City Council - workshop

We would like to see these these this infrastructure either expanded or built in the city I mean it should be in full and you do want to have your capital facilities projects that you forecast to have over the next Six years 20 years, you know long term or short term for time frame You wouldn't have those listed out in your comprehensive plan. So that's important to to do that now That doesn't mean we have to get all that work done Now we can make amendments in the future, especially if a key opportunity arises or support swells for a certain initiative. Since we were talking about 50 years, 50 years ago would be 1976. Some of us might think 50 years ago is like 1950, but it's not. So just a quick note. Okay, urban design. Let's talk about vibrancy and improvements. Goal UD1, unchanged, but we have some proposed new policies, create an attractive and culturally vibrant pedestrian and bicycle-friendly environment throughout the city. The summary of the proposed policies is shown here. It's about walkability, it's about redevelopment, sustainable development, a lot of the ideas that we talk about. The bottom one I will call out in response to the question that just came in, we want to protect important views, enhance access to natural features, support public art museums, interpretive centers, and gathering spaces. So once again, when you're looking through there, UD or urban design policy 1D, 1E, and 1G, those are all proposed new policies, again, to level up and kind of boost our opportunities and direction that we want to do. I think protecting important views is a good call out, too. You know, that was something that we noted that, oh, that should be popped in here, so. And then moving on to, in the same theme, urban design, looking at commercial area revitalization. The city wants to move forward and continue to revitalize those commercial areas, such as areas in the CBD, the uptown, and the island view corridors. Proposed policies are shown on this slide. Basically, this is about Making a welcoming experience and looking at all those different elements that make a place have a particular sense of identity and fostering that along the way. Now looking to natural features. Development should be done through appropriate design and should protect those natural features. We want to think about our rivers, our shorelines, our ridgelines, what steep slopes, and then those different archaeological and historic resources. A lot of times that's actually the view of the river or the view of the mountain. Those are our resources. So some proposed policies here, development should be planned and designed to account for the topography and landscape while minimizing the environmental impacts. It's actually pretty high bar, so that's a lofty policy. Next, hillside development should, as much as practical, blend in with the natural shape and texture of the land. And lighting comes up here as well. Lighting should be designed to promote public safety, but also promote those dark sky principles. So we don't want to be illuminating the night sky when we don't need to be. There's safety, security, but then it stops somewhere. We want to beautify our public spaces. So the goal here is to promote community beautification by enhancing public spaces and thoroughfares, encouraging private property beautification, and again, the light pollution comes in. We want to regulate light pollution because that also provides a beautiful environment. The items are summarized here. I would want to note that proposed policy 4D is an addition to encourage public...

If you tell me your hat size, I'll probably know.

Okay, I have six o'clock Tuesday, July 28th 2026 welcome everyone to the City Council workshop the evening appreciate you being here and First off we on the agenda. We have a presentation regarding hydro and into Excuse me industry update with Clint Whitney and Clark Mather. I was reading your statement, your mission statement of the organization that you represent, and welcome. Glad to have you here.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you Mayor, Council Members, Clark is the Executive Director with Northwest River Partners and this evening he'll share some information on survey results concerning our hydro system, some fish recent information and media information that's all related to the Northwest and And it's really science-based. Everything that Northwest River Partners does is science-based. So I think you'll find this interesting. If you have any questions, please answer or ask as Clark goes through this. Thank you.

Thank you, Clint. Mayor Richardson, members of the council, Mr. City Manager, thank you for the opportunity to be back in Richland. As I shared last year when we presented in May, this is a place that means a lot to me. It's where I really started my professional career working for Senator Cantwell as her first central Washington person. So it's great to be back in town and We appreciate the city supporting Clint's involvement in support of hydropower, of course, your largest source of affordable, reliable, clean energy. And there's all sorts of all sorts of other benefits that come from that system that we shared last year. But there a lot has happened since we presented here in May of last year. And I'm going to get into that. But first, I'm going to start with a picture. Does anyone recognize anyone in that picture? Lyndon Johnson. Who else? Does anyone know what that picture is from?

There's no storm in the background. Give it away.

in the spirit of time. This is from May 9, 1962, at the Pasco Airport. And Vice President Johnson was joined by Senator Warren Magnuson, a Democrat from Washington, Senator Frank Church, a Democrat from Idaho. And on the left is Governor Al Rossellini, the Democratic governor of Washington. And they were coming out to dedicate Ice Harbor Dam that day. And of course, the vice president was representing President Kennedy. And so I just mention this not to be partisan, but you'll see in our survey results later that on a bipartisan basis, the vast majority of people on both sides of the state across the Northwest, no matter where you're at, support the hydropower system. And for all of the noise and frankly troubling public policy that's coming out of Olympia, and Salem in particular, and the work that we work, the work that we partner with the city of Richland on, these are issues that are supported by everyday people in Richland and across the Northwest. So I just, I bring that up because I'm kind of a wannabe civics teacher, but also because this history has been bipartisan, and we see that in our survey results, which I'll share here in a bit. But as Clint mentioned, we represent the city of Richland and 99 other members across the Northwest. Every consumer-owned utility in the Tri-Cities area is a member of ours. Shaver Transportation, which has barging that goes all the way up the Snake River, is a member of ours. The Washington Potato Commission, the Washington Association of Wheat Growers, the Washington Grain Commission are all members of ours. And we think that we represent the diversity, the coalition that supports hydropower. Labor is a member of ours. And again, we think that diversity is really important because the Northwest depends on hydropower. It's a significant source of energy, of course, the main source of energy here in this community. So again, the messages that I want to leave with you tonight is that Washington residents continue to support our hydropower system on a bipartisan basis. We have a growing affordability crisis. Hydropower has long been the solution to keep rates as low as possible in the Northwest and some of the most competitive rates on Earth. We're losing that affordability. opportunity here in the Pacific Northwest. And that fish returns, according to the University of Washington, fish returns have nearly tripled since federal dams began operating.

So here's the survey data.

So for several years now, our organization has engaged in a scientific public opinion survey. 1,600 people across the Pacific Northwest, 400 people in Washington. And again, it goes back to where we started. The vast majority of people in Washington And the vast majority of people in the Pacific Northwest support the hydropower system. And just from a broader kind of political standpoint, I always think it's interesting when you look at Washington and the statewide elected officials here, where you have a Democratic governor and two Democratic US senators, and compared to Montana or Idaho, where I was at last week, where you have a Republican governor and two Republican US senators. And the support for hydropower is basically the same. In fact, in our survey, 80% of self-identified Democrats and 80% of self-identified Republicans support the hydropower system across the Northwest. So again, for all the controversy and frankly, again, challenging public policy we're getting, people support the hydropower system across the region. When you look at it region-wide, support has stayed the same, and you see opposition since 2021 actually going down. As I often share, one of my favorite talking points from this survey is that more people have no opinion about hydropower than oppose it. So opposition on hydropower is down to 8% in the Pacific Northwest. The people in this region care about affordability, reliability, and clean energy. And hydropower has delivered that in spades to Richland and communities across the Northwest, millions of people for decades. So I'll get to some of the things I shared earlier. But for those watching, we always want to have folks who want to engage in this conversation. So if you're watching this council meeting at home or you're here in the chambers, there's a QR code you can scan. You can sign up for updates. And it's an opportunity to engage with other elected officials to support our hydropower system and all the benefits it provides. So when I talk about affordability being a growing concern, we see it in our survey results. And you'll see that the trend line on the cost of electricity being a growing concern show up here. So if you go back to 2023, the cost of electricity was a concern, but climate change was actually the top concern when you gave people these three choices. Now, there is a clear gap between the cost of electricity and climate change. It's not that climate change isn't important. It's just the cost of electricity is outpacing all other issues that we test in the survey. And of course, you see this across the country. There have been a lot of movements around affordability as a key word. But energy affordability is a growing concern, not only here in the Northwest. but elsewhere in the United States. I'll also share that in Washington, the number is the same, 88% rate the cost of electricity, the top concern in our survey. And here's why. So there is now 25-year-old litigation from the federal hydropower system. The vast majority of your electricity in Richland comes from the 31 dams that Bonneville Power operates and, of course, the Columbia Generating Station nearby. And the state of Washington last fall decided to join the plaintiffs in degrading the output of the federal hydropower system. And Washington, Oregon, several Native American tribes, and environmental organizations won a court ruling in February that degraded the system even further by an average of 300 megawatts over the course of a year. and by close to 11 or 1200 megawatts in the summer by spilling more water through the federal projects instead of generating power through the federal projects. And I'll talk about some of the trend lines on energy production and the trend lines we've seen on fish. But there's not strong evidence yet that this level of spill, which has increased significantly over the last few years, is actually helping fish. If you look on the left there, you have data from the US Energy and Information Administration. This is data anyone can access. Washington retail electric rates were once, as recently as 2015, the most affordable in the country. By 2024, we've slipped to 13th. And the year-over-year data, 5.7% increase, is almost triple the rate of increase in the United States between 2023 and 2024. In the US, during that period of time, rates went up by 2.05%. So we're losing the battle. It's becoming harder for people to afford their electric bills. And on the right, is an even more shocking thing that I learned earlier this year. Again, I was up talking with Chris Voigt with the Potato Commission up in Moses Lake. He pointed me to this article. Washington farmers are now 50th out of 50 states on profitability. Washington farmers, based on recent data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, lost $400 million operating their farms. Farms are going out of business. We're driving up costs, particularly for irrigated farming, which is a huge deal in this part of the world. We're making the river transportation system less reliable through this spill operation. Farmers are struggling to hang on, and this is making it worse. And yet, you continue to see troubling policy coming out of Olympia. Just this last session, Governor Ferguson requested and the legislature funded an $800,000 study using Climate Commitment Act dollars. These are dollars that are meant to reduce carbon emissions to study replacing the energy services from the four federal dams on the Lower Snake River, including Ice Harbor Dam, which we talked about earlier, of course, the nearest one to the tri-cities. This is the third study, the third study since 2022 that Washington state taxpayers or funders have done. There was the Murray Inslee process. There was a study from the National Lab that was completed last September, which I'll talk about here in a bit. And now this study. And so why are we looking again when we've had all sorts of credible studies that talk about all the energy services that these dams provide, including this one from your neighbors, and I understand the city provides energy to the National Lab, that looked at this. This report is 111 pages. It's a 111-page report done by all the experts that you rely on in this community. And guess what it found? The lower Snake River dams provide essential services, particularly to the Tri-Cities, hundreds of megawatts of clean, affordable energy. And this was done with funding from not only the federal government, but from the state of Washington. And yet, Governor Ferguson and the legislature just authorized another $800,000 study. We opposed it. We're going to work to bring more light to this issue. But again, why do we need to study an issue that we think has been studied adequately, including by the experts at the lab?

So just a question, just to clarify that this increased spillage has not just had an adverse effect on the amount of energy that we produce, but it's also had an adverse effect on the cost of irrigation because all that water that spilled out is not used for irrigation. And that's increasing the costs on farms, and that's an added cost to the reason why these farms are having such a hard time being productive or profitable?

So there's a couple of issues in your question. The Bonneville Power Administration is estimating that the preliminary injunction awarded by the Oregon Federal Court in February will drive up wholesale power costs to Richland and its other customers by more than 6%. That will have an impact from a retail perspective on all customer classes, including irrigators. There are also concerns. Frankly, one of the things that there were some wins on is that what Oregon and Washington requested would have jeopardized what they call minimum irrigation pool behind the projects on the lower Columbia River. There was concern that they were going to drive down the cost or the level of the river so much that some of the pumping, irrigating infrastructure would not work anymore on both sides of the river. That actually was resolved to some degree. in the judge's ruling in February. But the cost issues are really important. And there are growing reliability issues. It's so obvious here, especially on a day like today. But if you lose power on a day like today and your pumps don't work, you might lose your whole crop for the year in one day. And so there's all sorts of challenges that come from the affordability, the loss of reliability. All of these things are really challenging, not only farmers, but people across the system. Hopefully it answers your question.

It does. And for context, you mentioned 1,200 megawatts of lost energy. That's the equivalent of losing Columbia Generating Station. Exactly.

Yeah. And that's in the summer. That's like in August. It's the estimation. So again, so we're doing this for fish. And to be clear, We totally acknowledge that dams have an impact on fish. They do. They absolutely do. And your customers are spending hundreds of millions of dollars, along with all the Bonneville preference customers, on what is one of the largest, if not the largest, fish and wildlife program restoration programs in the United States, if not anywhere on the planet. And we're making progress. Fish returns have nearly tripled since federal dams began operating. an example of the narrative that has historically won the day. This was an ad taken out in the New York Times in 1999 by an environmental organization. And you see right in the sub-headline, it says, if we don't act, Snake River salmon will disappear forever. So we'll come back to this in a bit. And it's hard. I think the mayor may be a coug. I'm a coug. But this is data from the University of Washington. And so sometimes it's hard to say nice things about the University of Washington. But they have a lot of expertise here. And they're taking data from all of the fish counters at the federal dams. This is Bonneville Dam, the first federal dam on the Columbia River. And people are counting fish there most hours of the day. And we know that in 1938, when Bonneville Dam began operating, there was about 456,000 fish counted at Bonneville Dam. Last year, 1.1 million fish were counted, adult fish returning past Bonneville Dam. And if you take the average, during the 21st century, fish returns had nearly tripled at Bonneville Dam. And if you look at the Snake River projects, I'll talk about lower granite here. If you look at the Snake River projects, if you take average returns in the 21st century, average returns, fish returns are higher at each of the four snake, federal projects on the Snake River since they began operating. So you go back to this ad, 1999, they said if we didn't remove the Snake River dams, we were going to lose salmon forever. Well, in 1999, about 10,000 salmon were counted at Lower Granite Dam, the most upstream of the four federal dams on the Snake River. Last year, nine times the amount of salmon returned to Lower Granite. It's not that everything's perfect. There's more work to do. But we are making progress here in the region on salmon returns, and we want to continue making progress. So this is part of our campaign. Again, we appreciate the city's support on this. There's all sorts of pieces of this, everything from airport ads to online video to custom content that we do around the region. The big number I want you to share is that this campaign has gotten 92 million impressions. That means 92 million times across the Northwest someone has interacted with our information, again, trying to educate people about hydropower in the region. Now, there's all sorts of serious issues around this, but we also try and add some humor. So this is our man in the stream, and this is a concept built on the man in the street concept maybe you're familiar with. And this is one of the ads we ran. I'll see if I can play it here for you. Oh, no sound. Well, at least you're laughing at the video. That's good. I'll just I'll fast forward through it. But basically, you have a person talking to not only a fish counter, in that case, a farmer or an ice cream shop owner talking about affordability or the reliability of the system or the fact that we're making progress on fish returns. We're very proud of this work, and this is due to engagement. And I would just make a pitch to you tonight that if we're going to turn this issue around, I was talking with Clint a little bit about this before the meeting, we need all of our members to engage. We need labor, we need ag, we need low-income customer advocates to engage with the governors, the attorneys general, the legislature, federal elected officials. And this is an example where that engagement worked. The Northern Forest Power Council is basically a group made up of the four governors. They proposed a fish and wildlife plan that would mirror some of the spill operations, again, spill particularly in the month of August, that was in the court's order. And that was proposed as part of the draft due to the engagement of our members across the Northwest at public meetings and meetings with the Power Council, we were able to remove that part of the plan. There's very few fish, juvenile fish, in the river in August. And it had all sorts of harmful impacts. We talked about the more than 1,000 megawatts of capacity you would lose in the summer months. So again, there's a balance here that we can find. We can have strong fish returns. We can get fish out the river. But we also need that power now more than ever in the region. So this is the way that I think about things. I love the Venn diagram. I'm a very left brain person. And so this is like the narrative, the current program where you all are investing in this fish and wildlife program. And there's a narrative that some utilities, our members may not want to do more. There's the dam breaching narrative that we need to breach dams in order to bring back the salmon. And our argument is, can we have conversations? Can we talk to the sovereigns involved in the court case? Can we ask Governor Ferguson and Attorney General Brown to bring people to the table to find solutions outside the courtroom where these negative rulings are harming the very people that you all represent here on the council? We're trying to engage with sovereign Native American tribes to see if there's some solutions we can find. Again, we don't think everything's perfect, but we want to work with those sovereign entities and others to find those solutions. This is one thing that I'm very proud of, and your ratepayers are funding this effort, and we are doing everything we can to support tribal leadership in this area. So the picture on the left, you may be familiar. That's Grand Coulee Dam when it was under construction. And when Grand Coulee Dam was completed in the early 1940s, it blocked fish passage in the Upper Columbia River. And those tribes in that part of the world have not had fish in that part of the river for most of the last 80 years, particularly the Colville, Spokane, and Coeur d'Alene tribes. And they have an organization called the Upper Columbia United Tribes. This picture, there's lots of rumors about it, but it feels like a stage picture where tribal leaders were asked to go out and take this picture. Obviously, there was not the level of consultation when Grand Coulee was built. Really tragic story. Flash forward to the right. There's a program called the Phase 2 Implementation Plan, which is funded by Bonneville's customers, led by tribes for more than a decade, where we're working to get fish up above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dam, the opportunities to have more than 100,000 adult fish return. And Northwest River Partners, the organization that I work with our board with and our members on, is supporting this very actively. It is an opportunity to right a historic wrong, to work with these tribes who do not want to change the operations of Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph Dams. If you don't know, those are two of the largest hydroelectric plants on the planet. very crucial for flood control, irrigate 700,000 acres in the Columbia Basin project, all of those things. These tribes just want fish. They want to have their culture back. And so we've worked. Actually, I was in DC two weeks ago. We've been coordinating with these organizations to advocate for the Trump administration to continue this program. We advocated for it during the Biden administration. And I think this is an example where if you have people come together, and you understand and try to understand these wrongs where they exist or the perspectives of others where we can have a strong hydropower system, also work to attain tribal treaty rights, have more salmon for everybody, it's the type of win-wins we're looking for in the region. So again, I appreciate the chance to be here tonight. We appreciate the city's support. This is a really crucial time for our largest source of energy and all of the benefits that come from the hydropower system. So thank you for the opportunity to be with you. Happy to take any questions if there's time.

Thank you for being here. Council, I think I saw Pat's light on first.

Just a comment. My husband's a big fisherman, and there were years that many, many, many salmon coming up, lots of pictures of salmon that he caught. And then like zero years, and the dams have not changed. Something else has changed. It's not the dams, but huge variety. Would you agree with that? And what is causing this big variety of numbers?

So Councilmember, it's a great question. So according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, both in the Biden administration and in the Trump administration, they would say that OSHA conditions, particularly sea surface temperatures, are having a huge impact on salmon returning to the region. You also can look at dams up and down the West Coast of the United States, whether they have dams on them or not. And in some cases, our system, in terms of adult returns, is doing better than largely undammed rivers. I cite the Yukon River, which starts on the Alaska coast, goes more than 1,000 miles into Canada. The first dam on the Yukon is more than 1,000 miles into Canada. They have had severe damage. fishing restrictions on the Yukon because there just are not the salmon coming back. Lots of reasons for that. There's human harvest. There's orcas. There may be international harvest that's questioned legally. There's ocean conditions and all the food web impacts of that. So there's lots of things that we don't know. Frankly, that's one of the things we've been advocating for with the Trump administration and Congress is to do more research so we can understand what's going on in the ocean and reminding folks that hydropower is a carbon-free source of energy. So if you think climate change is having an impact, hydropower has long been a solution for that.

What about netting, Indian netting on the Columbia? I know that's massive when the salmon are running, and also fishing off the coast. And we don't seem to be getting numbers from how much those are taking. Would you agree with that? Is it kind of uncontrolled?

Well, so there are tribal treaty rights that are administered jointly by those tribes in the states of Washington, Oregon, and with the federal government. And there are harvests. There's a lot of harvest that is happening. Frankly, the last two years for spring Chinook, for all the conversations about fish going extinct, those seasons have been extended. So we think that there's opportunities to have a harvest as well. We don't want to get in the way of tribes executing what they believe are their treaty rights in conversations with the states and the federal government they're doing. But those are things that are having impacts on fish too. I just mentioned one other thing, if I could. This month, there have been two pieces of legislation, one bipartisan by Congressman Baumgardner of the 5th District and Congresswoman Randall of the 6th District in Washington, and then Congresswoman Glusenkamp-Perez. Two different pieces of legislation on pinniped reduction, sea lions that are having a huge impact on these adult fish that we've... gotten to come back, a very small number of them go out in the ocean and come back and you have these sea lions that are growing in population and literally hanging out in the fish ladders and eating these adult fish. That legislation we think could have a significant positive impact in helping adult salmon and trying to deal with these growing sea lion and pinniped populations in a better way.

Thank you.

Yep.

We need Ozempic sealants. Mayor Pro Tem Van Dyke.

Thank you for being here. I appreciate it and I appreciate the cause, if you will. Thank you. I love that you use the word battery. That's something I talk about. I think that really resonates with people that the potential energy behind the dams is some of the largest renewable energy that we have in the world. I think there's something that goes along with this when we talk about a carbon-free portfolio, if you will. And if we want to change the ratios of dams, that new nuclear has to be part of that conversation of that portfolio. And it's something that, to me, goes hand in hand with this as the largest sources of, or I think they have to be our future between those two of what a balanced portfolio would be to meet our energy demand. So I really think that could be part of that conversation. You don't want to mix the message, if you will, but I'm sure you've had that, but it leads directly into that conversation. That's all. Thank you very much.

I think I'd add on that. I think hydro is just under 70% of our fuel mix and then nuclear is about 11%. And so it'd be great to see nuclear grow as well.

Council Member Meyer.

Thanks.

I'm going to play devil's advocate here. I don't have a dog in the fight. I don't mind hydropower. I'm a supporter of it by and large. But as an elected official, I get people giving me the business about it all the time. So I'm going to repeat some arguments and questions that I've heard over the years. Okay. The dams are very old and there is they're not maintenance free. There is a finite service life on some of these turbines. Do we have readily available information on where we are in that life cycle and when we're going to have to make some serious investments to keep those dams running and what that would cost?

Yeah, so the dams from our perspective are very well maintained. You brought up turbines. uh bonneville and the corps of engineers that operate the dams on the snake and lower columbia rivers are going through turbine upgrades right now that will not only provide more energy using the same basically apparatus for energy but in the chance that those fish go through the turbines which generally survive most the vast majority of those fish survive those turbines will provide even more fish protection for those fish that go through turbines. Again, there's lots of other ways. Again, we talked about spill. There's fish bypass. There's barging. So there's constant upgrades and maintenance going on. And frankly, Bonneville customers pay for the power part of those services.

And so where in a nutshell can I go to find information about that side of things, the maintenance and operations side of hydropower?

It's under the Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. They have capital work projects. There are, and I can't remember the name of the plans, but they are reviewed by Bonneville And, in fact, I was on a conference call this afternoon, and they were talking about which units were being replaced. And I could send you a list of that, but it's capital work.

I don't need to be that deep in the weeds.

And those investments are reviewed by Bonneville because Bonneville ends up paying for those capital improvement projects. And they want to make sure that they're investing in the most beneficial projects and do have input on that.

Okay. Next thing is you mentioned you had an infographic up there between 2015 and 2024 retail power up 5.7% in Washington. I didn't write it down. 2.05% nationwide, I think you said. Yeah. A lot of numbers. So Lawrence Berkeley National Lab tracks average wholesale price of power. Unfortunately, they don't have data going back as far for specifically the mid Columbia region. Everybody's focused on ERCOT and all the other places where there are constant disasters. But average wholesale price, with the exception of a couple years of natural gas getting expensive, hasn't really risen at such a steep level and arguably is down at 2017 levels. So if wholesale power isn't getting more expensive but retail power is, that's not a generation issue, right? That's a transmission and utility issue.

Well, I think there's a lot of things happening that go into this. And I would, I think it's, I haven't looked at that study. This is all information from the Energy Information Administration. And just to be clear, if in case I wasn't earlier, the 5.7% increase is a full year increase between 2023 and 2024. And we can provide you the data. This is all publicly accessible information. Again, I'm not trying to get you to recite things from memory, but if you could send it to me offline, I'd appreciate it. Yeah, I mean, you can dive into some spreadsheets as I did on a plane ride once to get to all this information, because I thought it was interesting. Let me see if I can get to... Well, you're looking for that EIA as kind of... I think this is part of it. And so again, Washington... Great segue. That's my next question. Good. Well, if you don't mind, if I could just address this one first. So I put this asterisk in there because I think it's important. I didn't really touch on it for time's sake. But we always point out that in 2014, you had 2.3 million salmon return. you had the system generating hundreds of more megawatts, even especially compared to now under this court ruling in February. And so that has reduced the amount of power available for Richland and the other customers of Bonneville. And our point is, if we were generating all this energy, we had a more reliable system for river transportation, and we had the most fish, shouldn't we go back and look at that and see if there was something there that worked for everybody in a better way? So yes, there are lots of things happening. Every utility has to set rates, particularly public utilities, based on costs. But in Washington state, how the hydropower system goes has a huge impact on the utilities, and particularly coming down into retail rates.

And so that's a perfect segue. Please. I believe on the previous slide, or maybe it was just out loud, the sentence was that the total returns have tripled since the federal dams have been operating.

Right? Nearly tripled, yes.

With the 1999 ad highlighted in a previous slide. Yeah. I have a degree in data analytics, and when I look at those two things next to each other, I see that the total returns have tripled since the 1999 ads talking about potential extinction. You see what I'm saying? Because it's pretty much a flat line until you get to the late 90s, and then all of a sudden, something caused something to change. Yeah. So I'm wondering... what we're trying to glean from this chart if it's, because what I hear is that that advertising campaign was super effective.

Well, so I think we need to be fair. I mean, since the late 90s, particularly on the Snake River projects, we've made real improvements on juvenile passage. And now those dams, all the dams, the federal dams on the Snake River and Columbia River meet performance standards, 93 to 96% juvenile survival through those facilities. One of the things I was going to mention on your earlier question. at ice harbor dam they have what is known as a removable spillway where congressman newhouse called it the fish slide yeah and so as you spill water over the dam it's meant to make it smoother So the juveniles sometimes get disoriented. Now, there's concern now, because of the level of spill we have, that there's so much dissolved gas in the water. Washington, Oregon raised their gas cap levels up to a certain percentage, that it's disorienting the fish. And if I was down at the Dalles a few weeks ago, there are birds that literally just hang out downstream of those dams and people are paid to go out and shoot blanks at the birds and then they have wires. So the juveniles, there are issues with juveniles and how they're surviving. We think that there are alternatives like barging juvenile fish downstream where they can basically go downstream and survive at an even higher rate or similar to spill in the system. So yes, I think that we've made significant improvements in the 21st century. There's no doubt about that. And we think it's an example where we can have the system that we all rely on and have stronger fish returns.

Okay, and then my last question. In the beginning of your presentation, you talked about how your organization didn't feel that these studies are necessary, that we've had enough of the studies, the ones that the governor is... Yeah. And then later on, just before I started harassing you, You said that we needed further studies, but somewhere else. Can you clarify which ones you think we don't need and which ones we do need?

I think it is very well understood by expert-led studies that the lower Snake River dams provide essential energy, river transportation, recreation, irrigation services to tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of people in this region, millions of people in the Northwest. There have been several studies since 2022 that have concluded that. And they are arguably the most affordable source of electricity that serves the city of Richland and the Pacific Northwest. elsewhere in the river. So if you turn left and go up the Hanford Reach and go past the Mid-Columbia dams up to Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee dams, that is what we're talking about. Where there has not been fish passage at Grand Coulee since the 1940s, And Chief Joseph, the dam immediately downstream, does not have fish passage. And we, really led by the tribes in that area, the Native American tribes and the federal government, are studying an effort to get fish up above Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph Dam. Grand Coulee is 550 feet high. It's very hard to figure this out. I will share with you that even in some of the early efforts, we're having fish that literally go through the dams now through some of the experiments, go all the way out the system, go out the ocean for a few years, and hundreds of them have returned. It's very cool. And if we can build the infrastructure to help support more of those fish coming back, that's what we're trying to do. Okay. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Thank you. Council Member Jones.

Yeah, thank you for the presentation.

Thank you, Council Member.

So you brought up something that I thought was important. It's the issue with the temperature in the waters, marine waters increasing that has affected marine life. And this is not just Obviously salmon, we're talking about whales and everything else in between, as well as the fact that we have sea lions as well at the very entrance of the Columbia River waiting for the fish to come through. So are we really adding those variables to those studies as well? Because... Yeah, we may be saying it's all fault because of the dams, but we're not looking that this is a very complex problem that many pieces come into play. One of those being the fact that waters are much warmer than they used to be maybe 10 years ago, maybe even five years ago. Ourselves, we're having problems with the Columbia River because of... the different issues with algae, all related to temperatures. So my question to you is, are we also analyzing how the water temperatures really, at the end of the day, affecting that passage more than anything else?

So are you talking about water temperatures in the ocean or water temperatures in the river? Both. So I'm going to try not to take a bunch more time. The water temperature issue in the river is an issue that is very important right now. And we are working on what is known as a total maximum daily load standard for temperature that Washington and Oregon are implementing. To share with you, the National Lab did a study in 2002. And what they found was, and this is taking data from the B Reactor, which predates every dam, I think, except maybe Grand Coulee on the river. And what it found was that the hydropower system, as the system was built out, helped shave off peak temperatures in the summer, that the peaks got lower in the summer on average. And if you think that summer passage for adults is really important and that temperature is important, there's an argument out there that the hydropower system has helped shave off those peaks. It does push the warmer water into the fall. But generally, the folks I've talked to think that that's a minimal issue. It's much less important than having cooler water, those cooler peaks, in the summer. So, and again, I think the foundation of your question is exactly the point we try and make. Yes, dams have an impact. We understand that. But so do pinnipeds. So do ocean conditions. So does human harvest. All sorts of things are having an impact on these salmon. You just have to know the salmon life cycle to know that they're either born in freshwater, travel hundreds of miles out, hundreds of miles in the ocean, if not thousands of miles, and then return. And you think about all the things that can happen to them along the way. We want to fix the damn challenges that we have. And there are still some that need to be fixed. But there are other things affecting these fish, too.

The last one I have was in regards to the study. You know, based on what you said, it appears that we're fishing mostly for a study that answers the question that they want to get, not the actual answers that we're getting, which is there is really that dams are not really affecting the passage of the fish. Is that what I understand to be correct? Because it seems like a lot of studies, we're looking for a specific study that meets our needs more than anything else.

On the lower Snake River dams, we think that the issues there have been very effectively studied at significant cost by experts, including in the national lab. On the upper river of Grand Coulee, we're working on some solutions up there. That study is needed and would be really important. I mean, the Native American tribes in that part of the world have identified it as important, and we need answers about how to achieve those objectives.

But that's not the study that...

That's not the study the governor is focusing on is the fourth study since 2022 to look at how you'd replace the energy services, the snaker or dam, the third study funded by state of Washington dollars. That's a problem.

Which is why I'm saying we're looking for a specific result, not for the actual, you know, true. That's right. Yeah. Okay.

Yeah. Can I just mention one other thing, Mayor? So I did leave a couple of things. This is just a little bit of information about our organization, talks a little bit about hydropower. And this piece here is something I'm actually very proud of. Victor Valerio, who was here last year, actually was born in Mexico. Spanish was his first language. And we've worked with our members to take a lot of the information on this sheet and translate it into Spanish. And so for your community and others across the Northwest where that might be where you have significant Spanish-language speaking communities, we want to make sure that information about hydropower is accessible to everybody. And so I just want to share that with you. We're committed to trying to spread the word as much as possible across all communities in the Northwest.

Thank you very much for your presentation and being here. I appreciate your work and the scientific data behind your presentation is helpful. I have a follow-up question, but I don't want to use the time now. If I queue on here, can I reach out to you?

Well, Clint knows how to get a hold of me. That will take you to sign up for our information, which we would hope you would do, Mayor. But if I need to set up another meeting with you, I'd be glad to do it.

Okay. It's not a question that has to do with the city, but something else that I was observing, and I don't want to take the time out of here.

Okay. Very good.

Thank you very much for being here. Thank you, Mayor. Enjoy. Next on the agenda is multifamily housing tax exemption with Director Rizzitello making his way up. And I think I saw your nameplate. Oh, you've got it with you. That's right.

Okay. Hey, good evening, council. Great to be here. So the concept before you tonight is another one of the tools that was mentioned in the attainable housing presentation I did last summer. So this will be a deep dive into a concept that the state has called multifamily housing tax exemption. So to tie this back to the strategic plan, our focus, development area, so increase housing availability in a vibrant downtown. And then from the 17 comprehensive plan, encourage preservation enhancement of historic elements, implement programs that improve the built environment, and then goal, HE goal number one, providing a range of housing densities, sizes, and types for all incoming age groups in the community. And then again, just to tie back from last summer, there is a slide to this presented in the Attainable Housing presentation. So why talk about this concept as potential tool to add to limited economic development attainable housing toolbox for the city and a lot of other states areas you have a wide array of things you can adopt it's very limited in the states so any and all tools is something that should be explored furthers housing diversity. And then the other concept is that unlike a lot of programs that the state has, you can actually customize this to fit local needs. You can put other criteria in it as well. They do provide baseline. but you can put in other criteria. So what is this? It's a property tax relief program authorized by state RCW 8414, new and rehabilitated multi-unit dwellings and urban centers. And it's a temporary exemption from property taxation on the residential improvement value. And it encourages increased residential opportunities and affordable housing opportunities, stimulates construction and new multifamily housing and rehab of existing vacant and underutilized buildings. There's yearly monitoring and reporting required and as of this year there's about 55 communities across the state of Washington that have some semblance of this program. Advantages and disadvantages. Cities and counties can give financial incentives to meet the housing goals without the need for direct funding. Requirements in state law can be flexible, let cities and counties tailor the programs and meet policies. Like you can require on-site improvements. that benefit the public more so building requirements or mandates for services and then MFTs are used by developers across Washington and they're often familiar with this because it's very commonplace. Disadvantages is if not carefully designed MFTs can result in a loss of tax revenue and development for the period of time So it has to be carefully designed. The programs do require some staff time to conduct regular monitoring, oversight, and reporting. And then regular updates can be necessary to make sure that there's a sufficient sign of a maximized public benefits. Where it's applicable is cities that have a designated urban center with deficiency in housing opportunities. So what does this deficiency mean? If you all recall from that last presentation last year, the goal tends to be around like a 5% vacancy. We were like at that 4.5%. Almost there, but not so much. So that's what allows us to consider this program. And then the RCW essentially 84-14-10 defines what the urban centers are. And that's just where there's a variety of services and public facilities available in a nutshell. So basically our downtown tracks D&E areas along George Washington where we all qualify. if we chose to go after this. How does MFT work? So the city defines a residential target area or areas within urban center. Approved project sites are exempt from the ad valorem property taxation on the residential improvement, not the land improvement. And if it's a mixed use, not the commercial improvement, just the residential improvement for a period of 8, 12, or 20 years, depending on which one's the city adopts. It can be any or all of those. Communities can choose to impose higher affordability requirements and include other requirements for projects as well. It's customizable. Cities must pass an enabling ordinance to enact it. And then any applications would go through the standard councilman process. It's not like if this program was created, it could be a free-for-all. Each project would fill an application on their own merits with Dunga Council for consideration. And land and commercial improvements are still taxed. So now I'll go over each of the three types. So the eight-year MFTE. Many communities utilize this approach to promote market rate housing in construction neighborhoods where the new investments needed. This one doesn't have a state mandated requirement for affordability, but cities can essentially put in such requirements. The 12-year, this one is used for providing affordable rental housing options, including choice and market rate private housing projects, and a developer must set aside at least 20% of the housing units for low- and moderate-income households. And I'll go over essentially the monetary number for each size of family in an upcoming slide, so you can get a flavor to that. And then 80% of area median income is considered low income. 115% is considered moderate. And then the 20-year one, this option was created in 2021. It's intended to encourage affordable housing home ownership. It requires 25% of the units to be sold as permanent affordable housing for households at 80% AMI or below with a nonprofit or government agency sponsoring the sale and restrictions in place for resale to ensure long-term affordability. So MFT requirements for the developer, it has to meet the RCW 84-1430, so it needs to be located within an urban center and then meet the adopted standards for height density, parking, the income limits, and other adopted standards. requirements that the local municipality so chooses a new construction must be completed within three years and then must enter into a contract with the city containing terms and conditions This right here is the median income limit by household size table. And this was just pulled for 2026. So the pink color is essentially the low 80% income limit. And then the green is 115%. the moderate and then you can see essentially those breakouts by the household size and this is for the Richland Kennewick metropolitan statistical area so tri-cities so a good flavor is also see what cities nearby us are doing so none of the tri-cities in and of itself have investigated this yet but there are ones nearby that have adopted this so Walla Walla has an 8 and a 12 year program. College Place has the 12 and 20 year. And then Othello has 12 and 20, and Moses Lake has 8 and 12. And then there's a litany of other ones. As I said, in total there's 55. The ones I identified here were ones that had the most easily defined codes and directives as far as how their program operates. This is a lot of numbers here, mainly for reference. Later on, I'm going to take a look at them for public, but the state, they actually aggregate the number of units issued, number of units constructed, the assessed value, the taxable value, and then the per-unit exemption value, and essentially all the benefits from it. So this table is for certificates issued through the program in fiscal year 2025. Now going into case study at Walla Walla, and I apologize for the map, but this is essentially the color scheme the city over there has. So they first adopted their iteration of the program in 2005. and earlier on it was a the 12-year exemption and they only had it in the red area in the middle of the city the downtown area and the so residential area was targeted to just immediately around the downtown two developments essentially were furthered under this concept view 22 apartments just north of the downtown and then the lodge which I'll show pictures later on. That was a former Elks Club building. That ended up being a mixed-use 137-unit structure with the 12-year exemption and 20% affordable units. That lodge development was so transformative for the eastern downtown area, there was a community discussion about broadening the program to cover other areas of town. So if you look at the red lines on the map, and this is what ended up being adopted in 2023, they drew the multifamily housing tax exemption geographic boundary to include the Eastgate area, Long Isaacs Avenue, and then also to go south of the downtown as well into the neighborhoods that needed investment around the fairgrounds area and then they eliminated the eight-year market rate exemption because market rate was being constructed by private sector so they decided to leave that one alone however the 12-year one they had the affordability provisions that was the one they doubled down and because and I know you've all heard me talk about in my tribulations live in the valley getting the affordable housing at all was a major challenge over there so they need to step it up and then the affordable units they were proportionate to the other units and then they expanded the other area to cover the residential areas going beyond the downtown into other areas that needed the assistance now going deeper into this lodge development was constructed in 2023 it replaced the former Alex Lodges saw better days and then and a lot of underutilized property right around there and it was a section of the downtown that was starting to see some disinvestment, and things were just standstill in the northeast quadrant of the area. So 20% of the units are affordable, 80% of the median income. The developer, on top of that, threw in some public art, and then also they had additional design standards to meet the college town neighborhood around Whitman College. They decided to opt in all that as well. The total cost of the incentive in the newer property tax over a 12-year period was about $902,000. However, the private investment when you figure in all of the construction costs, the sales tax additional from the commercial units, Everything else was over 30 million in the same period that the city ended up observing And then additionally with that lodge development, you'll see them like a before-after picture. I'm going to show you in a little bit The other parcels that were starting to be underutilized they decided to step up and reinvest in their own property so it took off like wildfire and and that yielded about an additional 35 million investment with a hotel that saw better days and then another one that was actually converted to some micro apartments for affordability as well so there were additional developments that followed this one So you can see a picture to the left, 2018, that was the Elks building. They had some decent landscape, but it was just a very empty parking lot, an older structure. And then to the right was the older Red Line Hotel. And then by 2026, you see the lodge development, and then the Red Line was turned into the Finch, and then there's another hotel behind that. that was converted into the micro apartments and then there's other development even to the east of that so it was transformative for the area so how to establish a program Richland would need to consider the RCWs of the urban center and its residential neighborhoods adjacent to a downtown area that has a mix of the commercial uses determine the zoning and development standards and then allocate staff and resources to review the applications and then there's ongoing reporting to the state for this for every year As far as how to administer it, it's developing the application in the forums, making sure it's in compliance with the city code and the state law, collect annual reporting information, and then submit it over a Department of Commerce. Final takeaways, if carefully, utilize it as a powerful incentive in the attainable housing toolbox to encourage reinvestment in your urban centers. It can be tailored to fit the desires of a given community. And then you can pick from the eight 12- or 20-year exemptions or utilize all three. It's up to the desires of that community's city council. So next steps would be if the council is interested, and then if so, the following would be needed. Resolution of intent, and then identify the geography to target, begin the public outreach, hold public hearing, draft the ordinance, and then ordinance review and adoption. And then these are some hyperlinks to the state program. And then other programs around the state, they have easily identifiable processes for MFT. So that is the summary of the research so far.

Thank you very much. I would imagine council's got a lot of questions on this. Who would like to go first? Council Member Meyer.

Yeah, I've got a quick question. I appreciate the breadth of information here. I'm kind of curious if you happen to have any information about what made Walla Walla drop to 8-year and keep to 12-year. Is that specifically because of the affordable housing requirement?

It dropped the eight-year because the 12-year had the affordable housing requirement, and with the eight, it felt like it was giving the market stuff, but they needed assistance on the attainable and the affordable housing, so that's why they aimed specifically to the 12-year.

Okay, and if... like what's the process for changing the program if you implement it right like if if let's say we picked two of them of the three and then decided four years later that we did it wrong and we needed to pick a different one what's is it just another ordinance or does it have to go through another comp plan how does that ordinance how does the program change

It's separate from the comprehensive plan. So literally, if this was codified in our municipal code, you go in later on, essentially do a resolution of intent to augment the program. Then you have a public hearing as far as what the changes are you would like in the program. Then pass another ordinance, and then you're off to the races. Because the city of Walla Walla, in fact, did that back in 2023 when they went from the 8th and 12th down to the 12th.

And how about for the actual definition of the targeted area? Is that something you do once and then you're, that's it? Or is that something that can also be revisited through the same process? That can be revisited through the exact same process.

And in fact, Wall Wall did that too because the original one literally only covered like a 12 city block area. Okay, thank you. Yeah.

So to follow up on that question, when you mentioned that we have the opportunity to customize it, could it be written in that customization that we want to review it in X amount of time to see if we're on track?

Yes, that can be in the code. In fact, with Cydia Wenatchee's, I know this, and their code and parameters, they have like a five-year review on it. So that is an option. And that's the unique thing. This program has like a lot of levers in it that you can customize it to your needs.

Okay. Councilmember Holden. Who owns the land under the river shore and that land, that empty land, that would be part of what we're considering as well as like where the old city hall was and Woodinville, have they done this?

I believe Woodlandville has done this. As far as the land that could be covered in this, literally it's anything that could be walkable from an urban center. So in the definition of Walla Walla, they... they went pretty liberal with it, where if you've ever gone to Walla Walla, they have residential areas going clear out to like the Safeway over by Plaza Way and stuff when they augmented the boundaries. So utilizing that logic, we could essentially we could have it like around the downtown area potentially tracks DNA. You could even have some things around Columbia Point or up toward uptown or even some of the areas to the west of the downtown. I think that's all at play. It would be up to desires of this council.

And Woodinville, did you say you're not sure or they have done it?

I'll check. When I looked at their website, I believe they were on the vote. Woodinville was on your list. Yeah.

And the River Shore, do we own under the River Shore? Who owns that?

As far as this picture right here, between the pathway and Bradley Boulevard, that vacant area is City of Richland. So we do own that. But then immediately along the river, That ends up being like Army Corps because Army Corps has the conveyance along the Columbia. But where the hotel is. The hotel, oh.

We actually own the property underneath the hotel and have a long-term lease with the operator.

Any other questions, Pat?

No, my son picked up on that. He does a lot of hunting, and so he said, hey, the city owns that. I didn't know that, that we own that under there. Okay, Council Member Witten.

Yeah, so that this tax exemption or the property tax exemption would only apply to the taxes that the city collects, correct?

It would also be the state as well.

Okay. Yeah. And this is school districts? Yeah, that's held harmless. Okay. That's the only question I have.

Let's see, Council Member Jones.

Yeah, thank you for the presentation. Much appreciated that you bring this to us. Market rate, probably the eight year.

Yeah.

And I don't know if we, I mean, there's plenty of market rate type of apartment buildings being built in the city, so I don't think... that we may need as many. However, I do feel that we should have it mixed, just because right now we may not need it, but in the future we might. So it would be helpful for us to have that ability to just add them as we need them. The 20-year, which is the transit-oriented type of multifamily Would you suggest that that would be more geared towards the downtown area more than any other area simply because the requirement must be near a transit, even though transit isn't really that great of a service anywhere in the Richland?

I mean, the 20-year, that is aimed, I would say, more philosophically toward the transit-oriented development, but I would say, per the state definition of transit-oriented development, the bus routes that are along George Washington Way, Jadlin, the nice square blocks of the community, that's sufficient to qualify for that program. It's one of those things where I just think it's very helpful to have the tool in the toolbox. If you don't have it, you can't use it. In Illinois, you could even do different classes of exemptions through the county, everything, and you can do the same in Oregon. Here, it's so limited, anything helps to at least have the tool.

Now, in regards to the review, just to touch on the city mayor, is we can just determine every five years they have to come back and verify that those actually apartments are serving that specific community? Or do they have to come, you know, since we have to provide reports to the state on an annual basis, is that something that we can also ask in order to ensure that we're really maintaining the program, the integrity of that program by ensuring that, let's say, on the 15 year, which is required that 20% of those units be for affordable units to create that mixed income type of buildings. then we can say, okay, annually, you have to come back to us and present this data in order for us to verify and justify to the state that these tax exemptions do really work for our buildings.

Yeah, I mean, the reports have to be full out and submitted to the state anyhow, so I don't really see that there'd be any. It's a public record, so we definitely could furnish that to this body every year because it's going to exist anyhow, so...

Okay. And then the other question is, it seems to me that based on what you're saying, the history based on your experience, at least with Walla Walla College City, is that this program has been a catalyst for a lot of new investment coming into the city. So why not? Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Yep.

So, Councilmember Meyer, I saw you twitch. I know you want to speak, but before we go to the second round, I'd like to give an opportunity for those who haven't spoken yet. Not yet?

No, I think this is a fantastic idea. I'm very supportive of it, personally, so I hope we move forward.

You have not spoken yet.

Yeah, well, I asked one question.

I'm going to get to Councilmember Meyer on the second round.

Yeah, go ahead.

So you haven't spoken yet, so you're on the first round.

No, I did ask one question.

You have?

Yes.

Okay, I lost track. I haven't asked a question, so may I? And then we'll jump over here. I'm glad this opportunity includes home ownership. I think that is a huge factor in creating community stability. I like the idea of reviewing it. I'm wondering specifically about the uptown. It seems to me that that would be ripe for just exciting redevelopment in that area. So would that area qualify?

Yeah, it's any area around the urban center. And per the definition of urban center, I would say the classical definition of it meets what our central business district zoning is, and then any areas that adjoin that. And our central business district zoning goes all the way down to the south end over by the intersection by Wake-Up Call. George Washington, Wayne Bradley over there, all the way up to like Simons and George Washington. That's the classical central business district. And it would be residential areas as well adjoining that. So I think anything around those areas is fair game. And if this is something you all task us with investigating, we could have that iterative discussion about what is at least the initial geography.

Thank you. Council Member Meyer.

Yeah, I got so tied up in trying to ask about implementation details, I forgot to say that, yes, I also support moving forward with investigating this. And I agree that a mix of homeownership and rental opportunities would be key toward this being successful. We want it to still be breadth of opportunities. We don't want to get too restrictive about what we encourage, but I think that there's a lot of folks who might be waiting for the right development opportunity and they might find it with a program like this. So I'm strongly in support of moving forward.

Thank you. Councilmember Whitten.

Yes, I would echo those comments. I also support this and had a couple of questions about the eight-year, the 12-year, and the 20-year. So the state program would give us outlines of like minimum requirements for those, and then we can modify them, make them more restrictive if we want.

Correct.

So I would be in favor of the 12-year and the 20-year. Because with the 20-year lease, like you said, you have that in your pocket. Whether or not anyone utilizes it is one thing, but you can't utilize it if you don't authorize it. So I would be in support of those two options.

Councilmember Holton, I didn't recognize you with your sunglasses.

Oh, sorry. They're prescription. So I do see better to see slides. It's complicated to me, very complicated. So lots to think about. So kind of the basic purpose is to encourage Housing in the core area, that's kind of what's driving this.

Attainable housing, yes.

Yeah. It gets complicated, like I say. I live in the core area. And so we have all kinds of different housing. And people like to... My son was talking about that. He has friends and they want to buy out instead of core. So a lot of things that affect those decisions. Like I said, it seems very complicated to me.

You mentioned at the beginning of your presentation that this could include historic housing. Yeah. So for the central area of Richland that has the alphabet homes and maybe people coming in and restoring them, could this apply in that case?

Yes, it could. When the city of Walla Walla did their boundary adjustment it actually included all the historical homes to the south of downtown around the YMCA because several of them were change owners and then they decided to reinvest in a multi-family product and then they helped in that regard so they absolutely could be a tool in the toolbox for that.

Does it have to be a minimum of four units to be able to qualify?

For the four state programs, yes.

Okay. Yeah. Councilmember Jones.

Yeah. So going back to, I think it was Councilmember Myers who mentioned Target. So we want to incentivize certain areas right now more than others. There's many areas where they're doing just well, a lot of single family housing, which obviously more than enough. But it's programs like this, want to hear your feedback on this, will be better served by having initially in the downtown core area to really bring that investment just initially to the downtown to really make sure that we have the highest density possible within those areas. Once we get that almost halfway through, then we can move into the, you know, into other areas? Yeah. Would that be something that you suggest as an expert?

Yeah, yes, I mean, I would suggest some areas around Central Business District are good places to start. The other area I would suggest would be because any properties will be pivoting for redevelopment that are viewed as like brownfields, so area where potential contamination could be because even when they're enrolled in a program and can get EPA grants there still are intrinsic costs beyond that sometimes that won't cover and that could essentially be part of the pro forma if you will if you have a MFT So like for instance, I think an area besides classical like CBD would be like tracks D and E. I think that this would be a tool in the toolbox for that, definitely.

So you'll be advising us on, you know, based on research, what the areas should be that we should be implementing?

Well, staff will make a recommendation and kind of tweak it as you will.

Mayor Pro Tem Van Dyke, you've been quiet. Is there anything on your mind that has to do with this?

Yeah, I think we're all excited about it, and you're seeing that. I think we're a little bit into the weeds. I think staff comes back with maybe a recommendation and potentially a phased approach to this on what we can evaluate, and we go from there. But I think you're hearing from everyone that we're interested and excited. Okay, great.

Okay. I think that's it. Thank you.

Can I ask one more question? Yeah. So for government housing to take advantage of it and to have four or three, four? Four. Four. So you, practically speaking, it would just be A houses, correct? And turning a former duplex into four units. Yeah. So they're little.

Yeah.

OK. And Mayor Richardson mentioned the Uptown. Would that be like building above?

I mean, mainly I would say residential areas around it or things to the effect. I mean, right now Uptown is a flourishing business district. And then the parking lots around it, those are owned by the city.

But it wouldn't be housing at the uptown?

It could be housing around the uptown. I mean, the businesses would need the parking and so forth. In the parking lot?

Yeah. OK.

Okay, anything else you need from us? You got clarity? All right, thank you for your presentation. We'll move on to item number three, presented by our city manager, Amundsen. Background on, how do we say that, Creighton? Creighton.

All right. Good evening, Mayor and Council. This is an informational workshop. There's no ordinance in front of you tonight, no action requested. What I hope to do is just give us a little bit of a common baseline on what Kratom is. This is at the request of City Council as a result of some public comment that was made, I believe, at the first July Council meeting. At the end, I'll ask you a few specific questions about whether you want staff to do more work on this particular topic. So all the sources here are public sources. You can see them. Most of them are from the state of Washington, including specific cities and Richland Fire Department, Benton Health District and so forth. And so you could see this is where I pulled all my information from. One note on the American Kratom Association. This is an industry trade group. Their state-by-state tracking is widely used, and I've relied on it. It's a good map, and you'll see it later on in the presentation. Their policy positions advocate for the industry. I just wanted to make sure I had that on record up front. But they do have good tracking of legislation within each state. Just here's the agenda for the evening. We'll talk about what it is, what it does, and then work on a ladder of government as far as federal, state, and local regulation. Then look at some of our own numbers as far as how it is or isn't impacting us. And then finish with four options and a couple observations from staff on how to structure an ordinance should you choose to move forward with something. So I've been working on how to pronounce this today. Hopefully I didn't forget. Mitrigina speciosa is the scientific name. Let's see. One thing to take away is kratom is not one product. It's a category. And the two ends of that category are very different substances. This Mitrogena speciosa is a tree that's in the coffee family. It's native to Thailand, Malaysia, and Myanmar. The leaf has been chewed or brewed as tea for literally centuries, traditionally by laborers as a stimulant and later as an opium substitute and to manage opioid withdrawal. The leaf contains at least 54 alkaloids. Two of them matter as far as our discussion is concerned, Mitrogena and then 7-hydroxymitrogene. which everyone calls 7-OH. And this occurs naturally at trace levels, typically under five hundredths of 1% by weight. What happens is that because 7-OH is so scarce in the leaf, it isn't economically feasible to extract it. So manufacturers take mitragyna, and chemically convert it into 7-OH. The result is a semi-synthetic product that can be enormously much more concentrated than anything the plant naturally produces. The FDA has documented products testing it up to 98% 7-OH. So highly concentrated of the alkaloid that matters. So when we talk about Kratom tonight, I ask that you hold two pictures in your head. There's a leaf product that's been used for centuries, and then the other is a concentrated semi-synthetic opioid being sold in various forms at gas stations, convenience stores, et cetera. Almost every regulatory disagreement in the space comes down to whether you treat those as the same thing or not. As mentioned, it's sold in powder, capsules, gummies, drinks, tablets, can be found online, convenience stores, smoke shops, gas stations, etc. Some of the street names include Natural O, Herbal Speedball, and Gas Station Heroin. So what are the effects? It's interesting. The effects are dose dependent. So at low doses, it's like a stimulant. It gives additional alertness, energy, talkativeness. High doses, it acts as a sedative and is pain relieving. An onset is about five to 10 minutes and effects last two to five hours. I want to be fair about why people use it because you may hear from some of the different users of the product in our discussion. Most common reasons are for general well-being, anxiety, energy, and pain relief. There's a meaningful number of users that use it for opioid use disorder, using it to manage withdrawal. On the other side, it does have significant side effects. including nausea, vomiting, constipation, drowsiness. And then long-term chronic use is associated with dependence, withdrawal, weight loss, insomnia, liver toxicity. In one study of regular users, about a quarter met the criteria for kratom use disorder. And on mortality, I have specific Washington state numbers rather than a national one. In 2022, kratom was detected in 36 overdose deaths in the state. That's about 1% of all drug-related deaths, and 89% of those cases involved at least one other substance. And I think that that's what you'll find when I show you Richland-specific information is oftentimes When reported, it's reported with another substance. So federal regulation. Kratom is not a controlled substance federally. It sits on the DEA's drugs and chemicals of concern list, which carries no legal restriction at all. DEA moved to schedule Kratom back in 2016 and withdrew after significant public and congressional pushback, and that's part of why current action is much narrower. In July of last year, the FDA formally recommended that concentrated 7-OH be placed in Schedule 1. And July 1 of this year, four weeks ago approximately, the DEA issued two notices of intent. The first covers 7-OH above a specific threshold. The second notice covers three synthetic derivatives with no threshold at all. Both notices were published in the Federal Register on July 6, and the DEA said the actual scheduling order would publish on or after August 5, so next week. So just want you to know that there's federal action in process that could potentially change the whole discussion as far as it being regulated or controlled substance nationwide. What the federal order will not do is set an age limit, require testing, require labeling, or touch natural leaf products at all. Those remain legal and completely unregulated. So that's the gap with any local ordinance that we would be filling should this council choose to do so. It's a narrow gap than it was a month ago based off of recent action. So here's the map I referenced earlier. I won't read the whole map. There are three patterns, essentially. There's a handful of states that have banned Kratom outright, including Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Indiana, and others. Roughly 16 to 20 states have adopted Kratom Consumer Protection Act style regulations. So they've regulated age limit, labeling, testing, vendor registration. But it's not a full prohibition. And majority of the states have done nothing, which is where Washington sits today. The one thing I'd like to take from this slide is the Congressional Research Service cataloged 11 distinct approaches states have used. And so a total ban is one item on an 11-item menu. So it's all over the board from a regulation standpoint. Here is a dashboard taken straight from the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board and is a subset of the Washington Poison Center. So there's 12 years of data on kratom-related calls. From 13 cases in 2014, it climbs through the late 2010s and sits in the 40s and 50s for several years, and then jumps to 89 in 2025. That's the highest on record and roughly double from the prior year. Let's see. The pie chart shows only 4.58% is concerned with 708. But it's important to notice that they didn't distinguish kratom from 708 project products until last year. And so it slightly skews. But if you were to take that into consideration, about a quarter of everything in its first year of existence is related to the 7OH product. So here's a little bit of local data that Chief Offs provided me. This is just what we were able to pull in our record system. There's been 14 incidents since April 22 where it was documented in the patient care records. That's not to say that there were other cases of it, but it wasn't specifically mentioned when there was a call. 10 of those were transported to Cadillac. There is a wide range, 18 to 58, median age being 35. Two patients under 21, including an 18-year-old, which actually was referenced in the public comment earlier this month. I will say a bullet point that I don't have on here is that the majority of the calls were males from about 18 to mid-20s. So state regulation, there's been some fits and starts at the state level. 2026 bill, or excuse me, legislative session considered multiple bills. And actually, in reading some different analysis, that was one of the challenges is there are so many different bills that that kind of was the downfall of getting any one bill particularly successful in getting approved. The most successful was HB 2291, which did attempt at what the majority of states have done as far as some sort of Consumer Protection Act that required 21-plus and similar regulation to cannabis-type products. And then it also did include a preemption clause that would not allow for any sort of local regulations. So the city could not have something in addition to what was proposed in House Bill 2291. There's indications that similar legislation will be run again in 2027 and that there will be another attempt at some sort of state regulation. So cities currently have broad police powers and can regulate it unless there is some sort of either state or federal preemption of that. The types of regulations can include licensing, age restrictions, labeling, testing, warning, zoning, et cetera. So currently, these are the cities that you could see have adopted full bans as well as those considering bans. Actually, Moses Lake is having their second reading tonight on a potential ban in Moses Lake. As far as I know, and in reaching out to the other city managers in the local area, we're the first to really discuss this issue locally. I did reach out to have a conversation with Janae Parent, who is the district administrator for Benton Franklin Health District. They will be going to their board in August with a presentation with potentially a formal recommendation in September. And that could mean meeting with local jurisdictions, including ourselves, as a result. And they are reviewing an approach similar to Grant County. And if you look here at the adopted bans and those considering bans, there was a resolution adopted by Grant County where they were seeing more of a significant spike, if you will. And that's why they acted in several cities in Grant County, followed their lead from the Grant County Health District. So what are the options for action should the council consider any of the option? One is a total ban on sale and distribution. It's probably the easiest to do and monitor. It mirrors what most of the neighboring cities have adopted, simple to administer, and it removes All acts that youth access at the retail level you don't need to lab test anything or worry about certain percentages of Concentration and so forth Considerations against it it removes access to adults who use the naturally for pain or opioid recovery There is some that suggest it can push to users to more dangerous or illicit opioids or online markets To be clear, any of the bans that are in place, it doesn't make it legal to have, it only makes it illegal to sell. So that's where the focus would be. Option B would be an under 21 ban. It directly targets the youth access, preserves adult access, less disruptive to businesses, consideration against it. It doesn't do anything about essentially the potency contamination. It does require age verification enforcement at retail level, leaves the highest risk concentrated products on shelves for adults as well as youth. This gets even more complicated is to try and target only the 7-OH synthetic ingredient. This most closely aligns with scientific consensus as to what the biggest problem is. Considerations against that would require lab capacity. Distinguishing it from pure kratom products from synthetic could be challenging from an enforcement standpoint. So those are options to consider for and against on that. And then option D, as I mentioned and alluded to earlier, there's a lot of action happening at the federal and the state level. So it could be no action, wait for state regulation. And I should put also on there federal legislation or regulation as well. Note of recommendation, whatever direction we do go, staff favors the Spokane Sunset Clause model under which a local ordinance shall be effective until preempted by state of Washington or federal government. It allows the city to act now while yielding to a future state framework or federal action reducing the risk of an ordinance that conflicts with state law later on. I guess that's the end.

Power outage.

I'm happy to answer any questions from council.

Thank you very much. That was a good presentation, thorough. Council Member Whitten.

I don't think a 21-year-old ban would be that effective. It would have to go with something more like the Spokane's recommendation or their Sunset Clause model or just a 7-0-H ban, but even that I feel like would be very difficult to enforce. So I would be in favor of this Spokane ban, style ban, if we did one at all. But that's all.

Council Member Van Dyke.

First, John, that was, thank you. I mean, we just spoke about this. That was incredibly comprehensive. That's, to me, another example of being really responsive. Thank you. Another part that I really liked was you helped with us. You set an expectation in the beginning, like bottom line up front. Hey, I need a decision from you guys, and here's what it is. For me, that helps keep me on track, and that's a model I'd love to see more. That would be great. Thank you. One thing I found, side note, so disturbing and sad is the 26 cases in the zero to five category on that histogram. That's, boy. You know, there's, on that last option of seeing what happens, plausible. The question is how long would it take for any of that legislation to come through? We could be more rapid. I'm just making general observations here. it would be interesting to hear from input from some of the cities like that have done the band for example like Spokane some of those others are reaching out to maybe so the city managers and saying so how to go you know are you seeing anything has there been any change was this worth it it would to me it'd be interested interesting to hear from them before we make any final decisions to get some of that input I think any type of hybrid or graded approach would be really hard for us. And I think it sticks us in an awkward, potentially awkward legal and then administrative cost position of trying to figure out all the things there, including lab results and age enforcement and so on. To me, I think this comes down to a decision of Do we think it's important enough to act on? And if so, is it helpful for us to our community to make a decision that we could move on quicker than other legislation happening? I think it's kind of binary go or no go, and I think we have to look at those decisions of what we would want to do. I'm most interested in hearing from maybe what the August 5th and hearing from other cities before a final determination is there. I'm leaning towards doing something about it, but that But I know you're not looking for the rest of that, but folks, that's my overall sense of things. That's all.

Thank you. Council Member Meyer.

It's indefensible to me that we have, as a council, have prohibited the sale of marijuana in the city while this is allowed to be sold. This is life-ruining crap in a way that weed is not. Part of the problem with Kratom is the stuff's strong enough that no matter how responsible you were when you bought it, you weren't after you took it. And that's how I would imagine a lot of those underage exposures are happening. Having said that, we also do have a problem locally with underage purchases of all kinds of crap, including vapes, as anyone who has entered a high school in the past five years can attest. So I agree that this is something that we need to get on top of. I think we at least need an under 21 ban. And it's not because, like, I don't... I have other issues with the, oh, this would be hard, so we shouldn't do it approach. I think that we should do hard things because we're amazing people and we can win if we try. But I think it's less about how hard it is to enforce and more about being able to bring the hammer down on whoever's selling this crap to kids. And without a specific ordinance highlighting our intent to bring that hammer down, then we don't really have a leg to stand on. So I would at least like to see an under 21 ban. I'm not, in general, a fan of banning things as a solution, but the state really needs to step up and bring us some regulation and some infrastructure for how to live in this world. And so I do also approve of the sunset clause to bring us in line if state or federal actors actually act. But in the meantime, in the short term, I would... I can't defend anything less than an under-21 band, and I would probably support more if that's what makes this actionable for the council as a whole, because we got to do something. This stuff is... it's rough i i've i've got i have at least one family friend that got sucked into this stuff and i still don't know if he's going to recover being able to fully function as an adult so this is this is horrible stuff the concentrated uh 708 or whatever horrible stuff. We needed to get it the hell out of here We shouldn't I mean it like I said it all boils down to me like we won't let weed in But this stuff is cool with us. That's I can't get behind that so either both or If not both at least in under 21 pan At least thanks Thank You councilmember Jones.

Yeah. Thank you for the presentation. I This is a really difficult subject to really discuss. I believe everybody's affected by drugs one way or another. I do agree that minimum 21 should be what we target. However, if we have a complete ban, if they don't buy here, they'll go to the town down the street where it's still legal. So we're really not moving the item off the table, we're just making them drive further. So I don't know if maybe a ban for 21 and over until, fingers crossed, the state or the federal government actually do something in which there is a complete ban. But I'm in agreement. I think we need to do something. and not go with, OK, maybe we'll wait to see what the state or the federal government do, because they may not get anything done next year. And at least we're doing something for our city residents that shows that we really care for our youth by prohibiting substances like this being sold just about anybody at any gas station. So I think that we should definitely at least do the ban for people that is less than 21 years old.

I don't see anyone else's light on, so I'm going to comment. I would support a total ban. If Councilmember Meyer is talking about it not being good for anyone, let's make it a total ban in our community. I believe that it is important to act now and not wait for the legislators, because We can do that. We're a little bit more nimble. We're smaller. We're more accountable to the community. We can act now. But I do like the statement in there that we would yield to state regulation when it finally would happen. But I would support a total ban mirroring regional cities who have done that. Council Member Meyer.

I'd just like to clarify, when you say a total ban, you mean of all Kratom products, including the natural leaf product, or a total ban of the 7-OH concentrated stuff?

A total ban of the 7-OH, but was that option A that you gave us?

Yeah, because there's a not immediately poisonous natural leaf product that I think...

The leaf product that's been around for centuries. Right, yeah. Yeah, it's the 7-OH.

And option A is total ban, just to clarify for council. Because if you can see, it's difficult to distinguish or try and determine natural from the synthetic. I would suggest most of what's sold in retail stores is the synthetic product. And so that's what's That's why I would suggest option A considers a total ban versus trying to distinguish between the two.

Thank you for that clarification. That's where I'm at. Mayor Pro Tem Van Dyke.

Yeah, just to clarify, great conversation. I lean more towards the total ban just for a lot of reasons. The thought I was pushing is as if and as we go forward on this, let's try and learn from others, whether it's language implementation, how it all worked out to make it as efficient and as effective as possible to support our community.

Councilmember Samuel.

So one of the expectations that citizens have of City Council is to create an environment in Richland where we're safe and and that we're protecting citizens to the best of our ability when we identify a concern or hazard that we're taking steps to try to address that and so I think this has been a case where Before this got brought up at a public meeting, I hadn't even heard of it before. But then to see the statistics of the number of people who have been affected, even here in Richland, it's been brought to our attention that there's a hazard, and I think we're responsible for addressing it. So I would be in favor of a total ban.

Council Member Weyer.

I'd also want to, like, if we need to do a total ban to get the stuff away from kids, then that's what we got to do. So I'd be behind that. But I also want to make it clear that You know, there are advocates who, like right there on the cons side of this slide, I encourage anyone who has those concerns to reach out because I will lend my voice to talk to our state reps to get something comprehensive put through in the state infrastructure. I think that's the piece that has to come with a ban, right, is we need to let our reps know that this is an issue that, honestly, the state needs to deal with as well. So I just, I didn't want that piece of things to get dropped. Like, I don't want, I understand where the advocates are coming from about, you know, minimizing harm, but... can order this crap on the internet like it's gonna be tough to you know this is a this is this is a step that City Council can take to make it less readily available and that's the goal here right that's that's the we're making it less convenient even though we can't we don't have the resources to handle this on a case-by-case basis forever. And I regret that. I wish we did. But yeah, so I encourage anybody with those concerns to reach out to all of us. But, you know, might be time for a letter-writing campaign or something to people up the hill.

Thank you. Council Member Witten.

I agree with that. I think that the total ban is just kind of preventing us from splitting hairs between the 7-0-H and the natural stuff because there's just limitations to I don't think that there's a lot of regulation around how this has to be labeled so how do you even tell if it's what it is without having to take it to a laboratory or contact the manufacturer and this just kind of makes it easy that it's all banned and hopefully then after doing this with the sunset clause we can advocate to the state and our local representatives there in Olympia to do something that will address this and trigger the sunset clause that will take it out of our hands directly. But this will at least do something. And a 21 and younger band, I would be in favor of that if we do anything as a minimum. But we've all went to high school and knew people who smoked. And that's, at least when I was in high school, it was 21 and over. There were people there that had other illicit substances that are still illegal or weren't legal until just, what, 2012? So a 21 and younger ban, really, I don't think would be all that effective. I think we would need to go to a total ban. And even that would have limited effectiveness because of West Richland and Kennewick and Pasco. But at least we can lead the way and do something.

My high school cafeteria had a smoking section.

Councilmember Jones, thank you.

I don't know if a sunset clause really matters at the end of the day. If the state or the federal government comes up with a regulation, we automatically, you know, their law, you know, their bill supersedes whatever we do and say, so that kind of becomes not a boy at that point. Or we just need to do a you know, set up a paper to show that we're now compliant with what the federal and state law ask us to do. Because to me, it seems like once the state or the federal government, especially the federal government, comes up with the law,

is done that's correct it would supersede ours but I think the sunset clause would specifically remove that ordinance automatically from the book so we wouldn't have to go back and remove an ordinance that isn't effective yeah I'd like to remind of my favorite legislation that we recently passed getting rid of the teenage dance hall regulations that would prevent another occurrence of us having to root out obsolete parts of the code if we have a sunset clause

then that doesn't require further action. It was a recommendation from the municipal research and services center to add such a clause and that's why I brought it forward today.

That's where I'd go into sorry let's let the pros do that find out best practices on it and come back to us with some.

I think there's a sense of the direction to take. However, Councilmember Holton, we haven't heard from you. If you'd like to comment. Don't want to force you if you don't.

Yeah, I agree. I wish there was some way that you could buy like the leaves or something and make some tea and get some very low doses. That seems beneficial, the natural low dose that they've been using for thousands of years. But what I'm hearing is that there's not an effective way to

know buy the leaves and make tea or something like that but okay you have directions so thank you for that presentation at this point the time is 7 50 unless there's further comment

or an announcement to make this meeting is adjourned whoops that's okay just a quick reminder that in light of national night out next tuesday our regular city council meeting will be on wednesday as as we've done in in years past so we'll look forward to seeing you uh council member holton under her richland jacket is wearing the uh richland polo we encourage you to wear um for tuesday night at national night out