City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening. It is Thursday, June 23, 2026, and I'm calling this session of the Ridgefield City Council to order. Would you please rise and join me for the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilor Clyde Burkle?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you very much. All right, Miss Julie, would you please call the roll?

Council Member Davis.

Present.

Council Member Fevella. Here. Council Member Wells. Here. Council Member Burkle.

Here.

Council Member Hamilton. Here. Mayor Pro Tem Shipman. Here. Mayor Cole.

Present. Thank you very much. Mr. Stewart, are there any late changes to the agenda tonight? No late changes, Mayor. All right, we're going to move on. We have a couple of appointments tonight, one for Planning Commission and several for our Budget Advisory Committee as we launch into budget season. For Planning Commission, we had applications we solicited over the past several weeks and had a lot of good applicants. So tonight, it is my pleasure to nominate Michael Hornbeck. Michael Hornbeck is a five-year veteran, sorry, a five-year Ridgefield resident and captain at Horizon Airlines where he is entrusted with the safety and coordination of flight operations under exacting regulatory standards. He also serves as vice president of Teamsters Local 1224 and sits on the airport planning advisory committee for the Port of Portland, an experience that has sharpened precisely the analytical rigor and long-range planning discipline the planning commission is charged with with bringing the City of Ridgefield, for the City of Ridgefield. Michael brings sound judgment, disciplined analysis, and a genuine commitment to the community. He is building his life and family, and I'm proud to nominate him to the Planning Commission. So with that, Council, I would accept a motion to approve Michael Hornbrecht for the Planning Commission.

Mr. Mayor, I move to approve Michael Hornbeck as position number five at Planning Commission.

I'll second that. I heard it was moved by Favella, seconded by Burkle. Any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, council say aye. Aye. Thank you very much, all opposed? Motion carries. Okay, we have a citizen representative to our Budget Advisory Committee. This person helps guide the budget process from a citizen's perspective along with members of council and staff. For the Budget Advisory Committee, I am nominating Mrs. Diana Barnett, who is here with us tonight. Hi, Diana. Diana Barnett is a long-time Ridgefield resident and Chief of Staff at Refresh Therapy, where she oversees the organization's operations, staffing, and finances, and she's built her career on analyzing data to identify inefficiencies and allocate limited resources responsibly which is precisely the kind of discipline this committee is charged with bringing to the city of Ridgefield. She is known equally for that analytical rigor and her hands-on collaborative leadership. Diana brings practical experience, sound judgment, and genuine commitment to this community, and I'm proud to nominate her to the Budget Advisory Committee. So with that, council, I would accept a motion.

I move to appoint Diana Barnett to the citizen appointment of the 2027 Budget Advisory Committee.

Second.

Okay, it's been moved by Hamilton, seconded by Davis. Any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Thank you, council. And congratulations, Miss Diana.

Congratulations.

And finally tonight, we also need to appoint two members of our council to the Budget Advisory Committee. For this one, per council consensus earlier this year at a retreat, bring forward the nominations of council members Ryan Davis and Megan Hamilton to the Budget Advisory Committee. Both have brought sound judgment as well to the city finance from the dais, and their voices on this committee will help ensure that council's perspective is part of the important work throughout the budget process. Thank you for stepping up for that. So with that, I'll accept the motion, council.

I'll make a motion that we appoint Ryan Davis and Megan Hamilton to the Budget Advisory Committee. I'll second.

Okay, it's been moved by Chipman, seconded by Wells. Any discussion? All right, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Thank you, and thank you, Councilors, for joining us. Okay, that concludes our appointments for tonight. We're gonna move on to public comment this evening. Anyone wishing to address city council regarding items not subject to a specific public hearing may come forward at this time to the podium or use the raise hand feature located on the toolbar at the bottom of your Zoom screen. For controls over the phone, press star nine for raise hand and press star six to mute or unmute. Please state your name and limit your comments to three minutes. There will be no back and forth between commenters and the council. Mr. Jennings.

My name is Michael Jennings. Again, thank you for your caring and carefully logical management of Richfield. Thanks to all of you.

Thank you. Is there anybody else wishing to give public comment in the room tonight? Come on up, sir.

My name is John Dotson. And today, I just want to let you know, Took a little trip to Kalama, and decided to take a little walk through Minimum's little area to give you an idea of what's going on there, because it's going to be something you may have to look at in the future if you go ahead with your new project. The People's Market, I think they call it. We walked in there, and they had a dozen little shops and three me, my wife, and another person that were walking through. That's it. It was not lunchtime and everybody gone. They did have a little bar at the end, people buying some beverages, going out on the back, maybe added six more people. That's how busy it was. All the shops had discounts on them, 40% average. It's just something you need to keep in mind, because just because you put a motel up, a hotel or whatever, doesn't mean the shops are going to pull people in. And on one side, they had brought in the wagons for people to go try different foods outside the building on the side where the playground was. And there were people going and buying there and sitting down and having lunch. was it was what it was so anyway i just want to give that as an update that was just something i wanted to do the other thing is a very very strange question for somebody not tonight they were talking about the uh creosote up along the riverbank or on the hillside and one of the people i was talking to at the uh port area uh said well they're They've got it where it's all taken care of. They have six feet above the material. I got to tell you something. They ain't going to support a hotel. You're going to have to go down much further than that. What happens then? You dig all that back up, start over. You clear it all out. It doesn't go away. Been involved in a couple of those items. Just to let you know. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Dodson. Is there anybody else wishing to give a comment? Come on up.

Good evening. I'm here to talk about the same thing. And I do want to appreciate the council. Can you start with your name, please? Oh, I'm sorry. Sorry, sorry, sorry. Dion Hess, 1280 North First Avenue here in Richfield. I do want to appreciate the council. actually engage you with the chats and one-on-one and meetings in the last few months to discuss that. Ms. Chipman, I think you're the only one I haven't talked to. I'm looking for you, but thank you very much. It's very much appreciated. And I think with what's going on in our city right now, communication is vital. I just want to discuss one quick issue and hopefully give examples later about the parking issue that's going to happen with the boat trailers and parking down at the waterfront with the proposed development. The other day, some of the folks were out canvassing, and they knocked on the door. Some of the people that are opposed to it, and Commissioner Melroy answered the door. Surprise. Surprise to everybody. Anyway, one of the comments he said, well, Dion's not going to get his parking. And I want to explain this. It's not about me. And I live three minutes from the boat ramp. I can launch my boat, drive home, get my truck, and go back, and I can be on the river in 10 minutes. So it's not about me. The current plan is going to take an infinite supply of parking, which I'm not saying we need to have that, and it's going to create a finite supply with the same, if not more, demand. And again, I could explain that more. When that happens, and it's happened at every port or place only Columbia right now, three things happen. Chaos, situations that involve law enforcement, and compromising the public safety. It will happen. I could give you examples. And I think it would really do the community, really a responsibility to the community, if we're going to head that direction and this is going to happen, that we have discussions between yourselves, the Port Commission, law enforcement, because it has happened at every port. And hopefully, if I can, on the back side of the meeting, I could give you a very good example of what's going on now. I've had the opportunity with some elected officials that are concerned in the region come to Ridgefield, we're showing off what we have downtown, and we're also explaining some reasons why we're opposed to this. And the one thing I was talking yesterday to Senator Braun is if this goes through, what's probably gonna happen down the road is we don't have any other options. I fish a lot, I'm retired, and 95% of the time I launch my boat at Ridgefield. If that's taken away from me, and I know you're gonna tell me it will never happen, but I'm gonna give you a good example on the next one. We don't have nothing to lose. That's why we're so committed to opposing this or at least coming up with a plan that works for everyone. So anyway, again, I thank you very much for your time. And I do really do appreciate it. I'm very sincere. And I know it's not easy to go out right now and talk to folks, but you guys have done a really good job. So thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Haas.

All right, hello. You guys know my name, but I'm gonna say it anyway, because I know you're supposed to. And I like to follow the rules, right? So, Shawna Fisher. So I just wanted to share like some perspective, right? Because sometimes when we talk about something, we're gonna be like, oh, the port's talking about putting 150 residential units on there. Sometimes when we hear that, we don't have like the perspective of what gauges that and what does that look like, right? So just an example. I'm sure you guys are familiar with Legacy Trails here in Ridgefield, right? That is 195 units at Legacy Trails, right? There are nine buildings in the 195 units. There are 341 uncovered parking stalls, 72 covered parking stalls, nine garage spaces. So that's a total of 422 parking spaces. So my question to you is, it just doesn't seem... Sorry, I just want to exit out of here. It doesn't seem feasible that it's like, how is that going to fit down there, right? It just doesn't make plausible sense, not only for where will it fit, but how will that work for traffic as well, right? You know, are you going to do just like cut off and have no sidewalks on Pioneer down there, right? That doesn't make sense to me. And so... And I did go to the ports and I appreciate you guys listening. So I did go to the ports thing at farmer's market this weekend, right? It was helpful to have the table out there, but it gave a different perspective. So what they have out for phase one is they have that event space where they have some seating and all that. And there's just a little square little nature park area. And then that other open space that's still there, they said that that's for future building. So basically it's gonna take away all that precious, valuable open space down there, right? So it's just gonna be just along the shoreline more of what it looks like. And that's not gonna be what people are gonna be able to use as much, right? Because people use that to play with their kids, play with their dogs. And just, I feel like there's so much more space valuable opportunity down there. Other than that, I understand the port is for economic growth, but I would love for you guys to work with them and say, hey, you know, what fits better? And then you look at Kalama too, so the, the McMinimins has 48 rooms and they wanna put a 58 room hotel down there on the waterfront. So how does that work for parking and all of that too? It just doesn't seem like it's very feasible and viable, especially when there's a lot of Airbnbs in Ridge Hill people can stay at and I heard there's a hotel that's being built across the freeway. So I feel like there's just other options that are more, Suited for Ridgefield's character be nice to keep the downtown character in Ridgefield Yeah, I think that would be nice to preserve that.

So, thank you My name is Josh Hansen, I live at 127 North Fifth Avenue here I'm gonna change the note, but I do agree with them on everything that they're saying about the boat parking and Why are we doubling down on what's not working with the one-way street between Pioneer and Simons? You guys are gonna do it on 4th, and I understand why with all the extra parking that's gonna be there because of diagonal. July alone, and we do not sit there and count every car going through the wrong way, was 64 so far this month. In August, sorry, my, my email to him was backwards. So, uh, in May it was 50 in March 35, but we were gone for two weeks, February 15, not bad. December was 82. The largest month that car's going the wrong way was 113 in July of 2025. We have contacted the police department. They do come up, and they will sit right there, but not to catch the people going the wrong way. Between myself and other neighbors have went and done the one-on-one and brought this up. The response was, contact your police department. They're the ones that need to be enforcing this. I did have a great conversation with the lieutenant. He goes. Sorry, the city needs to do more work on their signage of that intersection. I'm just asking, we're doubling down on 4th Street with what's going on in 5th Street. There's a lot of cars going the wrong way. I know that was under my... I could go over the two-year figures that we've set there and totaled up.

Thank you, sir. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to give public comment?

Good evening, council members. My name is Wendy McIntyre. Over the past several months, you guys have heard from me and many others with our concerns with the waterfront proposal. We understand that it is the port's project, but we also know that the city does have some involvement, specifically with the zoning. Recently, I've been able to review the document that was created by the city in 2023, the waterfront mixed use code, which from my understanding, governs this project. Now, I am admittedly no expert on these things, but I was surprised by what I read, and there were many things that stood out for me. The code allows for buildings up to 75 feet tall. This could be up to eight stories. And the code also allows for up to 85% impervious surface coverage. That's buildings, pavement, roads, concrete, et cetera. And only 15% landscaped area in the overall development. And no minimum designation for open or park space. When I read those standards, I couldn't help but ask, is this really what we value most for our waterfront? This isn't just another development site. This is Ridgefield's one and only waterfront beside a national wildlife refuge. It's the most unique place in our city and sets us apart. I recognize and appreciate that the current concept does include nine acres of park space. However, for a whole space of 41 acres, this is just a small part of a huge development, about 21% if we're getting statistical. So on that number, I find it really interesting that elsewhere in Ridgefield's development code, the city actually requires developers to set aside at least 25% of the whole site for natural space, for active and passive recreation, critical areas, et cetera. However, in the waterfront mixed use code document, I couldn't find anything that stated any sort of minimum amount of public space, park, space, so that was incredibly disappointing. So I guess I'm just wondering, why wasn't our one and only waterfront, again, the most special place of our city, held to an even higher standard than the common neighborhood development? We've recently been told that much of this project is now out of your hands as long as it complies with the existing zoning, which is scary after reading that document. So if that's true, then I respectfully ask what discretion does the city still have? How can you ensure that permit applications are evaluated not only for their technical compliance, but also for whether or not they reflect our community character and the voices of the people you represent? And if you believe also that the zoning may no longer reflect the community's vision for our waterfront, and maybe you've seen our petition, it's now over 3,200 signatures. We've also been in the community talking to so many people that also do not want 85% of our waterfront to be covered in buildings. So is there any way to exercise your Influence or any anything that you can do with the port at this crucial time that can help us actually build something that we really want to see Zoning should do more than just regulate what's allowed it should protect the places that define us and show our values as a community Thank you

Hello all, I'm Jan Hague and I'm here to help preserve the Ridgefield waterfront. We've been following the port around and all of their little places that they've been talking and they've been telling the community. The community has been telling them what they want and they do not want residential. And they told us that the public has not had access to this waterfront for over 120 years. But things are different now. Communities want waterfront. They don't want it just filled with jobs. They want the public to have access to this. In the 60s, the refuge took up a lot of the waterfront. So we only have about a half a mile of waterfront down there now. There is also absolutely no plan for a marina down there. They told me that, that it was totally cost prohibitive. The port cannot do housing, so the developer will be doing the housing. And how many jobs is that going to entail? They're also going to count people who work from home, but how can you count that in advance? So they might have a manager or two. They might have a maintenance person or two. We'll give them 10 whole employees for all of that residential.

One of the commissioners told me that they don't want residential down there.

And when I ask about how much parking they have for the hotel, they have 35 spaces for a 50-room hotel. And that also is for their office building, 20,000 square feet office building. But there is overflow across the street where the extra boat parking can be at. Or you can also go down to the other end and park down there. So I'm sure people with their little suitcases are really going to like walking across that whole thing to get to the hotel. So 35 spaces out of a 50-room hotel, I guess they're never expecting it to be full. I guess there won't ever be a restaurant there. And hopefully there's only five people working in the office building. So I'm hoping what the city can possibly do for us one of these days is make a larger marina. I know I'm going to see several of you at a ball game maybe later on tonight. The city invested in that. The marina is so special. A hotel can go elsewhere. Apartment buildings can go elsewhere. The marina and refuge cannot. Thank you for your time.

Is there anybody else wishing to give public comment tonight? Mr. Grenz, good to see you. Thank you.

My name is Rick Grenz, Richfield resident, Southwest Washington resident, all my life. I'll address Wendy's concern about 25% park open space reserved, set aside down at the waterfront. I tried that approach about three years ago, and I had the assistance of Claire Lust to kind of educate me on the process, but anyway, If you're talking 25% down there versus what the port set aside, you're only talking two or three acres additional. And the port has to agree to it, and they weren't interested. So good luck, Wendy, if you think you're going to get more out of the port, because they don't want to do it, not even two or three acres. And I don't want to put too much direction on any one individual, but I will say, Our city manager has a lot of control in this town and a successful city manager has three elements that he's responsible for and that is economic development, public safety and adequate infrastructure to handle the development that's coming in. I think we're failing at that. We do not have the infrastructure and we never will without two lane overpass to serve the waterfront development that everybody wants to not have. So the sooner you realize that and work with the community that is so upset and concerned about this waterfront development getting done inappropriately, not the way they want, Why don't you listen to the community and put the port in their place? Because what they are is a development company, a taxpayer supported development company. We don't want it. The community doesn't want it. So why not work with the community who puts you folks in office? You guys hired the city manager. And we know what our options are. And I tell you, in all the years that I've been involved with Richfield, since 1966 as a kid, coming here to fish, hunt, recreate on the river, I have never become aware of anything as divisive and upsetting to the community as what we're looking at right now with the development of that waterfront. And I guarantee you, if it's not handled properly, With that 3,200 plus petition signers alone, plus those folks that haven't even come forward to sign it, you will have a lot of people to have to calm down and address properly with how that waterfront's gonna develop. And I hope it gets done in a successful way that the community is not torn apart on it, because right now it's a real concern for the folks here in this town. But anyway, I'm not one to make threats, but I do say that there will be changes. I anticipate there'll be some big changes in this town if that waterfront development goes through as it's being conceptually proposed.

Thank you, Mr. Grintz.

You're welcome.

Is there anybody else wishing to give public comment in the room? Seeing none, Ms. Julie, is there anybody online?

No one online, Mayor.

Okay, we're going to close public comment for the evening. Thank you all for speaking tonight. We're going to go on to our consent agenda. Council, I'd accept a motion to approve consent.

I move to approve the consent agenda as presented.

Second.

It's been moved by Burkle, seconded by Fevella. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Thank you, Council. All right, we have one item of business tonight. This is Paradise Point Phase 11 Final Plot. We're gonna go to Ms. Lust in Community Development.

Great, thank you, Mayor. This is the Phase 11 of Paradise Point Final Plot. As council is well aware, this is a multi-phase project. Phases one through 10 have gone through the preliminary and final plot approval processes already. And phase 11 is the final phase to come before council. Next slide, please. Just a reminder of the overall project. The total number of lots shakes out to 289. Phase three, phase 11, excuse me is the final three lots in the northeast corner of the project shown on the next slide. So the final plot here has three residential lots and then three tracks. The purpose of those tracks is for future right of way road improvements. The plots themselves are some of the larger plots in the subdivision, some of the larger lots in the subdivision.

They are respectively 21, 16, and 11,500 square feet.

The three tracks, as I mentioned, are for future roadway improvements. And in the staff report, there is noted a condition of approval that prior to the city signing the final plot mylar, the applicant would be required to add a plot note dedicating those three tracks to the city. We've spent the past week or so working between staff and the applicant to figure out the proper way to document what those tracks are for and the the next order of operations for a getting them dedicated to the city and then be recognizing that dedication above and beyond which this does involved is TIF credit eligible so a corollary condition of approval is that to be added to the plot or otherwise agreed by the city and developer the city and developer is agree that dedication of Tract C, which is the larger tract on the corner there of Northwest 289th and North Royal Road, entitles the developer to traffic impact fee or TIF credits in amounts consistent with those set forth in Section 7 of the Second Amendment to the Development and Pre-Annexation Agreement to be issued on all of Tract C, excluding the area of one-half street width including the area of curb, gutter, and sidewalk along Northwest 289th and North Royal Road, which Half-Wit City and developer agree are related to the impacts of the development. Reading that out word by word so it is entered into the record as it is part of the staff report that if council is to approve this final plot is documented as a condition of approval. As usual, staff reviews, survey, engineering, and land use for final plots. All comments have been addressed. And as we've done with previous final plots, this area is currently under the Urban Holding 10 zoning overlay. Code allows the overlay to be removed at the time of final plot approval, so that is part of this proposal as well. With that, Mayor, I will hand it back to you for any questions, thanks.

Okay, thank you, Ms. Lust. Council, any questions on this final plot? Seeing none, OK, great. Pretty straightforward, with the exception of the additional language there.

I will make a motion.

Oh, yeah, go ahead.

I'll make a motion that we approve Paradise Point phase 11, final plat, as per the conversation from Ms. Lust, her description this evening.

Second.

Okay, it's been moved by Chipman, seconded by Davis to approve Paradise Point Phase 11 Final Plat to include the language that Ms. Luss offered in the proposed, in the proposed presentation. Is that correct? Yep. Okay. All right. Any discussion? All right, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Thank you, council. Motion carries, item passes. Okay, we're gonna move into a public hearing tonight. This is a public hearing and first reading of ordinance number 1484. This is our critical areas ordinance amendments. And again, we're gonna go back to Ms. Lust and community development.

Great, thank you again, Mayor. We have this evening a presentation and then public hearing and first ordinance reading on the proposed amendments to chapter 18280 of the development code, which is Ridgefield's critical areas ordinance. Next slide, please. All right, completing a critical areas ordinance update is a required part of our periodic comprehensive plan review under the Growth Management Act, and there are a handful of sort of central tenants of the GMA that apply to the critical areas ordinance update on the screen before you, notably including no net loss of ecosystem functions and values, and use of best available science as a foundation of proposed updates. Next slide. These first few slides are information Council has seen before at the work session we did on these. Proposed updates, but just for a refresher and for the benefit of our audience we have based the proposed amendments on a pretty large body of work including Going through a critical areas update checklist that the Department of Commerce helpfully provides the jurisdictions doing this work viewing best available science conducting extensive stakeholder interviews and follow-up back and forth with partner agencies as well as a few members of the development community. Reviewing existing planning documents and of course working through work sessions and hearing with the planning commission. All right, just another reminder of some of the record we've established to date, including literature reviews, work sessions with Planning Commission and Council, checklists for Department of Commerce, formal comment periods through Department of Commerce, and SEPA, or State Environmental Policy Act. Next slide. And as a reminder, this all ties into our comprehensive plan through some key policy language. So the first two items there in the existing 2016 comp plan and the environment chapter emphasizing ecosystem restoration enhancement and habitat, including contiguous networks, and then some draft policy language of the comp plan update we are going through currently. There's a lot of language in there that sort of touches on this topic from different angles, but just another example there, sort of creating that policy basis. This is a, Interesting process where we're doing our policy document update and our code update kind of Simultaneously can be a bit of a chicken-and-egg situation, but I believe they're working together. Well next slide Okay, just to give some color here to the work that the city has done in critical areas protection over the years The city's first critical areas ordinance was adopted in 1994 and that is when this aerial image was taken you can see The sort of networks of dark green are those kind of key critical area corridors throughout the city. And then jumping to the next slide, slightly different zoom, but 2024. Of course, a lot more development and you still see those critical area corridors. I think the point of showing this is that the critical areas protection chapter 18-280 is meant to work as the city develops, and the work it has done since 94 has really proven out its success in protecting some of those corridors. Next slide, please. Just quickly touching on actual sections of 18280, some areas have fewer or more changes proposed to them. We'll focus mostly on those substantive changes to fish and wildlife areas, critical aquifer recharge areas, and wetland sections of the chapter. Next slide. Some major themes that we've gone through previously but are kind of boiled down here to this round of updates are avoidance, buffers, mitigation, third party review, and critical aquifer recharge areas. The ones of the most individual interest that we'll dig a little farther into are the first three, the concepts of avoidance, some technicalities around buffering, and then concepts of mitigation phasing. Next slide. So the first of those major themes to talk through a bit and that shows up in this version of the draft is avoidance. Our existing code, does prioritize an avoidance first approach to working on sites with critical areas and critical area buffers. It has language stating that, you know, avoidance is first priority followed by minimization of impacts in concert with mitigation. This update asks for a little more work, basically says show your work on that. So when we receive a development application under this code, we would be requiring a little more elbow grease showing how are you first avoiding impacts to critical areas with some more evidence-based language in the narrative and on the plans proving that up. So it's not changing the policy, but it is hopefully strengthening the implementation. Okay, Mary, I don't know if you want me to pause for questions on any of these themes, or if we should just go through and then Look around.

Is there any questions at this point? No, I think we Okay, let's move forward then.

All right. Next major theme I want to touch on on the next slide, please, is buffers. This is definitely one of the more hot button topics as many jurisdictions in Washington are going through critical areas updates in concert with their comp plan updates is changes to best available science around buffer widths, both for wetlands and for habitat areas. So if I may, I'll just jump ahead to the next slide. Key points for habitat buffer widths. We've talked a bit about site potential tree height, and I'm not gonna go into the details of that again with the falling over tree diagram and stuff, The point here being best available science for habitat buffer widths has been updated such that buffer widths range from 100 to 235 feet. In our existing code, they range from 100 to 150 feet. We've talked extensively with our partner staff at Department of Fish and Wildlife and are proposing a bit of a middle ground here where that site potential tree height is codified. as a buffer measure. However, if buffer enhancement is proposed to equal the function and value of a larger buffer width, a project can elect to use the equivalent existing buffer width, which would be lower with more enhancement.

Just real quick on that, is that per, did that change after Fish and Wildlife's comment on it, or is that just kind of confirming what, they were asking a question and they confirmed it?

So Fish and Wildlife, we reached out to them as a key stakeholder before drafting any new code, and sort of talked through this concept of potentially finding a middle ground with them initially, and then drafted that in the code, and they're supportive of it.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions on that topic?

No.

Okay, we'll move along. Wetland buffer widths. So habitat areas and wetlands are two of the more common and impactful critical areas in Ridgefield. So wetland buffers... If you wanna know the dirty details, it's in the table. If not, the key point is wetlands are rated category one to category four. Category one's the highest function. Category four is the lowest. The vast majority of wetlands mapped in Ridgefield are category three and four. Based on best available science, there are proposed buffer increases to category two and three wetlands, none in category one or four. And those are shown on this slide and the next one. So unlike the habitat buffers where we kind of figured out a compromise for reduced buffers in exchange for increased enhancement, for wetland buffers we actually have existing tools in our code which are wetland buffer averaging and wetland buffer reduction. So the next slide. kind of describes those tools as they exist on our code, requirements that would be based on best available science, and then the proposed code, which is another one where with Department of Ecology, one of our key stakeholders in this process, we've met with them and figured out a path forward. So buffer averaging in the current code, the standard is to reduce with by no more than 50%, best available science no more than 25% and that's what's currently proposed in the draft. Buffer reduction in the current code is allowed with approval criteria but no basement basically for how much it can be reduced Best Available Science currently states that buffer reduction is not favored. Proposed buffer reduction allowed but limited to no more than a 25% reduction. And then our current code allows combined strategies basically of buffer averaging and buffer reduction on the same wetland resource but not the same segment of a buffer. So you can't reduce a chunk of buffer and then average more of it out. but you can do like left side of something, right side of something, use your tools accordingly. Again, that combined averaging and reduction, which is allowed in our current code, disfavored per best available science, but in the proposed code, we are proposing to maintain the ability to use both tools on the same resource, just not in the same segment, with some beefed up approval criteria. That's a lot and a little, so yeah.

We'll pause real quick.

I'm intrigued by the designation of disfavored. Is that just an opinion or is there like any sort of like, for lack of a better way of putting it, like muscle behind it? You know, can we get, things challenged based on that, or is it basically like, you know what, we don't like that, but if we do something different, there's nothing really?

Disfavored is my descriptive. That is based on the current best available science.

Okay.

Yeah.

But there's no kickback for us if we don't also say we disfavor that?

Yeah, so we have, this is again, one we've talked through with our agency partners and come up with what we believe is a mutually agreeable solution that minimizes our risk of appeal.

Okay, perfect, thank you. Councilor Wells.

Yes, I got a question. Who determines what the best available science is?

Councilor Wells, I can speak briefly to that. It's a little bit of a black box solution. State Department of Ecology, Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Fish and Wildlife, they employ wetland scientists, habitat biologists. They have extensive scientists internally and then externally. They do a review process. on a periodic basis that is a public process that looks at the science of wetlands, habitat, and otherwise. They get input from a variety of sources, whether it be industry interests and environmental interests and everywhere in between. And then from that, they draft up what they determine to be best available science. So best available science is a term of art adopted primarily from the state to identify the requirements associated with updates to their statewide ordinances. So I don't know the scientists personally, so I couldn't give you a name. It is not any one person. It's a whole bunch of people. No problem.

Other questions?

Thank you. Is there an opportunity to contest these determinations?

The determinations of best available science?

Yeah, or who decides that we need to go from 25 to 50? I'm interested in how this comes up.

So again, I can answer that for you, Councillor. It's similar to the question that Councillor Wells asked. Throughout this periodic review process that happens at the state level with a variety of stakeholders all over the state, they reopen the permit, they go back through the process to determine the updated science associated with it. They get feedback and input. They take comment, similar to how we're doing on what we're doing for our critical area ordinance updates. Very similar process, just statewide. And then once they've done that, they adopt that. And certainly there have been appeals that have been generated on the updated guidance that we get from the state. There have been appeals to that. I'm not sure when the last set of appeals occurred, but it happens about, I forget how many, Janine, do you remember how many years in between periodic updates?

I do not, and I was just trying to look it up quickly.

We can get that information. But yeah, the periodic updates, as they occur and as they're finalized, there is an appeal process, an appeal period for that that does occur.

Thank you.

Other questions at this point, Council?

Sorry, Mayor. And just to put the finishing touch on that, that appeal period is run. The best available science that we are working with and implementing has already been adopted and run through an appeal process and timeline. So that time is done. It is now to us to implement what they have adopted. with the caveat that the flexibilities that our staff has been working to build into it to promote community values is still something they work directly with the agencies on.

Oh, Councillor Davis.

Yeah, it's not a question, it's more of a comment. I mean, for one, I appreciate the work staff has done, but to me, this really highlights, I guess, another point that we're gonna need to lean on as we inevitably have to keep advocating for our community's growth plan. I mean, if you think about the situation of being asked to take on how many more thousands of more people push back on adding any new land in order to do that and then be in compliance with this. And believe me, I consider myself a conservationist. I want to be able to protect our natural resources environment. And I am not a scientist. So I'm going to do my best to believe the scientists. But ultimately, this takes away buildable land. And so it's going to make the puzzle that much more complicated to develop and build our community how we want to. And so to me, this is another area where we should be using it to push back on being able to grow our community in the way we want to.

That's a good point. Thank you. Anybody else? Councillor Wells.

I'm just going to say I concur with you, Councillor Davis. It's something that we've worked on for years and years and what has given Ridgefield the opportunity to turn around and put together its painting, if you want to call it, a matrix of the community. And now they're... trying to change the palette for us. That's my concern also, because like you said, we have constraints, more constraints, and having to put more housing, more in it. I think we need to do some kind of a little bit of a, and I can't say staff hasn't, a little more of a pushback on the agencies. I appreciate being able to move the lines a little bit, but the buffer areas just keep getting bigger, and the bigger buffer area doesn't change. You can't push the line back into the buffer, what I just read or what I heard this evening. So they're kind of getting their way to make it bigger one way or another. That's all I've got. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other comments before we move on? Okay, thank you. Ms. Les, back to you.

Sure, we'll move on to the next slide. Next topic is the last one I'm really gonna dig into before we just kinda flip through some slides and get to next steps. But it is an important one, because it's one where we received a lot of comments and feedback, and that is mitigation, particularly mitigation sequencing. So as I touched on earlier, the first step is always avoidance and proving that can or cannot the project reasonably avoid impacts to critical areas and buffers. If avoidance is not feasible, then it's about minimization and mitigation. Most projects, particularly for impacts to wetlands and wetland buffers, what we see for mitigation is purchasing of wetland mitigation credits from the East Fork Lewis River Mitigation Bank. And this is typically a process that is favored by our partner agencies as well as the development community. So consensus amongst a lot of our stakeholders that that is good practice. As we work through this process internally, we did kind of put forward in one of our earlier drafts the question, what if we prioritize mitigation on site or within the city? And What has shaken out in this proposal is to encourage that. Again, prove it up. Tell us if you're not gonna do the mitigation on-site, tell us why not, but take a look at it and see if it's possible first. And then if not, yes, mitigation banks are a tool, especially in cases where it's gonna produce a higher quality mitigation off-site. So just as a quick example on the next couple slides, Option A, mitigation pay credits. This is like critical areas review version 1.0 for the community and rec center, but it's a great example of what we see when projects come in. Of okay, here's a measurement of direct and indirect impacts to wetlands and wetland buffers. It's this amount of acreage. Our code says that amount of acreage translates to X amount of mitigation credits that are required. And in cases like this, you look on site and because of the, the conditions and space or lack thereof say, okay, on-site there isn't enough there to make on-site mitigation worthwhile in terms of quality. So then next step and what was proposed in this particular case is purchasing mitigation bank credits. And again, that is what we most often see. Looking at the next slide, just shows you the little red dots, us, and the little black outline by Fargo Lake is where the location of that wetland mitigation bank credit is. So definitely a regional solution. Moving on to the next slide, example of kind of option B, which is that on-site mitigation. This is one really big example here in Ridgefield of a site where that was going to work great. So it's what got proposed and it has worked great. This is over by Tractor Supply and the Crossing. Huge wetland complex that in 2007 enhancement began as part of a Requirement for mitigation through a land use process and that right aerial is 2023 showing how that natural area has Really filled in over almost 20 years So Again, the conclusion we came to there and what's in the current proposal is to encourage on-site mitigation Show us that you looked at it and figured out could it or could it not work if it doesn't work? It doesn't work then great, use that tool that exists and has also worked very well, which is the wetland banking strategy. Now moving on.

Real quick before we move on, I think Councilor Walz has another question.

I'd like to go back about three screens. Next one back, next one. New mitigation ratios. Do you have what those ratios are?

They are in the draft code, and I can provide them to you.

Okay. And for each category? Correct. Okay. You can or can't? I didn't hear what you said.

We can provide those to you.

At a later date?

They are in the draft code, but yes.

Okay.

I think we're ready to move on. Thank you, yeah.

Yeah, thank you, Councilor Wells. Moving forward, just a couple other things to touch on but not dig into. Third party review, this is a tool proposed by someone during a stakeholder interview that hey, we should have a process where if there's significant disagreement between a resource agency and the Professional that prepared a wetlands report on what it what it all means basically the city This is proposing that the city have a codified tool to hire a third party on the applicants dime to Mediate that conflict. I think we're happy with having this as a tool This is certainly as isn't something that would need to be used with every project usually it goes much more smoothly, but Proposing to have that as an option

Okay, and last major theme, critical aquifer recharge area.

This is a rewrite of the CARA section of the code. Simplifies the review process and just clarifies what exists in Ridgefield basically as far as critical aquifer recharge areas. Emphasizes that if you're within X amount of a wellhead, that's where the really deep review has to happen. Elsewhere is much simpler. Okay. As with any code updates, there are always a handful of lesser changes. This is mostly about updating definitions, et cetera. And the next and last slide is just next steps. Nothing out of the ordinary here this evening. Public hearing will come back to you incorporating any feedback into a final version of the draft. And then if council chooses to adopt at that future date, tied up step is to report back to the Department of Commerce. Thank you.

Great, thank you, Ms. Lust. Council, any additional questions for staff on this topic? Councillor Buerkle. Thank you.

When we send the final report ordinance to the Department of Commerce, do we have an opportunity to go back and forth with them, or is it cut and dried and that's it?

So our back and forth opportunity with them has been through their 60-day comment period, which wrapped up mid-June. So that's really when that work happened. When we send it back to them after adoption, that's really just a closeout step.

Thank you. Councilor Davis.

Yeah, again, thank you. Just to comment, I appreciate having the historic reference that was included a couple times in the presentation. I think it really helps, especially for a topic like this, to realize the impact. So I just wanted to point that out and say I appreciate having that included.

Remaining questions or comments, Council? Okay. Hearing none, we do have a public hearing on this tonight. So I'm gonna now open the public hearing. The public hearing is now open. If you sign up with the city clerk before the meeting, your name will be called and you will be receiving permission to unmute your microphone or step up to the podium. If you did not sign up in advance but would like to speak, please use the raise hand feature on your toolbar. If you're joining by phone, use star nine to raise your hand and press star six to mute or unmute. The city clerk will grant you permission to speak. When speaking, please state your name and keep your comments to three minutes. And again, there will be no back and forth discussion with the city council. So this public hearing is now open. And we have one person signed up for comment. This is Ms. Cindy Hill on behalf of David Morgan. Is Cindy here in the audience? Yes, ma'am. Come on.

Good evening, Mayor, City Council, and staff. My name is David Morgan. I live at 31812 Northwest 71st Avenue. I am also owner and manager of Plasnewood Farm, land that has been in my family since 1941, which borders a National Wildlife Refuge and includes a portion of Gee Creek. As part of my family's longstanding tradition of responsible land stewardship, I have a certified mitigation bank on my property for Oregon White Oak impacts in Clark County. Also, Washington State Department of Ecology and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have issued a notice of intent to certify my Wetland and Fish Mitigation and Habitat Conservation Bank, which will provide mitigation credits in the Lewis River and Columbia River watersheds. I would like to take this opportunity to support the revised critical area ordinance language in 18280 as included in the agenda materials for tonight's meeting. Collectively, these revisions adequately addressed the primary concerns I raised regarding the previously proposed text. Those concerns were also echoed by other developers and mitigation providers. These changes put the city permitting process in closer alignment to county, state, and federal guidance and regulations, allowing for a more consistent permitting pathway while also providing better spatial and temporal ecological gains and habitat functions provided by larger sites such as litigation banks. These revisions also better adhere to best available science, showing the city's commitment to protection of critical areas in accordance with the goals of Washington State Growth Management Act. Lastly, the inclusion of ecological function evaluation criteria and compensation provisions will provide the best chance for Ridgefield to achieve its goal of no net loss of function or values by utilizing the best habitat option available. Mitigation banks provide crucial options for unavoidable development impacts. Mitigation banks have a higher likelihood of success, allowing for faster permitting and more efficient compliance monitoring, eliminate temporal losses, and have increased ecological benefits as compared to permittee responsible mitigation options. Several mitigation banks have service areas that cover Ridgefield to safeguard valuable and beneficial biological and physical functions provided by wetland fish and wildlife habitats. I appreciate the City's firm commitment to the protection of critical areas as shown through their willingness to evaluate and incorporate input received from commenters on critical area ordinance amendments during the critical area code update process. I encourage the Council to adopt proposed amendments to critical area ordinance provisions 18280 as provided in tonight's agenda materials. I have submitted these comments for records. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you, Ms. Hill, and thank you, Mr. Morgan, for submitting testimony. Is there anybody else wishing to provide testimony during this hearing?

Hi, my name is Jean Stemp, and I actually was at the Planning Commission meeting when they were first talking about these things. And as a board member for Friends of the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, I am definitely in support of anything that will improve our wetlands and protect our wetlands. And so, yeah, I'm encouraged by some of the things I've seen here. I wouldn't want it to go any farther. So I'm happy that, you know, we're making some of the wetlands buffers a little bit bigger. And I certainly would never disagree with anything that David said. And so I'm very happy that this is working out for them, too. So thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Stemp. Do I have anybody else who would like to speak during the public hearing? Ms. Jolie, anybody online?

Not seeing anyone online, Mayor.

Okay, we'll offer one final opportunity for in the room to speak during the public hearing. Seeing none, this public hearing is now closed. Thank you. Okay, Council, any remaining discussion on this? All right, hearing none, Mr. Lee, would you please read the ordinance into the record?

Ordinance number 1484, ordinance of the City of Richland, Washington, amending chapters 18.280 of the Richland Municipal Code relating to the regulations of critical areas within the city.

Great, thank you very much. This is first reading only, and it will be coming back to council for second reading at a later date. Okay, that concludes public hearings for this evening. We are gonna move back into our second public comment portion of the evening. Anybody wishing to address City Council regarding items not subject to a specific public hearing may come forward at this time to the podium or use the raise hand feature located at the toolbar at the bottom of your Zoom screen. For controls over the phone, press star nine for raise hand and press star six to unmute. Please state your name and limit your comments to three minutes.

My name is Michael Channings. The port of Ridgefield sent everyone an advertisement. My best understanding of the port's plans to put a big, tall building on the Ridgefield floodplain is that the building would eventually lean over a small amount. When that happened a second time, everyone would be required to leave. That's all I have to say about that. I'm really surprised that they continue to talk about that in the ad.

Thank you, Mr. Jennings. Is there anybody else wishing to give comment this evening?

Before I get into it, I want to give an example. I just gotta bring this up, but I don't mean any disrespect to really anybody, but I was told within the last week by a commissioner that part of the overflow parking plan was to handshake agreement with the manager of the hotel to utilize their parking. And at this public comments prior, just that I heard prior to the ones before, was that we're gonna have a 58 room hotel with 35 parking spots. Now, before I go out and, utilize that as when I'm trying to talk to other folks about this. I am going to verify that number. But that's just beyond me that we would even have this discussion. So anyway, Drano, there's three places to catch spring Chinook in the fall after they close the main Columbia River. You have Drano Lake, you have Wind River, Skamania County, and you have Ridgefield to put your boat in and go up into the Multnomah Channel. to have a legitimate chance of catching a fish. Right now, Drano Lake is the best place to go. As the demand increases and the supply decreases, there's been a lot of pressure on Drano in the last few years. People would show up at midnight or spend the night in their boat. Parking was awful and everything else. This year, they implemented a 4 AM launch time. You couldn't access the facility till 4 o'clock in the morning. Well, that's created a whole list of issues on itself, including the fact that it's blocking Highway 14. And now the sheriff, from what I understand through the Washington Guides Association, and I talk to them on a regular basis because of the issues that we have with access, the sheriff is going to the county meetings proposing to shut the whole boat ramp down. Yeah, I'm a little passionate about it, and I know everyone's going to tell me, oh, we'll never do that. But if five years ago you would have said that would even have been discussed at Drano, no one, I mean, that's where we're at. And that's the critical part of what Ridgefield is. And the fall is a whole different can of worms. The last thing, I guess, I want to go back to my first statement as far as why I'm doing this. If I didn't believe that I was in line with the majority of the folks in this town, I wouldn't be doing it. I mean, I've voted since I'm 18 years old, and I have about 50-50 on who I vote for or what I vote for. I win or I lose. And I've been out there a lot, and the one thing when we're out there talking, we get excited when we find someone that's against it. They're not against it. It's for it. Because we can't find them. Everybody's against it. And we all, hey, this person's for it. And we want to know why. I mean, and not, we want to know. We want to hear that. And so I really can't emphasize, you know, I mean, we're not the loud minorities, what we're being told. I've talked to a hundred, I couldn't tell you how many people that are now friends or were strangers before. And the message is the same.

Thank you, Mr. Hess. Is there anybody else wishing to give comment this evening?

I'm gonna not seize the opportunity, right? You gotta do it. So, Shawna Fisher. So, I just wanted to continue, you know, what I was saying. So, I did that... little table that they had at the farmer's market this weekend. I was talking to Abby and Ethan, and what's really interesting is it's always Abby and Ethan there, and they're amazing, right? They're great people, you know, I've gotten to know them, they're nice, but it's interesting that none of the commissioners are there, and it's public, you know, they're engaging with the community, but the commissioners aren't there, so that's just an interesting thing. that I just wanted to bring up. So I was asking them about the big red building, you know, the one that used to be the port building, and they were saying that Palindrome was looking at to have that as an industrial building for industrial jobs. And you know, they're talking about last night I went to their talk that they had at the Lions Club and they're talking about like, oh, you know, the port had like all these 300 jobs. It seems like it's the 335 jobs that they're trying to replace. And that was back years and years ago, right? Times have changed and needs of community have changed as well, right? So it's like, do we really want that to be industrial when we can have industrial by the freeway? Does that really fit by the waterfront? So I think that's, you know, so I think, has the city studied long-term economic value of tourism, industrial nation waterfront development compared with industrial development? How will parking from 335 industrial jobs affect surrounding roads and neighborhoods? What protections are in place to ensure public access to the waterfront? Will residents have a meaningful opportunity to evaluate alternatives before decisions are made? How does this proposal align with Ridgefield's identity as a nature-focused community? How does it align with that? It just doesn't make sense. I understand Ridgefield is growing, but we have such a unique waterfront and people, especially now with the way, you know, stresses of life, we have the ways to bring people for the eco tourism and for other activities and maybe it might be different economic than maybe a hotel would be, but I think there's so much that we could create that's different than any other waterfront and Ridgefield is, you know, truly truly unique and i feel like there's so much more that's um i just want to make sure to miss and so much more that you know that we could that we could do you know and i think there's a lot and i've been talking to a lot of people too and i have i've only met a handful of people that are for it and a lot of them when you talk to them they don't realize the grasp of the whole proposal and a lot of them are voters and i feel like if we really highlight for the marina and the boaters and expand on that and expand in other areas, I feel like that would be really valuable and it could bring a lot of people to Ridgefield because voters spend money. They go downtown after they fish and all that. So just something to think about. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Fisher.

Anybody else wishing to give a comment? Ms. Julie, anybody online?

Not seeing it run online.

Okay, hearing none. We're going to close public comment for the evening. Thank you all again for speaking this evening. We're going to go on to council reports. Is there anybody on council we'd like to go first? Mr. Wells.

I'll be first.

All right.

And quick. I went to two ribbon cuttings, attended the police candidate meet and greet, and... Had a briefing? Yes, sir. I'm deaf.

Thank you, sir. Mr. Burkle.

Thank you. I, too, went to two ribbon cuttings. And for me, it's always very, very, very rewarding to see the new businesses that select Ridgefield. We had a ribbon cutting at KinderCare. And also, Legacy has a wonderful new facility with 20 patient rooms. Just again, it's one of the most rewarding things I can do is go and do a ribbon cutting for new businesses. I also had the pleasure of Monday taking the five final applicants for the police chief position on a tour of Ridgefield. I did this with Mayor Cole and Council Member Favala. It was wonderful to just drive around the city with them in a very casual, open opportunity to speak and ask questions. Thank you.

Councilor Hamilton.

Thank you, Mayor. So my ribbon-cutting story is going to be at the Blanc Nail Salon, which was opened right up by Costco. And it was a Sunday, and a lot of us couldn't make it. So I got to be the one that gave the bottle of Roundabout Red out, which was an honor and a privilege. Um, and I had a couple other things go on this week, some of which kind of overlap between my council and my, my regular job. Um, I hosted an event at the neighborhood refuge for community change makers. I want to thank Shannon who's in the audience tonight for two very lovely features on Meanwhile in Ridgefield. That was a surprise to me and very appreciated. Um, last night I was at, uh, Christmas in July at the Raptors game, which was very heartwarming. Our mayor stopped by too, which was lovely. got to see Mayor Pro Tem Chipman, and they both, plus Councilor Pavela, came to my event, so I wanna thank you all for coming to that. And then I really enjoyed, additionally, the police chief community conversation. I really value those moments, and I will be done with that.

Thank you, and I gotta say, your event was off the charts. It was really well done and really impactful, so thank you for putting that on, and it was good to see the conversation take place in Ridgefield. Councilor Pavela?

Yeah, it's been a busy last week, but I think the highlight of my week outside of the police chief tours is the fire department does a fired up girls camp. It's for all girls in Clark County between the ages of 14 and 18 who are interested in becoming a firefighter. And I got to volunteer at their camp and I. rappelled down a building and I climbed the ladder on the fire truck and I was I was Encouraging these young girls to do it. They're like, okay your turn and I was like, hahaha Okay So it was really incredible. I'm really encouraged. And I just appreciate all of the firefighters and volunteers that are speaking life into these young females and giving them encouragement to just do what you want to do, because why not? Anne? I would like to, for everyone who come hearing the, just for me personally, this is my council report out. I hear everything about the waterfront. We don't get to have the dialogue back and forth whenever there's public comment. I want to acknowledge that. This is a concern of mine too. Your concerns are not falling on deaf ears. I read every single email that I get. I hear every single comment that I get. I can assure you that for me, This is an issue that we are focusing on we are paying attention to and as soon as at the time for that Partnership to happen in public. You will hear it in a meeting happen. It will it will happen And I would also like to remind everyone that mr. Stewart is Has seven bosses. He doesn't run a ship on his own and and he has a very important critical job, and it is frustrating when people don't understand how the process works, and he does get put in a very difficult position where everybody blames Mr. Stewart, but I would like to remind everyone that he has seven bosses who guide the work that he does, and he does it very well. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Davis.

Yeah, thank you, Mayor. So I was out of town for most of the stretch between the last meeting and this meeting. But really, I'm excited about my update tonight. And it was something that happened today. So I had to go into my classroom to take care of a couple of things and decided to take back roads back home. And when I was in East Ridgefield, I'm cruising along. And all of a sudden, I see this car almost in the intersection. and having a front tire change. And I'm like, oh man, that's a terrible spot to have a flat tire. And as I approached it, behind it I saw a City of Richfield truck. And I'm like, you know, somebody in a vest. And I'm like, okay, I wonder what happened. I'm going to flip around. And so I parked behind. You know, it seemed like things were going well. And I just walked up. And mind you, I'm dressed in, like, shorts and flip-flops and a T-shirt. You know, I mean, whatever. And I'm like, hey, how's it going? And the city employee says... oh, well, you know, I saw she had a flat tire, and so, you know, I pulled over, and he's like, my supervisor, you know, for liability won't let me help, but this is a terrible spot. So I always wanted to get behind and draw some attention and put the cones out and stuff like that. And this guy was walking across. And so he is the one helping her actually change the tire. And so then I kind of told him what my role is here. And I'm like, that's kind of what I figured. You were just lending a hand and doing what you can. And he was like, yeah, this is what the city is all about. And it's so true. I mean, I know I can speak for the seven of us that we take a lot of pride in our staff. And it's not just because of the quality of work, but it's mostly the quality of the people that we have. And so the city employee, his name was Zach. And so I want to give that shout out to Zach for, you know, doing what needed to be done in a unique situation, and this time it happened to be noticed. So that's what I got.

Cool report, thank you, counselor. All right, Mayor Potem.

I'll just take a minute here. So probably the most interesting thing that I did in the last couple weeks was just sit here and listen to the five candidates that came in as police chief candidates. And we had five excellent, excellent candidates that came. and applied for the position of Chief of Police of Ridgefield. So whoever is selected, I'm sure will do a fabulous job for us. It's gonna be really tough to lose Chief Doriot, and we're all gonna head up to the ball fields to a deal for her at the seventh inning of the game tonight, so we're kind of in a hurry, but whoever follows her I think is gonna be a great candidate for us, so I'm really excited about how that's gonna go, thank you.

Thank you, Mayor Potem. Okay, really quick from me. A lot of the things have been mentioned that I was present at as well, so thank you, Councilors, for touching on those things. I did attend a meeting yesterday that was hosted by the Office of the Governor that was in downtown Vancouver. It sounds like the Governor has been holding regional meetings throughout the Puget Sound area over the last few months as a listening session for local governments, and then it's now expanded. They're trying to expand it throughout western Washington, and I think they're gonna eventually go east. This will become a monthly meeting, but I do want to say I appreciate the governor and his team for hosting a meeting and listening to the concerns of local governments, and yesterday was talking about everything from housing, IBR, there is a new public defense. policy that's going to be kind of heading our way, so I'm sure we'll be discussing about how we go about public defense because there's a cap on what we can provide or what public defenders can take on. But anyways, that was yesterday. I got the intent on behalf of the city, and it was good to listen to other members of local governments. There were several legislators there as well as staff, and the governor's team was there as well. So thank you to the governor and his team for that as well, and I'll look forward to next month, and council, I'll keep you apprised of what happens and what I know what I know. That's all I have. That's all from council. So Mr. Stewart, we'll go over to you, sir.

Thank you, Mayor, members of the council, the community. Just a couple of quick updates. First of all, and it's been mentioned several times, the process that we've been undergoing to find a police chief. And as has been said, it is impossible to replace Chief Dorriott and all that she has meant to this community over a long number of years. But as she retires at the beginning of September, we are looking for someone great to come in and really shine as part of Ridgefield, for Ridgefield, with Ridgefield. And the good news for us is that because of all of the work that has been done by a ton of community over a long period of time and all of the community assets that we have, the people, the place, We had some great applicants. We had 15 applicants for the position. We had five great applicants as semifinalists that we put through a long day of interview processes, including a community meet and greet in this room at the end of Monday evening with about 30 members of our community, a good cross section across a variety of interests and stakeholders and partner groups and just citizens who had an interest in it. So we appreciate everybody coming out, appreciate council participating in that. I had the opportunity then to interview three finalists on Tuesday and we're moving forward with the next steps of the process that we will be able to announce relatively soon here. But great applicants, great opportunity to meet people and have them see us. And from every one of them, the feedback that we received was, wow, what a great community you have and what great support you have within that community, whether it be the members or the council. Thank you for all you're doing, whether it's the police chief position, whether it is the public works admin position that we had 250 applicants for within a week, whether it is the public works stormwater position where we were able to have finalists that you could have chosen any of them and had them be great specialists to help make our stormwater systems better. We are getting great people because of the community that we work in. So, yes, we have great people and we have great people because we have a great community. So thank you for all you do.

100%. Thank you, Mr. Stewart. We appreciate that. Questions for Mr. Stewart? All right. We'll go to Public Works and Mr. Thamert.

I just wanted to say thank you to Councillor Davis for your comments and for recognition for our Stormwater Maintenance Workers Accurator. I will make sure that I pass on your comments and that he is aware of them. Other than that, I do not have anything tonight, but happy to answer any questions.

Any questions for Public Works? Okay, next we'll go to City Finance and Mr. Johnson.

I did not have any reports tonight, but I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Any questions for Mr. Johnson? All right, City Attorney, Ms. Parker.

Nothing to report, just happy to answer questions.

Any questions for our City Attorney? All right, thank you, ma'am. And back to Community Development, Ms. Lust.

Thank you, Mayor. Real quickly, we've won a fun little award recently. The Washington State Association of Permit Technicians Building Safety Month contest. So our building official, one of our permit techs worked with our communications staff during Building Safety Month to do a little social media campaign highlighting tips for homeowners as well as highlighting the work our staff do and the state association loved it. So good little recognition of work we are always doing but got to highlight.

So much winning, that's great to hear. Yeah, please pass along our congratulations to your team. Any questions for Ms. Lust? Okay, and then lastly, we'll go to our Deputy City Manager, Ms. Nottingeris.

Thank you, Mayor. Just wanted to give a little rundown of all of the community events that are actually happening between now and our next council meeting. There's quite a few. July 25th is Saturday. We're celebrating Storybook Hollow with food carts, face painting, and movie in the park. Movie is Sandlot. Next week, during the week, The Art Association is partnering with the city to create a street mural at Mill and Main, so that will create a detour, but ending with a great mural in that intersection. August 1st is for Saturday, which is our day of festivals, including City Days. We have a youth market, dragon boat races, and regional duck calling contest. August 4th, Tuesday, is National Night Out at Abrams Park, And we are continuing with Meet Me on Wednesdays. Every Wednesday at Overlook Park at 10 a.m., there is a guided walk. And every Wednesday and Friday at Davis Park at noon, there is Musicians in the Park. So lots of activities going on downtown.

Summer in Ridgefield, you gotta love it. Okay, thank you, Ms. Nonares. Any questions for the Deputy City Manager? Seeing none, okay, thank you very much. Thank you staff, thank you council for a good meeting tonight. And with that, this meeting is adjourned.