Park Board · Tuesday, February 24, 2026 · City Council Digest

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of January 26th, 2026

packet pp.3–9

Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 012342346789 78 670000 ! " #$%&'($%) *+006 233 7 8.*401*567 ,778-34.3034 /0!1 89.:7;75 ' <= 0= =/0 < >1#1< 001?#<1 10 @ABCDEFGHIGCJKE [DH\]\J^CB^\A]_`^BaaK L-7MN.O578 ,YY97N.P8S8.6789bO UU- P77Q.RSO578 c87S ,72795 L 3cd78.67896N7bP7NdU T7NN 778 2U N- O58T 77S 78N97V P77L W7758 7797S 67N6 78.6N87 7857X58.6N87 ,YY8-8ZNN.6N87 e U7-f5U2d8757 873 7.8787NN-5YNNZ d+ ghijklmknhopqrst u vwxyz{|ww}~{x}}www{yww}~{~{ u {www{yww}~{{~z{{{{{x{xzzw{~z{ k ghijklmkhjs u x{{w}w{w{www{{{{ …

4. REGULAR BUSINESS

Mayor Introduction & Priorities

Information · 40 min · Mayor Mark Mullet and Jeff Watling · packet pp.11–32

▶ Watch from 2:41 Open packet at p.11 ↗

Staff report:

Review proposed Provide update natural systems on ICAP progress targets & actions

Issaquah Climate Action Plan Update (I, D)

30 min · Stacy Vynne McKinstry · packet pp.33–76

Topics: Climate

▶ Watch from 45:30 Open packet at p.33 ↗

Staff report:

• Obtain Park Board feedback on plan to update and consolidate the Park Rules and Regulations within the Issaquah Municipal Code (IMC) • Gather initial thoughts on key rules to be included in updating these rules and regulations in 2026.

Park Rules and Regulations

Information / Discussion · 30 min · Dale Markey-Crimp and Jeff Watling

Topics: Parks

▶ Watch from 1:17:37

5. REPORTS

Chairperson's Report

Director's Report

Student Rep Report

6. OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS

Working Document - Park Board Work Plan attached

packet pp.77–78

Topics: Parks

▶ Watch from 1:49:45 Open packet at p.77 ↗

Staff report:

Applicable Strategic Plan Goal Areas 2026 WORKPLAN [WORKING] Proposed Meeting (check all that apply) PARK BOARD Schedule ☒Mobility ☒Social & Economic Vitality ☒Growth & Development ☒City Leadership & Services Tentative Timeframe ☒Environ. Stewardship ☒Infrastructure

2608 segments .txt ↗

0:00 ↗ It is 7:01

0:02 ↗ p.m. As chair, I will call this February

0:06 ↗ 24th meeting, the ISS club park board to

0:09 ↗ order. We'll start with roll call. Like

0:14 ↗ start the screen, but no one's on the

0:15 ↗ screen, which is amazing.

0:17 ↗ Start with the uh Martha Ginser.

0:20 ↗ >> I'm here.

0:23 ↗ Jeff renewal excuse

0:27 ↗ is no longer on the board. Excellent.

0:30 ↗ Marley Waxi here,

0:33 ↗ >> James Pushi, excuse

0:37 ↗ >> Diana Ren

0:40 ↗ and Hammond,

0:46 ↗ >> Tim Mley,

0:51 ↗ >> Chris Co.

0:57 ↗ David uh present and Brian also

1:01 ↗ >> here

1:05 ↗ and here's

1:07 ↗ a good

1:14 ↗ >> um we have no voting tonight correct

1:19 ↗ forum

1:20 ↗ um has everybody had the chance to

1:22 ↗ review the minutes from the last

1:23 ↗ meeting.

1:26 ↗ Anybody have any corrections or edits?

1:33 ↗ There are no corrections on behalf of

1:35 ↗ the board. The minutes are approved.

1:39 ↗ >> Public comment. I don't think we have

1:41 ↗ anybody in building. I do know we have

1:44 ↗ some email submitts.

1:47 ↗ >> We did. And we don't have anyone online

1:49 ↗ e uh um either. Uh yes, two written

1:54 ↗ submittals uh came in. I forwarded one

1:56 ↗ from a neighbor of Timberlake Park. Um

2:00 ↗ had some comments about the our park

2:02 ↗ rules conversation. Um mostly pertaining

2:06 ↗ to um interest in um off leash dogs and

2:11 ↗ enforcement of off leash dogs as well as

2:14 ↗ campfires, prohibition of campfires. Um

2:18 ↗ Connie Marsh also provided public

2:19 ↗ comment um suggesting some work around

2:23 ↗ special events um and also um some other

2:27 ↗ comments. So we will like we've done in

2:29 ↗ the past with written comments we'll add

2:31 ↗ those to the minutes uh for the meeting

2:33 ↗ for the record.

2:41 ↗ >> We will now begin our regular business

2:44 ↗ of the meeting. We will have a little

2:46 ↗ bit of switch up in our order. It's

2:48 ↗ listed under regular business. Um, and

2:52 ↗ so we will pivot to bullet point B and

2:55 ↗ we will start with the ISQA climate

2:57 ↗ action plan presented by Stacy V

3:00 ↗ McKinsky.

3:02 ↗ >> I see.

3:04 ↗ >> There's

3:07 ↗ Why don't we You're quick.

3:11 ↗ >> Yeah.

3:12 ↗ >> Like the wolf and picture.

3:14 ↗ So, we just kicked it off with Stacy

3:17 ↗ going climate action plan. Do you mind

3:18 ↗ if we do that first and then Okay.

3:20 ↗ >> I haven't even opened the presentation

3:22 ↗ yet. Are you sure?

3:23 ↗ >> Yeah.

3:24 ↗ >> Okay.

3:34 ↗ >> AC, you're able to share. Yes.

3:40 ↗ >> Well, thank you again for making time on

3:42 ↗ the agenda tonight. um as a reminder as

3:45 ↗ back in the fall, I'll summarize a bit

3:47 ↗ what we discussed last fall about the

3:49 ↗ final date. Um but tonight we are

3:59 ↗ um tonight we're here really just to

4:00 ↗ talk through an update on the IAP

4:03 ↗ progress and then um speak some more uh

4:07 ↗ in some more detail around the proposed

4:09 ↗ revisions to the natural system targets

4:11 ↗ and actions.

4:14 ↗ Uh tonight we're looking for your

4:16 ↗ feedback particularly on the revised

4:18 ↗ natural systems target and then on the

4:20 ↗ revised action concepts for including

4:23 ↗ the time action plan update.

4:31 ↗ So just as a reminder um especially if

4:34 ↗ you weren't here in the meeting last

4:36 ↗ fall uh the climate action plan is

4:39 ↗ really the foundation for the city's

4:41 ↗ climate work. It was adopted by council

4:43 ↗ in December 2021 following a pretty

4:46 ↗ extensive engagement with community

4:49 ↗ members and different interest group in

4:51 ↗ order to develop shared priorities. For

4:54 ↗ our five-year update, we're really

4:55 ↗ focused on revising actions that were

4:58 ↗ either really specific. They talked

5:01 ↗ about a particular campaign or project

5:03 ↗ or program that's either been completed

5:06 ↗ or maybe was too specific and we want to

5:09 ↗ broaden it. Um and then we're also

5:11 ↗ looking at some of the targets that um

5:15 ↗ needed revising or weren't well

5:17 ↗ connected to the action.

5:21 ↗ Um so again tonight uh we are really

5:25 ↗ interested in your feedback on the

5:26 ↗ natural systems target which is one of

5:28 ↗ the few targets that we're touching in

5:30 ↗ the climate.

5:34 ↗ A reminder, what we're trying to achieve

5:36 ↗ with the natural system section of the

5:38 ↗ plan is it's really focused on

5:40 ↗ increasing tree canopy to 55% uh over

5:44 ↗ the next nine years. Um and doing that

5:47 ↗ by maintaining and expanding tree canopy

5:49 ↗ and then the this section of the plan

5:52 ↗ also does conserve on water resources. I

5:55 ↗ talk about conserving water resources.

5:57 ↗ We don't currently have a specific

5:59 ↗ target associated with that. I'll in a

6:02 ↗ moment Our

6:07 ↗ progress to date for updating the

6:09 ↗ climate action plan involved working

6:11 ↗ with the committees which we talked

6:13 ↗ about last fall and several several

6:15 ↗ members of the park board participated

6:16 ↗ in that process. The input from the

6:19 ↗ committees was then brought back to the

6:21 ↗ boards and commissions for review. Your

6:24 ↗ feedback was taken to the environmental

6:26 ↗ board. Um they further worked the

6:28 ↗ actions and the plan. Um, and now we're

6:31 ↗ coming back to you all for input. One

6:34 ↗ other step that we had that's a bit less

6:37 ↗ uh relevant for this group is we did

6:39 ↗ meet with our planning, development, and

6:41 ↗ environmental council committee a few

6:43 ↗ weeks ago. They've asked us to come back

6:46 ↗ with some big bold policies that'll

6:48 ↗ really move the needle on reducing

6:51 ↗ climate emissions. Most of those are

6:54 ↗ going to end up in the transportation,

6:56 ↗ buildings, and energy area. a less

6:58 ↗ impactful discussion this evening.

7:04 ↗ So, reminder of the feedback you all

7:05 ↗ provided this fall. Um, you all talked

7:09 ↗ about having the target uh consider

7:12 ↗ wildfire risk. We don't want to expand

7:14 ↗ our tree canopy so much that it puts us

7:17 ↗ at higher risk for wildfire. There was a

7:20 ↗ lot of discussion around concern around

7:22 ↗ invasives and especially how invasive

7:24 ↗ species impact tree canopy.

7:27 ↗ um interest in focusing more on water

7:29 ↗ conservation

7:30 ↗ um which we are looking at including we

7:33 ↗ won't necessarily talk about that today

7:35 ↗ community gardens again we are looking

7:38 ↗ at including some actions around

7:40 ↗ expanding community gardens but speak to

7:43 ↗ those much today

7:45 ↗ um the group is also interested in

7:46 ↗ looking at drought tolerant landscaping

7:49 ↗ policies um we have been talking with

7:52 ↗ our planning department and those are

7:54 ↗ actually incorporated into our code. Um,

7:57 ↗ so we won't speak much to those today.

8:00 ↗ And then there was a lot of interest in

8:02 ↗ habitat

8:04 ↗ that

8:10 ↗ great. So any questions on that

8:13 ↗ background before we jump into

8:17 ↗ proposed revisions and discussion around

8:26 ↗ all right so the first one which is

8:28 ↗ likely to be the bulk of our discussion

8:31 ↗ tonight is around whether or not we

8:34 ↗ should revise the target for our natural

8:36 ↗ system section of the climate plan. Um,

8:40 ↗ again, that target currently reads 55%

8:42 ↗ tree canopy by 2035.

8:45 ↗ Um, currently we're at just a little

8:47 ↗ over 51% of our tree canopy, although

8:50 ↗ that last study was done before the bomb

8:53 ↗ site loan, but I think Dan doesn't

8:55 ↗ anticipate actually surprisingly major

8:58 ↗ impacts from that. Um, we do know that

9:03 ↗ going from our current tree canopy cover

9:06 ↗ to 55%

9:08 ↗ would require around 300 additional

9:11 ↗ acres of tree canopy.

9:14 ↗ We recognize that having ambitious

9:17 ↗ stretch targets is good, but we also

9:20 ↗ want targets that are achievable or have

9:23 ↗ a chance of being um achieved.

9:27 ↗ Um, one of the biggest jumps previously

9:30 ↗ in our tree canopy back in the mid 2010s

9:34 ↗ was um after Talis and Highland um the

9:39 ↗ Highlands uh developments once those

9:41 ↗ trees came to maturity we saw a big jump

9:44 ↗ in our tree canopy. So if you can

9:46 ↗ imagine those areas of developments and

9:49 ↗ the trees that are reaching maturity,

9:52 ↗ that's about what we would need to see

9:53 ↗ across the rest of the city to meet this

9:55 ↗ target.

9:57 ↗ Um so we've discussed several options

9:59 ↗ with the environmental board. They were

10:02 ↗ very mixed in their feedback. Um so I'm

10:05 ↗ really interested in your all's input

10:06 ↗ today. Um one option we discussed was

10:11 ↗ let's keep that target. It is very

10:13 ↗ ambitious. it's going to be very

10:15 ↗ challenging to achieve, but it's good to

10:17 ↗ challenge ourselves. Um, we also talked

10:20 ↗ about an alternative that would be a no

10:23 ↗ net loss tree canopy. So, that

10:26 ↗ recognizes that we want to at least stay

10:29 ↗ where we are. There may be some really

10:32 ↗ important environmental projects where

10:34 ↗ we have to take out some trees like a

10:36 ↗ stream restoration project, but

10:38 ↗ ultimately we want to keep our canopy um

10:41 ↗ at the same level across the city.

10:45 ↗ So those are um kind of one option is

10:49 ↗ either to keep the tree canopy target as

10:52 ↗ it is or possibly replace that current

10:55 ↗ target.

10:57 ↗ The board also talked about adding in

10:59 ↗ additional targets. Um, one would be

11:02 ↗ around a tree equity score that looks at

11:06 ↗ our tree distribution. So making sure

11:08 ↗ that we have improved distribution of

11:11 ↗ trees across the neighborhoods um so

11:14 ↗ that neighborhoods that experience more

11:16 ↗ open heat island effects um or don't

11:20 ↗ experience the many benefits of trees um

11:23 ↗ that we're really focusing our our

11:26 ↗ efforts in improving canopy in those

11:28 ↗ areas. The other target that the

11:32 ↗ environmental board was interested in

11:33 ↗ was actually adding a new target to get

11:36 ↗ to all the other actions in this area.

11:39 ↗ Um something either around riparian

11:40 ↗ habitat or conservation.

11:44 ↗ So I wanted to pause here and get some

11:47 ↗ feedback. Again the environmental board

11:48 ↗ was really split on whether we keep the

11:51 ↗ 55% or transition to the no net props.

11:56 ↗ So curious on our board input on that as

11:59 ↗ well as the potential for adding

12:02 ↗ additional targets.

12:07 ↗ >> What are the actual

12:11 ↗ achieve?

12:14 ↗ >> Yeah, great question. So the one right

12:16 ↗ now that we have in place is our entry

12:18 ↗ code which is really at protecting and

12:21 ↗ tree canopy. Um but a lot of the other

12:24 ↗ actions focus around incentives.

12:28 ↗ We did a tree giveaway program uh this

12:31 ↗ year. There could be other incentives

12:33 ↗ especially on creative property for

12:35 ↗ retaining trees. Um so that would be

12:37 ↗ part of our challenge is coming up with

12:40 ↗ a mix of policy programs and incentives

12:44 ↗ acquisitions

12:52 ↗ on

12:53 ↗ what the underlying motivation

12:58 ↗ target.

13:00 ↗ >> Yeah. Um I think in terms of the in why

13:04 ↗ we want to increase tree canopy

13:06 ↗ essentially. Yeah. So I think part of

13:08 ↗ that just comes from all the benefits

13:10 ↗ that trees provide everything from

13:12 ↗ habitat to the cooling um in terms of

13:16 ↗ addressing urban heat island um to the

13:19 ↗ clean air. So um originally how that 55%

13:24 ↗ was set looking back um at the content

13:28 ↗ when the plan was developed is I think

13:31 ↗ because we had seen a 4% around a 4%

13:34 ↗ increase back in the early 2010s. Um

13:37 ↗ there was interest in seeing another an

13:40 ↗ increase

13:42 ↗ during the um 15 or so year that this

13:46 ↗ was set for.

13:50 ↗ >> Yeah.

13:50 ↗ >> So it really was it was at the time it

13:53 ↗ was set it was aspirational.

13:55 ↗ >> Yes. Aspirational not based on any

13:58 ↗ planned projects or acquisitions

14:01 ↗ as far as standard I can tell.

14:07 ↗ um cities around us know what their like

14:11 ↗ where do we sit as far as

14:13 ↗ >> they're lower I know in urban forest

14:16 ↗ management plan others may have some

14:18 ↗ comparison but we're definitely one of

14:20 ↗ the most well treated cities

14:24 ↗ especially across the east side I can't

14:26 ↗ necessarily speak to north area

14:29 ↗ >> yeah it's a great question Marlene I

14:30 ↗ don't the most recent tree canopy study

14:34 ↗ that was done. Uh that was one of the

14:36 ↗ benchmarks. Um I can try and find it. Um

14:40 ↗ either send it to you all, but it just

14:41 ↗ it was a good comparison of Puget Sound

14:43 ↗ Cities and where we stand. And Stacy's

14:46 ↗ correct. We're we're very high on the

14:49 ↗ list when you look at percentage of

14:52 ↗ canopy cover.

15:02 ↗ Um I think part of our board wants to

15:06 ↗ retain a very ambitious target and feels

15:09 ↗ like we should be striving to increase

15:10 ↗ our treat.

15:12 ↗ Um I think other members of the board be

15:16 ↗ because of all the the benefits um

15:19 ↗ carbon sequestration didn't mention

15:22 ↗ other members of the board um and some

15:25 ↗ that work in habitat restoration field

15:28 ↗ recognize that some environmental

15:32 ↗ projects habitat restoration projects

15:34 ↗ we're going to need there's going to be

15:35 ↗ some tradeoffs we may need to use some

15:37 ↗ trees in order to do some really great

15:41 ↗ projects

15:43 ↗ community. Um, but we can balance that

15:46 ↗ out by planting trees.

15:50 ↗ So, I think um, and just recognizing

15:53 ↗ the amount of acreage that's needed to

15:56 ↗ increase the canopy and

15:59 ↗ having a plan for that

16:04 ↗ very likely.

16:09 ↗ You mentioned the first major event was

16:11 ↗ that we really projects having these

16:16 ↗ more trees. Um

16:19 ↗ so for us to make these other these next

16:21 ↗ jumps without residential changes

16:24 ↗ without larger social projects um

16:27 ↗ fruiting more mature trees uh would the

16:30 ↗ city like parks be able to help increase

16:34 ↗ right? Is there something we can do in

16:36 ↗ the parks department to to intrigue or

16:39 ↗ to grow more trees? I guess to increase

16:41 ↗ canopy.

16:42 ↗ >> Um it's my first question. Basically,

16:44 ↗ how much impact can we have in the

16:47 ↗ public sector?

16:49 ↗ >> Um and also from a safety standpoint,

16:51 ↗ right? We talk about tree code. I think

16:52 ↗ after the bomb, we're all really aware

16:55 ↗ that um right trees can be really

16:58 ↗ damaging to our structures um both

17:01 ↗ public and private. Uh so one of the

17:04 ↗ concerns is if we mess with the code too

17:06 ↗ much to make it really hard to remove

17:08 ↗ trees that you know are a risk to to

17:11 ↗ home or structure structures. How much

17:14 ↗ of a concern is that? Um, and then on

17:18 ↗ the flip side of that, because they have

17:20 ↗ such great tree coverage, um, I think

17:24 ↗ landslides and things like that, we have

17:25 ↗ so much critical slope here, right? Um,

17:28 ↗ we have some of the most stable

17:31 ↗ slopes of of our neighbors. Um, so I'd

17:35 ↗ be interested to know about balancing

17:36 ↗ that again that impacts us on a public

17:38 ↗ level and that's safety.

17:42 ↗ >> Yeah.

17:45 ↗ >> Yeah. No, great questions, Hannah, that

17:47 ↗ really I think speak to trade-offs,

17:49 ↗ right? And this becomes a really big

17:51 ↗ trade-offs conversation in terms of the

17:53 ↗ role the public property can play and

17:55 ↗ and should play in canopy, not only

17:59 ↗ increasing the canopy, but sustaining

18:01 ↗ the canopy and um ensuring the canopy

18:05 ↗ stays healthy. Um yes we through green

18:08 ↗ isqua and through our urban forest

18:11 ↗ program through the urban forest plan

18:12 ↗ that right came before you all um tree

18:17 ↗ succession planting replanting trees is

18:20 ↗ going to be it's a constant it's it's a

18:23 ↗ constant goal um I think until we get

18:26 ↗ into that routine and see the results of

18:28 ↗ that which is often 10 years later um I

18:32 ↗ I think we're expecting when we start

18:34 ↗ looking at percentage change. A lot of

18:37 ↗ what we're doing is sustaining

18:41 ↗ um that canopy cover. There might be an

18:44 ↗ increment increase, but it's really more

18:47 ↗ about health of the canopy cover. Um and

18:51 ↗ you're absolutely right. You know, when

18:53 ↗ you look at our forested slopes, um

18:55 ↗ those trees are and the and the roots

18:58 ↗ are doing a lot for stabilizing u slope

19:01 ↗ and um dealing with water. you know, one

19:04 ↗ one Doug fur tree um don't know the

19:08 ↗ stat, but it's an amazing amount of

19:09 ↗ water that one Doug fur um absorbs. So,

19:14 ↗ um I think it's more about sustaining

19:16 ↗ than growing. Um if you were to again

19:19 ↗ look at it might be worth um sharing

19:22 ↗ with you all the the most recent tree

19:24 ↗ canopy um study that was done a couple

19:27 ↗ years ago. A lot of the area the

19:32 ↗ potential area is in central Isiqua.

19:34 ↗ That's probably where our our biggest

19:37 ↗ tree desert is when when you think of,

19:41 ↗ you know, north of Tibets Valley Park, a

19:44 ↗ lot of those, you know, storage

19:45 ↗ facilities and the top pot donut and

19:48 ↗ right a lot of big lots that don't have

19:50 ↗ a lot of trees. That's so a lot of the

19:53 ↗ potential Stacy was mentioning 300

19:56 ↗ acres. It's currently privately owned.

19:58 ↗ Um and um but as as central Isqua

20:02 ↗ redevelops there is potential even in

20:05 ↗ just street trees um probably you know

20:08 ↗ adding to canopy um but again I don't

20:11 ↗ know that that's going to be a 4%. So

20:15 ↗ trying to be realistic I think is really

20:17 ↗ what Stacy's question is.

20:25 ↗ I'll just say that I'm personally not in

20:28 ↗ favor

20:30 ↗ overly ambitious targets in this

20:33 ↗ respect. Um, first of all, I don't

20:36 ↗ necessarily think that these are a

20:39 ↗ perfect proxy for environmental

20:43 ↗ things like wildlife habitat. All that

20:44 ↗ kind of depend on what species are. um

20:47 ↗ whether there's continuous travel

20:49 ↗ workers for wildlife or whether it's

20:51 ↗ just you know one tree here or there

20:55 ↗ which doesn't necessarily

20:58 ↗ provide

21:00 ↗ habitat

21:02 ↗ um but then the other thing is we're

21:04 ↗ talking on a hyper scale within

21:08 ↗ and what I see happening when we kind of

21:10 ↗ come out uh and look at our neighbors is

21:13 ↗ that if it's increasingly difficult to

21:17 ↗ develop it's here in developers go to

21:20 ↗ like Maple Valley and they're taking

21:22 ↗ down you know just acres and acres of

21:25 ↗ trees and so from that perspective

21:29 ↗ um you're creating these externalities

21:32 ↗ by maintaining a stricter standard here

21:39 ↗ >> like I like Diana

21:43 ↗ she's singing from my playbook over

21:48 ↗ Chris,

21:49 ↗ >> I don't know if anybody would have has

21:52 ↗ had the time yet, but you know, the

21:55 ↗ question that came up in my mind

21:56 ↗ immediately is so you said in the 2010s

21:59 ↗ we saw an increase of 4% which got us

22:02 ↗ from something to something else. How

22:05 ↗ much of that is just all the trees

22:09 ↗ growing a little bit

22:11 ↗ >> and then less the few that these get

22:14 ↗ taken down or whatever planted. But you

22:16 ↗ know how much of that getting to 55

22:18 ↗ would be achieved just by natural growth

22:21 ↗ of what we have. Um, you know, it's

22:25 ↗ almost like a project for a summer

22:26 ↗ intern or something to spend a lot of

22:28 ↗ time digitizing some aerial photos and

22:30 ↗ figuring out what what actually happens

22:32 ↗ because you might be able to get close

22:34 ↗ to that without trying too hard and then

22:37 ↗ the other part becomes more achievable

22:38 ↗ or something that actually happened by

22:43 ↗ active actions.

22:46 ↗ >> Yeah, that's an excellent question. I

22:48 ↗ believe there's another tree canopy

22:50 ↗ study that's going to be done in the

22:51 ↗ next year or so. Um, and that may give

22:55 ↗ us an idea of where we are and I I'll

22:56 ↗ talk to Dan whether that shows a mature

22:59 ↗ and trees so that we could get an idea.

23:06 ↗ Some of what I think I'm hearing um in

23:08 ↗ this conversation, Stacey, and some of

23:10 ↗ what certainly Dan and I have talked a

23:12 ↗ lot about is I as this goes back to the

23:16 ↗ Environ board, I I think

23:19 ↗ quantity isn't the only metric.

23:22 ↗ Um so, you know, I I'm I'd rather have a

23:27 ↗ realistic quantity, but then also a

23:29 ↗ metric that talks about canopy health.

23:33 ↗ So whether it's 51%

23:36 ↗ but but getting healthier um is also a

23:40 ↗ really really important metric. So it's

23:41 ↗ not just about how much, it's how well.

23:50 ↗ >> I like what they're about this equity as

23:52 ↗ well. And so I think to your point on

23:55 ↗ quality, it's like where are the places

23:57 ↗ where we should be focusing our effort?

23:59 ↗ We should do that.

24:01 ↗ >> So I think that's really great.

24:04 ↗ Yeah, that's what I was going to speak

24:06 ↗ to a bit match as we or further as we

24:08 ↗ know that there's areas around the city

24:10 ↗ that really lack that tree canopy and so

24:13 ↗ having at least from public side focus

24:16 ↗ our efforts in those areas throughways

24:20 ↗ programs making sure that people have

24:23 ↗ access to those benefits.

24:28 ↗ >> I think I discussion

24:29 ↗ >> I agree with a lot of that. I mean I

24:32 ↗ don't know enough about this

24:34 ↗ field to provide any real.

24:38 ↗ It's like one of those things is like

24:39 ↗ you're trying to strive

24:41 ↗ from 51 to 55 is the the cost to get

24:45 ↗ there like mountains exponentially where

24:47 ↗ it's like when I look around and as

24:50 ↗ discussed and we saw the survey from

24:52 ↗ last time is how we how we rate compared

24:55 ↗ to our neighbors is we're already I feel

24:57 ↗ in a really good spot and so like the m

25:00 ↗ the maintenance of that and the

25:03 ↗ continuing to to work on that but maybe

25:05 ↗ not have that lofty goal of like pushing

25:06 ↗ even though it does have all those

25:08 ↗ additional benefits. I think kind of

25:11 ↗ where my brain kind of falls into is we

25:14 ↗ have this beautiful thing already. Let's

25:15 ↗ secure it and make it better, but not

25:17 ↗ necessarily need to push to make it just

25:20 ↗ a bigger number.

25:24 ↗ >> Great. Well, I will take this feedback

25:26 ↗ to the environmental board and then I

25:28 ↗ anticipate we'll end up we the

25:30 ↗ environmental board will provide a

25:31 ↗ recommendation to council. We may show

25:33 ↗ different options um there, but we'll

25:35 ↗ definitely provide

25:38 ↗ questions

25:40 ↗ target forward.

25:42 ↗ Um so next

25:44 ↗ all right um I'm gonna walk through five

25:48 ↗ actions um to get your feedback. These

25:50 ↗ are follow-up conversations from the

25:52 ↗ fall.

25:54 ↗ Um and I'll go one at a time just so we

25:57 ↗ can focus in on each one. Um so the

26:00 ↗ first one uh the current action in our

26:02 ↗ plan talks about implementing um the

26:06 ↗ park plan and so what we are proposing

26:09 ↗ is to adjust that action to include the

26:13 ↗ updated name of the park plan and then

26:15 ↗ to add in the urban forest management

26:16 ↗ plan that was not adopted prior to the

26:21 ↗ um and then the other piece of this

26:23 ↗ action is instead of calling out very

26:26 ↗ specific actions in the park planner

26:28 ↗ forest management plan to speak

26:31 ↗ generally that the IAP is focused on the

26:35 ↗ actions in those other plans that help

26:37 ↗ us meet the climate.

26:40 ↗ So a fairly minor revision here really

26:43 ↗ just to encompass

26:49 ↗ that pretty sums up what we talked about

26:50 ↗ last time pretty well.

26:53 ↗ >> And I'll just note these are the longer

26:55 ↗ descriptions I provided for you. We'll

26:57 ↗ have a a short action name for each of

26:59 ↗ these.

27:00 ↗ >> And just a time check, Stacy, we're

27:02 ↗ going to try and wrap this up like

27:05 ↗ >> five minutes.

27:05 ↗ >> Y

27:06 ↗ >> yeah, great.

27:08 ↗ >> Um okay. And then the next one, um this

27:14 ↗ is focused in on uh increasing

27:18 ↗ uh trees in the private area with

27:20 ↗ private land owners. Um I'll just note

27:24 ↗ here that uh the language around

27:28 ↗ sequestration was flagged and so we'll

27:30 ↗ providing more general terms uh for what

27:34 ↗ that actually mean which is absorbing

27:36 ↗ carbon taking in carbon um just so it's

27:39 ↗ to the um but this this action is really

27:44 ↗ not changing from the current action. Um

27:47 ↗ the one idea that did come up was to

27:49 ↗ include some language around that

27:51 ↗ distribution and looking at tree equity

27:54 ↗ um to align with a new target.

28:00 ↗ Any concerns questions here?

28:12 ↗ >> We can do that. Yeah, the current action

28:14 ↗ focuses on trees, but absolutely

28:19 ↗ >> Yes. Do you have any recommendations on

28:24 ↗ >> Yeah.

28:36 ↗ Yeah. I'll I'll talk with Dan.

28:46 ↗ Right. Uh the third one is a brand new

28:49 ↗ action that looks at invasive

28:52 ↗ species and addressing invasive species

28:54 ↗ that impact our forest health. Uh there

28:57 ↗ was a lot of interest in focusing on

28:59 ↗ private. So that's reflected in the

29:02 ↗ section.

29:05 ↗ questions, concerns about the language

29:08 ↗ here.

29:10 ↗ >> And I think all of these that are

29:12 ↗ private property related are are

29:13 ↗ volunteer in nature, not not mandates.

29:17 ↗ >> Yeah.

29:17 ↗ >> Yes.

29:18 ↗ >> Yep. So, uh the previous one would be

29:21 ↗ programs like our tree giveaway program.

29:23 ↗ Uh this one, yeah, a voluntary program

29:26 ↗ where we offer education outreach

29:28 ↗ services to support our department.

29:38 ↗ Um the next one is also new. Uh for a

29:43 ↗ little bit of background here, we were

29:45 ↗ considering developing a wildlife and

29:48 ↗ habitat resilience section of our

29:52 ↗ community resilience focus area in the

29:54 ↗ plan. Uh we felt like this action better

29:58 ↗ aligned with the natural system section.

30:01 ↗ Soing including it there. This is around

30:05 ↗ enhancements for riparian protection,

30:07 ↗ flood plane, uh looking at strategic

30:10 ↗ acquisitions,

30:12 ↗ um and then also supporting the

30:14 ↗ resilience of wildlife. Um it's a little

30:18 ↗ different than the rest of the climate

30:19 ↗ action plan, but it's being proposed

30:22 ↗ because this was such a big area focus

30:25 ↗ with the comprehensive plan update and

30:28 ↗ currently the IAP nor other CD plants

30:31 ↗ really address topic. Um so essentially

30:35 ↗ this is around habitat resilience um in

30:39 ↗ order to improve the ability to respond

30:41 ↗ to the changes.

30:56 ↗ I don't know if it feels like action

30:58 ↗ like supporting like it's just the other

31:00 ↗ ones are a little stronger. Yeah.

31:02 ↗ >> So I don't know if you guys answer, but

31:04 ↗ I you guys are looking at that one. Like

31:06 ↗ is there a call to action there?

31:08 ↗ >> Right. What's the program?

31:12 ↗ >> Yeah.

31:12 ↗ >> The other ones just seem a little bit

31:13 ↗ more.

31:17 ↗ >> Yeah.

31:18 ↗ >> And the nexus between I mean protection

31:20 ↗ of wildlife absolutely important, but

31:22 ↗ what's the nexus with climate?

31:24 ↗ >> And that's Yes. So what we've spoken

31:28 ↗ about is trying to build that resilience

31:30 ↗ for a changing climate because there's a

31:32 ↗ real strong interest to see this

31:34 ↗ incorporated into the climate action

31:36 ↗ plan um for better alignment with the

31:38 ↗ comp plan. But yes, we will work on some

31:41 ↗ boarding here and figuring out what that

31:43 ↗ call action

31:48 ↗ we are

31:50 ↗ do these quick. Um, so then the last one

31:54 ↗ is a revision to a current plan or

31:57 ↗ excuse me a current action. We wanted to

31:59 ↗ bring it before you because it is so

32:01 ↗ related to many

32:04 ↗ programs like green is um and so wanted

32:08 ↗ to make sure that you all were able to

32:09 ↗ provide feedback. Um the current

32:12 ↗ language in the IAP is really focused on

32:14 ↗ a specific climate outreach campaign and

32:17 ↗ what we're recommending is broadening

32:19 ↗ that to um include additional public

32:22 ↗ engagement activities that really focus

32:25 ↗ on education and climate action. Um, we

32:29 ↗ wanted to provide some flexibility so

32:31 ↗ that staff can uh really implement the

32:35 ↗ the best programs, outreach, um, and

32:39 ↗ education opportunities. So this could

32:42 ↗ be everything from Dan leading a hike

32:45 ↗ with or leading a greenness event and

32:49 ↗ speaking about how this supports our

32:52 ↗ climate action in the city or hike being

32:54 ↗ led by a community partner where they

32:56 ↗ connect it back

32:59 ↗ uh uh climate work. So um really

33:02 ↗ provides kind of a lot of opportunity

33:05 ↗ to reach the public

33:13 ↗ question any feedback on this.

33:20 ↗ This was rapid feedback session. So um

33:24 ↗ you do have a memo with additional

33:26 ↗ details uh or with the details on all

33:30 ↗ these actions. Um so please feel free to

33:33 ↗ reach out to our team or the park team

33:36 ↗ and we can additional feedback.

33:40 ↗ Um what we will be doing next is

33:43 ↗ bringing this input to the environmental

33:45 ↗ board as we work on further revisions to

33:47 ↗ the climate action plan that will be um

33:51 ↗ uh taken to the PD committee and then

33:55 ↗ eventually put through the council

33:57 ↗ process.

34:00 ↗ The last item I was going to mention um

34:03 ↗ is that our Pickering Barn solar

34:05 ↗ installation is currently scheduled.

34:07 ↗ This project's been in the works for a

34:09 ↗ very long time. Um, so we're looking at

34:12 ↗ scheduling a ribbon cutting ceremony

34:14 ↗ likely in early April. So we'll extend

34:16 ↗ an invite to

34:18 ↗ have you all at that event

34:22 ↗ >> completed just before farmers market and

34:24 ↗ we'll have some solar solar panels and a

34:27 ↗ great demonstration site as we head into

34:29 ↗ farmers market. So Stacy, thanks. Really

34:32 ↗ appreciate it.

34:33 ↗ >> Thanks for the discussion as well around

34:35 ↗ tree canopy. Um, important one there.

34:39 ↗ >> Thank you, Mayor.

34:43 ↗ >> All right. Next item, Mr. Chair.

34:47 ↗ >> So, want to have a chance to welcome uh

34:50 ↗ introduce uh Mayor Mullet. I don't know,

34:52 ↗ Mayor, if you want to have

34:54 ↗ >> I would love if people Yeah. people

34:55 ↗ could say how long they've been on the

34:58 ↗ park board for and then how long they've

35:00 ↗ had a connection is awa for would be

35:02 ↗ great.

35:03 ↗ >> So, I don't know.

35:04 ↗ >> Katie, do you want to kick off?

35:06 ↗ Yes, you start.

35:07 ↗ >> Oh, Nick, sorry.

35:11 ↗ >> Um, since 2020,

35:18 ↗ >> two or three

35:21 ↗ >> time goes fast. You're having fun.

35:26 ↗ >> Okay.

35:33 ↗ 19.

35:36 ↗ It got in 2016. So,

35:38 ↗ >> okay. Where'd you come from?

35:40 ↗ >> Minnesota.

35:40 ↗ >> Oh, wow.

35:42 ↗ >> Twin Cities.

35:43 ↗ >> Okay.

35:54 ↗ >> Yeah. May of last year.

35:55 ↗ >> Yeah. Got it.

35:57 ↗ >> Hi, I'm Hannah. I also started May of

35:59 ↗ last year. Um, you moved to Izzy in

36:03 ↗ 2020.

36:04 ↗ >> Okay. Co move.

36:06 ↗ >> Yeah.

36:06 ↗ >> From where?

36:07 ↗ >> Awesome.

36:08 ↗ >> Okay. Seattle to here. Okay.

36:13 ↗ >> Martha,

36:16 ↗ two years.

36:19 ↗ And um, so far, I think I beat everybody

36:22 ↗ so far, but we beat um, we joined, we've

36:25 ↗ been in this class since 1990.

36:27 ↗ >> Oh, wow. Yes. You're ahead right now.

36:30 ↗ >> Yes.

36:31 ↗ You got me beat. I'm 06. So

36:37 ↗ >> my name is Chris. I've been on the park

36:39 ↗ for nine years, I think. Glad I asked.

36:43 ↗ >> And we moved here in 2000.

36:45 ↗ >> Okay.

36:46 ↗ >> So 2016.

36:47 ↗ >> Where'd you come from?

36:48 ↗ >> Uh Seattle and before that California.

36:50 ↗ >> Okay. Got it. Got it.

36:52 ↗ >> Cool.

36:52 ↗ >> Uh David Lou been on the board for four

36:55 ↗ years now. Um moved family moved here

36:58 ↗ 2017. So,

36:59 ↗ >> okay. Where from?

37:01 ↗ >> Um, from San Francisco, actually.

37:03 ↗ >> Oh, really? Be here. Okay.

37:05 ↗ >> Ryan Olsson. Um, I think I've been on

37:07 ↗ the board for four years, give or take.

37:09 ↗ >> Um, been in Isqua for eight. Prior to

37:12 ↗ that, uh, Seattle,

37:15 ↗ Bellingham.

37:16 ↗ >> Okay. Bellingham. My daughter is a

37:17 ↗ Western grad.

37:19 ↗ >> Yeah.

37:20 ↗ >> One more. Nick, our youth, our youth

37:22 ↗ representative.

37:23 ↗ >> Yeah. My name's Nick Wilson. I'm senior

37:26 ↗ at Gibson High School.

37:27 ↗ >> Oh,

37:28 ↗ >> yeah. And this is um about my second

37:31 ↗ meeting.

37:33 ↗ >> All right.

37:34 ↗ >> You get that award?

37:37 ↗ >> Lived here. Yeah. My whole life

37:42 ↗ 18 years.

37:46 ↗ >> Well, I appreciate you guys taking some

37:48 ↗ time. I just wanted to share. I think

37:52 ↗ I started this role on January 1st. sat

37:54 ↗ down with the finance director the first

37:56 ↗ week you start looking at your bonds

37:59 ↗ that are outstanding and when they

38:00 ↗ expire and it kind of jumped out at me

38:03 ↗ that there is a park bond expiring this

38:05 ↗ year. So I think the way I think about

38:07 ↗ these things is if you let it expire and

38:10 ↗ you don't renew it when you go to renew

38:12 ↗ it the next year now you're raising

38:13 ↗ people's taxes. So I think there's an

38:15 ↗ argument to be made to say you have to

38:17 ↗ actually make sure you ask for the bond

38:20 ↗ renewal before it expires. So it expires

38:22 ↗ this year. So that means November of

38:24 ↗ this year will be our last chance to ask

38:27 ↗ squad voters do they want to renew this

38:29 ↗ park bond. And to be honest to put

38:32 ↗ things in perspective, the King County

38:34 ↗ parks levy, if you add up what is squad

38:36 ↗ people pay, it's roughly $4.5 million.

38:39 ↗ This park bond is a year. This park bond

38:42 ↗ is $670,000 a year. So it's a drop in

38:45 ↗ the bucket if you look at a property tax

38:47 ↗ bill. You're not talking about big

38:49 ↗ numbers that are really noticeable to

38:50 ↗ people. And so then I think the proposal

38:53 ↗ was well let's go ask people to renew

38:55 ↗ the parks bond and then I worked with

38:57 ↗ our finance director and our bond

38:58 ↗ department that would free up roughly 9

39:01 ↗ or 10 million we can make in park

39:03 ↗ investments uh right now. And then we

39:06 ↗ then did this long kind of finance dive

39:10 ↗ of you know as people pay park

39:12 ↗ mitigation payments for new projects

39:14 ↗ everything else we started adding up

39:16 ↗ what that money came to and we got two

39:18 ↗ and a half or $3 million. And so now

39:20 ↗ we're kind of like, oh, there's like 12

39:22 ↗ or $13 million of investments we can

39:24 ↗ make. I think going into this current

39:27 ↗ summer, most communities are struggling

39:30 ↗ financially. So a lot of the grants that

39:32 ↗ are out there, you need a match. And so

39:34 ↗ I think we could be in a very

39:35 ↗ advantageous place this upcoming summer

39:37 ↗ to go after a lot of matches if we

39:40 ↗ decide to move forward on kind of doing

39:42 ↗ this park bond renewal. And uh and at

39:45 ↗ the same time, I think I look at the

39:49 ↗ cost of these projects going forward.

39:51 ↗ They're not getting any cheaper. And I

39:53 ↗ think our community is expensive. I'll

39:55 ↗ be honest. Like the average home here is

39:56 ↗ a seven figure number. I think the way

39:59 ↗ people feel like they're getting value

40:01 ↗ for being in isqua is to have a very

40:02 ↗ robust parks, trails, and open space

40:05 ↗ network. I mean, this is literally

40:06 ↗ probably one of the most beautiful

40:08 ↗ places in the entire world. I think

40:10 ↗ people live here because they enjoy the

40:11 ↗ outdoors. So I think everything we do to

40:14 ↗ invest in making it easier for people to

40:15 ↗ enjoy the outdoors is an advantage I

40:18 ↗ think for the square residents. And so

40:20 ↗ I'm also open to not only doing the park

40:23 ↗ bond renewal, not only you know figuring

40:26 ↗ out the best way to spend the impact fee

40:28 ↗ money we've been collecting, going after

40:30 ↗ grants, but then if there's missing

40:32 ↗ money, I'm also open to doing just a

40:33 ↗ councilmatic kind of debt issue to

40:36 ↗ figure out, you know, as we get better

40:38 ↗ numbers. And so we have a list of

40:42 ↗ projects based on stuff you guys have

40:44 ↗ come up with. So this was basically I

40:47 ↗ think projects we went through a list

40:49 ↗ that you guys have kind of itemized. I

40:51 ↗ think uh one of those projects was and

40:54 ↗ we're going to pass this out. Why don't

40:55 ↗ we just pass it out?

40:56 ↗ >> Yes. Uh,

40:58 ↗ and I think this is I mean it's the

41:01 ↗ start of the discussion, but we also

41:02 ↗ there's a clock ticking because we got

41:04 ↗ to if we want to renew our park bond, we

41:08 ↗ can't just in my opinion, you can't just

41:10 ↗ ask voters for to pay taxes without

41:12 ↗ telling them what they're going to get

41:13 ↗ in return. And so I think our challenge

41:15 ↗ is we want to have a voter guide

41:17 ↗ statement in November that kind of

41:20 ↗ spells out, hey, these are the things

41:22 ↗ you might get or this is what we hope to

41:24 ↗ get if we actually move forward with

41:27 ↗ this. And and so I think is everyone

41:30 ↗ does everyone have the list now? Okay.

41:32 ↗ So the first one you guys may or may I'm

41:35 ↗ assuming are probably familiar with Yuck

41:37 ↗ House at Confluence Park. I think his

41:39 ↗ school obviously has a shortage of

41:40 ↗ meeting space uh kind of sitting there.

41:43 ↗ it's not going to ever fix itself. So I

41:45 ↗ think the thought is I mean we got that

41:46 ↗ when I was on the council. So I was on

41:48 ↗ the council 09 to13 that's when we

41:50 ↗ acquired the confluence parks you know

41:53 ↗ property and when we got it way back

41:55 ↗ then the idea was we're going to

41:57 ↗ refurbish this thing and now it sat for

41:59 ↗ the last 15 years. Uh so that's one of

42:02 ↗ them. I think the the Ramos trail head

42:05 ↗ paving, I think that access to Tiger

42:08 ↗ Mountain because it's literally right

42:09 ↗ off the freeway is extremely popular and

42:12 ↗ it's also like when I was in the state

42:14 ↗ senate, I don't know if people ever hike

42:15 ↗ at High Point off exit 20, but I don't

42:18 ↗ remember that road used to be like like

42:20 ↗ that thing was just moon craters like

42:22 ↗ you and so unless you had a four-wheel

42:23 ↗ drive car like if you try to go with

42:25 ↗ that thing in a Prius like you were

42:26 ↗ going to screw up your transmission. We

42:28 ↗ paved that and it made a huge difference

42:30 ↗ and giving people access who didn't have

42:33 ↗ four-wheel drive vehicles to enjoy that

42:35 ↗ trail head. I think we have the similar

42:38 ↗ challenge with this, you know, right

42:40 ↗ there off Sunset. It's a bad parking

42:42 ↗ lot. It sucks. And and plus there's kind

42:46 ↗ of a shortage of bathroom facilities. So

42:48 ↗ I think the thought is pave it, put in a

42:50 ↗ bathroom and you really kind of

42:52 ↗ substantially change I think how people

42:55 ↗ can utilize that access on the Tiger

42:58 ↗ Mountain which I think would be a huge

42:59 ↗ win for the community. I think you guys

43:01 ↗ have acquired some really good

43:02 ↗ properties uh you know between Bergsma

43:06 ↗ and Kolkari and I think the thought is

43:10 ↗ the easier you make it to access trail

43:11 ↗ networks in those properties it's a

43:13 ↗ giant win for the community and so I

43:15 ↗ think that's where the thought for those

43:16 ↗ projects comes from. I think you'll

43:18 ↗ start to see a theme here because we're

43:21 ↗ having geographic diversity but also

43:24 ↗ park use diversity because now you're

43:27 ↗ kind of shifting from some of the open

43:29 ↗ space public meetings trail access to

43:32 ↗ the next one really goes back to the

43:34 ↗ work you guys have been doing for the

43:36 ↗ shared use agreement with the Isqua

43:37 ↗ school district. I think I will say

43:40 ↗ campaigning last year, I think what

43:42 ↗ people really hate is when governments

43:44 ↗ create unnecessary silos and it's like

43:46 ↗ you have the city of Isqua, then you

43:47 ↗ have the Isqua school district, Isqua

43:49 ↗ school district. It's very territorial

43:50 ↗ over all their stuff. And so I think our

43:53 ↗ big goal is how do we break down kind of

43:55 ↗ that false barrier because at the end of

43:57 ↗ the day it's all this taxpayer money and

43:59 ↗ it'd be nice if everyone was kind of

44:01 ↗ being more open with their facilities to

44:02 ↗ help each other out and I think we have

44:04 ↗ a chance to do a couple pilot projects

44:06 ↗ in that space. I think uh the two ones

44:09 ↗ that really jump out is is turfing Esqua

44:11 ↗ Valley Elementary because that, you

44:13 ↗ know, grassy field is a swamp at recess.

44:16 ↗ It sucks for kids and and so but that is

44:19 ↗ also if you did turf it, I mean that

44:22 ↗ would be great field space. We don't

44:23 ↗ have to buy anything, right? We're not

44:25 ↗ making a land acquisition. We're just

44:27 ↗ taking land that's publicly owned, just

44:28 ↗ not by us. And yeah, benefits kids at

44:31 ↗ recess. We get it evenings, we get it

44:33 ↗ weekends, we get it all summer. And I

44:35 ↗ think there's a win for the community.

44:36 ↗ You also have a similar sand lot at

44:38 ↗ Grand Ridge Elementary behind that which

44:40 ↗ is right next to kind of our whole

44:42 ↗ Central Park ecosystem. Once again,

44:44 ↗ that's where all my kids went. I mean,

44:46 ↗ that's a crappy in the winter. I mean,

44:47 ↗ that thing is just not a usable. It's

44:50 ↗ not a fun place for kids to go out at

44:52 ↗ recess. So, I think if you were able to

44:54 ↗ turp that one as well, especially with

44:56 ↗ proximity to to Central Park and all the

44:59 ↗ other things, once again, you're opening

45:00 ↗ up cool opportunities and I think it's

45:02 ↗ really sending a message to the school

45:03 ↗ district. It's time for us to do as much

45:05 ↗ cooperation as possible across all our

45:07 ↗ facilities, not just park facilities. We

45:09 ↗ want to use the auditorium of the high

45:11 ↗ school for more community events as

45:12 ↗ well. Uh beyond that, you see some other

45:15 ↗ ideas. I I think memorial field is a

45:18 ↗ really interesting one. I mean that is

45:20 ↗ also and some of these have POS

45:22 ↗ challenges, right? And I think you could

45:24 ↗ kill two birds with one stone of you

45:27 ↗ know where the technology is there where

45:30 ↗ you could turf a field without tires.

45:32 ↗ We're talking court methods now. also

45:34 ↗ much better for the environment. At the

45:36 ↗ same time, you kind of create this

45:38 ↗ barrier where the PAS is basically being

45:40 ↗ pushed down beneath. And I mean, this is

45:42 ↗ the forever chemical that just

45:44 ↗ unfortunately is present in this squad

45:46 ↗ because of the way we cleaned all our

45:48 ↗ fire equipment back in the day. And uh

45:50 ↗ but there is a chance with Memorial

45:52 ↗ Field where I think you could turf it

45:53 ↗ and solve the PAS issues at the same

45:55 ↗ time. That also feeds into the Dodd

45:57 ↗ Field which is owned by the school

45:58 ↗ district where the Little League stuff

46:00 ↗ happens that has really high PAS levels.

46:02 ↗ And so I think there's some potential

46:04 ↗ not only better public use wins but at

46:06 ↗ the same time some environmental health

46:08 ↗ wins as well. Uh and then the final

46:12 ↗ couple which is ironic cuz I am a tennis

46:14 ↗ player but

46:17 ↗ I will say side note when we made state

46:21 ↗ we made pickle ball the state sport of

46:23 ↗ Washington at Bass Senate 48 to1. I was

46:25 ↗ the only person who said someone has to

46:27 ↗ stand up for the tennis community. But

46:29 ↗ that being said I play pickle ball all

46:30 ↗ the time. So, it's a it's a fun sport

46:34 ↗ and uh and I do think it gets a lot of

46:36 ↗ usage and so we don't at this point have

46:38 ↗ any dedicated pickle ball courts.

46:39 ↗ Obviously, we're just doing the tennis

46:41 ↗ courts which works great, but I think

46:42 ↗ there is an opportunity here. And then

46:45 ↗ Tibbitz Valley, I mean, this is I think

46:48 ↗ there's a lot of cool stuff happening

46:49 ↗ potentially at Tibbitz. Uh I think when

46:52 ↗ you doorbell the Talis neighborhood,

46:53 ↗ their main complaint is Highland's got

46:55 ↗ all the parks. Talis just got a bunch of

46:57 ↗ homes and got short changed. We can't

46:59 ↗ fix that now. It's literally that ship

47:01 ↗ is sailed. The only thing you can fix is

47:04 ↗ how do you make Tibets as robust as

47:05 ↗ possible? It's literally the closest

47:07 ↗ park to them. At the same time, you

47:09 ↗ know, I just came from the Sisqua light

47:11 ↗ rail meeting. We're trying to get light

47:12 ↗ rail to end right in the middle between

47:14 ↗ Costco and Target there in the middle of

47:16 ↗ I90. That's where we want all our future

47:18 ↗ development to happen. The closest park

47:20 ↗ for those people is going to end up

47:22 ↗ being Tibets, I think. And so, we need

47:25 ↗ to make some huge upgrades and

47:26 ↗ investments, I think, at Tibbitz. Uh,

47:29 ↗ this starts with the idea of, you know,

47:31 ↗ an all-inclusive playground. I think at

47:33 ↗ the same time,

47:36 ↗ Lakeside is doing homes up in the

47:37 ↗ Highlands, and I think we're in

47:39 ↗ negotiations with them about, you know,

47:42 ↗ what sort of mitigation payment we can

47:43 ↗ get for the density they want to put in

47:46 ↗ up there to make, you know, I don't

47:49 ↗ know, we want to make a run at the Kelly

47:51 ↗ Ranch. I mean, we really do. I think the

47:53 ↗ time is now to try to acquire that

47:55 ↗ property and and really enhance. It's 35

47:58 ↗ acres connects obviously contiguous to

48:00 ↗ Tibbitz and I think there is a you know

48:04 ↗ this park bond investment be the first I

48:07 ↗ think of saying hey Tibbitz needs some

48:09 ↗ love it needs some investment you know

48:11 ↗ based on the talis and the future growth

48:13 ↗ that we see coming this is a place and

48:16 ↗ uh but that's the rough idea and I think

48:18 ↗ the the goal is you know I know there's

48:21 ↗ one item on here where we just don't

48:23 ↗ know with cost yet I was saying to Jeff

48:25 ↗ I wish Costco sold to feels because I

48:28 ↗ want like a volume discount but uh the

48:32 ↗ but that's the premise

48:34 ↗ so you guys are seeing it first uh

48:38 ↗ >> and I think the thought is to start this

48:40 ↗ process and I think that this isn't like

48:43 ↗ we're open to ideas I mean this is we're

48:45 ↗ just throwing out a you know something

48:47 ↗ that we think is spread geographically

48:49 ↗ throughout isqua but at the same time

48:52 ↗ also has people who want athletic fields

48:54 ↗ people who want playgrounds people who

48:55 ↗ want pickle all people want trail

48:57 ↗ access. You know, I think the Confluence

49:00 ↗ project's very unique. Uh I think

49:02 ↗ everything's we're trying to find a mix.

49:04 ↗ So I think what So we're open to ideas

49:07 ↗ if there's something on here that we're

49:09 ↗ not thinking of. Like I'm not saying

49:11 ↗ this is an exhaustive list, but we also

49:13 ↗ are trying to the big change I think for

49:16 ↗ how we're approaching things this year

49:17 ↗ is try to live in fiscal reality. Uh,

49:20 ↗ and I really like what you you guys were

49:23 ↗ saying on the tree canopy goals. Like

49:25 ↗ having goals that aren't realistic isn't

49:27 ↗ really the best use of our finite

49:29 ↗ resources. I think we have to have

49:30 ↗ realistic goals. The same thing comes to

49:32 ↗ finances. Like we could come up, we

49:34 ↗ could sit here and come up with $50

49:35 ↗ million of amazing park projects, but

49:38 ↗ that is outside of what we can actually

49:40 ↗ afford to do. And so I think you're

49:42 ↗ seeing kind of in this range of what we

49:45 ↗ think we can do between the park bond

49:47 ↗ renewal our current impact fee dollars

49:49 ↗ and what I think we can actually support

49:52 ↗ just through a councilmatic debt issue.

49:54 ↗ Uh and and so but that being said if we

49:57 ↗ find really cool stuff that we think is

49:59 ↗ missing I could always try to figure out

50:02 ↗ you know where the stretch is I guess

50:03 ↗ but I'm curious for feedback.

50:05 ↗ >> Yeah.

50:08 ↗ Um, EP house. I know we always talk

50:10 ↗ about the EF house wanted to visit. The

50:12 ↗ thing that jumped out at me on this one

50:13 ↗ was $2 to3 million feels like a lot.

50:16 ↗ >> Yeah, I agree. Willie, THAT'S WHAT I

50:18 ↗ SAID TO JEFF. I'M LIKE, WHAT THE HELL

50:19 ↗ HAPPENED? HIS FIRST NUMBER WAS a

50:21 ↗ million.

50:24 ↗ >> Like taxpayer projects and bank feels

50:27 ↗ high. Not saying we shouldn't do

50:29 ↗ something to the house, but like that

50:31 ↗ felt aggressive to me. um on the

50:34 ↗ athletic field. Something I want to call

50:36 ↗ out is we talk a lot about um equity of

50:38 ↗ turf. Um and then a big component

50:40 ↗ obviously tips everyone I'm glad to hear

50:43 ↗ that it doesn't come out on this page.

50:45 ↗ So I think like how we strengthen that

50:46 ↗ that's part of what we want to do with

50:48 ↗ this I think would help with the talis

50:50 ↗ and squawk problem.

50:51 ↗ >> Yeah. Yeah.

50:52 ↗ >> Um I think the same thing when I think

50:53 ↗ about this valley elementary that's that

50:56 ↗ huge flat. That's awesome. Like that

50:57 ↗ would be amazing. Clark has the same

50:59 ↗ problem.

51:00 ↗ >> Clark is Clark's candidate too. It's

51:02 ↗ right there.

51:02 ↗ >> But I think like I think with the

51:05 ↗ Highlands, I love the Highlands, they

51:06 ↗ get a lot of turf and they have a lot of

51:08 ↗ all the time use that they can walk to.

51:10 ↗ That does not happen in the rest of the

51:11 ↗ spot. So I think it's important at least

51:14 ↗ for me to say how are we making sure

51:16 ↗ that this is Canadian.

51:17 ↗ >> Yeah. Yeah.

51:18 ↗ >> Enough across.

51:19 ↗ >> Yeah. Yeah.

51:20 ↗ >> Otherwise, I like all the things that

51:22 ↗ we're talking about.

51:25 ↗ >> Yeah. And if I could if I could just add

51:27 ↗ a couple great overview, mayor, thank

51:29 ↗ you. Th this I these are familiar

51:32 ↗ projects and that as as for the last

51:36 ↗ seven weeks as we've been sort of

51:37 ↗ exploring this and thinking boy this is

51:39 ↗ a really strategic moment to to um ask

51:42 ↗ is voters and figure out how to leverage

51:45 ↗ a bond renewal with some of these other

51:47 ↗ revenues. what can we get done and

51:49 ↗ realizing I think as the mayor said um

51:53 ↗ of the projects that have already been

51:55 ↗ prioritized in the park system plan and

51:56 ↗ all the public engagement we've done

51:59 ↗ what are those small to medium size that

52:01 ↗ give us um the diversity in in a mix um

52:07 ↗ the cost estimates please don't nobody

52:09 ↗ get married to them or went into them

52:11 ↗ they're super super super super rough so

52:16 ↗ um I think the idea with conflict uence

52:18 ↗ if you recall from those discussions is

52:19 ↗ not just renovation of the house but

52:22 ↗ it's really reimagining that whole

52:24 ↗ northeast corner of Confluence Park that

52:26 ↗ just feels

52:28 ↗ it feels unfinished right and so there

52:31 ↗ would need to be a lot of in the next

52:34 ↗ couple of months um as Robin and I have

52:36 ↗ been beginning to to to think about this

52:39 ↗ and squeezing this into our work plan

52:40 ↗ there's going to be a lot of defining

52:43 ↗ should we be moving forward on this and

52:46 ↗ cost estimating that gets us drill down

52:48 ↗ a lot more specific. Um

52:51 ↗ >> yeah,

52:53 ↗ not your numbers. I just say we're going

52:55 ↗ to split out you know 20 million like

52:57 ↗ what's the

52:58 ↗ >> Yeah. Yeah. No you

53:00 ↗ >> thanks that was just my

53:03 ↗ >> it's really good Marlene if I could have

53:04 ↗ one thought TVP you're right is is that

53:08 ↗ there's still a need to revision Tibbitz

53:10 ↗ Valley Park and

53:14 ↗ that is going to be such a big lift

53:16 ↗ um

53:17 ↗ >> we weren't sure where to begin on it

53:19 ↗ like we don't want to make small

53:20 ↗ investments that then screw up a big

53:22 ↗ investment.

53:26 ↗ Every time we start talking about tiles,

53:28 ↗ everyone's like, "It's too big. You

53:29 ↗ don't know what to do with it."

53:30 ↗ >> But I do think we are. So, well, I mean,

53:35 ↗ since this is We're trying to be really

53:37 ↗ creative. I think if if we can make the

53:39 ↗ Kelly Ranch deal happen, I think there

53:42 ↗ is a portion of property there where you

53:43 ↗ could actually put homes. Uh they don't

53:46 ↗ they don't have access to that portion

53:48 ↗ right now because we had to give them

53:49 ↗ access. So I think the question is could

53:51 ↗ we do all 35 acres but the part where we

53:55 ↗ could give ourselves access now we

53:57 ↗ create a valuable residential lot and if

54:00 ↗ we were to sell that we could reinvest

54:02 ↗ all those funds back into Tibbitz solely

54:05 ↗ and I think it's uh but there's a lot of

54:08 ↗ dominoes have to fall first the Kelly

54:10 ↗ Ranch folks have to agree to sell a

54:12 ↗ sedan property and so uh

54:15 ↗ >> it's the one with all the little boats

54:19 ↗ 30 30 plus acres just south of Timbitz

54:21 ↗ Valley Park.

54:24 ↗ >> So it's the one it's uh but people have

54:27 ↗ been talking about buying the Kelly

54:28 ↗ Ranch since I was on the council. So

54:29 ↗ this has been out here forever. But I

54:32 ↗ think the point now is we're trying to

54:35 ↗ just

54:37 ↗ at some point you just have to make a

54:38 ↗ run at these things. And so I think the

54:40 ↗ strategy we're saying is Jeff's going to

54:42 ↗ them saying we got a new mayor like I

54:43 ↗ want to pitch him on this. what's the

54:45 ↗ cheapest you guys would sell your

54:46 ↗ property for? I mean, I think that's our

54:48 ↗ strategy and then uh and then we just go

54:51 ↗ after it. But I think I agree Tibets

54:54 ↗ needs a a larger investment and like I

54:56 ↗ say, I think if if this does end up

54:59 ↗ going through, I think I'm not I am not

55:03 ↗ ruling out using councilmatic debt to

55:05 ↗ make investments that I I think will not

55:08 ↗ get cheaper down the road. like waiting

55:10 ↗ isn't actually saving the taxpayers

55:11 ↗ money because you can literally borrow

55:13 ↗ money at a lower interest rate and the

55:15 ↗ cost of these projects are going up from

55:16 ↗ year to year. So there is a lot to be

55:19 ↗ said of of just saying hey

55:22 ↗ needs it now and and I think uh pay as

55:25 ↗ you go doesn't work for the size of that

55:27 ↗ project. You're going to have to look at

55:28 ↗ bonding I think. But but that being said

55:31 ↗ it's you know one advantage we have as a

55:33 ↗ city right now we have a $68 million

55:35 ↗ general fund. We have 1.7 million of

55:37 ↗ debt service. That is we're in a good

55:39 ↗ spot. Like we I didn't come in as mayor

55:42 ↗ like my biggest positive surprise was oh

55:44 ↗ wow like a city of our general fund side

55:47 ↗ could easily have $4 million debt

55:49 ↗ service. I think so I think we have some

55:51 ↗ flexibility to look at. We just got to

55:52 ↗ make sure we're being really strategic

55:54 ↗ about those investments. I think

55:58 ↗ >> um how much of the 16 to 20 would be the

56:01 ↗ replacement bond?

56:03 ↗ >> Half of it.

56:04 ↗ >> Yep. So then the other half would be

56:06 ↗ councilmatic and matching grants and the

56:10 ↗ $3 million park fees that developers

56:13 ↗ have been paying. So yeah.

56:15 ↗ >> Yeah.

56:15 ↗ >> And then the other part too is the two

56:19 ↗ things people ask me about all the time

56:22 ↗ are tibbits and the dog park tibbits.

56:26 ↗ Just reporting what I hear.

56:29 ↗ >> So well that's good feedback. I mean

56:31 ↗ what is dog park option there?

56:34 ↗ uh dog park area was proposed um on the

56:38 ↗ sort of upper part of the park up on

56:40 ↗ just off of 12 um

56:43 ↗ >> those town homes

56:45 ↗ just below the town homes

56:46 ↗ >> below the town homes on on on

56:49 ↗ property. Yeah, Tibbitz Valley Park

56:51 ↗ property um for some critical areas.

56:54 ↗ There's also just per our development

56:57 ↗ code since there's an adopted master

56:59 ↗ plan for the park. there's a rather

57:02 ↗ expensive bill that would need to be

57:04 ↗ paid to revise the master plan. Um,

57:07 ↗ >> oh,

57:08 ↗ >> so I mean there's there's

57:10 ↗ >> there were a number of things that

57:11 ↗ needed to be sort of thought through of,

57:13 ↗ hey, let's let's get a master plan for

57:15 ↗ the whole park. Let's let's reinvision

57:17 ↗ the whole park. um let's get a dog park

57:20 ↗ over um let's get a first dog park over

57:23 ↗ by the community center and realize

57:25 ↗ again with the size and scale and mayor

57:27 ↗ you may not have heard this but you know

57:30 ↗ a lot of the dog park discussion we had

57:32 ↗ for the last couple of years has been

57:34 ↗ hey Isiqua is not a town that's going to

57:36 ↗ create a one 5 to 10 acre dog park our

57:39 ↗ our dog park strategy needs to be smart

57:41 ↗ with our land realities and we need to

57:44 ↗ look at dispersed you know one one acre

57:47 ↗ dog parks in multiple parts of town.

57:50 ↗ >> I have three dogs. I will say problem

57:52 ↗ with three dogs is when you walk three

57:54 ↗ dogs, everyone assumes you work for

57:55 ↗ Rover. So I will warn you, don't get a

57:58 ↗ third dog. Unless you want people to ask

57:59 ↗ you to be their professional dog walker.

58:03 ↗ >> Nicholas free advice.

58:06 ↗ Stop it. Two dogs.

58:10 ↗ >> I think it would be good. Also, I mean

58:12 ↗ ambitious plan. You can't come to a park

58:14 ↗ board and say we're going to do all

58:15 ↗ this. We're all going to love it. Right.

58:16 ↗ I think the diversity of the program is

58:18 ↗ great. The one thing that we should

58:20 ↗ focus on is specifically with the

58:22 ↗ athletic fields, maybe putting those

58:24 ↗ more in the front of the five or six

58:26 ↗ year plan, whatever we build out,

58:28 ↗ because they could be more revenue

58:29 ↗ generating, you know, similar to Central

58:30 ↗ Park. So, it actually starts to pay back

58:32 ↗ more. Yeah.

58:33 ↗ >> And fund even additional projects down

58:35 ↗ the line. Right. So,

58:37 ↗ >> you're right. There's going to need to

58:38 ↗ be a sequencing. This is a a $20 million

58:41 ↗ of work with five or six projects is a

58:45 ↗ sixy year. It's a five or six year

58:47 ↗ endeavor. So, you're right. How we

58:48 ↗ >> That's hopefully quicker.

58:51 ↗ >> A little quicker than that, but Okay.

58:56 ↗ >> But yeah, that's a good Yeah. Uh well,

58:59 ↗ and I I will say that it's uh my take

59:03 ↗ away from my Senate time is it's

59:05 ↗ sometimes it's you kind of list the

59:08 ↗ projects and then you go you sequence as

59:12 ↗ because sometimes if you put the

59:14 ↗ sequence on the voter guide statement

59:15 ↗ sometimes then everyone just complains

59:17 ↗ about the sequence and the thing they

59:19 ↗ want is at the tail end of it. So

59:20 ↗ sometimes the trick is you just got to

59:23 ↗ say here's what we're going to do if you

59:25 ↗ support this and uh and then we have to

59:27 ↗ then prioritize on the back end because

59:30 ↗ I agree with what you're saying though

59:31 ↗ what you're saying makes a lot of sense.

59:35 ↗ >> Question. So is there a way you could

59:38 ↗ still move forward without acquiring the

59:40 ↗ Cali property?

59:41 ↗ >> Yes.

59:43 ↗ >> Yes. 100%.

59:44 ↗ >> With Tibis Valley Park.

59:45 ↗ >> Yes. 100%.

59:46 ↗ >> Yes.

59:47 ↗ >> That's just that would be like the dream

59:48 ↗ scenario. And so I think we're going to

59:50 ↗ make a run at it. I think uh either

59:54 ↗ they're going to come back to us in the

59:55 ↗ number that is basically telling us to

59:56 ↗ pound sand or they're going to come back

59:57 ↗ with a number that actually maybe we

1:00:00 ↗ just buy it and this whole thing's

1:00:01 ↗ finally, you know, we spike the football

1:00:04 ↗ and just declare a success. I don't

1:00:05 ↗ know. We're going to find out though uh

1:00:08 ↗ one way or the other. I think we got to

1:00:10 ↗ force the question with them and see how

1:00:12 ↗ it goes.

1:00:14 ↗ But if they say if they're open to it,

1:00:17 ↗ if it's a reasonable response from them

1:00:19 ↗ in this first quarter, like we're going

1:00:22 ↗ to make a run at it.

1:00:26 ↗ >> We find really creative ways to purchase

1:00:28 ↗ property.

1:00:30 ↗ >> I mean, right now the plan for the

1:00:32 ↗ Lakeside development is to buy 400 TDR

1:00:34 ↗ units. If they buy 400 TDR units, that

1:00:37 ↗ money will go somewhere else that has

1:00:38 ↗ nothing to do with this. And they'll

1:00:40 ↗ write a big giant check, you know, for5

1:00:43 ↗ to$10 million. we won't really see much

1:00:44 ↗ of it at all. So, our proposal is we're

1:00:47 ↗ going to redo that agreement, just have

1:00:49 ↗ them make a park mitigation payment

1:00:51 ↗ directly to us that we could use to

1:00:53 ↗ acquire open space and and that would

1:00:56 ↗ qualify like is kind of our back of the

1:00:58 ↗ napkin thinking of of how we would go

1:01:01 ↗ about it. So, first step is figuring out

1:01:03 ↗ if they're interested from the Kelly

1:01:04 ↗ Rando site. But I think our plan is to

1:01:07 ↗ to redo the lakeside development

1:01:09 ↗ agreement to try to just have them

1:01:11 ↗ basically instead of having to buy TDRs

1:01:14 ↗ to get the housing units they want on

1:01:16 ↗ that on that parcel, they would just

1:01:18 ↗ make a payment to us that we could then

1:01:20 ↗ reinvest in the community.

1:01:23 ↗ >> But again, different

1:01:25 ↗ >> lot of dominoes to fall

1:01:26 ↗ >> different than completely different than

1:01:28 ↗ this.

1:01:29 ↗ >> This is all clean. that thing is

1:01:31 ↗ complicated. We don't want to put

1:01:32 ↗ anything complicated in front of the

1:01:33 ↗ voters. I think it's just like you vote

1:01:35 ↗ yes, we're going to build these like and

1:01:37 ↗ that's our message and uh yeah,

1:01:44 ↗ other general thoughts

1:01:47 ↗ much more discussion ahead. I think

1:01:50 ↗ Mayor, some of what I know we've talked

1:01:52 ↗ about is um there'll be a further

1:01:55 ↗ conversation in April with city council.

1:01:58 ↗ um would love to come back and our spend

1:02:01 ↗ have some dedicated time at our March

1:02:03 ↗ park board meeting talking about this a

1:02:05 ↗ little further as

1:02:06 ↗ >> this was probably the April 6 council

1:02:07 ↗ meeting. It's facilities and this park

1:02:09 ↗ bond. So, and uh facilities is a whole

1:02:12 ↗ different animal. We got to figure out

1:02:13 ↗ how to redo the police station and move

1:02:15 ↗ the people that are currently in the

1:02:16 ↗ police station that aren't police

1:02:17 ↗ officers, i.e. me

1:02:20 ↗ somewhere else in the city. So it's uh

1:02:23 ↗ yeah, so that's a whole different but of

1:02:26 ↗ that meeting at the council on April 6

1:02:27 ↗ like facilities and this park bond are

1:02:30 ↗ the big things and I presented this to

1:02:31 ↗ the council at our retreat on January

1:02:33 ↗ 31st. That was so the council sort of

1:02:36 ↗ got hey this is I think we got to renew

1:02:39 ↗ this park bond and and if we're going to

1:02:41 ↗ renew it, we better come up with a list

1:02:42 ↗ of things that is squab voters are going

1:02:44 ↗ to get if they vote yes and and that's

1:02:46 ↗ what our goal is to come up with a good

1:02:47 ↗ list uh for that.

1:02:50 ↗ >> Yeah. So, prior to that April 6th

1:02:51 ↗ meeting, it will be our March 23rd

1:02:53 ↗ meeting. We'd love to keep furthering

1:02:56 ↗ this conversation to get Rob and I.

1:02:58 ↗ We'll keep doing some work.

1:02:59 ↗ >> Marlin, keep getting the lower the

1:03:00 ↗ numbers. Like, the lower the numbers are

1:03:02 ↗ on this, the better. I like the way

1:03:04 ↗ you're thinking.

1:03:04 ↗ >> Bring your bring your coupon bring

1:03:07 ↗ coupons.

1:03:11 ↗ >> And the only thing I will say too, it's

1:03:13 ↗ great to see expanded pickle ball at

1:03:15 ↗ Central Park and other location.

1:03:18 ↗ >> Tibbitz.

1:03:19 ↗ >> That'd be Tibbitz. Yes,

1:03:22 ↗ >> I agree.

1:03:26 ↗ >> So, we got to figure out where you can

1:03:28 ↗ do because the problem with where the

1:03:29 ↗ tennis courts are at Tibbitz, you can't

1:03:31 ↗ do anything without you're too close.

1:03:33 ↗ >> So, we have a lot of grandfather in

1:03:35 ↗ stuff right now. So, it just would have

1:03:36 ↗ to be in a different location because

1:03:38 ↗ the tennis location is way too close to

1:03:40 ↗ the creek. It's now so it's a But you're

1:03:43 ↗ right.

1:03:46 ↗ Mhm.

1:03:47 ↗ >> But you could add somewhere else

1:03:49 ↗ >> or if we or if we do, what does that do

1:03:51 ↗ to other future plans for the park or or

1:03:55 ↗ the needs for turf fields or

1:03:57 ↗ >> I agree pickle ball like we started out

1:03:59 ↗ like I mean obviously we've been doing

1:04:00 ↗ this for a while but pickle bar pickle

1:04:02 ↗ ball at Tibbitz was on the original list

1:04:04 ↗ and then things that we realized were

1:04:06 ↗ going to create a lot of other side

1:04:07 ↗ headaches. We're like, "Oh crap." Like,

1:04:09 ↗ but if we could put it somewhere else at

1:04:11 ↗ Tibbitz, uh,

1:04:14 ↗ >> yeah,

1:04:17 ↗ >> that like having a nice playground,

1:04:19 ↗ >> community parks sized playground. Yeah.

1:04:22 ↗ >> We originally that was just that was

1:04:24 ↗ originally like open-ended of anywhere

1:04:26 ↗ in the city. And that's when I think we

1:04:27 ↗ realized we've got to have something

1:04:29 ↗ that is really connected to Tibbitz

1:04:30 ↗ specifically. And uh but our hope is and

1:04:34 ↗ my you know my goal is in this first

1:04:38 ↗ term as mayor is Tibet Valley is going

1:04:41 ↗ to see love. I mean I got in the Senate

1:04:43 ↗ and I felt like Lake Samage State Park

1:04:44 ↗ was dying on the vine and I went to

1:04:46 ↗ Olympia and just fought for that part

1:04:48 ↗ year in year out and it is completely

1:04:51 ↗ transformed I think now in a very

1:04:53 ↗ positive way. So park investments

1:04:55 ↗ transform communities in a very very

1:04:58 ↗ positive direction. So to me like

1:05:00 ↗ Tibbitz is the new lakes state park. I

1:05:03 ↗ want to see it transformed. So

1:05:06 ↗ >> and again we we've said it right and I

1:05:08 ↗ so appreciate that mayor. It it is it

1:05:11 ↗ needs to be repositioned and ready to

1:05:13 ↗ perform for the neighborhood that is

1:05:15 ↗ going to be growing around it.

1:05:17 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:05:17 ↗ >> Um so not you know current residents but

1:05:19 ↗ just what that neighborhood's going to

1:05:20 ↗ be that that park needs.

1:05:23 ↗ >> If you want people to buy homes it's

1:05:24 ↗ like where the Hobby Lobby is right now.

1:05:26 ↗ You better have them with something they

1:05:27 ↗ can walk to that isn't

1:05:29 ↗ >> just I mean I like top pot but you can

1:05:31 ↗ eat something more than top

1:05:39 ↗ >> I do like the gas lamp too. It's a I

1:05:42 ↗ know. Don't get rid of those two.

1:05:46 ↗ >> I should like the Fortunado chocolate.

1:05:47 ↗ The Fortunado chocolate's hiding back in

1:05:49 ↗ there too. It's like there's a lot of

1:05:51 ↗ good little hidden gems in that part of

1:05:52 ↗ his squad. Uh okay. I got to run. Uh

1:05:56 ↗ >> mayor, thank you.

1:05:57 ↗ >> Yeah. Yeah.

1:05:58 ↗ >> We'll be in touch. Thanks everyone.

1:06:00 ↗ >> Keep the keep the conversation going.

1:06:04 ↗ on the the little bit there just on the

1:06:08 ↗ record for my two cents. But um after

1:06:11 ↗ learning in one of our most recent

1:06:13 ↗ meetings from the school board or school

1:06:14 ↗ district that elementary schools fields

1:06:17 ↗ are open, they're the only ones that are

1:06:19 ↗ actually open to the public out outside

1:06:22 ↗ of ours is I I do think I do like the

1:06:25 ↗ idea of putting turf in multi-use areas

1:06:27 ↗ in those particular someone that when

1:06:30 ↗ it's raining, the only place I can go or

1:06:32 ↗ has rained within the last 72 hours, the

1:06:35 ↗ only place I can go hit a baseball with

1:06:37 ↗ my kids field

1:06:39 ↗ if you were to to even takeick off a

1:06:41 ↗ couple more of these and some of them

1:06:42 ↗ look pretty terrible is it's a lot more

1:06:45 ↗ space just for people to just walk there

1:06:47 ↗ and play and not get soaked in mud.

1:06:50 ↗ >> And as you recall when we really talk

1:06:51 ↗ about our athletic field um needs and

1:06:54 ↗ our priorities in town um back to the

1:06:57 ↗ park system plan, right? We said, "Hey,

1:06:59 ↗ let's take care of our fields. Let's

1:07:01 ↗ let's add multi-use synthetic in our own

1:07:04 ↗ system. let's partner with the school

1:07:07 ↗ district and find ways to create

1:07:09 ↗ community sports fields. And so this

1:07:11 ↗ meshes right with that. And as we've

1:07:13 ↗ talked with the district and just the

1:07:15 ↗ concept to remind you um and why the the

1:07:18 ↗ elementary school fields really hold so

1:07:21 ↗ much potential is um the the operational

1:07:25 ↗ premise is the the residents through the

1:07:28 ↗ city make the investment, the city

1:07:31 ↗ becomes the scheduler and the city

1:07:33 ↗ becomes the maintainer. So during the

1:07:36 ↗ school year and during the school day,

1:07:37 ↗ the students have a fantastic improved

1:07:40 ↗ recess facility. But when school's not

1:07:43 ↗ in session or in the afternoons and

1:07:45 ↗ evenings, the city is scheduling that

1:07:47 ↗ for multiuse, multiport

1:07:50 ↗ um open to the public uh use. It really

1:07:54 ↗ becomes that win-win. So um the district

1:07:56 ↗ seems very interested in that. And um if

1:08:00 ↗ there is, you know, as we continue this

1:08:03 ↗ idea and if it percolates that this is

1:08:06 ↗ the strategic moment to do a park bond

1:08:08 ↗ renewal, um those are some really strong

1:08:11 ↗ candidate projects. So, um lots to be

1:08:14 ↗ done. Um I can I'll tell you right now

1:08:16 ↗ the road map is fast to think if there's

1:08:19 ↗ a something going to voters in November,

1:08:22 ↗ there's a council decision that would

1:08:23 ↗ need to be made in August to put

1:08:25 ↗ something on the ballot. Um that that's

1:08:28 ↗ that's a lot of work. Thankfully, if I

1:08:31 ↗ can just add one more comment, we're not

1:08:33 ↗ starting from scratch. Again, I want to

1:08:36 ↗ reiterate, I think it's important as you

1:08:37 ↗ start talking to your neighbors and your

1:08:40 ↗ spheres of influence about this idea,

1:08:41 ↗ please do. This isn't this isn't set in

1:08:44 ↗ stone. Please see that word example

1:08:47 ↗ projects. This is meant to just be, hey,

1:08:49 ↗ here's a here's a potential menu of what

1:08:52 ↗ could be done. Um but um I think the

1:08:56 ↗ important thing is that um

1:09:00 ↗ I lost my train of thought. Um

1:09:04 ↗ >> not set in stone.

1:09:05 ↗ >> Well, yeah.

1:09:07 ↗ >> Not starting from scratch.

1:09:08 ↗ >> Why don't we let D will come for me? No,

1:09:11 ↗ it'll it'll come back.

1:09:13 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:09:16 ↗ >> Um so this

1:09:21 ↗ >> Yes. Uh so I know this Kari property is

1:09:25 ↗ like just big

1:09:29 ↗ land.

1:09:30 ↗ >> Um but there is a trail head relatively

1:09:33 ↗ close to it already. Um

1:09:36 ↗ >> which one?

1:09:39 ↗ >> Oh, on the other side.

1:09:40 ↗ >> Yeah, slightly to the other side. I mean

1:09:44 ↗ >> it's on the north. So I was going to

1:09:47 ↗ mention there's nothing on the east.

1:09:49 ↗ there is city property that backs up um

1:09:54 ↗ the statement but I was wondering if

1:09:56 ↗ there's anything that

1:09:59 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:10:00 ↗ Yes. So the the Squawk Mountain corridor

1:10:03 ↗ is both of those Diana. So, so if I

1:10:06 ↗ could pull up a map and maybe I'll we'll

1:10:08 ↗ have some maps to sort of talk about

1:10:09 ↗ these budgets, but but Kil Kilkari 3 is

1:10:14 ↗ 17 acres that meshes with the 20 acres

1:10:17 ↗ that we bought a couple years ago, which

1:10:19 ↗ was the way property. So, it creates a

1:10:21 ↗ 37 acre corridor that goes right to

1:10:25 ↗ Squawk Mountain State Park. So, they're

1:10:28 ↗ both they're both on the east side of of

1:10:32 ↗ Squawk Mountain. So they're one in the

1:10:34 ↗ same corridor.

1:10:36 ↗ >> Okay.

1:10:41 ↗ >> Squawk Valley Park. No, Squawk Valley

1:10:43 ↗ Park is is

1:10:45 ↗ um across Isiqua Creek. So this wouldn't

1:10:48 ↗ this wouldn't involve Squawk Valley

1:10:50 ↗ Park. This is off of Sunrise. This is

1:10:53 ↗ this is Mine Minehill Trail.

1:11:12 ↗ There's long there's long range plans.

1:11:15 ↗ Um

1:11:17 ↗ any any trail head on that side of the

1:11:22 ↗ mountain would involve the need for a

1:11:24 ↗ pedestrian bridge across Isiqua Creek.

1:11:26 ↗ Um um you'll note in the in the park

1:11:30 ↗ system plan and this is going to come up

1:11:32 ↗ um we have some community members that

1:11:34 ↗ are not really excited about the idea

1:11:35 ↗ but you might recall in the in the park

1:11:37 ↗ system plan um under Squawk Valley Park

1:11:43 ↗ um that parking lot there is really

1:11:45 ↗ underutilized. And so one of the

1:11:48 ↗ concepts that uh we talked with the

1:11:50 ↗ community about and and was in the in

1:11:52 ↗ the park system plan is what if there

1:11:55 ↗ was a pedestrian bridge there at Squawk

1:11:58 ↗ Valley Park that

1:12:01 ↗ basically allowed that parking lot to

1:12:03 ↗ become a trail head.

1:12:10 ↗ >> Oh right, right.

1:12:21 ↗ So,

1:12:22 ↗ >> so again, I'm I'm I'm

1:12:25 ↗ not going to get into a lot of the

1:12:26 ↗ conversations we have in terms of

1:12:28 ↗ acquisitions because those are really

1:12:30 ↗ hard public conversations to have. Um

1:12:33 ↗ but yes, aware aware of all of that and

1:12:35 ↗ that's certainly part of the strategy I

1:12:38 ↗ think as we look at what might be a

1:12:41 ↗ candidate for a small to medium-sized

1:12:45 ↗ project that would fit in a diverse um

1:12:48 ↗ park bond renewal. Um that has a trail

1:12:53 ↗ head on the east side of Squawk has so

1:12:55 ↗ many so much more community work that

1:12:58 ↗ needs to be done. It's not ready. It's

1:13:01 ↗ not it's not fully baked whereas the

1:13:04 ↗ Kcari way parcels are are begging to be

1:13:08 ↗ a new trail corridor and just like

1:13:10 ↗ Bergsbay is. So the other idea is Cougar

1:13:13 ↗ Mountain, right? We purchased Bergsba,

1:13:15 ↗ but actually let's develop the trails.

1:13:17 ↗ Let's let's let the the um um um our our

1:13:24 ↗ parking garage here with Sound Transit

1:13:26 ↗ become a trail head um as people can get

1:13:29 ↗ up into into Cougar Mountain. So, that's

1:13:31 ↗ the other trail corridor that could be

1:13:33 ↗ an opportunity with this with this

1:13:35 ↗ project.

1:13:37 ↗ So,

1:13:39 ↗ lots of need, lots of ideas. Um I love

1:13:42 ↗ the idea of 16 to $18 million. it

1:13:47 ↗ doesn't go far. What our our needs in

1:13:49 ↗ our park system are probably far greater

1:13:51 ↗ than that. Um um I think to echo what

1:13:54 ↗ the mayor said, I think this is an

1:13:56 ↗ opportunity to try and present a package

1:13:57 ↗ that's pragmatic and practical um

1:14:01 ↗ demonstrates

1:14:03 ↗ taking care of what we got and and sort

1:14:06 ↗ of improving um the function and

1:14:10 ↗ capacity.

1:14:12 ↗ Yeah.

1:14:17 ↗ So every discussion absolutely

1:14:21 ↗ robust discussions tonight and with

1:14:23 ↗ that.

1:14:27 ↗ >> Yeah,

1:14:28 ↗ >> we're good.

1:14:28 ↗ >> We're good.

1:14:30 ↗ >> We'll move on to our bullet point C

1:14:32 ↗ here. Park rules and regulations

1:14:35 ↗ presented by Dale Mark.

1:14:37 ↗ >> You saved the best for last.

1:14:39 ↗ >> The most exciting on the list, rules and

1:14:42 ↗ rags. Yeah.

1:14:43 ↗ >> Jeeoff, do you want to say a few words

1:14:44 ↗ before I jump in?

1:14:45 ↗ >> Yeah. No, thank you, Dale. Um, so I had

1:14:48 ↗ the chance I know at our at our last

1:14:50 ↗ meeting, I think I mentioned that the

1:14:52 ↗ following night I was presenting to the

1:14:54 ↗ city council services, safety, and parks

1:14:57 ↗ committee, kicking off the this

1:14:59 ↗ discussion and saying, "Hey, we're going

1:15:00 ↗ to come back." Um, thank you, Dale. Mark

1:15:03 ↗ Crimp who's with the exe uh

1:15:05 ↗ administration office, the city

1:15:06 ↗ administration office is going to be

1:15:08 ↗ helping us uh in this in this work which

1:15:10 ↗ is uh uh really really exciting. Um I I

1:15:14 ↗ I would introduce this by saying um city

1:15:18 ↗ council was very encouraged and and

1:15:20 ↗ appreciated hearing that uh we're ready

1:15:22 ↗ to to take this on. And what this is is

1:15:26 ↗ um park rules are really really

1:15:29 ↗ important um and and having a more

1:15:33 ↗ thorough um all-inclusive

1:15:36 ↗ list of park rules within the city code

1:15:40 ↗ um is a really really good important

1:15:42 ↗ management practice uh because it it

1:15:46 ↗ helps us as the stewards and the

1:15:48 ↗ managers of those parks uh to make sure

1:15:50 ↗ those parks are welcoming and they're

1:15:52 ↗ safe. Um and and those that are using

1:15:56 ↗ the park understand what you can and

1:15:58 ↗ can't do uh within within the parks. Um

1:16:01 ↗ one of the public comments you'll see I

1:16:03 ↗ I want to touch on that. Um this this

1:16:05 ↗ endeavor this work we're doing is really

1:16:08 ↗ focused on park rules. There's already a

1:16:12 ↗ lot of

1:16:13 ↗ regulatory language within the city code

1:16:16 ↗ that talk about parks and what we can

1:16:18 ↗ and can't do and how we need to develop.

1:16:20 ↗ Um, if you the the development code

1:16:23 ↗ speaks um at at at length in terms of

1:16:27 ↗ what we can or can't do as we develop or

1:16:29 ↗ do capital projects within our within

1:16:32 ↗ our park system. We're not trying to

1:16:33 ↗ update that. We're really the the the

1:16:36 ↗ scope of this work is um we have a very

1:16:40 ↗ small sample of park rules that are in

1:16:42 ↗ our city code that were put in in 1985

1:16:45 ↗ and a couple more put in in the '9s. um

1:16:49 ↗ um they're very deficient. Um there's a

1:16:52 ↗ lot of current practices and and current

1:16:55 ↗ things. Um the use of drones, um ebikes

1:17:00 ↗ and e- scooters. Um there's so many new

1:17:03 ↗ uses uh within our park system that our

1:17:06 ↗ our city code is silent about right now

1:17:08 ↗ and and we think it's time to to change

1:17:11 ↗ that. So Dale, thank you.

1:17:14 ↗ >> Great. Yeah, excited to be here with you

1:17:16 ↗ all tonight. So, my name's been thrown

1:17:18 ↗ around a few times now. Dale Murky

1:17:20 ↗ Crimp. I work in the mayor's office. Um,

1:17:23 ↗ on all sorts of things. It kind of

1:17:25 ↗ depends on the month. Uh, I'm currently

1:17:29 ↗ finishing up a stint over managing our

1:17:32 ↗ municipal fleet. Um, which is not I was

1:17:36 ↗ was mentioned this morning as the first

1:17:37 ↗ time my father has been truly proud of

1:17:39 ↗ work that I've done. the idea that I was

1:17:42 ↗ there supporting the mechanics with all

1:17:43 ↗ of our our vehicles. Um, rules and

1:17:47 ↗ regulations and city code is a place

1:17:48 ↗ where I'm much more comfortable. So, I'm

1:17:50 ↗ excited to be with you all tonight to

1:17:52 ↗ talk a bit about this project and and

1:17:54 ↗ the purpose of our next 30 minutes is

1:17:56 ↗ twofold. One is to get your feedback on

1:17:59 ↗ the overarching plan which is to update

1:18:02 ↗ and consolidate park rules and

1:18:04 ↗ regulations from all the little place

1:18:06 ↗ they places they are in our current

1:18:08 ↗ municipal code into a single chapter and

1:18:11 ↗ then also to gather your initial

1:18:14 ↗ thoughts on key rules or topic areas.

1:18:17 ↗ This will be the first of multiple uh

1:18:19 ↗ visits to this board about this project.

1:18:22 ↗ Uh, so if you leave at the end of this

1:18:24 ↗ evening being like, gosh, I forgot. I

1:18:28 ↗ wish I we I had said we need to make

1:18:30 ↗ sure we've got drones at the top of the

1:18:32 ↗ list to use an example. We will have

1:18:34 ↗ more opportunities for that. Um, I

1:18:35 ↗ recognize the hour of the day. Um, and

1:18:38 ↗ so maybe some of those topics and and

1:18:41 ↗ opinions might come back at an earlier

1:18:43 ↗ hour for each of you.

1:18:46 ↗ Three questions tonight. These are long

1:18:47 ↗ and wordy and I'm going to shorten them

1:18:49 ↗ a little bit. Do you agree with the

1:18:51 ↗ general direction? So, do you agree with

1:18:53 ↗ the idea that we should consolidate and

1:18:55 ↗ update and clarify park rules in a

1:18:58 ↗ single chapter?

1:19:00 ↗ Second question is what topic areas do

1:19:02 ↗ you think are going to be the most high

1:19:03 ↗ interest and where do you already maybe

1:19:05 ↗ have some emerging policy perspectives?

1:19:08 ↗ And then the last is as we endeavor on

1:19:12 ↗ broader public engagement, do you have

1:19:14 ↗ any opinions at this stage in the game

1:19:17 ↗ about how we might pursue broader

1:19:19 ↗ community input on these park rules and

1:19:23 ↗ regulations?

1:19:25 ↗ We're going to start with this first

1:19:26 ↗ question, which is do you agree um with

1:19:29 ↗ the general direction we're proposing,

1:19:31 ↗ which is to consolidate, update, and

1:19:33 ↗ clarify park rules in a single chapter.

1:19:35 ↗ I'm already seeing nods, but I will

1:19:37 ↗ briefly give you a little bit um from

1:19:39 ↗ the staff report and then I'll pause to

1:19:42 ↗ get thoughts.

1:19:43 ↗ So, a little bit of background on this.

1:19:45 ↗ Um and Jeff actually went through much

1:19:48 ↗ of this, so I'll kind of skim quickly.

1:19:50 ↗ Um, right now our park rules, the ones

1:19:53 ↗ that exist, are sprinkled throughout a

1:19:56 ↗ number of different chapters in the

1:19:57 ↗ Isquaman municipal code, which means

1:19:59 ↗ that if you're a user of our park system

1:20:02 ↗ and you want to know a rule, it's hard

1:20:04 ↗ to find the answer to can you do this or

1:20:07 ↗ not do this? Um, how can I apply for a

1:20:10 ↗ permit to you a park at a for a special

1:20:13 ↗ event? That information doesn't live in

1:20:15 ↗ one single place. It lives dotted

1:20:17 ↗ throughout.

1:20:19 ↗ hasn't been updated in a long time, in

1:20:23 ↗ some cases before I was born. Um,

1:20:26 ↗ whenever something is older than me, I

1:20:29 ↗ wonder if it maybe needs to be updated.

1:20:33 ↗ And we're also, as you saw in the

1:20:35 ↗ materials, there are places where our

1:20:36 ↗ park rules are just not complete. Not

1:20:38 ↗ only are they not complete for some of

1:20:39 ↗ the current and emerging uses we're

1:20:41 ↗ seeing in our parks, trails, and open

1:20:42 ↗ space, um, but may not even be complete

1:20:45 ↗ by stuff that is already happening in

1:20:47 ↗ those spaces.

1:20:49 ↗ I just touched on the next one. And then

1:20:51 ↗ also the current way that our our park

1:20:55 ↗ rules and regulations are written make

1:20:57 ↗ it really difficult to address and um

1:21:00 ↗ enforce any sort of issues in parks. Who

1:21:03 ↗ who who are the enforcers and what

1:21:07 ↗ process by which um can they determine

1:21:09 ↗ what needs to be enforced and how? So,

1:21:12 ↗ we've got an opportunity

1:21:14 ↗ which is to provide a more complete set

1:21:16 ↗ of rules in a centralized singular place

1:21:20 ↗ that will support our parks in remaining

1:21:21 ↗ safe, welcoming, clean, um, and also

1:21:24 ↗ help in outline how emergent issues will

1:21:29 ↗ be dealt with, sort of providing a

1:21:30 ↗ framework, so to speak, um, for things

1:21:32 ↗ that we may not be able to anticipate,

1:21:34 ↗ but we can put a framework in place for

1:21:36 ↗ how we would anticipate them as they

1:21:38 ↗ come up. Um and also an opportunity at

1:21:41 ↗ this point to think about uh how

1:21:43 ↗ responsibility is shared between the

1:21:46 ↗ number of different uh city departments

1:21:48 ↗ and divisions that do have a stake in

1:21:52 ↗ our parks, trails, and open spaces. And

1:21:54 ↗ of course the opportunity as always to

1:21:56 ↗ engage with you all and our broader

1:21:57 ↗ community as we develop these rules and

1:22:00 ↗ this framework.

1:22:02 ↗ I shared as part of the staff um

1:22:05 ↗ materials for this evening. One of the

1:22:07 ↗ attachments was uh the newly adopted uh

1:22:11 ↗ city of Redmond chapter on parks. Also

1:22:14 ↗ hot off the press I would say probably

1:22:16 ↗ in like maybe a month. The city of

1:22:18 ↗ Kirkland will also have a new

1:22:20 ↗ consolidated updated uh rules and

1:22:23 ↗ regulations chapter in their code. we

1:22:25 ↗ happen to know the person working on

1:22:27 ↗ that project and so we can also look at

1:22:30 ↗ what they've been working on too in a

1:22:31 ↗ future meeting. But you'll notice

1:22:33 ↗ they've just done this work and so it's

1:22:35 ↗ really nice to have a neighbor that's

1:22:36 ↗ recently gone through a similar process

1:22:38 ↗ because we're able to learn about you

1:22:40 ↗ know how might you have gone about

1:22:42 ↗ updating this and what might we want to

1:22:43 ↗ take from that process that we would

1:22:45 ↗ find valuable for ourselves.

1:22:47 ↗ >> So trademarking in the public sector

1:22:49 ↗ >> absolutely not there's a lot of

1:22:51 ↗ borrowing and a lot of stealing

1:22:52 ↗ especially when it comes to code. So

1:22:54 ↗ Redmond just recently went through this

1:22:56 ↗ process of consolidating into a single

1:22:58 ↗ park rules chapter. You'll notice

1:23:00 ↗ there's a there was a dedicated

1:23:02 ↗ definition section. Um I found that to

1:23:05 ↗ be very helpful. Um they also outlined a

1:23:09 ↗ rulemaking section. Um and an

1:23:12 ↗ enforcement methods section which I

1:23:14 ↗ thought was really elucidating in a way

1:23:16 ↗ that I had not seen in other code as I

1:23:18 ↗ looked at other neighboring

1:23:19 ↗ jurisdictions.

1:23:21 ↗ probably what everyone noticed as you

1:23:22 ↗ look through it were the specific um you

1:23:26 ↗ don't want to call them the whole thing

1:23:27 ↗ is a chapter but the specific sub uh

1:23:30 ↗ headings on on particular behaviors. Um

1:23:33 ↗ so really clearly walking through

1:23:36 ↗ fireworks, weapons, tobacco, controlled

1:23:38 ↗ substances, naming those pretty

1:23:40 ↗ explicitly and then having um rules and

1:23:43 ↗ regulations under each of those known

1:23:45 ↗ behaviors. And then also they did and we

1:23:47 ↗ can talk about whether we would want to

1:23:49 ↗ they uh integrated the permitting

1:23:51 ↗ process for special use permits into

1:23:53 ↗ this chapter as well which is a little

1:23:55 ↗ different than a lot of other um

1:23:57 ↗ jurisdictions.

1:23:58 ↗ >> So that would be special events

1:24:00 ↗ community groups that want Yeah.

1:24:03 ↗ >> need space for special event. Yep.

1:24:05 ↗ >> Yep. So a very high level comparison.

1:24:08 ↗ And you saw a more in-depth analysis in

1:24:10 ↗ attachment B in the staff report for

1:24:13 ↗ tonight. But um as Jeff mentioned, we

1:24:16 ↗ are really strong and we're not touching

1:24:18 ↗ our commitment to open space acquisition

1:24:20 ↗ and development and our clarity around

1:24:22 ↗ funding and design around parks and open

1:24:24 ↗ space. We kill it at that. That is like

1:24:27 ↗ a place that we shine and that other

1:24:29 ↗ jurisdictions look at our code to

1:24:30 ↗ understand how to do that. Redmond is is

1:24:34 ↗ in my humble opinion as a non non-p

1:24:37 ↗ parks personal a parks lover but not a

1:24:40 ↗ not an experienced park code person

1:24:43 ↗ they're kind of winning at at what we're

1:24:45 ↗ trying to talk about tonight which is

1:24:47 ↗ rules and rags on behaviors activities

1:24:50 ↗ and how to enforce that. So, it just

1:24:52 ↗ feels like there is clear governance.

1:24:54 ↗ There's clear public facing park rules.

1:24:57 ↗ It's also worth a look. I did not

1:24:59 ↗ reference this in my materials. They

1:25:01 ↗ have a really clear web page also where

1:25:04 ↗ they don't just have the chapter, but

1:25:05 ↗ they actually have it written out in a

1:25:07 ↗ much clearer way that accompanies their

1:25:09 ↗ update. Um, it treats perks as a sort of

1:25:13 ↗ system

1:25:14 ↗ rather than a singular place. um and it

1:25:18 ↗ treats it as something within but of its

1:25:21 ↗ own entity that is not simply the city.

1:25:24 ↗ They've got a stronger trail protection

1:25:26 ↗ position in their uh rules. We really

1:25:29 ↗ don't touch on our trails currently at

1:25:32 ↗ all um in what we have written.

1:25:34 ↗ >> A lot missing.

1:25:35 ↗ >> Yes. And then a lot of future proofing.

1:25:37 ↗ So really a way to think about a

1:25:39 ↗ framework for addressing emergent issues

1:25:40 ↗ as they come up which our code doesn't

1:25:43 ↗ currently have.

1:25:45 ↗ So, I guess my my I'll go back to my

1:25:48 ↗ initial question. You know, we're

1:25:50 ↗ proposing moving to a model like Redmond

1:25:53 ↗ has for its rules and regulations. So,

1:25:55 ↗ moving to a consolidated, updated,

1:25:58 ↗ clarified park rules and regulations

1:26:01 ↗ chapter within the Isqua Municipal Code.

1:26:03 ↗ And my first question of the night is,

1:26:05 ↗ does the board agree that that's the

1:26:06 ↗ right direction? Um, or do you believe

1:26:08 ↗ we should stay status quo?

1:26:12 ↗ It's a lot of hot air for me for an

1:26:14 ↗ absolutely but I'll make the next part a

1:26:16 ↗ little bit faster. Okay, this is the fun

1:26:19 ↗ part I think personally which is this

1:26:21 ↗ next question is what topic areas do you

1:26:23 ↗ believe are going to be the most high

1:26:25 ↗ interest for the community and do you

1:26:28 ↗ have emerging policy perspectives on

1:26:31 ↗ some of the positions that you think the

1:26:33 ↗ city might take on some of these topics?

1:26:35 ↗ I'm going to reiterate this is a first

1:26:38 ↗ conversation about this. So, we're going

1:26:40 ↗ to come back to this list and talk about

1:26:43 ↗ policy positions. When we come back, we

1:26:45 ↗ will likely have a proposed position

1:26:48 ↗ that that we'll then want feedback on,

1:26:49 ↗ but wanted to seek your input here at

1:26:52 ↗ the outset.

1:26:54 ↗ So, some types of rules to consider. Um,

1:26:57 ↗ I've got I think two slides on this and

1:26:59 ↗ so I'll walk through these and I'll kind

1:27:01 ↗ of say, okay, what these are some of the

1:27:03 ↗ things that we're already thinking we

1:27:05 ↗ definitely want in here. My initial

1:27:07 ↗ question is which of these do you think

1:27:09 ↗ are going to be of the most

1:27:11 ↗ contentious interest to the community

1:27:14 ↗ and or do you already have some opinions

1:27:17 ↗ about the policy position on any of

1:27:19 ↗ these uh these topics here and then

1:27:22 ↗ we'll go to the second slide.

1:27:41 ↗ I already know one but I you know

1:27:45 ↗ >> fireworks firearms and

1:27:50 ↗ >> thoughts Martha. Well, I think

1:27:54 ↗ I think your safety you would feel safe.

1:27:57 ↗ You saw

1:28:00 ↗ where you join in with your family or

1:28:05 ↗ >> might

1:28:12 ↗ filters camp.

1:28:16 ↗ how we help find appropriate locations

1:28:20 ↗ for um you know some of our unhomed

1:28:23 ↗ populations, but also just people coming

1:28:26 ↗ through or maybe really appreciating our

1:28:28 ↗ open spaces,

1:28:30 ↗ you want that to be appropriate.

1:28:32 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:28:40 ↗ as you all think about trail use and I

1:28:42 ↗ think as you see the the the

1:28:46 ↗ work developing trail use also includes

1:28:50 ↗ um

1:28:52 ↗ could include speed and how how do we

1:28:56 ↗ understand there's such a diversity of

1:28:59 ↗ use on our trails? Do we consider um

1:29:02 ↗ identifying a a speed limit? Because

1:29:04 ↗ often some of the biggest conflicts on

1:29:06 ↗ trails is conflicts of speed. Um,

1:29:11 ↗ so that will be that that will be a

1:29:14 ↗ conversation that I think we'll we'll

1:29:16 ↗ want to, you know, dive into in earnest

1:29:20 ↗ and really think through the the pros

1:29:22 ↗ and cons of certain approaches.

1:29:26 ↗ >> I think the animals and pets y

1:29:28 ↗ >> it's going to be du and really it's

1:29:31 ↗ bigger thing is where demand is out is

1:29:34 ↗ outstripping available resources. Yeah.

1:29:37 ↗ You got thousands of pet owners

1:29:40 ↗ looking for places to go and we're going

1:29:42 ↗ to have one in a month.

1:29:44 ↗ >> But uh you know there's

1:29:47 ↗ drive by Tibbit.

1:29:48 ↗ >> Absolutely.

1:29:49 ↗ >> When you see, you know, people need a

1:29:51 ↗ place and that's where they go.

1:29:52 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:29:55 ↗ >> Yep. That was the one

1:29:57 ↗ that was the one I was like that's gonna

1:29:59 ↗ Yep.

1:30:00 ↗ >> Yep.

1:30:02 ↗ always

1:30:03 ↗ >> other thoughts on this set and then I'll

1:30:05 ↗ go to the next slide and then I've got

1:30:06 ↗ like a what are we missing? That's my

1:30:08 ↗ question.

1:30:13 ↗ >> Okay, what about this slide? We've got

1:30:15 ↗ amplified music, park hour, well park

1:30:17 ↗ hours, interference with parker trail

1:30:21 ↗ use, damage to wildlife property,

1:30:23 ↗ building fires, dumping, solicitation,

1:30:27 ↗ tobacco, alcohol, other controlled

1:30:29 ↗ substances.

1:30:30 ↗ any of these that you think will be of

1:30:32 ↗ particular community will there will be

1:30:34 ↗ a lot of opinion or that you already

1:30:37 ↗ have an emerging policy position you'd

1:30:39 ↗ like us to think about

1:30:41 ↗ >> being fired you know along 900 you still

1:30:44 ↗ have um people burning trash maybe

1:30:48 ↗ >> um

1:30:51 ↗ that

1:30:53 ↗ yep

1:31:02 ↗ in an emerging conversation that we're

1:31:04 ↗ going to have. So now a lot of our

1:31:06 ↗ neighboring cities have become tobaccof

1:31:08 ↗ free parks.

1:31:10 ↗ >> We haven't had that conversation yet as

1:31:13 ↗ a community, but this will be the

1:31:14 ↗ opportunity for us to to consider that.

1:31:17 ↗ Do we want to join our

1:31:20 ↗ many neighboring cities? Um

1:31:24 ↗ tobacco tobaccof free park position.

1:31:36 ↗ Are there any behaviors or topics

1:31:38 ↗ missing currently that from your

1:31:41 ↗ perspective? I know we think that there

1:31:43 ↗ might be a few in my deeper read of

1:31:45 ↗ Redmond's um and actually my pre-eread

1:31:47 ↗ of Kirkland's I have some other ideas

1:31:49 ↗ but from your all's perspective

1:31:52 ↗ on these two slides any behaviors or

1:31:54 ↗ topics that were that are missing our

1:31:56 ↗ consideration.

1:32:05 ↗ Absolutely.

1:32:08 ↗ There we go.

1:32:12 ↗ and they framed it as contentious or

1:32:14 ↗ what most the committee will have the

1:32:16 ↗ most say on but I just feel like they're

1:32:18 ↗ all good rules to consider both pages

1:32:22 ↗ >> they're all good things to consider

1:32:24 ↗ >> so

1:32:26 ↗ I know some will be less

1:32:30 ↗ >> the only one is animals and pets maybe

1:32:32 ↗ just like you know Tibet park is

1:32:34 ↗ basically dog park

1:32:37 ↗ >> so I don't know how

1:32:40 ↗ going.

1:32:45 ↗ >> What's that?

1:32:46 ↗ >> What's wrong with that?

1:32:48 ↗ >> I mean, that's good.

1:32:51 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:32:55 ↗ >> Yep.

1:32:57 ↗ >> You know, you take a look at Ranger

1:32:58 ↗ Alex's data and I thought he spent he

1:33:01 ↗ was spending a lot of time talking to

1:33:03 ↗ people at Tibbitz.

1:33:05 ↗ >> So, how long has Redmond had their um

1:33:08 ↗ new rules?

1:33:09 ↗ They they did this uh just before the

1:33:14 ↗ pandemic.

1:33:14 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:33:15 ↗ >> I want to say 2018 or 2019.

1:33:18 ↗ >> So they've had it for a while now.

1:33:19 ↗ >> So any um lessons learned, any feedback,

1:33:24 ↗ anything that they might, you know,

1:33:28 ↗ >> report after consolidating their rules.

1:33:30 ↗ >> Yeah, I think worth worth more

1:33:32 ↗ conversation with them. The anecdotal

1:33:34 ↗ conversations I've had with their

1:33:36 ↗ director, uh it's been very very

1:33:38 ↗ positive.

1:33:39 ↗ Um,

1:33:40 ↗ >> so we wish we did this or wish we didn't

1:33:42 ↗ do that.

1:33:44 ↗ >> Yeah. Yeah. Nothing. I think they've

1:33:47 ↗ made a few modifications between now and

1:33:49 ↗ 2018, but that's expected,

1:33:51 ↗ >> right? I think that's another I think as

1:33:54 ↗ we do this and I think it's part of the

1:33:57 ↗ forward thinking that Dale mentioned is

1:33:59 ↗ we want to create a um a standard a

1:34:03 ↗ cadence that says we probably shouldn't

1:34:06 ↗ we should be touching this every couple

1:34:08 ↗ years not waiting every 20 years

1:34:12 ↗ >> to

1:34:14 ↗ that'll be I think is a great question

1:34:16 ↗ for us and something we can dive a

1:34:18 ↗ little deeper into in terms of if if

1:34:20 ↗ that's a if Again, that's a template

1:34:23 ↗ that we want to sort of build our frame

1:34:27 ↗ our rules around. Um certainly asking

1:34:30 ↗ them what what's worked well, what would

1:34:32 ↗ you do do different? Um if anything Yep.

1:34:36 ↗ >> I know in talking to Kirkland um as

1:34:39 ↗ they're working on theirs right now, one

1:34:40 ↗ of the things that came up that they've

1:34:43 ↗ really that they learned from Redmond

1:34:45 ↗ that they wanted to have was this idea

1:34:47 ↗ of a framework for decision- making.

1:34:52 ↗ rather than moving away from language

1:34:54 ↗ that really is like very very specific,

1:34:57 ↗ there's more um assignment of like

1:35:00 ↗ decision-making and ownership. So

1:35:02 ↗ there's a process for anything. So any

1:35:04 ↗ exception that comes up rather than just

1:35:05 ↗ saying this can never happen, there's a

1:35:08 ↗ process for getting things approved or

1:35:10 ↗ things exempted which didn't exist in

1:35:13 ↗ their code previously. It doesn't exist

1:35:14 ↗ in ours right now.

1:35:17 ↗ I

1:35:17 ↗ >> think vandalism and graffiti is that

1:35:19 ↗ covered in their something

1:35:22 ↗ >> probably worth but worth

1:35:24 ↗ >> yeah it's in there's a damage I think

1:35:27 ↗ it's yeah the bullet yeah pertaining to

1:35:30 ↗ to damage would certainly fall under

1:35:33 ↗ that

1:35:36 ↗ >> also under damage would be encroachment

1:35:40 ↗ >> right where we have a maybe an ambitious

1:35:42 ↗ neighbor to one of our pieces of open

1:35:44 ↗ space that stretches their friend their

1:35:47 ↗ their backyard fence and creates a

1:35:49 ↗ little bit more backyard onto onto

1:35:51 ↗ public land. We'll we'll want some

1:35:53 ↗ rules. They're really clear about what

1:35:56 ↗ happens in those cases because there are

1:35:59 ↗ there are a number of people that do

1:36:01 ↗ that.

1:36:09 ↗ >> Again, trying to be the best steward we

1:36:11 ↗ can, the best manager of of your your

1:36:14 ↗ all public land, right? 40,000 people

1:36:17 ↗ who own all this public land. You want

1:36:19 ↗ rules and regulations that are clear um

1:36:25 ↗ to manage it well.

1:36:28 ↗ >> Yeah. You look like you have a

1:36:30 ↗ >> No, I think it falls under damage. We

1:36:32 ↗ think a lot about trees recently. We're

1:36:34 ↗ dealing with trees at

1:36:35 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:36:36 ↗ >> Um so damage goes both ways, right? Like

1:36:38 ↗ if our if the park tree falls on

1:36:41 ↗ residential or vice versa,

1:36:44 ↗ >> that's covered.

1:36:48 ↗ >> Yeah. and not necessarily in park rules,

1:36:50 ↗ but it's it's covered in terms of risk

1:36:53 ↗ and other areas of the city code. Um

1:36:57 ↗ >> yeah. Yeah. And we've had a lot of

1:37:00 ↗ practice in that the last couple of

1:37:01 ↗ years with

1:37:03 ↗ >> bomb cyclone and other and other cases

1:37:05 ↗ where um

1:37:07 ↗ >> yeah, trees trees fall multiple ways,

1:37:10 ↗ right? They fall from our public

1:37:12 ↗ property onto private property. They

1:37:14 ↗ fall from private property onto our

1:37:15 ↗ public property, etc.

1:37:18 ↗ Yeah, I really think about this as is

1:37:21 ↗ different from that in that it's like

1:37:23 ↗ the who are the actors, the people are

1:37:25 ↗ the actors here.

1:37:26 ↗ >> Okay.

1:37:28 ↗ >> Y got it.

1:37:31 ↗ >> Not mother nature.

1:37:32 ↗ >> Got it.

1:37:33 ↗ >> Acts of God, right?

1:37:35 ↗ >> Yeah. She she supersedes this chapter of

1:37:38 ↗ our code, unfortunately.

1:37:39 ↗ >> Okay. You're not going to make rules for

1:37:41 ↗ her.

1:37:41 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:37:47 ↗ cities that have tried have not been

1:37:49 ↗ successful.

1:37:49 ↗ >> No.

1:37:51 ↗ >> Is there anything that

1:37:54 ↗ would be covered in this or maybe is

1:37:55 ↗ somewhere else in somewhere in the city

1:37:56 ↗ say that pertains to engaging in water

1:38:02 ↗ on property. So if there's a stream or a

1:38:05 ↗ creek going through the park, how the

1:38:08 ↗ person can engage with that or not or is

1:38:11 ↗ they

1:38:12 ↗ >> Yes. So that the idea is swimming swim

1:38:14 ↗ through there. You saw one of the

1:38:16 ↗ bullets about swimming is we need to be

1:38:18 ↗ really clear where you can engage with

1:38:21 ↗ water and where you can't. And Isqua

1:38:24 ↗ Creek is not a

1:38:26 ↗ >> beach that is not a swimming pool.

1:38:31 ↗ >> Is that what you're thinking of? You

1:38:33 ↗ could

1:38:36 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:38:37 ↗ It just through like Bernstein and on

1:38:40 ↗ the other side of Bern

1:38:44 ↗ people fishing. I know it's kind of

1:38:46 ↗ fishing people fishing.

1:38:57 ↗ >> Okay. If you if you go to bed tonight

1:38:59 ↗ and your head lays down on your pillow

1:39:00 ↗ and think of something,

1:39:02 ↗ >> email me. Um, the last thing I want to

1:39:07 ↗ brooach the topic of, but again, you'll

1:39:09 ↗ notice on my my bullet point in the

1:39:11 ↗ presentation, very limited thoughts so

1:39:13 ↗ far. Um, what if any thoughts do you

1:39:15 ↗ have about our overarching approach to

1:39:18 ↗ broader input outside of the bo the

1:39:20 ↗ board? We know that we want to have a

1:39:23 ↗ survey. Um, we want to have it

1:39:26 ↗ accessible at all of our key park,

1:39:27 ↗ trail, recreation locations via QR code.

1:39:30 ↗ Um, you know, this is happening

1:39:34 ↗ The current timeline, which I'm sure you

1:39:36 ↗ saw on the last slide, is is to bring

1:39:38 ↗ these rules back um to the the services,

1:39:42 ↗ safety, and parks committee in June,

1:39:44 ↗ July. So, you know, where I like to

1:39:46 ↗ think about doing a lot of my surveying

1:39:48 ↗ during the summer is at the farmers

1:39:50 ↗ market, but we're on a timeline to try

1:39:52 ↗ to do some of of good, if not almost all

1:39:54 ↗ of this prior to that. And so I wanted

1:39:57 ↗ to solicit thoughts or ideas about

1:40:02 ↗ additional ways to engage in public

1:40:03 ↗ outreach around this code um code update

1:40:08 ↗ process or thoughts specifically on how

1:40:11 ↗ we might um

1:40:14 ↗ market's not the word I want share the

1:40:16 ↗ survey broadly with

1:40:20 ↗ well our meeting today and I think

1:40:26 ↗ I know invited the mayor to our meeting

1:40:31 ↗ >> that's one place and I know it's not

1:40:33 ↗ everybody it's just a small amount of

1:40:36 ↗ you know cluster of homes if you will in

1:40:37 ↗ a neighborhood that's certainly

1:40:39 ↗ >> we live very close to you the woods

1:40:44 ↗ >> yeah I mean broadly ho yeah that's a

1:40:46 ↗ great idea

1:40:50 ↗ >> yep

1:40:50 ↗ >> I think next door lot the neighbors have

1:40:53 ↗ that app

1:41:02 ↗ >> and are we considering like you know you

1:41:03 ↗ do the word on a street is there places

1:41:06 ↗ you could put um that at some of the

1:41:09 ↗ detail

1:41:09 ↗ >> yeah so this idea of the QR code much

1:41:11 ↗ like we've done with some recent surveys

1:41:14 ↗ we've done the last couple years if you

1:41:16 ↗ recall is getting some signs and putting

1:41:18 ↗ those all on your trail and trail heads

1:41:21 ↗ and multiple parks and giving people a

1:41:24 ↗ chance to just open up the hey come, you

1:41:26 ↗ know, take a look at our draft park

1:41:28 ↗ rules and regulations and give us your

1:41:30 ↗ thoughts.

1:41:31 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:41:38 ↗ >> Yes.

1:41:46 ↗ >> That's what we want to hear from, right?

1:41:47 ↗ is is those that are using the parks and

1:41:50 ↗ does this did you know

1:41:52 ↗ >> does what we're creating resonate

1:41:54 ↗ >> y

1:41:55 ↗ >> does this help make this a safer

1:41:56 ↗ welcoming park system

1:42:00 ↗ >> I think those types of feedbacks too as

1:42:02 ↗ you get there regardless of the trails

1:42:04 ↗ that are

1:42:06 ↗ you talk about speed a little bit trails

1:42:08 ↗ that are a heavy bike a heavy person

1:42:10 ↗ walking trail

1:42:12 ↗ >> as if one of those survey questions in

1:42:14 ↗ there has to do with that type of stuff

1:42:16 ↗ it's

1:42:21 ↗ Yeah.

1:42:22 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:42:22 ↗ >> Yep.

1:42:27 ↗ Recently there was an ebike ordinance

1:42:29 ↗ that was approved and so part of this

1:42:32 ↗ work is going to be making sure our

1:42:35 ↗ rules and regulations

1:42:37 ↗ um are complimentary to that new ebike

1:42:39 ↗ ordinance and and um

1:42:43 ↗ and not just speak to it but um you know

1:42:47 ↗ elaborate on and and again this idea of

1:42:50 ↗ future thinking. Um,

1:42:53 ↗ we shouldn't be just thinking about

1:42:55 ↗ ebikes because there's e- scooters and

1:42:58 ↗ there's e uniballs and there's e

1:43:02 ↗ whatever the next I don't even know what

1:43:03 ↗ those are called but I think you know

1:43:04 ↗ what I'm talking about

1:43:06 ↗ >> there there will be another five year

1:43:09 ↗ two years from now a year from now

1:43:10 ↗ there'll be the next

1:43:12 ↗ e personal vehicle right so let let's um

1:43:18 ↗ let's think broadly um and again not

1:43:21 ↗ rewrite the ebike ordinance that was

1:43:23 ↗ just done, but how are we complementing

1:43:25 ↗ it and think addressing a a broader set

1:43:28 ↗ of e vehicles?

1:43:31 ↗ >> Yeah. Are we going to let those

1:43:33 ↗ autonomous food delivery robots be on

1:43:35 ↗ our trails?

1:43:36 ↗ >> You know, that's a, you know, we can

1:43:38 ↗ create a framework for making those

1:43:41 ↗ decisions

1:43:42 ↗ >> in the future.

1:43:43 ↗ >> So, a little bit about where this is

1:43:45 ↗ headed, though I feel like I've

1:43:46 ↗ referenced this throughout, but always

1:43:48 ↗ good to look at. Um, I'll be back. Jeff

1:43:52 ↗ will be back. Jeff is here all the time,

1:43:53 ↗ but I'll be back. Um, the goal

1:43:56 ↗ >> stuck with me.

1:43:57 ↗ >> Yeah, they're stuck with you. Um, the

1:43:59 ↗ goal is to come back with some draft

1:44:01 ↗ language. Um, and then in April to get

1:44:05 ↗ public input via the survey. Um, we'll

1:44:08 ↗ make sure to bring a draft of that

1:44:10 ↗ survey to this group to take a look at

1:44:12 ↗ before it goes live. So, I'll be here in

1:44:14 ↗ March. Um the goal is to have in May a

1:44:18 ↗ draft updated park rules chapter for you

1:44:20 ↗ all to uh finalize your recommendation

1:44:24 ↗ on so that it can then go to the city

1:44:27 ↗ council in in June back to the committee

1:44:30 ↗ and then hopefully in July to the full

1:44:32 ↗ council. Um and so that's the high level

1:44:36 ↗ direction we're headed. Any

1:44:39 ↗ lingering thoughts?

1:44:45 ↗ It was a delight. I'll see you all next

1:44:47 ↗ month.

1:44:48 ↗ >> You know, big big thank you, you know,

1:44:50 ↗ for for helping in this effort. Um,

1:44:52 ↗ you'll be a great a great partner in

1:44:54 ↗ this work. Um, like I said, it was a

1:44:56 ↗ very engaging conversation with council

1:44:58 ↗ to kick off and thank you all. This is

1:45:02 ↗ be some really really important work um

1:45:04 ↗ that you all are going to do and

1:45:07 ↗ will have some lasting lasting benefit.

1:45:11 ↗ >> Thanks.

1:45:13 ↗ >> Excellent. Thank you. Thank you again.

1:45:16 ↗ Um

1:45:18 ↗ we can move on to our next scheduled

1:45:21 ↗ business here which is reports.

1:45:25 ↗ Maybe since it's your Nick your second

1:45:28 ↗ meeting with us, is there anything that

1:45:30 ↗ you'd like to bring up in this meeting?

1:45:33 ↗ Um yeah, I mean I could just briefly uh

1:45:37 ↗ the work I've been doing with uh Robin

1:45:39 ↗ which is making the trail standards um

1:45:43 ↗ or in most of the trails that we for

1:45:47 ↗ this booklet that we're uh compiling um

1:45:50 ↗ is that

1:45:52 ↗ uh I started or me and Robin kind of

1:45:55 ↗ split touring some of the parks. Um, so

1:45:59 ↗ just last week I went to K once and took

1:46:03 ↗ some pictures um just to kind of so then

1:46:07 ↗ in the booklet we can kind of have

1:46:08 ↗ examples of existing trails

1:46:12 ↗ that all match in standards. Um, yeah,

1:46:15 ↗ that's kind of neat work that we have

1:46:17 ↗ been doing recently.

1:46:24 ↗ >> Thank you.

1:46:29 ↗ Do you have anything you'd like to

1:46:30 ↗ report for? Uh,

1:46:32 ↗ >> couple things. First, and I'm gonna I'm

1:46:34 ↗ gonna pass the ball to Robin. Dog park

1:46:36 ↗ update. Robin, do you want to give

1:46:38 ↗ >> update? Yeah, it's coming along really

1:46:40 ↗ well. We have um some rough weather

1:46:43 ↗ coming in. All the forms are ready to

1:46:45 ↗ pour concrete. We just decided to hold

1:46:47 ↗ off one more week. Uh, next week looks a

1:46:50 ↗ lot better, but then the plaza areas

1:46:53 ↗ will be set. They're working on fence

1:46:55 ↗ line and the post right now. So, it's

1:46:57 ↗ coming together. Hopefully, next week

1:46:59 ↗ after concrete, then they're going to be

1:47:00 ↗ shooting in all the fiber, all the

1:47:02 ↗ mulch.

1:47:03 ↗ >> So, then Yeah. And then planting. So,

1:47:06 ↗ >> all the utilities are done.

1:47:07 ↗ >> All the utilities are done. Everything's

1:47:09 ↗ passed so far. So, it's looking really

1:47:11 ↗ good. We placed uh did shelter locations

1:47:14 ↗ today. So, those are set. They can take

1:47:16 ↗ footing for those tomorrow. So, we're

1:47:19 ↗ getting excited. If the weather would

1:47:21 ↗ just cooperate,

1:47:23 ↗ we'd be flying. So,

1:47:25 ↗ >> Dana, I know you've visited multiple

1:47:27 ↗ times as that's a regular route, but if

1:47:29 ↗ you're down on the Rainer Trail, please

1:47:30 ↗ walk by and and take a look. It's it's

1:47:33 ↗ really starting to take shape, and I I

1:47:34 ↗ think some of the feedback we're hearing

1:47:37 ↗ is wow, it's it's a bigger off leash

1:47:39 ↗ area than people could sort of visually

1:47:43 ↗ think. So, um lot of excitement. Robin,

1:47:46 ↗ great work.

1:47:52 ↗ And I have one other update. Thanks,

1:47:54 ↗ Ryan. Um, our department operations

1:47:56 ↗ specialist position, um, I've had a

1:48:00 ↗ fantastic interview process, a really,

1:48:02 ↗ really impressive pool of candidates.

1:48:04 ↗ Um, a couple weeks ago, thanks again,

1:48:07 ↗ Stacy. Couple weeks ago, um, made an

1:48:11 ↗ offer. Uh, that offer was accepted. Um

1:48:14 ↗ Laura Hos will be starting uh next

1:48:17 ↗ Monday, March the 2nd. Uh really really

1:48:20 ↗ excited. So for our March meeting, uh

1:48:23 ↗ Laura will be here uh to meet all of you

1:48:26 ↗ and and start to get an idea of what

1:48:28 ↗ Park Board's all about. So be extra

1:48:30 ↗ nice. No, just just kidding.

1:48:34 ↗ >> Great. Um

1:48:37 ↗ Laura comes from the University of

1:48:38 ↗ Washington uh in the School of Public

1:48:42 ↗ Health. Uh support of the dean's office.

1:48:45 ↗ Uh did a lot of um oversight of

1:48:48 ↗ marketing and communications that came

1:48:50 ↗ out. So it brings just a a great I think

1:48:53 ↗ set of skills, a real excitement uh to

1:48:55 ↗ get into local government and so I um

1:48:59 ↗ really excited.

1:49:01 ↗ >> Thank you.

1:49:05 ↗ Um chairperson report I do not have much

1:49:08 ↗ data. I know there's some good uh bare

1:49:11 ↗ root uh plant potting events coming up.

1:49:15 ↗ If you're interested in uh uh those,

1:49:18 ↗ check out the squall website. But if you

1:49:20 ↗ want to help ball up some plants into

1:49:22 ↗ some pots so we can grow them into

1:49:24 ↗ further canopy

1:49:26 ↗ to increase our canopy, um check those

1:49:29 ↗ out. Um otherwise, it's as we come into

1:49:32 ↗ spring, I just encourage everybody to

1:49:33 ↗ get out and start enjoying more of the

1:49:35 ↗ open spaces and trails more. um as this

1:49:38 ↗ the days get longer it's been excellent

1:49:40 ↗ to see. So

1:49:42 ↗ >> do you want to add anything?

1:49:45 ↗ >> Is there any other business anyone would

1:49:46 ↗ like to uh flag? No. Okay.

1:49:51 ↗ >> So one more item, Ryan. Um again on your

1:49:55 ↗ agenda each month we have the sort of

1:49:57 ↗ working document of the parkboard work

1:49:59 ↗ plan. U I think as we bring back uh this

1:50:03 ↗ park bond renewal idea and have further

1:50:06 ↗ conversation about that. Um Rob and I

1:50:08 ↗ are also sort of looking at our work

1:50:10 ↗ plan and boy if that um really really

1:50:14 ↗ important effort um is added to our work

1:50:17 ↗ plan, you know, what um what needs to

1:50:21 ↗ give or what needs to adjust a little

1:50:23 ↗ bit to make sure that that that work um

1:50:26 ↗ is really given being given the time and

1:50:28 ↗ attention that it needs. So uh we'll

1:50:30 ↗ have a little bit more understanding as

1:50:32 ↗ we come to the March meeting for all of

1:50:34 ↗ you. But um again, thank you for just

1:50:37 ↗ your initial conversations with the

1:50:39 ↗ mayor. As you can tell, the mayor is

1:50:41 ↗ really excited. So, look forward to

1:50:44 ↗ furthering that conversation with all of

1:50:46 ↗ you. And please, um I said it before, um

1:50:49 ↗ between now and the March meeting, you

1:50:51 ↗ are free to talk to your neighbors, talk

1:50:54 ↗ to your groups, um your little league

1:50:58 ↗ groups or your uh whatever recreation

1:51:00 ↗ groups that you're part of, your trail

1:51:02 ↗ groups, etc. uh because I think it's

1:51:04 ↗ going to be really important to get a

1:51:05 ↗ pulse of the community. Is this is this

1:51:08 ↗ a renewal that the community would be

1:51:10 ↗ interested in?

1:51:12 ↗ >> So, thank you.

1:51:13 ↗ >> Thank you.

1:51:15 ↗ >> Um our next meeting is March 23rd.

1:51:20 ↗ So, just throw that on your calendars

1:51:21 ↗ and radars.

1:51:23 ↗ And that says no further business. This

1:51:25 ↗ meeting is a jerk.

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 (12)

Ryan Olson

David Liu

Jane Takushi

Katie Bell

Tim Motley

Chris Kovac

Marlene Waxse

Diana Ren

Hannah Novakivic

Paul Adair

Martha Ginthner

Jeffrey Newell

Staff (2)

Jeff Watling, Director, Parks & Community Services

Robin Spear, Park Planning & Development Manager