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

The minutes PDF below is the canonical record. Structured parsing of attendance and motions for this body's minutes format is not yet implemented — open the PDF for the full content.

Open PDF