:56:11 ↗ through the the administrative motion of

1:56:13 ↗ like this is what you're going to work

1:56:14 ↗ on. Is there anything else you want to

1:56:15 ↗ add?

1:56:17 ↗ And that gets proposed back to the mayor

1:56:19 ↗ and then the mayor can say yes or no

1:56:22 ↗ because we are you are an advisory board

1:56:24 ↗ to the mayor and city council. I'm

1:56:26 ↗ wondering if you can hold off on

1:56:28 ↗ approving of the work plan because it

1:56:30 ↗ feels weird to approve it, but at the

1:56:32 ↗ same time you're saying, "Hey, we're not

1:56:33 ↗ really happy about it and we're going to

1:56:35 ↗ have a meeting to write a letter to say

1:56:37 ↗ that we're not happy about something

1:56:38 ↗ that we wanted to do, not be in it." So,

1:56:41 ↗ can we just hold off on approving it and

1:56:43 ↗ then maybe

1:56:44 ↗ >> talk more at our next meeting and then

1:56:47 ↗ go from there? I recognize that our work

1:56:49 ↗ plan is fluid.

1:56:50 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:56:51 ↗ >> But it feels like this is an important

1:56:53 ↗ thing and so if it's an important thing

1:56:56 ↗ we want to put on our work plan, it

1:56:57 ↗ can't be something that's like

1:57:01 ↗ >> as a secondhand thought,

1:57:03 ↗ >> you know, like it needs to I think the

1:57:06 ↗ idea is this is an important topic.

1:57:09 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:57:10 ↗ >> There was passion about last meeting.

1:57:12 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:57:13 ↗ >> And it's got revisited and there's still

1:57:15 ↗ interest. What in terms of the May 13th

1:57:19 ↗ meeting which will be the next time this

1:57:21 ↗ group is together? Absolutely. We can

1:57:24 ↗ have an agenda item that is focused on

1:57:27 ↗ you all writing a letter. I think we'll

1:57:30 ↗ it will be it will happen on the record

1:57:31 ↗ unless you'd like a subcommittee to

1:57:33 ↗ draft a letter prior to the meeting

1:57:36 ↗ which is also an option. Um though I

1:57:40 ↗ will say the the item we're not going to

1:57:41 ↗ get to tonight indicates we've not had a

1:57:43 ↗ ton of success and our subcommittee like

1:57:46 ↗ really making the work happen between

1:57:49 ↗ meetings. And so which my proposal in

1:57:52 ↗ that next item was going to be that we

1:57:54 ↗ save part of our aotted meeting time

1:57:57 ↗ every month for subcommittees to meet.

1:57:59 ↗ Um so we actually short shorten the

1:58:01 ↗ regular business and then break off into

1:58:03 ↗ groups that are smaller than to do that

1:58:06 ↗ work. Um, or if you want, you can start

1:58:09 ↗ the conversation um, at the upcoming

1:58:12 ↗ meeting.

1:58:14 ↗ However, I I mean, I guess you could

1:58:15 ↗ also vote on it the same night, but we

1:58:17 ↗ would need to decide that you were going

1:58:19 ↗ to do that and put it on the agenda.

1:58:23 ↗ I'm just getting into the very the big

1:58:25 ↗ old logistics.

1:58:26 ↗ >> That's too rushed.

1:58:27 ↗ >> Okay. So, do you want to would you like

1:58:30 ↗ to put just have the next meeting be

1:58:33 ↗ about drafting this letter?

1:58:36 ↗ a discussion, right? Like

1:58:38 ↗ >> yeah, it would be labeled as a

1:58:40 ↗ discussion, but the

1:58:42 ↗ >> Oh, would you would you like to actively

1:58:45 ↗ draft I mean like

1:58:46 ↗ >> maybe have a discussion, talk about key

1:58:48 ↗ things and then we have a committee.

1:58:51 ↗ >> Okay.

1:58:51 ↗ >> To draft the

1:58:53 ↗ >> Okay.

1:58:54 ↗ >> Everything to me right now I'm feeling

1:58:57 ↗ fresh.

1:58:58 ↗ >> And I have written a letter to the

1:59:00 ↗ mayor. Yeah.

1:59:00 ↗ >> From me that I am very happy to share.

1:59:03 ↗ >> Yes. that kind of outlines from my

1:59:06 ↗ perspective because I couldn't speak for

1:59:08 ↗ us.

1:59:09 ↗ >> Are you interested in also having

1:59:14 ↗ do you want to just meet as a board and

1:59:17 ↗ get all of your thoughts out? Are you

1:59:19 ↗ interested in my inviting the mayor to

1:59:21 ↗ come and answer questions?

1:59:24 ↗ Like what would the what would you would

1:59:27 ↗ you find any of that helpful

1:59:29 ↗ >> in this process or

1:59:31 ↗ >> Oh yeah, go ahead. Oh my gosh, Chris, I

1:59:33 ↗ I know you're here, but you're speaking

1:59:35 ↗ from the ceiling like a tiny god. Um,

1:59:41 ↗ >> I I would recommend we don't invite the

1:59:44 ↗ mayor until we kind of like have a

1:59:46 ↗ unified message to give him. Um, that's

1:59:50 ↗ my only input. So, I'd like for us to

1:59:52 ↗ kind of have some talking points at

1:59:55 ↗ least and then I don't know if it ends

1:59:57 ↗ up being drafted into a letter or not,

1:59:59 ↗ but at least we need to be aligned on

2:00:02 ↗ what we're talking to him about before

2:00:04 ↗ we kind of just invite him because I

2:00:06 ↗ don't have a question for him yet. Um,

2:00:09 ↗ and that's kind of why I'm like I I

2:00:11 ↗ would like to think on it a bit.

2:00:14 ↗ >> Sounds good.

2:00:14 ↗ >> Do others agree, disagree?

2:00:16 ↗ >> I agree. I agree.

2:00:18 ↗ >> I agree. But regarding the work plan,

2:00:22 ↗ >> if I look across the items on the work

2:00:24 ↗ plan, this is something I feel has

2:00:27 ↗ higher priority than other things on the

2:00:30 ↗ work plan. So that's where I'm like a

2:00:32 ↗ little hesitant to approve a work plan

2:00:34 ↗ today when I think this is more

2:00:35 ↗ important

2:00:36 ↗ >> and I would rather dep prioritize

2:00:38 ↗ something else.

2:00:39 ↗ >> Okay. And I know that work plan goes

2:00:41 ↗ back to the mayor, but I think that's

2:00:45 ↗ >> we want to advise on what feels like the

2:00:47 ↗ highest priority y

2:00:49 ↗ >> things to tackle.

2:00:50 ↗ >> Y'all, it's it's your decision. I don't

2:00:54 ↗ >> Yeah.

2:00:54 ↗ >> I You don't have to convince me.

2:00:57 ↗ >> So

2:00:59 ↗ >> So go with what we're saying, which is

2:01:01 ↗ postpon.

2:01:04 ↗ >> Well, no. I think we're not and we're

2:01:07 ↗ going to discuss and meet. I think you

2:01:09 ↗ have to not approve. I think you have to

2:01:10 ↗ vote against approval.

2:01:12 ↗ >> We have the motion.

2:01:13 ↗ >> Yeah. So, we withdraw the motion that

2:01:15 ↗ was on the floor because it it it's

2:01:17 ↗ basically going to die for lack of a

2:01:19 ↗ >> quarrel.

2:01:20 ↗ >> So, um can I hear?

2:01:23 ↗ >> Yeah. Well, you actually you need to

2:01:24 ↗ vote on it. It's still you have enough

2:01:27 ↗ people and you you have to vote on

2:01:28 ↗ whether to approve or not.

2:01:30 ↗ >> Yeah. Discussion. So, now I get it's the

2:01:33 ↗ vote. So, um,

2:01:39 ↗ >> what's the phrasing? I'm losing the

2:01:41 ↗ phrasing.

2:01:41 ↗ >> Well, it's all in favor of Thank you.

2:01:43 ↗ That's what I was losing. Sorry, it's

2:01:44 ↗ getting late. Um,

2:01:47 ↗ >> who is in favor or um, please vote to

2:01:51 ↗ indicate if you are in favor of

2:01:52 ↗ approving the 2026 work plan?

2:02:00 ↗ >> Okay, you have to you have to ask the

2:02:01 ↗ other one. So let me ask the so the

2:02:03 ↗ other question in reverse who is in who

2:02:05 ↗ is not in favor

2:02:07 ↗ >> in favor and then you say any um

2:02:12 ↗ say opposed those opposed

2:02:15 ↗ >> okay so who so who's in favor no hands

2:02:19 ↗ um who is opposed to approving the 2026

2:02:22 ↗ work plan

2:02:24 ↗ >> I

2:02:25 ↗ >> any abstensions

2:02:28 ↗ okay

2:02:30 ↗ The motion does not carry unanimously.

2:02:38 ↗ >> I jumped ahead to the last item. I'm

2:02:40 ↗ just going to mention it briefly for

2:02:41 ↗ consideration. Um, we've had some

2:02:43 ↗ struggles getting work done in

2:02:46 ↗ subcommittee. Um I am proposing that

2:02:49 ↗ moving forward if we do move things to

2:02:52 ↗ subcommittee that we if there is

2:02:53 ↗ subcommittee ongoing subcommittee work

2:02:56 ↗ we actually carve out a portion of that

2:02:58 ↗ we shorten the meeting um so that that

2:03:01 ↗ subcommittee can meet during our

2:03:03 ↗ allotted board time. Um I think that

2:03:05 ↗ that will enable some activation of

2:03:09 ↗ stuff that's been difficult to

2:03:10 ↗ coordinate over email. Um we do not have

2:03:12 ↗ time tonight but moving forward. So, for

2:03:16 ↗ example, uh Oh, Chris, go ahead.

2:03:18 ↗ >> Oh, no.

2:03:20 ↗ Even better. I I

2:03:22 ↗ >> I was just supporting you from the air.

2:03:25 ↗ >> From the air. I love it. Um, so we'll do

2:03:28 ↗ that moving forward. We will, it sounds

2:03:30 ↗ like likely form a subcommittee at the

2:03:32 ↗ next meeting. Um, and so that group, uh,

2:03:35 ↗ potentially even at the next meeting, we

2:03:37 ↗ could adjourn early and give that group

2:03:39 ↗ some ordination time, uh, so that you're

2:03:42 ↗ not done in the the no man's land of

2:03:45 ↗ email exchange. Sounds like folks are

2:03:48 ↗ supportive of that idea.

2:03:50 ↗ >> Absolutely.

2:03:50 ↗ >> So, I'm in support.

2:03:52 ↗ >> Great. Okay, Leslie, back to you to

2:03:54 ↗ close us out.

2:03:59 ↗ agenda

2:04:02 ↗ items.

2:04:03 ↗ >> All right. No more agenda items.

2:04:04 ↗ Absolutely, Dale. So, with that being

2:04:06 ↗ said, no closing um uh comments or

2:04:10 ↗ questions other than thank you all for

2:04:12 ↗ your hard and thoughtful work. Um I um

2:04:15 ↗ think that we're going to do some really

2:04:17 ↗ good work on our uh May agenda item in

2:04:20 ↗ regards to our uh feature engagement

2:04:22 ↗ with uh the mayor um on the uh

2:04:26 ↗ appointment process. I agree 100% with

2:04:29 ↗ all of the sentiments tonight in terms

2:04:31 ↗ of prioritizing this as an item that is

2:04:34 ↗ very equity focused and that's the work

2:04:37 ↗ we do. So with that being said um we can

2:04:41 ↗ adjourn the equity board meeting of um

2:04:43 ↗ April 8th at 8:19 p.m.

2:04:48 ↗ >> Thank you.

2:04:49 ↗ >> Thank you guys.

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 (10)

Lesley Millender-Irwin

Karthik Kashinath, Vice-Chair

Priti Mody-Pan

Varnika Dokka

Lorna Gilmour

Chris Ziade

Quan Palmer

Kelly Munn – Alternate

Nisha Nair – Alternate (unexcused absence)

Kunal Srivastava* - Alternate (unexcused absence)

Staff (3)

Gillian Straub, Management Analyst

Andrea Lehner, Deputy City Administrator

Dale Markey-Crimp, Assistant to the City Administrator

Excused

Heather Youngs

Oscar Montano

Recommendations & actions (2)

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

a) Minutes of the October 2025 Meeting and February 2026 Meeting Lorna Gilmour moved to approve the minutes of both meetings as presented, Quan Palmer seconded the motion.
Markey-Crimp noted difficulties in coordinating subcommittee work via email and recommended shortening regular meetings to allow subcommittees to meet during board time, with board members expressing support for the…