City Council - Regular Meeting

are hot. Go for mayor. [laughter] Good evening. Sorry for the late start. We had a tour over at Wolf Industries. So, uh, our clerk was madly getting the meeting ready. I have 701. I'm going to call this November 3rd regular meeting at Battleground City Council to order. If you're able, please rise for the pledge. Pledge to the flag of the United States to the

roll call, please. Mayor McCoy, here. Deputy Mayor Bowman, here. Council member Kypers, here. Council member Ferrer present. Council member D. Roger here. Council member Davis here. And uh Council Member Overhozer is uh absent this evening. Mayor, I move to excuse Eric Overholzer. Motion is second. Excuse. Council member Overholzer. He did let me know he was going to be traveling and would not be able to meet the meeting. Uh all in favor of excusing him, please say I. I. Any opposed? Thank you. Uh, next up is agenda approval.

Um, I would like to amend the agenda. Um, I would like to move that the 2026 uh, legislative agenda from the summary reports and presentation be moved to the business item since we will be making a motion on that item. Do we have somebody presenting tonight? We do. Okay. Then can we just do the business section under business then? Uh there's a motion on the floor to to move the legislative presentation to the business section. Do I have a second? Second.

Any discussion? All in favor? I I opposed. Nay. That passes. We'll move that to the uh business section. Uh brings us to council member report or no, I need a motion on the the approval of the agenda then please. As amended. Yeah, I'll motion to approve the agenda as amended. Second. Thank you. Second by Kypers. All in favor? I

I. Any opposed? Okay. Now we can get to council member reports. Uh any committee that the council member serves on, this would be the time to report out. Do we have any such reports tonight? Yep. Nope.

Okay. That'll bring us to the mayor's report. And we have a new employee introduction by Mr. Good evening, council. Today I'm going to introduce you to Aiden Oldm. He's our new maintenance worker in the streets division. Um he previously worked with the city of Vancouver as a grounds in the grounds maintenance department. Uh he also worked as a seasonal maintenance worker here for us this summer in storm water. Uh he's a graduate of Battleground High School. Um in his spare time he likes to snowboard, mountain bike, rock climb, dirt bike, and scuba dive. I'll let him say a couple words. I'm just thankful for this.

All right. Thank you. Come up, meet your council. Glad to have you on board. Looking forward to it. Chief, tell me about this new officer. Officer Brody Free, would you come up, please? So, Brody was uh hired about two weeks ago. Uh prior to being hired by the Battleground Police Department, he worked for the Lebanon Police Department uh just outside of Nashville for 7 years. Um he grew up here in East Vancouver in Battleground. He's a graduate from Evergreen High School in 2013, which every time I say these years, it just makes me that much older. Uh Brody's not married yet. Uh he's got no children other than his dog Annie. Uh however, he keeps busy helping his girlfriend raise his 8-year-old son, uh Ree. He brings seven years of law enforcement experience. It's really exciting for us. Uh he's was already a hostage crisis negotiator. He's trained in crime scenes, communication, deescalation, and already been to leadership classes. Uh when he's off duty, uh he plays basketball. As you can see, I'm kind of fit for that. Uh, I can bring out the water to the guys, I guess. Uh, walking the dogs and, uh, playing video games. Uh, his parents, Brian and Derey Free, are here tonight to congratulate him along with his girlfriend, Shannon, uh, and their family and friends. Uh but more important than that uh we're just very very fortunate when we get somebody uh who already comes to us with this type of caliber that has this type of training uh that understands uh the city understands our values. It was a no-brainer when he came to a test. It

was how fast can we extend that op that uh option out to him. And as you can imagine, seven years in policing, sometimes people come with baggage and I was, you know, you're going through all the pre-employment and to hear the rave reviews. So, we're expecting such great things from Officer Free. So, very, very grateful to have you and uh and to have everybody here. So, if you would please, sir. All right. You want to give the oath? Yeah. Please raise your right hand and repeat after me.

I state your name. I, Brody Free, do solemnly affirm do solemnly affirm that I will support that I will support obey obey and defend the Constitution and defend the Constitution and laws and laws of the United States of America of the United States of America and of the State of Washington and of the State of Washington. I will abide by I will abide by the law enforcement code of ethics. the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics and will diligently and will diligently and impartially and impartially perform all duties perform all duties of police officer of police officer for the city of Battleground

for the city of Battleground county of Clark County of Clark state of Washington state of Washington as such duties as such duties are prescribed by law are prescribed by Oh,

sorry. two. Okay. He's

just apply his steps. Yeah. I just didn't process what you're saying. And now we have our graduation ceremony. Correct.

We do. Yes, sir. All right. Um, on behalf of uh Dean Swanson and the other staff, it is my pleasure to present to you the city council, the graduates of the 2025 class of Battleground University. For the sake of those in the audience who may not know, Battleground University, or BGU as we call it, is an education and public outreach program that provides our students a glimpse of the inner workings of city hall. We share a bit on how we're organized, how we function, how we operate, uh, and what we do in service to our residents, our businesses, and our visitors. Um, we hope that BG removes some of the mystery that public often associates with city hall, addressing misperceptions that can arise over how the city functions, as well as explain how city government fits in the grand scheme of things under the federalist form of governance that's been practiced in this country for 20 almost 50 years. BGU takes place over a 10-week period and we structure the program so that it's more of a discussion than a formal classroom experience. This means that uh there are no quizzes, there are are no tests, which I think our students were very pleased by. We ask only that students be active and be engaged during the classes and if they attend at least four out of the five sessions, they graduate. Uh, I'm happy to announce that we had 23 students attend the minimum four classes to graduate and 13 actually attended all five classes. Um, I'd also like to take a moment to offer my sincere thanks to a few key staff who contributed to the success of the program. First, each class was led by a department director who played the role of professor uh for the evening. So, I'd like to thank professors Flynn, Leato, Lowry, and Hersig for taking the time to lead a session in their particular area of expertise. I'd also like to thank Miss Smith for helping to promote the program, solicit and process student applications, and then serve as

the primary point of contact between students and the city, as well as Miss Jensen, who was instrumental in all behindthe-scenes work, uh, ensuring that we had whatever we needed for class, each class session, and that things were always ready to go. Also, uh, city manager Swanson Swanson and I would like to thank the city council for allowing us to host a BGU. Uh, as council members know, but for the sake of our audience, one of your goals has been to grow our already strong public outreach and engagement program. This is the third year of BGU and we feel the program has and will continue to help us realize that objective. And lastly, to our students in the audience this evening, I cannot say thank you enough. Thank you for taking the time out of your life to learn a bit more about how the city we all call home operates. Thank you for showing up and being encoura and being engaged. And I hope that you felt it was time well spent and that you'd be willing to share what you've learned with others in the community. And so what we're going to do now is I'll ask uh Miss Smith to come forward. She'll be at the podium. Mr. Mayor, if you could join her at the podium. Um, and then, uh, council members, if you could be in the front of the uh, deas here, and we'll take some photos, and Miss Smith will say a few words, and then she'll invite each graduate to come forward and accept our diploma. Thank you.

All right, we'll have them come. You want to be there? I'll just pass them to you if you have some.

All right. So, thank you, Rob, for that. I just wanted to uh add over the course of the BGU sessions, the students received little trinkets representing the departments that they learned about each night. Each item included a link to our web page that would connect them to additional information and resources that we offer online to our public. It made it relevant to the subject they've learned that that evening. Those items were presented along with a sign to encourage student to take the items home called building your toolkit. The items were small but useful and they represented a real tool, the real toolkit that they were building which was attending BGU. The knowledge of learning he sorry with this knowledge about their city and connecting with the people that they serve tonight as we graduate the Battleground University class of 2025. We would like to present them with their last piece of their toolkit. It is a golden keychain inscribed with community is key along with a mini key to the city. This token is meant to represent the gratitude we have for them sharing their time with us and their desire to learn more about their city while building community through connection. Tonight we celebrate each of you for making that commitment and we thank you all for making Battleground University a success. So with that we will one by one. First up, we have Kevin Alvarez. And then if you want to line up in front of the DAS as well.

Next we have James Bennett. We'll do a group picture at the end. Chris Brown made myself Larry Bruss Jessica Cole. Lily Cooper, Edgar Garcia. Yeah. Joseph Hardy Spence, [laughter]

Glenda Hawkins, Navar Heard. Debbie Kelly

Debbie 11's next Nancy Little, May Olsen and Rebecca Olsson. If you guys want to come up together, you're welcome. You only got one hand to shake though. Yeah.

Jennifer Rosenberger. Isaiah Rogers,

Lisa Sans,

you guys might have to scrunch it. Oh, yeah. We'll we'll have to double decker. Jill Stansbury, Katrina Wogan, and that is all I had RSVPd for tonight. But we also wanted to thank Sheila Clark, Joseph say Bquitz, Joseph, Joseph G,

Joseph G, uh, Christina McCord, and then Rob and Tony Woodward. So, thank you all. We want to Yeah. have together. as you guys kind of filter out. I just want to thank you all for that time commitment. It means a lot to us on council to see citizens take time out of their day to maybe understand a little bit uh maybe understand what we do and what we don't do. So, it means a lot to us to see that commitment. So, thank you for taking time out of your nights to do that. It's really appreciated. Uh brings us to at this point we have the state legislative agenda and I'll defer to the motion maker. Did you want to talk about it now and then have the motion later or do talk about it now? Okay. So Josh, are you able or are you are you

there or did you uh I am still here. Good afternoon or good evening Mr. Mayor, council members. Um nice to see everyone. Um so I am going to share my screen. I think that's what we decided I'm doing. Is that correct? Yes, that's correct. Okay. So let me work on this here. How does that look? We're good.

Okay. All right. Sounds good. Well, uh, thanks again. It's good to be here tonight. Um, tonight what I am planning to go over is just a little bit of an overview of last legislative session, both in general terms, but also uh how the city did with your priorities and want to jump right into talking about the upcoming 2026 session. Again, in general terms on what to expect, what we think from, you [snorts] know, a couple months out. Want to talk a little bit about what the association Washington cities is planning on pushing trying to push forward. um what we have talked about with the legislative committee in terms of the draft legislative agenda and then opportunity to answer any questions and I will say that though I I can't really see with my screen sharing like this um if there are questions in the middle of the presentation I'm happy to take them I just need an audible um throw me an audible mayor and I'm happy to take a pause um otherwise I'm just going to keep going here so uh last session was the two-year long session. Uh the major priority for the legislature was to adopt their operating transportation and capital budget for the 2-year bienium. Um they did all of those. They also considered uh over 1,900 bills. They passed 422. Only one was vetoed by Governor Ferguson. That's about a 22% passage rate, which um is almost exactly the same passage rate as the last 2-year uh long session. So, um pretty average number of bills. Uh the operating budget, we are continuing to see our state operating budget grow. We're now at uh about 70 almost 78 billion in the operating budget. Uh that was an 8.2% increase in new revenue, $4.4 4 billion in new revenue from the um sales tax uh

package that the legislature passed for the operating budget. They also made a significant number of cuts and reductions. So it was a pretty significant shifting around of resources. Um, one of the themes you'll hear me talk about is we're still very much after 12 years with Governor Eninsley, we're still very much learning about Governor Ferguson and what his his um not only his priorities, but also just his uh mode of operating. Um, one thing that we were we were waiting until late May to really know whether or not he was going to sign the revenue package that the legislature had passed and the budget that was that was based upon it. Um he went through he did sign all three budgets, but he did go through the operating budget at a level of detail and made a number of of vetos at a level of detail we really haven't seen before. Um including well including one that was important to us for $100,000, but actually I noticed one in there that was for $50,000. he came up with $25 million worth of savings through these sort of um what were largely kind of nickel and dime type of um provisos in the budget. So very interesting certainly not what we're used to seeing um but maybe understandable in the situation where they were facing such um budget challenges. Transportation budget they also passed a revenue package $3.2 2 billion. That's over a six-year period. Um the operating budget number I gave you was over four years. Um we're now up to $15.5 billion in the transportation budget. That revenue package, if you may have seen in the news, was necessary really to keep the existing projects that the legislature had planned for uh in the last two revenue packages um on track. There's not there are a couple of new capital projects in the transportation budget, but really not many at all. Um, and

that's really a result of inflation and rising costs um and overexpendures. Um, some of the major projects along I5 have just been a lot more expensive than was originally anticipated. So, they needed additional revenue. We're also seeing gas tax collection, which is the foundation of the transportation budget, are declining. We've this has been the case for several years now. Um this package should pretty much keep them um above water for a couple of years. Um but eventually they're going to have to deal with the fact that the gas tax is not the reliable steady revenue source that it used to be or at least as big of a revenue source as it used to be. The capital budget very stable and steady uh predominantly funded with bonds um 7.6 $6 billion in expenditures. It's the smallest budget. Um the average I put here the average local community project was $578,000. We had a couple of different local community projects. Did very very well this last legislative session. The local community project is what we typically are competing in when we work with our delegation to ask for capital budget funding money. Um so and that averages across the state. So, for our request this last session, we were requesting an additional $11 million for the Eden Boulevard Boulevard reconstruction. Um, we did not get that money in the final transportation budget. As I mentioned, there were not new capital projects for the most part. We did show up the Senate in their proposal um that did not end up getting adopted. They took a very different approach to the transportation budget with by essentially identifying a a kind of large pot of money that would be available for the legislature to pick

projects out of in the coming years. And Eaton was identified in that list of uh eligible projects. Um so that was about as close as we got this year. Uh which is not surprising given where they sort of ended up on that. We were successful in a $ 1.5 million request for um planning and and beginning development for the the Remy Park. Um as I just mentioned before, the average project was $578,000. So we are, you know, triple the average amount there. Um which was really great to see. Our legislative delegation and really working across the 18th, but also the 17th and the 49th and the 20th gets involved uh as well. and we have really fantastic bipartisan leadership there. Um, we also were successful in getting another $500,000 for the design of the next components of the downtown revitalization project. And just a reminder, probably mostly for the public, that in 2023, we got a $350,000 um operating budget um proviso to do community outreach and um start to look at options for revitalization. So, legislature very vested in the downtown revitalization project. um and you know over $2 million there in capital budget requests that we were successful in funding this the request for the city document management system. We were in the final operating budget and this was one of the items that Governor Ferguson vetoed and um I don't think it was any sort of reflection on um the uh legitimacy of the project. Uh I don't think it was a substantive statement. It was really like I sort of mentioned before, he was just looking for places to to um make up some savings. Um and it also was not a

political statement. Um there was a project down in the 49th district um that we had uh Democratic members that were very strongly pushing for that he also vetoed. And so I don't think it was favoritism either. I just think it was the criteria of trying to save money. Um, so looking ahead, 2026 will be the short session. It's only 60 days. Um, before we get there, I know that many of you are paying close attention to the local elections that will be um, election day tomorrow, but we also have nine statewide nine elections statewide that are legislative. A lot of this is because Governor Ferguson picked um, legis some senior legislators to serve in his cabinet. um that usually meant that house members were bumped up to the senate. Um and then that creates a house vacancy. So sort of a domino effect in several different places. Uh we really I don't think there's any there's there is no way that any of these elections are going to impact the majorities in the legislature this next year, but we it could potentially impact the tenor. I think we're feeling less and less like there's going to be an electoral reaction to the tax package that was adopted by the legislature last session. Um there are a couple of swing seats that we're watching really closely up north in um King County as one and in Pierce Kitap County is the other. Um I I think we're looking to sort of see what the what the voters are thinking out there in these swing districts. Just a reminder that bills introduced in 2025 but that didn't pass in 2026 will be eligible for action or sorry that were introduced in 2025 but did not pass in 2025 will be eligible for action this coming session. So you know some of those terrific and not so terrific

proposals that we saw last year that didn't quite make it through with only that 22% passage rate we could be seeing again. there are still problems in the operating budget. Um this is uh I would say sort of three-fold factor. One is that uh like you are seeing and and many uh everybody out there in the market is feeling inflation is a real thing. Costs are going up on everything. The state in addition is dealing with um increased case load forecast. So that's basically uh pupils in student in schools that they have to pay for and social services programs that are that are mandated um that they have to pay for those costs are increasing and then you know the general questions about the economy are still hanging around and that does affect um a state that's so heavily based on sales tax. Um we are seeing a little bit of lagging just from the overall national and global impact. So forecasts are coming in slower than we're anticipated. Our budgets are always based on uh uh you know projections essentially that uh are are estimating how much money they think they will have to spend over that. It's actually a forecast period is four years. Um so the collections in June, I'm sorry, collections in um September came in $900 million less than they anticipated in June. That wasn't quite as much as they had anticipated in March, but it's still lower. Um, we have one more revenue forecast on November 18th, so just in a couple of weeks. That will really be the foundation for what Governor Ferguson uses um to put his proposed supplemental budget together. We expect that in early to mid December, and it'll be very interesting. As I mentioned before, we're still getting a feel for this governor and his priorities. Um, we'll get a real good

glimpse into that when we see the supplemental budget, but we do think, and I'll talk about this in a few moments about priorities for the session. We think they're going to be making some reductions. Um, the impacts of the federal budget are also likely to be driving concern as well. So, it's not going to be a in the operating budget, it's not going to be a growth year. Um, the Association of Washington Cities has established already their priorities. They're going to be focusing on um basically four major uh topics and then they have a whole bucket of other important issues. Um and their whole agenda is boris. I think it might even be five pages long when you get to all those other important issues. But the main ones are wanting to make sure the legislature is continuing to pay attention to the new uh case load forecasts that have been adopted by the Supreme Court for um mandating um what cities and counties have to provide for indigen defense um defending criminal defendants that can't afford an attorney. um both in terms of increasing state funding, helping cities um with the cost of providing those attorneys. Washington ranks very very low. I think it's 50th um in the nation for number of uh money that amount of money that the state provides to local governments. And then also just enhancing the workforce is as odd as it sounds, it's hard to find attorneys that are willing to do this work. So we need more attorneys out there. Um, transportation will continue to be a priority for the association, wanting to make sure there's resources for local preservation, maintenance, and also operational needs. Um, given a time of potential, I'm not going to say recessionary, but decrease uh revenues, wanting to make sure the state doesn't look to those revenues that are shared at the local level or with the local

governments, uh, making those reductions like they did during the Great Recession. And then housing supply. um continues to be a priority for everybody. The cities are wanting to make uh emphasis on basically tools and opportunities to increase new investment in infrastructure and local housing, but also just frankly needing time at the local level to implement all of the recent legislation and policies that that have been passed by the legislature. Um I won't get into the other important issues, but we can talk about more of that if you'd like. So, in terms of setting your legislative agenda, the city legislative committee and staff and and I have been meeting um over the interim um to develop the first draft uh what you're seeing tonight. Uh my recommendation has really continues to be that you prioritize items that only the city of Battleground is going to champion. um you know making sure that there are other items that we know are important but what are the the pieces that if nobody else brings forward and asks for will get left um behind. There will be opportunities in the capital budget um more so probably than you typically would think in a supplemental budget year but there are not going to be opportunities in the operating or transportation budget. um we also need to be prepared to defend against the worst cuts um sort of mentioned before shared revenues and then also as I mentioned before the idea that there will be bills returning from last year that that will be considered again. So, here are the items that the committee has put together and um in very consistent with the recommendations that I had made. Want want wanting to keep Eaten Boulevard um on the agenda for the purpose of making sure the legislature is aware that there are

still need local transportation needs out there. Um, I I really want to be prepared uh in the case that they decide to raise some new transportation revenue and do some new local projects that we have something that is available and that we can say this is important to the city of Battleground. We are recommending going back for another million-doll capital budget request for actual construction or maybe property acquisition on the downtown revitalization project. That's a consistent theme. we know we've got support in the delegation for this. Um and then also similarly with Remy Park um adding some inclusive play equipment um um that uh differently aabled uh kids can play on and enjoy as well and asking for $1.5 million in the capital budget. That might be a little bit high but we can justify that and it gives us a place to at least start discussions. I also want to ask for a million dollars for the 92nd Avenue sewer pump station and force main. That's the next step. And I know that you had um were in line to be receiving some federal money that that fell through. Um so wanting to use that as the rationale to come forward and and and ask for additional funding for that. Um, we and that's a lot of capital budget requests and I would not expect that we would be successful with three capital budget requests, but I do like the idea of having a few different ideas on the menu, so to speak, that are all legitimate and could go forward that we can have conversations with our delegation about. We also do want to continue or emphasize the need for help with indigent defense. That's a huge cost. It's only going to be ballooning. um legislature needs to be continuing to hear about that. And then the other big one that we haven't talked about before is actually putting forward requesting a piece of legislation. It would be a a

bill that would go into statute and remove the authority for Clark County to have a railroad industrial overlay um for the Chilache Prairie Railroad. There's only two counties in the state that are authorized. Clark is one. Um obviously this has been a contentious issue and given the city's desire to really see that um railroad um not put back into railroad use um this seems like a logical first step. Um and we do have some support from the delegation on that. So that's on the proposal. And then there's three items there that are very typical. It's actually exact uh think it's exactly what we had last year on our agenda. We typically say that we support state and regional priorities with AWC um the regional law enforcement training academy which is an ongoing regional priority and then also with the Clark County Transportation Alliance and I know you have a presentation from the alliance um at some point this evening they can talk more about what's on that agenda but that does include um the Eden Boulevard project. Um so that's the end of my presentation. And I'm really I'm going to stop sharing and I'm happy to answer questions. Um actually before I stop sharing, does anybody want to go back to any slides?

Okay, questions. So, this would be the time to talk about if there's something on there you don't like, if there's something you want to add, there's something you want to modify. what we just want

I guess I would be curious to know how staff because are those the same numbers that um we had been given in our packet on the 2026 agenda the 1.5 million and a million my mind is just I guess like trying to remember the numbers that were actually on that original um agenda that was given in our packet on Wednesday and are those the same numbers that were I don't I don't print off of probably in my packet and I don't have my new

iPad. Sorry, it is all the same. 1 million for each one of those. Okay, we good. Good. Yep. Okay, Josh, I think you get off easy. No questions. Wow. Okay. Okay. Well, thanks for the time everybody. Um, look forward to seeing you soon. All right. Thank you. Okay. And we'll uh we'll vote on that after the presentation from Clark County Transportation Alliance. Then uh that moves us to automatic traffic safety cameras. Dean.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, mayor of council. Um, the council's consideration of using automated traffic camera systems or ATS cams is not new. Council asked staff to gather information on their use and we presented information on multiple occasions between August of 23 and February of 24. Ultimately, council chose not to provide specific policy direction regarding possible implementation. Fast forward to September of this year and BGPD shared data with the count council on automobile collisions, traffic stops, and traffic citations at select locations in battleground that occurred between September 1st of 24 and August 31st of 25. At the conclusion of that report, council asked staff to revisit the topic of ATS cams and report back at a future meeting. And here we are this evening. I would like to note that MRSC, which is the municipal research and service center, it's a leading nonprofit organization here in Washington that's dedicated to serving local governments across the state with legal and policy guidance on topics germanine to your jurisdiction. They have an abundance of information on ATS cams and in fact uh there's a couple of links that are embedded in the staff report that I put in there to uh allow you to review that information at your leisure. I'd also like to mention that ATS cams are not new here in Washington. They've been in existence since 2005. Um, I will say that the law was recently amended last year in 24 and provides rules and regulations to cities and counties who use them to detect certain traffic violations. Simply put, they're used by many cities, many counties up and down the state to one degree or another. What are they? Well, in practice, ATM cams go by many names. Some people call them stoplight cameras. Some people call

them red light cameras, speed cameras, school zone cameras. In RCW, the revised Code of Washington, they're defined as a device that uses a vehicle sensor installed to work in conjunction with an intersection traffic control system, a railroad grade crossing, or a speed measuring device. Uh on the screen there, you see there's a picture of a cam uh up in the up in the sound area. They look a little bit different depending on who makes them and and what their use is. They're also an increasingly common tool used by uh oh, before I get to that point, it's important to note that ATS cams uh or here we go are used for a different purpose than other similar traffic cam systems that are used by law enforcement. things like body warn cameras or dash cameras or license plate readers. Those are more typically associated with efforts by law enforcement to detect criminal violations or to document police activities. Something totally different. They're subject to different legal requirements and restrictions and they're not part of this conversation this evening. And uh I would also mention that Chief Land, if I get out of line or I say anything, please correct me. uh in discussion of uh who uses them. As I mentioned, they're an increasingly common tool used by cities and counties to detect vehicles running red lights or speeding in the community. They can be used to detect other types of violations such as failing to stop at railroad crossings. Why do they use people use or why do jurisdictions use them? Well, they're motivated by a desire to improve public safety. They're looking for greater uh safety of pedestrians, prevent speeding, traffic collisions. They can also serve as a force multiplier and address staffing restrictions uh for law enforcement agencies across the state. One of the questions council asks us to review is what is the process used to install and use an ATS cam system. Well, step one is to select a permissible camera location. You can include things

like intersections, rail crossings, or a school zone. One of the questions that c that council asked last time was we've got a busy intersection here at 502503. It's a state highway. Can you place cameras in the intersection? The answer to that question is yes, you can. But you do have to notify the Department of Transportation that you're going to do it. So even though it's even though it's a state highway, doesn't matter. We can place them there. The second step is the law requires that each camera's uh impact be measured on the chosen location. So they through some analysis. That analysis must examine how the camera could impact the location's livability, accessibility, economics, education, and environmental health, as well as show that the chosen location has a demonstrated need for the traffic cams. That means the analysis needs to show that the chosen location is one traveled by what they call vulnerable road users as defined by law. Those are people who ride bicycles, those are pedestrians, people ride motorcycles, people who use uh other forms of personal mobility devices, scooters, things like that. Or there is evidence of vehicle speeding or collisions at a given location or other means to reduce traffic safety risks are infeasible or ineffective. Then the agency, the law requires the agency to adopt an ordinance that at a minimum adopts the state law cam restrictions and signage requirements. Then the agency is required to post its CAM restrictions and policies, uh, including putting it on their website. It's essentially a statement of how the jurisdions's ATS program works. And MRSC again has several great examples of other cities that have done this. Um, and if you've uh had a chance to look at those or you've not yet looked at those, I would recommend you do so. And then lastly, at least 30 days prior

to the use of cams, a jurisdiction has to physically place signs at the location stating the cams will be used to enforce traffic violations.

[gasps]

Now, in congruence with this, the city would also need to identify and select a vendor to either sell or lease cams to us to the local jurisdiction. Now, some vendors, their business model is sell the equipment. Other vendors, their business model is lease the equipment. Staff, when we first looked at this back in the end of 23 and 24, we actually had some initial conversations with some of those vendors. uh and we would need to revisit those when discussing uh potential terms after we get some specific direction from the city council. In terms of processing infractions, RCW treats them like parking tickets. Okay. By law, cams can only record images of a vehicle and its license plate and only while the violation is occurring. So you can't use it to record images of of the faces of the people who are driving the vehicle or passengers in the vehicle. And interestingly enough, the registered owner is presumed responsible for the violation and ATS cam infractions do not become part of the vehicle owner's driving record. Further, state law caps ATS cam infraction fines at $290 for school speed zone uh speeding violations and 145 for all other violations, for example, red light violations. These amounts are not set by the local jurisdiction. They're set by law. Uh it's reviewed by uh for inflationary adjustments once every 5 years beginning in 2029. Also, fines for first violations and subsequent violations that occur within 21 days after the first violation by law must be reduced by 50% for offenders who are also recipients of certain public assistance when they make that request. So think of participants who have uh

received wick support. Someone who resides in a nursing home, they may be eligible to have that uh reduction. Uh and all those different qualifications are defined in RCW as it deals with public assistance. Furthermore, state law places restrictions on how cities and counties may use revenue. For example, compensation to the camera vendor must reflect the actual value of the equipment or the services provided, not measured as a portion or a percentage of the fines that are generated by the infraction. Also, for programs instituted after January 1 of 2024, which if Battleground did this, we would fall into this category. Revenue can may only be used to cover program costs and to pay for specified traffic safety activities such as road design projects that reduce speed or projects to enhance transportation user safety. Jurisdictions with populations in excess of 10,000 must also direct a portion of their revenue towards projects that provide direct and meaningful traffic safety benefits to areas with household income in the lowest cortile and areas with injury crash rates above the jurisdions's a uh average. And then also starting four years after the camera's placement, the city would be required to deposit 25% of the camera's revenue, less allowed camera and infraction processing costs into an account called the Cooper Jones Act of Transportation Safety Account. Uh for background, Cooper Jones was a juvenile cyclist who I think in the late 90s he was struck and killed while um participating in a road race, a cycle road race in Eastern Washington. Uh this is a state program. It supports projects across the state intended to improve the safety of peds, bicyclists, and those using other forms of active transportation as well as encourage

public policy and the legislation to that effect. Other considerations that council will be mind should be mindful of when formulating policy on ATS cams include the RCW requires a law enforcement officer or other authorized personnel to review ATS cam images prior to issuance of an infraction uh which may require re reallocation of existing resources specifically staff time. somebody would have to be able to review uh each one of the infractions. Looking at some of the data from other cities, you could expect that you'd have a fairly healthy number of infractions occurring. The volume of the citations would very likely create a new work burden on battle battleground mini court, which could mean need to hire an additional court uh clerk staff. And also council should be mindful of the subjective perception of ATS cams by our residents. Notwithstanding what the law says about precluding the capture of images of drivers and occupants, it isn't outside the realm of possibility that some folks may hold a less than favorable opinion on the use of cams on the basis of privacy concerns. It's a lot and so I'll leave it there and open it up for questions. I got a question. Robert, can you go back one slide? Yep. So, who determines what authorized personnel is? Yeah. Pull up. One second. Shane, council member I'm going to guess it's not us.

No, it's not us. I'm just wondering like down at PD, can it be the records person? Can it be if if if they're trained? Yes. More likely it's most places it's probably going to be somebody with a badge. But if but if an individual has been trained to review each one of those, yeah, he or she could probably do that

because I'm trying to figure out like leave it to the state to screw a good good thing up because if all you can take is a picture of the license plate and the car. No, it said you couldn't take a picture of the driver. So if you can If you can only take a picture of a license plate in a car, who needs to review the what what are we reviewing? You're reviewing that an infraction actually occurred. There's probably going to be multiple pictures that are taken from different angles.

From different from different angles. Yes. And so what they'll do is they they take a photo to confirm, yes, that vehicle was was running a red light. And then you track and you send the citation to whoever the registered owner is of that vehicle. The law presumes that the person who owns the vehicle is the one who actually ran did the infraction. Yeah. Did the crime.

And so but the I mean when I and it says which may require additional staff time like I think this is fairly easy. Is the car in the intersection? Is the car not in the intersection? Did it take the c? Did it take the picture? And then we just forward it on. Um it's different than like state of Oregon. and it takes a picture of your face and now you're trying to line up. Well, is that the registered owner? Is it not the registered owner? Is it? So, think of it this way. Uh there the city of F has a has an intersection up up in their town. Yeah. And uh there were 10,000 violations that occurred in that one intersection in one year. They have multiple cameras around their town. Okay.

10,000. You divide that by 52 weeks. I don't know what the number is. Say a couple hundred. Okay. So, somebody is going to have to review a couple hundred pictures. Yeah. To confirm that some violation occurred. Now, let's say it only takes you up two minutes to do that, right? Pretty easy. Yeah. That's still 400 minutes of time a week. And you do the math. That's almost 7 hours a week. So, that's 15 20% of somebody's time is going to be spent review each one of these to make sure that that what the camera says occurred actually did occur.

And and which I I get that. It's just it's not as hard as to me it's not as hard as reviewing someone's face and saying who's the person driving this car. The other thing that I think is important to that we haven't hit on is while it doesn't go on your driving record um the the information that I've received is it may not go on your driving record but go try to renew your license. That's correct. So that's 100% true. cuz that's my kid driving through the the stoplight and I just keep paying t or I don't pay the tickets because it I'm like it wasn't me. When I go to renew my vehicle license, there's going to be a whole bunch of tickets on there that I have to square up before I can renew that license.

Yes, you will.

And so, um I think that's the difference because I I've had some people say, "Well, you can't enforce it. Um you know, there there's nothing you can do. You don't have to pay them." Well, somebody's gonna pay him or you just don't have a license drive on your vehicle. So, um, and then you have a talk with your kid. I I uh I just don't I I don't think I mean I mean I think it is going to take some time and I think that probably to begin with it'll take more time than once people get in the habit of it. I know in Portland um they have these for speed all over now in Portland and my little GPS will tell me speed camera ahead, you know, and it will tell me, you know, slow down. There's a speed camera ahead and and it won't take long before people change their their habits. So, I think in the beginning it may require us a little more, but I don't know if it will over overall because it's fairly easy to to look at. But, um, I appreciate the the presentation. Um, I know a lot of cities are using this. A lot of cities on the east side of the state are using this. Um, I've been through them. I've I've seen them in uh in Moses Lake. They're using both uh uh red light cameras and they're using speed cameras in school zones. Um, you know, and and we have a school zone that basically starts at Safeway and ends at Parkway. So, um I I think that it's it's definitely worth looking at. So, I appreciate the the presentation again. And uh just to clarify the answer to your question, it does say that it can be a civilian employee of a law enforcement agency or um an employee of a local public works performing under the supervision of a

qualified traffic engineer. Looks like Mark's got a new job. get that man a badge. So I think I think because of the way they do it, it does give us some flexibility there and and maybe this is, you know, somewhere where where you use volunteers, you use uh you know, people like that that that uh reserves, those type of things if we ever have a reserve program. So all right, there needs to be a civilian employee. I wouldn't.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, thanks for the presentation. Always interesting, always learn something new. Um, my go-to on this though is I would like to put the brakes on it being said because we just lowered the speed limits in the city and we don't even have any data on that how that's going to work. I would love to go Chief Flynn six months, eight months to see how we are evening out with what we just did before we start jumping into the next phase and mode. So, I um appreciate it, but at this point, I I would like to put the brakes on it and and ask for staff to come back and share with us how the reduced speed limits um are working for the city.

Thank you. No pun intended, right? Put the brakes on. Council member Fer.

So, yeah, I was actually thinking the same thing. Um I'm all for safer roads. Um, but we are we are uh we are always talking about changing the behaviors of our drivers and I know that we've got some plans on 503. You know, just south we're looking at a roundabout that should be coming in starting to break in what almost summer 2026, right? So that that's going to alleviate I would think some some collision numbers. Um, also, I mean, I know it's going to be a little bit further out, but we got North 503 Onsdsorf, another one. Um, also like, um, Council Member Davis just said, uh, we did just reduce those speeds on Main Street and 20th and I'm I'm glad that we did that because there was some major collisions there. And so, but I would like to gather some data, have staff gather data over a period of time to see if those are some measurable changes that we can, you know, look at and um before we just go rush out and then give us this expensive camera and maybe it's not that expensive, but then the fact is we might need to be hiring FTE for that position because there might be so many um so much data being that they're going to have to go through like you said, seven hours. That's a full-time employee right there. And our staff is already being maxed out at the police department. So, um I I would say if if council does not agree and they would like to have you come back um next meeting or whenever with some more information, I would definitely be looking up um where would the chosen locations be um based on I believe it was Chief Flynn, you had those things ready, but what would be the actual costs? I think you said that you've done those in the 2023, but bring that back

out. Um, have us take another look at it. How many inf um infractions are we currently doing right now? I know you give us those numbers, but looking at it as a whole now with this ask um and then the hours that the the officers are spending currently right now just um with those infra infractions, what is the revenue that we're getting on those infractions? And um and we've we talked uh you guys said on here that we can use the funding for behavior changes. So would that be uh putting islands in a road or a roundabout, which I know that's that's going to be costly, but little islands to change the behaviors or what would that look like using the funding from this ATS camera? So that's that's where I'm at. Thank you. So, I'm also in agreement on uh waiting. I mean, we just switched the speed limits and I'm not really sure why this came up today. I I thought we were going to wait on it. Anyways, but u my second point is when we did initially talk about this, I believe you said that the cost involved was neutral, right? We pay for the equipment and it paid for itself with infractions. So, we weren't going to be out any money.

Well, it sounded like the when you compared it to that one city, they were making money off of it. So, yeah, it was a positive thing. I mean, it definitely seems like a good idea if people aren't changing their behavior. Like I said, if we can look at the data since the change. Um, I mean, I'm definitely interested. I was interested in it before. I just we just made the change, so I'd like to wait if we can to see the the data. Thank you.

Thank you. I think most people have said the same thing I was thinking. Also, I I do think that, you know, the data has showed us that we have a couple of um really high impact areas where we have accidents, the 503, 502, and then the 20th and Maine. Um and then in between that, we've got the high school area where we have a lot of speeders anyway. So, if we can do anything to kind of get that under control with these speed limit adjustments, that's going to be positive. But again, I think the data will tell us in the next few months. Um, and if the time to implement signage changes and get this rolling under the assumption this moves forward, that would probably be sometime in the first quarter before it's all said and done in terms of implementing all the speed limit changes. And then we're going to need a little bit of time to look at the data. So, we're probably Q2 at least before we're looking at where are we and is there still u reason to move forward.

Dep if we're looking for data especially on red light cameras because we're we're mostly talking about red light cameras here. Not we're not talking about speed cameras as I mean we can put them in school zones. We could have school zone cameras and we can get data there. But I think if if we're looking for red light, you sit a police officer on the corner and you won't see people run a red light. But if you look at some of the main complaints we get is people running red lights. And so I think if we're looking for data, then maybe what we should do as a council, we we've done this in the past, is authorize the city to free up some money for uh emphasis patrols and do emphasis at those intersections that we're looking at, 20th and 503 and those, and have um undercovers that are standing on the corners or whatever it may be to radio ahead. we had this car run the red light. And that will tell us more probably than just out patrolling and saying, "Well, how many accidents did we have?" Because just because you didn't have an accident, didn't mean there wasn't 10 people that ran a red light. And and I think all of us have seen it, you know, on 502503 if you're there in the mornings or if you're there in the afternoons. there's some pretty pretty drastic um [clears throat] red light runners that we'll say uh that don't want to wait for that stoplight again. And so I think that that's an opportunity that we could do is is we've done that in the past is just free up a little bit of money to do some emphasis patrols that are going to cost them overtime. Work with target zero potentially on some of that and and get some more data for us. I think that's a fabulous idea because you know between if if the reality of

implementation signage changes getting the data were months out we could have a major crash in between that where somebody's actually seriously hurt and so if we could do something like that I wasn't aware of that op option and I think that's a good way to get us some data maybe in the meantime get a feel for what the impact might be and then decide from there. Okay. Uh to try to give staff direction. Um Mark, uh when do we think we're going to hear back on 503 speed limits? Is there a timet there? Do we know Wazdot's doing a traffic study? I think

nothing will change until the the coming in. Yeah. Okay. All right. Um, so what's council's what are we looking at? You want six months of data, nine months of data. How much data do you want before you see this again? Well, I would like the inperson data. Officer, the red light runner stuff. Okay. Yeah. I mean the other we're going to put that from main and 20th with those new speed limit reductions and see if that

Well, I think it's any I think you would have to do it anywhere that we like if we're talking different intersections 20th or 503 in Maine. I think you would have to do multiple um emphasis patrols to to see what that's going to look like. um it'll give you kind of an idea, but I think that, you know, they would be different times because it doesn't take long before you start doing emphasis patrols, before people start saying, "You're doing emphasis patrols. Watch out." Right. Um so these are good times of the year to do them when it's darker. Yeah.

Uh because they don't see you there and you can radio who it is. Uh we used to do seat belt ones this time of year and uh so I think that you'd have to do multiple ones depending on where we wanted to look. If it's just 20th and just do them do two on 20th. I'm almost like what about some Manny 2.0 cameras make people think there's a camera out there and it'll slow them down. [laughter] Have you ever seen that when you're in Portland? You slow down because you think it's going to take a photo.

Okay. Um I'm looking for direction. Where are we at? I would like to do at least, you know, a couple emphasis patrols and so maybe come back with a a budget on what the emphasis patrols would look like so that we can determine that and and uh you know leave that up to we approve the budget and let chief decide when he's going to do them. That would be helpful to come back with those numbers for the emphasis for me on it. Yeah.

So, what I'm hearing is uh direct staff to develop a plan for emphasis patrol uh specifically on 502503 and main and 20th. Yeah. And anywhere that the data shows in his prof in professional opinion it would be useful for council. Is that what I'm hearing? Y. Yes. And is a twomonth testing and yeah cost and what what that would look like based on two months of testing you have let I'd say let let chief okay let the professionals professional

because these these emphasis patrols aren't cheap to to do because you're paying overtime usually to do this and so you know let's I think we let them bring it back and say this is what it's going to cost per patrol and then we decide how many we want to do. Yeah. Yeah. I definitely want to see those numbers cuz I mean the whole reason on why I'm not going jumping on these cameras is because of the funding part and how much that's going to cost. I mean if it was cheap I'd be like let's do it. Let's throw it out there but it's not. So yes, um definitely want to see those numbers before I vote on that. It's a cost neutral.

Probably good. Then hold on traffic cameras emphasis patrol data. Any any other comments from council? Anything else? I would say if we did decide on the next meeting that we're not comfortable with that cost and six months data,

we'll wait till that next meeting and see what those costs are before we have we good. All right, that brings us to communications portion of the meeting. We'll now open the meeting for citiz communication individuals limited three minutes to provide comments. Uh it's opportunity to hear from the members of public in a limited public forum. If your comments pertain to an item listed on the agenda as a public hearing, please reserve your testimony for the designated public hearing period. Please direct your comments to the mayor. Council may not be able to respond to individual comments. Uh if you have handouts, the clerk is right here as well as the city manager's business cards. Please give them there. Uh thank you for your understanding of participating in the council meeting this evening. Do we have anybody online set up for comments?

No, Mr. Mayor. Okay, with that, uh, I have one signed up for safety tax criminal justice purposes, but that is a public hearing. So, we will do that at the public hearing, correct? Yeah. So, that will be I'll call you up on that. So, we have Jessica Cole on speed limits.

Hello, city council. My name's Jessica Cole. Of 18 pedestrian and cyclist crashes since January 2023, none have involved speeding. Most did not occur in residential areas and those struck were mostly adults, not children or elders. No child or elder has died and the only two fatalities were adults hit on higher speed arterials, not 25 mileph residential streets. In short, the reasons given to lower residential speed limits aren't supported by the city's own data or where crashes are actually happening. The city has already lowered speed limits on arterials where serious crashes occur. The 25 mph section of Main Street functions very differently for then neighborhood roads and lowering the residential limits to 20 just to make them different doesn't make them safer. The city and engineer has said that changing the speed limit sign without trafficcoming designs won't change driver behavior. This new 20 mph rule is unlikely to make a measurable difference except for to add confusion and frustration for residents. Some have suggested stronger enforcement will make up the difference, but no new officers or patrol time are planned. This change won't be enforced anymore than the old limit was. A better approach would be a clear way for residents to request lower limits where safety is a concern. Some areas already have 20 mph zones, so there's a precedent. What's missing is a consistent process for others. Since the city can lower speeds without a study, but must do one to raise them, this change will be hard to undo, even if it's ineffective. This isn't fiscally conservative or responsible. And just so you're aware, my understanding is you only have one

year to raise the limits back under this current law or change. The council acted on assumption, not evidence. If the goal is safety and livability, rely on local data, not assumptions. And then I would also like to just note that some council comments have come across dismissive or disrespectful to citizens or staff at times. And I encourage you to rewatch the last meeting. Some tones and words were lost when people uh happened to speak over each other, but it was noticeable in person. Thank you. Thank you, Jessica. Anybody else in the audience didn't sign up? Okay. Uh we'll close this uh sit communication portion of the agenda. Uh brings us to consent agenda. Council, what's your pleasure? A motion to um approve the consent agenda.

Do I have a second? Thank you. Any discussion? Motion by Council Member Ferrer, second by Council Member Davis. All in favor, please say I. I. I. Any opposed? Uh before we start the public hearings, does anybody need a five minutes or are we all good? We good? We good? Okay. All right. Public hearings. First one we have up, Miss Megan. Is this yours? Yep. Believe they're all mine. You have all of them. It's the Megan show. Megan. Megan. Megan. Yeah.

All right. Good evening, council. So before you you have the resolution 25-12, which is our fee schedule for 2026, the proposed that we've discussed over the last several months during our study sessions related to the fee schedule. And tonight is our public hearing to accept any public comment on the fee schedule and then it will come back to council for adoption at the next regularly scheduled council meeting. So with that, staff suggests opening the public hearing.

Okay. Okay, we don't need the title read for the public hearing. Okay. All right. With that, uh, I will now open the public hearing at 8:19 p.m. for public testimony. Individuals are limited three minutes to provide testimony regarding the proposed 2026 fee schedule. Please direct your comments to the mayor. Uh, clerk, do we have anybody on Zoom wishes to provide testimony?

No, Mr. Mayor. Seeing that, anybody in the audience wishing to testify to the uh fee schedule 2026? Seeing no further members wished of the public wish to speak, I'll close the public hearing at 8:20 p.m. Um, action on this item will be considered at the November 17th meeting for those that are aware. So, uh, this was just a chance for the public hearing. Uh, brings us to the next one, property tax levy. Okay. So, this is ordinance number 2025-9, which is our property tax levy for 2026. And it is a recommended tax increase of 1% over the 2025 levy, which is a 4 cent decrease in the levy rate from 2025. And with that, here is the property tax projections. You can see at the no increase and then at the 1% increase and each base gives you what currently a house value. So if we look at the first one, 2025 base, a house valued at $450,000 this year pays $451. In 2026, if the 1% was adopted, they would pay $16.98 less versus a no increase, they would pay $21 less. So overall, if you look down the very far right column, the difference between taking the 1% versus not taking the 1% is about $5 regardless of your assessed value um across the board. So that's the difference between the 1% versus not taking it. And then looking at assessed values, you guys have seen this multiple times over the years. The as the assessed values go up,

the property tax levy rate goes down. We are now slated to be less than a dollar. And then this is our example home. This is a former council member's home that we have the data back to 1992, which is great historical data. So back in the 9293 area, they paid $574 to the city. And in 2026 with the 1% it that same home with their current assessed value would pay less at $498. And so it just shows over the course of over 30 years property tax levy rates for the city individually, not talking about total property tax which includes multiple other jurisdictions, but the city only remains relatively flat. And then looking at what inflation would be. So obviously $500 this In today's dollars back in '92, those are not equal based on inflation. So running this through the inflation factors in 93, that would have been the equivalent of about $1,300. So $1,300 this individual home would have paid in today's dollars versus the 500 today. So half as a dollar back in the day does not buy what a dollar buys today, if that makes sense. So looking at their assessed value of that home, you can see the assessed value in '92 was just over 100,000 and then it's well over 500,000 today. And I will also note that assessed value again is not the same as market value. So the same home had an assessed value of 252,000 in 2017 but sold for 317,000. And then the home had a $450,000 assessed value in 2023 but sold for $546,000. So just to give you some perspectives on what assessed values are. And I will say

that the medium home value assessed value according to the assessor's office is 455,000 for 2026. So the next steps would be to have the public hearing this evening to accept public comment on the property tax with the motion to adopt on November 17th. We have to have an ordinance adopted by November 28, 2025 in order to collect any property tax in 2026. So regardless of the 1% or 0% we have to pass an ordinance. So with that, if there's any questions or open the public hearing and then we can have discussion if there's any questions.

Do that now. Um, thank you for the inflation graph. Very informative. We'll now open the public hearing at 8:24 p.m. for public testimony. Individuals limited 3 minutes provide testimony ordinance 2025-9 2026 property tax levy. Please direct your comments to the mayor. Do we have anybody on Zoom that wants to speak?

No, Mr. Mayor. Is there anybody in the public who wishes to in the audience that wishes to speak on ordinance 2025-9 property tax levy? Seeing no further members of public wish to speak, I'll close the public hearing at 8:24 p.m. Can we have the title read, please? Ordinance number 2025-9, an ordinance levying the annual property tax to provide revenue for the city of Battleground, Washington for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2026.

Thank you. And just like the previous item, action, this item will be considered a November 17th regular city council meeting. And one more.

Yes. Give me one second. Okay, this is for ordinance 2025-17 related to the 0.1% public safety sales and use tax. City council has an opportunity to conduct a public hearing accepting public comment on said tax. But before that, just wanted to have a few items of clarification for the council as a whole. So this is a council manic.1% which would take effect April 1st of 2026. The city is to receive 100% of the tax. There is no cost sharing with other jurisdictions. It is estimated to bring in $500,250 for 9 months of activity in 2026. The tax would be dedicated to adding two police officers in 2026 along with associated costs as well as being a match for potential CJTC funded positions. With the addition of officers, overtime should be reduced with the ability to have a different schedule. And then sales tax is a way for the estimated 92,000 people who come to the city to shop to share in the cost of the city's law enforcement. And then this last slide is actually it was a request of one of the council members who asked what the other tax rates are for our comparable cities and I wanted to share it with the full council as I was unaware of the other tax rates for the other city and I found it interesting. Those highlighted in green are equal to our 8.6%. Those highlighted in red are less than but all those not highlighted are all higher than the city of battleground. None of these take into effect any new taxes that have been adopted such as City of Richfield just adopted the same tax. This doesn't take that into account. So this is as of today. So with that, we suggest opening the

public hearing for public comment. I'll now open the public hearing at 8:27 p.m. for public testimony. Individuals are limited 3 minutes. provide testimony on ordinance 2025-17 0.1% public safety sales and use tax. Please direct your comments to the mayor. Do we have anybody online? No, Mr. Mayor. And we do have somebody signed up for this one. Janice Ferguson. Good evening. My name is Janice Deproano Ferguson

and I would like to state the following. Builders and corporations are getting tax incentives and deferrals to come and build here and open businesses for 10 to 12 years. Since building of apartments, houses, franchises, and corporations bring in excess and increase of population and vehicles and shopping along with students. This also increases the crime in various types. Building plans get reviewed. Part of the re review process is the significant impact that it may bring. It's amazing that how many come back with no significant impact. It impacts our traffic, our schools, our roads, and the quality of life here. These costs need to be placed upon the corporations, franchises, and contractors that come into our town and not on us. Increase permit fees, impact fees, etc. Stop the tax exemptions that span for years. Our tax rate and taxes are high enough. then throw inflation, housing coest, gas, insurance premium increases. School levies have failed twice here because we the taxpayers and citizens are tired of misuse of our money as well as always having to carry the burden. Our roads are a mess, traffic is a mess, drivers are insane, yet the building continues and decreasing speed limits and the cost of new signs is not going to change that. Drivers are not obeying the existing limits. Now, I believe it's a total waste of money. We could have used that to hire yet another officer. Tens of thousands of dollars were spent for new speed limit signs. Um, and it was unnecessary because nobody is adhering to the current speed limits as they are. I and many welcome change. However, we do not welcome overpopulation, increased crime, and overbuilding. I've been here for almost 39 years and change is not always beneficial nor is it

always good. Once quaint town is no longer quaint and it's being destroyed. There's over 30 apartments going in on Southwest 20th Avenue next to Magnolia Square Housing. That is 2.5 people per unit and at least two cars per unit. Over 60 cars can be hitting Southwest 20th Avenue and as you're well aware is very dangerous as it is now. afford affordable housing is a joke. They're only required to have so many limited units that they considered lowincome housing which are only 100 to $200 less compared to the rents. When is enough going to be enough? What does the growth management plan say?

That's my conclusion.

Okay. Thank you, Janice. Anybody else in the audience? Okay. I see no further members of public wish to speak. I now close the public hearing at 8:30 p.m. And can we have the title read, please? Ordinance number 2025-17, an ordinance of the city of Battleground, Washington, enacting an additional sales and use tax of onetenth of 1% as authorized in section 2.201, 2011, Chapter 350, Laws of Washington, 2025, for criminal justice purposes, adding a new section to title 3, Revenue and Finance Municipal Code, chapter 3.25, Public Safety, Sales, and Use Tax, and providing for severability and establishing an effective date.

Council member Dashers. Yeah, I have two things. So with this, wasn't there something that if we didn't act on this now, the county could do it? No, we are able to act on this without the county in any way, shape, or form. So they couldn't come in and do it. They can do their own. Okay. So this is different than the one that's the This is the new public safety sales tax. I think you're thinking of the second one.

Okay. Okay. And then uh my other comment or question is what's the timeline for you needing an answer on this for it to be implemented in time? In order to collect April 1st, we'd have to have it adopted by the first meeting in January. I believe that's 75 days to April 1st. Cuz I personally would like to wait until everyone on council is here to vote on this because it's kind of a big deal to to vote on. So, I think we should have everyone here. Just my opinion. Thank you, Member Davis.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, bear with me for a little bit on this one because in my four years, this is one of the hardest decisions that I've had to make. Um, and it is because of our love of our law enforcement um, and uniform and all that they do, and they are exceptional. So, I want that to be the first thing that I say, which is why it makes it very difficult. Um, I look at this and when you're a parent and and your kids come with a big list for Christmas and they want this and and you know you can't do it, you as a parent have to go back and say, "Okay, skim it down. What can I do? Where can I scrape so I can get something similar or best?" What I would like to do in this situation is I would like council to direct staff to go back in while we're in budget season and to go through this and nitpick and see if there is anything that we can scrimp to help without going out for a public safety tax to our constituents. If it means we're looking at a couple other, you know, hires, what does that look? I would like it to come back with a few options. I I'm under this understanding that there are options before we do this. And I think it's important for us to do our due diligence on something that is this big. And and I'll tell you another reason why is Clark County is coming with in the new year with an affordable housing sales tax which is a tenth of a percent. And we will get that burden to you. Not that we have anything to say about it except that we don't want that. Um that is another tenth of a percent. This has to be in our mindset before we make these other decisions. And to clarify from what I've learned, if I'm

incorrect, the CJTC grant that we've been talking about,

um, it it is not we do not need to have this tax in order to be qualified for the CJTC because we are already under a public safety tax situation from the prior from the county. So, it it's not a rush in order to get this grant. We are still up in the running for that. And if I may just one other thing, the portion of that grant is so minimal that I think if you could tell me the number that we would get for the 36 months, right? This this grant is for 36 months and after that the grant is gone. And so we need to think of that too as we are it's going to come back to us at that point to help continue whatever we use that for. Lastly, so thank you for your patience. I agree with um council member D. Roers. I was thinking earlier this is a huge deal and I I not only would like to postpone it for my prior statements but to have a full council here. So thank you so much for bearing with me. Any other comments, Council Member Fur?

Yeah, I will think I'll kind of go with what everybody else has said so far is um I love our police offic. I'm sorry, my mic's not even on. Oh, okay. Sorry. I'd like to also start out by saying I I love our uh police officers. would love to be able to give them all the help that they need, including our other departments that are, you know, needing that are asking uh they're making requests that we're seeing on the budget for FTEES um because we have a growing city and um but the reality is right, we don't have uh an open pocketbook. We can't we can't afford all of this stuff. So, I was going to ask so thank you council member chairs Davis. I was also going to ask council uh respectfully if we could uh postpone this for another meeting um and have maybe staff come back with some some information that would help e maybe all of us or even me make a a well-informed decision because this isn't an easy one. It's like you want your police, but you also it we don't want to just jump at you this new tool, this new tool that the state has given us um by using this this tax. Um I don't feel comfortable just rushing in and grabbing it. Uh we had a citizen here. I think there's going to be other citizens who are going to be like, "Oh, they're just money hungry. They're coming at us. You know, they want more taxes." And I just think it would be nice to show our citizens that we are taking like we're, you know, we're not just rushing, but we are trying to be fiscally responsible uh responsible taking a look at all these avenues. Um I mean like I guess some things that I had

wrote down um some thoughts maybe that uh staff could come back with is um right now what is the amount that uh our police officers the dollar amount of their overtime and could that potentially be in itself a police officer hire right there and then um and then looking at this new FTE the project manager and seeing And you know, I don't want to, you know, maybe maybe this is where staff needs to help me realize which one's more important. Do we need this project? I know that it's a request. We need it, but which one's more important? Sometime that's what we have to do when we budget, even in our own in our own households. Which one's more important? We might just have to wait until the next one uh the next year for that one. Um, and maybe one thing that could help me to be come up with a uh just to figure out if that is a good um option is what can you come back with a clear definition or a job description for this project manager? Because I I think it was in October 6, we weren't as council like we didn't have a a real clear understanding of what that job entails. And maybe that's just me, but um yeah, that's it. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I don't have a problem waiting uh till we have a full council. The one thing that I think is important to realize is um we we did a transportation benefit district and we did a a is it $50 tabs? 25 $25. It was $25. $20. It was $20. We did $20 car tab uh that that hit all of our citizens. And so if you lived in the city of Battleground, you paid $20. And um we had uh former council member that was very upset with out of state plates because of those people that paid the $20 and those people that chose not to pay the $20 by having out of state plates. And um I'd first like to thank the police for eight years later going out and actually enforcing this and and letting people know that that they need to they need to get up to date on their their plates. Um, but we changed that from um $20 car tab fee to a tenth of a percent sales tax. The reason we did that is because when we look at the city of Battleground, we represent 23,000 people, but 90 plus thousand people come through this city or shop in this city that don't pay anything for our police outside of sales tax revenue that we have to take and use from the that we get in the general fund and and shove it over to them. And so, um, when you see, um, our police officers, uh, there's a joke about where South Precinct is in this town and where we have to, uh, spend a lot of our time at at certain establishments that may have higher theft and our police officers are there. That's not just our people stealing from

our businesses. In fact, most people don't steal where they live. Most people don't commit crimes where they live. They go commit crimes somewhere else. And so this gives us opportunity to take those 92,000 people or 80,000 plus people that come into our city and they participate in helping because they're part of the problem. It's not just our citizens that we need to police for. And so that's the beauty of this tax over um just just a property tax or or those type of things that are only hitting our citizens. And this this is the battle that that is is happening across the state right now is is how do you fund how do you fund these things? And this is the first time in 14 years that we have had the opportunity to do something like this and to to supplement because when when we have um other agencies, the challenge is I' I've been around long enough to know that that this time of year during budget is tough for the city because when we did when we did our our um our council retreat, it always comes out public safety is number one. When we when we put out our when we put out our survey to the public, their number one priority was public safety, ma being being safe. Then it became streets and parks and all those other things. They want to they want to have a safe community.

And so there's a lot of things that go into that. But but when we're sitting when these staff are sitting in a meeting, I would say probably most of the time there I wouldn't say most of the time. There's there's there probably can be some contention because police always get funded. Police get funded. We we we put a lot of money into public safety, but it costs a lot. We're we're right now for staffing where we were in like 2007 as as an agency and we were Walmart wasn't here in 2007. Um Maddox wasn't here in 2007. I'm not saying that they're they're having issues over there, but when you look at the growth that we've had in this city and some of these big companies that have come in with large employers, Wolf Industries, we just we just toured them tonight. They got 100 employees. They weren't here in 2007. So, when you look at the growth that we've had and the amount of people that we've added and the amount of and not just us, when you look at what the county has done in building around us, like that's why we have traffic issues. People think we have traffic issues because Battleground doesn't take care of the roads. No, we have traffic issues because the county is exploding around us and so all those people are coming through here. I live on Onstorf. I never used to have to wait to get to Onsdorf and traffic backs all the way up to Main Street now and it's not our traffic. It's traffic going north. And so, but but we have to patrol that and we have to take care of that. And so I think this is the best way for us to have a funding source that can maybe ease some of that. It gives us the opportunity to to continue to support our police and grow, but it also gives us the opportunity to support other departments that we're already taking away from

because we're having to shove that money over into PD and to to meet the staffing levels. The other thing that that has changed big time and I've seen it with PD and I see it from the fire side that I participate in is FMLA. FMLA has completely changed. 12 weeks a year that you get to take an FMLA has completely changed our budgets and what and what we can do. And these are all things that are out of our hands. We we don't have any control of that. We can't tell someone, "No, you can't take it." And they can take that and and get paid for 12 weeks. and and um so those are things that we have to be creative and look for other ways and I think this is a great way to do it. I don't think this is the answer to our problems. I think it's it it can give us the opportunity to get where we need to be short term but even when Megan did her her presentation on the 1%. We're below a dollar. At some point in time, we're going to have to run some type of a lid lift because we are it's going to continue to move down

as inflation. When we had six and 7% inflation and we could only take a percent, we're we're moving the wrong direction. And at some point in time, we've got to go ask for that to come back so that we can continue to provide the services that that our citizens need and deserve and that we want in our community to be a thriving community. So, I don't have a problem pushing it off. I I I think um getting more information is good, but I think it also spreads that load out amongst everybody that's coming into our city right now that's that's buying and shopping and doing stuff here. and it makes it a lot easier to sell than just putting it the burden on our citizens. Thank you.

Uh great discussion. Um what I would recommend uh is to work with staff on the questions you need answered. Um so that they come back at the next meeting. That would be my my ask. Yeah. Um so that you get because I I think it is important that you get those questions answered. I also agree we should have a full council when we do this. Uh, I do want to say two things. Um, the deputy mayor touched on it and um, I asked Megan to to give that graph of the inflation adjusted dollars for the property tax. You really need to look at that and understand what that graph means. 20 years ago, the real property taxes was $1,300 a year for the average house in here. Now, it's 500. So, everybody says, "Oh, cities raising our taxes raising." Well, no, it's it's not this city. Are taxes going up? Yeah, maybe. But it's not us. So we're having to do serve more people with less than half of the real dollars we did 20, 30 years ago. That's just cold hard fact. What the sales tax does is it gives you some inflation protection because we can only raise that property tax by 1%. So every time there's a 5% inflation, we're taking a 4% haircut. And I know haircuts. So the in the sales tax gives you some inflation protection, not all of it, but it gives you more than the property tax does. And as the deputy mayor pointed out, uh the people who are in the city using your services will share a larger burden. Um I would um when we have this come back and uh I'll need a motion to um delay this at some point. Um, I would also like to see uh maybe what to throw the 1% in there, not taking the 1%. What does that look like uh in conjunction with the 0.1? Um, and and finally, uh, Chief did give us a heck of a presentation on this. So,

I would really suggest we go back and look at that and what the overtime is doing to his staffing. Uh, look at his plan on providing officers when we need them. And this is this is part of that plan. And we I mean we were all there. We we gave him Yeah. Let's go forward. And if we're going to pull this out now, we better have another in my opinion, we better have another funding source or another way to get those officers on the street. We owe this city that and we owe um the staff that. Uh overtime is not good when it's when we're stressing our officers like that. So, um, I'm fine delaying it. I'm fine if we want to find another way to do it, but we need to find a way to do it in my opinion. Uh, with that, I'll entertain a motion to delay this uh, ordinance to next meeting.

Second. All in favor?

I. Any opposed? Motion was by Deputy Mayor Bowman. Second was by Kypers. Brings us to business portion. Mr. RP awake? You still with us? I want to uh first of all thank the Battleground City Council, particularly Mayor McCoy and also a deputy city manager. We appreciate both of you uh participating in our Clark County Transportation Alliance Summit and also the Clark County government affairs roundt where we collect input and help use that information to develop policy that we take to the legislature every year. So it was very helpful. We had about 50 or 60 people in the room uh and we dedicate the first part of that to bring consensus to a transportation u policy statement that we update each year. the the update in your packets uh had very few changes from last year actually. We brought forward a lot of the projects um a number of the budgets needed to be revised or clarified. There were a few tiny tweaks um that were made in the actual language, but by and large I would say it's it's 95% the same document we had last year. Um, we do this every year for the very simple reason that we have a variety of politics in our four legislative districts. And the Puet Sound, uh, for many years did a great job of can of basically allowing us to cancel ourselves out politically and then ignore Southwest Washington when it came time for funding. Uh we have been getting nowhere near our 6.7% fair share of state funding for for many years when it comes to transportation and this is an initiative to help get the dollars coming back to the state back to the county uh and make the necessary improvements that we need to make. We also socialize a list of projects in

this policy statement. City of Battleground has two mentioned. Um, you mentioned both of them in other presentations this evening, so I won't get into the details, but we we we do represent this in in an overall balanced statement as as a shared plan for the region, and it opens up some wonderful conversations. Um, I watched Paul Harris uh as a representative, defend funding the I-5 bridge, which was not in his district. I watched Sharon Wy stand up and defend 179th and improvements to the uh Camis [snorts] Slooh bridge. I watched everybody in unison go to bat for 502503 improvements through the years. That's the kind of synergy and interaction we get from having a unified policy statement for our region. Uh it it's not perfect. It's a broad strategy. It's a broad consensus, but it works very effectively for us to carry a unified message to not only Olympia, but also to Salem and to Washington DC. We use this at all levels to be able to to advance transportation priorities in our region. Um, there's a lot of projects on that list and we want to keep this uh we call it a spring-loaded plan. We never know when the next package is going to come out. If you would have told me a short session in 2022 we would have had a big transportation package, I would have never believed you. Uh but in fact we did. Uh and we were able to get projects funded as a result. So we always have to be at the ready to let people know where our next priorities are and we work with everybody the regional transportation council and each municipality and organization to be able to do that. Then we go out and get about 60 or 70 endorsements on this policy statement every year, which is critical to show uni unanimity and support. Um, it's not just municipalities, it's also school districts, it's labor, um, it's business organizations, it's organizations south of the river. Uh,

not not just in this area. We want to show a regional strategy and regional support. That's what drives this this policy statement. uh happy to answer any questions you have, but really appreciate the opportunity to give you an update here this evening. Uh Ron, just uh uh there was two takeaways from that meeting. I was hoping you could touch base on you you made a comment uh about the projects. You said something along the lines of and I'm I'm not not the speaker that you are. Something along the lines of we just have if we agree on 90% of these projects. It we're not going to agree on 100% but it's about having a unified message. I was hoping you could touch on that real quick.

Yeah, for sure. Um We all want the projects in our area funded and and it's so easy to create competitive pressures within the region, but a thriving I5 and 205 helps every every uh component of the of the area. A thriving um intersection at 502 and 503 does help people get to and from. It's important for us to to lean into each other. Uh how we do it, the exact amount, exactly the projects, we're not trying to micromanage. We're trying to basically hold together under a broad tent our overall uh approach.

And uh the second thing was uh Carly, Miss Francis from WADOT shared uh that they are going to fix the panels on I5 uh which which was great to hear. I know that's not new news to a lot of us, but um I think what was really shocking was she shared how much that would cost. Yes. And how much of her sixcount budget that was. I don't know if you remember those numbers.

I I I do. I was hoping to forget them, but uh she said to replace a mile uh with took 15 million of her $31 million of maintenance and preservation to just do one mile. Um they have four more miles they must do and they're trying to figure out where they get that uh that funding. But maintenance and preservation is a critical issue. It's one of our platforms in in the overall document. We have to continue to keep our community, our our road system, our our pedestrian system as well, uh, in good repair and and and so it's going to continue to take more investments. Uh, unfortunately, the inflation rates are getting construction, unbelievably so. I think in the last four years, we've averaged about 9 or 10% inflation increases um on on construction projects, on major construction projects. Um, what one example, the Keybridge that you saw a ship run into in Baltimore, the original estimate for that project was $2 billion. Um, the estimate that they're working on right now is $5 billion, and they're not even sure that that's going to get it done. Um, so the runaway costs of construction, steel costs, those sorts of things are are very real. So, the sooner we can get concrete in the ground, uh, steel in the ground, we we freeze that inflation at that point. and then we're actually um moving forward on getting it paid for as quickly as possible.

And that's action number two council for on that statement. So I just want that I thought that was really instructive. Sixcount area essentially a $30 million budget and she's I mean 15 million for I5 and that's the wasot regional transportation director and it's only the middle lane. Yeah. I mean it made me realize I need new shock so the local business did get some business out of that. So, right. Um, questions

about the whole process and what this looks like because when I see it, I think of the RTP, right? You have a board, you guys come together with all your wants from every city and you have a representative from all of the different uh municipalities and and there's obviously a lot of other people on on Yeah. at the table as well. And so, this is this isn't even getting into like the weeds of it. This is just here's the plan. Here's some this is our ask and now we can go out and seek grant funding for this. Okay. My only concern is um because is I it was right under action three. I don't have my tablet so I don't get to see this and sorry for the people out in the audience that um you don't know what I'm talking about right now. Action three underneath the square. It talks about the Chilache Prairie and I know we're talking about supporting your guys's policy or well the CCTA's policy, but doesn't that kind of go against what we're talking about when for a legislative 26 agenda ask which is to go in that RCW and change the language on that the the railroad overlay usage and but you guys are seeking to like so I'm just I'm only asking I'm trying to, you know, cause any problems. I'm just asking.

Yeah. And and I appreciate your question last year on the same subject. So, and I'll answer it the same way I did then, which is regardless of what happens with the Salache Prairie Railroad, whether it it's commercial, whether it's recreational, or whether whether it gets reclaimed and, you know, is is torn apart and sold out sold off or whatever, we're going to need state support to be able to help do any of that, whatever that that happens to be. So, we're not in any way trying to prescribe an answer for how to get the how to move forward. That's really not our job in this policy statement, but it is to say it's a it's a it's a railroad that's an asset. We need to figure out how we're going to manage that asset, and we're going to need some state help to be able to do it because I don't believe any municipalities along that railroad have the wherewithal to be able to put any dollars um to improving or in any way addressing that that overall corridor. One last thing. Are there any um what is Dang Nabbit, sorry, forgot my mic. What is the conversations that are being had? Because I'm not at the table, so I'm not privy to all of these inside conversations. Um what are the conversations around the road usage? Um

you mean tax? Yeah, the road mile tax.

Yeah, I'm just curious on which direction that's going. If it's just We don't know. We just Yeah, I'm not going to answer for you. that the House Transportation Committee Chair Jake Fi was championing that conversation uh this year and got to the point where it eventually went into the two hard pile. Um and I I would assume that that something along those lines is going to be come back at to us at some point. Um we have heavy electric vehicles that don't pay a whole lot to use the road. Uh we have we have gas taxes that are actually less effective in terms of of you know we're more miles per gallon, less gas being burned. We we still need road improvements. So how are we going to do that? Um so so the tax necessarily doesn't doesn't work. So we have to figure out other revenue streams to support our infrastructure. Um and the the road usage charge is one that's been under study for a long time. uh the Washington State Transportation Commission, I believe, uh is the group that has been doing a lot of study. We're we're silent on the issue. Um we know we have needs u but we're not here to try to prescribe the exact solution. Um we're here to say we recognize the needs and we're here to support moving forward on on keeping our roads and our our infrastructure system in good repair. Good.

Yeah. I've not been part of any conversations on that. I think it's going to come from Olympia myself. But I'd like to move to approve the endorsement of the 2026 Clark County Transportation Alliance policy statement in its entirety as presented. Second. I have a motion on the floor with a second. Any other further discussion? All in favor, please. I'm sorry. What? Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. I'm sorry.

Thank you. Um I just want to say this has come up every year and um there are a few highlighted things that I don't um that raised the hair on my neck and one is the action number one and the action number two with the road usage. Um, and in prior years, um, I have voted against this because those are things that I am not in favor of. I think it's a little difficult for us to put our logo on something when we had um, a resolution against uh, light rail. So, I don't know how that works, but I I get the I I hear it every year and I I understand that this is a broad um action that we're just trying to get whatever we can get by saying we want to work together. That being said, I am I'm I believe that I will just say here that I am against action one for the multimodal and against action number two for the road usage charge. I don't like those phrases, but this year I'm not going to um be a stickler and say that not everything else is important as well. So, I just wanted to let you know that in the years prior why I voted this way and why this year state my opposition, but I'm not going to vote against the whole thing because of that. So, thank you.

I really appreciate the discussion on the vote. Um, just to clarify, has is there any statement on light rail on this? It's just my multimotal could be bus rapid, right? Yeah. Bus rapid transit. Yes, it could be. And that's why I'm asking instead of so broad I would like specific of it's just a bike or a bus. Okay, I got you. The the the broad of multimodal anything can go in there and that has always been my problem as far as the vagueness of it. Gotcha. It makes me All right. Thank you. All right. We have a motion on the floor. Um all in favor to approve endorsement of the 26 Clark County Transportation Alliance policy statement, please say I. I. I.

Any opposed? Okay. Okay, that passes. Thank you. Thank you so much, Ron. Sorry for the the late night. Um, that brings us to the uh uh legislative agenda of which this was part of. Um, so now I would entertain if there's discussion or a motion on the legislative agenda of which this is part of. Move to approve the legislative agenda as presented. Second. Who was the second? Second by D. Roers. Any discussion?

Yeah, I'll just um I'm not going to vote against it because I believe in the 2026 legislative agenda and all of the what staff had uh presented to us this evening. I'm not against any of it. I would just as a counselor like to say that I also um I I didn't like some of the things that the AWC's policies although most of it was good. I I do have some concerns. So, I don't know where this will go. If you guys may or you're on a board or something, I would just like as a council going forward um or our lobbyists if they you know, anything moves towards this. I just feel like as a counselor, I should at least share my concerns. Um that I don't like how they were talking about a highway usage fee on top of retail delivery fee. And then they're also going to be um they also support revising the property tax cap. And so all those I mean they had a whole list of things that I support. But out of it, like I said, I'm going to I'm not going to say no just um but I will I just wanted to share that those four things are very cons uh or those three things are very concerning to me and I don't support those things.

Yeah. And I think again it's that 90% rule. Um, and it's the same concern you had last year, and I'll just bring up the same thing I did last year. Um, House Bill 1110, which was the middle housing, which was part of AWC's legislative priorities. We lobbyed against that. So, just because we as a city still chart our own course, okay? And something like that, I mean, I I would hope anybody who sits on a committee would come back and ask for council direction. Okay? With that, we have a motion on the floor. Any further discussion? All in favor, please say I.

I. Any opposed? Okay. Engineer Hersik. All right. I have a series of franchise agreements to go over. Uh the first being with Forged Fiber, um essentially an AT&T company. Um when looking at uh franchise agreements, there's three things. to meet the state law. Council has to hear it twice. Uh those two hear or two presentations have to be five days apart and then the agreements have to be reviewed by the city attorney. All of these that you will hear have met all of those requirements. Um so I don't have anything to add to this particular one. Um so I'd recommend that we approve ordinance 202520.

Before we do that, can we get the title read, please? Ordinance 2025-20, an ordinance of the city council of the city of Battleground, [clears throat] excuse me, Clark County, Washington, granting a non-exclusive franchise to forged Fiverr 37 LLC to construct, maintain, operate, replace, and repair a telecommunications system in, across, over, along, under, through, and below certain designated public rights of way of the city of Battleground, Washington for a 5-year term.

Mr. Mayor, I make a motion to adopt ordinance 2025-20 granting Forge Fiber 37 a franchise a franchise as presented. Do I have a second? Thank you. Um, my only concern, especially seeing all of these, is that I hope we take a very aggressive approach on uh the five-year window on our roads getting torn up. H um and I maybe the new project manager

can be tasked with that if we approve that FTE that uh follow up on that because I know uh having driven down south 20th for 25 years where they cut into that is is a large part of our problem. I know I know after 5 years there's not a lot we can do but um that's just my only concern with all of these coming forward. And I'll say generally speaking, the I call them private utilities, but there's an easement behind the sidewalk for this. So that's generally you'll have like your street crossings and things where it will go into our rightway, but generally speaking, this is outside of it. Okay. Especially if we're looking at spending some money on roads. Okay. Uh any further discussion on this? There's a motion on the floor for approval. All in favor, please say I. I.

I. Any opposed? Passes unanimously. Next one. Our next franchise agreement is with Easy Fiber. Um I actually have Austin Christopherson here. He wasn't able to be at the first meeting, so he'd just like to say a couple words and answer any questions if you have them. If you would state your name for the record, please.

Yes. Hi, my name is Austin Christopherson. I'm the director of government affairs for Easy Fiber. Um we are actually uh investing $400 million in the state of Washington uh to build our projects. Um, a little bit about our company. Uh, we like to do things a little differently. Um, we like to invest in the communities that we serve. We have a a community impact team that has a quote of five to seven events a week in the communities that we serve. Um, we also have a life for life pricing. Uh, transparency is key. $90 a month gets you the two gigs plan. That's for life. That includes taxes, fees, equipments, everything like that. Um, and we also want to work with the city, especially when it comes to engineering. Uh, I hear your concern for, uh, tearing up the roads, mayor. Um, and we want to make sure that we do this right and in a respectful way, uh, working with your team, uh, to make sure that we, uh, have restoration up and running in a certain time. We actually keep our contractors on, uh, very short timets on restoration, and we'll make sure that that is followed through um, for you all there. Um, and we actually are already um breaking ground in Southwest Washington. We actually announced I think four days ago um that we are uh breaking ground in Vancouver, Washington. So, we are we're around uh we're already down here. We're super excited to start uh in Battleground and happy to take any questions. But one more thing, I want to give a huge shout out to public works director. He's been an amazing partner uh on behalf of us. I will say uh definitely one of the more easygoing processes that we've had. So, thank you.

Awesome. Thank you. With that, can we get the title read, please? Ordinance 2025-21, an ordinance of the city council of the city of Battleground, Clark County, Washington, granting a non-exclusive franchise to Easy Fiber Texas LLC to construct, maintain, operate, replace, and repair a telecommunication system in, across, over, along, under, through, and below certain designated public rights of way of the city of Battleground, Washington for a 5-year term. Mr.

Mayor move to adopt ordinance 202521 granting Easy Fiber Texas LLC a franch a franchise as presented. Second. Second by Ders. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor? I. Any opposed? All right. Metro Fiber Net. Thank you. All right. Um, not much to add here. Um, Jill from Metro Fibernet uh presented at the first meeting. Um, again, we've met all the requirements of the RCW, so I'd recommend approval.

Can we get the title read, please? Ordinance 2025-22, an ordinance of the city council of the city of Battleground, Clark County, Washington, granting a non-exclusive franchise to Metro Fiberet LLC to construct, maintain, operate, replace, and repair a telecommunications system in, across, over, along, under, through, and below certain designated public rights of way of the city of Battle Battleground Washington for a 5-year term.

The mayor move to adopt 2025 ordinance 202522 granting Metro Fiberet LLC a franchise as presented. Second. Any discussion? Second by D. Roers. All in favor, please say I. I. I. Brings us to the next one. Ordinance 2025-23. Uh so our last one is with Ripple Fiber. Um Kevin gave a presentation at our last meeting and again we've met all the requirements for RCWS. I'd recommend approval.

Title read, please. Ordinance 2025-23, an ordinance of the city council of the city of Battleground, Clark County, Washington, granting a non-exclusive franchise to Hyperfiber of Washington LLC DBA Ripple Fiber to construct, maintain, operate, replace, and repair a telecommunication system in, across, over, along, under, through, and below certain designated public rights of way of the city of Battleground, Washington for a 10-year term. Mr. Mayor, move to adopt ordinance 202523 granting Hyperfiber Washington LLC doing business as Ripple Fiber of franchises present.

Second discussion. Are there discussions? Yeah, go ahead. Um, I'd just like to ask and it's probably not a big deal, but I'm just asking that one. This one for Whipple is for 10 years and the rest were all five. Did I hear that correctly? So, the first three are for 10 years, but they're a fiveyear with an automatic five-year renewal. Um, Ripple negotiated to just straight up 10 years even though they're all 10 years. Um, which is consistent with our code. So, okay. Thank you. Good. Good question. Any further discussion? Seeing no, motion on the floor by Bowman, second by D. Roers. All in favor, please say I. I.

Passes unanimously. I just want to say with all of this coming in, I'm looking forward to some starkly lower prices for internet in the city. Okay. Comprehensive plan update time. Do we need anybody need a break? Are we still good? So far so good. Okay, we march on.

Good evening. This topic will wake you up. So, it has [laughter] it has uh been some months since we presented um to you related to the comprehensive plan update. We've had some work happening um including our draft comprehensive plan which is now available online uh that we also shared with planning commission last month. So, uh, we're going to do a a brief summary and status presentation for you and then I'm joined by, um, planning supervisor Sam Kummit as well as our, um, consultant, which I'll introduce in just a moment to answer any questions you might have and then, um, look for some direction. We're planning to come speak with you again at the November 17th meeting. So if there's any areas of focus or that you'd like us to highlight um during that meeting as well as we will share at the close about um a upcoming community openhouse that people can attend to learn more about the comprehensive plan. So with that this evening we have Ben Han with Burke Consulting. There are partners uh working on the comprehensive plan update for us. Uh good evening Ben. So he will be presenting and thanks for for hanging in there with us.

Uh good evening Mr. Mayor and city council, it's great to be here again. Um, I'm just going to quickly share my screen with the PowerPoint presentation. Okay. Is my is it sharing my screen? Oh, perfect. Okay. Yeah, we can see it. Thanks, guys.

Um, great. So, it's great to be back again. As Kristen mentioned, I was last here in May of this year to give an overview of the battlegrounds comprehensive plan. And so my hope for today is to give an overview of again kind of refresh folks on what the comprehensive plan is, what have been sort of our major updates to the plan um and give an overview when to anticipate uh have a little review of the cities uh to say growth for the next 20 years through 2045. And um yeah, would love to hear feedback on key questions to make sure that we're addressing um as this plan moves towards adoption. Um just to kind of give a brief 101 overview um for folks who may not be familiar, uh this the city's comprehensive plan is a really critical document in really ensuring that we're trying to think about household and employment growth over the next 20 years. Um, as a critical part of this work, um, there was there's been a lot of community engagement and thinking about how a city's vision can for growth reflects the values of of within the city of Battleground and their own goals and and dreams for for living for the city to thrive. And so the document should encompass a series of policies that that will help guide future development within um within that that community based vision. And so how this relates to the state planning process is that uh we've been working with Clark County closely um and ensuring that the city's comprehensive plan aligns with the counties um as well as thinking about the overarching growth management act and uh and new legislation um from Olympia over the last couple years. Um all this as I mentioned before is is a requirement under growth management act. Um the office of financial management provides projections uh population projections for both uh within the county and for a city. And so working with Clark County, we um knowing

that there's a a specific number of jobs and housing anticipated within the county, what share of that growth should be carried forth within the city of Battleground. Um, with regards to what's what topics are covered in the comprehensive plan, um, there's a wide range of elements that are required for a city staff to consider, including land use, housing, uh, capital facilities, which includes schools, as well as, uh, thinking about police and fire services, uh, utilities, uh, transportation, parks, recreation, open space, um, the natural environment, particularly thinking about how the city lines has a shoreline management plan, as well as thinking about protecting uh critical areas as well as fish and wildlife habitat um economic development which I know is a big driver of this update to current plan as well as a new requirement under house bill 1181 for cities to adopt the climate element to think about uh ways for us to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as well as as we anticipate uh more extreme weather events such as wildfire flooding or smoke that we have a a strong plan in place to protect uh those who work work and live within the city. On top of what's required within uh the commerce plan update, there's some additional elements that the city of Battleground has elected to adopt as well in terms of thinking about livability. Uh thinking about like um the aesthetics or sort of design of of the architecture structures within the city as well as trying to think bigger picture urban design uh strategies as well. Um as well as adopting a subary plan for mobile downtown this past year. Um, I personally had the joy of working with Sam and Kristen since 2023. Um, but in terms of thinking about what all the planning work that has gone into the comprehensive plan, this work actually began six years ago. Um, with the

adoption of a community vision plan in 2019. Um, and since then there's been a subsequent series of plans that have been developed that um, that's all being integrated into this current plan update. And so 2021 there was a land use master plan as well as a housing action plan. The trans transportation system plan has been updated in 2021 with additional updates this year as well too. Um this also integrates the parks recreation open space plan or pros plan from 2022 and over the course of this last year. Um uh just been noting and tracking that there is the adoption of the old downtown plan this year as well as knowing that there's updates to the sewer and storm water comprehensive plans as well too. Um lastly, we did a tree canopy assessment for a city of Battleground as well. Um doing assessment of existing trees within the city of Battleground both on private and public uh property. And so all this work um uh has been culminated and and we've done our best to ensure that policy recommendations from these plans are integrated into the comprehensive plan um uh compared plan update. Um, one of the key sort of topics of which we had addressed through this commerce plan update was looking at a preferred alternative for growth for the city of Battleground. Um, and in with the adoption of the land use master plan in 2021. Uh, part of this work um included an adjustment to the urban growth boundary to uh to incorporate dollars corner to the west side of the city to the city. Um and the primary drive for this is desire to see increased deployment opportunities within um within the city as well. Um and a part of this work as well too um there was a minor adjustment of removing

um a portion of the UG in the southwest corner as well as integration of some more employment opportunities in the in the northern corner of the city as well. And so this is the preferred growth alternative that we worked with in terms of thinking about meeting um the city's uh household housing and employment goals for for 2045. Um as I'm mentioning about uh 204, I just want to note too that um this is a 20-year vision and so there's still um a lot of work to be done. But in terms of thinking about what this alternative provides is that it provides a pathway and direction for city staff into thinking about um new household [clears throat] employment opportunities for the next 20 years. Um we looked at two different alternatives in looking at growth in this within the city. The first is what's called a no action alternative which means that if we look at the city as it is today um will we be able to accommodate um the households and jobs that um that would that has been allocated to us from the county. And then we also looked at a second alternative um which is based off of assumptions from our from what was adopted by council through the land use master plan and it does include the J adjustment to dollars corner. The table in the bottom left is a highle summary of of anticipated um excuse me is our allocation of household and employment growth through 2045. And so working with um numbers from office of financial management as well as Clark County um our allocation through 2045 is 6,979 households and 8,859 jobs. Um if we were to look at the existing city boundaries and existing policies um we will they'll note that we will fall short of that goal um under

our no action alternative um there we we will fall short about 1,600 households as well as not being able to demonstrate capacity um for employment as well. Um however um because of the land use master plan and through the past planning efforts to date as well as the land capacity analysis um we were able to demonstrate that through this past planning work that's been done um that uh through this through this process we would actually hit um about 8,000 uh households within city battleground um and on top of that we did assume that um uh 5% of households that are zoned for residential use would consider had adding an ADU as part of their housing development. And so with that, we'll hit a surplus of about um a thousand thousand units within city battleground. With regards to employment, um the reason why you see this the large shift from 5,400 jobs to to about uh 8,600 jobs with the preferred alternative is because of the the inclusion of Dollar's Corner into the city battleground. And so that that was the large drive with that. Um we also the clar county has also provided um job allocations for construction and work from home jobs. And so um collectively that adds up to about an additional 1100 jobs. And so um that's how we're hitting our target of 9,777 jobs for employment through 2045 with a surplus of 918 jobs. um been kind of speaking for a little bit, but yeah, I think I'll just kind of pause here and kind of check to see if there's any clarifying questions I may answer about the current plan or um about what I talked about with regards to um housing and employment allocation uh through 2045.

Were there any questions on those figures? Would you like us to continue? I know everybody's ready to head home. So, I have a question. Yeah, of course. And I'm sorry if I missed this. I'm Why would we Why would we want a surplus of a thousand in in the household specifically? I'm sorry. Yeah.

Yeah. So this is kind of so all this work in terms of calculating housing has been driven largely by um house bill 1220 um which require cities to ensure to demonstrate capacity for housing at different income levels uh within the city. And so um I I could I can talk for a while about this but um essentially our the challenge that we've had with the cities with say for the city of Battleground is the need to demonstrate um for housing from the zero to 80% AMI level meaning we have to provide housing from uh for moderate income level housing all the way down to uh emergency shelters and beds. And so a lot of the pivot in housing the surplus comes from um looking at multif family housing with the city of battleground but also uh within the current zoning regulations that city has currently um the city actually has quite uh an abundance of supply capacity to meet housing from from then 80% AMI all the way to uh I believe the number was up to up to about 100 120% AMI. as well too. Oh 120%. 88 to 120%. So the surplus is coming from a mix of recognizing that the city of Battleground is able to provide an an surplus of housing from the 80 to 100% AMI level as well as with multif family housing as well. I just think my con my concern would be the average person if they were looking on our website and going through some of these uh data points to see when the big complaint is that we're growing too fast, we're growing

too quickly, we're doing too much and then to say that in the end we could have a thousand more unless I'm misunderstanding how this reads. Um, I understand what you're saying about it's just kind of how the numbers fell based on different the different categories, but the average person isn't going to understand that, I don't think. So, it's just a little concerning to me in terms of being able to articulate to the citizens what that really means and and what is our intent with that surplus. Yeah. And I would argue too that, you know, I think at at its best, this is really um a long range planning exercise about demonstrating capacity for housing. Yeah.

Um as you all know, like as city staff, we're not developers for housing. We don't dictate what actually gets built as well too. And so um at its I would always argue that this isn't this is a presentation on on demonstrated capacity. Uh but in terms of what gets built in um through 2045 is um yeah it's kind of we can't we don't have control over the market as in that sense I'm sorry we don't have a what

that we're not developers and so we're not dictating like but it depend there's there's other factors such as market of developers building choosing to build in the city of Burn as well And council member Kypers, perhaps this is an area when we come back on the 17th, we can do a little bit more analysis at the income levels and kind of look at how those numbers break down. That would be great. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Any other questions before we move on? Okay, Ben.

Awesome. Um in terms of project timeline, uh we are approaching the end of the comprehensive planning process. um currently giving a presentation on where the draft conference plan is currently. Um Sam, you're much more I don't know if I think you're on this call as well too, but um one of the things that we're keeping in mind is that um we're following the county's comprehensive planning process as well too. Um and ensuring that u our plan is in alignment with with their with their with their schedule as well. Um, and that's actually my last slide. So, I could pause here for any additional questions or if Kristen if you or Sam have anything else you wanted to add. Um, if there's no questions from council, this is Sam Kromit, planning supervisor. If you're trying to figure out where I'm at, I'm over on right field next to Alicia. Um, our next meeting is November 17th. If there's any areas you'd like for us to focus on the comprehensive plan, let us know. That could be, for example, the agricultural land study that the county should be wrapping up anytime within the next few days and what implications that may have for Battleground. If you would like to hear more about our jobs planning, housing, reach out to the city manager, any one of us, and we can we can focus on those items. There's an open house scheduled at the Battleground Event Center on November 19th. We'll make that open to the public. And uh

that's uh it'll be two days after uh the the next city council meeting, Wednesday the 19th.

Wednesday the 19th. And then uh I would ask that the council establishes a public hearing date on this item for December 1st. And at that meeting uh we can get a little bit more into the planning commission recommendation. This has gone through our planning commission that the planning commission has recommended approval. They also have included the addition of three parcels along the edge of our urban growth boundary that we can give more details on. And then I I think the final thing I'd like to say is we have our comprehensive plan ready and ready to be adopted by the end of this year including draft uh code updates required by the growth management act. I think it's important to let all of you know that we've done our work to be in compliance with the GMA by the end of the year. Uh this will need to be adopted sometime in 2026 because our urban growth boundary expansion does include Clark County and these decisions need to be made in tandem. So um I just wanted to state that and uh see if there's any questions.

I think yes on the egg study, please. Yeah,

I just want to tell staff um thanks for having this done. I wish the I wish we weren't behind uh waiting for the county on this stuff, but I think our staff has done a great job of meeting the deadlines that needed to be met and putting the stuff forward and and uh I know it's a it's a lot of work and you know, most of us don't have any clue what it involves. or why we do this. So, but uh I appreciate the the work that you guys have done and and being ahead of the game and uh I wish the county was a little bit more in tune and had their work done too that it wasn't being delayed at all. Thank you. Yeah, I would just say that um echo that for those who haven't been on council long enough to have gone through a GMA, you know, I don't know all the process and I'm wondering if a study session on such a thing would have been nice to have. Um cuz for me, you we talk a lot about the housing need and what those requirements are going to look like and what's being passed down onto us as city councilors, but there's more to this this comp plan than just housing. I mean, there's nine different topics here. And I'm just like and we keep getting this is just my personal thing. We keep getting the well, this is what the complant I was like, I want to get to the meat. what exactly does that mean? What does this look like in the city of battleground? What does this look like for our economic growth and for our a land and all these other topics? So, that's what I'm like would get excited to see more of,

but thank you. Well, excited and GMA in the same sentence is a brave statement. Wii with that I would entertain a motion to set up public hearing for the December 1, 2025 council meeting to hear public testimony regarding the comprehensive plan update. So moved. Second. Motion on the floor by FRA, second by Kypers. All in favor, please say I. I. I. Passes unanimously.

Mr. Hersik, did you corral your mic? [laughter] Yes. Um, for our next topic, we're going to talk about the comprehensive storm water master plan update. And I'm actually going to turn it over to Emily Stevens with Windsor Engineers to go over it. Um, good evening, Mr. Mayor, Council. Thank you for making it to this this evening. Um, I just going to share my screen. Give me a second. All right. Is everybody able to see my screen?

Yeah, it's fine.

Okay. Well, this last presentation on the comp plan set up um our presentation very well. So, this should be quick and smooth. Um we'll be talking about the comprehensive storm water master plan that we have been working with Mark um to develop. So very um very much in line with what we just talked about with the full comprehensive plan. The comprehensive storm water master plan is a subset of the comprehensive plan. Um most most cities do a specific plan dedicated to storm water management and the storm water management program. um as part of the comprehensive plan and the GMA. Um but the the other items within a storm water master plan, it it really helps the city focus on managing their storm water infrastructure and programs um dedicated to surface water and storm water runoff. Um the plan also supports uh what is called the EDP PDES phase 2 permit compliance which is a um storm water permit that the city holds with the state. It helps incorporate and um implement storm water management plan items which are um a separate plan that outlines specific um needs and projects within the cities to improve water quality. and it provides that capital improvement plan for 20 years right alongside with the comprehensive plan so it can all be incorporated together and then it establishes those long-term storm water goals for the city as a whole. I think a lot of the questions on um why

is a comprehensive plan necessary were just answered um very similar and in line with the GMA that is what drives a comprehensive plan and then with a comprehensive plan under that environmental there's always a storm water management section or chapter and the city of Battleground has um for a while now had a specific storm water master plan that satisfies that chapter requirement um and just really expands on the program itself. Having a specific storm water master plan really improves eligibility for funding applications on storm water infrastructure projects. Um and then they are updated every 10 years um for a 20-year horizon. So we are doing that in line with the comprehensive plan and the last one was updated in 2015. So, we have started the update. Well, we're actually wrapping it up now. So, on on the right side here, um just an image showing the various different storm water plans that the city of Battleground has. A lot of times people can look at these and wonder why there are so many and how they're all related. And so we just um part of the plan is outlining the how the comprehensive plan really guides the storm water master plan and how the various plans within the engineering department help guide the storm water comprehensive storm water master plan. Um again similar to the the last presentation we are um at the council review portion of the project looking for review and comment period from the council. Um after that would be city adoption. What's new from the existing um storm

water plan? This version is much more um robust and comprehensive um than the 2015 version was. We did build on the 2015 version um and we added some long-term goals um and very clear actions related to those long-term goals. We included a fish passage and protection section, which is new. And then we also have a staffing needs um and recommendations specific to the city's storm water program. A large component of the stormwater master plan is the capital improvement program. Um you can see a list. I know there's a lot in this table. Um but this is a list of those capital projects for storm water um that the city has in the 20ear CIP. This total cost that's over the 20 years total. So, it's not annual, that's a 20-year cost. Um, and so the city does have a lot of exciting projects coming down the line for um, storm water improvements for the infrastructure. And with that, I can open it up for any questions or comments. Any questions other than uh council would like a copy of that? Council member Ferwood. Um

can I get a copy the plan? Yeah, because she's just she's given an overview which thank you but this is not where I want to dig into it tonight but there was some interesting things. I was yours actually woke me up this this CSMP [laughter] and it's got gives me a lot of questions. I'm actually excited. So yeah, if I could get a copy of that, I'd appreciate it. Yeah, that the full plan was in the packet. So Mhm. already. What's If you had more questions, go ahead. I was going to say, what's the reasoning for the ditch elimination? What what's the storm water benefit?

So it's more of a traffic safety benefit um for that particular one. Okay. All right. Uh, with that, council, I would entertain a motion to set a public hearing for the December 1, 2025 council meeting to hear public testimony regarding the comprehensive storm water master plan update. So moved. Can I get a 2025? Second.

Second by Kypers. Motion by Ferrer. Any discussion? All in favor, please say I. I. I. Passes unanimously. Administrative reports. I just want to touch on this a little bit because I think it's a little too early to come back with a report, but we did spin up community court as you know and our our first one was held at the end of July and really within three months we've already had a graduation um that took place last week. um someone who's involved in that um successfully completed all the conditions uh in his plan and then we plan to have another one November 20th that that was really um a bigger deal for us. I just want to touch on that and let you know that we're really pleased with how it's going in community court and the successes are coming faster than we thought that they would. But I think after the first of the year, we'll have more of a comprehensive report because I really thought we needed to give it at least 6 months. I just wanted to touch on the fact that I'm um amazed at the successes we're having with individuals that were getting that are in the system and then we are getting them out and on a path to wellness. Other than that,

quick question on that one because I like the I like that you're saying that you're seeing success already, but and you're going to bring back something more detailed. I would just say if you're going to bring back something, could you elaborate more on what that success looks like since we don't Okay, awesome.

Yes, happy to do that. And the other um thing I'd mention is that tomorrow is election day and please don't forget to vote. That concludes my report. uh brings us council communication. Um I just have one thing real quick. Uh I I've had discussion with staff about this, but I I think it's good to get it out there. The the uh sidewalk that was torn up on 20th. I understand there was some miscommunication with the contractor. I'm curious from staff if we have because it's gravel right now on all four sides. So I've gotten citizens complaints on that. So, I was hopeful maybe we could get something out about that. Or is there a plan for those cross? It's the ADA ramps, the yellow bumpy on the corners of 20th and 6th. I think the somebody jumped the gun on something is my understanding. Um, so maybe we could get something out. I know there was a great project update that came out recently. Thank you for that. you can come up to the podium. All right. So, in speaking with the project manager last week before we uh sent out that project announcement, he did confirm he is working with the contractor to make sure that the ADA ramp replacement is a priority. I do not have a timeline on that, but he is working closely with the contractor on that. will share announcements not just on that piece but every phase of it including traffic updates on our Facebook page and Instagram page. So follow for that.

Okay. Thank you. Mayor, you have something. Anybody else? Yeah, I I just had um the email that we got tonight about the the Portland Lu in the the park um and seeing that I I wanted to find out number one how long it would take for us to get the correct Portland loose to meet the the ADA codes. the last I'd heard it would be sometime next year, but um we can follow up and get a revised timing from them.

Okay. Because my my concern is is when we and may maybe maybe I'm completely wrong and council you can correct me if I am but the whole reason we were putting lues in was because of the issues we were having with the bathrooms that are there right now and because people could lock them they could go in. They could vandalize them. They were doing all kinds of stuff in them around them. And that's why we needed to go to these and to look at it and see that they aren't going to meet the standard. and then we're just going to leave one. We're going to remodel or fix one of the bathrooms to be able to use. Doesn't seem like that was the intent of or at least what I thought the intent was of going to the Portland Lu's. And um we I I used to make fun of the former city council member who we used his house tonight about the half a million dollar bathroom that the city council approved in 20089ish that was built um and was very seldom open because of vandalism. And uh this has already been in the paper this last week on what we're paying for these things. I'd hate to see that we're not getting what we wanted and that it's not being used as it was intended. So I'd love to see, you know, where council is with that or if if um what it would take to get the proper ones and do it right.

Can I ask a quick clarifying question? is the AD requirement that half of them have to be AD ADA is is if I read that in the email correctly. So, so here let me just let me phrase my question. What if we hold off on one because the issue right now is there's not a nice So you could use the old one and then would that meet the requirement? My understanding is yes. I think there's a 50% requirement. So, if we went ahead and kept the order for one and waited for the order on the second, then we would be Mike,

the email said that we'd have to upgrade the existing bathroom first. I don't I don't think we would with this idea. Well, no, because we wouldn't be at 50%. Yes, we would. Yeah, there might be a timing issue.

I I think it would depend on the timing of that of that second one. because you may you may have to do and see the hard part is too it's it's not an ADA federal ADA issue, it's an IVC issue. So the bathrooms do meet federal ADA law um that they don't meet the building code requirement. So that that's the struggle. You know that the email I sent you tonight is they do meet the federal law of the American Disability Act, but this state adopted building codes last year, March of 2024, that now require that turning radius to go from 60 in to 60.

What's what's the risk of non-compliance? And do we need to ask the lawyer that in an executive session? That would be my question. Yes. Well, I I think my only issue with that is is is And and we can ask the attorney this, but but would we require anybody else to meet that code? And and if we would, then that's probably what they're going to come back and say is that we we can't say no, we're not going to meet it, but you know, if the mayor wants to build two bathrooms, he has to meet that.

So So per our building official, we can't pick and choose. So we have to hold ourselves and our permit reviews to the IBC standard that we mentioned, not the federal. So to answer your question, yes, we require that 67 in of projects we review and we should require that of our projects as well. And the current bathrooms do not the current bathrooms wouldn't matter because they are not being they're not new.

So they fall under the old code. My understanding is 50% of the bathrooms have to meet that standard. So if we have and again I'm sorry I have parts of the story so correct me if I'm wrong. If we have two existing brick and mortar that aren't necessarily up to code and we're bringing in the LLE's which it sounds like their designs aren't to the the updated code. Uh we're required to have 50% of our bathrooms meeting that. So, the two brick and mortar existing would need to be upgraded. I believe we have the space. We just need to add There was just a couple things to if you just took away the brick and mortar, you're two for two.

So, in the scenario you proposed where perhaps we bring in one current design and then close one brick and mortar. We still have two bathrooms. When you get the second L, you bring it in. It meets IBC codes. It gives you 50%. you close the second brick and mortar. So, as long as we're talking about the timing of keeping half of what's available up to code, I think we could look at what I'm asking. Something like that. Yeah, that that makes sense to me.

Okay. because I I would hate to do it and then they don't meet the standard and we're just leaving the bathrooms open that we were told needed to be closed for, you know, vandalism purposes and everything else and and so it just doesn't that's a lot of money to spend and not accomplish what we were trying to accomplish. So, thank you.

Anybody else? Next regular city council meeting will be held Monday, November 17th at 7 p.m. with a study session at 5:30 p.m. The study session will be held at the foundry Michelangelo located at 808 Southeast Commerce Avenue number 120 in Battleground. If you've never seen it, it's quite a treat. Uh it is 953. This meeting is journed.