City Council - Regular Meeting

Welcome everyone. I now call the May 12th, 2026 regular city council meeting to order. Uh we'll start by taking a moment to take roll call of the council members by position number. Please say here when the city clerk calls your name. Council member, yes. Mayor Thompson here. Deputy Mayor Alder here. Council member Kurt here. Council member Miles here. Council member Dodd here. Council member Alcabra here. All present. Thank you very much. Um, next up we're going to move to the uh city meeting agenda approval and first is the city manager review of the agenda. Thank you mayor. I'm still working on the new script. It's it's getting there.

We're going to find our rhythm. Well, good evening mayor and deputy mayor and members of the city council. We have a lengthy meeting agenda tonight with a few highlights that include um council will be issuing three proclamations. So, welcome to those who are here to accept for both uh for safe boating and paddling week, affordable housing week, and mental health awareness month. Um the city manager uh report also includes four updates for you tonight. Um so, we'll get to those here very shortly, but it also includes a conversation about the draft uh proposed draft agenda for the joint meeting with the Shoreline Fire RFA board next week, which um it was emailed to you this earlier this afternoon. Council will later be asked to consider a projected agenda item from the deputy mayor about flying the disability pride flag in the month of July. And there's also several items for approval both on the consent calendar and also with presentations which includes uh formalizing flying the LGBTQIA plus progress pride flag in June. Uh some property easements both temporary and permanent. uh as well as adoption of recently discussed code establishing legal consequences in both brothel for exposing a minor child to domestic violence. At the conclusions of tonight's meeting is a study session on affordable housing and multi-family tax exemption code update proposals for consideration as well as a periodic training of compliance of the open government's training act. So with that I'll turn it over to you to consider adoption of tonight's meeting agenda.

Thank you very much city manager. Um, council, are there any changes to tonight's agenda that somebody would like to propose? Thank you. There is not. Um, we'll move on to public engagement opportunities. Arts Alive art walk and collage workshop. Meet artist Matthew McCoy, who is currently featured at our city hall gallery, and learn more about his work at the Arts Alive artwork. Artist Andrea Lewiki will also host a collage workshop. That's Thursday, May 14th from 5 to 8:00 p.m. here in the city hall lobby. Wayne A Wayne openspace action plan open house. Join the second open house for the Wayne open space action plan. You can get an update on the project, explore explore preliminary design concepts and speak with park staff and project consultants. That's Thursday, May 28th from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. again right here in city hall. Summer in both is almost here. Both summer event lineup is now available. We've got a variety of exciting events for all ages to enjoy all summer long. There's something for everyone. Listen to live music, watch a movie under the stars, or attend a familyfriendly performance. And next up is proclamations. We're going to start with safe boating and paddling week as soon as I pull it out of the pile here. Whereas the city of both encompasses the Seamish River and other waterways, and whereas many both residents of all ages engage in recreational boating and paddling, and whereas the vast majority of serious boating and paddling accidents are caused by a lack of training, human error, or poor judgment, and whereas with the surge of Americans engaging in paddling activities since 2020, many without any training, paddling fatalities now constitute more than 25% of all boating fatalities nationwide. And whereas a significant number of boers who lose their lives by drowning each year would be alive today if they'd worn their life jackets. And whereas the mission of the United States Coast Guard auxiliary is to promote and improve recreational boating safety by teaching boating safety courses and conducting vessel safety checks. Now

therefore, I Mason Thompson, mayor of the city of both, do hereby proclaim May 16th through 22nd, 2026 is safe boating and paddling week in both and encourage all community members to learn about and practice safe boating. And we have someone here to accept. Correct. Awesome. I'll tell you what. Meet me up there. Script there. Thank you. Okay, now I'm on. Thank you. So, um, Dale Bodica, um, there past uh, vice commander for division 2, which is the greater Seattle area in the United States Coast Guard Auxiliary. So, good evening and thank you for recognizing recognizing National Safe Boating and Paddling Week. Also, the great livability provided by the recreational boating opportunities provided by the city of both miles of shoreline within the city. We come to you with this request at this time every year to remind residents of the inherent dangers of these activities. And while while the air may be warm and warmer, it the water is still cold. To prevent incidents and preserve the life, the Coast Guard has established minimum carriage requirements on all vessels including paddle craft. uh the most important of which is the life jacket which is required uh for every person on board and every person that

may be towed. I would okay um I would uh I would hope I this is where um I would ask that the council take a look at what u other cities have done in the area in regards to mandatory wear of life jackets. I think the city of Kenmore and Forest Lake Forest Park has now got an ordinance that requires life jacket wear in the northern part of Lake Washington in the lower extremities of the Seamish River. Okay. Uh I would also like to highlight the requirement to carry a sound producing device on all vessels including paddlecraft. This can be accomplished by simply attaching a whistle to your life jacket which can be used to u pre uh prevent collision and also to summon summon help in the in if you need it. Our efforts in the past decades to to educate voters on safe boating practices and the requirement of a boer education card for motorized vessels has has fortunately driven the numbers down. But however, as you indicated earlier, the um recent um increase in uneducated paddlecraft operators has resulted in a continuence of our unacceptable numbers of deaths and injuries and property damage throughout the state of Washington. Uh hopefully the residents of Bath will hear our message this this evening and adopt safe boating operational procedures and enjoy their recreational boating activities. We look forward to continuing our partnering with the city of both to advance water safety activity and boating organizations within the city. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

And if you want to hang out and get a picture with us later, we'll do that after we do all the proclamations. Some life jackets if you'd like to wear them. I'm good, but thank you. Oh. Oh, deputy mayor's into it. Definitely wear the life jacket. All right. If if we call a vote, I'm going to end up wearing a life jacket anyway. So, I'll wear a life jacket for you to wear a life jacket. You were not recognized.

All right. Next up is affordable housing week. Whereas all people should have access to safe, healthy, and affordable homes within communities that provide opportunity. And whereas the US Department of Housing and Urban Development defines affordable housing as housing on which the occupant is paying no more than 30% of gross income for housing costs, including utilities. And whereas studies have found that each $100 increase in median rent results in a 15% increase in homelessness in metro areas and a 39% increase in homelessness in suburbs and rural areas. And whereas united to raise public awareness, people, organizations, and communities throughout King and Snowish County counties are participating in local affordable housing week activities to elevate the critical need to create healthy communities with ample affordable housing. And whereas the city of both is proud to partner with and support current and future community partners on the development of affordable housing in both, helping to expand access to safe, stable homes for residents in our community. And whereas the city of both endorses the goals, objectives, and purposes of affordable housing week, and in doing so, firmly recommits itself to ensuring that all people in both live with dignity in safe, healthy, and affordable homes. Now, therefore, I, Mason Thompson, mayor of the city of both, do hereby proclaim the week of May 12th through 16th, 2026 is affordable housing week in both, and commit to actions and efforts towards stable and sustainable housing solutions for our community. Um, and we have representatives from Imagine Housing and Hasco here to expect if you come up there.

Thank you so much. You guys can fight over this and thank you and feel free to say a few words. Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. It's an fantastic opportunity to celebrate the needs of our community and support those who desperately need affordable housing. Thank you so much for this proclamation and inviting us to speak here today. My name is Lori Olsen. I am the CEO of the Housing Authority of Snomish County. Um we don't represent all of your city because of course we represent Snomish County, but we're really happy to be here with you today. Uh Hasco serves as a pass through for the federal voucher program. We support over 4,000 households that live throughout the county, including both. We also own and operate 2700 apartments that remain affordable for uh residents up to 80% of the area median income. As you know, housing affordability is a challenge where most folks need to earn at least $200,000 in order to buy a home. Rent has gone up 50% since 2014 and incomes continue to not rise at that same level. We need to change the story on affordability for our community and cities like yours. Taking action like this really does highlight and improve our opportunity to do just that. I want to talk about Hasco. We're doing several things this year. Uh in February, we purchased a building called the Allegro. This is a a purchase that allows 240 apartments near a future light rail station at 164th in Nashway. In addition, we have two new construction projects coming online this year, including one in the city of Lynwood, 120 apartments, and then uh we have one in the city of Mary'sville Breing Ground next month. In addition, we're also helping Habitat for Humanity launch their first new construction affordable home ownership project in about 12 years. So there'll be eight cottages in the city of Lynwood. So if you have any surplus land that you'd like to share with the Habitat for Humanity, we'd be happy to chat. We're doing a lot to create affordability in our region and

we're just grateful to be here with you today. Thank you. Good evening, mayor and council members. Uh my name is Troy Draws with Imagine Housing. Uh wanted to say thank you so much for including us in this affordable housing proclamation. Uh we value the city as a valuable partner in the work that we do and we're very excited that uh later this summer we'll be opening our first affordable housing development here in both just down the street called Sam Senior Apartments. We're almost there uh just about ready to cross the finish line. So thank you again for being such a great supportive city to do this kind of work in your jurisdiction and uh we look forward to doing many more projects with you.

Hello. I don't know if you were aware that there were four of us here to accept the proclamation. So, Anan said we could be here. Um, so thank you, mayor, deputy mayor, and council members and city staff for recognizing the need and continuing to do the work to create opportunities for housing that is affordable to people with low incomes. I'm Reverend Kristen Joiner and I'm leader of the both urban project um due to the land contribution from the city of both and a partnership with Bridge Housing that will bring exciting uh affordable housing to the city of both. Your work to create incentives and your very practical and productive partnership with both United Methodist Church and Bridge Housing shows true leadership in our region. Growth is going to happen because we live in a beautiful place. continued attention and careful planning that balances all the needs that arise is tough work and it takes people that see the long-term benefits of diverse housing choices alongside the immediate and real impacts of the current residents. So this work that's done well strengthens our community and that is something that our team greatly values. The both urban project that includes affordable housing is a great example of how affordable housing doesn't just benefit the residents who live there. It supports local employers, schools, and neighborhoods. In both Urban's case, with construction anticipated to begin in early 27, we will bring an amazing community space, bless you, with new food and beverage options and human services to the people who are in both for a day or a lifetime. something we couldn't have done without the affordable housing portion of the project. And I'm aware of efforts to bring ID housing um and Habitat and housing with Habitat for Humanity to downtown both. And I'm super excited for that. And I hope for all of us that this comes to fruition. Our hope for affordable housing week is that people take the time to go to the webinars and events that are brought to us by the

Housing Development Consortium and North Urban Human Services Alliance. and we thank you for your support. Good evening. You get one more affordable housing week proclamation recipient here, but my name is Sophie Glass and I'm with ARCH, which stands for a regional coalition for housing. As many of you know, ARCH brings together 15 cities and King County. Uh the 15 cities are across East King County, to have a shared mission to build more affordable housing faster. And through pulled resources, Arch has built about six affordable housing developments uh within both. And we continue to steward a number of other units that you all have created through your programs, affordable housing programs. Uh we're very excited to be one of the uh contributors to the Baffl urban program, which uh project, which you just heard about a moment ago, which is really um an exemplary project of how community and cities can work together. Uh, so a lot of great progress is being made in the city of both, but we recognize that there are 11,000 people on Arch's mailing list who are just standing by for the their affordable apartment or their first uh affordable home ownership unit. And so we have a lot to work to do, but I think I'm a real believer in ARCH and the power of collaboration. And I want to thank you all for joining ARCH back in 1995. And so for 31 years, if my math is right, you all have been a tremendous partner. and I've enjoyed getting to know some of the elected officials on your council recently and I know that Kyle has been a huge asset for in our executive board for years. So, thank you for being part of a regional solution to our regional affordable housing crisis and u it's a pleasure to to be here to celebrate this week.

All right, next up we have one for mental health awareness month and this is our last one in case you were wondering and about to present and wondering when you can go home. Uh whereas May is designated as mental health awareness month to raise public awareness, reduce stigma, and promote understanding of mental health issues. And whereas in Washington state, approximately 300,000 adults experience serious mental illness each year. And nearly half of all adults have reported symptoms of anxiety or depression. And whereas 15% of youth in Washington have suffered adverse childhood experiences which are linked to mental health illness and substance misuse in adulthood. And whereas mental health conditions are common and treatable, yet access to care remains a challenge with only 44% of Washingtonians with a serious form of mental illness receiving treatment. And whereas mental health challenges disproportionately affect historically marginalized communities, including people of color, LGBTQIA plus people, and low-income populations who often face additional barriers to accessing culturally competent mental health care. And whereas the city of both is proud to partner with community organizations including the Northshore YMCA to expand access to free mental health services for both residents and reduce barriers that can prevent individuals and families from receiving the care and support they need. Now therefore, I Mason Thompson, mayor of the city of both do hereby proclaim May 2026 as mental health awareness month in both joining advocates and communities across the country in promoting mental health awareness and supporting those affected by mental health conditions. Um, and I believe we have the Northshore YMCA team here. Perfect.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Appreciate it.

Uh, good evening everyone. My name is Donnie Goodman. I'm the executive director over the behavioral health programs for the YMCA of Greater Seattle's Social Impact Center. Try putting that on a business card. Um first of all let me just briefly tell you about the social impact center. We are the second largest impact or social services of the wise in the United States and we always think of wise of the swim and gyms branches as we call them. Well in addition we have three programs that make up our social services. One is foster care. We're one of the most robust placements for foster care in the state and we're very proud of the fact that we provide additional support to families once they uh agree to be a foster parent. We're the largest housing of 18 to 24 year olds in the state who are homeless or uh struggling with um consistent and supportive housing and we run shelters. And then the third program which I oversee is the behavioral health services. It's made up of four different programs. the outpatient behavioral health um which is the traditional mental health and addiction services. We're based in various branches, schools and community centers. We have the formerly known as Kors Children's Crisis Outreach Response Services. We're the one and only uh agency in the county that carries this. 24/7 we respond to 18 and younger uh individuals and families or 19 to 24 year old youth in homeless shelters. Um either case, we respond with a group of three people that provide behavioral health immediately and as well as parent and youth support. And of course, I'm very proud of we have uh just graduated the first 48 students in a free masters program. We started two years ago to increase the diversity and representation of behavioral health individuals. As a gay Native American, I know what it's like not to have people look at me or be like me across from me sitting in therapy. And so our goal is

to expand that. And then I'm here tonight a nod I really want to recognize because he invited a while back with the opioid award monies basel reached out about hey what are the things we can do for our community and I was invited to one of your community meetings uh the daytime ones with different social services and agencies from both and right away like why do I not live here to have to have providers council members politicians to truly care about their constituents is So I I was emotionally uh moved that day, still am, especially in the times that we're in right now. And so I just want to extend my greatest gratitude with that. And so what we have done because of your guys' support and really want to enhance, we um if you've been to the Northshore Y, you will might have noticed we call it the greenhouse. There's a a house. It was I guess a daycare at one time. Prior to that was truly somebody's home. And we are currently remodeling that. We are putting mental health therapy rooms, group rooms uh in there and as well as we are locating one of our six corors teams will be stationed there. So a year ago Kors was revamped to meet a new model of services and we are expanded to have instead of one office at 2100 downtown Seattle where people go out for the emergency response we have six offices both being one of them. And so they're currently in the Y as we're remodeling. And so it's really a great honor and we're able to do this because of the care and compassion all of you have done and a and nod and your team. So it's really humbling to receive this. So thank you.

Thank you.

Hey, the next time people from the YMCA come, can we get like a village people theme like music going over the thing? It seems like it'd be fun. All right, next up is public comment. The city has accepted public comment in writing as well as accepted signups for those who wish to speak at tonight's meeting. Written comments submitted to the city clerk no later than 3 p.m. today were forwarded to all city council members and are part of the record. When the clerk calls your name, you'll have three minutes to speak. Please note that council will receive your input, but we do not engage in discussion of these topics. Staff will make note of items requiring follow-up. City clerk Thank you, mayor. We received comment from Bart Flora who wrote in regarding the multif family tax exemption and development challenges for building affordable housing which was forwarded to council and council received comment from Natalie Reber um on behalf of the master builders association of King and Snomish counties regarding proposed mandatory affordable housing requirements. That was it for written comment. I do not have anyone signed up to speak, but anyone in the audience that wishes to, can you please raise your hand? And anyone, any remote attendees, please raise your virtual hand? I'm not seeing anyone.

Thank you so much. Um, all right. Next up is reports, and we're going to start with the city manager reports, and we have presentations under that agenda item.

Yeah, quite a few tonight. So, I'll keep my my additional comments brief, but I did want to just uh close the loop with one thing from last week with council. Uh during your meeting, you authorized me to complete a transaction to purchase the property at 100015 Main Street, the former Guy Deoro site. I'm pleased to report that as of 3:00, that transaction is completed, recorded with the county, and uh it is now in city control. And again, we'll continue working on additional property acquisition in downtown with an update to council on June 2nd. Um, next up then in the first report, you'll see on your agenda, there was a placeholder for a discussion of a draft agenda for a joint meeting between the both city council and the Shoreline Fire Department RFA board of commissioners. And we've been um working hard to pull and try and align calendars for 17 elected officials, which is no small feat. We haven't hit perfect attendance, but we hit uh critical mass. And so the proposed date and time is would be next Monday, May 18th, starting at 5:30. Uh and we will uh we will be hosting here at both city hall. We'll make the table just a little bit larger for um everyone to participate. Earlier this afternoon, I sent an email with a draft agenda as well as a copy of discussion items that staff have been working through as we discuss the nuances of what would it look like to move forward with uh joining the Shoreline Fire Department RFA. Um, I also wanted to share that uh before opening it up for any feedback that Chief Count and I both uh walked into our meeting last Thursday to start discussing this joint meeting with the sense that it would be helpful to find somebody to facilitate the meeting so that all participants were able to participate. And so uh we are uh we're poised to be joined by Bruce Granni who would be facilitating that meeting. He has done work with Shoreline Fire before through their conversations with the Northshore Fire District. Um, and I did

meet with him today and seems very well suited for the task and was able to uh reflect on the agenda as well. So, what I wanted to note is that the agenda that's before you essentially has four parts, introductions, brief background, and then the heart of the meeting would be on discussion items to talk about service level considerations uh which Chief Cowan would lead. uh discuss the proposed plan of governance of which there will be draft language for both uh sides to consider as well as um finance finance discussions. There's a number of things in the attached document uh about discussion items that staff are working through that are financial related. Um but in the interest of time of not being here for uh six hours or plus uh what uh what Bruce had suggested was if we start with a top three and I think I merged together four topics uh for the financial discussions to focus on but your packet would also have answers to all the remaining questions too. So there'd be opportunity for Q&A if there were details that you wanted to know more deta information on. Um, but before finalizing this and based on the feedback from last week of at least wanting to have some touch, I wanted to update you on what was planned, see if there's any missing, anything missing, and then otherwise, u, we will be prepared to publish an agenda for next Monday. With that, I'll pause if there's any questions or feedback.

Question. Yeah. So, uh, city manager, thanks for this. This looks really great. Um it looks like an aggressive agenda and I know we've got what I call like two law firms coming together. Um and it feels like there going to be 60 people in one room and thankfully we have a facilitator. Um is it realistic that we're going to get through all of these um agenda items? Here's where I'm having pause. It's the financial discussion that feels like the deepest dive and I want to make sure that we we get to everything. Is there sort of a plan B if we do not get to any all of it?

Thank you. you know, and we will we'll be sure to prioritize and perhaps even um we the flow of it was we were thinking that um the first two are um are higher level questions that I think both bodies both elected bodies are interested in but um I think the written answer should be uh fairly informative but all of it like leads up to then what is the impact of both voters so we'll try and spend the most time there but very well point well taken if you have even if we have um of the potent potential 17 even if we had 12 there if everybody speaks twice that's a that's a meeting right there so understood.

Sure. Sure. Sure. Um Robish rules of order. Um and my last question would be what should we take away as the the net takeaway? What would be next steps after this?

Yeah. So our facilitator will follow up to listen for things. There will be no decisions made in this meeting, but it is intended to uh put clarity on the table for both parties to make a decision on whether or not you are interested in moving forward. As mentioned last week, um we would then at a future meeting here at the both city council, you'd have a resolution before you to consider do we want to send notification to the shoreline RFA board of an intent or interest in joining. So, I think that conversation is where then the things that you learned at this joint meeting next week would help inform then of whether or not you have what you're looking for to make a decision. Yes or no? Do you want to join?

Okay. Thank you. You've answered all my questions. Thank you.

I think this uh pretty accurately uh summarizes what we cared about the most and what we want to talk about. So, I'm I'm good with it and appreciate this.

All right. Well, thank you all for the consideration and the tight turnarounds. Um we're we're seeing this come together pretty quickly. Um the next report then before you. We do have a presentation from uh King County Metro staff. So, I'm going to invite first though our very own Steve Morawa, deputy director of public works here to introduce staff members. We're joined by staff here online and in person. Um, as council may remember last July for five of you, you were part of sending a letter to King County expressing your support for continuing the Metroflex program in uh both by way of background. As a reminder, we had been alerted to our by our neighboring jurisdiction in Kirkland that there was changes being considered based on writership and we uh brought this forward to council in which he then expressed the importance of boy we have some BRT coming uh and let's see let's keep the program in our in our neighborhood in order to uh see what that influence will have. So, um, again, Metroflex is considered a pilot in the Baffl area right now. And while the original area was underperforming, we're thankful that, uh, the boundaries were at least adjusted and not that this didn't go away. And to hear more about it tonight, I'm going to turn things over to Steve to introduce King County staff who we're thankful to have join us. So, good evening, Mayor Thompson, Deputy Mayor Alder, and council members. Tonight we have King County Metro staff here to give you a short brief and also be available to answer questions on recent modifications to the metro flex area serving both. Like uh city manager mentioned, providing efficient effective transit service is a very complex thing made more difficult with the always present funding limitations and in this case the pilot area serving both was not performing well and King County had to make some hard decisions. So, I want to thank staff for continuously being open and to listening to our input and working hard to see if modifications could be found to make the pilot the

best give the pilot the best chance to succeed. So, tonight we have three staff members. There's Amanda Pleasant Brown, local policy and government affairs lead, Meredith Samson, transportation planner, and sitting in the back is Genevie Jones, government relations administrator for North and East King County. Uh, thank you so very much and um, big shout out to both staff as well, past and present, who were really wonderful in the conversations and really appreciate the continued conversations we had. So, thank you so much for that work. Um, so yeah, like Steve said, I'm Amanda Pleasant Brown, she they pronouns. I do government relations for King County Metro, working with our 39 cities. We're really uh, excited to be here to talk with you tonight about the adjustments to the Metrolex boundaries. Um, please let us know your questions. Um, oh, work for me. Here we go. Uh, here's our agenda tonight. So, we're going to give you a quick overview of the program just so that you're aware of it. Um, we'll go over what adjustments we made and the why. And then we we're have a couple minutes for Q&A, but we're going to be a little tight tonight, I know.

Hi everybody. Uh, Meredith Samson. I use she her pronouns. I'm a transportation planner for Metro. Um, I can give a quick overview of Metrolex. So, Metroflex augments the fixed route transit network in King County by reaching areas of lower demand with less fixed route transit coverage, bridging connections between community destinations and local transit hubs. Um, we currently serve 10 service areas across the county. Um, so if any of you have used Metroflex, you may know this, but uh Metroflex is open to the general public. You can request a ride on demand using the app or uh through our call center or through web booking. Um you provide a start or end location anywhere within the service area. You get an ETA. You walk to a nearby pickup location, usually the nearest intersection. Um and you join a shared ride, potentially shared ride within a 15-minute ETA on average. Um it's the same fair as a bus, free transfers with Orca, youth ride free. Same rules apply as all Orca cards. Okay. Um, so now I can go over kind of the adjustments to the service areas that affect both. So we're talking about the former Wanita service area and the Northshore pilot service area. Um, so this slide shows the performance of both service areas from April to December 2025. Um, and this performance is really the impetus for us making these changes. We track quite a few different metrics across our service areas. Um, some of them are to track service quality like weight times or percent of time riders get a notice that there's no seat available. Um, other metrics feed directly into our evaluation like cost per ride, rides per hour, and really get it are we using our resources efficiently um and in a way that aligns with Metro's goals for the program. So, for reference, the rides per vehicle hour here um in our last evaluation, the service areas that passed had about 2.1 rides per vehicle hour. So, both of these service areas were underperforming. We saw that they likely would not pass our evaluation. So seeing this, we thought we could probably make a change that would um help these

service areas serve more riders. Um since launching Metrolex, we have learned a lot about where these types of services perform well. We've tried it in a lot of different areas across King County. Um and so I can kind of get into those on the next slide, but we use these best practices to inform our our decision- making and changes for the service areas. Um so some of these best practices are uh population density uh and destination density uh near each other drive productivity. So if you have um an area with a certain level of residential density and businesses that are close by to each other um it it makes for shorter rides. It increases ridership and when I say productivity I mean rides per hour. So just gets that rides per hour number up. Um having a transit hub in the service area that is served by frequent routes drives ridership across all of our service areas. Transit hubs are the number one location that riders are traveling to. Centering these destinations like transit hubs within a service area can help to increase efficiency. So shorter trips, if the the hubs are on the outskirts of the service area, it creates longer trips. The vehicles are in use for a longer time. Um so it decreases that rides per hour number. And lastly, uh taking the street network into account is really important. Something might look really close on a map, but you know that driving there could take a lot longer than it might look. So, so we it is a vehicle. So, we do have to take the street network into account there. Okay. So, this slide shows the adjusted Wanita and Totem Lake pilot service area. So, we the gray outline is the previous Wanita service area and the green outline is the um the new service area. I think we might have missed

I did.

Yeah, we could do either order, but this one was first. Okay, backing up. We're going to talk about the Northshore service area. Um the blue service area is the new Northshore service area and the gray is the former Northshore service area. So this centers around the Kenmore park and ride. Um this area has a higher population and job density than the previous service area which was like largely residential through the middle of the service area with destinations on the outskirts like I talked about. And this also has more destinations and community assets included in this area including Udub both St. Edward State Park um both and more high schools. So, this area brings new coverage of Metrolex to areas of both that were not previously covered, which we're really excited about and we think will make this service area a lot more productive than the previous one. Um, and the southern portion here of this service area was formerly covered by the Wanita pilot, uh, which I will get into next, but we kind of are switching coverage here. Okay, here is the new Wanita Totem Lake pilot service area centering around the Totem Lake Transit Center. It's a smaller service area. The Wanita service area was very large compared to like across our service areas which led to much longer trips. This has a higher population density, higher density of destinations and community assets listed here. Schools, high schools, um colleges are uh huge ridership drivers in metrlex service areas. So we really focused on the areas of Northshore and uh Wanita that were having the highest ridership so far and then extending them into areas that we thought would perform better. Uh so to talk about rider communication uh in we started the writer communication a month out from when we made the the change to give riders enough time to understand what was happening but not too much time where they were confused. So in late March um there were inapp messages released in the via um or in the metroflex app. There was emails to riders who have used Metroflex in either service area. And

then in early April, we had sent a follow-up inapp message, posted a Metro Matters blog post. In mid April, we updated our website. And then on launch day and afterwards, we did a social media and marketing push and invehicle flyers. In addition to these, for people who called in in the call center and might not look at their email or have access to the app, like they were the people in the call center a month out were were letting folks know about these changes as well. Um and lastly, these pilots will uh last at least one year from April 20th. So this the Northshore pilot, which now covers both um began in September 2024. So the two-year mark would be coming up this September, and that's normally when we would evaluate a pilot. Because we're making this major change right now, we will be running this pilot in this new service area for at least a year. And the evaluation takes into account the last six months of u performance. So, we're really hoping that we can get the writership up and it it does well in our performance. Um, and we will also be setting up regular meetings with um city staff to kind of review performance every couple months and discuss if we've heard any feedback or if there any minor changes that need to happen

and as Meredith is talking about um it really it goes we work together on this and so um we're continue we already shared a communications toolkit and so please share that. Um, we have video promotions that have gone out, social media, copy, graphics. Um, we even tried to do some YouTube and Tik Tok ads. Um, and we also have a blog post that we're happy to share as well. And so we're going to continue as as Merida said to dedicate staff time to this. Um, it was really helpful when we got the staffs together of Wanita Kirkland uh, and Kenmore when we were trying to save the services. We had a combined communication effort and we hope to continue that sort of energy so that we can get more people writing the service. And that's the end of our presentation. We're happy to take any questions you have. Council member Dodd,

thank you. Thank you for the updates. I really appreciate it. Um I was uh struck by two questions. Um the first you mentioned um learning about what types of street networks support Metrolex. Are you sharing that with like our community development department and our transportation engineers and the other affected cities so they kind of know what's working when it comes to this sort of service?

Yeah, we certainly can. The Metroflex is operated by minivans. So essentially, if a car can navigate the street, the minivan will also be able to navigate the street. When I'm talking about street networks, we're mostly talking about um you know, if a if a service area is biseected by a highway and it maybe only has one crossing, like that could lead to a lot longer trip time. So, we have to consider do we want to include that area or not? It could increase the could use the vehicles for more time. Um but yeah, we're we're coordinating with cities and happy to share any information we learned.

Yeah, that makes sense. We have a lot of highways in some of those zones. Um the other question I had um is if anything what does the handoff look like between like community transit and metro? Like if you are using Metrolex on and the overall trip crosses the county line, what does that handoff sort of look like? How are people guided through that journey? So the current Northshore ser or the Northshore service area as of pre April 20th it did cross county lines and that was um it was seamless for riders. We just operated it as one service. They didn't know they were crossing county lines. The new service area is fully within King County. So I guess when someone is saying I need to get and I'm going to pick something random I guess I need to get from the Fred Meyer in Snomish County to Udub both are they kind of guided through taking a community transit bus if they and then Metroflex if they if that if it's called for I'm really struggling to come up with a route that would make sense with that but like how is someone guided through getting across the county line and it's okay if that's a question that needs to go somewhere else. I just I'm curious about how writers are engaged with with that.

Yeah, absolutely. So, there is a boundary. So, if folks are within that boundary, then they will be requested or they can request a Metroflex ride. So, you do need to be within the boundary to even request the ride. So, as far as the handoff, because it's no longer serving Snowomish County, there wouldn't necessarily be a handoff. We do have fixed route filtering on the service. So, if there is a um a trip that they can complete on a fixed route service or fixed route bus that would be better for their trip in general, they will be pulled to that. And so, I think that's about where we can get to on answering this question, but if there's more specifics, please let us know. And we work with Steve all the time, so we're happy to follow up.

No, and that totally makes sense. If you you couldn't use it if you aren't in the boundary. So, and I live in the Snowish County part of the city, so I'm not, you know, unless I'm coming from here, I wouldn't, you know. Thanks. Makes sense. Thank you. Council member Miles,

thank you. Great presentation and I'm super excited about this. I am a former New Yorker and have lived here 30 years without a car. Now I do have one and I know I know metro. Um, since I moved from Wanita to both what I've noticed is that there is a der of transportation options where I live in North Creek. It's now becoming a little bit more residential. There are office parks there as well. It's mostly car ccentric, but I have a teenager right now that can't take the bus. So, I was looking forward to this being a service. So, I was wondering, is there an opportunity to expand the service area knowing that there are constraints within the pilot?

I would say at this time, we're not looking to expand the service area for a couple reasons. Uh, one is just the metroflex budget. Like, we have a certain number of a certain amount of money that provides certain number of vehicles in the service area. And the larger the service area is, the worse the service quality gets without f more funding. And just from a service design standpoint, we don't like to create very large service areas. But that doesn't mean there can't be um like there's always partnership opportunities on the table. But uh we would have to look at that from a like a service design perspective as well.

Understood. And this is something I think is like a longer term conversation and different options that are on the table. It's sort of my own personal mission to get more transportation options there. is just seems like it's the lone 230 bus and there has to be a little bit more um now that it is becoming more residential. So, I'm happy to partner with you and have further conversations and you can come talk to me because um we do have some opportunities potentially with another bus provider. We're kind of in two counties and that's a good thing and sometimes complex but um yeah, come talk to me and there's some things we have going on that hopefully will pan out.

Oh, perfect. Thank you. Giving me hope. Council member Kurt, thanks for the presentation. I um love this program. It does, it's kind of like the metro's answer to ride um hailing. And so um one of the experiences that I had with the initial pilot program in the Northshore area was that our the area that intersected downtown both also intersected um Evergreen Health in Totem Lake. And that was a service that I talked up to a lot of people to get them a connection to the hospital for their appointments. Um, and I I have lamented the change in um the boundaries now that um we're kind of separated out from the the other district that contains Evergreen Health. um and thinking about resources for writers who are looking for that um sort of flexibility to get from their door to um an appointment. I asked Metro and they said, "Oh, we have this hide shuttle service. Um check with that." Like both is the only area in King County that doesn't have hide shuttle. Um so are there other resources that you would point people to to cross between these um service areas now that um our our area is sort of shifted? Do you have any ideas or if you don't have any on the top of your head? I know you didn't prepare for that. So um I'd love to hear more um more ways that we can connect folks to resources to get around. Um and I know there's a lot of different requirements and eligibility requirements and so forth. So, um, uh, that sort of helpful resource could be, um, shared more broadly. We get a lot of folks coming to us as council members with a problem with transportation and they're looking for a solution and we are long-term thinkers up here. Um, so

it's really helpful to connect them to resources at Metro. Yeah, those those types of um desired connections are something we definitely want to hear about with these services as we're working to refine them. I don't have I have a couple ideas of connections, but without uh my map in front of me, I can't say for sure, and I don't want to be on the record saying something incorrect. So, I'll have to follow up about about those options. But, um, always appreciate the feedback for those kinds of connections. Deputy Mayor,

uh, thank you, mayor. Thank you for this presentation. Um, great job on timing and pacing. I know you were worried about that. Um, but it's really exciting to see that. Um, so like you know, everyone up here has different experiences of depending on where we live in the city. And so previously my story was that uh my neighborhood was not included within the service area and it is now which means that my kid who goes uh to Lake Washington Tech and gets a bus to the Kenmore Park and Ride could now benefit from the service and that is an excellent improvement for for you know my little pocket of the city. And so I think what my colleagues are saying up here is that we all are looking to these programs to meet the needs of our communities and our neighborhoods. Um, and so it can be it can be awkward and uncomfortable to be like, "Hey, it was better for you now and now it's better for us." And so I I recognize this some of the the strain and effort that goes into trying to create something that works for as many people as possible. Um, and so while I understand, you know, the some of the logic and reasoning that went into these changes and appreciate the improvements, um, I guess I'm wondering, you know, what well, and I'm I'm also observing you being open to feedback as well. And so, what is the best way for people to communicate their like desired paths and corridors that are beneficial to their community? and like where do we put that feedback to you like through a public process?

Um really appreciate that and there are lots of ways which we receive feedback. So I think our customer service is one intake place. So that's 2065533000. So folks can always call that and provide feedback especially we have like the east link connections network that's getting implemented. And so if folks have feedback, we have already alerted our customer service folks like, "Hey, you might be getting some feedback about people's chains and routes. Please be aware that gets passed on to our service planning, service development team." Um, we also have we'll have some projects coming up and so I know that we've got some policy updates that are coming up next year. Um, we'll also have some restructure projects that are going to be coming up around the new rapid ride kine that's going to be happening in a couple of years. So, we really are and just know that here at Metro, we've been really trying to improve our communication and connections with cities and partnerships. And so, we've been trying to do better in just letting folks know and letting city staff know and have more regular conversations about what's coming up so that we can also prepare and city staff can prepare their resources with the limited resources that folks have to participate in those processes. And oftentimes those do have a community engagement element. Um, if you hear things from your public comment, please always feel free to pass those on. Again, we talk to your city staff. You all have connections to us. Metro literally hired me so we can make sure that we could have better relationships. Um, other ways that we can hear from folks. I think those are the ones off the top of my head. So, just, you know, I would subscribe to our updates. If we've got projects that are coming out, please subscribe to our blog. Um, we let try to let jurisdictional staff know what's coming up. We're trying to do also a quarterly newsletter so that folks know other ways that they can participate. But those other things, please do contact our customer service. We do read all of those comments. We sort them. They go to our planners and then Meredith herself will read them and then see how we can meet a need if we can.

I would like to pledge that I will subscribe to your newsletter and when there are projects that are relevant to our community, I will put them in my newsletter that will go out to both residents. Thank you so much. And please do include the Metroflex info. Oh, I would love to. Yes, would love to. We really do want to see writership grow. Council member Angulari uh great presentation, great initiative. Uh nowadays owning a car is expensive. So I think now light rail and with all this I think a lot of people can afford to go around easily. Thank you so much. Thank you.

I just want to say thank you for continuing this. I know the writership was down and we sent a letter and I see you being responsive and just please know that's appreciated. like we really appreciate you coming out here. We really appreciate kind of getting another bite at the apple on this and hopefully our comm's team has the comm's toolkit and we can communicate it out as best we can. We have a we have a new comm's team this year. So, we're we're doing we're doing a little better than we used to. So, we'll do our best to amplify that message as well and just really appreciate you all coming out here tonight. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you for your partnership. Thanks for the time this evening. Bye. Thanks.

All right, council. turning to the third presentation tonight and we'll still get to hear from Steve I believe. Um I've been attending council meetings since 2015 now and there's two things that I'm reminded of tonight that I don't get to pull out very often. Number one is is that May is safe boating and paddling week. I've been hearing about it now for over a decade and it's ingrained in me. The second is is that there's an endless treadmill relationship between the capital facilities plan and the transportation improvement program or tip that is due by July 1st if we want to stay grant eligible. I've been hearing about that annually for over a decade too. So tonight you're going to hear about it and hopefully can explain it to your friends at cocktail parties. With that, I'm going to turn things over to Steve Morawa, the deputy.

We love so much. We have plans on plans. Plans of plans. Stack them up. and I'll turn it over to Steve to put it in context and tell you what to expect.

Thank you, city manager. Good evening again. So, the goal of this briefing is to introduce you to the six-year transportation improvement program. We also call it the TIP or TIP. Um, there's no action tonight. Let's see if I can do this. Yeah. Um, I'll briefly cover what it is, why we need one, how it's developed, and how it's related to the capital facility plan and the comprehensive plan. Uh, what the process will be to adopt it, and then try to answer any questions that you have. So, the six-year TIP transportation improvement plan program is a list of transportation projects and programs that the city will work on over the next six years. For this cycle, it's 2027 through 2032. It's required by the revised code of Washington, section 3577010. Um, it must sub be submitted at least one time annually and by July 1st to the state. A public hearing is also required prior to approval and you, the council, must be the approving body to approve it. We could actually update this as many times as you want per year, but you would have to go through the same process. One of the important reasons why we want to do this and meet this requirement is also because projects that we go after for grants, the grant agencies often require the projects to be on this six-year tip. So, in both, we develop and approve a capital facilities plan. We call it a CFP. every two years along with the budget. This is the year that we do that. It includes all capital projects. So, transportation projects, utility projects, facility projects, parks projects. And this works out well since we can update the CFP while considering the entire budget rather than and all the capital needs rather than just

looking at the transportation needs all by themselves. So, the six-year tip is essentially the transportation section of the capital facility plan. And you'll notice that the capital facility plan is seven years and it's done every two years and the tip is uh six years and done every one year. So they kind of balanced each other on that second year if that makes sense. And transportation projects in the capital facility plan and therefore in the transportation improvement plan, they come from the 20 year list um of transportation projects that were adopted in the comprehensive plan. And if you're looking for that, the list is in the transportation element. So the process, it's kind of interesting because in odd years since the CFPs have been adopted later in the year, usually like November or December, um the tip that following year basically just matches or mirrors what that CFP approval was. In even years like this year, the tip actually kind of predates the CFP. We're kind of working on the draft CFP right now. So what you will see is essentially matching the draft CFP that you will see. Now if we go through the capital facility plan process and there are some changes made then the following year we will make the tip match that again. So the next step we're just holding the briefing tonight would be a public hearing and that would be on June 2nd. Um, again, that's a requirement and that's where I actually present the list to you folks. Um, and then the following would be June 16, which would be probably on consent if everything goes well, would be to adopt it. And that would give us time to submit it by the July 1 deadline. And again, there's no action tonight. I just wanted to kind of introduce you to what the six-year tip was. um let you

know what the process will be and then I'll be back in early June to kind of go through it in more detail. And with that, if there's any questions, I would be happy to. Let's go back a little bit. It doesn't look like there are any questions, but thank you for bringing this. We uh we all did the capital facilities plan, so we've been through this list and uh we need to get done. Thank you.

Thank you. Appreciate it. All right, last presentation tonight is an update on uh the pop the city's pop shop program. Uh that would be pop, pop shop program. Uh we're be joined tonight by our deputy city manager Claire Corey and economic development coordinator Ashish Jooshi. Uh essentially the tonight's update is about the completion of the third cohort program. So it's a two-year cycle. Um, and in your packet is some video uh some audio testimonials. We're also joined by some of our graduates as well tonight. So, we're excited to have them here. Thankful for their participation in the program and uh looking forward to hearing about uh the program and what's coming next. So, with that, I'll turn things over to Claire.

Thank you, city manager. Good evening, Mayor Thompson, Deputy Mayor Alder, and both city council. Ashish and I are here this evening to provide an update on the pop shops. Uh so there is no action this evening. It is just a briefing on the overall pop shops program. And this is just a reminder that last week we were with you and you approved uh the city council vision 2040. And as you're all aware, one of the vision areas in that document is focused on economic vitality. And one of the important priorities that's listed under that vision area is the economic vitality plan and that was launched last year at about this time. Um and one of the major elements that's included in that plan is uh supporting small businesses and small business incubators and this project is a really important part of that plan and that theme. Um and with that I will turn it over to Ashish and Ashish is going to dive into the details for you.

Thank you deputy city manager. Thank you mayor, deputy mayor and council members. Um as you see here a key part of economic vitality is business growth and one way to measure business growth is through um GDP which is a gross domestic product or the production of goods and services. Uh taking a look at our region you can see that more than 45% of our um GDP is produced by our small businesses and this is measured through payroll and workforce but it outlines that um the way to support those small businesses and one of those methods is a incubator and an incubator is a program where you provide starter space uh for a limited time um for in our case it's two years um at reduced cost to a small business so that they can start to experiment and grow and um build that strength. Our incubator started in 2021 um with a partnership with the city and the port of Seattle and uh working to build uh four 6' by 8 foot uh sheds and turning them into spaces for a small business to begin to grow in. Um since then we've worked on um several cohorts. Um uh we've uh uh gone through um uh three major cohorts and uh the third cohort's graduating uh this spring um and is joining us today. Um as you can see um the first two cohorts we had a lot of learnings um through that process. Uh a couple early exits, a couple additions in the middle of them. Um and so we've taken those lessons um from the third cohort. One thing we wanted to do is make sure that they have additional education and structure so

that they can make it through the whole two years and um pleased to say that uh three of them uh were able to do that and joining us today. We take that um f uh going forward as well to the fourth cohort that we started last year. That included the construction of four additional pop shops as well and um continue those lessons in the fifth cohort that is currently in progress and also our first uh mobile food version of that. So there's a mirrored program um joining us at Triangle Junction. So a handful of metrics define success in a program like this and uh success for a business in general. Um you can see here um a couple and in your packet as well and then there are the qualitative elements through the testimonials that are are accompanying the packet as well. Uh here you can see that revenue is a challenge. um despite being in the heart of downtown um there is that paradox of meeting supply and demand at the same time and we see that um in many elements as we uh continue to bring vibrancy to downtown and other districts. Um from a business perspective though um the key things that they can control is finding a way to build a following and connect to the market. Uh so um connecting with those learning experiences is a key part of this program and um one um area is engaging with um uh those learning opportunities. For example, one of our businesses was in the region's first ever small business um accelerator cohort, which is a learning program over 15 weeks. and they were one of two businesses within six cities in our region that got um high notes of um uh going through the

program and being a high performer in that program. So um that was one example. Another one is um the partnerships that the businesses can make and uh our businesses have made several partnerships. A couple examples are um just working with other local businesses as well as um uh regional businesses. Uh one of our pop shops as part of this cohort. Uh you can actually see their product in uh a business down the street as well as at the airport. Their product um was right near Terminal C at the concourse um until a few um months ago. Um and then ultimately um we want them to also engage in learning to find their market. So a couple of our businesses looked into distribution for example and connected to resources and learning opportunities at the state with its free advising as well as um attending um local um markets and um the uh trade shows. So for example, there is a um local uh chocolate festival and uh the learnings and connections there are invaluable. So that the fact that they went out and connected to those helped. So as we continue this program, we want to uh learn from our peer organizations uh whether it's regional, whether it's national and take some lessons from there to build more structure and more support so that these businesses can uh be in a better place at the end. A couple lessons that we took from um some other peers are um scale matters. So having more businesses go through a program is a key element of success as well as um identifying that pipeline for the next steps. So um commercial space

is a big um area that this program tries to cover but it's a a few steps there. So there's a big um uh area to be able to get a commercial space just due to cost, due to size and due to learning. So continue to uh reduce that gap and we continue to learn um and implement that through future iterations of the program but also um with partnerships. So we are partnering with the campus the graduate program at the school of business to take a holistic look at the program and figure out where we can provide more support where um we can adjust our approach to continue the program in the future. And then um a bigger part is that we want to make sure it aligns with the vitality plan. So this program predated the vitality plan, but it is uh directly aligning with several actions in the vitality plan. And ultimately uh serve in that goal of supporting these many small businesses that you can see on our polka dot map on the right. Um and then uh simultaneously with all that work, we want to launch additional cohorts. So we're launching the current cohort um this summer. Um uh once again um as a reminder, no action is needed. Um and happy to answer questions uh with a special thanks to our businesses in the audience as well who uh helped us learn just as they learned through the program. Thank you,

Deputy Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. Um and thank you for this update. Um, I've been very excited to watch the development of this program since it was introduced and to see it expand and um, get new people in has been really exciting. Um, I recall I think maybe with the second cohort there was like a graduation celebration. Is that happening for the third cohort? Uh, we did have a graduation celebration. Um we have these monthly meetings to check in and um as they connected with the new cohort they had a graduation celebration.

Excellent. Great. Um yeah I just want to congratulate the folks who participated and and I you know I hope that it was a successful um and and just fruitful opportunity to learn and and connect with our community. I know that um community members feel really drawn to that space and that area and and and thank you for the work that you've done. So, um, yeah, I glad to hear this update. Thank you.

I too was glad to hear the update. I'm excited to see who is coming into the next program and see what else we're going to have down there. And um really excited to see us uh you know obviously the space has been upgraded and really excited to see hopefully especially in the summertime more people going there and hanging out and food trucks and just make it a cool place to be. So thank you. Really appreciate it. Well, thank you mayor. That completes the city manager report tonight. Fantastic. Thank you. Um next up is council reports and conversations. Council members. Council member Dodd.

Yes, I have. Um I've been trying to remember to say this. Um Council Member Kurd, the senior center transportation program would go from both to Evergreen Health, but it's not ondemand rides. So, the other thing that's fascinating to me is transitioning folks between um specialized transportation providers, like when someone crosses a county line, like the systems are not the same and there's like a lot of weird extra manual work that the transportation providers have to do to do it. I don't have any thoughts there other than it sucks and if anybody ever hears of work being done to try and normalize that, that would be great. But um there's a lot of room there for more last minute rides. I think it's hard for a lot of people to plan that far ahead to request a ride days in advance, especially if you suddenly have to go to the doctor.

Deputy mayor, I've got an update on the human services committee. Um was that really yesterday? Yeah, we met yesterday. Um, and it was a good overview of of funding and the grant opportunities and just really fantastic to hear about the the work of of how our community has come together to, um, to look out for our immigrant neighbors. And so, um, it's I really enjoy being on that committee, grateful to be on it with, um, Council Member Dodd and Council Member Miles. and and we heard some really great updates that I'm sure will come to the whole council soon, but wanted to let you know that that we met and and things seem to be moving forward well.

All right, I'm going to move on to projected a discussion and kick it over to the deputy mayor about the disability pride flag. Oh, really? Yes.

Fascinating. Um, I'm really grateful for the staff uh putting this memorandum together and um and and bringing this forward to councils for for our consideration. U the disability pride flag is um really recognizes the just the whole gamut and diversity of um of disability that exists within humans. Um, and so each there there is a photo of it in your in your packet. So it's available to the public and also to council members. And so every stripe on this flag represents a different type of disability. So I'll just read through them. Uh, sensory disabilities, psychiatric disabilities, invisible disabilities, cognitive and intellectual disabilities, and physical disabilities. Um it's against a gray background which um has its own so the well like black gray black background which represents mourning the lives that have been lost to systemic abbleism, disability fueled violence, abuse and negligence. Um and as uh well this is personally meaningful to me but I also like to remember that all of us experience some form of disability at some point in our lives. like none of us are um are free from you know the free from the effects of mortality and and having bodies that can fail in a ver in a massive variety of ways. Um and so I think it's very meaningful for us to be able to recognize disability pride month in the month of July. um and and I would very much like to see it displayed to recognize and honor um all of all of us and all of those that we love with uh disabilities in our community. And

so my question to you is would you like to do this? Yes, council.

Yes. And I will remind everyone should you need it that both's location near Seattle Children's in the Northshore School District which has led a lot of great programs over time for access with students with disabilities. Um and just how close we are to services having kindering and child drive. Um we attract a lot of families with a lot of kids and adults with different disabilities whether they be physical or intellectual. and we should support them. I think this is a great idea and I thank you deputy mayor for bringing it forward.

And mayor, with three council members expressing interest, you can keep the ball rolling if more people want to speak to, but um we do have enough now that I will make sure to this gets added on a future agenda similar to how tonight the LGBTQIA plus flag is uh being approved per our flag policy. We'll prepare an agenda bill with a resolution to direct staff to raise this flag in the month of July. But again, if there's more if there's more discussion, please continue. But I just wanted to clarify though, we have what we need. I was just going to say, name your color. I'm gold.

All right. If anybody else has something to say, you're welcome to. All right. And lacking that, I would love to um entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda. Council member dot. I move to approve the consent agenda. Second. I have a motion from council member Dodd and a second from council member Alcaro. Would anybody like to speak to the motion? Seeing none, city clerk, please say yes or no. Council member Angulari, yes. Mayor Thompson, yes. Deputy Mayor Alder, yes. Council member Kurd, yes. Council member Miles, yes. Council member Dodd, yes. Council member Alcabra, yes. Passes 70.

Thank you. All right, it is 7:16. We are going to adjourn to executive session to discuss potential litigation pursuant to RCW 42301101 I with action expectant under item 11A for 15 minutes. Council will return from executive session or journ from executive session or return here at 7:31. Um we'll see you in a few minutes. All right, welcome back. It is 7:31. Um, next up on our agenda is ordinances and resolutions. Um, agenda bill 26078, washdout local agency agreement for the 102nd Avenue Northeast Bridge Planning Study. City Manager.

Thank you, Mayor. We have two items under ordinances and resolutions tonight. And as you mentioned that this uh first one is has does have to do with the 102nd Avenue Bridge. We are joined tonight by Christopher Stillwell, the capital project engineer managing the 102nd Avenue Northeast Bridge Replacement Project. Um and uh we'll turn it over to staff to walk you through.

Thank you. Good evening, Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and members of the council. Um as stated, I'm Christopher Stillwell. from the the engineer managing the replacement study. And uh this is going to be um similar to the presentation we discussed in February. Our hope tonight is that you will approve a resolution authorizing the city manager to execute a local agency agreement with washdant for the 102nd Avenue Northeast Bridge planning study obligating just over a million dollars in grant funds and committing the required local matching funds. I'll do a quick overview, touch on the timeline, and then there'll be time for some questions as well. So just briefly the intent of the project is to conduct a type size and location study with community outreach and cost and feasibility analysis. We received FHWA funds that will be administered or passed through washd which requires the city to enter into a local agency agreement with washd which will enable us to use the funds. In February the city applied for the grant. February 2024 city applied for the grant. We were awarded the grant in August of 2024. And then throughout 25 and 26, the city uh joined other local governments in challenging certain federal grant conditions, specifically King County vers Duffy. In February of this year, uh we came to you with the grant agreement with the FHWA, which you approved. We're here now in May hoping for approval of the WASH local agency

agreement. And if approved, we intend to start the project as soon as possible. Uh no later than quarter 4 of this year. That's it for me. Council member Kurt, thank you for the presentation. I'm excited to get started on this project and I move that we adopt a resolution uh authorizing the city manager to sign a local agency agreement with WASH for the 102nd Avenue Northeast Bridge planning study to obligate 1.08 million in grant funds. Second.

I have a motion from council member Kurd and a second from council member Dodd. Would anybody like to speak to the motion? Seeing none, city clerk. Oh, sorry, Council Rock. I know. Please speak to the motion. I've been I've been quiet. Um I uh last time when we had this I actually voted no because of the terms and conditions imposed on us, but I feel like we as a council we decided to move forward and it makes sense for us to move forward uh uh with uh in this very important piece of infrastructure. So just wanted to for the record. Thank you, Council Member Dodd.

Thanks. Um, I just wanted to say thank you, Council Member Alcabra. Um, you brought up very good points the last time that we talked about this and I think that your points were wellreceived and we also need this infrastructure. So, I just want to say thank you for saying what can be you put it's a tough position you were in. So, thank you. All right. Please say yes or no. Council member Angular, yes. Mayor Thompson, yes. Deputy Mayor Alder, yes. Council member Kurt. Yes. Council member Miles. Yes. Council member Dodd. Yes. Council member Alcabra. Yes. Passes 70. Thank you.

Thank you. That would be nice. All right. Next up is uh agenda bill 26079 recommended allocation of 1% for the arts program fund for two permanent public art installations. City manager.

Thank you, mayor. So, this is the second of two resolutions and um yeah, as I was corrected yesterday and uh one of my conversations with with a council member was uh I I leapt to the exciting part of the $10,000 for the fishing frog, but there's more to it than that. So, we're going to let DA McGee, the tourism and arts manager, um really cover this and she's also joined by Mary Beth Turk, who's the chair of the arts commission. So, thank you for being here tonight and thank you to the arts commission members. D, I'll turn it over to you. Great. Thank you, Kyle. And thank you, mayor, deputy mayor, and city council. Uh we're asking you tonight to approve a resolution for use of 1% for the arts program funds up to $90,000 to commission a professional public artist for artwork at Cedar Grove Park playground, and to purchase Fishing Frog, the permanent display um for permanent display at the park at both Landing Pedestrian Bridge. So council recognizes the importance that uh the role the important role public art plays in enriching both's cultural landscape. In 20 in 2009 council adopted ordinance number 2013 creating the art and public places program by dedicating 1% of eligible city capital improvement project costs to public art. Resolution number 1368 adopted in 2017 established policies for public art expenditures and authorized the Both Arts Commission to advise council on the use of 1% for public art funds. The current public art fund balance is $178,000. Approval of tonight's recommendation for $90,000 would leave $88,000 of available

funds for future permanent public art projects. Um the uh fourth point point here about the arts commission endorsement. Uh this is something that the arts commission uh met on earlier this year in one of our meetings and is excited to be here tonight talk uh to uh get your endorsement recommendation or approval of this as well. Um in addition to me attending tonight um vice chair Holly Hughes is here as well as our newest uh commission member um that Tan uh Tanya Kadena Sagun. So uh we are excited to be here. Thank you.

Cedar Grove Park is currently being designed with a new inclusive playground that will create a welcoming, accessible, and socially engaging environment for all users. As part of the project, the parks board and the both arts commission proposed issuing a call to artists to create artwork integrated into the playground design, adding sensory richness, visual identity, and interactive elements to the space. The creative arts grant award program also supports temporary public art projects. In 2025, creative arts grant award recipient and professional artist William Schlow created Fishing Frog, now displayed at the Both Landing Pedestrian Bridge, as a temporary installation for up to three years. The original $10,000 grant covered design, fabrication, and installation costs, but not long-term maintenance, which is why Fishing Frog was introduced to the public as a temporary installation. Following strong, very strong community support for the piece, the Bothal Arts Commission explored purchasing Fishing Frog for the city's permanent public art collection. William Schlow has agreed to sell the artwork for $10,000 and Bach the Both Arts Commission is requesting use of 1% for public art funds to complete the purchase and support future maintenance costs which are expected to be minimal due to the durable materials used in the piece. That concludes our presentation. We hope that you consider approving this resolution and we're happy to take any questions if you have any. Thank you,

Council Member Dodd.

Thank you. Thank you for the update and um to our arts commission members for being here tonight. Um I am super excited because I I know I've said this to probably most people in this room, but uh I have said before, what is the Snomish County version of our bridge? We don't really have a sort of uniting landmark in that half of the city. And not to put all the pressure on this artwork at Cedar Grove Park, but I kind of am a little bit that it would be really cool to have something that you can have a visual of and be like, I know where that is. That's in my city. So, I'm very excited at the location um that was chosen um in the park and excited that the city is purchasing fishing frock. What a great cute artwork. I've heard from so many people who are like, I saw this cool frog at the park. Like um I just really appreciate that you've brought this to us and that we have a chance to do this. So, thanks for your work on it,

Deputy Mayor.

Thank you, mayor. Um, and thank you, arts commissioners, for being here tonight um for this presentation. I have looked forward to the arts commission coming to us with something exciting for a really long time. And so, I am I am very excited about um especially what you did bring forward. Um, I heard there was like thousands of people provided feedback on just how much like immediately they saw Fishy Frog, they're like, "Can we keep it?" It was really that that was the reaction that I saw throughout the city. Um, and thank thank you for being responsive to our community and and making it happen. And and please pass our thanks on to the artists too for creating something so whimsical and exciting um for our community. Um the Cedar Grove Park playground um ab absolutely is um I I really love Council Member Dod's vision of of a recognizable um visual that people can point to in in Snomish County. Um and and if this can be that can become that that sounds fantastic. But I also know that we're very lucky to get an inclusive playground that um that integrates art and um and sensory enjoyment in the space. And so, thank you for bringing this. I'm absolutely happy to support it. Um, and can't wait to hear more from the arts commission. So, thank you,

Council Dod. I'd love to offer a motion if we're there. Oh, not quite. I want to I want to I'm going to talk for half a second. Um,

done. Um, I am so excited that this is going to be permanent. The fishing frog especially, like I have had I saw it, I was like, that is so cool. I have had friends reach out to me that like aren't even necessarily involved in politics. Like, what is that? Like, when did that get there? How long is it going to be there? Um, so like this and the and in Cedar, the yard and Cedar Grove are like the easiest yeses I've had in such a long time. So, I'm um I'm super excited to have y'all here tonight. Thank you for coming to the arts commissioners. Um, and yeah, um, I think we're ready for a motion. Council member Dodd, I'd like to move the recommended action. Second.

I have a motion from Council Member Dodd and a second from the deputy mayor. Would anybody like to speak to the motion? Seeing none, city clerk over there, please say yes or no. Council member Angular, yes. Mayor Thompson, yes. Deputy Mayor Alder, yes. Council member Kurd, yes. Council member Miles, yes. Council member Dodd, yes. Council member Alab, yes. passes 70. Fantastic. It is now 7:44. We are going to take a 16minute break and we'll be back at 8:00.

All right, welcome back. It is now 8 o'clock. Um, next up we have agenda bill 26080, King County wastewater treatment rate comment letter.

Thank you, mayor. And um tonight before you is a letter for consideration by the city council to see if you'd like to sign on. There's been a lot of uh regional dialogue recently about concerns about proposed wastewater treatment rate increases and due to the significant impact on both rateayers. Wanted to bring this to your attention and see if communication to King County was warranted. With that, I'll turn things over to our public works director, Aaron Lenhard, and utilities and development services director, Boyd, manager, Boyd Benson, to provide additional information and take a feedback on the proposed letter. Take it away. Thank you, Kyle. Good evening, mayor, deputy mayor, and council. So, the action that we're requesting this evening is to consider having the mayor on behalf of the council submit a letter to the Metropolitan King County Council about proposed wastewater treatment rates. So, as many of you know, uh, both operates a sewer utility that collects and conveys waste water to King County system for treatment. Uh, the King County Executive has proposed a 12.75% annual rate increase for that treatment uh, between the years of 2027 and 2030. And he has proposed that to the King County Council for their consideration in June. Uh this is the largest single expense for the city's wastewater utility and as such King County's rates significantly impact the sewer utility fund and its customers. Uh the proposed letter requests that King County develop a more equitable rate structure than what they currently have. And so I'll hand it over to Boyd for a little more context and to help answer questions. Good evening. Um so we just have three brief slides. The first slide shows uh

King County rate forecast projections for the last three years. So the uh blue line is the rate forecast that was developed in 2024 for 25 on. Orange is developed in 25 or 26 on and the I think it's green is the current uh rate forecast. And when we first looked at this uh forecasting back in 2024 2025 as part of the utility rate study, we developed our fund finance models and we looked at rates required for 25 and 26. And at that time to keep our sewer utility um fiscally viable, we recommended 4.25% rate increases for both 25 and 26. Um as you can see that the basis for those rate increases have changed significantly. And what's being proposed at this time is much higher um in the 12.75 to 13.5% rate. Next please. So this slide gives you an example of um expenses for the sewer utility for the the chart on the left is our current 2526 bianium and you can see that the wholesale treatment costs are about half of the total utility costs the rest capital onm and uh taxes in fund transfer. We forecast based on the current King County rate forecast that by 2031 2032 the treatment um portion of this will have increased significantly. You can see that the inter fund transfers utility tax and on&m don't change much over that time. The major change is the King County wastewater treatment rate expense. Next. And right here is just kind of showing you over time based on the current forecast. Shows the uh treatment costs um in orange and the on andm costs

forecasted on&m costs in blue. Um the increased costs uh will the proposed rate increase forecast will basically double um sewer treatment expenses over the next five six years. And as you can see by the total expenses, uh our revenue will have to be uh we'll have to match this expense to keep our utility fiscally uh viable. And if we do not uh unless these proposed uh treatment rates change or we look at additional revenue sources, we will not have a uh we'll have a negative fund balance by 2030 2031. Okay. And then the rate treatment comment letter that we're requesting that you review is basically to ask King County to evaluate rates based more affordability and equity with how they assign costs to different cities. That's it. So, um there are other agencies adjacent to both who are also considering sending letters. Um we've had some conversations with the city of Kirkland in particular who is uh their council will be considering a letter at next at their meeting next Tuesday. So, um if council has any questions, we are here to answer. Uh the again the requested action is to consider sending a letter to the Metropolitan King County Council about their proposed wastewater treatment rates.

Council Dodd, thank you. Um thanks for bringing this forward. Um just as I'm processing this, what are the main reasons for the proposed rate hike? And aside from the letter, what is King County doing to make sure that those situations don't continue to get worse? Like how are they getting ahead of a future big rate hike?

Yeah. So, uh, a lot of this rate increase is due to capital costs for capital programs and increase associated with those programs. In the agenda bill, in the letter, we specifically point out combined sewer overflow projects that are within uh at the mouth of Dwamish and that is one of the projects that increase their capital program spending by about 20%. So that's part of part of the request is to look at some of these capital programs and and make sure that the folks that are paying for these programs are the ones that are benefiting from the programs. And then as to how King County is forecasting out um future rates, uh the MUPAC, the the advisory group doesn't have a lot of say. It's uh we uh MUPAC basically responds to King County proposals and we provide input, but they do have a pretty aggressive capital program and they're looking at ways to fund that over time. So, if you look at the current forecast, they're they're looking at trying to not front-end load some of these costs, but take care of some of the the costs in the short term with proposed decreases in the long term. And we typically don't see those. So, that's why we're asking at this time to to look at this a little more closely with respect to affordability and equity with different jurisdictions.

Thank you. And um I would support the mayor sending a letter. I think it makes a lot of sense. Council member Miles. Thank you, Mayor, and thanks thanks for this presentation and overview and the letters. How soon do we need to act? So, the King County Council is scheduled to begin discussions about the rate uh I believe in early June. Yes. So, very very quickly quickly. Okay. I like um council member Dodd, I support the mayor in sending the letter. Council member Kurt,

thank you. Thanks for the presentation and for bringing it up. A couple of questions. Um the combined sewer overflow at the mouth of Dwamish, is that intended to extend the life and performance at West Point treatment plant?

That's a very good question. Um so I'm going to back up a little bit. You've council has had staff come forward about our INI inflow and infiltration program um where we're looking to reduce infiltration from the groundwater into our sewer system because that generates more treatment flow to treat the same with inflow which is like storm water. This is a separate program from that program. So um when you when you look at this one, it is basically to store combined sewer, which is storm water and sewage during high rainfall events in a very large reservoir and then treat that as the precipitation tails off. So it's it's almost like a big detention tank for sewage. So it stores it and then it still the effluent still gets treated as opposed to what can happen now is that because of the combined sewers where storm water is going directly into the sewer you can have overflows into Puget Sound. So we're trying they're trying to avoid that.

Right. So it's a really important project for Puget Sound of which we are upstream waters. Um, and I just want to point out that a portion of the King County portion of both drains to the same treatment facility for which this capital improvement program is also meant to go. So there could be an argument made that our community does contribute and partially benefit um with a wider region um as part um contributors to the West Point treatment plant. Um so I guess that's just one thing to be considering um is that um we can send a letter um because yeah increasing rates we didn't sort of plan that um and we aren't in control of King County's uh wastewater u planning processes and and obligation of of um infrastructure changes and and updates. A question that I have also kind of playing devil's advocate here is did people in other jurisdictions that don't contribute to Brightwater um which most of our community does flow to did those other jurisdictions pay into that and is there a regional um economy of scale and benefit for contributing to these larger infrastructure mega infrastructure projects that benefit our region as a whole.

I'm gonna real quick and then director Lenhard will respond. You bring up some very good points. There is regional treatment and that is directly offset by Brightwater. So there is regional treatment. The point of the letter is to look at how we are assessed our rates because the city of both is spending significant capital effort to reduce inflow and infiltration. Um and you've seen that in the past and you'll see it in a future budget. What we're requesting is maybe look at how those costs are allocated for facilities that may only benefit jurisdictions that have combined sewer that allow storm water in their sewer system. That's where we're asking. So I I hear where you're coming from. I'm sorry Erin, go ahead. I just want to point out that there is a discrepancy in the policies that we have being part of a wider region and you know contributing to the health of Puet Sound. Um this could be part of our commitment to those policy inputs too. So, I'm fine sending a letter, but I'm also fine knowing that we need to step up and contribute as part of a wider region for this. Our our county and our whole region is built on um sewage treatment. We wouldn't have the cities or the places that we love today without it. Um, and I know that it's a regional cooperation. Um, and we all bear um, the benefits and the the frankly the risks of aging infrastructure. And there will be a time where our infrastructure is aging um, and other jurisdictions will be asked to pay into resources that help our uh, facilities and our aging um, infrastructure as well. And so, um,

I want to be careful to, you know, going forward that we, um, set the tenor of the conversation that we're willing to be a collaborator. Um but um understanding that we don't have a lot of input in the process and that sort of collaboration and consultation would be helpful as we set our rates and as our constituencies are impacted by these increasing fees and structures. Uh so um I'm obviously conflicted, but I'm going to be um supportive of the letter just to open up a dialogue. Deputy Mayor.

Thank you, Mayor. Um, I really appreciate the thoughts that, uh, Council Member Kurt has put forward. Um because um as as residents of this community um and in this region, it was horrifying to hear headlines about the wastewater that was entering into our uh water systems and and I absolutely do support um you know improving treatment because it needed to be done like it it it's really about uh remediating the negative impact impacts of the past and and you know not necessarily being able to undo the mistakes of the past but also to do better going forward. Um and and I also think that this letter makes a very good point about whose uh financial responsibility that is. Um and and so I support sending this letter. I support the you know it it's always a good thing when like you're bringing up a problem to offer a proposed solution and you are offering a proposed solution that would protect the rateayers of both and I I do appreciate um that piece of it and um and I also do want to see our region do better especially when it comes to environmental stewardship um and and want to be a team player but that doesn't necessarily mean that um we should be shouldering the cost that um other areas also need to be shouldering as well. So I appreciate the the nod towards equity and asking for equitable treatment for city of both residents and so I do support signing on to this letter. Thank you.

All right. If nobody else has anything to say, I will accept a motion. Deputy mayor, I will make a motion to have the mayor on behalf of the council submit the letter to the Metropolitan King County Council about proposed wastewater treatment rates. Second. All right, we have a motion and a second for the recommended action. Would anybody like to speak to the motion? Seeing none, city clerk, please say yes or no. Council member Angular, yes. Mayor Thompson, yes. Deputy Mayor Alder, yes. Council member Kurd, yes. Council member Miles, yes. Council member Dodd, yes. Council member Al, yes. Pass to 70.

Thank you, council.

Thank you. All right, we have a couple of study sessions. Um, so let's go down there. All right, welcome to uh where we do our study sessions. We have agenda bill 26018 for affordable housing and MFTTE updates.

Thank you, Mayor. And yeah, going along with affordable housing week, here we are. So, I'm gonna turn things directly over for introduction and context to our deputy director of community development, Christian Gats. He's joined by community development director Jason Greenspan and senior planner Ray Sosa. Christian, thank you.

Thank you, city manager. Good evening, mayor, deputy mayor and council. Uh, it's great to be back again. Uh yes, we're going to talk about affordable housing which for the last few years has been uh the tip of everybody's tongue uh working through it and staff have been, you know, diligently working through things like the comprehensive plan update, affordable housing, um middle housing, uh voluntary incentives, and throughout all of that, we've been working really closely with the community members, reaching out to and cultivating relationships with the building community, making sure we can get their input and we can pull in all these perspectives through all the conversations that have led up to office and as we move forward. So tonight there's no no action requested. Um we're here to seek input on really just two items. So really, you know, the first question on a potential shift uh of the city's approach involving affordable housing going from a voluntary program to a mandatory. Uh paired with that uh consideration of a series of offsets and incentives that we've built together um with input from the community. uh input from the planning commission. Um so just trying to understand these items a little bit more thoroughly and planning on leaving here tonight with uh uh ideas to develop some scale options to come back. So again, no decisions really just wanting to know are we are we on the right track for for studying this which we would then come back with proformas and additional information uh for uh council to consider. Uh we've got these three uh discussion questions for you. They'll return at the end of the presentation. No need to memorize. They're in the packet as well. Um but we'll use these to just uh guide us through. Um so starting off, let's get to the why. Why are we here? Why are we bringing this back to you this evening? Um to get at this, I want to walk through some important background and then some key steps that we've taken to lead to this point. So first is uh

some of the city initiated updates. uh the 2024 comp plan which was a huge endeavor that involved um everyone most everybody in this room um and uh set out to establish increased densities. Uh you'll remember and for those listening in, we set those densities to span across the city, not just in our centers. Uh moving them throughout the neighborhoods. Uh that increased density has led to um lower density communities being raised. um uh have increased densities that have uh resulted in um a lot more interest in redevelopment and we're starting to see that come about even in these uh economic times that we're seeing. Uh we worked through our voluntary affordable housing incentives last year uh expanding uh to areas throughout uh almost half the city. Uh and with that conversation uh from the planning commission came this recommendation to revisit uh a mandatory approach. should we should we approach this this year? Um and then bookending both of those or I guess tying last year but prior to the comp plan update was the middle housing work that we did where we set off and we initiated the action uh and then we wrapped it up last year where we established a a base density of four allowing up to six. Um getting into some of the state legislation uh for more background and context. Uh, House Bill 1220 was one of the fundamental components that was used to build out the comp plan and the housing targets uh, which each jurisdiction was required to plan for and accommodate housing uh, to households of all income levels. So, you've heard us talk about this before. Um, this is the requirement that uh, to establish zoning and development codes that that we will see uh, in the completion of residential units below

market rate. So those are the 0 to30s, 30 to 50, 50 to 80% AMIs, not just uh market rate. Um, and these were all established and you'll see in a slide here, uh, the the countywide targets that were established for each jurisdiction over over 20 years. That's table one on page 87 of your packet if you wanted to jump there uh already. Uh, and then finally, uh, Senate Bill 5148, which is also known as the Housing Accountability Act. That's the oversight uh bill that established reporting and accountability measures to ensure that housing production is aligning with those 1220 targets. Uh we're starting to see the state look at that uh already uh through initial reporting and then our anticipated five-year look back or what what what's everyone's calling the five-year look back period at the end of 2029 where we report out in 2030 what has been built in the first uh quarter of of our 20-year plan. The next slide uh I'm going to talk through this just a little bit. This is pulling in the the data from the comprehensive plan uh breaking apart by county uh our total housing needs. These are the countywide planning goals and targets that were given to us uh within each of the AMI bands. Uh we combined everything in the greater than 80% uh just for simplicity. Uh the table gets pretty extensive if we don't do that. Um and we've started tracking these as far as completed projects. um nothing's really done until somebody can live in it. So those are the ones that we are tracking and will continue to uh we do have data for what's under construction, what's in, you know, conceptual design, land use permitting. Um but to date, uh we've seen just under 200 units all above 80% AMI having been completed and issued a certificate of occupancy. And those range from single family homes to

condo, condominiums, town homes, and multifamily. All of which were started well before um the comprehensive plan uh began. So, we'll use this and we'll keep growing it. You'll see it come back uh time and time again uh as we provide updates on development activity. What are we seeing um in which income band um as we as we move forward? And I'm going to hand it over to Ray here in a second. Um, so that's the work that we've completed already and the planning comm so the planning commission recommendation to consider a mandatory approach. Those 1220 um targets, the housing accountability act, all that data that's been completed has landed us here this evening. Um, so really want to talk about a potential shift to a mandatory affordable housing code. And to do that, we'd have to align with uh the state requirement to provide that balance, show what those offsets are. Um, and to talk through those, I'm going to turn it over to Rey.

Thanks, Christian. As Christian mentioned, we have these goals here that we want to meet. And so, staff are looking at the following list of incentives that you see above. Um, but these often incentives presented here are to entice residential developers to build a muchneeded D-restricted deeply affordable units. We recognize that units at the price points and AMI levels significantly below the current market rate cannot get built alone without providing developers a comprehensive and attractive and of many of offsets and incentives. Simply put, we can't house people in projects that don't get built. Our proposals ensure that developments in Basil can pencil out and actually get built, keeping Bosone an attractive place to invest and build on. To that end, staff are proposing the following development incentives, offsets and incentives. open space flexibility, reducing an open space requirements, or waving and consolidating private and public open space requirements. Currently, these open space requirements in the BMC establish a minimum of private and public open space to be installed on a project by project basis. Staff propose considering reductions or waving of both private and public open space requirements given Basel's abundant park system that we all know and love. Also looking at development standards and relief uh flexibility focused on supporting development of affordable units. Um for the full list of identified standards proposed for adjustment, you can turn to attachment one of tonight's memo. Also size based standards incentive fee. Development of a size based incentive fee can encourage the construction of moderate size housing options and capture revenue from larger homes to fund affordable housing. Currently there are limited myth as the city funds affordable housing development projects. Following the council's priority under a connected and thriving city which seeks to refine our housing strategy approach, staff are considering adding more ways to fund affordable housing such as this proposed fee. And lastly, looking at permit and fee related flexibility. As name implies, reducing or waving fees for projects with affordable units that recommend these approaches as they offer realistic incentives and offsets and present the greatest potential to be

implemented or modified within the city's authority to uh enact or expand affordable housing incentive pro uh programs. All combined, these zoning and land use approaches represent a potential shift from a voluntary to a mandatory affordable housing approach. Based on council's feedback tonight, staff will continue to explore and evaluate these offsets and incentives, returning with a potential amendments that could support a mandatory affordable housing approach as part of an inclusionary zoning model in the future. Okay. And then the last thing that we tagged onto this is the multif family tax exemption. uh we wanted to include this as it's it really is uh what I think of as a yes and part of affordable housing where it's it it needs to it needs to align and accompany or it it could be aligned and and accompany affordable housing projects. Uh so we're gonna we're going to have this trail the work that we're doing. Um we'd like to have a trail the work that we're doing on a potential mandatory approach and looking at this with a an overhaul because we haven't seen any interest in the program since it was created uh about five five and a half years ago. Um we've met with uh developers. We had a few focus groups uh completed last fall. Um, and what we heard was that that it just it didn't align with what they were what they were looking for. Obviously, they they'd like it to be as flexible as possible. We wanted to get that input. Um, they they'd like to see um some some improvements, a few of which we've listed here. Um, some of the things that we could include in potential future discussions um around legislative policies surrounding parking inconsistencies within the state laws. So, the MFTTE state law says you have to provide parking for MFTTE units, but the state law that just passed about parking

said you don't need to provide parking for affordable housing units. Um, so those obviously were not um built out uh to align. Um, also looking at aligning the exemption uh duration with the duration of the uh affordability. Um, and to do any of these, we'd want to make sure we square them with the comp plan and with our current policies. Um, there's a lot more to do here. We'll continue to work with our development group, make sure that we're we're pulling in their in their their input and their perspective as we work through this. Uh, returning with proformas as far as how these would work, uh, what they would equate to working with, uh, finance as well on what the the potential impacts might be uh, from a budgetary standpoint. uh and then bring that back for discussion. This is handled all in uh sort of inside baseball but title three rather than title uh title 12. So it's not a development regulation. It it's handled on its own track but we we do think that they they warrant having discussion together at least at this point and then we can pull them apart and and run them through uh to the end. So again, no action tonight. uh really looking for just that some general input after what we've uh presented here and provided in the packet materials and with that I will set up these uh questions to support the the conversation. I like to take an opportunity to go first when I can. Um I have a couple things to say. Um I'm going to talk about the MFT first. Um I love the recommendations that we did. We got some comments today from somebody who owns property in both and wants to build here using our MFTTE and um the recommendations would handle the the main objections that that that gentleman had. Um I was brand new on council when we did this the first time and I I want

to use our MFT as a tool to get affordable housing but also as a tool to simply create more housing to be built. So if we align the dates with the um of the um tax incentive and the affordability requirements like you know in you know 13 years or however long it's going to be those units are going to now go on the market as market rate units and more market rate units makes everybody's rent a little bit cheaper. So like I see a benefit there down the road too even as we lose the mandatory affordability. Um the um so yes, love your recommendations there. Like let's let's tune this to get stuff built is my feedback. Like let's let's get affordable housing built through this process. Um some that is not perfect is much better than none that could conceivably be better if it were real, which is what we're getting right now. Um, in terms of mandatory ability, like I I kind of feel the same way that I felt in December when we talked about this. Um, I mean, we haven't gotten any housing built since January 2025 that's mandatory affordable. Our voluntary incentives just went into effect in January of this year. So, like I don't feel that the zero there is a super fair uh expectation of what's going to happen in the future, especially because we have like the both urban project coming on board. um hopefully in the next few years as well. Um I would like to give those some time to work and do everything else that we can before we add mandatory affordability. Like when we tax housing, we make housing more expensive and it's hard to get cheaper housing when you're adding cost to it. So like I want to see the work that we've done in our comp plan that is going really well. Like I want to let that cook before we do anything that might slow it down. Um, I've been really happy with the results we've

seen. Our comp plan's doing a really good job. Um, I mandatory affordability is a tax on new renters to pay for um, affordable housing and I just I don't love it and I don't love what it can potentially do to supply. Um, I do however like all of the recommendations in terms of the like here's what you can do because of this. Is there a way that we could add more options to the voluntary and make the voluntary even more appealing and give that a chance to work before we do something that could potentially drive down housing production in both?

Yeah, there's always ways to to add things to the to the voluntary. Okay. Um it's

you can kind of tailor it to to the the needs of of a jurisdiction. um as you know as as as we may have regulations in place that no other city does or give I mean give people a menu like you can choose from these things like pick a sum of them or like some way to make it appealing to the maximum amount of potential builders to use those incentives. Um, I mean I honestly the mandatory public space like I see more value in extra housing than I do in that. So like I'm fine if we just don't have that. So like yeah, give it away as an incentive. Like I I I think I've only spent time in the like public space of some of the buildings that have gone up over the last 5 years just to like take a field trip to see where they actually are and find them. So, um I I I love the ideas, the offsets. Um but, um the one offset that I'd want to have a larger discussion around is the fee on larger housing. Totally open to it. Like I want to see more smaller units in general and the more we can do to incentivize that I think the better. Um everything else is an easy yes on that. Um in terms of tuning a voluntary affordable housing incentive to it. So, That is my take.

It's This is really interesting. Sorry. Um I um I'm glad that you went first, mayor, because I agree with all of that. Um I if someone is building a large project, I would really like them to go up to add more units. I know there's a project in North Creek that has has I don't know where they're at. I know they weren't in the list because they're not built yet. Nobody can live there yet, but I know that they took advantage of extra stories with affordable units. I think whatever we can do um within that menu to say just go up um that we have so much more vertical space than horizontal space to use. Um, so if it's possible to somehow be like, "Here's a menu, but today's special is adding more stories, like it would be great if we could encourage that." Um, I think if we're going to reduce public space, I agree that public open space can be a mixed bag of useful and not, but I would love to just have some kind of standard like there are bike racks and benches at, you know, at in on the sidewalk or something. So there's something that still makes around the building feel like a community versus just there's a giant building now and who knows what happens in there. Probably people doing normal stuff, but um I just some kind of little bit like, hey, make the surroundings, you know, a community versus just one big building if we're not going to have open space to share. Um, yeah. But I also wonder with the the the conflict in state law around MFTTE requiring parking and then the newer state law, how does that clarification come about? Is it going to be are we going to seek like an update in our legislative agenda to ask for that to be sorted out? Are we how are we going to find out? So, you should mention that um we're right now in the process of refining some of our potential legislative priorities for the next session and

that's one of the ideas that we're floating is to get those inconsistencies resolved and have the state really look at that and work with cities to make sure that this type of thing doesn't happen. It's probably not just in the space of MFT where we have conflicting policies and regulations that are um not allowing projects to move forward and it's not necessarily a city's regulations that are doing that. Yeah, for sure. Um, that's that's great. Thank you. Um, and then I think the only other thing um that stuck out Oh, I do like the idea of the fee on let's say oversized housing. I don't know how you determine what's too big, but I'd love to hear more about that when something firmer comes back because I think that that's a really fascinating idea. Um, and yeah, I just I can't say enough. um have people go up not out as much as possible. Thank you.

Just a quick comment to council member Da. The building that you're thinking of in North Creek is in my neighborhood. You've passed it. I have. You're right. You have. Thank you. Has construction started on that? No. Okay. Still a parking lot.

It Yeah, it's just there. I think the um conversation about or hesitance to support mandatory um affordable housing is well placed. And I also am concerned that 2030 comes around. We're only four years away and uh the numbers that we want to see in the lower and moderate income bands are not there. Um, so I I do think it is kind of early to uh change our experiment, but I also um this is another tool in the toolbox that we should really give a lot of thought to. Um, I liked the conversation at Planning Commission last month where they were talking about the community amenities of um, open space and how to other members of the community that open space might not really be relevant or um, worthwhile to the people who live in the possibly affordable housing there. We want to make sure that they have access to amenities and that we're not creating um an echelon of housing that um folks uh uh shy away from because of its lack of amenities. And maybe that's, you know, market conditions um necessitate that housing that is affordable is not as um desirable as housing that is expensive. Um but that

is a worthwhile consideration is these community benefits that we're wanting to prioritize. Um, are there other creative options that we're not looking at like setbacks um or um sort of logistics of of uh development rather than um simply taking away requirements that that we um put on uh buildings to make them livable. So, uh I'm conflicted. I don't have anything really worthwhile to add, so I'm just blathering. But um I'm also deeply concerned about the um the economy as many people are and um while developers are looking for consistency um in regulations, I also feel that um we will be entering a time where um projects don't necessarily pencil to our proforma. So I'm hoping that whatever we do um we continue to update this regularly um our policies regularly to um reflect market conditions and the economy and um whether things are getting built. Um but I've said for a long time that we're not going to get zero to 30% affordable housing from requiring a developer to do it. um those really deep levels of affordability are things that we're going to have to um put our money where our mouth is and um uh lean in. And so I think that's sort of a different um that's a different conversation than what you're asking for today, but um in some regard it is kind

of a helpful uh guide or guard rail or boundary on what we're looking at here. So increasing the depth and consistency of housing affordability. I think there are limits here to what we can do with an afford a mandatory affordability requirements. Um so I'm hesitant to tow that line and get up close to it especially in uncertain e economic conditions. Is it an option to reduce required public space where a property is well served by our park system but still require it where there are no parks within whatever set distance makes sense?

We could look into that and I think I think the the majority of the you know most residential development multif family development it does have um private open space requirements. the the the public space open public open space requirements are primarily in uh the downtown. Um so creating the you know the area by the pop apartments um they all have their their own private outdoor space whether it's balconies or uh other exterior spaces but yeah we can look into that um and and consider what that factor would look like. Yeah, I don't I don't want to create housing that sucks, but um I also think that we can acknowledge that there are parts of the city that excel with park availability and parts that don't and hopefully pivot around that a little bit. So looking at that table we have 0 to 30% AMI 5300 30 to 50% is 2200 and 50 to 80 is 2,000. Um do you think if we do any of this we're going to make a dent in any of those numbers? It's a great question. Um I can say that what we are seeing right now with projects in whether it's it's in the land use permitting building permit review or in construction. So before that 199 number uh we have approximately 1,900 residential units um in that process. some and hopefully they all turn into permits and they all turn into occupied uh structures. The the sites that have had the will have and and other cities have said this too will

have the biggest benefit are those that have city control like P South where part of that uh that agreement uh establishes some conditions for what needs to be included. Um, so that's going to provide 200 units within both the 30 to 50 and the 30 50 to 80. Um, so it it puts a dent in it, but I don't know if we have enough control over enough city parcels. So it it it will it will support more opportunities but these are uncertain times and so it we we just won't know until we like if if you you know uh 0 to 30 for example council member Kurd's point we need to put our money where amount like we did with peace south so we did get some of that but we are u 53 to 500 uh 7,500 or so. We need between zero and 50% AMI in the next 20 years. How much land do we need to own to be able to give away for us to make that? It would it would be a lot and and part of uh the work that Ray is doing on the housing action plan uh you know finding strategies uh it might tie into legislative agendas uh like like Jason referenced uh where we and all the other cities need state support for the really really difficult ones to to find because no matter how many offsets you you provide whether it's setback reduction you build to the sky it it it won't matter um that will be a really really um difficult thing without uh what would you say buckets of money that could could support those things to to subsidize it um at the lower the lower

AMI bands because you so if we do if we add the mandatory piece to this uh this problem we're trying to solve is that going to make things better or worse, you know, for us to move it in

the So, yeah. So, if we take if we if we take out the city controlled site, we take out the 200 units, we'd say, well, there's 1,700 units there. Of those 1,700, there's uh about uh just under a hundred or just around a hundred that will that are currently proposed. So that that percentage is is well below what we would need to achieve. So if you could if you could have a mandatory that would say all of the units that are proposed 10% of them are going to be affordable then you would at least be getting that 10%. Would you though wouldn't the developer say you know what it's not penciling out for me anymore. I'm going to withdraw

like like the email we got today you know. So I mean that is a risk we're taking uh with this because it we have our goals. I mean the people providing the housing have their goals. So we need to figure out where that intersection is. This is where I think the the uh the performers and and and scenario, you know, uh simulations that we need to be able to if you talk about 7,000 units in the next 20 years between zero and 50%. Uh no, Z that's z Oh, yeah. Yeah. 0 and 50%. Uh it's uh it's a quite a bit of uh with a short amount of time. I mean time is flying you know so and things take time for physibility and permitting and design all that stuff and even if we decide to do this right now I'm thinking out loud right now I'm not making any so that's why I'm trying to get your feedback so even if we decide to do mandatory today those 1700 in in uh process won't they get grandfathered in before we kick in the

absolutely so they will we'll have we'll tell them you know now you have to do 10% or whatever the number is or is it they're they're set under their regulations. So So they're set. So now we have to wait for new applicants, right? Yeah. So um what do you I mean what do you think? I mean what like what's this? I know you're trying to get our and and you looked at the city manager. I know like what is what like what makes sense, you know, because we're we're playing with those scenarios. I'm asking the question

and and it's a it's a really it's a really difficult time right now to to to answer the the question the the preliminary work we had done last fall uh all the performers came back just market rate came back not feasible so it wasn't feasible to build just a market rate project and it probably still isn't so the conversation would be totally different if we were fine there were that you know the global economy was humming along

2% interest rates and and we you know there there could be you know no issues with resources um it would be a different conversation and I've you know having experience with other jurisdictions that have had a a 10% mandatory yes you saw incremental growth over time and it it it adds up in the long run. Um, but even those even that 10%, right, we've we've talked about what 75% of our housing is below 80%. If you just look at the 20-year target, it's like, well, we can't say 75% have to be affordable. That's that's not feasible. Um, so how do we put the dent in it? Um, and maybe it's, you know, seeing what happens with what we have now. Maybe it's shifting to mandatory. Um and and what we're looking for now is just if we came back with materials that identify here's the offsets that align with the state law requirement. If if we were to consider a mandatory, here's what it would be. Here's what the performance come back as. Um, we would like it to to to pencil out to show well it's it's as equitable as a project as as beneficial as a project with a mandatory or without. So that's that's the test we have to pass a

discussion. So I'm asking I mean if it's not feasible to build something right now with at market rate, why would we consider adding mandatory affordability? It's just going to take longer for anything to start getting built if we do that, wouldn't it? I mean, logically, yes.

And then wouldn't it tank our permitting cycle and then all of our fees that we depend on for revenue? Yeah, good questions. Have you heard of City of Spokane's kind of innovative approach to um uh with go their sales tax revenue for affordable housing projects that source m like oftentimes when you're buying materials for a project, you ship them to the project site and because we have a state where sales tax is charged at the the source or at not the source, at the sink Um, so Spokane was saying for affordable housing projects, we won't charge the city's sales tax revenue. Like are there other way other like

hm don't tell Quan.

So yeah, we have to put our money where our mouth is somehow, right? Um, and so this is one of the other controls that we one of the other levers that we have. Um, I'd be interested in seeing kind of a overview of what they've seen if it's been implemented or if they're um losing a lot of revenue and are looking to like stop that. Um, but have you heard of other ways besides mandatory? Arch always talks up Redmond and mandatory and we're not unfortunately we don't have the economy of Redmond um to build build.

Yeah, we we've we've been listening in on conversations around around MFTTE as an as an as an option. Um and that's across the state. So there's there's some jurisdictions that have have utilized it and the it's the likely what we see what we've seen is the duration um of the affordability requirement. It does tie where we see higher numbers of just units being produced. It ties with the duration of the the exemption. So if it's a 12-year duration and the the exemption ends then the affordability ends then. Um sometimes they have a flexibility to extend it another 12 years which is great because then you get 24 years of an affordable unit. Um but then it sunsets. Um those are throughout the state. So there different markets that that we we need to look at. Um and the data for 2025 will be coming out soon. Um so we can definitely bring that back and and include it within the conversation around MFTTE. That is a it is a tool that a lot of jurisdictions have utilized um especially when they're in um not necess they they don't have a a mandatory affordable program established for one reason or another. Um so there's there's no one answer but we can always continue to seek out other other mechanisms. I'd love to weigh in. Um I am not interested in mandatory um affordable housing uh for reasons stated by my colleagues. Um but some of the questions that I have are well first I guess I'll make a comment. This is going back to and I think it's been brought up a couple times, but to what the mayor said um around like the sun setting of um of like deed um

affordability that it's my understanding in in the housing market that um when units first go to market and they're brand new, they're like pre like they you're paying a premium for the newness of that of that unit. Um, but if it's been 13 years of livedin or 24 years of lived in based on what you're saying, um, those will be considered older stock when they come to market. And there's actually going to be some, um, like more it's more attainable and a level of like affordability because they're not going to be charging as much as a brand new, you know, luxury unit. it'll be charged at um older stock prices and that often is an opportunity that helps get you know people who are starting out, young professionals, families into housing. Um and so that also has I think a tail end benefit um later later on when it's no longer needed. Um so I just want to put that out there. And then one question that I have is it is my understanding and please correct me if I'm wrong that when we're talking about MFTTE, we're really talking about the like 50 to 80% AMI because there's not necessarily going to be um affordable units with the tax exemption in like definitely not permanent supportive housing and def and often yeah not going to be non-permanmanent supportive housing either. So, am I understanding that correctly? That we would expect it to be at the higher levels of the lowinccome AMI.

Correct. We we see through programs across the state, it's between 50 and 80% that that they're they're offering.

So, really like the this policy targets that what third column, right? 50 to 80% AMI. And I think that's a really useful kind of metric for us to look at and understand. So, you know, we're really talking about policy choices that could positively impact the number of units, you know, to hit our that goal of two 2012 specifically. Um, and so I I like what I've heard tonight around the open space flexibility, uh, especially around the parks piece. um you know if we're looking at Snowhomeish we know that parks are underserved however um and and so there is a balance there um I appreciate the work that the planning commission put into the development standards relief um generally like I really respect and support the recommendations that they're coming out um coming out of them for that as well as the sizebased standards Um, we've, you know, we've talked about, you know, I I appreciate council member Kurt saying permit like not just the permit and fee flexibility of like trying to bring down the costs of of you know, being in the business of building affordable housing or, you know, reduced uh reduced rate housing, but also like how can we help save on the building costs too, permit fees, maybe maybe you know tax on materials like I would I would add that in as and consider bringing that forward. Um, but really what like I've been sitting here thinking about is how are we going to build 1,800 units of permanent supportive housing in a city that has no permanent supportive housing at this point. Um, and I I know that that is not

the topic of this study session. Um, and I'm wondering when that is going to be a topic of a study session and when do we get to start digging into what it what it would mean to bring permanent supportive housing to both. Um, and I recognize that the biggest number on this list is actually the non-permanmanent supportive housing 0 to 30% AMI. And so like I'm curious when we get when do we get to have those conversations? uh we're going to bring back the housing action plan in June where we'll talk about the strategies, make sure that what we've provided uh can can establish mechanisms to achieve just that. Um and and yeah, so we'll be taking it to planning commission next week and then uh bring it back here. I think the second meeting in June,

June 9th.

Cool. I love that there's an answer for that. Um, and I realize that that's part of the the bigger housing action plan strategy and that's a piece of it. And so I I do hope at some point when we dig into the housing action plan, like there will be study sessions specifically on permanent supportive housing and addressing the, you know, the challenges and opportunities and and goals related to that. Um, there was one other thing that I was thinking about. Um, it'll come back if it comes back. Thank you. So these are all incentives seemingly for like pretty big projects and thinking about PSH or talking about 0 to 30% AMI nonPSH I find myself thinking about projects for those um for like adults with ID or or other sort of smaller situations. Will the housing action plan have sort of strategies to help encourage smaller specialized projects like we hear about when we get like the arch update for example where it's a home that can serve six people who have a a a caregiver on site for example like how we can foster that too cuz some of these just won't be in large projects. I'm I'm looking at the deputy mayor's um targets graph because I realize I'm pointing at the back of a laptop to you three. Uh so the so currently the goals are not that specific to the level of the ID housing but we do have goals that are more broader talk about supporting um affordable housing such as ID through more I guess you said more general ways like finding um looking at alternative sources of funding for supporting the housing or partner with communities to address where we can build that housing or how we can support them to get that housing built. And then last, we're looking at also the tenants and renters rights. Um looking to make sure that any residents who have those conditions who are renting are supported and are able

to stay in their homes. So we're keeping it very general. Um but through the and I don't want to spoil it for next month, but as we do as we do our engagement in the summer, we will be asking the community as well um if we need to fine-tune anything or be more specific. What are those specifications that you mentioned that we can then include in the second update in the fall? That totally makes sense. Would you be talking to like like the Ark of King and Snowish County as part of that? I'm thinking about groups we don't always hear from on housing, but that might have that specialized. I'll say that. Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

I don't know. Do I I feel like we didn't answer your questions, did we? Or we answered questions, but we gave more questions. I guess it seems like a set of answers.

I I think we I think we understand where the council's coming from. um on on the mandatory question and that there there is there is interest in the the incentives in considering those for the current voluntary um sort of summarizing what I what I've heard here tonight. Um and so we can we can definitely come back with what those might look like to tag on um scaling them. I one of the things that planning commission did bring up is um ensuring that these aren't just for uh as council member Dodd mentioned you know smaller projects you know small to mid-size builders you know they shouldn't just benefit the large sites even though that's where we get the the biggest uh bang for for the buck of of of units on a on a sheet um but finding mechanisms and part of this will be within the housing action plan. How do we support small to mid-size builders with um you know how to how to even understand what MFTTE is? They they can still avail themselves to it even though it might seem you know difficult. Arch does have you know can support how somebody could go through that that process. Um, but we could look to scale these so that they're they're beneficial to to those sites where they would get a a significant benefit from whether it's a setback reduction or an open space reduction. Um, on a 8-unit project versus a 100 unit project um sometimes that's more meaningful because of the scale of the site um and the flexibility that it can provide. So

I have one more question then I promise I'm done. Um do you have an estimate of like I you know I'm recogniz so I'm looking at slide five. It is my guiding star tonight. Um and we have these you know big round zeros in four of the columns. Um do we have estimates of what's in progress? like you know maybe it won't come through and it won't you know go into like the completed column but like I I just would like to know you know especially in this 50 to 80% AMI um column like what are we anticipating will come online um based on what's in the pipeline now

if if everything that's in the pipeline goes through to completion uh which could be between you know two to four years. We would see 209 within that column of the 50 to 80. Um 101 of those are P South. Uh SAMA is another one and then the one over by uh Council Member Miles residents um over by the Home Depot. So that which is 10% of the the total target, the total 20-year target. So it it it puts a dent in that. Um and that's if those complete. There's there's there's others that are in the lower band. Um which is a smaller chunk of that. But um understanding that it sounds as though the focus within that 50 to 80 is where council's going. Um understanding that the others are going to be harder. And if we can get any of those, great. We'll we'll eek them out where we can. Is there a way I know that the volunteer incentives that we have in um on the project in North Creek bring it up to eight stories. Do those incentives exist and can we pair those with the MFTTE? So like could somebody in downtown like use those and build a similar building?

The MFT doesn't have the the height uh bonuses. The the benefit is the the tax exemption. Um and and that that developer is interested in the the program in in p pursuing their project through that. Um so there's not really a way to stack the voluntarian size and the MFT. You kind of have to pick one.

They they more or less align with the because it's it's you currently it's 20% of the project is MFT and the voluntary incentive is 10%. So our hope with how we would build an MFT program is that it overlaps 10 10 over that 10 and then the other 10 is whatever it is. I guess the only thing is if somebody's going to utilize the MFT then they don't get the height bonus and then we have wasted vertical space

like is there any way to like cuz if somebody's building an MFTTE building and a certain percentage of them have to be affordable. If we give them more stories then we get more units. So, like why would we why would we have 20% of fewer units as opposed to 10% of more units using the voluntary? Like is there a way we can get the height up if you use the MFT? We can look at that. Cool. I have a follow-up question. I know it's like we just opened up a whole new can of worms. Um, I saw you when I said it. You're like, "Woo!"

Well, two like both Urban Sama and the North Creek 8 story. Are any of those using MFTTES? No, but they are using a a good amount of Amazon Arch. Yes. Chip. Yes. Other funding sources. And so, so right now in the pipeline, we do not have any units projected to come online in the next 2 to four years that utilize MFT. Correct.

Okay. How and and I recognize that this is why we're here is to like how do we develop an MFT program that is attractive enough to use so that we get there's actually units that come out of it. Um, yeah. Okay. that but I'm not that's not encouraging to me. Thank you for the information. Do you want to keep going because you made me think of a question. Sorry, I have to do it. Is it related to the study session or another topic?

It is related to the No, let's talk about Let's talk about the World Cup. No, the uh because so the question is to that point is MFTDE even the right conversation to have? if people aren't using it because they may not find value, is it the right program? And if it it is, then that what are some tweaks we can make to it? And if it's not, then let's just dump it and think of something else. Right. Right. I think we've seen other jurisdictions see success with an MF program and since we've had no interest, it we wouldn't be doing our job if we weren't saying, "Let's take this apart and put it back together in a different form." Okay. Makes sense.

I wouldn't say no interest. We got a public comment tonight. Expressing interest. Expressing interest in us changing things so he could build something. Exactly. Which is what we're talking about. Yeah.

And that's what like I was thinking like if we are stuck with the like base density and somebody wants to build a project, if we allow more density, we get more affordable units. Like anyway, I'm sorry I already had that. I uh I'm seeing comment slowing down. Do you have everything you need? Perfect. Thank you.

All right, our last agenda bill of the evening. Y'all can sit around and chat after while I go home if you would like. Um is agenda bill 26082 open government training city manager.

Thank you, mayor. And tonight we're joined by Anmie Sto who is a Madrona law partner and is going to walk us through the open public meetings act, public records act, and some social media dos and don'ts. Um, Ann Marie, you might remember, uh, has been with us before and has developed a special emphasis on open government in her practice. She regularly provides public records training act to local government employees, elected officials, and speaks at several conferences. Um, just as a as a note to uh, while the slide deck is imposing of 51 slides, Anmirie will cruise through this, but consider this a training guide that you'll be able to refer to back later. With that, I'll turn things over to Anmirie to uh, lead us through and answer your questions. All right. Yes, I know it's a little daunting when you see 51 slides, but some of them are just pictures. So, we're just going to go right through. It still will take us a while. Feel free to ask questions. If it's something I'm going to cover during the presentation, I'll let you know. Uh, but if you want to jump in with any questions at any time, that's totally fine with me. So, what are we going to talk about today? We're going to talk about what is the Public Records Act and why should you care. We're going to talk about your responsibilities um as a government agency and some challenges related to that. Uh we'll do a little refresher on the definition of public record, how to respond to records requests, uh some records retention matters, and then we'll shift over to the OPMA, do a quick refresher, and end with some riskmanagement strategies and takeaways and some additional resources that you can check out on your own because that is probably what you're going to want to do tonight as soon as we leave here. All right. So, what is the public records act and why should I care? So, the public records act is a requirement of uh for public agencies such as city of both. You're required to make your records available for inspection and copying upon request. Um it's important

for everyone within the agency to at least have some familiarity with the requirements under the public records act. um it all your employees and your officials really should know. And then there are certain employees and elected officials who are required to have training under the P. Another reason that you should care, public records act can come with some pretty hefty penalties, even if it's just a simple mistake. You know, we're all human. everyone makes mistakes and sometimes you have a public records request that gets missed or some other issue is involved and all of a sudden you're looking at hefty penalties. And so it's just really important to understand your responsibilities under the public records act. And finally, you should care because you really need to um be cognizant of your requirements under the P because it will help you to avoid litigation or it helps you to prepare uh for litigation in case that does arise in the future. So, what are some of your responsibilities and challenges that local government agencies face? So, I don't need to go through every single one of these, but these are some of the um uh responsibilities under the public records act for public agencies again such as city of both. You have to have a policy. You have to have a public records officer. You have to have a list of exemptions um that is uh exemptions that are outside of the public records act. You have to have an index and track your public records requests. You also have to retain and maintain your records in accordance with state retention requirements. So some challenges however that we see with a lot of public agencies and this is a really big one is keeping up with technology. We've seen a lot of uh changes in technologies and the way agencies use technology just within the last few years especially ever since the co 19 pandemic. things like using Zoom

and using Teams and Slack and sending text messages. So, it's really important to stay up um on the requirements on um with techn or with the public records act with these changes in technology so that you can make sure that you are maintaining your records um in accordance with the law. Funding and staffing levels is a really big thing. You know, some agencies will only have one person who works on their public records requests or sometimes they don't have someone who is full-time working on public records requests. They have, you know, someone who that's like a second job for them. Um, but again, it's really a responsibility of everyone in the agency to understand what your requirements are under the public records act. And so having the appropriate funding and staffing levels is uh just really appro uh important dealing with serial or difficult requesters. There are some requesters that will send a request to every agency in the state. Uh some who are frequent flyers and everyone knows their names. That doesn't mean that they don't have the right to make public records requests just like anyone else. But it is something that um agencies do face is how to deal with these uh types of requesters. Maintaining consistent documentation. Um you know we have seen a lot of improvements with that since agencies have been required to do tracking for their uh public records requests using the JARK. But at the same time, you know, you have different people working on requests and sometimes there are staffing change over or you have people who might not be used to working on requests and so you're not having consistent documentation. It's really important to have policies in place that um really cement how the city of both is going to document how it responds to requests so that you are consistent um all the time and not having to worry

about if somebody leaves now we don't know what were they doing I don't understand this you know it's just really important to make sure that you have a standard way of handling your documentation and then maintaining records that are held by third parties. So, you have records that um people other than someone within city hall might have that are responsive to a request, such as your contractors and consultants or your volunteers. And it's not always the case that those individuals understand what the requirements are under the public records act as well. So, for example, the records that our office creates are often considered public records as well. And so if a city gets a public records requests and uh they we have records that would be responsive, they really should be checking with us too to uh do a search for our records and providing those to the agency. So what is a public record? So this is the definition from the public records act and it's really any writing that relates to the conduct of government or performance of any governmental uh or proprietary function that's prepared, owned, used or retained by the local agency. So the the definition of writing um is uh pretty broad. It really is any s sort of medium. So it can include your paper documents, it can include videos, it can include your web content, it can be text messages, emails, etc. Um, it can also include social media posts. So we're going to talk a little bit about things such as uh social media text messages and records that are maintained on personal devices um and personal accounts of agency employees and officials in just a little bit. So one thing to keep in mind is there's a difference between requests for

records versus requests for information. So requests ah there we go. Um again requests for records are records are those uh writings that relate to the conduct of government and that are own prepared owned used or retained by the public agency. A record has to be identifiable. That really means that the agency has to be able to reasonably locate that record and it needs to be something that's in existence at the time that the request is made. So if someone just says, I want all records related to that thing, well that's not identifiable. What is that thing? Right? But if someone says, "I want all records related to the May 12th city council meeting," then those are things that the agency can reasonably locate because it is identifiable within the meaning of the public records act. So a request for information on the other hand is really when a requester is asking questions or asking for information and not ask actually asking for records. So, for example, two different ways you can think about it are if a requesttor asks for a copy of your public records policy, that is a request for records. But if they send you an email where they say, "I'd like to know how the city handles public records requests." That's not a request for records. That's a request for information. And there's no requirement under the public records act that you respond to requests for information. Sometimes you might still want to do that because it's good customer service. And it also might um keep it from the requester making a later request that's broader than what um you know just by broader than the question is really asking in the first place. So you know that's just something to keep in mind. Um but you know agencies are not

required to do research on behalf of requesters or to explain records to requesters. are really just required under the P to provide records. So let's talk about how to respond to public records requests. So these are just the basic steps of a public records request. So your public records officer receives the request or someone else within your agency re receives the request and then they forward it on to the public records officer. The agency then has five days to respond to the request. You can respond in a couple of different ways that we'll talk about in just a moment. If the records are read readily available, you go ahead and provide the records. If they're not, then you have to provide a reasonable estimate of time that's required to respond to the request. That estimate of time might be based on the need to provide third-party notice or to seek clarification. depending on the request. Maybe it's a really large volume of records. So, you might give more time to um to respond if there's a really large volume of records or workload considerations, need to consult with legal because their records might be exempt. Those are all reasons why you might um that factor into your estimate of time. Again, has to be reasonable. the model rules really caution against using blanket like 30-day uh estimate of time for every single request that you receive because it's really uh dependent on the language of the request itself. So, for example, if you have a request for a copy of ordinance 123, that's very quick. You could just provide that right away versus I want a copy of every single record that the city manager has ever touched and has ever looked at. that's going to take a lot more time. And so you want to you would maybe provide the

record for ordinance 123 within that five days. But if you're if the requesttor is asking for something that might take you more time to compile, then you would provide an estimate of time that's pushed out a little bit. If you're not providing records within that five days, then you are doing your search for records and we'll talk a little bit about what you need to do for your search after you have identified responsive records and you provide those to the requesttor. You can do that in installments. You can also extend that estimate of time if needed. So, if originally you gave a 30-day estimate of time, you started working on it, there's still more records, you can provide a a new estimate of time. It's just really important to make sure that you're um being consistent with your documentation on pushing out the request or the estimate of time date so that you don't forget about that requesttor. And then at the very end you document closing your request. So I mentioned you within the 5 days you have um you are able to respond in one of five different ways and we refer to this as the five-day letter. So within 5 days you have to do one of the following either provide the record provide an internet address and link to your agency's website where the records can be found. You can't provide them a link to some other agency's website. So you I'm not sure if both had this request but a few years ago um a lot of agencies received a request for audit records and instead of providing a link to their own uh website with audit records they would provide links to the state auditor's website and that would not be uh compliant with this requirement of the public records act. If the requester says that they don't have access to the internet, then you still have to provide the records or you have to give them

access to computer so that they can an agency computer so that they can review the records. Um, another option is acknowledging receipt of the request and then providing a reasonable estimate of time needed to respond. So that is if you need more time to respond because maybe of workload considerations again or uh you have to search for the records. Um the next option is if the portion of the request is unclear or if the entire request is unclear, you can acknowledge receipt of the request, ask for clarification and then still provide a reasonable estimate of time required to respond. You have to provide that estimate of time even if the request isn't clear. Um if the request is if if a the if the requesttor doesn't clarify however after you've asked for that clarification and the entire request is unclear then you no longer need to respond to the request. If they don't respond but a portion of the request is clear and another portion is not you only have to respond to the clear portion. So, if for example they have like two things that they're looking for, you know, I want a copy of ordinance 123 and a copy of that document that the mayor was looking at at the council meeting. Well, we don't know what that means. And so, you um you might ask for clarification on that second part. Let's say the requester doesn't respond. You don't have to then respond to that second part of the request, but you'd still provide a copy of ordinance 123. And then finally, the other option within those five days is to deny the request. So if there if you don't have records, if they're not records of your agency, then you would just simply deny the request. So searching for records, again, if you uh receive a request and you need to do your search, you have to conduct an adequate search for responsive records.

It's really important to think about the context of a request and not just rely on things like keywords or computer searches because you really need to think about all the places that records are reasonably likely to exist. That can be paper records, that can be electronic records, it can be um audio recordings, etc. Also to think about all the people who might know where responsive records exist. So again, we shouldn't just be relying on, you know, IT staff or your public records officer to do a search without consulting the agency staff members and officials who might have more background on where responsive records might reasonably be likely to exist. You should be um really consulting all the people who have knowledge on the underlying facts of the of the request. All right. exemptions. See, I told you we're we're flying through this, flying through it. So, there are um times when all or a portion of a record might be exempt for from disclosure, but one thing to keep in mind is that the courts have really emphasized that records are presumed to be open. So it's only when there is an exemption that you can point to that either prohibits um the the disclosure of the the record or um exempts the record that you would withhold any part of it. These exemptions are narrowly construed. There are exemptions that are within the public records act itself but also exemptions that are found in other laws. Uh and so again there is you are required to have a list of exemptions from um that are found in other laws outside of the public records act. There are also resources with that uh

information on the Washington sunshine committee's uh website. But ultimately if a request is exempt you would only withhold the the exempt portion. If there are portions of a record that are nonexempt you would still release those portions. just um redacting out the exempt portions. So there a a lot of times I'll hear people say, "Well, we can't give that out. It's confidential or it's it's private." Well, one thing to keep in mind is that there is no general right to privacy in the Public Records Act. there might be an element of an exemption that um invokes this privacy exemption and if so then the test is that privacy is only invaded if the disclosure would be one highly offensive to the reasonable person and not of legitimate concern to the public. But again there it needs to be a prong of another exemption. It is not a standalone exemption. So if if there's no such thing as oh well this is private and it would violate someone's right to privacy only if it is part of another exemption. One place that we see that for example is in personnel records. It'll say you know information that's maintained in files for public employees to the extent that it would violate their right to privacy. And that's where you would put it you would uh do that test. All right. text messages, social media and other electronic records. So, this comes up quite a bit and we've seen some changes within the last several years uh related to text messages and social media because I think we're just seeing more use of that within public agencies. So the courts have made it really clear that text messages and social medias social social

media posts on the personal devices and in personal accounts of public agency employees or officials may be public records that are subject to the public records act if one again the record relates to the conduct of government and two was prepared within the scope of that individual's employment or their official capacity. And what that means is when the position requires it, the public agency directs it, or when it furthers the agency's interests. If there is a requirement that you search a a personal device or personal account, then you have to fill out what's commonly referred to as a Niss Nissen affidavit. This test that's um outlined above that is from Nissen versus Pierce County. One thing to keep in mind is that agency does not have an obligation to do a forensic search of private devices. Sorry, the courts have um talked about how that could be an unlawful search under the constitution. So, that's just something to keep in mind. You really are relying on your agency employees and officials to perform that search themselves. the agency wouldn't ever demand a you know give me your device and we're going to do a forensic search to make sure that you don't have any uh responsive records. So one thing to keep in mind uh when we're dealing with this issue of things like you know whether it was within the scope of employment or official capacity is again you have to look at this test but when you're looking at the test we don't have a whole lot of guidance from the courts. Um one case that I like to point out is the west versus city of puallup case where we were dealing with Facebook posts of a council member there. this council member was posting

about things like events that were happening within the city um and things such as you know like uh like road projects I believe was one of the topics that she had posted about. It was also on her uh her original campaign uh Facebook page. Well, what the court had talked about was that the her types her posts were really um merelyformational and they didn't directly address the conduct or performance of government functions. So, they might be public records, but they weren't public records per se. And in that particular matter, the court said that these posts about goings on within the city were really only tangentially beneficial uh to the agency's interests. But the court did call out the fact that these posts did not contain specific details of the council member's work as a council member and did not include uh information regarding city council discussions, decisions, and other actions. So, I think that this case really does um kind of clue us in that if the posts or, you know, for example, text messages did include specific details about a council member's work as a city council member or discussions that were before the council that those might be considered public records. So, that's just something to keep in mind when you um might be using your personal devices and accounts for uh sending or posting messages. So, some best excuse me, best practices. It's really important to avoid comingling your personal and official accounts whenever possible. Um, having disclaimers on your personal page that includes things like, you know, this is your personal account. Um, and all posts are strictly my own and not, you know,

the posts of the city of both. That's really important because it uh creates a presumption that it is personal and not um public. If someone is reaching out to you on your personal account or uh personal devices, it's really important to direct them back to official methods of communication such as an official phone number or official email. Again, whenever you are doing a search for records uh responsive to a public records request using your on your personal devices or on your personal accounts, uh you have to fill out that Nissen affidavit. Also, I mean, social media is here to stay and so don't be scared of using it, but just be really mindful about how you do use it. I know um you know a few years ago when people first started using uh social media I was don't do it, don't do it. But now we're at a point where I think it's really you know the cat's out of the bag. We're doing it. People are using social media and there are really some benefits to using social media. But just really be mindful about it. Yes.

How long ago was that your stance? Oh, like can you name a year? Name a year? Oh gosh. I mean, it's probably been at least like eight years or so. That matches my understanding. Yeah. I mean, the the um the Nissen case came out in 2015 and the West versus Pialup case came out in 2018 and you know, that case was like, uhoh, you better watch what you're doing. But now we're at kind of at a point where I think we just see social media has such a benefit um to public agencies that we're just seeing it used so much more. So just really be mindful about how you use it.

Right. And like it also sounds like there's been enough time to establish some norms and like patterns of behavior that people understand are either reasonable or out of scope and Okay.

Yeah. Yes. Um and then again having policies regarding your text message and social media use is really important and that's that's another thing that we've seen within these last you know seven or eight years is a change in the policies that agencies have. You know back at the that time a lot of agencies didn't have policies on what to do about using your personal devices and personal accounts. I mean, it's still really important to use your official accounts whenever possible, but I also recognize that um people do use their personal accounts. Um, one other thing I want to keep in mind is that some use of social media can implicate some First Amendment considerations. It's not directly related to the public records act, but just something to keep in mind. Uh when you're doing things like blocking people on uh social media, you know, that can potentially raise some um first amendment concerns. Uh so I would suggest avoid blocking other users um like specific users. If you don't allow any comments, that's one thing. But, you know, I wouldn't remove uh one particular person's comments over other people's comments simply because you don't like what they're saying because that could potentially um start getting into the realm of um protected activity under the First Amendment. Of course, the person um you would have to have actual speaking authority on behalf of the city for it to really implicate the city with liability, but it's just better to not even go down that road if you can avoid it.

All right. So, this was a specific request um was to do you have a question? Yeah. About the last slide? Yeah. Sorry. Sure. Um, so with personal social media accounts and blocking, I think I blocked two Buffalo residents and I mean it was due to harassment. So, and if it's my personal account that I'm very clear is not for city work, you're not saying don't do that. You're saying if you're using it for official Yeah. Okay. Yes. Just wanted to make sure. Yes.

All right. Body warn cameras. So, um, this was something that was specifically requested that we talk about today. So, just some basics. Um, bodybu cameras have their own procedures within the public records act and there are specific requirements if you're making a request for bodywn camera footage. You have to include uh the name of the person or persons who are involved in the incident. You have to include an incident or case number, the date, time, and location of the incident or incidents, and you have to ident or sorry, or you have to identify a law enforcement or corrections officer that is involved in the incident. If you don't include all of the that information, then um then there, you know, there's no responsibility for responding to that request. So you can also recoup redaction fees from certain requesters. Um that is not for everybody. Certain types of requesters um you cannot charge them. Those are people who are directly involved in the incident or their attorneys. um if the it the person is requesting information that's relevant to a criminal case involving that person um and some other individuals like some other government individuals who do not have to pay for that retaction fee. There are some rebuttable presumptions of highly offensive dep depictions that we'll talk about in just a moment. And as far as penalties are concerned, I know we haven't talked about penalties yet, but uh for penalties, there has to be a showing of bad faith or gross negligence. So there are some exemptions for body warrant cameras that are really important to uh keep in mind. Um so

these are prohibitions in the public records act. So a lot of the exemptions in the public records act itself are not prohibitions. they are just these records are exempt and the agency um can withhold or redact the records. However, in the body worn camera section, these are prohibitions. So, you cannot um disclose body warn camera footage to the extent that they're exempt under this particular subsection. Um this is one of those exemptions that includes that right to privacy prong. So they are exempt to the extent that non-disclosure is ex is essential for the protection of any person's right to privacy. There can be multiple body warn camera exemptions that apply and also exemptions outside of the public records act or uh the or the body worn camera context. Um and there are certain areas where that are presumed to be highly offensive. So, here is a list of the um things that are presumed to be highly offensive that are uh contained directly within this body warn camera exemption. They're things like the interior of a residence, um minors, certain health care information, deceased persons, all of those things need to be um blacked out in the body worn camera footage to the extent someone is making a request for those things. It's also important to keep in mind that there might be other things that are um shown within bodywn camera footage that need to be blacked out such as, you know, um police have uh their screens up sometimes in their cars and it might have like NCIC information for example. Those types of things also

need to be u mindful that those might need to be blacked out or passwords or things like that. Um, but those are a little bit different than these specific exemptions that are contained within the body warrant camera section. And Marie, real quick, um, I think the next couple of sections are really ones that might be good reference material for council to refer back to and staff handle for them. Would you be comfortable skipping forward to the open public meetings act on slide 34? I would love to skip forward. That sounds wonderful. Can I say something? Yeah, I was going to say nice work, chief, for including body warn cameras in here. All right. I definitely knew it was of interest. Okay. So, you can read all about

legal challenges and penalties and all that fun stuff later. Um, and your requirements to retain records under the retention requirements. All right. OPMA. So as you all know the OPMA requires that all meetings of the governing of governing bodies of public agency have to be open to the public. So that includes not just your city council but other governing bodies of agency. So that those are your multi-member boards, commissions, committees, councils, or other policy or rulemaking bodies um or committees thereof when they're acting on behalf of the governing body conducting hearings or taking testimony or public comment. Does not apply to entities like the courts, the legislature, um private organizations. This is really for public agencies. So what is a meeting? Um, I love the definitions in the Public Records Act because they're so helpful. A meeting is meetings at which action is taken. I love when you have a definition that includes the defined term in the definition. So, u So, really a meeting is when you have a quorum and you're taking action.

Right. I mean

yes I just I think it's so much fun these wonderful definitions. Uh so what is action? So this is a trans transaction of official business including decisionmaking fin which is your final action deliberation and even discussion. So if you don't have a quorum then you don't have a meeting no exceptions. So again what constitutes action? Again, there are different types of action. There's just action where you are uh just transacting your business and that can just be things like receiving public testimony, having deliberations, having discussions. It can include your final action. But your final action really is that collective positive or negative uh decision often taken by vote of a majority members of your governing body. All final action has to be taken in a meeting open to the public. So, a couple of examples of meetings, things like email conversations can be meetings, serial phone calls, texting, and text messaging that have a quorum of your governing body involved can be considered meetings. um a quorum in the parking lot or having dinner or cocktail party or site visit where you're talking about agency business might be considered a meeting. So, it's just really important that you keep that in mind when you have a quorum that is engaging in any sort of discussion regarding um discussion or action regarding your agency business that it could potentially constitute a meeting. You know, I uh mentioned serial phone calls. Um serial meetings are those meetings where the majority of governing

body might gather either in person on the phone or in emails in smaller groups but collectively take action even though the majority is never part of one communication. So, you can have a situation where council member A calls council member B, council member B calls council member C, council member C calls council member D, and they're all talking about, hey, did you hear council member A? They're going to vote this way. Oh, yeah. I'm going to vote this way, too. And now you have a quorum of the council who's taking some sort of action together. Um, it still requires that collective intent to meet. So, you know, if council members A and B and C have a discussion and they don't realize that somebody else, you know, already had a discussion with, you know, council member D, that's not necessarily a collective intent to meet. Um, and passive receipt of information is not considered um an OPMA violation. So when you have a situation where you know someone accidentally replies all to an email um that is often simply passive receipt of information and not necessarily an OPMA violation. So special meetings again we have a really helpful definition in the public or in the OPMA it's those meetings that are not regularly scheduled. So again really helpful. uh when you have a special meeting, you have to have 24 hours notice. Um and you cannot take action on final action on any things that are on uh that are not on the agenda. So that's something that's really important. If you planning to take final action has to be noted on the agenda. Yes. So, for example, in a special meeting, you wouldn't necessarily like amend the agenda to add

a new item and then make a a vote like take a vote on that item. It would have to be noticed 24 hours in advance. Yeah, you could you could discuss something, but you can't take final action. Yeah. You could like propose putting it on a future agenda and then it would be noticed. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Could you propose putting it on a future agenda if discussing it wasn't even on your special meeting agenda though? Like you couldn't add a new topic of discussion.

You can have a discussion topic. You just can't take final action. So, and again final action is that collective positive or negative um decision making or vote to do something. So, you know that having just mere discussion that is not final action. Okay.

All right. And then for um sorry for special meetings if notice isn't required if there is an emergency or there's some sort of impending injury or damage that could result agendas. You have to have um your agendas available online 24 hours in advance of the meeting. There are a few exceptions to that. the first one doesn't apply to you because you do have a website and you do employ more than 10 full-time employees. Um, but again, you're not restricted from later modifying your agenda. And ultimately, if you had not posted your agenda, it doesn't invalidate otherwise legal action that was taken at a regular meeting if even if your agenda wasn't posted in advance. So, executive sessions, those are those portions of a regular or special meeting where uh members of the public are not able to attend um for limited purposes that are listed in the OPMA. Some common um examples of when you would have an exe executive session are when you have personnel issues. Uh so such as to review complaints or charges um regarding a public employee or to review the qualifications of an applicant for public employment or performance of a public employee. Uh another option is for litigation or potential litigation or legal risks. This is the only executive session um provision that requires a specific person to be there. You have to have your legal counsel uh present in an executive session for this purpose. All other executive session types really it's just the people who need to know people who need to be there can be in the room. Doesn't need to be just city council members. Uh, another time that we see um, executive sessions

used is when you're dealing with real estate negotiations or publicly bid contracts when uh, having that discussion in the open meeting could potentially increase costs to the agency. So, there are a couple of requirements before you go into an executive session. you have to have the presiding officer announce the purpose of the executive session typically with the RCW um along with the estimated time. You can extend that time if needed. So if you said it's going to be 15 minutes and you're in the executive session, you need more time. You just have to come back out into the open session and announce how much more time you need. um you would have your discussion in the executive session um that is not open to the public but any decisions actually need to be made within the open meeting and secret ballots are not allowed. So when you're looking at potential OPMA violations, there is a test that the courts have um have developed and it's when number one a majority of the council meets two with the collective intent to transact official business and three during the meeting the council members take action as defined by the OPMA. And again keep in mind the action can include simply discussing. So, um, even if you're not taking any sort of vote, that could potentially be, um, considered an OPMA violation. So, what are the penalties for a violation? Well, first of all, actions that are taken in violation of the OPMA are null and void. You know, it's a little difficult when you're dealing with pure discussion. How do you declare a discussion null and void? It's basically the discussion never happened but it is um it is included in the definition of action. So that's just something to keep in mind.

There can be personal liability uh for each governing body member who attends a meeting in violation of the OPMA and who knows that it is in violation of the OPMA. There's a civil penalty for um each person who is involved in that meeting. Um $500 for the first offense and then $1,000 for any subsequent offenses. Can also be used as grounds for a recall. Uh the agency can also have some liability. Um if a person prevails against the agency in court, they can get their costs and attorneys fees. But I think almost most importantly is you can potentially lose the public's trust. Um even if it's inadvertent, you know, maybe you didn't realize that, you know, oops, we waited into the territory of having a discussion and there's a majority of us or, you know, it occurred on email or something like that. The very fact that it happened, I think, can really um help to erode that public trust. So that's just something to keep in mind. Some OPMA best practices and other considerations. You know, there are other ways that you can communicate um you know, outside of open meetings um that are still allowed. So, you know, one thing if there's stuff to talk about, just meet more frequently. If you have decisions that need to be made, meet more frequently. I'm sure everyone loves hearing that, but it is an option. Um, you can also filter information through other staff members or through your city manager. So, you know, if you if there are questions, you know, and you want to have a discussion about it, your city manager or staff members might be able to help you um get answers to those things without u involving other council

members. You know, again, just keep in mind that a quorum, you know, is four. So just try not to discuss anything related to the city outside of an open meeting with more than two council members and you know also keep in mind who those people might have already talked to so that you're not involving a quorum and then when in doubt just have an open meeting again meet more frequently. I say that because I'm here tonight but not normally. So meet more frequently everyone. Uh what some kind of best practices for some best practices for executive sessions. Try not to overuse executive sessions. I um I've seen agencies that look for any reason to have an executive session as possible because they don't want to uh talk about something um in the public. But you know there are times that the public really does have the right to know what is going on. And so, you know, it's better to just have those discussions in the open meeting when possible. Stay on topic during the executive session. These um reasons for executive sessions are pretty narrow and we've seen the courts um have looked at that very narrowly and said, "Hey, it's the the exception is only to talk about price of real estate. You can't talk about anything else related to the negotiation of the real estate. You can only talk about price." And so it's just really important to stay on topic. Um, let the public know if you might be taking action following an executive session. A lot of times you'll have members of the public who will stick around if they think that there might be action that's taken. Um, but if you're not going to be taking action, let people know so then they can go home if they don't want to sit around and wait. um after you have your executive session and if you are going to be making a final decision, consider discussing

um that item in the open meeting so people understand what is going on. Of course, there are going to be times that you might not be able to do that because it might be um you know, it might be confidential or it might be um it might increase like legal risks or whatnot. But um you know so you're not going to want to discuss what you talked about in the executive session but you might want to provide some context as to why you're taking a particular vote. Couple other best practices avoiding situations that might create the appearance of an OPMA violation. Avoiding text messaging during meetings. I've seen this happen before with um agencies where a council member was up on the dis and they were sending a text message and then later on, you know, another council member looks at their phone and it created this appearance that they were um texting each other and that then um had resulted in public records requests and other you know allegations of some sort of impropriety. So, just kind of keep that in mind that it just doesn't really look good. Um, also, you know, just helps to make it appear that you actually are paying attention if you're not on your phone. Um, and then be careful when you're using social media. I mean, we've talked about social media quite a bit, but you can run into issues with uh OPMA when you're using social media. So, if a council member posts something online or the city posts something online and then c multiple council members start responding to it, you all of a sudden you have a majority of the council members who have responded. Now, that could potentially be considered an OPMA violation depending on the circumstances. Um, and also just keep in mind that, you

know, you want to make sure that you're being fair. And so what you don't want to do is hurry up and have three people respond to a post. And so then that kind of makes it so that others can't respond because if they do then that could potentially be an OPMA violation. So uh just one other thing to keep in mind. All right. I've got a bunch of resources here that again you can check out this evening before you go to bed. Um they're very fascinating, help you fall asleep. And other than that, I'm happy to take any other questions that you have. I know I went through that all very quickly, but you know, it's a lot of material, so um might take you some time to digest.

I have some niche questions that I will not bother my colleagues with right now. Um should we email Eileen or you or both of you? Either. Yeah, either. Yeah, cool. I guess if it's something specific to the presentation, feel free to email me, but um otherwise either is fine. Excellent.