City Council - Regular Meeting

Welcome, everyone. You have made it to Tuesday, July 21st. Thank you for joining Tumwater City Council meeting. Meeting is now called to order. Roll call, please, Tracy.

Council Member Brandon Whedon. Council Member Angela Jefferson.

You're off to a great start.

Angela, can you hear us?

Right. Also, your mics are off. Okay.

Councilmember Joan Cathy?

Councilmember Cathy is excused.

Councilmember Eileen Swarthout?

Present.

Councilmember Megan Sullivan?

Present.

Councilmember Peter Agabi?

Present.

Councilmember Kelly von Holtz. Present. Mayor Leata Dahlhoff. I am still here. Councilmember Angela Jefferson. We know she's here.

She's very stoic right now. And then we're working with Councilmember Whedon.

Correct. Correct. Yes. He is trying to log in. So we are.

Okay, we will figure that out. It's Technology Tuesday. Please join us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

This is the flag of the United States of America and through the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you, everyone. There are some available seats in the front if you want to come in front. Perfect timing. We are on to item number four, special items. We have a proclamation, National Purple Heart Day. We have Mayor Pro Tem Kelly Von Holtz who will read that proclamation. Thank you, Mayor.

Whereas the city of Tumwater is deeply supportive of its military veteran population, and whereas the Purple Heart is the oldest military decoration in present use and was initially created as the badge of military merit by General George Washington in 1782, And whereas the Purple Heart was the first American service award available to those in the United States Armed Forces who have been wounded or who have made the ultimate sacrifice and service to our country. And whereas the mission of the Military Order of the Purple Heart is to foster an environment of goodwill among combat wounded veterans and their families, to promote patriotism, support, better governance on behalf of veterans and their families, and most important, make sure we never forget. And whereas the city will recognize the National Purple Heart Day on August 7th to honor the bravery and sacrifice of military personnel who have been wounded or killed in action. And whereas by issuing this proclamation, we aim to raise awareness of the heroism of our service members and their families and support the growing population of veterans in our community, including those who serve with honor and made sacrifices beyond what most people will ever understand. And whereas, Tumwater recognizes these sacrifices made in support of our freedoms by recipients of the Purple Heart on the local, state, and national level and wishes to solemnly acknowledge veterans for their courage and show them the honor and support they have earned. Now, therefore, Lieta Dahlhoff, Mayor of the City of Tumwater, does hereby proclaim August 7, 2026 as National Purple Heart Day and calls upon the people of Tumwater to join with her in showing our appreciation for the sacrifices Purple Heart recipients have made in defending our freedoms, to acknowledge their courage, and to show them the support they have earned. She encourages the city to consider adopting the National Purple Heart city designation and also encourages residents to learn more about veterans, the services all branches of government provide to them, where those services continue to fall short, and to remember always what it means for members of the armed forces to serve this nation with courage, sacrifice, and honor.

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. We have Jim Peterson, a Purple Heart recipient. Jim, would you like to join us at the podium and share some words?

Mayor, city council, and staff, and friends, and guests, I'm Jim Peterson. I was born here in Olympia, raised in Tenino. Thank you. Graduated 1967, Tenino High School. And my kids graduated from Olympia High School, and we're all proud UW graduates with advanced degrees, so go Dawgs. I've lived for the last 34 years with my wife, Kathy, here in the front row. We live on Barnes Lake here in Tumwater. And back in 1969, I joined the Army and for some reason went airborne school and went in the 101st Airborne Combat Infantry in Vietnam. And in 1970, on May 5th of 1970, I was wounded in action and in a firefight with the enemy that killed my platoon sergeant and gravely wounded me. And so that's why I wear the Purple Heart. I'm here to represent all Purple Hearts of all wars, not just the Vietnam War, and, of course, be a spokesperson for those who gave the ultimate sacrifice, who cannot speak for themselves. On May 4th was the day before I was wounded. That happened to be the day that Kent State riot of where people were killed protesting against the war. A very dark day in our history. And as you may know, if you're old enough, 18 to 21 year olds could not vote. We had no say in what was going on in the politics of our country. And I'm happy to report on July 1st, 1971, through the 26th Amendment, we did give 18 to 21-year-olds the right to vote. So that's a major step forward and, of course, true today. Finally, what I want to do is just encourage you to continue to go forward and work towards getting the designation for Tumwater to be a Purple Heart City. I think that would be a really great thing. I know you've done work towards that. And I'd be happy to do anything I could to help in that process. So I want to thank Mayor Sullivan and Mayor Dalhoff, both, who carried on that effort. So thank you all. And again, I'm proud to be here today for the proclamation.

Jim, would you be open to hearing from some council members? Sure. Let's start with Councilmember Jefferson.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Those words when you said that you represent all Purple Heart veterans. And as we know, our country is at war. And we're going to have a lot more Purple Heart veterans. And you get a Purple Heart by not just being in the combat zone, but by dying or being critically wounded or getting blown up. So you being here today is serious business. And I thank you so much, we at Tumwater. We are a Purple Heart city, as a matter of fact. And we just love our veterans. And we love you and thank you for showing up today. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Jefferson. Any other council members like to share some words with Jim? Council Member Swarthout.

Thank you. Thank you, sir, for coming today. I come from a military family, too. My husband served and my grandparents or my in-laws served as well and in World War II. And I just I have such respect for the military and my all that you stand for. And so I appreciate that your service to our country and that you were deserving of the Purple Heart Medal as well. So I really appreciate that you're part of our community and that you're sharing this with everyone because not everyone comes from a military family and they don't always get it. And so I appreciate you sharing that message that those of us who are from a military family too, that how special this really is and how special your service was to our country.

Thank you. Yeah, my dad served in World War II, and my brother served in Vietnam before I did as a helicopter pilot. And so we were, in effect, a military family that way. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Swarthout. Mayor Pro Tem Von Holtz.

Thank you for your service. And I was getting choked up reading this. My husband served for 23 years, and he saw a lot, and... I just appreciate everything that our veterans do for our country, and so thank you. Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. Council Member Whedon, did you have anything to add?

I just like to say I apologize for my tardiness to hear technical difficulties, but I appreciate you being here, showing up for the community and how important it is to really pay attention to our veterans, especially at this time that we're currently at and with us having a huge veteran presence, not only in tomorrow, but the whole time. Thank you very much for this. I appreciate it.

Thank you, Council Member Whedon. Any other Council Member like to say something? Council Member Sullivan.

I just echo what my colleague said. Thank you. I, too, am descended from veterans on both sides of my family and appreciate you for being here and sharing your story with us and for your service.

Council Member Gubbe, would you like to add anything?

Yes. Thank you for your service. Not everybody wear the uniform in World War I. Americans. My dad fought in World War II in Southeast Asia. I'm from Nigeria. In 1939 to 1945, there was no country called Nigeria, which means he fought under the British. He was a platoon leader. He retired from the Nigerian Army as a three-star general. So I come from a home where honor, duty, and obey is the buzzword. So you mentioned Kent State University. I remember watching Kent State on the television. And Kent State, at that point in time, had a, I guess, at the University of Lagos, the student from the University of Lagos actually mimicked Kent State University, which became a very, very big issue. When you were fighting in Vietnam, thank God, Nigeria was busy fighting a civil war. Otherwise, we would have had a whole bunch of war in Nigeria, but we did have mercenaries from across the Western world. So I thank you for your service. I'm sorry you had to go to Vietnam, but if you hadn't gone to Vietnam, maybe I wouldn't have a country called Nigeria today. So that is just what history tells us. So thank you for your service.

Thank you, Council Member Agabi. Coming from a military family, it does shape you. I still tell time in military time, and I make my bed every day. It just shapes you. I wasn't allowed to have sweats growing up, right? Because you got up and you were a service. So it does shape you. And so utmost respect to all of you and your fellows. And we are a Purple Heart City. And that really started with Bayer Sullivan, right? And her... experience and her husband being in the military and her passion. And so we are proud to continue what she started. So thank you for being here. Jim, would you be open if we all awkwardly came down and took a photo with you? Okay, let's let's do a photo. Thank you again, Jim. We are now moving on to public comments.

Tracy. At this time, we will receive public comment. You may comment on items relating to city business not scheduled for public hearing. When I call your name, please come up to the podium, speak into the microphone, and state your name and contact information for the record. Each individual will be limited to three. to one three-minute period to make their remarks regardless of the number of topics they wish to address. Speakers may not comment upon, promote, advocate for, oppose, or speak against the pending initiative, ballot measure, or candidate. All comments shall be directed toward the council as a whole, not to individual council members, and not to members of the audience. Please refrain from disruptive behavior such as booing, hissing, audible comments, cheering, or clapping. to ensure that everyone has an opportunity to speak please limit your comments to three minutes if you if someone before you has already shared the same information we encourage you to simply state your agreement rather than repeating the comments this helps us to hear from as many community members as possible and to make the best use of council's time we thank you for your cooperation so right now we have a total of 18 people for public comment and only one that I can see online. Two people signed up, but only one person is online. Okay, we will start with in-person. Okay, so the first person on the list is, I apologize if I mess your name up, Barack.

You did it perfect. Thank you. I'm Barack Ale of Tumwater. I urge you to adopt the Home Energy Score Ordinance. I just got a mass mailing from Washington Realtors warning that a home energy score would impose another cost, another form, another delay, claiming sellers would be placed at a complete disadvantage. and urging the council don't make housing more unaffordable. These claims don't square with the experience of realtors who have actually worked with home energy scorers. and claiming that Tumwater would be just one of a small handful of jurisdictions in the nation is deeply misleading. Communities as varied as Hillsboro, Oregon, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Austin, Texas, already require home energy ratings or related disclosures. Tumwater would not be conducting an untested experiment. Here is what practicing realtors in Portland have said after years of experience. Teresa St. Martin of Windmere Realty Trust says, a home energy score reduces a seller's risk. That doesn't square with the claim that the score is simply another burden on sellers. Jana Green of John Scott Real Estate says the score is so simple to understand. That doesn't square with warnings about red tape and complication. Ana de la Rua of Living Room Realty says the score helps buyers make a smarter decision on a home. and that it makes it easier to discuss things like insulation and the state of the home's mechanical equipment. That doesn't square with the claim that it offers buyers and sellers little of value. Washington realtors are telling us what they fear. These realtors are telling us what they've actually experienced. After more than 20,000 home energy scores, I'm wrapping up, Portland found little to no disruption of the real estate market, quick scheduling, and an average assessment cost of $125. When predictions collide with real world experience, follow the evidence. Thank you.

Thank you, Barack. Next, we have, is it Lynn Fitzhugh?

Lynn Fitzhugh, Executive Director of Restoring Earth Connection.

I'm here to encourage you to join Olympia and the county, your TCMP partners, in passing the Home Energy Score audit. This common sense measure helps us meet our climate goals and reduce residents' home energy bills. For $180 to $350, depending on the size of the home, sellers can complete a home energy score audit before listing. Unlike a standard home inspection, the audit provides meaningful information about home energy efficiency. My own home inspection said nothing about the energy efficiency, and only after I bought the house did I discover that it had little to no insulation. Knowing that during negotiations would have been extremely valuable. Some people ask, how can an audit alone help? The timing is exactly why it matters. When homeowners prepare to sell, many take out home equity loans to make improvements that increase the home's value. At the same time, many buyers finance with their mortgage renovations they want to make after purchase. That makes the point of sale the best opportunity in a home's life cycle to improve energy efficiency. Those improvements strengthen our county's entire housing stock. I've also heard concerns that we do not have enough trained auditors. I see that as an opportunity, not an obstacle. Last year, I tried to hire someone to conduct an energy audit on my own home and could not find anyone. Recently, I mentioned this ordinance to a contractor who was doing work for me and he immediately contacted staff to learn how to become certified. I believe we will have no trouble training enough auditors before the ordinance takes effect. I also welcome the additional jobs that this would create. In other communities, homeowners can schedule these audits within a week. Some are concerned that this does not help renters. Every measure cannot help every person. However, if it improves our housing stock, it also improves the houses that will become rentals. I do understand that the real estate agents are upset about this. Honestly, it does not in any way impact the large commissions they make. It is not a cost, but it is useful info to buyers and it only costs sellers a very small fee for the audit. They are not required to do anything else. So essentially, we are talking about the inconvenience of some paperwork. Climate change has already threatened the lives and well-beings of our descendants. Addressing it will require all of us to accept some inconvenience. This ordinance is not a silver bullet because no single policy can solve the climate crisis. We must implement every measure in our climate mitigation plan. So I ask you tonight to take action on climate. Thank you. Thank you, Lynn.

Don Baker.

good evening mayor dollhoff and council members i'm don baker and i'm the president of thurston county realtors over the past several months we've approached this conversation in good faith we've asked for a pause we've participated in work sessions we've proposed alternatives we have offered our expertise as housing professionals throughout this process our goal has remained the same to support energy efficiency while protecting housing affordability and home ownership Unfortunately, we continue to believe this ordinance moves our community in the wrong direction. Our elected officials cannot continue to profess support for housing affordability while simultaneously enacting mandates that increase the cost and complexity of buying, selling, and maintaining a home. Housing affordability isn't measured by good intentions, it's measured by the policies we adopt. Every new requirement, every new fee, and every additional step imposed on homeowners has a cost. Whether that cost is paid directly by a seller, passed along to a buyer, or ultimately funded by taxpayers through program administration and subsidies, the people of Tumwater are the ones paying the bill. This ordinance also raises fundamental questions that remain unanswered. How will compliance be monitored? How will enforcement be carried out fairly? How will long-term administration be funded? How will the city justify creating another regulatory program while local governments throughout Thurston County are facing significant budget shortfalls and discussing reduction to essential public services? These are not implementation details to be solved after adoption. There are answers that should be adopted. They are questions that should be answered before imposing a new mandate on homeowners. The Thurston County Realtors Association supports energy efficiency. We support consumer education. We support voluntary home energy scores, rebates, and incentive programs. What we do not support is tying another government mandate to one of the most important financial transactions a family will ever make. Housing affordability doesn't begin with speeches. It begins with affordable policies. Tonight, you have the opportunity to choose one. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Dawn.

Christina Davis. Oh, pardon me.

Sorry. Well, good evening, Mayor Dalhoff and council members. I'd like to briefly address two concerns. I'm taking off a little bit with Don has to say to that I believe the deserve more attention. The first is tomorrow's competitive position with our regional housing market. Homebuyers and home sellers have choices. They can decide where to buy, where to invest, and where to put down their roots. If Tumwater adopts this ordinance, it would become one of only a handful of jurisdictions in the nation requiring a home energy score audit before a home can be listed for sale. That creates an additional requirement that neighboring communities simply don't have. Every new mandate, every additional cost, every extra step makes Tumwater just a little less competitive other than the communities that surround it. At a time when we're trying to encourage home ownership, attract investment, we should be asking whether this policy unintentionally places Dunwater homeowners at a competitive disadvantage. My second concern is where the policy leads. Today you're being asked to require the disclosure of a home energy score. Today's disclosure requirement can be tomorrow's retrofit requirement. We've already seen that progression elsewhere. In Berkeley, homes that receive a low energy score are now subject to mandatory energy retrofits before the home can be sold. Whether you support that approach or not, it demonstrates that policies like this often expand over time. Once a government establishes an energy performance as a condition of selling a home, it becomes much easier to add more requirements in the future. And that layer and layer and layer of, what do you want to call it, bureaucracy, red tape, it's cost. And I think even a local jurisdiction called it death by 1,000 cuts. We need to be careful that things are well-intentioned, but they don't just keep layering on those burdens of cost to our homeowners. The conversation our community deserves before we take this next step. And when I say community, our homeowners. I think going through this process, there's a lot of homeowners that really weren't in the know of what this really entailed. And I think those conversations really need to be had. Thurston County Realtors Association, like Don said, we support energy efficient. We support education and knowledge of what you're buying. Currently, there are ways and means of finding this voluntary without having to make it a mandate. We urge you not to establish a precedent that makes homeownership more expensive today while opening the door to even greater mandates tomorrow. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Just Janice. Jen Charnette?

Good evening. My name is Jen Turnit. I'm the executive officer of the Thurston County Realtors. This council has made reducing carbon gas emissions a priority. We appreciate that. In fact, this ordinance repeatedly states that its purpose is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But this ordinance does not require a single action that actually reduces emissions. The only thing that it requires is that a seller conduct and disclose a home energy score. Nothing in this ordinance requires energy improvements or emission reductions. Disclosure is not the same as emission reductions. If this is simply an informational disclosure, then it should be evaluated as an informational disclosure, not as a greenhouse gas reduction strategy or as a substitute for meaningful climate action. The Department of Commerce does not identify mandatory home energy scores as a recognized greenhouse gas reduction strategy. In fact, out of 247 approved climate measures, mandatory home energy scores are not one of them. And we've seen what can happen when disclosure alone doesn't achieve the policy goal. Berkeley, California adopted a home energy score disclosure requirement similar to the one before you tonight. When disclosure alone produced limited homeowner upgrades, the city ultimately required mandatory energy retrofits. That should give this council pause. This ordinance asks you to assume that information alone will change behavior, but assumptions, again, are not outcomes. Last week, the city posted on its Facebook page that housing affordability is one of Tumwater's greatest challenges, and I couldn't agree more. But if housing affordability truly is a priority, I ask you to consider whether adding another government mandate moves us closer to that goal or further away from it. This ordinance adds another cost to buying and selling a home. Staff has pointed to financing programs like the SPARC loan, but financing doesn't make housing affordable. It simply spreads the cost out over time. Families in Tumwater aren't deciding between a heat pump and nothing. Look only to your Facebook comments and you'll see that they're deciding whether to have childcare, buy groceries, or fill up their gas tanks. Borrowing more money is not the same thing as making housing affordable. So tonight, I'd simply ask you to consider three questions before you cast your vote. First, has the city demonstrated that this ordinance will produce meaningful, measurable gas reductions? Second, is this ordinance what Tumwater residents are asking you to prioritize? And third, does this ordinance make buying, selling, or owning a home more affordable? If the answer to those questions is no, you must vote no. Thank you.

Thank you, Jen. Lauren Tambor.

Good evening Council Members and Mayor. My name is Lauren Tambor. I am a member of the Thurston Climate Mitigation Collaborative Community Advisory Workgroup and I am here to represent that group tonight. and share a letter with you that is in strong support of adopting the home energy score ordinance I will read it as follows. Alongside steep increases in home prices energy costs are one of the most significant financial stressors for working people. As the group that is assigned to provide input and perspective on implementing the thirst and climate mitigation plan. The community advisory workgroup strongly supports the residential energy performance rating and disclosure ordinance and urges you to adopt it. Home energy efficiency assessments equip home buyers with information so they can make more informed choices. An energy efficient home, whether new construction or improving prior construction, reduces costs for working people and reduces the greenhouse gas emissions generated in Thurston County. Climate change poses the greatest threat to humanity and to our community. Urgent action is needed to protect people from its unavoidable consequences and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions generated in the county. For these reasons, the Thurston Climate Mitigation Collaborative identified the HES ordinance as a key first action to take and regional initiative for implementing the plan. Sustainability and climate staff from the city and the county developed this model ordinance with input from the Thurston Climate Mitigation Collaborative Community Advisory Workgroup. And earlier this year, City of Olympia and Thurston County adopted this ordinance. Adopting the ordinance across the region will bring predictability and consistency for homebuyers in Thurston County, and it will help create a model that other regions can follow. Therefore, the Thurston Climate Mitigation Collaborative Community Advisory Workgroup strongly supports the HES ordinance that you're considering tonight, and we respectfully urge you to adopt it as soon as possible. This was signed by all 15 members of the Community Advisory Workgroup. Thank you for your time and the opportunity to provide comment this evening.

Thank you, Lauren. Jack Zeiger.

Jack Siger with the Houston Climate Action Team on the board there. And thank you for pronouncing my name. It doesn't happen that often. I think that Lynn and Barack and Lauren made points that I don't need to repeat. I think they made some really good points that I support. So I just want to make two points. One is Some of the real estate agents here mentioned that they're in favor of more information and saving energy. And I just remember when I was looking for a home in Thurston County, admittedly I'm an energy guy, so I was interested in that. And that was one thing that I had trouble finding good information about. I would ask the agents and they just didn't know and didn't seem to care. And so I definitely would have enjoyed having an energy score to care of the homes because that's one of the things that I consider. And the other thing would just be to sort of amplify Lauren's point that I'm sure you're aware that the county and city of Olympia have already passed this. So it would be good to have uniformity throughout the county. So I urge you to pass it. Thank you.

Thank you, Jack. Tom Crawford.

Good evening, council members. My name is Tom Crawford. I'm a longtime resident of Thurston County. I have children who attended Tumwater schools. And I'm also a board member of Thurston Climate Action Team. And also, by the way, a member of the community advisory work group that Lauren referred to. Thank you for your early and ongoing commitment to taking meaningful local climate action here in our communities. I am speaking this evening in support of the Home Energy Score Ordinance you are considering. With extreme heat, wildfires and wildfire smoke, floods and other extreme weather events engulfing our nation and the world, all of which are linked to human-caused climate change, it is imperative that every community take immediate steps to reduce our carbon pollution. In 2021, this city council joined with Olympia, Lacey, and Thurston County to adopt the Thurston Climate Mitigation Plan. The Home Energy Score Ordinance is not the only step in that plan, but a key first step to meeting the goals contained in that plan. I would like to address some concerns that have been expressed about this ordinance. First, that it would simply add cost and administrative requirements. Since the home energy score will be a required item in the multiple listing service system, and realtors will be trained on this requirement, staff time and cost to administer and ensure compliance will be minimal. Secondly, the reliability and usefulness of the ratings. This program will use a protocol established by the US Department of Energy for a home energy assessment that produces a score which is based on multiple data points and is comparable from one home to the next. It also reports recommended energy efficiency improvements and the cost savings that will result from those improvements, which I think is probably pretty useful information. The cost of a home is not just the initial purchase price, But it also includes the ongoing cost of operating the home. And a key component of that cost is energy cost. And I'd also like to point out that this measure was never intended to be a standalone measure. As I referred to earlier, it's part of an overall plan, overall set of strategies that together will produce reductions, significant reductions. in our local greenhouse gas emissions. And one example that I think actually has been mentioned by the realtors in previous sessions is the Thurston Energy Program. Well, that was the whole reason for the Thurston Energy Program was to complement and supplement this particular measure so that when you get a home energy score, you are aware of ways in which you can mitigate that. And then whether a mandate is most appropriate, I would say... I would say that mandates have been demonstrated to be not only much more effective than voluntary programs, but also much cheaper. Thank you very much for your attention.

Thank you, Tom. Natalie Needham-Husman?

My name is very difficult to pronounce. Good evening, mayor and council members. My name is Valley Needham Heisman, and I'm here tonight as the president of the League of Women Voters of Thurston County. The League is a grassroots, nonpartisan organization dedicated to empowering voters and defending democracy through active, educated participation in government. While we never support or oppose political parties or candidates, We advocate for the collective welfare and for environmental stewardship. We believe government must be accountable and transparent values directly reflected in the proposal before you. The League strongly supports Tumwater's adoption of the HES ordinance. Our support is grounded in two longstanding positions. For nearly 50 years, we have advocated for building thermal efficiency and weatherization, which is modifying a building to reduce energy consumption and optimize efficiency. And our second position is that the league supports an interrelated approach to climate change, specifically through energy conservation, pollution controls, and building resistance, resilience. These strategies are necessary to protect public health. The HES ordinance responds to these principles by providing essential transparency for home buyers, allowing them to understand the operating costs of a home structure before making a major life investment. This ordinance is a result of a multi-year, highly-coronated regional effort drafted in common by staff from Lacey, Olympia, to Modern Thurston County to ensure a consistent policy. Because older residential buildings account for a disproportionate share of our local carbon footprint, the HES is vital. Current reporting from other cities show that homes with an energy score are 10 times more likely to undergo efficiency upgrades. By voting in favor, Tumwater joins its neighbors in a uniform regional framework and takes a significant step toward our shared climate goals. Thank you for your commitment to a sustainable Tumwater.

Thank you. League of Women Voters.

Connie Campbell.

Mayor Dahlhoff, excuse me, and Tumwater City Council, thank you for your service to our community and for your support for local climate action. I live in Thurston County in the Tumwater School District, where our children attended school. I'm also a member of the Zonta Club of South Puget Sound and am a climate reality leader. I am supportive of the home energy score ordinance, as it will help homebuyers select a home that is more affordable to live in and save money. In addition to recent dramatic increases in home prices, energy costs are one of the most significant financial stressors for working people. The cost of the audit needed to produce a home energy score is very modest, likely $200 or less for our region. and there is assistance provided for low-income sellers and exceptions for forced sales. We do need climate action now across all sectors of society. In 2021, the Tumwater City Council adopted the Thurston Climate Action Plan. Passing this ordinance is one way we can help meet our climate commitments by ensuring transparent energy efficiency. My husband and I actually had a home energy audit a few years ago and implemented suggestions that greatly helped with energy costs and made our home cooler in the summer and warmer in the winter. It's amazing. Please pass this ordinance. It will help make our planet more livable for my children and yours and for all living things. Thank you.

Thank you, Connie. Kathy Lindemeyer.

Hello. Thank you. I'm here to speak on a different topic tonight. What?

Cassie.

So, thank you. My name is Kathy Linnemeier. I am the city clerk for the city of Yelm, and I have the privilege of serving as president-elect for the Washington Municipal Clerks Association. Tonight, on behalf of WMCA, I am here to honor and congratulate Tracy Corr on earning her Certified Municipal Clerk designation. The certification represents far more than simply attending classes. It requires a significant investment of time, dedication, professional development, and a genuine commitment to public service. Earning the CMC is an achievement that reflects perseverance, professionalism, excellence, and Tracy should be incredibly proud of this accomplishment congratulations thank you i would also keep talking kathy keep talking it's okay i would also like to recognize and thank the tumwater city council for supporting tracy's professional development your investment benefits not only your clerk but your entire organization and the residents that you serve the work of a municipal clerk is often done quietly and behind the scenes while much of what a clerk does may not always be visible to the public It is essential to the effective operation of local government. Clerks help ensure transparency, maintain official records, support legislative process, preserve the public's trust, and keep many moving parts of local government working seamlessly. Our profession is also constantly evolving. New laws are enacted, regulations change, technology advances, and public expectations continue to grow. Continuing education helps clerks stay current with these changes so they can provide accurate guidance, ensure legal compliance, and effectively support their elected officials and the community. Also, this isn't part of my notes, but part of the Washington Municipal Clerks Association, the organization is strong. And not only are the educational sessions that we go to help us with all of those things. The relationships and the support received within our organization is just as powerful as the educational sessions that we do attend. Tracy's achievement reflects not only her own dedication and commitment to excellence, but also the City of Tumwater's commitment to investing in a professional development of strong local government. On behalf of the Washington Municipal Clerks Association, congratulations once again on earning your certified municipal clerk designation, and we wish you continued success through your career. And I have something. Is it okay if I approach over?

Unacceptable, Kathy. Yeah, get over there. Is it balloon and streamers? No. Oh. Oh.

Well said, Kathy. Thank you so much. Can I ask a question? How many knew about this?

Only your direct boss.

Okay. Thank you so much, Kathy. Thank you, Kathy. Who wants to go after that?

Congratulations, Tracy. So next we have Rhonda Hunter.

It doesn't start until you take all the time you need. Thank you.

Good evening, council members, mayor. My name is Rhonda Hunter, and I am speaking about the Home Energy Score. I have lived on the forest edge in Thurston County for 50 years. My three kids graduated from Tumwater High School. I now fear forest fire as the climate is changing faster, hotter, drier. We have longer summers. I never did before. As an ecosystem biologist, I know the old science maxim, if you can't measure it, you can't manage it. The inconvenient truth is that measurements show the climate is heating up and destabilizing faster than our efforts to slow it down. And soon we'll hit unmanageable tipping points. This afternoon, it was 108 in my garden. In Olympia, Puget Sound energy is over and in Tumwater over half fossil fuels of coal and, quote, natural gas, which is really methane. And the price of energy is relentlessly rising. all of which is why this ordinance for a home energy score is so valuable for buyers and sellers of homes in Tumwater. Multiple states, as has already been mentioned, have these scores, and these scores often raise the sales price by thousands of dollars and lower even some mortgage rates and inform improving energy upgrades. Given that average sales hover around $500,000, the cost of that $200,000 to $300,000 energy score amounts to pennies well spent. And it answers the question, how much will I pay to operate this house? On basically a retired teacher's salary in my own home, I have done the energy audit, added a heat pump, plus solar arrays, which heat and cool my home for free. Free, I tell you, eight to nine months of the year. Plus, run my car for free. Ooh. I can't even tell you the price of gas. All off my solar array. but I'm aging out of my small home and my big family house and hoping to move into town. Thurston County and City of Olympia both have passed this energy score. I think my home will sell for more because of its efficient energy score, but I hear Lacey is stalling on passing this ordinance, so I won't bother to look there, but I'd like to live in town in Tumwater. It's very important to me that my new home is at least as energy efficient as the one I have now, keeping my costs down. Measure it to manage it. Please pass the ordinance for the home energy score.

Thank you.

Thank you, Rhonda. Betsy Norton.

Hi. Dear Tumwater City Council and Mayor DeRogha, my name is Betsy Norton. I live in Olympia. I am also co-chair of the Conservation Committee for the South Sound Bird Alliance. SSBA has a membership of over 1,200 from Thurston, Lewis, and Mason counties. As birders, we know that the two biggest threats to birds are habitat loss and climate change. It is from this perspective that I'm asking you to vote for the residential energy performance rating and disclosure ordinance, which I think is the name of your particular ordinance. I would like to echo my colleagues here in support of approving the ordinance as an important way to conserve energy resources and mitigate the impacts of climate change. The US Department of Energy encourages the use of home audits as a way to conserve power and qualify for federal tax credits. These audits are a nationally accepted mechanism for promoting energy conservation. And I do have a link if you guys need it. Providing these performance ratings help buyers make more well-informed decisions about the ongoing affordability of their home. Over time, these ratings will encourage everyone, sellers, buyers, and developers to upgrade old buildings and build more energy-efficient new buildings. Energy-efficient buildings are a key item in the panoply of community actions that are needed to effectively address accelerating climate change. I'd just like to also share my personal experience as a homeowner. In Pittsburgh, in a poorly insulated house, I paid $400 a month one winter for heat. Here in my well-insulated condo that has a heat pump, thank you, Olympia, I pay typically $75 a month for my electric bill. As a senior on a fixed income, that difference in utility costs is what's key to my affordability. So please vote to approve this ordinance. Thank you. Thank you, Betsy.

Talana Reed.

I was going to say, so I'm going to stretch out most of it.

I'm sure you have other things on that page, Talana.

Not very much, but anyway, my name is Talana Reed. I'm mayor and council, and I'm president of the NAACP of Thurston County and also serve on the TCAT, the Thurston Climate Action Team Board. The things that were not said that I'd like to amplify is that Thurston County NAACP adopted a resolution supporting this ordinance because we believe consumers deserve access to clear, transparent information before making one of the largest financial decisions of their lives. And this ordinance is fundamentally about consumer protection, in my opinion. The climate thing is a big deal, but consumer protection is an even bigger deal to me. I also want to recognize that this ordinance is a result of the collaboration between the different jurisdictions. But even though climate change is one of the greatest challenges facing communities and local governments, it's important that we take a practical step, or you all take a practical step, that supports both environmental responsibility and household affordability. Homes that use less energy are less expensive to operate, helping families manage their monthly budgets and reducing pollution. Good public policy just doesn't always solve problems. It really doesn't. But it does give people the information they need to make informed decisions, and that's exactly what this ordinance does. On behalf of the NAACP, I respectfully ask you to adopt this ordinance and, you know, something that's not on my page that I wanted to address was, I work with tenants across the state of Washington, and housing costs are horrible for renters. If the costs go up, like one of the realtors said, if they increase for renters, it's because of greed, not because of necessity. There's no reason costs need to go up for this assessment, or just like any other junk fee, it's because of greed.

Thank you, Talana. Ryan Reynolds.

My name is Ryan Reynolds. Hello, Mayor and Council. And I'm speaking as a reminder of an invitation to elected officials August 3rd, specifically having to do with housing affordability. It's our elected officials' boots on the ground bus tour. And at 9 a.m. on August 3rd at South Puget Sound Community College is where it's going to begin. That's the opportunity to take you around the community and see firsthand examples of real-life, real-time examples, homes on the market, homes that have just sold, homes under contract, to give an example of that affordability. And I think each of you have had... Ryan Hoffman, email couple have rsvp, but if you could please if you do plan on attending it online and register through the online, so we can let interstate transit know how many folks can be on that bus when we pack it.

Ryan Hoffman, Right, thank you, thank you Ryan great reminder.

Thanks.

Okay Ryan okay. It's not a strike against you for the year you graduated from Tumwater High School. That's right.

Tracy, take control. Okay, so we're going to transition to online. We have Court Olson. Can you hear me?

I can hear you. Can you hear me? I can hear you.

It looks like you're muted.

Well, I unmuted once, and I just unmuted again. Can you hear me now? Hello? Court, did you want to speak? I'm trying to speak, and I've unmuted.

I can hear him online.

I'm not getting any responses.

I can hear him. I can hear him. Wait.

I can hear him, too.

Can you, too? Councilmember Jefferson and Councilmember Reading, can you hear Court? Yes. Well, I can't hear you.

I can hear you loud and clear.

Welcome again to Technology Tuesday. Lance? Do you two want to act out what Court is saying so we can physically just see? You both have three minutes. Thank you all for your patience. And yes, I'm just joking. I see Brandon's face going, wait, do I have to act this out?

Are you still unable to hear me?

This shows that he's talking. I'm imagining that he's talking about the home energy score. Thank you, everyone, for your patience. If you need to use the restroom, it's out to the right.

Court, can you hear us? Are you guys able to hear us?

I think we can hear you now.

Can you hear me now?

Well, I could if my eardrums weren't just blown out. Yes, Court, you have.

Apologize for the technical difficulty.

Well, okay, thank you for this opportunity to speak in favor of the Home Energy Score Ordinance. I'm retired from my consulting work overseeing the design and construction of commercial buildings, including the Olympia City Hall, for example. So I have nothing to gain by abdicating for this particular ordinance. But I have a fair amount of knowledge about how these ordinances work, having developed legislation around this subject that I've submitted to the legislature recently. So I'm speaking in favor tonight and just want to share bits of information that I don't think have been adequately covered. First of all, just want to repeat, To have a home energy score is very inexpensive and it's easy for a home seller to accomplish. The $200 to $300 cost can be rolled in a closing cost, so it's not a financial burden. The HES Home Energy Score reports have become quite popular across Oregon since the state created a standard reporting tool over 10 years ago. And though there was originally quite a bit of objection from realtors in Portland where it was first passed into law, There are many reports, documented reports from realtors in the area now saying that they really appreciate having the Home Energy Score tool because many of their clients are interested in the information that it conveys and it helps them in the process of selling homes. So I think the fears being raised by the realtors that you've heard from tonight are not well-founded. Of course, it has a lot of benefits to show prospective buyers how to compare from one home to another what their potential operating costs will be, as others have said tonight, but it bears repeating. In short, it's just a real bargain to have a home energy score in the game of selling and buying a home because it simplifies and answers a whole lot of questions that people have in the process. Finally, it's a very little cost to a city to adopt such an ordinance. All the work in evaluating a home is done by a hired consultant that's paid the two to $300 fee. The realtors only have to make sure that gets included in documentation in the home sale. So it's not a big administrative burden to anybody. And the city doesn't have to pay any cost in the whole process. So I urge you to pass this ordinance tonight. Thanks very much for listening. And I really congratulate you and other people in Thurston County for taking this issue seriously. Have a good evening.

Thank you, Court. Thank you for your patience as well.

My pleasure.

Is there anybody else in the audience that didn't get an opportunity to speak that would like to? I think that concludes public comment. Thank you, Tracy.

Moving on to item number six, consent calendar. Are there any items that council would like to have removed from the consent calendar? If not, I would entertain a motion, but let me know you want to make a motion so I can unmute your mic. I move to approve. I have a motion from Mayor Pro Tem Vom Holtz and Council Member Swarthout to approve the consent calendar as presented. Any discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Moving on to council considerations. 7A, ordinance number 02026-003-2025, the 2026 budget amendment number one. Sir Finance, thank you for joining us tonight. What do you need from council tonight?

Thank you, Your Honor and Council. We have just a very short presentation. This is the same presentation you heard two weeks ago at your meeting about the budget amendment. And at that one, we had a little bit longer presentation. For the sake of time, I cut this down a little bit. And tonight we'll be asking you to adopt the ordinance. Okay, so some of the highlights, as you recall, we had a lot of budget savings in 2025, so we didn't need a lot of amendments there, just a few corrections, a few things like LTAC funding increasing and more participation in the Tumwater Youth Program. Overall, this amendment adds about $15,000 in revenue and $62,000 in expenditures across all funds, and for the general fund, only about 10,000 in revenue. Excuse me. It decreases revenue by 10,000 and increases expenditures by 85,000 For 2026 a similar thing on this slide some small corrections increase in LTAC and TYP And then some of the bigger highlights of this year are things we've we've done already with council approval like the purchase of the lodge building We also had some increased costs in the fire department, and we're changing funding for the fire engine coming soon. And then we're also, the council has asked to do more with code enforcement and abatement. We have some previously approved commitments to the Gary Oak tree, and then approving the opioid settlement funds to transfer to the county. So overall for 2026, this increases revenues across all funds by 1.3 million and expenses by about 5 million. Most of that is the lodge building and the opioid funds. And then in the general fund specifically, increases revenues by 36,000 and expenses by just under a million. And nearly all of that is for code enforcement and the opioid funds as well. So the recommended action is to adopt ordinance number 2026-003, budget amendment number one, amending the 2526 annual or biennial budget.

And thank you for the penguin. Council, any comments, questions? This is the, you've seen this before. If not, I'd entertain a motion. Your mics are hot.

So moved.

Very good.

Got a motion from Council Member Sullivan and a second from Peter Agave. Thank you so much. Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, same sign. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you so much. Thank you, Sir Finance. I got so excited, I forgot to give you all a summary of the consent calendar. I think falling into my chair earlier threw me off. The consent calendar includes approval of the July 7 council meeting minutes and the July 14th work session minutes, along with payment of the city's regular vouchers. These routine actions ensure transparency, accurate public records, and timely payment for city services. The consent calendar also included an ordinance clarifying building demolition requirements, particularly the removal of foundations. This provides clear and consistent expectations while helping prevent unsafe or unusable properties. also includes a five-year regional agreement with lacy olympia and thurston county to continue shared environmental education and stormwater outreach this partnership protects local waterway waterways while delivering required public education efficiently also an agreement allowing tumwater and the lot clean water alliance to share staff equipment and materials for maintenance repairs and emergency response this helps both agencies respond more quickly and make better use of public resources Also included an amendment with the Port of Olympia outlining shared costs for the next phase of the Bush Prairie Habitat Conservation Plan. This work supports responsible development while protecting threatened and endangered species. These items were reviewed and recommended by the appropriate council committees. Thank you for letting me to go backwards to now go forwards. We are now on to item 7B, ordinance number 02026-004, residential energy performance rating and disclosure. Alyssa. Good evening.

Hi, everyone. I'm Alyssa Joneswood. I'm the sustainability manager, and I have the pleasure to bring to you ordinance number 02026004, residential energy performance rating and disclosure, which I and others have also colloquially called the home energy score ordinance.

Next. Oh, I have the thing. I don't have to say next slide.

I'm going to read the purpose verbatim. The require that homebuyers be provided with information about residential building energy performance prior to the time of property purchase to enable more informed decisions about the full cost of operating dwelling units and to encourage investment and improvements that lower utility bills, reduce carbon emissions, and increase the comfort, safety, and health of building occupants. In the past work sessions, we've spoken about the general requirements and applicability, as well as quite a bit about the Home Energy Score tool and report itself. We haven't quite talked about compliance and enforcement, so I wanted to include a slide about this. The draft ordinance language identifies the Water Resources and Sustainability Director as the director with authority for implementation and enforcement. It refers to existing code enforcement code for civil enforcement, which contains procedures for enforcement, including voluntary correction. In terms of finding instances of noncompliance, we can either follow suit with how we do code enforcement currently as a complaint-based process, or we may have the opportunity to get some help from a national service provider that gets contracted to help with other program parts such as quality assurance, quality control, and mentoring. Thurston County has completed a request for qualifications. for this national service provider, and the contract will go before the Board of County Commissioners in early August. The selected and proposed national service provider does compliance checks for other jurisdictions and can review various websites, not just MLS, to find instances of noncompliance for sale by owner as well as sales via realtor or broker. This RFQ was done in such a way that any jurisdiction that passes the ordinance can opt in to receive and cost share for that assistance once and if that contract is approved by the Board of County Commissioners.

Melissa, before you go to the slide, Mayor Pro Tem Von Holtz has a question. Yes.

Do we have an estimate of what the cost would be? I do. Okay.

Yep, we have actually the cost it will be. Okay. And in terms of just for the enforcement part, I have a total project cost for City of Tumwater, including our subsidy, and also a separate cost for the per partner cost for that national service provider. So in 2027, subsidy aside, the per partner cost for having that national service provider is $18,083. In 2028, it's $15,000 per partner. The subsidy had been budgeted this year and last year at $4,000 a year. That's also been requested for 27-28 budget. So that would bring the total project costs for Tumwater to have this ordinance and regionally coordinate it with the national service provider for $22,083 for 27 and $19,000 for 2028.

And we have that. I mean, we have that.

That is already budgeted. It is included in the budget request.

The budget enhancement?

No. It is consistent with the costs that we have had for the TCMC implementation and the intergovernmental line in the past biennium.

Yeah. So our budget process is that departments were directed to put their base budget in the budget and anything new required an enhancement request. And so If you've considered, I don't recall seeing it as part of the enhancement request, so are you saying it's part of the base budget?

Yes.

Okay, and that's something we should probably discuss a little bit, just because if it's a new program, even though it was in the base budget for this year, it wasn't, yeah.

And the reason I ask is because I've been a part, like, the base cost, but Is that considering staff time? Is that considering if we're going to do something close to code enforcement? I know that we've seen increased costs with all the work that we're doing with code enforcement. Is that taking all that into effect?

Those numbers do not include staff costs, but per the interlocal agreement that we have with the four jurisdictions of the TCMC, We provide 0.25% FTE, which is my time, towards actions and processes of the Thirst and Climate Mitigation Collaborative in which this is a regional initiative of. So this would be part of that 0.25% FTE.

And so the enforcement would be this national service and you? Yes. Well, technically Dan.

Okay.

But yes. Thank you, Mayor Pro Temo. And before, Alyssa, you go on, I see Council Member Whedon has his hand up. Thank you, Council Member Sullivan, for reminding me.

Thank you. So to clarify, it says Thurston County will hold the contract with the U.S. Department of Energy. So that hasn't even been decided. That's not coming up until next month. Is that correct?

I believe it's August 4th. They've approved the RFQ to be sent out through the board process, and they've gone through the competitive process to select. And then the board... I believe it's August 4th, will vote on a determination of if they adopt that contract or not. And that contract, through our interlocal agreement for Thirst and Climate Mitigation Collaborative, because this is a regional initiative, we have the opportunity to opt in and cost share for those services. We also have the option to not opt in.

What was that, Council Member Whedon? We don't know what the total cost of that is yet.

That's the cost that I reported. We do. I have the proposal right here.

Okay, and it's been accepted? Because it says that we're, I mean, if you're not doing your meeting until August 4th, or if Thurston County isn't, I guess I'm now confused.

The RFQ was put out and bid with the opportunity for all four jurisdictions involved. So they bid the cost as if all four would adopt. It could be a lower cost if not all four adopt. But otherwise, the costs that they provided are split evenly between the four jurisdictions.

And by evenly, does that go off of the size? Or is it just you're taking the number, dividing it by four?

Yes. Number divided by four. That's how we split costs for the Thurston Climate Mitigation Collaborative.

OK. So it's not based off population or size. OK. No. Thanks.

Thank you, Council Member Whelan. Thank you, Alyssa.

At the last work session, there was some discussion about the proposed subsidy to offer, including commentary on how many households who make more than 80% area median income may still struggle to pay the Home Energy Score audit cost. To reflect that, I've increased the area median income cap in the draft language before you all tonight to 150% area median income, which is generally where state and local subsidy programs get capped in Washington State. This pathway also provides a pathway for meeting subsidy requirements by showing proof of other assistance programs, such as SNAP, WIC, and the City Lifeline program. On the next slide, I have an alternative subsidy option, which provides you tiers for subsidization, which Council has the option to tonight to adopt as an amended ordinance, should that be your preference. Here is that tiered subsidy option. So as an alternative, this is to potentially adopt the draft ordinance with small amendment that provides for a tiered subsidy program that caps at 120% area median income, which is the same upper threshold utilized for the energized Thurston program. I recommend providing full cost coverage for households who have less than 80% area median income. That means that the city would pay the full bill for the cost of the assessment, $150 to $300, and that these income qualified for these income qualified households so that they would have no out-of-pocket costs. It would also subsidize income qualified folks between 80% and 120% at 80% paid by the city directly and 20% paid by the seller themselves. The city and a region would competitively solicit and procure one or more third party agencies to conduct these subsidized home energy score audits in order to secure competitive rates so that we can have reliable rates that we can then budget from for that $4,000 of potential budget line item for the subsidy.

Alyssa, Mayor Pro Tem Von Holtz has a question. And that is also budgeted. The city has the money right now to start. I guess that's my fear is that I don't want to write checks that we don't have the money in the account to cash.

We have the funding allocated for this year and last year, and it is a request within the base budget for the general fund sustainability for the mayor's proposed budget. Of course, I can't speak to what is actually in that, and I also can't speak to what's in the mayor's proposed budget. It has been submitted by me as a request.

So we don't know?

No, we do not. That is up to you all later.

Okay. And you said last year and this year, but this wouldn't take place until 2027. Correct. So we thought the work would happen. We don't have a budget for 2027 yet. It's been requested, but I cannot guarantee it. So a request and what we have are two different things. Yes.

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. Council Member Whedon, I see your hand up. Thank you again to Council Member Sullivan for reminding me.

Yeah, I guess I should have been asking better and more questions during general government too. It now says that the city pays $300 directly to contracted third party, no out-of-pocket costs to seller. Quote me if I'm wrong or tell me if I'm wrong here, but this is just kind of an estimate that we believe that the price is only going to be up to $300 at most. Yes. What if it's more?

We will work with the budget that we have to provide this. And there is a bit in the ordinance, should it be adopted, that we may exempt sellers if the budget is not available. My preference is that we do subsidize if we have the funding available. That way, the maximum number of homes have this information available to prospective buyers rather than having gaps in that information.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member. Mayor Pro Tembon-Holtz.

All right, I have a follow-up.

We don't apologize.

I'm not sorry. I am not sorry. Okay, so if it's more than that, we will, or whatever, there's the opportunity to exempt from it. So remind me again why it can't be voluntary to start.

The outcomes will not be... Less people will take part in it if it is voluntary, and we will get less results. There also won't be an even amount of information available for buyers at the point of searching for real estate to purchase. It would be spotty. Voluntary is an option that you all have before you. I recommend the mandatories to get greater results.

Well, I wonder, how do we know that the results won't be as good? How do we know that? I mean, we can guess. We can guess that people won't want to pay the extra to get the home energy score, but I've heard a lot of in favor of this would be great to have. So... I'm just, how do we know?

There's peer-reviewed literature about home energy score and similar policies throughout the country. And they show, as one of the public speakers said, that homes are 10 times more likely to make improvements to their homes if they have this when they are searching and purchasing their home. There is a data point that shows that people are more likely to do this when they have the information.

Okay, and I have a follow-up when you say have the information. So I've heard a couple comments in the emails that we've received and people that I've spoken to and we've heard tonight where there's a question as to how we did public engagement on this. Can you tell me that we followed the recommendations from the HILLA Act? when we did outreach for this.

I am unfamiliar with the Hill Act, so I can't.

The Hill Act is the Healthy Environment Act.

HEAL. Oh. HEAL. To the best of my knowledge, we're not in one of the overburdened or vulnerable communities that is subject to the HEAL Act. But I could be wrong, and I would love to be informed if I am wrong on that. I know we're not qualified to apply for any funding under the HEAL Act because of our lack of status.

Well, the HEAL Act, though, what it does is it makes sure that everyone who would be affected by a decision made by a municipality or a project is given the opportunity to learn about it. So that would mean that we would look at the demographics for Tumwater. We would make sure that we conducted information in a way that people who English as their second language, we just would do our due diligence to make sure that communities who are historically left out of these kind of conversations are not. The reason I asked, one of the emails that we received talked about someone trying to make a decision about their mother, right? And might needing to sell their home one day. I want to make sure that we've cast a wide net to make sure that we are making a decision that is not just right for our climate, but is right for our community members. And that we meet in the middle. So... I would appreciate if we looked into whether the Hill Act was followed.

Yes, I will look into that. Can you speak to its requirements on, is it all ordinances that a city enacts or just ones that are related to environment and climate?

Are you doing point of order?

Council Member Whedon, one second, please. Eileen Swetha has voiced point of order.

I'm reading from the Washington HEAL Act, the Healthy Environment for All Act. Let's see. It requires seven state agencies to address health disparities in overburdened communities, conduct environmental justice assessments on major actions, and actively direct funding to heavily polluted areas. And so it's directed to agencies. It's not directed to us.

I agree. wait so wait yeah so i just i'm pointing out that i'm not sure how that applies to this as far as the um as far as the home energy score here's what i'm going to recommend we're doing a discussion right now how about councilman reading can you lower your hand right now how about we listen to alyssa's presentation and then we actually have a discussion and get through the slides thank you Does that work? Nodding. Angela, I mean, Council Member Jefferson, Council Member Whedon, can we get through Alyssa's slides and then we have this robust discussion. Thank you so much, Alyssa. Please continue. Thank you for your patience.

Of course. Thank you. Work is well underway regionally to establish the supporting program for more widespread use of home energy score tool. Thurston County, as I mentioned, has released an RFQQ for a national service provider that would serve the county and potentially the city should we choose to adopt the ordinance, should you all choose to adopt the ordinance, truly. That national service provider would also help meet quality assurance requirements of the U.S. Department of Energy, help with education of stakeholders, including the realtors and building community, set up IT systems for the model to be run, create a regionally relevant report that includes information on things like PSE and energized Thurston incentives, and potentially create a help desk for people to call and could even run daily compliance monitoring and reporting. This contract is expected to go before the Board of County Commissioners in early August for their consideration. Work is also underway for stakeholder engagement on how the supporting program for home energy score could be built out. including important stakeholders like the Realtors Association. Some jurisdictions are also well on their way of creating things like subsidy request forms and processes and workflows. My role in the collaborative is to lead the workforce development part with the national service provider that the county contracts to ensure that we have an adequate number of home energy score assessors ready to go to work on the effective date. We're also working on a communications plan, program implementation and monitoring plan, and then the launch for at least those jurisdictions that adopt the ordinance by spring 2027. This is the beauty of doing all of this work regionally, that many minds can work towards a common goal together, distribute the work, and keep the wheels turning towards progress. So with that, I have two options of a recommended action for you, and I humbly thank you for your time and consideration that you've provided for this specific topic and for climate action and Tumwater generally. Thank you.

Thank you, Alyssa. What is the difference between the first and second one?

the two subsidy options. The first one is the up to full cost subsidy up to 150, and the substitute, the S1, is for the tiered subsidy option. And I believe that those were printed and placed on your dais, or at least that was...

The one...

Yes, that would be replacing the language in those sections. Striking the subsidy...

So I believe what you received is a red line version of the changes between the original and S1. So those red lines that you have there, they've been incorporated into what's 2026-004-S1. S1.

Like substitute one? Yes.

I feel like my brain's coming back. Okay. Anything else, Alyssa, before we open it up for a discussion with council?

Happy to answer whatever questions you have to the best of my ability.

Much appreciated. We're going to go back to council member Whedon because he had his hand up, and then we're going to go to council member Swarthout.

Thank you. So I'm reading through this again, and it was saying throughout the development of the climate element and comprehensive plan in general, it looks like only one comment was made from all of the stakeholders. Is that correct?

On this action during the climate element process?

Yeah, it says in the register of comments compiled during the climate element drafting of the adoption process, only one comment was provided.

All comments that were provided to staff were included in that comment log. I can't speak to it from memory, but I know that I included every comment, including Facebook comments on that log.

OK. I guess I'm feeling like there's still a bunch of unanswered questions currently. And with there's still more to come in August, it looks like there's still a lot more that is being done. And I want to be very clear that I really appreciate the work that is being done. The climate change is real. Science says it's real. We need to continue to work on it. I just I'm I'm Starting to feel like this might not be fully ready for a full council vote. I'm interested to hear what everybody else has to say, but with there being more to come in August and October and then moving on, I just feel like there might be time for us to continue the process and not fully adopt everything currently.

Thank you, Council Member Readon. We're going to go to Council Member Swarthout, who serves on... What?

Do you want me to speak?

That's right. Council Member Swarthout.

Thank you. Are we reading our remarks or why we're in?

This is discussion.

Okay. All right. I have had the honor of being able to serve on the, as the chair at one point of the Climate Collaborative. And so I have, we've been through this for so many years. And so, and I realize that that's probably not a good, the questions that you're bringing up now can still be answered. But I think that, you know, back in 2020 is when we first started talking about The home energy score, that's when I first learned about the word C-PACER. And that group was a wide group of people, realtors, builders, and all that were in on the first process. And so, and then we, as a city, we have stepped forward. We have adopted, we set clear goals for our climate goals, the 45% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and 85% by 2050. This, I believe, is going to be helping us towards those goals. In 2023, we also adopted the interlocal agreement supporting the implementation of the 2024 TCMC regional initiatives, which this is included in, which include both the home energy scores and the residential energy efficiency electrification campaign. And so this ordinance is a follow-through on the commitment that we've already made. And then we've also, too, with the years-long work that went into the comp plan and the climate element, that we also went into that. And this particular, the home energy score, is also one of the actions that we can take. And we adopted that. We had public participation, and we adopted the comprehensive plan and with these climate elements in it. And so I think that that's why this is the home energy score is part of that and helps as part of that action plan that we need to be looking at as well. So again, I think that I have great faith in our staff and we're continuing to answer questions and I appreciate that. And I guess that's what shows about the process too, is that we're listening and we're answering questions. And so the process, it doesn't get implemented until 2027, but it gives us the opportunity to set the rulemaking and have the question and everything in process. The work that's already been done now is amazing. The product that they've already, our team has already produced for us and the different, areas that they've taken responsibility for um are are before us now so i i just have i have great faith in this and so um i see it as uh information that we deserve to have um one of the things that we have that i found out too in my research that um when it comes to home inspections just plain old home inspections uh that's not um That's not a mandatory thing, but yet I think from my personal experience in selling my home and purchasing homes, the home inspection is the one that has had the most impact on myself. I don't like surprises, so I had my home inspected beforehand and made the corrections that were brought out. And then when it came to actually doing the The offer and all that, the buyer had their own home inspection done and came up with all these other things that hadn't been part of the inspection that I had done by a person that I trusted to do that. And a lot of the things that they were pointing out were things that weren't in any code at the time that my house was being built. I think this is an alleviation of anyone that has these issues with their houses, that you have the opportunity to know before you walk into your house how much your utilities are going to be. And if you want to make corrections, then you can take out a loan. There's the Energy Spark loan, and you can make those improvements on your own. Sorry to be so long-winded, but that's where I am.

We don't apologize. The whole point of this meeting is to share your thoughts. Thank you. I see this as a very...

important tool to the house is the biggest investment we make and when i first moved here in 89 my first heating bill was 300 1989 and this little house in tumwater i can't even imagine what it would be now and so um i i think having this information is really helpful to for people i was shocked and how much it was so i think we're trying to address this we want to make this fair and equitable and have people have the information they deserve when they buy their houses.

Thank you, Council Member Johnson. Council Member Jefferson, you had your hand up, then you took it down.

Yes. Yes, I did. And we're always, well, I'm always, we're always talking about the health of our Deschutes River, right? the estuary. We have a lot of salmon restoration projects. And we know how vital our environment in that river is to the Tumwater. That's our beginnings, is that river. So I remember when we had our youth, they did a sit-in right there in front of us and disrupted our chamber meeting because they wanted us to do something, to take it seriously. So it will reduce greenhouse gases, right? Because most of our greenhouse gases we know comes from heating, air conditioning, water heaters, electricity use. So I'm inclined to vote yes when it comes to transparency as a homeowner myself. My question is this. The timeline. So is there consensus on the timeline, Alyssa? Has everyone agreed that two months is enough for the communication to the residents?

The Climate Collaborative has set up this timeline and did a delineation or a division of labor for tasks and assigned staff to each of these. We can start any of these sooner. The one that I am assigned to is the Workforce Development, which I cannot start until the National Service Provider contract is approved by the Board of County Commissioners, because those are the professionals that can provide the mentoring that's required for Home Energy Score assessors. But any of this is negotiable. But this has been agreed upon at the staff level as our work plan. And it is easiest for staff. Granted, not everything has to be easy. But easiest for staff if when we're participating in it, we know the level of commitment of our council so that we can then either proceed with the concept of it being a mandatory or voluntary for the way that we put our time and work in.

So I'm inclined to voluntary course of action, which was number one, full subsidies, because we have a lot of fixed income residents in our community, you know, who probably can't, you know, afford the fee. So that's what I'm looking at. But it just looks like a tight timeline. And I just want to make sure that everyone is in agreement with the timeline.

We are, and I'm confident that we can accomplish all that we have set forth before us before adoption or before implementation.

That's great feedback, Council Member Jefferson. Thank you, Alyssa, for that. Council Member Agave.

Thank you, Mayor. So one of the statements that was made on the floor was, I want to convince you that this is a good thing. And the assertion was, in the state of Oregon, this is a thing. Well, it is a thing in the state of Oregon, but it's not mandatory. It is voluntary. There are only four cities in the state of Oregon that make this mandatory. That's Portland in Multnomah County, and that's Milwaukee, a suburb of Portland, and Hillsborough is in Washington County, and then Bend on the other side of Mount Hood. So you took four cities out of the state of Oregon as being where it's a thing in Oregon, where it is, but it's not mandatory. And the Beverly report, if you read that report, it started out as being voluntary, and then it went to mandatory. That is because I come from the enforcement world. I work for the state of Washington. I've done it for 20 years now. If you're going to do something, if I'm going to enjoin you or comply you to do something, the enforcement mechanism have to have some tip behind that. In this case, if I say to you, you're going to have this own manager's score, right? What happened to homes that were built 20, 30 years ago? Do we grandfather those into the equation? That's one question. Then question number two is, if you're selling your house In this modern day, if you're selling your house, you will say, I have this type of insulation in the attic. I have a heat pump. I have this. I have that. So all of these things have been listed as to sell your house. So this is the same thing the Energy Home Score is going to do, except you want that to be listed upfront so that we can have another avenue of having somebody make a sale. So in the Berkeley Score, If you have a score of seven, let's say a score of 10, that puts you 0.5% up in the bracket of how much to sell your house. But if it's under seven, you lose 0.5% value. So either way, you're... And another thing is, the argument is, well, it's going to help climate change. It does not... necessarily do that because it depends upon the person who live at that house, how they utilize the appliances that help the environment. It is not your home score that helps the environment. If I drive a car that pumps a suit into the air all day long, if I sell it to you, unless I fix the exhaust or the carburetor, that vehicle is still causing damage to the ozone layer. So, Alyssa, do you know why the state of Oregon has not made this mandatory statewide?

I do not know why the state of Oregon has not made that mandatory statewide. I do know that the state legislature bill for Washington was to do the same thing that Oregon has done, which is to create a standard that jurisdictions can opt in and use that standard so that it's consistent across the state and To make it so that home energy score would be the home the audit that would be Adoptable by a jurisdiction so it's consistent and they can do that mandatory or voluntary Mandatory will have greater results based on the research that I have found Would you accept that we make us mandatory at least giving that Lacey hasn't said anything

If we can get all the cities around us to say yes, then we can talk about making it a compliance issue. But for now, can we do a voluntary program?

That is within your power. Great comment. City Administrator Simmons, can you address that with Council Member Agave?

Yeah, the whole point of council review is to decide, is for the council to decide what we are comfortable with here in Tumwater. And so we are part of the regional collaborative and the decisions that happen regionally definitely influence and help guide the things we do. But at the end of the day, Our decisions in Tumwater are up to the council decide how we want to move forward. I do hear, you know, I hear Mayor Pro Tem Von Holtz talk about process. I heard Councilmember Whedon talk about timing. I heard. Concerns about budget. I hear council member Gabi talking about voluntary versus mandatory. I also hear. General support for the concept and what the intent of what this ordinance would accomplish. And so. There's nothing that requires council to make a decision right here right now at this point. And so sometimes. If there's this many questions, it may be worth taking a pause. There could also be, you know, I was looking at the staff report and sometimes we box ourself into two options, pass or do not pass. The reality is U.S. Council can make a wide range of recommendations. There's always an opportunity to make another recommendation. So if you wanted to do a temporary focus on voluntary with the idea that conditionally we move to a mandated ordinance at some point, that could be discussed. If you wanted to table this and bring it back for a future work session, that could be discussed. If you decide this is what council wants to do and you want to approve it, that can be discussed. So it really, every, I just, I don't want you to feel rushed by the moment into a decision you're not ready to make. So I just, I think the dialogue is good and we encourage it to continue.

Great comments, Council Member Gubbe, and thank you, Administrator Simmons. Council Member Sullivan, do you, I see Council Member Jefferson and Whedon's hand up, but you have not had an opportunity to weigh in, Council Member Sullivan.

I'm listening. I would love to hear from follow-ups from both of those folks first.

I was not paying attention of who had their hand up first. Okay, Council Member Whedon, you just can't keep your hand up the whole entire time. So I'm going to go to Council Member Jefferson and then Council Member Whedon.

When I think voluntary compliance with Tumwater, I'm thinking about that brewery property where the owner has been, you know, told to voluntary comply and that voluntary compliance never comes through. So, I'm thinking for this case, if it's voluntary, I'm not going to do it. But if it's mandatory, I have some incentive to do it. And when it comes to appliance usage, let's say I have a 30 or 40 year old house, old appliances, not energy efficient. And then I get the house inspected and my energy score comes back. What I'm going to do is, is i might get an energy you know efficient refrigerator maybe stove maybe a dishwasher so and those are the old appliances that are causing these greenhouse gases so um you know when i heard it's not the appliances uh yes it is because we have energy efficient appliances out there so that's all i had to say thank you thank you councilmember jefferson and councilmember whedon

I am still leaning towards. So if we did go ahead and put a pause on this, we can still continue the work. Everything continues to move forward. Is that correct? When I heard Paul said, hey, we can kind of table this and continue to move through the process so that we get all these questions answered. I believe it's the intent of this council from what I'm hearing from everybody here is that we all love the intent of this and that we all would like to support the intent. i'm not sure of the complete impact yet so i guess that's where i stand is that i would like to see this work continue until we get a full picture of everything that it is going to go ahead and do for our community and thank you councilmember administrator simmons

there are definitely lots of things that we could continue to do uh alyssa will still continue to be part of the thurston county climate uh work group and they will still be able to advance forward the development of getting um more certified inspectors on board so that there are enough of them We talked about we could still participate in the county's contract if we have a mandated, I assume we could still participate whether it's voluntary or mandatory.

With the national service provider?

Yes. So that could still be an option if we have that direction to move forward and it's budgeted. So there are many steps that we could continue to look at and work through as this program continues to develop and we learn more.

Thank you, Administrator Simmons. We're going to do Councilmember Sullivan, Councilmember Jefferson, then Mayor Pro Tem Von Holtz.

Thank you. I just want to say thanks to everybody who provided thoughtful commentary. And I know that this is a nuanced and complicated issue. And I know a lot a lot of work, not just staff, but regionally has gone into this. I have taken some notes, and I'm going to talk through a few of them. And I do hear that there are lots of questions. And I do hear that there is a spirit and an intent to move regionally and protect our environment. I'm a parent, and I think about the reality that this body, before I joined it, you know, already made proclamations and declarations about climate I think about climate justice and equity. My background is in public health. And I also think about what my seatmate Eileen council member Swarthout shared about the climate action plan, which I also wasn't here when this body adopted, but that this has been years in the making. And I, I want to say that I know that nothing is perfect, but I know that we can continue to work through some implementation pieces. And I do think that we can get to a point where this does move forward. I know that's not what everyone wants. And I know that there are trade-offs, right? As a parent, I have to look my six-year-old in the eye when he asks questions about the climate. Stop there.

Thank you, Council Member Sullivan. Council Member Jefferson.

Yes, can we have it come back to the council in 60 days? Because I just don't want to put it on the shelf and forget about it for six months to a year.

Okay, hold that. Council Member Jefferson, Mayor Pro Tem Von Holtz has an idea.

Has our Equity Commission looked at this? I'm just wondering if we have an opportunity to have our Equity Commission look at this, because a lot of the concerns I'm hearing and I'm feeling myself is that I'm not worried about if I want to sell my house. I can afford the home energy score, even if it's $350. I have that privilege. My concern is for me, 15 years ago, when I was literally making a decision on how I was going to pay my house payment and get out of a bad decision. I was house poor. The Kellys 15 years ago me is who I worry about. And so I really wonder if this isn't an opportunity to involve our equity commission and look at these concerns and find, I think we're all in agreement that we are in a climate crisis. The home energy score isn't bad. I just want to make sure that it's equitable and is this an opportunity that we could give our equity commission something to sink their teeth into and do some good work for the community and make sure that we make a decision that works for everyone.

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tempon-Holtz. Council Member Jefferson, is that something you'd be amenable to within your time frame that you've requested that it has a look through the Equity Commission? I see Brandon, Council Member Whedon has his hand up. Yes. Okay, thank you. Council Member Sullivan would like to say something else.

just to follow up i appreciated the comments that um reminded us that this could be exempted for a time should we arrive at it if it were passed where we didn't have budget for subsidy because i too share the question and the concern that subsidy be available if this does go forward great comment council member seven could we have sir finance come up and just give a current state of our budget right now just to put it in perspective

His real name is Troy, but we call him Sir Finance.

Thank you. And I did forget to introduce myself when I did the ordinance. So I'm Troy Niemeyer. I'm the finance director here at the City of Tumwater. So the current state of our budget, as you all know, the 25-26 budget was balanced with using $5.5 million of reserves. So going into the next biennium, that issue is still there. There are also, in the general fund, $25 million worth of new requests from directors and staff. And so we've got way more needs than we do money to pay for them. So this will be a tricky balance for the council to strike.

Thank you, Director. Okay, so we've had a conversation and you've had a couple options. We know that there's support. This is your time to make a motion. I heard some support of sending this to the Equity Commission and coming back in a certain timeframe. I would entertain a motion, any motion.

I move we send this to the Equity Commission for review and they provide their perspective on how they would recommend Town Water move forward.

Second.

Can staff, well, let me do the, I have a motion from Council Member Sullivan, a second from Council Member Whedon. Any discussion? Council Member Swarthout.

We have like a timeline on this. Are we kicking the can down the road?

Or we had a great question. That's what I was gonna say. I was gonna wait till after the vote. I was gonna say we had a request from Councilmember Jefferson for 60 days. Is there a realistic timeframe to scheduling looking at city is getting close to nine o'clock? Assistant City Administrator Kelly Adams thumbs up the next meeting, you just Second Monday in August, we have our two week annual break. So you said 60 days, that's two months. Is that realistic? Got a thumbs up from Kelly Adams. 60 days. Administrator Simmons.

I think the one thing that we have to look at is there's the capacity of the Equity Commission, but then there's also getting it back on the council schedule. And as you know, we have a lot of upcoming biannual budget meetings and hearings and agenda items that will consume a lot of the fall meetings.

And so- Should we say by- 90 days. 90 days? 90 days. 90 days? Council Member Jefferson, is that- 90 days. Council Member Swarthout, is that suitable?

I will amend my motion to have it go to Equity Commission within 60 days and come back to this board within 90.

I had a friendly amendment to her own motion. Thank you, Council Member Sullivan. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion, which is to send this to the Equity Commission within 60 days, 90 days it comes back to Council, whether that's on the dais or a work session, we will figure that out and check in with everyone, but 90 days. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. I don't know why everyone's leaving. We still have, we still have things to do on the agenda. Thank you all for coming. I'll give a minute for everyone to exit with no judgment. Thank you for staying to Lana. Okay, this was your chance to leave.

Now you're staying until the end of the meeting.

We are on to 7C Resolution R2026-001, Community Economic Revitalization Board Grant Application Authorization. Kelly, I think this could have been longer, the title.

Don't worry, it's going to be exciting. You know, let's... So tonight I'm bringing you an opportunity to talk about a lighter topic.

which is what about the brewery?

That's light and happy. So I'm bringing you, in all seriousness, I'm bringing you a grant opportunity that was brought to us by the Economic Development Council, so specifically Aslan Meads. So shout out to Aslan. So we have an opportunity to apply for a grant for a planning item that we need. So when we look at all of the different complexity and uncertainty around the brewery sites, it's really a barrier for redevelopment and for investment. And so in looking at this table of our current toolkit of items that we have and that we're actively using and pursuing, it's really focused around environmental uncertainty, the uncertainty around what is the contamination level, how much, and what is the remediation. But there is a huge gap that exists between the environmental issues and everything else that we need to fulfill the vision of the brewery district plan. So we propose to develop a redevelopment roadmap. And this is the brainchild of a lot of different stakeholders in our community and in the development community. So how can we answer questions about infrastructure uncertainty, funding uncertainty? What are all the different permitting pathways? How do we eat this elephant one bite at a time? And so we propose to create this redevelopment roadmap. And so this is the only item that applies to this grant. So this is coming from the Community Economic Revitalization Board. So CURB has agreed to look at our application. Getting a resolution from council that authorizes us to apply is one critical step in the application. This is familiar to you as we just did this with our Opportunity Zone application. And so CURB's mission is to help communities create and retain private sector jobs. End of story, bottom line up front. This is to create local private sector jobs. And so our grant request is for $100,000. The requirements are that we provide 20% matching funds. We have these funds. They are already part of our budget. And so it's part of our brownfield redevelopment funding that we have. And so part of the other requirements is that we complete an extensive site readiness checklist. It's two pages long, and it really aligns to everything that a site selector or a developer would want to know. And then all of our environmental readiness, that also feeds into that feasibility assessment. They have asked us to limit the scope of our application to the small area of the brewery warehouse and the parcels around in the valley. And so that will help us to make a successful deliverable in the grant request amount. And then we can use that template for other geographic areas in Tumwater. And then there's five years of post-award tracking. They like to keep up with our progress. And we've actually done this before. So in 2014, we had a curb grant that helped with the craft district. And so the Tumwater craft efforts. And so building on that success, we would like to apply for this funding. So our recommendation is that we adopt Resolution R2026-00011

authorizing the mayor to apply for a community economic revitalization board grant thank you city is assistant city administrator adams it's getting close to nine uh i see council whedon's hand up has that been up the whole entire time or is it for this topic it was for this topic i just went in and did it is the maximum that we can buy for a hundred thousand dollars

I'm sorry, that question, the audio broke up.

You're getting a little robotic. Is it the maximum we can apply for is $100,000? Yes, Council Member Whedon.

Okay. Well, then I put in a motion to adopt Resolution 026-011 and 375 for Community Economic Revitalization Grant. Second.

Second.

We have a robotic motion from Council Member Whedon and a second from Council Member Sullivan. Any further discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Now for what you've all been waiting for. 7D, Memorandum of Understanding with Teamsters Local Union Number 252. Michelle.

Good evening, Council and Mayor. I'm asking you this evening to authorize the Mayor to execute this memorandum of understanding between the City of Tumwater and the Teamsters Local 252 Union. A little bit of background, the proposed MOU reflects collaboration between the City and the Teamsters 252 regarding the addition of new classifications, updates to the annual leave accruals, adding additional paid holiday, very similar as to what we did with the nonrepresented that you approved previously, and wage placement for newly established positions within the bargaining unit. So in 2021, the Public Works Department was reorganized into water resources and sustainability and transportation and engineering. At that time, they took all of the specialized positions such as water resources specialists, cross-connection control, and reclassified all of those positions as maintenance technicians. So over the course of time, we need to bring those positions back because the essential functions that these positions are doing don't align with the maintenance technician. So I'm happy to answer any questions regarding this MOU, but that's the basic of what this covers in collaboration between the city and the Teamsters 252.

Thank you, Michelle. Any questions from council? If not, I would entertain a motion.

I move we authorize the mayor to execute the MOU between City of Tamwater and Teamsters Local 252.

I'll second. A motion from Council Member Sullivan, a second from Mayor Pro Tem Von Holtz. Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, same sign.

Aye.

I'm going to assume Angela was pro, which is a delay. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Nod head. Nod head. Got it. Thank you. All those opposed, same sign. Motion approved. Past nine o'clock. Motion to approve unanimously. Thank you so much, Michelle. We are on to Mayor City Administrator's report. My report is there is a budget and finance meeting this Friday at noon. Administrator Simmons.

Just real brief, just a reminder that August 3rd to the 14th is a recess and there are no council meetings or council committee meetings.

I'm going to ask council for their opinion right now. It is 902. Would you like to give your council reports? Would you like to email them in and we'll share them with all of council? Email. Okay. Any other business? Meninger 902. Thank you so much.