City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everybody. Full house tonight. And welcome to the City Council meeting for North Bend for May 19th, 2026. May the clerk call roll, please.

Mayor Pro Tem Errol Tremolata.

Present.

Council Member Mark Jocelyn.

Present.

Council Member Brendan Elwood. Present. Council Member Heather Cullen. Here. Council Member Rob McFarland.

Here. Here.

Councilmember Christina Rustick. Councilmember Susan Torgerson.

Present.

All are present with the exception of Councilmember Rustick, who is excused.

Thank you so much. We'd be kind enough to lead us in the flag salute. Oops. The United States of America. The United States of America. Okay, well, good evening, everybody. I really said full house and I meant it. It's just great to see you all here tonight. We appreciate your input at all times. Let's see, Mayor Protem from a lot. Would you like to make a motion to approve tonight's agenda?

Yeah, motion to approve the agenda as written for May 19th, 2026. Second.

Thank you, motion by Mr. Tremolin and second by Mr. Johnson. All in favor?

Aye.

That was a resounding aye. Thank you very much, one and all. Moving on to consent agenda, but before we do, council, does anyone wish to pull an item from consent tonight? Okay, seeing none, can I get a motion to approve consent? Oh, yes, can we? All in favor? Okay, we're moving on. Wait, wait, wait. We need a motion.

That was consent.

Did I hear a motion?

No, that was consent.

Okay.

I didn't hear a motion. Sorry. No, because there wasn't one yet. Okay. Would anyone like to make a motion? So moved. Thank you. Second. Very nice. Okay. All in favor?

Aye. Aye.

Any opposed? Thank you, Rob. I can hear you loud and clear, just so you know. All right. Let's move on. That's passing. And so audience participation. All right, we will now move on to audience participation at this time. If you'd like to speak to general items and items on the agenda that do not have a public hearing. If you're here to speak about item number 5, AB 26-044, Resolution Adopting Six-Year TIP 2027-2032, excuse me, or item number 6, AB 26-045, Ordinance Adopting Moratorium Regarding Bess, please hold your comments until we have public hearing on each of those items. Please remember to state your name and spell your last name for the clerk. And you have a limit of three minutes to speak. Anybody interested? Welcome, Kate.

Thank you for being here. Kate Ling, everybody. Kate Ling, 980 Mountain View Boulevard, Southeast. I'm here tonight on behalf of Valley Pool Together because May is Water Safety Month, and I wanted to let you know about our Water Watcher Tag Program. We got a grant from King County Local Services this year to greatly expand this project, so we're really excited to launch this this week. As I've mentioned before, the CDC says that 88% of child drownings happen with at least one adult present, which tells us that everyone else thinks that someone else is watching children when they're in the water. So our tags are a reminder to carry about what the duties are when you are watching children around the water and for you to pass along to another responsible adult when it's time for you to be off duty so someone is always watching the kids when they're in the water. These are going to be available for pickup starting later this week at the Snoqualmie City Hall, North Bend City Hall, Sideview Pool, Snoqualmie Fire Station, and the Chamber of Commerce. There's a QR code on the back for an optional registration as well that helps us track who is picking these up and where they are going for future program expansion so that we have that information as well. The other part of our grant-funded program for this year is that we're working with Two Rivers students as interns to develop some water safety resources directed at teens. We found that there's a gap in water safety education. There's a lot of literature that's geared towards parents about their safety for their children. There's not a lot that's geared directly towards teens to tell them what they need to do to be safe around the water. So it's been really insightful talking to these students about what they've observed their friends doing. Frankly, as a parent of a teenager, two teenagers, it's a little hair-raising sometimes to hear about what they see. As we all know, raising teens, their prefrontal cortexes are kind of applesauce, and they don't always make the best decisions, but they are very good as well about noticing around them what is being done that's right and wrong. Sometimes it's about empowering them to be the one to be able to call out their friends and say, hey, that's not safe. Or have you thought about whether or not you should be doing that? So hearing from them about their thoughts about that has been really insightful. Teens are five times more likely to drown in natural bodies of water than they are in pools. And also alcohol is involved in 70% of deaths for adults and teens around the water and one quarter of ER visits. Addressing that is going to be really important. And teens are also more likely to overestimate their abilities and underestimate the risk. So we're working on addressing that. They've had a lot of questions about life jacket and signage availability. I may be encouraging them to contact some city employees about research about that as well. And empowering them to be the friend that says something about keeping their friends safe around the water. So these are going to be available at the locations I mentioned, and we're looking forward to getting this program growing this year. So thanks for your support. Thank you very much.

Folks, if I can ask you to desist from clapping, we're running a business meeting. I appreciate the enthusiasm, however. So anybody else wish to speak?

Good evening, Beth. Hey. I am Beth Burrows, B-U-R-R-O-W-S, 312 Northeast 6th Street. And I have lived here for about 36 years. I'm a property owner and I own and operate two downtown businesses, the North End Theater and the Italian Restaurant. And I just wanted to come to speak in support of the Downtown Foundation. I think that I've noticed it when it was barely hanging on by its fingernails. And now I notice it as a really vibrant and growing organization. I really appreciate what they do for the downtown businesses. One, they act as our advocate. I know that I can go to them and ask for their help in finding advice or resources. I like that they bring events to downtown, which means foot traffic, which means more people in my restaurant, more people coming to the theater. And I enjoy that they are... getting all of the business owners to feel more of a cohesive group. And they also magnify the events that I have. When I have an event at the theater, they will share it on their social media, which increases my reach. So just wanted to say I am in support of the Downtown Foundation. So thank you very much. Thank you so much. Anybody else wish to speak?

I have to go back to work. Hi, Beth.

Hi, Sandy. Welcome. Hi there. My name is Sandy Knauft. I live in the Wood River neighborhood at 13729 463rd Avenue Southeast here in North Bend. I am here to request you guys consider putting in a bike lane on Southeast 140th On May 9th, we experienced at the intersection of 140th and my street, 463rd, a hit-and-run accident. The victim ended up going to the hospital. She was thrown about 10 feet in the air. And the vehicle, which was just identified today with an unknown suspect, fled the scene. They left behind a few items to help identify. But my point is, it was, you know, last weekend was a beautiful weekend. You know, we experienced really nice weather. And the bikes were out in full force because I take that road all the time. And I think people on bikes now are using Southeast 140th instead of North Bend Way because there's less traffic on it, right? And they're supposed to be going slower. Well, that's not always the case. So we could probably use a little extra enforcement on that street too. But I think for safety, and as Mary knows, I'm always about the safety in our city. And I think it's absolutely essential that you guys at least go out there and take a look at the stretch that I'm talking about. And I'm talking about from where it turns on North Benway all the way to the truck stop. So it's a very traveled route for bikes, and we're not even in summer. And last weekend was just, I mean, I probably saw 30 or 40 bikes, you know, and some are in groups, which is also, you know, drivers get they get irritated because they have to stop because of a bike in front of them for crying out loud but they do so please consider a bike lane okay thank you very much anybody else wish to speak anybody online oh sorry pardon me i mean to rush hi there good evening welcome

Hi, my name is Rachel Bennett. I grew up in the Snoqualmie Valley. I currently live in Snoqualmie and my husband and I own and operate Tweets Cafe. I'm here to also speak in support of the North Bend Downtown Foundation. For the first few years of my ownership, it felt like we were on an island. We had little connection to other business owners or to the local community. It was also during COVID. That changed when I joined the board of the Downtown Foundation about a year and a half ago. Through my work with the foundation, I have been able to make meaningful connections with other business owners, organizations, and community members. Being involved in the foundation has opened the door for me to understand the ways our community can work together to improve our town for everyone. Each year, Tweeds draws in thousands of visitors from around the world, and through my work with the downtown foundation, I'm able to better direct these visitors to other businesses, as well as activities and events happening. We have a really active and involved board. We show up and volunteer at all of the events. You'll always see us there. The feedback from residents and visitors is overwhelmingly positive and enthusiastic. We host events both large and small throughout the year. We support and highlight North Bend businesses and partner with other nonprofits. We even spend our time cleaning up downtown once a month, which actually happened earlier today. As a resident of the area and a business owner of one of the most popular locations in town, I cannot speak highly enough of the value that this organization brings to North Bend. and the valley as a whole. I would urge this council to listen to the constituents and help support the downtown foundation so that we can continue this valuable and exciting work. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you so much.

Anybody else? Jacqueline.

Welcome. Howdy. I'm Jacqueline Goodbar. I live at 314 Southeast 13th Place. I am a resident and a chronic volunteer in North Bend. I serve on the board of directors for the North Bend Downtown Foundation, which I am here to speak in support of. I'm also the president of a supportive community for all, which is a nonprofit based incarnation that's all about equitable access to resources in our valley. So I started with the North Bend Citizens Academy, which led to volunteering with supportive community for all. and the Downtown Foundation. And I just, it's been very rewarding and it's been very fun. I regularly hear from people that North Bend is fun again, which is great, but it's not all fun and games. Social organizations like NBDF play a crucial role in strengthening community relationships. supporting local businesses, improving mental and physical health outcomes, and reducing crime. So we're going to hit on two pillars of happy, healthy communities, which is social capital and social cohesion. Social capital refers to the resources available to you through your social networks, your relationships, and your community connections. So hearing about a job opportunity from a neighbor or friend. Social cohesion refers to the strength of the relationships and the sense of solidarity among the entire community. The degree of social cohesion within communities comes from local networks of organizations and residents who work together to uphold common values through community-oriented events and efforts like block party, holidays, trick or treat street, and all the other fun stuff that we do. So community events bring residents and neighbors together. The best part of any NBDF event is watching residents connect with other members of the community. Putting faces to names and watching people make friends and get to know their neighbors is kind of the best part of all of it. High levels of social support, which is a product of high social capital, and cohesion positively influences health outcomes through behavioral and psychological pathways. Both these pathways can affect biological functioning in the cardiovascular, neuroendocrine, and immune systems. So social support can therefore directly benefit people and indirectly benefit them from risks that might otherwise damage their health. Social cohesion also has a significant impact on our adult and our older populations. During event like heat waves, flooding, power outages, snow, elderly individuals living in neighborhoods with low social cohesion may lack the social support from concerned neighbors who will check on them. It benefits our kids as well. Anxiety and depression impacts the majority of our school-age kids in North Bend and the surrounding areas. Family and community support can help youth be more resilient to mental health challenges, preventing things like suicide, and addiction. Communities with higher levels of social cohesion are more likely to be able to regulate activity in public spaces and control the set of crime through shared values. So this comes through emphasizing the social norms that we all believe in, like not smashing business windows or stealing things, efforts to clean up neighborhoods and improve... There we go. Okay. I've also cited my sources if you're interested. Yeah.

And just so you all know, laughter is always welcome here. So thank you. Well done. Anybody else? Taking another pause. Anybody online, Phil? Oh, I'm too quick. I'm sorry.

Carrie Lee.

Myself. Yeah. Good to see you.

Hi, good evening, mayor, council members. My name's Carrie Lee Gannon. I'm the executive director for King County Search and Rescue Association. Before I get started, though, I just wanted to say North Bend really is easy to find and hard to leave. You've made a home for search and rescue here, and that is something that is very hard to replicate anywhere else. One of those reasons is because of the investment you've made in the city's public safety, regional resilience, and the volunteer infrastructure here. Um, we are a 100% volunteer run nonprofit that's deployed by the sheriff's office. There's over 600 plus responders throughout King County. Um, and I have had the opportunity of speaking to you before and a lot of our rescues, which you might've seen over the weekend happen right here in your beautiful backyard. Um, which is why the partnership with the North Bend Downtown Foundation becomes such an incredible asset. We have our regional advocacy through the Snow Valley Chamber, which has been a beautiful thing to experience. But we also need that hyper-focused, local, boots-on-the-ground, civic pride-driven volunteer support. And those events are actually where a lot of our volunteers feel like they have a home and a place to go that's outside of those mission-driven areas. experiences. Those community events and those opportunities provide them a table, a place, a home where they actually get to engage with the community in spaces they otherwise might not have the opportunity to. And because King County, when you're looking at SAR as a regional asset, can kind of seem like a pie in the sky type thing. Yeah, they're there when we call 911. Good job. Applause. When we get to go to those community events that are offered to us free of charge, which is a bonus when you're talking about a nonprofit that's driven by donations and grants. It really does change the relationship and our ability to garner support when we need it for future initiatives like legislative actions and those type of things. Thank you to North Bend just in general. I don't know where Erin is, but she was here all weekend allowing us to do a psychological first response training in this room, her and her husband. So thank you. But I wanted to extend support for the North Bend Downtown Foundation for that unique niche that they provide for our volunteer assets. So thank you.

Thank you. Hi, Mark. Come on up. Welcome. Welcome.

Hello, my name is Mark lean I live at 980 mountain view with my wife Kate back there um I wasn't planning on speaking today, I was looking through the packet and notice the. let's see the. The resolution accepting South fork avenues out these annexation notice of intention to commence annexation proceedings based on signatures. of 10% of assessed property value. And I'm going to defer to your attorney on this. I'm only speaking based on reading like MRSC, but I noticed that there's no valuation given for either Syview's property or I believe King County's. I believe the assessor will value them for purposes of these types of applications, and I'm certainly not speaking on behalf of SciView, whether they're for or against it. But I just noticed that that was an issue, thought that I would at least raise it so the council has that issue before it. And thank you for all that you do in serving our community.

Thank you, Mark. Anybody else? Okay, now I'm going to go online. Still nobody?

Not for this session tonight.

Thank you, Phil. Okay, we're going to move on to announcements, presentations, and appointments. We have a proclamation, Public Service Recognition Month. This is the first time we've ever done this, so I'm very proud to go forward tonight. And let me read it. Okay, whereas public service is a noble calling that supports the foundation of a vibrant, resilient, and inclusive community. And whereas North Bend is strengthened daily by the dedication, professionalism, and integrity of its public servants, those who work diligently behind the scenes and on the front lines to serve our residents. And whereas these individuals include city staff, police and fire, educators, public works staff, librarians, administrators, and many others who dedicate their time and talents to enhancing the quality of life for everyone. And whereas public servants demonstrate unwavering commitment to transparency, accountability, and service, ensuring our community's needs are met with compassion, efficiency, and care. And whereas these efforts often go unseen, but are essential to the daily operations of our city, from maintaining safe infrastructure and delivering vital services to fostering civic engagement and preserving the public trust. And whereas Public Service Recognition Month offers a chance to honor and celebrate contributions of those who pursue careers in service to others and to motivate future generations to follow their example. Now, therefore, I, Mary Miller, Mayor, do hereby proclaim the month of May 2026 as Public Service Recognition Month in the City of North Bend, and I urge all people in our area to join me in this special observance. That was fun. You're always fun. Okay, we're going to move on to Commission and Committee Reports. Let's start with Community Economic Development. Council Member Torgerson, take it away, please.

Certainly. Hey, today we met on May 19th at 4 p.m. and we discussed several items. First item on our list was to discuss ADU size, potentially making the zoning laws we have around that a little bit more flexible, and we deferred that to potentially next year's work schedule. We also talked about the potential for some amendments for non-conforming uses in the single-family area for the downtown commercial. What that was about is if... That's now no longer a single family is no longer conforming to the downtown commercial. So if someone wanted to do an add on, how can we make that more flexible or whether we should or not? So we're going to put that towards a work study, discuss that some more. We also talked about Mudderbrook Heights, potential zone change and some complexities around that area. And then we talked about the South Fork Avenue annexation for a few moments. And then we finished off with a little discussion on 2030 Maine and how another hiccup came about and how that's definitely not going to be going forward. And then we did a few updates on some of our activity around here, like what kind of businesses we have coming and going, that kind of thing. And that concluded our meeting and we finished with five minutes a little bit after.

So that's pretty good. That's much longer. There you go. Thank you very much for that. I just realized Councilman Rustick is not here for finance and administration. Who is offering to? Anyone giving that report tonight?

Who is on it?

Oops. Rob? No one? Mark? Okay. We'll just kind of move on through. We'll provide that next time maybe. I don't know. Public health and safety is Councilmember Elwood.

Thank you, Your Honor. We met May 5th at 4pm in the adjournment room. We had a wonderful fire update from Deputy Chief Walker, police update from Chief Hall, and a walkthrough of our super cool, super slick, in-development North Bend Police Department dashboard. Check it out. It's really cool. And then I don't think we had any walk-ons that one, but we will next be meeting June 2nd in the adjournment room, right over there to the left, and we will add water safety awareness. Thank you for the testimony tonight, as well as bike lane conversation on Southeast. even though that probably sits better in the transportation public works, but thank you for, uh, the testimony today. We will add that to our agenda. Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Your honor. If I may.

Yeah.

I will offer a, uh, read out on the finance and administration committee. We last met Tuesday, May 5th, uh, in the adjournment room, uh, items that were discussed included an update on the two 30 main project, which, uh, The funding simply did not come through, and staff is continuing to look for alternatives and paths forward to help address the need for workforce housing. We discussed the Glacier annexation, which is on the agenda this evening, and we will be discussing it. We got an update on the 2026 first quarter budget from the finance director, which was positive. We got to check in on the 20, 27, 20, 28 budget calendar as this is a, you know, the budget comes around to the every two years funding cycle. And this year is a year that, that we go back through that process and, We got an update from staff on the audit status, given that there is quite so many folks in attendance. It may not be always recognized, but the city does regularly get audited by the state of Washington. We passed with flying colors. You know, there's an issue here and there, but they randomly pick items and go everywhere. on a very deep dive and take a lot of time. And in fact, it costs the city a fair amount of money to pay the state to be audited. But we are under, you know, strict oversight from the state in terms of how this city handles its finances. I want to acknowledge and thank you, uh, thank the financial staff for, uh, continuing to keep us, uh, above board and on the, on the rails. Uh, we also got an update on utility billing, uh, and issues with, uh, the new town homes on the East side of town that, that, um, For reasons in staff turnover, it's taken a little while to sort that out, but that is being addressed, and we appreciated the information. We'll next meet the second Tuesday of next month. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Johnson, for stepping up in the heat of the moment, so to speak. Do you happen to have the Eastside Fire and Rescue report in your back pocket? Just kidding. No, that's me. Just kidding.

Okay.

Okay, we're going to go to Eastside Fire and Rescue, and that'll be Ms. Torgeson.

All right. So we met on May 14th. And we, we have been talking about regional fire consolidation options. And we had a presentation from Fire Chief Mark Jones regarding the Puget Sound RFA. And it was very detailed and very long. And very informative. In fact, I'm asking for the deck page because it was very interesting. Maybe not for others, but for me, it was interesting. Anyway, so we went through that and that was pretty much the entire meeting other than, you know, reviewing some expense reports and things like that. But that was it for the Eastside Fire and Rescue.

Fantastic. Okay. TPW Transportation Public Works Council Member Collin.

Yes, we last met on April 28th at 3 o'clock in our June, that room there. We first talked about a resolution accepting SS4A grant funds, which is in January of 2026, the city receives safe streets and roads for all grant funds, and it's funding 80% of eligible project costs. which is great with a maximum grant amount of $200,000. Uh, secondly, we talked about resolution approving project closeout for the 2025 sidewalk gaps project. This is a housekeeping item to close out the project. Third, we talked about a second review of the city's 2027, 2032 six year transportation improvement plan, which is on tonight's agenda. Um, And that was our last opportunity for committee to comment on the TIP and the staff will go over Snoqualmie Tribe's comments briefly. They did. The fourth thing on our agenda was motion approving purchase of acoustic sewer line assessment system. This is important for helping find leaks in our system that will help save us money in the long run. On the fifth thing on our agenda, discussion on 2020 sidewalk gaps project. Staff would like to go through project options attached for the 2027 sidewalk gaps project and get our recommendation. We like sidewalks here. Anyways, number six, we discussed contract amendments proposed for the Seattle Pacific Utility contract for supply of untreated water. as we always talk about water. That is it. Our next meeting is on May 26th, which is next week in the adjournment room at three o'clock.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Mayor Pro Tem work study, Mr. Trimble.

We had a council work study on April 28th, and I think it went fairly well considering all three items are now on the agenda tonight. So it feels like we actually did some work that's going to come to fruition. So I'll keep it short. We had a lengthy discussion about the Regional Fire Authority, Fire District 38, and Eastside Fire and Rescue. I would encourage our residents to stay tuned. That's going to be kind of an ongoing conversation over the next months. Then we followed up with further detail on the South Fork Avenue annexation, which we'll hear more about tonight. And then we introduced the conversation about the commercial battery storage discussion and the moratorium, which is on the agenda tonight for North Bend to look into this further and be wary of our valley and what is going on around us. And the next work study is next Tuesday.

Fantastic. Okay, Mike McCarty, Planning Commission, Parks Commission, Economic Development Commission.

Yes, Your Honor. Let's start with the Planning Commission. Planning Commission did not meet in May, but they will next meet on June 3rd, and they'll review draft unit lot subdivision regulations. Those address requirements of recent state legislation to enable a simplified form of lot division for certain types of middle housing residential development, such as cottages, townhomes, and accessory dwelling units. as well as draft lot splitting regulations, which is another simplified form of division of a single family residential lot into two lots. Next, the Parks Commission. Parks Commission last met on April 22nd and reviewed draft amendments to our parks element, reviewed feedback from the bike survey and other public engagement for the bike north bend plan, and discussed work to date on their reconnaissance exercise to identify wayfinding sign needs around the city so they can prepare recommendations for future pedestrian and bicycle wayfinding signage improvements. The Parks Commission will meet next Thursday for a public workshop at 6.30 p.m. on the draft amendments to the Parks Element of the Comprehensive Plan. So we welcome any public participation for that public workshop. The Economic Development Commission met on April 23rd and discussed several items, including hosting the What's Brewing North Bend event, which focuses on coordination with local businesses on news and topics relevant to those local businesses. The next What's Brewing meeting will be on June 10th. Commissioner Mike Koontz provided a presentation on the relationship of recreation and tourism on the local economy and the potential impacts of greater investment. The EDC also discussed updates to the Creative Economy Plan that's being coordinated by North Bend and Snoqualmie, funded by a Port of Seattle grant. On that effort, staff are contracting with a facilitator to help with public engagement, which will include a steering committee as well as community outreach events. The EDC will next meet on May 28th, and they will discuss lessons learned from the first What's Brewing North Bend event, progress on the Creative Economy Plan, and continued discussion on the benefits of outdoor recreation on the local economy.

Thank you, Mr. Riccardi. Retro Reports, any council members wish to supply as well? Thank you, Mr. Jocelyn.

Yes, the Sound Cities Association Public Issues Committee met on Wednesday, May 13th. It was virtual. We received a presentation from the Housing Development Consortium. It's the front end of a conversation. King County Executive Girmay Zahileh has issued an executive order that emphasizes identifying new dedicated revenue sources to address King County's affordable housing shortage. And so this was outreach to the Sound Cities Association in an effort to start that conversation. The HTC would like to continue these discussions directly with cities and welcomes feedback on how to expand their outreach and engagement on this initiative. There was conversation around a letter to the county about proposed sewer rate increases, which are at double digits for the next decade or so. Thankfully, of course, in this town we have our own sewer treatment plant, so we are not impacted by the King County proposed rate increases at this time. Thank you to those who came before me. There was a conversation on Sound Transit and their efforts to reduce prioritize their plan going forward. And, uh, the public issues committee is bringing forward a letter, uh, to the sound cities association board, uh, addressing concerns and, um, That was an interesting conversation. There is no update on the King County Transportation District and their consideration of a 1% sales tax levy to fund roads in unincorporated King County. While the King County Transportation District Board did meet, no action was taken. The sense remains. from Robert Feldstein, who's the director of the Sound Cities Association, is that they will, if they are to adopt a sales tax, that there will be some pass-through to cities, 12.5% seems to be most likely. And it's hopeful that action will be taken by them or that their actions will become more clear later this month when they meet. Public Issues Committee will next meet on Wednesday, June 10th. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Any other regional committee reports, Ms. Torgerson?

Yes. At the April 23rd Sound City Association's King County Regional Law, Safety, and Justice Committee, we were briefed on the 2026 World Cup Safety Preparations and Regional Planning Committee. While there's still a lot of work ahead, the level of coordination between public safety, emergency management, transit, fire, law enforcement, and the courts is very impressive. The World Cup will bring a major surge of people into the region during an already busy summer tourism season. Public safety leaders are preparing for large crowds, heavy transit use, match day marches, and the need for keeping people moving safely around the stadiums and throughout the region. Because there will be no event parking, this will be largely a transit-based event. The Sheriff's Office described its role as the connective tissue. Between jurisdictions with officers expected to be deployed along transit platforms, from Federal Way to North Seattle. Seattle Fire is preparing for the realities of large international soccer crowds. They have plans for soccer culture risks, such as flares and smoke bombs, by putting quick response teams right inside the stadium to put out flares before they escalate. Seattle Fire preparation includes quick response teams inside the stadium, bike EMTs to move throughout the dense crowds, and coordination teams with hospitals and fan zones across the state. The King County Emergency Management is serving as a regional coordination hub, helping manage resources so that if the city has an emergency during a match, public safety resources can still be shifted where needed. They are also planning for normal summer risks like heat, wildfire, smoke, and transportation disruptions. We also heard a couple of updates on counter drone preparation, visitor safety information, human trafficking prevention, court impacts on match days and transit planning, including shuttle service and Metro tap to pay options for visitors. So that'll make it easier and quicker for them to get on the bus and pay. The one takeaway is that world cup planning is not just a Seattle issue. It'll affect the entire region with world cup events, summer tourism, and revive I-5 construction happening in the same general timeframe. The next year will require patience and strong coordination. The overall good news is that the communication systems and decision-making structure appear to be in strong place. That is the regional law, safety, and justice report. I also have a chamber report. All righty. So the chamber update. SR 18 advocacy. The chamber recently participated in a meeting with the Washington State Department of Transportation, Secretary Julie Meredith and CLTC members regarding SR18 safety and future improvements. While the larger phase one widening project may not begin construction until approximately May 2030, the conversation was promising. We are encouraged that WSDOT is looking for potential near-time safety improvements while the region waits for a larger widening project to move forward. SR18 remains a critical corridor for North Bend businesses workforce movement. freight access, tourism, and public safety, the Chamber will continue to advocate for the regional partners during this. Also happening recently, restaurant health inspection concerns. They recently met with the Director of Environmental Health and Safety regarding the increase in health inspection write-ups and permitting concerns being reported by restaurants in our area. So they're advocating for our restaurants. And lastly, upcoming chamber luncheon on May 27th. At the upcoming chamber luncheon, they'll be highlighting North Bend art and industry and Snoqualmie Valley Museum. So that should be a very entertaining luncheon with a lot of information about local history, strengthening arts, and supporting North Bend's unique sense of place. And that concludes the chamber report.

Wonderful. Thank you. I'm going to take one more look around and see if we have any more Regional reports, I don't think we do though. Nope. Okay, we're going to move on to our very robust main agenda. Let's see, item number five is public hearing, ordinance adopting the six-year TIP 2027 to 2032. Mr. Moore, I turn it over to you.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. A lengthy introduction for this subject was provided at the April 21st City Council meeting, so let me just cover a few of those highlights as the TIP is largely unchanged from last year. On page 13 of your packets, you will see the TIP table showing all the projects. Projects highlighted in yellow are actively being designed by staff and consultants. There's also a project narrative and map following the TIP table within the packet. Significant changes from the previous TIP include construction projects scheduled for this year have been moved as this is a forward-looking document. A list of the completed TIP projects can be found on page 14 of the packet. We moved project T067, the North Bend Way Complete Streets Segment 4 up the priority list. This is the segment along North Bend Way from the entrance to Torgerson Park east to 436th Avenue. We added project T073, the Avenue South Roadway and Parking Improvements Project. We added the Ballarat Plaza Project, and we added the 2027 Sidewalk Gaps Project. Other than that, the TIP remains largely unchanged from last year. The Transportation and Public Works Committee reviewed this item after March 24th and April 28th meetings and recommended approval and placement on the main agenda for discussion as you see it now. We also received two public comments, which have been included in your packets. And before the six-year TIP is voted on by City Council tonight, the public hearing will need to conclude. With that, happy to answer any questions City Council may have.

Thank you, Mr. Moore. Any Council questions for Mr. Moore? Seeing none. OK, this public hearing six year TIP was open in April 21st City Council meeting and it's continuing to be open tonight. At this time, if anyone from the public would like to speak to this hearing, you're welcome to come to the podium and state your name, spell your name for the record and you have three minutes to speak. Anybody interested tonight? Anybody online?

Not for this item, Your Honor.

Okay, I guess I'm going to gavel it closed. Imagine that. Okay, close the public hearing. Thank you so much. This came through. Where are we? Ms. Colon. Yeah. Excuse me. Thank you. I'd like to make the motion. I would. I'd love it.

Motion to approve AB 26-044, a resolution adopting the six-year transportation improvement plan 2027 through 2032 as a final reading. Can I get a second?

Well, can I give it to Rob? He's kind of quiet. Rob, you're taking a second. Is that okay with you? Awesome. Okay. Ms. Cohn, would you like to speak to your motion?

Sure. So the TIP is just a plan to help us keep on track of our wonderful infrastructure that we try to keep for the city. It's nothing set in stone unless it's already being in the process of being built. And it's a fluid plan that I highly recommend. Thank you very much.

Mr. McFarland, do you have anything you'd like to add?

I'd only add that it's important to keep mindful that the vast majority of the funds for our transportation plan are grant-related from outside of the city, and then the balance made up by city funds, and so revenue to support these projects is critical. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Okay. Anybody else have any comments to make? Mr. Kralak.

I will add, um, I think the, um, although I think Tom might've undersold it, the significant changes are pretty significant in my opinion, um, specifically moving up priority of the complete street segment. Um, I think since I've been on council, it's something we've want to focus on is making sure we're diverting as much focus and effort into the downtown corridor and expanding downtown as much as possible, uh, both with sidewalks and investments and infrastructure to make it a more walkable and, um, accessible downtown from wherever you live in North Bend. So I appreciate that. And I think it should be highlighted.

Wonderful. Anybody else wish to make a comment? Seeing none. Okay. Motion to approve AB 26-044, a resolution adopting the six-year transportation improvement plan, 2027 to 2032 as a final reading. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you so much. Moving on to item number 6, AB 26-0545, public hearing ordinance adopting the moratorium, battery energy storage systems, otherwise known as BESS. Mr. McCarty, you're going to have a lot on your plate tonight. I know you're aware of that, so take it away.

Happy to take it. Looking at the crowd tonight, thinking that, trying to guess what the popular item was, and it wasn't the transportation improvement plans.

Yeah.

Yeah. All right, so just for an introduction, battery energy storage systems, or what are referred to as BES, are large scale power storage facilities that are connected to the electrical grid. And these capture electrical energy during low demand periods and discharge that power during high demand periods. So these facilities are intended to help stabilize electrical grids to improve system function and reliability. So as the council and probably the community is highly aware, a recent proposal for a battery energy storage system in an unincorporated King County near Snoqualmie has raised a lot of community interest in this topic. According to the US EPA, best facilities can pose potential public health and safety risks due to battery fires, fire emissions, and associated environmental impacts. So as this is a relatively new technology, the city of North Bend does not have regulations that contemplate or address best facilities. And these could otherwise be permitted as a utility facility within our zoning code with utility facilities allowed in all zones presently. So to better understand the potential risks and benefits of BEST facilities, the city is proposing a 12 month moratorium on the submittal or processing of applications for BEST facilities. So this moratorium is specifically intended to allow time for city staff and the city Planning Commission to develop recommendations on whether best facilities should be allowed within the city, and if so, to recommend appropriate regulation and public process to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. as well as to ensure that these facilities are developed compatible with the overall vision for the city. So findings and recommendations for these would be developed in consultation with other government agencies, including Eastside Fire and Rescue, Puget Sound Clean Air Agency, the King County Sheriff's Office, Washington State Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council, electricity utility providers, and the Snoqualmie Tribe. So consistent with state law, a public hearing is necessary to enact a moratorium. So that public hearing is scheduled tonight. And written comment received to date for this hearing has been provided to the council. I'm happy to address any questions the council might have for clarification ahead of the public hearing and also happy to address any questions the council wishes me to address following the hearing.

Thank you, Mr. Riccardi. Any council have questions? Hands up. Okay, who's calling?

Have we had any interest from anybody wanting to put in one of these projects in our city?

We have not. No, this is purely thinking ahead.

Any other council members have any questions for Mr. Riccardi?

If there was an unincorporated area, would we be in the know of that happening?

We would receive likely notification from King County. I'm not totally familiar with their notification requirements, but I imagine that it would be similar to ours in which adjacent agencies would be noticed.

Sorry. So would our PSE and Tanner Electric be in the know of this situation if it were to come our way?

I can't speak for them, but we're not aware of anything.

Okay, if you do. Any other questions? Mr. Jocelyn?

Just a clarifying question, and we've talked about this, Mike, but in the packet tonight, there's a number of whereases that are going to be adopted by reference if this passes. And there's a statement that battery energy storage systems are commonly used to store energy produced by renewable energy sources. Is it not correct that... Power generated by any means whatsoever could, in fact, be put into these batteries. It's not by definition that it's renewable energy only that might be.

That's correct. Thank you. Yeah, they're typically they are associated with renewable energy because renewable energy tends to fluctuate, such as wind and hydropower and solar based on when the sun's out. But it could be any power generation that then is stored by battery facilities.

Mr. Tremolata.

So just so kind of we're all understanding why we're here or that kind of the next steps, this creating a moratorium is sort of the first step legally, so to speak, or at least to have the most grounds. Should we make a rezone or a comp plan update down the road? This allows us to provide the diligence, sort of the data to back up a later discussion with council if we want to take sort of more severe action for the land use planning of the city downstream.

That's correct. Yeah, this is just to give us time to contemplate the appropriate regulations.

Great. Anybody else? Brendan, and then Susan.

Thank you, Your Honor. Mine was just a follow-up to Councilmember Jocelyn's call out about renewable energy sources that was brought up in committee and here again tonight. Will that be edited once we approve this or do we need to edit that? So that's not specifically calling out renewable energy. Do we just need to make that a little bit more energy agnostic?

That could be a motion tonight to amend the language and the whereas clauses of the ordinance and the resolution.

Anybody else Susan, excuse me. That was my question. So at what point do we need to make that amendment? First vote, then amend? Is that how that works?

to strike renewable if you may or if I may certainly may please weigh in if a council member wishes to make an amendment to an ordinance first the ordinance needs to be introduced by a motion in a second and then we would offer the amendment in the discussion and then you would vote on the amendment just like any other ordinance okay all right anybody else

Mr. McFarland, do you have any questions? Okay. Just wanted to check in.

Thank you.

All right. Okay. We're going to move on to the public hearing. The public hearing on ordinance adopting a moratorium on battery energy storage systems is now open. If anybody from the public would like to speak at this time, please come up to the podium. It waits for you. And please state your name. Spell your last name if you don't mind. You have three minutes to speak for the record.

Hi, I'm Melody Correa. My last name's C-O-R-R-E-I-A. Good evening, mayor and council members. My name's Melody Correa. I'm a resident of Snoqualmie, and I've been a member of the Snoqualmie Valley community for 18 years. I'm here today to express support for the City of North Bend's drafted moratorium regarding industrial-scale battery energy storage systems, a.k.a. BAS. Since March 17th, when I first found out about the proposed Cascadia Ridge bus, it has become clear just how little has been taken into account when it comes to the public that has to live with these proposals, the environments that are irreparably damaged by their installment, let alone their failure, and the potential for dismantling the way of life our communities have explicitly sought out in the Snoqualmie Valley. Some of the most concerning facts we've learned are developers believe letting it burn without sufficient water for containment is an acceptable response to the large-scale fires in the event of a thermal runaway. Developers are not proactively engaging to ensure proper evacuation and emergency response management exists for those of us who live here. And specifically, in the case of Cascadia Ridge, the operational profile that PSE and Jupiter Power agreed to assumes maximizing market return over minimizing cycle stress, which may increase equipment stress and risk profile faster over time. In attempting to keep these developer-friendly market economics, the framework we have today asks too little of developers and too much of the communities volunteered into living next door while developers monitor them from afar. Clean energy should never be at the expense of public health and safety. If we destroy the homes, schools, rivers, and trails that draw many people to Washington, our land becomes nothing more than an industrial yard powering the rest of the nation, not a place to build homes and raise families. I encourage you to pass AB 26-045 tonight so that you don't get caught flat-footed as Noquamie has. Additionally, based on what we've learned, consider the fact that North Bend's substation does sit within city limits. potential interconnections matter. Consider what rights North Bend can exert regarding our water supply, particularly when it comes to fire suppression, and making sure there is sufficient water containment and runoff strategies in the event of thermal runaway. Please take the time needed to truly understand the impact these industrial scale bests can have on our community, extending your moratorium as many times as you need to make sure the Snoqualmie Valley isn't expected to absorb outsized risk for the sake of developers' profit margins. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Anybody else wish to speak? Welcome.

Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. My name is Peter Lully. The spelling is L-U-G-L-I. I live in Snoqualmie, and I'm here in support of your moratorium. The point I want to make tonight is about PSC and electricity rates. As you know, PSC is a regulated monopoly. It can't simply raise the price it charges for electricity on its own. It must ask for permission first. Permission from the Utilities and Transportation Commission, or UTC. What you may not know is that the PSC has included the cost of the Snoqualmie BESS in its recent proposal for higher electricity rates. One of the important principles the UTC uses in approving rate requests is something called prudence. Prudence means PSC must prove it made reasonable informed decisions about investments before customers are asked to pay for those investments. For us in plain English, the question is this, did PSE act responsibly based on what it knew or should have known before committing rate payers to this deal? And we don't think it did. Among other factors, PSE's own materials about the Cascadia Ridge Bess said the project was still in early permitting and that PSE knew of no organized opposition more than a year before it became public. We don't think that meets the definition of prudence, and we think that the UTC should disallow PSE's claim to recoup those costs in the form of an increase in ratepayers, ratepayers in this room, in Snoqualmie, and throughout PSE's service area. I'm asking you to consider authorizing the mayor or staff to file a short public statement to the UTC before a May 26th response date to our claim and ask the UTC not to grant prudence, rate recovery, or return for the Cascadia Ridge Snoqualmie Bess. Now, the reason that's important is that a decision by the UTC not to grant prudence helps set the rules and brings early notice and transparency to any future community engagement of potential best sites, potentially including North Bend. And that's exactly why North Bend should make its voice heard. Now, earlier, Council Member Colin had asked about what PSC knows and what's going on. And together with your moratorium, I would also recommend that North Bend actually writes a letter to PSE and ask whether any best site in North Bend or in any area adjacent to North Bend is currently under consideration by PSE, by PSE or its affiliates or its vendor counterparties. It's been very important to include the ask about vendors. It took two years before general knowledge of the Cascadia Ridge best site before it popped up in Snoqualmie. It's the kind of surprise you don't want for North Bend. In fact, I'm reading North Bend, easy to reach, hard to leave. It's a little bit like PSE, only PSE, it's hard to reach and hard to leave. A utility that seeks customer funded recovery should be required to answer its regulator and the affected cities. And that's the point of proof.

Thank you, sir. Welcome. Thank you, Mayor Miller and council members. My name is Teresa Bechtold, B-E-C-H-T-O-L-D. I live in Snoqualmie and have been here for 11 years. When I heard about the BESS, I looked at North Bend's comprehensive plan and Snoqualmie's. They are about the use of land and the fiscal future of our cities and our valley. A 130-megawatt industrial battery facility next to our homes is the opposite of our sought-after community and land use. North Bend's plan explicitly requires the buffering of incompatible uses from our homes, schools, hospitals, and businesses. This best is not. outside that buffer zone. The fiscal side compounds the problem. Washington passed House Bill 1960 in April, and that exempts best from personal property taxes. It replaces that with a locked excise rate with no inflation adjustment and no local opt-out. At Cascadia Ridge's projected size best, the local share of that excise, if King County cares to share it, which is not clear, would be less than the $240,000 a year that King County itself could collect. That's far lower than real estate or personal property taxes. This best will buy no produce, they won't play in our community sports leagues, and our valley communities inherit the spoke plume, the watershed exposure, the mutual aid burden, and the long-term wear with no financial benefit. The fiscal math doesn't balance, and our levees cannot adjust to fix it. Please pass AB 26, 045 is drafted, continuing to strengthen your laws as you understand our relationship to the prospective interconnection and water rights within North Bend. Please also consider sending a letter of direct opposition to the UTC and to the King County Permitting Division against this project at this site. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else? Welcome.

Good evening, mayor and council members. My name is Jesse Skorupa, sorry, S-K-O-R-U-P-A. I'm a resident of Snoqualmie and I've been a member of the Snoqualmie Valley community for roughly 12 years. I wanna provide the council an update on how the Valley has responded to the Cascadia Ridge proposal over the past 60 days, because it has implications for how North Bend chooses to engage going forward. Our collective community has knocked on over 4,500 doors to raise awareness across the Valley. Over 650 of your fellow Valley neighbors showed up to march in peaceful protest against the Cascadia Ridge site a mere three weeks ago. We've engaged with the WUTC asking for scrutiny on PSE's handling of the Cascadia Ridge interconnection that they are using to partially justify the rate increases. We've engaged across multiple cities, provided testimony at King County, met with the state representatives, and raised our concerns to our federal representation. Just yesterday, we wrote to the King County Executive asking to direct the Office of Emergency Management to engage in readiness review before any county approvals proceed. The citizens of the Valley are in the thick of this fight on all levels, city, county, state, and corporate. Not because we want to, but rather because we're faced with a web of jurisdictional silos that require citizens to first become quasi experts in battery technology risk, and then the connective tissue that independently identifies which city, county, or state entity should care about these risks. We didn't ask to be put in this position, but there's no other choice given the risk to our collective community. So we're here now asking for your help. We believe in North Bend's ability to lead. You're already showcasing your ability to do so with the moratorium in front of you. We are here to humbly ask you to continue leading by one, submitting public comment to PSE's general rate case docket within the next seven days, and two, submitting a letter of formal opposition to the WUTC and King County permitting authority for Cascadia Ridge. The Cascadia Ridge proposal represents a real risk to North Bend. North Bend deserves a proper seat at the table to weigh in. Please exercise that right to protect your citizens and the Valley as a whole. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello. Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. Danielle Wallace, W-A-L-L-A-C-E. I'm a resident of Snoqualmie. I'm speaking tonight as a resident of the Valley for the last seven years, as well as the president of the Snoqualmie Valley for Responsible Energy, SVRE. We are a group of ordinary citizens representing all forms of beliefs, politics, and walks of life that have had no choice but to organize and work literally 24-7 to defend our Valley. We are here today to ask for your help. You've heard four asks tonight that I would like to put in front of you once more. First, pass your drafted moratorium as a first and final reading, ensuring that interconnection activity, applicant disclosure, and water access protection are added to section six of the work plan. Second, authorize staff to file public comment in WTC dockets for PSE's general rate case before the May 26th deadline, seven days from tonight. Third, request that the mayor send a letter of direct opposition to the Cascadia Ridge project to the WTC and King County permitting. Fourth, partner directly with SVRE to join the broader regional and statewide conversation across communities and governments facing the same dilemmas for industrial scale best proposals. We need more holistic analysis of how we achieve clean energy goals without sacrificing public health and safety. None of these commits North Bend to a position that the city cannot defend later. Each is built on facts you can audit yourself. What the Snoqualmie Valley needs from North Bend is leadership. If those who stand to commercially benefit from the project are unwilling to provide a reasonable justification for this site, it's time to take a stance against the proposal to protect our valley. If the expectation is that the community is more accountable to a project they were voluntold into than the utility or the developers themselves, it's time to take a stance against this proposal to protect our valley. And when independent experts with no affiliation to our advocacy nor financial incentive to participate voluntarily raise concerns about whether our valley can safely evacuate during a major emergency caused by the site. And we as residents already know from lived experience just how fragile our access routes can be. We cannot afford to dismiss it as a hypothetical. It's time to take stance against this proposal to protect our valley. SVRE is committed. We're not going anywhere because the people who live here deserve the same level of care, scrutiny, and protection as the corporations seeking the profit from building here. Please partner with us to protect Snoqualmie Valley. We are neighbors in the impacts to North Bend, and the event of failure should be part of this discussion. Please join our coalition. Please continue to lead. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Anybody else wish to make a comment? Thank you. Bye, Dan.

Dan Murphy, Snoqualmie. Thank you, Mayor, Council. My name is Dan Murphy. I'm here as your neighbor, but I also serve on the Snoqualmie City Council, but I'm speaking on my own behalf, not in part of any organization. So I'll start off saying this past December, when our river flooded, I put out a call for help. I sent a text thread out to some dads to help some residents in need clear debris from a few homes near the high school. Three dads from North Bend showed up. No questions asked. Trucks, boots, time. Nobody checked a map to see what city they were in. They just showed up. So tonight, I'm showing up to say thank you for showing up for our valley. We have a proposal, as you all know, just outside our city limits that came together quietly. It caught us off guard. It came together behind the scenes and out of view. A private equity backed company from Texas looked at our valley. They saw an opportunity. They saw new permissive zoning. They saw a friendly utility provider and they saw available land and they moved. What they didn't do was bother to ask any of the folks in our community what they thought about this project. So now this council has an opportunity to give a voice to your residents, a voice that many of our residents did not have. A moratorium doesn't say no forever. What it says is slow down. It says, take a pause. Let's understand what we're dealing with. Let's understand issues related to emergency evacuation, environmental contamination, public safety. All of these are legitimate things for councils to take a look at and to get their arms around before development happens on someone else's timeline. Because here's the truth. What gets cited in this valley affects everyone. Environmental contamination, fire risk, air quality, that doesn't stop at a city limit sign. So I'm very grateful for your counsel considering this tonight. I know many of our residents are watching what happens tonight and are also grateful because as we know, passing this moratorium doesn't just protect North Bend, it sends a signal to every community in the Valley and to every opportunistic developer encircling it that this Valley looks after itself. Thank you.

Thank you, Dan. Anybody else wish to speak? Hello, Kate, again.

Hi. Need my address again. Absolutely. I'd like to speak in favor of this ordinance, and I'd like to call to mind the area I grew up in, which is in western Washington County in Oregon, near Hillsboro, Oregon. and what's happening there right now. There's been an explosion of battery storage facilities and data centers that has happened over the last few years, and it really caught everybody off guard and frankly wasn't dealt with well. There was an effort by the developer, including Jupyter, to hide and obfuscate what was happening until it was too late. Residents wrote 350 letters opposing the development and it didn't make a difference. They were approved by the county. There's now one operational and three to four that are pending. Residents have seen this cascade of unintended consequences because of this. They had a 50% increase in their electricity rates over the last five years from PGE, which is also a privately held utility company similar to PSE, because PGE spent $210 million on infrastructure to support this growth. There's a huge amount of rate inequity. They now have in this little area that I grew up in that used to be rural agricultural productive land, they have what is the equivalent of one large nuclear reactor worth of power that's being stored there. It's encroached on neighborhoods. It's caused noise pollution, safety and environmental risks, strain on water resources, and PGE is now telling residents that the grid is full. They can't support any more growth, any more growth that would actually benefit the residents, that would contribute to the economic growth of the area. They can't do it. It's full. So that means that that benefit is no longer available to the residents that live there. It's similar in that this is happening on the boundary of Hillsborough in an unincorporated area, and the speed with which it has happened has been really remarkable. I share a lot of the concerns about our urban reserve that we have. I think people would be really surprised to learn how much of the land between here and I-90 is actually not in the city boundary. It's in the urban growth area, which is exactly where in Snoqualmie that this best is being cited as well as in their urban growth area. That takes away the city's ability to use that land for something else in the future, for future growth. future opportunity and meeting their requirements. I'm also concerned about evacuation. You know, if we're looking at that boundary between us and I-90 that impacts our evacuation routes, if there's a fire. And North Bend should have priority for that urban reserve, right? That should be the cities to determine. So I hope you can advocate the county for better ways to advocate for that for yourself. And it's prudent to pause and understand all of these impacts. I hope you can look at Hillsborough as lessons learned and gain some insight from their experience with that. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else wish to speak?

Anybody online?

Bonnie Helms online.

I'm sorry. Tim, do you want to speak? Excuse me.

I'm a bad driver. Welcome. But I have lawyers in London. Thank you, Mary Miller and the council. I'm Tim Brown. Let me just call me.

I'm the former fire officer's district for forest fires back in 1980.

And I had to write burning permits pretty much from Renton Highlands all the way to the pass. the watersheds here, all the way up the North Fork, the Middle Fork, and the South Fork. We had control burns in Coal Creek. We burned it very hot, or allowed the contractors to burn it hot, to push the smoke up over the Cascades as best we could. And once that smoke was dispersed, we didn't want any pollution in the cities at all, all marine air. We had wind from all directions here all the time. So Kwame Ridge is a very dangerous fire spot for wind. I fought this fire in Rattlesnake Mountain in 1973 and 1980. We barely stopped it, that big hole up there. We're in hot water. Those toxins, if they get out of control, smoke screens will cover this place. You'll never see the fire from the air, I mean from the air to the ground. This watershed here is the drinking water for the city of Seattle and many cities around. If those toxins, it'll pollute that lake non-repairable. They don't have the pollution control mechanisms and those filters in these watersheds here. So Homer's got an excellent one up there, but they're all different. I worked with endangered species also, aside from fighting fires for 30 years, interagency, all the United States. I worked with the Canadian government also interagency. We collected eggs and all kinds of animals that had passed away from toxins, seals, bears, Salmon, you name it. And these systems are very delicate. If that thing catches on fire, it'll leach in that river there and go all the way to Puget Sound, all the way up into Canada and down Puget Sound. The eelgrass is one of the coverings for salmon. We only have 3% of the salmon population of certain salmon species worldwide. They were just salmon habitat, Alaska, Canada, and here down here. So it's very serious what we've got going on with this pollution thing. The other thing is it would pollute this river all the way down there, every single city, fall city, Carnation, Stillwater, Duval, Monroe, Snohomish, all the way to Monroe, I mean to, pardon me, to Everett. And then it would be out in that system. That would affect the salmon for Canada. Our neighbors in Canada need to be notified about this danger. Also, we don't have the right to abuse the environment at all. So thank you very much for your time. If you have any questions, feel free to call me or whatever. Thank you, Council. Thank you, Mary Miller.

Thank you, Tim. We see Mark Lean. Welcome again, Mark.

Thank you, Mark. Lean 980 Mountain View. I rise this evening to ask for caution. These best facilities are very exciting, but there's a lot of them that's still unknown. And I would just ask you to keep in mind the old adage, measure twice, cut once. If you're not certain about the risks, and I'm not asking for 100% certainty. That doesn't exist in this world. But if you can't put your head down on your pillow and be certain that an activity that you're going to allow in our community is not going to cause great harm, then that counsels for caution and pause. And so in light of that, I think the wise choice is to enact this moratorium. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else wish to speak? Okay, I will now close the public hearing. Oh, pardon me. Who do we have?

We have Bonnie Helms online.

My apologies, Bonnie. Go right ahead. This is your time.

Thanks. Hi, Council. Bonnie Helms. I have been traveling all over the Puget Sound talking about BEST for about two years now. I'm actually from Cumberland. Northbenders, no Cumberlanders. I'm here to support a moratorium on the BEST. I would also like to discuss how changing federal subsidies are compelling the BEST industry to deploy their tech faster than the regulations can keep up. It's not just coming from the state regulations. There is some things that are happening in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. I can also send this to council later. But just to read you real quick, I'm working on something. Under the OBBA, projects may still qualify for valuable credits in the near term, but developers face growing pressure to use compliant domestic or allied supply chains and to move projects forward before incentives decline. The Department of Treasury and the IRS issued a notice providing guidance for determining whether electricity-producing energy storage technologies are receiving material assistance from prohibited foreign entities, and that would make them ineligible for certain energy tax credits. There's new restrictions to the clean electricity credits under the IRS Code Section 45Y and 48E. and the advanced manufacturing production credit under section 45X to determine eligibility for credits when there's material assistance from a prohibited foreign entity. So there's so many acronyms of this stuff too. So a lot of people can't even keep up with it. The treasury has yet to address the foreign entity of concern guidance, but it's expected to be done by the end of the year. It does prohibit taxpayers from receiving material assistance. These minimum percentages that they are allowed to have of the technology are starting to increase this summer in 2026. So that's where a lot of this push is coming from. For energy storage technology, the minimum required share of prohibitive foreign entity costs start at 55%. And that starts for projects beginning construction in 2026. And then it goes up from there. The thresholds for battery storage are actually higher than for solar, which is only at 40% in 2026. The difference reflects the deeper Chinese penetration in battery manufacturing relative to solar panel assembly. So best, best, best. There's also a change in course due to EV credits under the Big Beautiful Bill Act. There's clear evidence of companies repurposing those batteries into energy storage. automakers and battery suppliers appear to be redirecting excess EV-era battery manufacturing into stationary storage. So this is not just driven by grid demand or change in clean energy tax credits, but it's also over capacity. Specifically, Ford, they just launched Ford Energy, and that's a wholly-owned battery energy storage subsidiary with a utility-scale best product that's aimed at all of this stuff. So an article from PV Magazine directly ties this move to Ford's strategy to repurpose underutilized EV battery manufacturing capacity and redirect capital towards higher return opportunities. So this matters for local permitting because this isn't a project-by-project, site-by-site response to our actual rural community need. It's more automakers and other industry using buses as a pressure release valve. for stranded or underused EV era batteries.

I'm going to have to ask you to wrap it up if you don't mind. I apologize.

Yeah, this might just, I'm going to say it's keep the moratorium. We need to ask who actually needs this. Is it actually us or automakers, battery suppliers, utilities, data centers, and tax credit driven developers? Thank you. Thank you.

Anybody else? I don't want to miss anybody. Phil, anybody else online? I can't.

Not at this time, Your Honor.

No? Okay, Mayor Pro Tem. I think this is, we're going to go. Mayor, could you please close the public hearing? Pardon me. We'll now close the public hearing on ordinance adopting a moratorium on battery energy storage system. Okay, now we'll move on to Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. We'd like to make the motion. Yes. Page 31.

Motion to approve AB 26-045, an ordinance adopting a 12-month moratorium related to battery energy storage systems as a first and final reading.

Can I get a second? Thank you. Second, Ms. Torgerson. Mr. Tremelow, I would like to speak to your motion.

Yeah. So I brought this up a bit ago. I think we've had a number of conversations with our neighbors. Obviously, the news that we've heard from folks around. I think there's twofold that this council needs to consider. One is what is our role, right? Our role for our neighbors is to look to the future. I think this council as a whole has done a great job of that. If you look at our comp plan update, all of the economic development plans that we have, nothing is really planning for next week. Everything is planning for next year, the year after five, I'd argue five, 10 years down the road. And I think land use planning, keeping ourselves up to date with technology, environmental risks, all those types of things need to be incorporated in that. I think this step is really kind of calling a timeout saying, we don't really know what this is. We've heard our neighbors loud and clear that it doesn't sound great off the cuff. And so as we, go through this process. If at the end we make a land use decision, I think we need to, A, have the data and the due diligence behind it so that we can stand tall and make that decision and protect our town's future. And then secondly, if it helps our neighbors, I do think some of the comments that we've heard today that we are a valley and we've spoken about that, that what happens next door affects us both positively and negatively. I think that's what small towns need to do. I don't particularly like the way this shook out for our neighbors. I'm not saying that we should go head to head with the county necessarily in any way, but I think we can be a loud voice. And as an elected, if we have a lever to pull to, to amplify that voice I think that's our job. So I'd encourage us to, to take this time out, support this moratorium, move forward. Let's do the work. Let's figure this out. And, and really look to the future for not only our town, but the upper Valley and all of the Valley as well. Thank you, sir.

Ms. Torgerson.

Yes. Yeah, this moratorium, it's a proactive and responsible step to give the city time to carefully consider whether these systems are appropriate in North Bend and how they can affect the long-term community safety. While we hear about best technology offering benefits for grid stability, the potential for public health and safety risks like volatile battery fires, toxic emissions, environmental contamination, potential impacts to our own valley's water aquifer, demand a thorough and localized evaluation. Just as important, consulting with regional stakeholders such as Eastside Fire and Rescue, the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency, and the Snoqualmie Tribe also helps us get expert and diverse perspectives. to shape our local policy discussions. But I also want to be clear that supporting this moratorium does not mean we're supporting any BEST facility. This process should not assume that BEST facilities belong here. The first question should be whether these facilities are appropriate for our community. at all, given our geography, our emergency response capacity, like everybody has stated here recently, environmental concerns, proximity to our neighborhoods, and the importance of protecting our Snoqualmie Valley. This temporary hold is not about rejecting energy innovation, nor is it about creating a pathway for development. It's about taking time to gather facts, ask difficult questions, protect local control, and make sure public safety and environmental stewardship come first. So that's why I am supporting this.

Very good. Anybody else on council? Ms. Cohen?

I am not quite as eloquent as my Councilmember Tremolata and Torgerson, but I do support this motion to approve the moratorium. My concern is that helps our city of North Bend. My concern is do we need to be thinking of the unincorporated areas and the urban growth areas and are they going to Not to be paranoid, go around our backs to get things done. We maybe need to look a little broader than this is great. We maybe need to do something more. Thank you. Very good. Anybody else?

Your Honor, I'd like to offer an amendment. In the packet, we have the ordinance itself and the third whereas. I would like to strike five words. It currently reads, whereas battery energy storage systems are commonly used to store energy produced by renewable energy sources for use during periods of higher demand, I would like to strike produced by renewable energy sources such that it will read, whereas battery energy storage systems are commonly used to store energy for use during periods of higher demand. Thank you.

Second. Okay, great. We need further conversation on that. I'm going to need the wording to speak that correctly and accurately. Because I didn't catch much of that, if any.

Well, the motion, the amendment's on the floor. Okay.

Okay. So do you want to speak to it?

Yeah.

If you're looking down this way, I'll just speak. Yeah, I am.

I'm looking everywhere.

No, I appreciate that catch. And what I'm going to say here also echoes to the main motion itself, which is this is just the beginning. Thankfully, our neighbors... unfortunately caught wind of it a little bit late, but rallied together and started getting some momentum going and really brought some awareness our way. And this is one of those other great moments. I was just having a meeting with somebody the other day where it seems odd that in an emergency situation, then that's when those times where you see the beauty of humanity and coming together, there's a lot of divisiveness, a lot of division in our cultures and whatever, but here we are a community, we're tight knit, something impacts us and a catalyst happens and now we're all in motion. So to me, this is a wonderful bonding of our two communities, especially some of the other history, some council members might recognize. So it's really good step forward on that front. But I also think that this is just the beginning. I mean, there are data centers, IT infrastructure is moving so rapidly, we can't even keep up with it. And so this is just but one step. And Council Member Jocelyn's call out on the renewable energy piece, that's a specificity that a lawyer could walk around. So thank you for that catch. And I also want to thank Council Member Tremolata for really beating the drum on this on the City of North Bend and making sure that We're keeping track with this and we're talking about it in committee and so forth. So thank you to my two colleagues, but it also points out that more to come on this. I firmly believe that this is the first step and taking our time, slowing down and really understanding what it is that we're dealing with is the best step forward for making any sort of governance decision, any sort of strategic decision, especially that kind that will impact public health and safety. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Elwood. Anybody else wish to make a comment? Make another comment. You're welcome to.

To the amendment. I do appreciate the catch. I'm fully supportive of that. I do agree with Council Member Elwood. Those are the nitpicky things that we might get caught up in. The other point I wanted to bring up is the fact that it's on the agenda and we've had work-study talk about regional resources, RFA. We talked about it as we made the transition to King County as well. We're a small town. Just last weekend, I believe what I had heard, there was nearly 60 people involved in this rescue on Mount Sai. And that's for one hiker that fell, right? A massive fire on the ridge at one of these facilities. who knows what kind of resource constraint that would put not only in Sao Paulo, but North Bend. We saw it as well with the floods and Tom's team was great, but that was a well-organized, fully operational emergency center that we had going. And I can't imagine having a need more than that or what that happened, you know, if there were a fire and we're not prepared on the back end, what happens if there's a car accident on I-90 during the fire or another hike or fall. So, I think those are all those little intricacies that a small town like us has to take into consideration and why taking a step towards a moratorium like this makes even more sense for us.

Very good. Excellent. Mr. McFarland, would you like to say anything?

No comment in regard to the amended motion. That's on the table for vote now.

Okay. Okay. All right. Should we take a vote? Ready to take that? Okay. All in favor?

This is just a point of order. We're voting on adopting the amendment, which will then we will go back to acting on the main motion as amended.

Mayor, before we cite that, I'll give you the verbiage so that you have it. Thank you so much. So we're striking five words from the third paragraph. It will read, whereas battery energy storage systems are commonly used to store energy for use during periods of high demand to stabilize fluctuations in the electrical grid or to serve as backup energy sources. Is that correct, Councilmember Jocelyn?

Yes, thank you.

Right here. One, two, three. We're striking paragraph three.

Produced by renewable energy sources.

Okay.

Very good. Okay, motion to approve the amendment with AB 26-05, an ordinance adopting a 12-month moratorium related to battery energy storage, amending and striking paragraph three.

Five words from paragraph three.

Five words, which are?

Mayor.

Okay. City attorney.

Okay, city attorney. I apologize. Before we get too far down, so we're just voting on the amendment at this time. So the striking of those five words in the third paragraph, so the third whereas. So if you'll call for the vote on the amendment. Sure will. And then we will go to the ordinance as amended. Yes.

I'd like to call for the vote right now. All in favor?

Aye. Aye. Aye.

Any opposed? Thank you, everybody. That amendment does pass completely. Thank you. And now we're going back on the floor. So let's go back to motion to approve AB 26-045, an ordinance adopting a 12-month moratorium related to- Mayor? Yeah.

Rob's got a comment. Would you be sure and ensure that everyone has made comment to the primary motion?

Yes, I think all has commented. No, I'll- Okay, Rob, you're on. Okay.

Thank you. I would purely say, particularly the comments already made, particularly those of Mr. Elwood, I would echo, and it's an appropriate pause. Thank you.

Very good. Okay. We're ready to take that vote.

We still have commentary on the primary.

That's true. Okay. Anybody else? There's a lot going on. Anybody else have any comments to make? Mr. Jocelyn.

Yeah, I just wanted to reiterate what's been stated. This is us doing our due diligence, educating ourselves. This did come up very fast. I appreciate all the time, energy, and effort that's gone on in Snoqualmie and in the Valley to bring this to the fore and raise awareness. I will certainly be voting yes. in favor, but it should not be mess-read, as Councilmember Torgerson pointed out, as support for battery storage systems. We're simply using the tools at our disposal to take a timeout and a pause and learn more about this going forward. But it does, in fact, impose a moratorium for the next 12 months such that were anyone to walk in the door and ask for a permit, within the city limits of North Bend, of course, not unincorporated and not within the urban growth area because we don't have authority in those geographies. So with that said, I'll certainly be voting in support of this motion this evening. Thank you.

Very good. Anybody else wish to comment? Mr. Elwood? I don't see anybody. You're on.

I just want to thank staff on this. This came up as everybody's acknowledged very quick and very rapidly. And I think we're all passionate here as North Bend's representatives and to work with our neighbors, but staff also recognizing the seriousness of this and how we all need to work together and really coming through with a good strategy. Okay, let's hit the moratorium. Let's do 12 months. There's other infrastructure things that we have to discuss down the road. Let's break them up into bite-sized digestible bits. Let's get all of our ducks in a row so that if this does come up, We have demonstrated good faith effort to the community that we are doing what we can to protect the community. And if this ends up in a court or any sort of legal predicament, we have all of our documentation outlined as to why we are making the decisions that we are making. So thank you to staff as well. This isn't just a council-led or a council perspective in what we need to do. So thank you. I just wanted to call that out.

Thank you. Anybody else I might have missed?

Nope.

Okay, motion to approve AB 26-045, an ordinance adopting the 12-month moratorium as amended related to battery energy storage systems as a first and final rating. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you, one and all. And just to be noted, as elected officials, we are tasked to be careful and thoughtful with our decisions. And I want to thank our staff and council tonight and the input from the community at all times. Much appreciated. We look forward to a conversation going forward, of course, and into the process. So thank you everybody. Okay. Moving on to mayor. Yes.

Um, I have an unusual request. Um, Ms. Wallace, you had listed a bunch of things that you wanted to ask us to consider, and I was wondering if you could provide that to our city clerk.

Council Member Torgerson, I noted it on the time, and I'll go back and review it for the record, and we will bring that to council for consideration. Perfect. Thanks. She's got it. So, yeah, perfect. Thank you.

Okay. Your Honor?

Yeah.

I'd like to make a motion to authorize the mayor to draft a letter to the UTC objecting to the siting of the Best by Jupiter Energy at the currently proposed location in the unincorporated King County within the urban growth area of the city of Snoqualmie. Second.

Okay, would you like to speak to your motion?

Yes. My daughter's a firefighter with the Bellevue Fire Department. Recently graduated. She's a few months into being off probation. But when I mentioned this to her, She went white because one of the things I have learned is when electric cars catch on fire, there's nothing people can do. They stand there and they let it burn out. They don't put water on it. They can't carry chemical retardants because those have their own implications and are bad, you know. So this scares, I'm sorry, scares the crap out of me. And I've read on Living Snow Qualmy, and I trust these folks have been doing their homework, and I've seen numbers, it's the equivalent of 7,000 Teslas. And quoting... Jupiter's own emergency response plan says the battery units are not equipped with any automatic or manual fire suppression systems. In the section titled, quote, fire suppression systems, the document states the BESS is not equipped with any automatic or manual suppression system. So they put this concentration of lithium ion batteries in one spot, and these things are known to catch on fire. You can't carry them on airplanes. You can't send them through the mail, right? I have an electric bike at home, and I had to add a rider on my insurance policy to protect my home because of the possibility that that lithium-ion battery is going to burn my house down. And once 7,000 Teslas light on fire, we're done. I mean, this will directly impact the people living here and our schools and our parks and our water supply and our way of life. We had a former firefighter. Chief, if I'm not mistaken, talk about Snoqualmie Ridge is a horrible place to have a fire to begin with, let alone if it's a bunch of batteries that are going up. And based on testimony here this evening, it's an important step that this city could take to provide pushback because this is how it works. And clearly the people in charge of this, in my opinion, have been dragging their feet and not straightforward and not forthcoming about their intention in hopes of having an easier path to permitting. And I don't think that's right. And so I would like you, or with the authority of this council, sure, would this to pass to draft a letter that says as much and send it to the UTC. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Who seconded? Oh, thank you, Mr. Tremolata.

Yeah, I appreciate council member Jocelyn bringing that up and I fully agree. I think what we just passed was a little bit more homegrown. We're focused on our residents, right? And this is a proposal to look at the greater valley and frankly ask an answer when neighbors are asking for help. I'll point out council member Murphy when he came to speak, I appreciate him coming. When he ran for council, he and I had a conversation about how do we do better together, right? Like how do we help each other out being neighbors? And as far as I'm concerned, our neighbors are here asking us for help. And maybe this letter will be in principle only and maybe the UTC sends it right to the trash. Right. But I think these are the types of things that when our neighbors ask for help on something that I think, frankly, matters significantly, as Councilmember Jocelyn just outlaid. Yeah. Once again, as electeds, we should kind of pull the lever and be there to help when we can. um so appreciate councilmember murphy coming and sort of walking the walk as we've discussed before he joined council uh and so now i i feel like i should walk the walk with him uh when i said what i said so i will certainly support this i appreciate councilmember jocelyn for bringing it up and i hope uh the mayor would as well thank you very much anybody else have any comments to make

I just think it's a really good idea. Whether or not they listen to us or not. I would hope they'd be listening to us because I know that as council members, we listen when people speak to us. So, yeah, I think it's important that we do this and support our local neighbor as well as the fact that, you know, in an indirect way, it supports us at the same time. So I think it's important to do. I'm glad Jocelyn brought it up. Thanks so much.

Mayor, may I ask some clarifying questions real quick for council because we're in a very short timeline. So I want to make sure we have the letter drafted and out quickly. So we talked about prudence as a general rate on the 26th about the prudence of limiting the bar for the rate study. So I'll do some research in that and produce the letter, but I just want to make sure that's what you want us to speak to in the letter. So if I can get anything clarified right now so we can get that drafted, I would appreciate it.

Okay, great. Brendan.

Thank you for bringing that up, because that's exactly where I was going to go, because I appreciate our neighbors here, and I do agree we need to rise with our friends. But I also understand that we have to be responsible governing agents here, and so we need our staff to make sure to validate, verify certain claims and assumptions that we all believe to be true, trust, verify, right? And that this is the right course of action, both legally as well with all the information. So I would... prove and support staff crafting a letter. I think May 26th was the date I heard on that one, but then there was another, there was two or three other items on there. So I would encourage staff, in your honor, to look at those other items. And if there's anything else that you think that we can do to further our cause and further our support with our neighbors, then that comes down the line after this letter gets out. Because I think the letter is the closest shark, quite frankly. But that's my point of view on that.

The second piece before sorry, Councilman Torsen was the King County permitting and the WTC UTC. So we can draft a secondary letter and council can review that with a timeline for the other one. We'll get on right away. Does that answer your question? It does. I have clarification on what you guys want in the letter as far as content.

Miss Emery, we can get started on this tomorrow. Great. Ms. Torgerson.

I was just going to say, let's defer to Ms. Wallace because she's done thorough, you know, research on this. And so she might have something to add.

Yes. So maybe. I'll look at that, but we want to go through our legal and make sure that we're taking all the pieces that we need to hit and make sure that we're, but I have all the information. Thank you. And I took notes when you were speaking too. So I appreciate that. And then we'll get that all incorporated and do our, do our checks and balances.

Great. Did I miss anybody? Rob, any more comments?

Nothing to add, Your Honor.

Very good. So motion on the floor is, does anybody have the proper wording for this?

I do.

Oh, thank you. I love it.

I move to authorize the mayor to draft a letter to the UTC objecting to the citing of the best by Jupiter Energy at the currently proposed location in unincorporated King County within the urban growth area of the city of Snoqualmie. Gondar has called for help and Rohan will answer.

All in favor.

I'm sure in favor. All in favor. Aye. Aye. Aye. It passed unanimously, and I can't wait to write this letter.

Well done.

Thank you for this, everybody. Appreciate it. Okay, we're going to move on to number seven, resolution accepting South Fork Avenue Southeast annexation notice of intention to commence an annexation proceedings. Mr. McCarthy, it's a busy night. I told you it would be.

We'll see if this one can be as fun. On March 30th, the city received a notice of intent to commence annexation proceedings for properties located outside city limits within what's generally referred to as the Shamrock Park neighborhood located east of South Fork Avenue Southwest and west of the Snoqualmie River, as well as property owned by Craig Glazier. That notice of intent included signatures of property owners representing the minimum of 10% of the assessed value of properties within the area being requested for consideration and annexation. So a copy of that notice of intent is included in your packet tonight. And receiving such a notice of intent in accordance with state law, initiates a process by which the council then needs to schedule a meeting with the petitioners within 60 days of submittal to determine whether or not the city wants to first accept, reject, or geographically modify the proposed annexation. Second, whether it will simultaneously adopt proposed zoning regulations applicable to the area. And then third, whether or not to require the assumption of all or any portion of existing city indebtedness by the area to be annexed. So Council discussed this notice of intent at its April 28th Council Work Steady Meeting and provided direction to staff to bring forward a geographically modified area for the proposed annexation that also incorporates properties located off Southeast 125th Street, which the resolution before you tonight has addressed. Finance Director Martin Cha has prepared a preliminary analysis of the fiscal impacts associated with annexing the geographically modified annexation area. And that analysis is included in your council packet. And I want to also turn it over briefly to Martin to present that initial analysis.

Great. Thank you, Mike. For the record, Martin Cha, Finance Director, North Bend. You do have a copy of this one-page handout, Council. This analysis that Mike referenced is included in your packet. It's on page 69. On table two, as you can see on the screen, we summarize the fiscal impact for a average household in the proposed annexation area. In these figures here, council do reflect the expanded area as Mike mentioned. We're estimating that the net difference or savings to a typical household will total $713 a year. As you can see, that's made up of several things. Number one, property taxes. The typical household would expect to see a lower annual property tax payment of about $920. City water services, these properties in the annexation area are currently outside city customers. So when we annex them into the city, they would be assessed inside city rates, which are lower. So that also results in a savings estimated at an average of about $250 a year. And these savings would be offset by two items, or personally offset by two items. Number one is utility tax on utilities. Now the city, for the listening public, the city assesses a 6% tax on both public and private utilities. And as these properties are currently outside the city limits, they do not pay this utility tax. And once we bring them into the city, those taxes would be assessed. So that becomes a new charge for them. And then the last item is on flood insurance. Currently, these properties have a flood class two rating. And once they annex into the city, there's a class five rating. The class five rating, the discount on the annual insurance premiums are a bit less. So therefore, the savings or the insurance costs for the homeowners would increase slightly by an estimated $210. So the net total between all of these would be net savings of $713. I do want to note for the record council in your memo on table two, the $210 is noted as a negative and that should be noted as a positive. And I'll make sure that the city clerk receives a corrected copy of this memorandum. The second table is the fiscal impact to the city of North Bend. We're estimating a net additional revenue to the city of about $15,000. This includes several things. One is a property tax revenue to the city. Again, these properties are located outside the city limits. And once we bring them in, we would expect to see additional property tax revenue from these properties. Same with the utility tax revenue, as I explained earlier. And also with the stormwater utility revenue, these properties are currently outside the city limits and currently do not pay the stormwater utility fees to the city. Offsetting these additional revenues would be the water utility revenue loss to the city. Again, because of the lower rates shifting to an inside city customer. And then also the Eastside Fire and Rescue contract payment. And for the listening public, the contractual payment that we make to Eastside Fire and Rescue is a formula based on assessed valuation and calls for service. And Eastside Fire and Rescue prepared the analysis and determined that our city's payment to Eastside Fire would increase by about $12,000 a year. And between these five items, there's net additional revenue of $15,000 to the city. as a result of the annexation. That concludes my presentation. If you have any questions, I'm happy to entertain those. Otherwise, I will turn this back over to Mike for his comments.

Thank you. So I just wanted to also clarify that staff do not recommend simultaneous adoption of zoning amendments, given that the proposed zoning for this area has been established in the city's zoning map to become effective upon annexation. So approval of the notice of intent to annex will allow the circulation of an annexation petition by the petitioners who would then need to achieve signatures representing 60% of the assessed value of properties within the area considered for annexation for that annexation to then come back to the council for a hearing and potential action. And then that action would then require approval by the King County Boundary Review Board before becoming effective. So I'm happy to address any questions the Council may have.

Council, do you have any questions for Mr. Riccardi or Mr. Turalata?

Um, I don't know if you have the ability to put that map up, but the one that in the packet, I just want to be clear that this was updated from the work study map. So we've expanded, we've lowered or expanded it to include one 20.

That is correct. Yeah. So exhibit B to the, um, Resolution then includes the properties that were specifically added. And then Exhibit C shows the total area for consideration of the annexation.

And then, so I remember we reviewed the signatures from the applicant, right? And then so would adopting this addition mean more signatures required?

More signatures would be required to get to the 60%. Yes. Okay.

Any other questions from Mr. McCarty? Mr. McFarland, you're on.

Thank you. I've got a couple of questions. First, and mostly to Martin. Martin, thank you for earlier confirming how the utility tax applies and for catching and remarking on the correction on how the Flood rating applies. In regard to the fiscal analysis, I wanted to first confirm that this is all in the pre-development state. In other words, it's not considering what revenues the city might realize should any or all of those properties further develop. Is that right?

That's correct.

Thank you. In the fiscal analysis, there is a cost assumed that you spoke to for fire services and $12,000, but no cost for increased police services. And I wanted to point out, while that may not be determinable at this time, I don't think it's logical to assume there will be no budget impact down the road for expanded police services. And to be clear to my fellow council members, while this may be a very small area and might not impact that, we need to think of how does this apply anytime we're doing an annexation, large or small, services do increase. And so that is something I think should be addressed in a fiscal analysis, some way of projecting a police services cost. And then, Martin, also in regard to questions I had regarding the septic systems, I did also want to point out the analysis used some wording that reflected that homeowners, if they had a failed septic, would be required to join the city's sewer system, but we do have language in our code that limits that to a certain linear footage away from existing systems. So the vast majority is important for those residents to know that the vast majority would not be subject to that in the current state, at least, because there's only a few properties that would be within that realm. Is that correct?

Thank you for those questions, Councilman. I'm going to defer to Tom, have him answer the septic question first, and then I'll circle back and answer your question regarding the King County Sheriff's Office.

Thank you.

Okay, to answer the question about the, it's a 150-foot measurement from the property line measured along the right-of-way to the existing sewer system. So if you're within that 150 feet and your septic system fails, you would have to connect to sewer. If you're outside that 150 foot, you would not have to connect to sewer. Just as an example, if you look on page 50 of the packet, All the parcels within the annexation area are numbered in red. I'm looking at parcels, and parcels kind of adjacent to 412th. Parcels 27, 26, 3, 4, 2, 1, and 29 would all be ones that would fall within that 150-foot realm but would have to connect to sewer. Everybody else would be outside of that. unless maybe in the future a ULID came through and expanded sewer into those dead-end roads, 123rd and 125th, then at that point in time, those people would be required to connect to sewer if their septic system failed.

May I? Yes. A clarifying question in this regard. Is that going to be any different than the current situation those homeowners face being in unincorporated King County? Is the annexation going to make any difference? No. Thank you.

Anybody else?

Thank you, Tom. And Councilmember, looping back to your first question regarding the King County Sheriff's Office and for the listening public, particularly those residents in the proposed annexation area. What Council Member McFarland is referring to is our police services. The City of North Bend formerly contracted with the City of Suquamish for policing services, and now we contract with the King County Sheriff's Office. The cost for policing services, whether we had contracted with Suquamish or with King County, would have gone up. Currently, we pay about $3 million a year for sheriff's office services, and that's forecast to increase to about $5 to $6 million in about five years. One of the challenges for the city is determining a financial strategy to pay for that increased cost of policing services. For these properties, once they annex into the city limits, those property owners and their property taxes would be part of the calculus for that long-term financial strategy.

Thank you, and my final question is, nowhere in the analysis is there a cost capture or projection for road maintenance, such as snow plowing, maintaining the existing. I understand they're in pretty good shape now, but these do not meet the current city code, as many roads in the city don't meet the current code. But without sidewalk, without hard edges, there's, I would assume, additional costs to keep those maintained. And so I'll direct that question to Tom. What should we be mindful of there?

I think for the first few years, we'd probably go in and do some minor crack ceiling and patch repair work just to stabilize the road. So on the order of maybe five to $10,000. And then just looking at that area, it's probably a seven to 10 year timeline before we would ever have to go in and overlay or anything like that. That cost based on, I think we got about 2,500 feet of road there or something with one 23rd and one 25th is on the order of three to $400,000 to overlay those two roads. So there is a cost in terms of plowing. Our current maps show high, medium and low priority routes. These kind of dead end residential low volume roads on our map now are the lower priority, which is what I would think these would fall into as well. meaning we would hit them when there was a, in a short storm, we would hit them when there was a gap in a longer storm. Same thing as, as we had the opportunity to get into them, we would, but we'd be focused on the higher arterials and emergency routes with our plows.

Thank you. And, you know, not intending to be nitpicky at all. Just want to be sure that, that we're all aware as best we can of potential. That's all your honor.

Thank you very much. Anybody else? Mr. Jocelyn.

Yes, I'd like to address this to the attorney. There are two parcels here in the proposed annexation area that are publicly held, one by the Syvee Metropolitan Park District, Shamrock Park, not the neighborhood, but the actual park, and a parcel held by King County. How are those reflected in this need for 60% of the assessed valuation? Are they participants in the process or are those somehow treated differently?

Short answer is, excuse me, they are participants in the process. Right now it is in front of the council as we are just considering the annexation petition. So should this move forward, When a proposed annexation includes government-owned property, the county assessor would need to value the government-owned property, which would count towards that assessed value within the area proposed for annexation. And although government-owned property is not annually valued, it can be valued when necessary. So should this move forward, that would be the request for the county to provide that valuation, and those local governments would have an opportunity to participate in the petition process.

So King County, the county board would need to take an action that either affirmatively or to weigh in on this particular parcel as to whether or not they are supportive or not of the annexation.

So my answer was specifically related to the county's valuation of property generally. I don't advise the county in terms of how they would respond to a petition process. However, they would have the right and opportunity to respond. A government is allowed to sign a petition.

Thank you.

Great.

Any other questions, Mr. Elway? No.

I apologize because this just popped up as council member Jocelyn was talking. So if there's no answer, that's perfectly acceptable. Currently, the river system right there across from Shamrock Park is a huge lumbered pileup. Talking with King County engineers, what we heard as a resident on that river is that they're just going to wait and see what's going to happen to it before they do anything. That's not an official statement from King County in any capacity. That's me talking with somebody who's surveying the river. if we assume that property, do we then become responsible for any of that river maintenance? My assumption is no, because we don't currently assume any of that river maintenance, but if we wanted to do improvements and things like that, that would then fall within our budget purview. Is that correct assumptions? And I apologize, this just popped in my head, right? And I know we have a no surprise.

No, I think your assumption is correct that we would not. It's state waters. Anything we would want to do in there would require permits because it's their water that they deal with. I had the same conversation with the King County flood control rivers and floodplain group about can we move that stuff? And they told me the same thing that they wanted to just see what happens.

OK, good. I just want to make sure that once we annex it, they don't say, OK, well, here's a five million dollar million dollar bill to move all that lumber. So, OK, thank you.

Okay, I'm going to take one more look around if anybody has any comments to make. Okay, this came through CED several times and then moved on to work study. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem Tremoletto, can you make that motion, please?

Yes, we can. Motion to approve AB26-046, a resolution accepting the South Fork Avenue Southeast annexation notice of intention to... Commence annexation proceedings subject to review and approval of a fiscal analysis to be prepared and authorizing the preparation of a formal annexation petition.

And I got a second. Second. Thank you. Okay. Would you like to speak to your motion, Mr. Tremlata?

Yeah, I mean, I think we've talked about this quite a bit. I mean, this, I think, was originally brought up originally at our comp plan update many months, months ago, over a year now. I appreciate all the diligence. I think for me, you know, the fact that the petitioner has gotten all... The signatures that he has makes a huge difference for me. And I think, you know, this is clearly something that is a group effort, even though there is a single petition petitioner. I think it makes sense. I think there's a benefit to both city and the homeowners there. And I think there's some ancillary benefits to the city as well, which we've discussed at work study and others. So I'll support it. Excellent. Ms. Torchison.

Yes. Yeah, I agree with Councilman Tremolata. There's not going to be a lot of cost burden to the city. The proposal has broader community benefits. For example, the property owner's been, the family's been in North Bend since 1908 and has several properties in downtown North Bend, and he has shared that he wants to update those buildings, which will definitely help our income, economic development in the downtown area. Also, there's a lot of property owners that are in support of this, that are in that area, and You know, I think he's got at least 70 property owners so far. So that's a good number. And I just think it's going to be a positive addition to the city of North Bend, as well as the people that are living there. So, yeah, I'm going to support it.

Great. Anybody else on council that wish to speak? Nope.

Okay.

Mayor. Rob. I just missed your hand, but I hear you.

Yeah, well, I was a little slow there, but there'd be more. I am generally supportive of this petition. I think it's always a positive when there seems to be a plurality of property owners, not just by assessed value. So that's a real plus for me as well. And my only other comment is I did submit to the clerk for the record a couple of options that I thought council members should take into consideration perhaps at a future time, but I am not intending to make any motion regarding those tonight. Thank you.

Thank you. One more time going around. Okay. Motion to approve AB 26-046, a resolution accepting the South Fork Avenue Southeast Annexation Notice of Intention to commence annexation proceedings subject to review and approval of a fiscal analysis to be prepared and authorizing the preparation of a formal annexation petition. All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you, one and all. Okay. Thank you for the lights. Okay, moving on to 8, AB 26-047, motion authorizing contract with OTAC, Mr. McCarty, Back to you, please.

Thank you, Mayor. So for the same annexation petition of interest that Council just took action on, a contract with the city's planning consultant, OTAC, is proposed for the purpose of review and processing of the annexation proceedings. So this work will involve the analysis of the annexation proposal against applicable state and local regulations, preparing an annexation report, legal descriptions, and consultation with other agencies, including the King County Boundary Review Board. So the scope for this work is attached with the agenda bill with a budget not to exceed 35,976, which would be paid for by the lead annexation petitioners. So should council approve the agenda bill, a contract will be prepared utilizing the city's standard professional services agreement in a form and content acceptable to the city attorney. So I'm happy to address any questions.

Thank you, Mr. McCarty. Any questions for Mr. McCarty? Council? Seeing none. Okay, this came through Mayor Pro Tem work study again. Do you mind making that motion? Thank you.

Motion to approve AB 26-047, authorizing the mayor to enter into a contract with OTAC for processing the South Fork Avenue Southeast Annexation Petition in a form and content acceptable to the city attorney in an amount not to exceed $35,976.

Can I get a second? Okay, Ms. Colon is the final second there. Thank you very much. Mr. Tremolin, I would like to speak to your motion.

Nope. Seems like housekeeping from what we just voted on.

Okie doke. Ms. Colin, would you like to say anything? Agreed. Housekeeping. Thank you. Excellent. Okay. Anybody else wish to speak? Brendan? Mr. Ellen?

I was just going to point out that the petitioners are footing the bill for this, so I appreciate that and just wanted to make that public information.

Very good. Mr. Jocelyn? Oh, okay. Well, that was important information to convey. Thank you for that. All right. I think I got everybody. Good. Okay. Motion to approve AB 26-047, authorizing the mayor to enter into a contract with OTAC for processing the South Fork Avenue Southeast annexation petition in a form and content acceptable to the city attorney in an amount not to exceed $35,976. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Thank you for that. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you again, everybody. Moving on to number nine, ordinance amending NBMC chapter 20.05 concerning permitting timeframes. Mr. McCarty, I'm not getting through to you yet. Or never. Never. Excuse me.

So amendments are proposed to Chapter 20.05 of the North Bend Municipal Code, which is staff report, public hearing, and notice decision. These amendments address recent state legislation concerning permitting timeframes. The effect of the amendments is to shorten the timeframe for project review for most of the project permits. So currently, the city has established an across-the-board 120-day review period for project permits under North Bend Municipal Code 2005. The proposed amendments reduce the permitting timeframes to 65 calendar days for permits that don't require public notice and 100 days for permits that require public notice. So consistent with state law, the permitting timeframes for projects that require a public hearing are being amended to be within 170 days of a completeness determination. And then also subject to an allowance under state law for extending permitting timeframes for certain types of project permits, the city is establishing a 170-day permitting timeframe for projects that involve issuance of an environmental impact statement, shoreline permits, or critical areas review. So projects that involve these types of review tend to be more complex and are likely to receive more comments from the public, state agencies, and tribes, and therefore take additional time to process. So the dropped amendments are both consistent with state law, as well as consistent with the city's overall goal of increasing development review efficiencies, and work in tandem with our new permitting software that we will be implementing, which will enable more efficient tracking and processing of permits. So the Planning Commission reviewed and held a public hearing on this on May 18th. They did not receive any comments at the time and provided a recommendation of approval. Subsequent to the Planning Commission's recommendation, the Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties provided a letter in support of the draft amendments, which has been provided to the Council. So I'm happy to address questions.

Thank you, Mr. McCarty. Council, do you have any questions? Mr. Drellin.

I think I know the answer to this, but I honestly can't remember. Since this is trickling down from the state, what options do we have to accept or reject?

Yeah, we really don't have too many options here. We do have that option of the optional additional time for consideration of specific permits, which we are engaging with those specific environmental reviews.

How... Shortening the permitting process period, how does that have an impact on staff?

We are always under the obligation to get the permits out the door as quickly as possible, and that is always our goal. We don't want to sit on permits because that just adds to the stack. With that, we are implementing that new permitting software that we feel like will really increase our efficiencies. So that's what we are relying on. And otherwise, we're always just working as fast as we can to get things out the door.

And then just finally, you probably don't know this question, but is King County, has King County challenged this at all or are they just going in lockstep?

Not that I'm aware of. All right.

That was just a softball question because we hear about how bad King County is permitting. So I wasn't sure if this is more of a reaction to them from the state, but okay. Thank you.

Great. Anybody else have any clarifying questions from Mark or Mike? No. Okay. This came through CED. Ms. Torgerson, would you like to make this motion? Certainly. Great.

Motion to approve AB 26-048, an ordinance amending chapter 20.05 of the North Bend Municipal Code entitled Staff Report, Public Hearing, and Notice of Decision as a first and final reading.

Very good. Okay, would you like to speak to your motion, Ms. Torgeson?

Sure. These amendments... are basically state required, so we need to do them. But what's kind of positive is that most of it is going to, the review times are going to be shortened. And hopefully that's going to mean a greater efficiency and predictability. And so, of course, I'm going to support this.

Wonderful. Anybody else on council? Oh, Brendan, you're second. Sorry about that.

My apologies. I was trying to keep a promise to myself that I was going to be quiet tonight. No, I think, as Mr. McCarty pointed out, this is a state-driven initiative to expedite development and so forth. I'm not really a fan of that. I'll just speak publicly on that. But what I do appreciate, and Mike spoke to this, is staff recognizing, oh, crap, we've got more coming. Let's make some smart investments in some technology and really start trying to figure out ways to streamline our services and what it is that we can do to our public that wants to actually do business here in North Bend. So I appreciate how that kind of goes hand in hand. And of course, I'm open to as this thing takes full effect, if there is a flood of more permits and things like that, that you keep CED open. abreast of that, if there's any more dramatic type of response that we need to provide support for staff to accommodate that, obviously we're open ears. So thank you.

Great. Thank you very much. Anybody else have any comments to make? Mr. McFarlane.

Thank you, Mayor. I just want to give appreciation to the staff for developing this. I think often when we say, hey, we're being mandated to do this, it sounds like we're making an excuse for ourselves to pass it, and that is not certainly where I'm coming from. Having been on both sides of the table in permitting staff properties, it's a frustrating process for all involved. And I know that staff often feel caught in the middle. And so I appreciate all that they do. And I think these are wise and good efforts that they're taking here to work on that. And, you know, When you've got a permit in front of you, it is almost always based on what's already allowed by our codes. And so the more we can do to help move those through takes the pressure off of the staff and allows the revenue stream to flow. Thank you.

Thank you. One more go around, buddy. Okay, motion to approve AB 26-048, ordinance amending chapter 20.05 of the North Bend Municipal Code entitled Staff Report, Public Hearing, and Notice of Decision as a first and final reading. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you, one and all. And thank you, staff and council, for your hard efforts tonight. Moving on to our last item, believe it or not. Number 10, motion authorizing Mayor to initiation discussions with FD number 38 regarding regional fire authority. Mr. Cha.

Thank you, Mayor. And for the record, Martin Cha, Finance Director, you do have a copy of this handout at your dais. On April 20th of this year, we received a letter of interest from District 38. I do want to recognize that Chief Commissioner, Commission Chair, Chris Dailene is here in the audience. We did receive a letter from the district expressing interest to form a regional fire authority with the City of North Bend. The letter is included in your packets. It's on page 111. The formation of a RFA council is governed by state laws. There's basically a three-step process to this. The first step is a formation of a planning committee in preparation of a regional fire service authority plan. Once the plan is complete, the plan is then submitted to District 38 in the city for review and approval. And then the final step would be proposing to the voters of both communities a ballot measure to formally form the RFA. And that completes the final step. Tonight's action council is simply to authorize the mayor to respond to the letter from District 38. The formation and appointment of representatives to this planning committee will come at a later date. As I mentioned, a copy of the letter is included in your packet. For the listening public or the watching public, I did include a copy of the letter here on screen. Again, I won't go over that with you, but again, it was transmitted to the city on the 20th. In terms of the steps, the first step, as I mentioned earlier, is forming a planning committee. The RFA is governed, or the committee process is governed under RCW 5226. The committee would consist of six members, three members from each body, and that would be appointed by its governing body, which is you, council. The planning committee would be charged with preparing and adopting a regional protection fire service authority plan that they would submit to the respective governing boards. And the plan would include several things, policy and governance, a statement in terms of design and operations, its financing plan, which would include whether or not to assess a fire benefit charge. And then finally, development of the fire protection and emergency services plan. The second step would be submitting the plan to respective bodies, as I mentioned earlier. Up on screen here, and also for the listening public, are SNPs of example plans that were prepared in the not too distant past. The one on the right is for the Shoreline and North Shore Fire Department and forming RFA there. And then the one on the left is between the cities of West Benton and Prosser, Washington, again forming a regional fire authority plan there. But if you look at the Table of Continents Council, what you see here is a description of the boundaries of the service area, the government structure, funding, and deployment programs. So essentially a business plan for the RFA. And then finally, if the... Submitted plan to the respective bodies is accepted and approved. The final step would be passage of a resolution by both bodies and then submission of a ballot measure to the voters of both entities. The examples that I have here on screen is a joint resolution regarding the shoreline and North Shore RFA. That's to the left. And then the actual ballot measure itself that is shown on the right. In terms of my final slide for you, counsel, in my staff report, we do lay out a series of public policy considerations. I tried to summarize it here in the form of a Venn diagram for you. A circle on the left represents the city of North Bend. A circle on the right represents District 38. In terms of the public policy and public service considerations, there are several, and they do overlap. Fiscal stability and sustainability for both organizations. Servicing a growing community, again, for both organizations. Accountability and governance directly to the voters of both communities. In terms of the city benefit, Forming an RFA would remove the immediate need for considering a city levy lift. And the reason for this is that the cost for fire services that the city currently pays to Eastside Fire and Rescue would be shifted to the RFA. And the RFA would continue to contract for services through Eastside Fire and Rescue, but would be contracted as a joint operation between District 38 and the city of North Bend. If the city were to maintain status quo, in other words, we continue to pay Eastside Fire and Rescue independently, finances forecasting that the city tax increase will be required. By forming an RFA and shifting the costs of Eastside Fire and Rescue from the city to the RFA, that would allow us to redirect that existing taxing capacity to preserving existing city services. And then the last public policy would be the disposition of assets that's currently housed in Fire Station 87, as well as Station 88. and how those assets will be transferred to the RFA. So that concludes my presentation council. I would be happy to answer any questions.

If I can add just one thing to end of Martin's presentation, because we are on a really tight timeline. So next year would be 27. When we're looking at the vote, going to the voters, I would recommend that we put this on the council meeting for the selection of the members for the governing body to decide the three people on the next council meeting of council chooses to approve this tonight. So I just wanted to put that for the record so we can consider that.

Counsel, do you have any questions for Mr. Kahn?

I do. Just a clarifying question, I guess, about governance. Right now, the City of North Bend and Fire District 38 both have representatives on the EFER board, and that's governed by an interlocal agreement. My understanding is with the formation of this RFA, things upstream don't really change. The RFA will then be a member to EFER. Instead of the two entities, there'll be one. And I mean, my experience as a council member, EFER sets its own budget and sort of dictates to its members what funds would be required as a contributor to EFER. And that really isn't going to change as a result of this. What changes is downstream in what we experience and how we fund our part of our contribution to EFER.

That's correct, Councilman. Currently, Eastside Fire and Rescue, I mean, City of North Bend and District 38 is represented on the EFRU board with one vote apiece. By forming the RFA, coming together and forming an RFA, the RFA would be represented with two votes. So the voting proportionality would not change.

Council Member Johnson, I will add to that before we get to Council Member Torgerson, that depending on how the planning committee decides to set up their governance, that also impacts how much council impact is on that RFA. So when we look at that from that RFA potential, that planning committee is key on how the governance is set up for the actual RFA, not the E for vote that Martin just mentioned, but the representation of our council. And therefore, if it's a Some do a voting fire commissioner for those RFAs. Some do other options. So there is that planning committee that decides that for the governance. So just wanted to put that out there that there is the other area of voice as well.

Any other clarifying questions? Ms. Torgerson.

This is a huge lift. I think it's a great thing that we want to do, but it's going to be a lot of work. And I went to the EFER meeting last week. as the alternate for Christina because she's in Denmark having fun. But one of the things that was concerning, because EFER is still trying to figure all this out too. So as a team, if we do this as a team, District 38 in North Bend, it sounds like we would be like the guiding light on trying to make this happen. So... I guess my point is it's not going to be that easy, and we all have to be really involved to try and make this happen. I don't know if that's necessarily true, what you just said, is that we would get two votes because they were saying differently at the meeting on Thursday. So those are a lot of little pieces that need to get figured out. And I would say that we want to have the two votes, right?

We need to advocate for that. So I would also say, too, that I know in the letter that the fire district sent over, they talked about contracting with Deanna Gregory. Council that has done a lot of these pieces. So there is a lot of experts that are going to be at the table to have this. I'm not going to throw Martin out there, but he did one for Black Diamond. He did a fire and fire district analysis for that. So there is expertise at the table. Plus, we have other chiefs and also Chief Ajo did Renton. So we have people at the table that are involved in the intimate process that, but I agree with you, this is a huge lift and we're happy to go down it if that's what council wants to do. And there is benefits as Martin has laid out. And there's economies of scale that you get from these fire authorities that are popping up all over the state of Washington. But whatever council's direction, we will figure out the workload and how we shift it. And if we need resources, we will articulate that and we'll see where we go. So my, actually my first question was going to be,

What exactly, if you think you sort of answered it, but what exactly happens? The mayor sends them back a letter, says, yeah, we want to get together. Yes. What's the next step?

You're saying we're going to have another. I would recommend that we bring the appointment of the three members to council as soon as possible so that we know then, you know, the three members of each party are going to be what are going to be making up the planning committee so that we can get that going. Um, so I would recommend that we do the appointments at the next, and that would be the governing body. So all of you deciding which three of your peers you want to, um, be on the planning committee.

Okay. Yes. I'm in support of this by the way. Wonderful. Great. Anybody else?

Uh, Ms. Killen. Um, in the packet on page 108 for me, it says if a fire benefit charge is also utilized, um, And my first question is, what is a fire benefit charge?

Yes, so I can answer that, Councilwoman. A fire benefit charge is, first of all, it's not a tax, but it's a fee. And it's a fee that is based on the relative fire risk of a structure. So for example, a single family residence would have a lower fire benefit charge than a gas station, for example. So the fire benefit charge is a means that's authorized under state law to fund a fire authority. However, if a fire authority utilizes a fire benefit charge Councilman Cullen, the tax rate for that regional fire authority, its maximum tax rate has been capped at $1 per thousand. Whereas if that fire authority were to finance itself solely through taxes, then its tax rate would be capped at $1.50 per thousand. Second.

question maybe it's too early for this it also says that we may need a new fire station and would that go to a vote for the voters and when would we know that i wrote it down who decides how will we know

So the long-term need for a additional fire station council would be determined, in this case, would be determined by the planning committee. So based upon projected growth, for example, in the population base, the number of calls for service, those would be metrics I think the planning committee would consider in determining when a second fire station would be required.

And Councilmember Cullen, I would say that after the planning committee decides the governance structure, and then the chief for EFER, because they'll continue to contract through EFER, would decide based on call volume, number of residents that they're going to be serving. The district already goes up all the way to Snoqualmie Pass. If we add density to certain areas, what that looks like. So that would be, EFER would play a large role. And depending on the cost of it, what budget they have, they may have to go out for a capital bond. So that would be nothing to do with us. That would be the independent tax structure going out if they had to to the voters for a capital project, if they needed to do so.

You're welcome. Any other questions from council? Yeah, that's okay.

Just to confirm, this is just a vote to explore the opportunities here. We're not signing any paperwork.

You got it. This is just the letter to engage the fire district to start the planning process. Resetting. Raise your brain.

Exactly. And Mr. McFarland, do you have any comments you'd like to make?

No. Okay.

Anybody? Okay, we're, this came through, well, Mayor from 10. Yeah, it's back to you.

Motion to approve AB 26-049, authorizing the mayor or the mayor's designee to initiate discussions with Fire District 38 for regional fire authority.

Second.

Thank you. I would like to speak to your motion, Mr. Tremloff.

Yeah, I think that we had a great work study discussion on this. I think as you've heard the comments, I think it's fairly intriguing. I think there's like other items that we've discussed tonight. There's some due diligence to do, no doubt. But I think we certainly should kick this off, look into it, have likely multiple work studies of updates as this planning group goes along. And then, yeah. see what we can provide the residents in terms of the highest and best public safety option for our town.

Mr. Johnson, would you like to add anything?

Yeah, it only makes sense that we proceed down this path and continue to educate ourselves and learn what we can. It has lots of advantages that I can see. That doesn't mean it's not without questions. I also want to once again acknowledge Staff Martin in particular for all your hard effort in bringing us this far this fast in response to outreach from Fire District 38. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other council wish, Brent and Mr. Elwood?

I concur. I mean, this is an example of our community maturing. We need to entertain these type of agreements and these type of opportunities for the betterment of our community, but also the broader neighbors outside of city limits and so forth. So I'm supportive of the exploration myself.

Great. Anybody else? Mr. McFarlane? Oh, go ahead. Rob, can you see me? Can you see us?

I can. If I have the floor, I'm going to be, I guess, the lone wolf going kind of the other direction here. I understand that this is only exploratory, but these things tend to have a a life of their own. Once initiated, it's hard to pull back, especially if we send half of our body into a group to spend a lot of hours developing a proposal. And so that concerns me. And so I'll first state that at this time, I do not support this effort because I think there's too many unknowns. I do appreciate the additional information that was in tonight's packet over that we heard in the work study at Fire District and EFER that I assume put that together as far as calls go and the maps. Those were very helpful, all of those things. What's unclear, though, is that there's a benefit to city residents, right? So I can clearly see within the information provided the benefit to District 38 residents. And I'm hearing about the benefit for the city's budget that's backed up with the threat that we would have to take a levy lid lift action more than likely if we don't go this route. Yes, that's a tax. And so is deferring our responsibility for fire safety to another entity that's also going to tax. We're not gonna escape that tax, But what's unclear to me is, will our resident experience no greater increase than they would otherwise, or perhaps even a decrease? So for instance, council has not been afforded the time to have internal discussions on if fire services move outside of our general fund, Are we going to consider a reduction in our taxing authority to reflect that, well, Martin would have to answer it, but 20 to 25% of our general fund spending now is not taxable? not being spent in that way. So the idea of handing off responsibility was used in the overview. So to hand off that kind of responsibility for a core service concerns me in that regard. And finally, and this was spoken to, I forget, somebody else brought up the idea of the governing structure. I'm still uncomfortable with the unknowns around how the governing structure would be set up and particularly how then the voters would be able to impact that governing body. So those are my reasons for hesitation. Again, I would be open to this probably down the road, but not at this time. Thank you.

Thank you. I think we got everybody. Did you want to speak, Chris?

Yeah.

You certainly may. Thank you. Welcome.

I have a bunch of comments prepared, but I'd like to address some of the questions, too, that were brought up. But let me start off. Good evening, Mayor Miller, honorable council members, city administrator Emery, all the managers and directors, appreciated staff. My name is Chris Tallien, and strangely enough, I'm not from Snoqualmie. But I'm here tonight as the chair of Fire District 38. And I'd like to talk to you about formally presenting a letter of invitation to explore the possibility of creating a regional fire authority between North Bend, City of North Bend and Fire District 38. City of North Bend and District 38 have been partnering to provide fire service and medical protection to Valley residents for decades, since the 1940s, I believe, when District 38 came about. Two examples of our past partnership are, one, the formation of Eastside Fire and Rescue. We were two of the original five members that drafted and adopted the ILA, of which EF&R still operates under. And the second one is... Fire Station 87. And that actually was the reason I became a fire commissioner, was because I was a volunteer in the station down here in North Bend in the 80s. And I knew firsthand how badly that station was needed. So finally, in 2013, it was built. So what I mean by exploring the possibility of creating an RFA. is exactly what we just talked about, is forming a six-person committee, and it is a heavy lift, Council Member Torgerson, it is a heavy lift, to design the business plan. Everything from the government structure and all the way down to the funding model. So that is a big lift for sure. My preference, and I will be involved if it goes forward, is that it would be open to future members of joining on board, possibly the rest of Eastside Fire and Rescue. And if that was the case, then it would be the RFA board dictating to EF&R what the budget was and not vice versa, Council Member McFarland. Okay, why you say should we look at this option? Well, in my opinion, We owe it to the communities we all represent to deliver a quality fire and EMS service that can adjust to community needs in the most efficient, sustainable, and affordable way possible. And sustainable is the key word there. Affordable is two. I know you all heard that. In the past, we both benefited from an economy by scale. First, when we were just partnering together to provide fire and EMS in the Valley. And then later on, after the 90s, when we joined EF&R together. And RFA has a potential to enhance this fiscal and functional efficiency in a sustainable model. It also has a prevention to provide a pathway for adding additional municipalities and districts seeking a sustainable, efficient, and affordable fire service model by further spreading the costs amongst a larger membership without degradation of service. As we've talked about, Fire District 38, as well as the City of North Bend, will be facing significant decisions in the near future to continue funding the excellent fire and EMS service we currently enjoy. We should definitely have all options on the table to consider. I appreciate the chance to address you this evening, and I look forward to your decision on this important issue. And I would like to... Talked, first of all, to the two seats on the EFNR board. And my understanding, and I've sat on the EFNR board for a very long time. I've been a fire commissioner for 25 years. And it would only make sense that the City of North Bend and District 38, who have always historically and traditionally had one seat each at the table, if we came together, we would have two. So I can't see that going any other direction. I would also like to say that there's a huge education piece in this for me, for all of us. We're going to learn a lot if we go through this process together. The fire benefit service charge is optional. It's not required. And it actually requires a super majority of 60% of the voters to pass as opposed to 50 plus one for just a RFA. So that's something that we'll decide in the planning committee and we'll all have input on it. Again, this was just a draft that will be brought to both city council of North Bend and to the commissioners of fire district 38. for amendments, suggestions, and approval, ultimately, or disapproval. As far as the unknowns in the governing structure, typically RFAs, and there's a lot of flexibility here, but we can write it any way we want it, make it as comfortable or as uncomfortable as you like, but usually it's commissioners, I guess they're RFA commissioners, I'm not sure. But they're representatives, and it has to be an odd number to my understanding. And those people are taking care of the needs of the fire service. It's no longer the responsibility of Fire District 38. It's no longer the responsibility of the City of North Bend. It is the responsibility of the RFA. All right. Thank you very much. If there's any questions of me, I'm here. Happy to answer.

Mayor, I just wanted to state, I'm sorry. We apologize that we didn't offer chair to come up during our staff report. That would have been the appropriate place for this to happen so that the conversation could have been question and answer. So apologies to that. So I just want to talk about that. It was out of sequence for you all. So my apologies. Appreciate that.

And thank you, Chris. Any questions for Chris? No. Okay. Thank you very much for your input. Okay. Okay. Motion to approve AB, where am I? Yeah. 26-049, authorizing the mayor or mayor's designee to initiate discussions with fire district number 38 for regional fire authority, RFA. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Opposed.

Okay. Motion passes. Five ayes and one nay. Mr. McFarland being the nay. Okay. Okay. Thank you very much. What a night. Moving on to mayor, council, administrative concerns and initiatives. Let's start with Mr. McFarland online.

Thank you. Yeah. I feel like I'm trading places here with council member Elwood for a change. So I get your perspective in it and it's actually, it's worked great. And so let me start with a shout out to Phil for how well the online program System is working. I felt part of the meeting. I can hear everybody. Apparently you can hear me sometimes, apparently loud. Tonight, earlier tonight, was Public Service Recognition Month, and I wanted to leverage that just to appreciate all, each and every staff member who has chosen North Bend as their choice in employment and service to community. Thank you all for what you do for us. It's a great thing. Beyond that, I'm going to keep it very short, but sticking almost with my usual, I was recently in Coopville and And, you know, it must be a radical town because I was in an awesome bookstore. So instead of a song tonight, I'm going to offer you two quick reading materials, short and formative on the times we live in. The first title is The Common Good by Robert Reich in 2018. I'll share one sentence. Civil education must instill in young people a passion for truth. The second one, very irreverent but very on point, is called Lessons from Cats for Surviving Fascism by Stuart Brittlestar Reynolds, just written in 2025. It's a gas with chapters like refuse to wear a collar and remember you're always the boss. Doesn't sound like it's talking politics, but boy, is it. Thank you.

Very entertaining. Thank you, Mr. Elwood.

I'm still laughing myself. Like the cat logic, be your own boss. No, I have nothing further to add other than I appreciate everybody who stepped up. I appreciate staff and I appreciate our neighbors coming and really trying to educate us and get us to go along on your journey with you. And I think we will do that. So thank you to all who showed up and provided testimony. And I do look forward to exploring options on the Regional Fire Association. Thank you.

Great. Storkison.

Yeah, I was just going to say, I really appreciate you guys. The amount of work you're putting in isn't just for Snoqualmie, it's for our entire valley. And you guys have really stepped up and I've seen all the work you've been doing. So I truly, truly appreciate all your work and have empathy about what you're going through. But I'm so appreciative that you guys are doing the work. So thank you.

It's cool. Yeah. Yeah. Different subject, but same valley. Last night I went to a presentation. I think it was put on by EFER, Get Ready King County. And it was about wildfire concerns for Western Washington. And it was a really nice presentation. I learned a lot. I was unable to stay for the questions and answers, but it was very informative and important for where we live in our urban slash forest area. They offered preventative recommendations as well as what to do if the worst happens, which we've all talked about our One Route I-90, and plans for your family and neighbors. So you can get more information about this at www.kingcounty.gov slash wildfire. And have a plan, people, because it's coming here as well as eastern Washington. That's it. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Johnson.

My single comment is that if cats could text, they wouldn't. That's all, Your Honor. Thank you.

Okay. Mr. Tramolata, follow that one up, please.

Yeah, I've got a few things. One, I just appreciate Council's action tonight and Council Member Jocelyn for bringing the impromptu action to Council. I think we, as a Corps, spoke loud and clear and in unison, not only for ourselves, but for our neighbors. I think that'll go a long way in our town and I'm sure throughout the neighborhoods in Snoqualmie as well. Also, I would like to acknowledge the incredible regional joint effort this weekend on the Mount Sai rescue. I think I'm getting all these right. There was ISAR, King County 4x4 Search and Rescue, King County Incident Support Team, SPART, Seattle Mountain Rescue, of course, as well as King County Sheriff. I think that just highlights the importance of regionality and support that we need, although a small town, so many people come to our aid when something happens. And then I do not want to overstep on our proclamation this month, Mayor, but it is nationally mental health awareness month in May, which means a lot to me. And so I'll leave you briefly with around one in five adults in any given year experience mental health issue. One in five youth have a mental health condition at any point in a given year with anxiety being the most common condition. It's a difficult time in most people's lives at any given moment. Ask questions, check on your friends, have a cup of coffee, and don't let the hard days win.

Thank you very much, Ms. Emery.

Yes, Mayor. Thank you. Thank you for the Proclamation for Public Service. We have a lot of weeks in May that acknowledge the clerk's office. They acknowledge public works, which is this week. But I want to call attention to the fallen officers, police officers that are acknowledged through the May 5th through the 15th. And a shout out to Chief Hall back there and his team. The National... Police Week observed, like May 5th through the 15th, they read over 300 names for 2025 and then 109 officers that were killed in the line of duty. So I just want to call out that as special recognition to our law enforcement for the dangers that they face.

Thank you for that. Okay. The City and Parks Commission invite the community to attend a Parks Workshop at Parks Commission meeting at City Hall on Thursday, May 28th at 6.30 p.m. Workshop will provide an opportunity to participate in planning for the future of recreation spaces and amenities in North Bend. Additional information is available on the news section of the city website. The Yard Waste Recycling Program is always a favorite. It will be held on Saturday, May 23rd from 8 a.m. to noon at Public Works. Those attending are asked to use the Public Works entrance off of North Bend Way. The program is open on select Saturdays through October and is available to all who reside in 9804 North by the zip code area. And city offices will be closed Monday, May 25th in observance of Memorial Day. And I want to add to that a little bit before we adjourn. I'd like to take a quick moment to recognize Memorial Day. This weekend, while many of you are gathering with family, enjoying the outdoors or, you know, at the mark of the beginning of summer, that's where we're at, we should pause to remember the true purpose of this holiday. To honor the men and women of our armed forces who gave their lives in service to our country. The sacrifice made possible the freedom, safety, and communities we often take for granted, including the ability to gather here openly and democratically as neighbors and public servants. We owe them more than remembrance on one single day. We owe them our gratitude, our respect, and our commitment to serving our community with integrity and purpose. I encourage everyone in North Bend to take a quiet moment this Memorial Day to reflect on those who never came home and to keep their families and loved ones in our thoughts. Thank you, and may we never forget their sacrifice. Thank you, one and all, for a pretty tremendous meeting and the input from the public. Fantastic. Very, very important. Our staff, incredible. Our council, great job tonight. Everybody be safe going forward, and we'll see you soon.

And will we adjourn?

We can certainly adjourn. With that, all in favor?

Aye. Aye.

Good night.