[0:00] Recorded and summarized.
[0:17] >> Good evening and welcome.
[0:18] Calling to order the Clark
[0:20] County Council. Tuesday, Augus
[0:23] 18th, 2026. If you’ll join m
[0:26] in standing for the Pledge of
[0:27] Allegiance and then remain
[0:30] standing for the invocation
[0:31] that will be provided by Ale
[0:33] Carr from New Heights Church. I
[0:38] pledge allegiance to the flag
[0:40] of the United States of America
[0:43] and to the Republic for which
[0:44] it stands one nation under God
[0:48] indivisible, with liberty and
[0:50] justice for all.
[0:59] >> Good evening. I invite you
[1:01] to join me in this prayer.
[1:03] Father God, we humble ourselv
[1:05] before you as we gather this
[1:06] evening. We thank you for your
[1:08] countless blessings and
[1:09] gracious sacrifice of your Son
[1:11] Jesus. Lord, you know each and
[1:13] every heart in this room. I a
[1:15] for your help in aligning our
[1:16] hearts with your will for our
[1:18] community. I ask for your
[1:19] wisdom and guidance over the
[1:20] hearts and minds of those
[1:21] entrusted to serve and lead
[1:23] Clark County. I thank you for
[1:24] the institution of government
[1:26] you’ve given us. I pray that w
[1:27] would seek enacting statutes
[1:29] for our community that honors
[1:30] you and advances love for our
[1:32] neighbor. I thank you for
[1:34] growing in these City Council
[1:35] members a heart to serve our
[1:36] community and seek what is bes
[1:38] for them. I ask that Your Holy
[1:40] Spirit would govern and direct
[1:41] the hearts and minds of these
[1:42] leaders, and help them navigat
[1:44] the challenges that face our
[1:45] county. Today. We thank you f
[1:47] this opportunity to serve
[1:48] others, and I ask for your
[1:50] strength to be over us as we
[1:52] seek to align our actions in
[1:53] accordance with your goodness.
[1:54] We pray these things in your
[1:56] Son’s mighty name. Amen.
[2:03] >> Thank you very much. Let’s
[2:05] move on to the roll call.
[2:07] Michelle. Councilor Young here.
[2:13] Councilor Belkot present.
[2:15] >> Councilor Fuentes here.
[2:17] Councilor Little here, and
[2:19] Chair Marshall here.
[2:20] >> Thank you, thank you. Are
[2:22] there any amendments to the
[2:23] agenda?
[2:24] >> None. Tonight.
[2:25] >> Okay. Thank you. Then we’ll
[2:27] open public comment. And this
[2:28] is open public comment. And y
[2:31] can also comment on the conse
[2:33] and separate business items.
[2:35] And just a reminder, please
[2:37] keep your comments civil and
[2:39] related to county business a
[2:41] refrain from making any
[2:43] statements that are disruptive
[2:45] to conducting county business.
[2:48] >> Carmen de Lehan.
[2:54] >> Hello.
[2:56] >> Press the button.
[2:58] >> Yeah, I’m Carmen de Leon,
[2:59] also known as Melo. So I’m jus
[3:01] going to read this to you
[3:02] because I like it. It says
[3:04] Without God nothing in life
[3:05] makes sense. Spain’s coach
[3:08] confession of faith. And that’
[3:09] the people who just weren’t w
[3:11] the World Cup. FIFA thanking
[3:13] God. This one is just about a
[3:16] mother of a cheerleader and my
[3:18] son suffered two staying awake
[3:21] five days, which caused
[3:24] problems. And this girl and I
[3:26] say I’m lucky for the problems
[3:28] I got because this woman lost
[3:30] her daughter and these energy
[3:33] drinks can give them heart
[3:34] attacks with zero warnings. S
[3:37] I mean, like cigarettes have
[3:38] warnings, energy drinks need
[3:40] big warnings. And I see people
[3:42] all day just chugging them on
[3:44] down. And I’m just waiting for
[3:45] these 25 year olds to have
[3:47] heart attacks. Something needs
[3:49] to be done. Alcohol has a
[3:51] warning. You have to be a
[3:52] certain age. This should be
[3:54] like alcohol 21 and over. I
[3:56] mean, it’s no joke. So anyways
[3:59] according to these things here,
[4:01] changing subjects, if you don’t
[4:02] remember, the Tower of Babel
[4:04] was made to confuse their
[4:06] language. Let’s confuse them t
[4:07] make them weaker. And that’s
[4:10] what I see. All this
[4:11] translation business, you know,
[4:12] you can get translation
[4:14] services free on your phone.
[4:16] why are you paying for it? Why
[4:18] are you giving more money to
[4:19] disable people? Like I said
[4:22] repeatedly, the first thing my
[4:23] dad did when he came to this
[4:25] country was learn the language.
[4:27] He expected nothing in return.
[4:28] He said, I want to be respected
[4:30] I want to work. I’m going to
[4:32] speak English. In one year. He
[4:33] taught himself, what’s with
[4:35] everybody else who has free
[4:37] internet? We shouldn’t be
[4:38] paying a dime for translations.
[4:41] Okay, do I have time? What’s
[4:43] the next one? Oh, yeah. So
[4:45] garbage. I’d like to see an end
[4:47] by date because certain
[4:49] countries have when it comes t
[4:51] waste, they burn it all up and
[4:54] they have even run out of
[4:56] garbage. They’re buying
[4:57] importing garbage to burn and
[4:59] using the heat to whatever
[5:01] energy. So why can’t we do th
[5:03] We have mountains of garbage
[5:05] bigger than actual mountains o
[5:07] the east coast. I heard that
[5:09] some of the biggest mountains
[5:10] on the east coast are trash
[5:12] mountains, so I would love to
[5:14] see all that burnt to the
[5:15] ground and have an end by date
[5:17] And end by date would mean the
[5:19] end of garbage and where we
[5:20] would actually have to import
[5:22] it, where we’re actually
[5:23] recycling things. Which glass
[5:24] is so important to recycle?
[5:25] Because it doesn’t diminish, i
[5:27] keeps its size and strength.
[5:28] You can keep using it
[5:30] indefinitely, whereas other
[5:31] things, they keep getting
[5:31] smaller and smaller. You can
[5:33] only recycle paper so much. So
[5:35] I’m saying recycling and
[5:37] burning things, and I don’t
[5:38] know what methods these people
[5:40] are going to pitch to you, b
[5:42] certain countries, yeah, it w
[5:43] expensive to buy the machines,
[5:45] but generations later it was
[5:46] worth it because they’re having
[5:48] to buy garbage, not just creat
[5:49] it, they’re making something
[5:51] with it. You know, that’s what
[5:53] art is making something
[5:54] beautiful out of nothing. So
[5:55] maybe we can aspire to be lik
[5:57] that. Anyways. That’s it.
[5:59] >> Thank you. Is there anyone
[6:03] else in the room who would lik
[6:05] to speak.
[6:06] >> Theresa Hardy?
[6:12] >> I’m. Good evening. I’m sor
[6:13] I’m a little going to be a
[6:15] little disjointed, but we’re
[6:17] just beginning to kind of put
[6:18] the pieces together. The
[6:22] multifamily housing, sorry, th
[6:26] multifamily, residential,
[6:29] outdoor recreation area
[6:31] standards before 2022. July 5t
[6:35] 2022. April 1st was in
[6:38] management then, and there
[6:39] seemed to be some. That some
[6:44] developments were being
[6:45] approved, allowing them to
[6:46] combine landscaping and
[6:48] recreation, and some weren’t.
[6:49] And the interpretation was tha
[6:51] those two codes were separate
[6:53] 20% landscaping and and
[6:57] recreation. So the D brought i
[6:59] to the council on July 5th, the
[7:03] day after July 4th. And they
[7:06] wanted an interim ordinance.
[7:07] And that ordinance was passed.
[7:09] There was 100 signatures. It
[7:10] was raised to try and stop tha
[7:13] And because I was an interim
[7:15] ordinance, then it went back to
[7:17] what it was. But then D we
[7:18] think it was D pushed it
[7:20] through under the biannual. And
[7:24] it was then Brian Ng who was a
[7:26] planning commissioner, and he
[7:28] said that there were unintende
[7:34] unintended consequences,
[7:36] density implications. It was
[7:38] not a minor amendment, and it
[7:40] should be considered under
[7:42] policy. But Planning Commissio
[7:43] went ahead and approved it to
[7:46] move forward. And then it sort
[7:47] of fell between the cracks. And
[7:49] then it seemed to come back
[7:53] under. After you pass the
[7:54] middle housing option under the
[7:56] multifamily housing options.
[7:57] But you haven’t totally passed
[7:59] that yet. And then they were
[8:01] having meetings with Elizabeth
[8:04] Decker, looking at what this
[8:07] language should be. And those
[8:12] were done with the tech forum
[8:13] And at that time, the tech
[8:15] forum was debe developers and
[8:17] realtors. If you were a member
[8:18] of the public, you could join
[8:21] those meetings, but you weren’t
[8:23] allowed to say anything and y
[8:25] had to send in your comment.
[8:27] And now we are. It looks as
[8:30] it’s going forward in the
[8:32] hearing on the 20th, and it h
[8:37] totally changed. It is no
[8:40] longer multifamily, residential
[8:42] outdoor recreation areas. It
[8:46] now special use and standards.
[8:49] It’s it’s multifamily,
[8:51] residential amenity area
[8:54] standards. The landscaping
[8:55] seems to have dropped the the
[8:58] recreation part is changed. T
[9:00] all of the standards that wer
[9:03] expected under the multifamily
[9:06] recreation standards are have
[9:08] been diminished. So my time is
[9:12] up. It needs to be looked at.
[9:15] It shouldn’t go forward like.
[9:17] >> It is. It’s timely. So
[9:18] please, please come back or
[9:20] send us some information. Thank
[9:22] you.
[9:23] >> That seems to be all the
[9:24] people that we have signed up
[9:26] in the room. We do have one
[9:28] caller with their hand raised
[9:29] online. Great caller. You’ve
[9:30] been sent a request to unmute.
[9:32] Please go ahead and do so.
[9:33] State your name for the record
[9:34] and go ahead with your comment
[9:39] >> Good evening. This is
[9:40] Kimberly Goheen Elbon. I
[9:43] appreciate Melo speaking about
[9:44] God, and I’d like to say that
[9:47] part of our problem is taking
[9:48] God out of not only our schoo
[9:52] and that’s designed to have
[9:54] children. Rely actually grow u
[9:58] and rely on the government,
[10:01] which is wrong. But also you
[10:03] took God out of our judicial
[10:06] court system. And I have a
[10:09] definite problem, as you well
[10:10] know, with my son Cleve going
[10:12] Rengulbai being victimized by
[10:15] our very own Clark County
[10:17] judicial law and justice system
[10:19] here. I’m going to speak a
[10:20] little bit about your
[10:22] interpreter interpreters that
[10:23] you’re going to be paying a lot
[10:25] of money for at the cost
[10:27] increases result from multipl
[10:28] factors that include in-person
[10:30] assignments and increase of 8%
[10:32] in caseload and complexity of
[10:34] caseloads and increase in
[10:36] assignment complexity, such as
[10:39] transcriptions of body camera
[10:41] footage. These people are going
[10:42] to transcribe a camera footage
[10:46] It’s on the rise and becoming
[10:48] factor in an increase in
[10:50] service cost. Additionally,
[10:51] with fewer defense attorneys
[10:53] available for hearings, cases
[10:54] are taking longer to resolve,
[10:56] and defense counsel’s may have
[11:00] to be prioritized over the
[11:02] interpreter case to allow. S
[11:05] what I what I’ve seen when I
[11:06] sit in the court cases is, is
[11:08] there are a lot of illegal
[11:10] immigrants here. I don’t care
[11:12] what the mandates state that
[11:14] they need interpreters. The
[11:16] fact is, is we need to just
[11:19] ship them back home. I, I don’t
[11:21] know what else to say, but
[11:23] they’re they’re getting a
[11:24] better trial and more funding
[11:28] and responsibilities being
[11:31] taken than my own son. And I
[11:35] have a big problem with that.
[11:37] I’d like to also mention that
[11:38] I’ve received a letter from th
[11:40] ACLU of Washington State
[11:43] reprimanding our law and
[11:44] justice system, stating that
[11:46] they are holding people
[11:49] incarcerated with no attorney.
[11:50] And that is my son’s case. He’
[11:52] not only spent two years in
[11:54] jail, but now, come to find ou
[11:56] is going on his third week of
[11:57] no. No attorney, no, no public
[12:01] defender. That’s criminal. And
[12:04] the fact is, is when you do
[12:06] love God, we’re patient. We
[12:08] might suffer, but we give all
[12:09] glory to God and this will com
[12:11] to light. We are going to take
[12:12] care of Clark County’s law and
[12:14] justice system here. I have a
[12:16] real big issue with number six
[12:18] on your agenda, that you’re
[12:19] going to pass all of these,
[12:21] you’re going to pass, but the
[12:25] neuropathy pathology
[12:27] consultations were infant
[12:29] deaths. And with traumatic
[12:33] brain injury, where does an
[12:35] infant get traumatic brain
[12:36] injury that we have to, you
[12:38] know, get thousands of dollars
[12:39] to pay people to come in?
[12:41] >> Okay. Thank you.
[12:43] >> Chair, that concludes public
[12:45] comment.
[12:45] >> Okay, then let’s move on to
[12:48] the consent agenda. Would
[12:50] anyone like to pull one throu
[12:54] eight? Not hearing any. I’ll
[13:02] entertain a motion to approve
[13:03] the consent agenda. Items one
[13:05] through eight.
[13:06] >> So moved.
[13:07] >> Second, moved and seconded.
[13:09] All those in favor say I. I I
[13:11] I thank you. Motion carries.
[13:15] Then let’s move right on to
[13:17] separate business item number
[13:20] one, David Zimmerman and Mary
[13:23] Ann clear. Please come forwa
[13:32] or you can sit right up here.
[13:37] Welcome. Go ahead.
[13:47] >> Hello. Good evening, council
[13:49] members.
[13:54] >> I think it was working.
[13:59] >> Can you hear me now? Yes.
[14:00] Okay. Perfect. Almost felt li
[14:02] that was commercial. Good
[14:05] evening, Council members. My
[14:06] name is Mary Ann Clear. I’m a
[14:08] district court administrator
[14:10] and I am here to talk with y
[14:13] Item number one was to speak
[14:15] about the our request for
[14:18] additional funding for the
[14:20] interpreters. That is a
[14:22] mandated service that we are
[14:24] providing. And we had been
[14:27] looking at our projections.
[14:29] This is David Zimmerman. He is
[14:30] our finance manager, and we’ve
[14:33] been looking at our projections
[14:34] I’ve been at district court f
[14:35] about a month and a half now,
[14:37] going over our budget, spendin
[14:39] quite a bit of time with it,
[14:42] and wanted to make sure that w
[14:43] have enough money to provide
[14:46] interpreters throughout the
[14:47] rest of the year, because it i
[14:49] a mandated service, and this
[14:50] something that district court
[14:52] does for our criminal justice
[14:54] system. We do it not just for
[14:58] district court, but for
[14:59] Superior Court and several of
[15:01] our other partners. And you can
[15:06] see there is an increase in
[15:09] services. We did move with
[15:12] District court back in Februar
[15:14] over to an additional buildin
[15:17] We have interpreters who appea
[15:21] virtually. They also appear in
[15:23] person. Interpreters aren’t
[15:26] just with verbal, but we do
[15:28] have American Sign Language,
[15:31] and it is an important service
[15:33] that we provide for individual
[15:36] individuals. Our request is for
[15:42] $328,400 to finish out the res
[15:44] of the year.
[15:47] >> Great. Thank you. Was there
[15:48] anything you wanted to add?
[15:55] There you go.
[15:56] >> This is David Zimmerman,
[15:58] accounting services manager at
[16:00] District Court. We’ve built
[16:02] this projection on seeing a 3
[16:07] increase in service cost on a
[16:09] monthly basis, on a monthly
[16:10] average. And this is our
[16:12] projection for the end of 2026.
[16:16] >> Thank you. Are there any
[16:18] questions or comments from the
[16:19] council?
[16:19] >> I have a comment.
[16:21] >> Yes, please.
[16:21] >> Why the significant increase?
[16:24] Is it labor costs?
[16:28] >> We we’re operating out of
[16:30] two physical locations now. A
[16:32] it’s mainly the in person
[16:35] assignments. Interpreters are
[16:37] not. It’s not really possible
[16:42] for them to toggle between the
[16:44] two locations. So we’ve got
[16:46] district court assignments and
[16:47] then superior court assignments
[16:49] Superior court makes makes out
[16:51] about 32% of of our caseload.
[16:56] And juvenile court, which is
[16:57] one location before, when we
[17:00] were at the courthouse, when
[17:01] district court was at the
[17:02] courthouse, interpreters could
[17:04] toggle between assignments. Now
[17:06] we need in-person interpreters
[17:09] at one location and the other
[17:10] location that is contributed to
[17:12] a lot of the cost increase.
[17:15] >> Thank you.
[17:17] >> Other comments or questions
[17:20] I have a question. Was this
[17:22] partially grant funded in the
[17:24] past?
[17:25] >> No. This is something that
[17:28] because of ongoing increases i
[17:31] services with in terms of
[17:33] growing caseloads between case
[17:36] filings and this has been
[17:40] something I believe last year
[17:41] was an additional request that
[17:44] was made as well. This isn’t
[17:46] something that’s been grant
[17:48] funded. Typically, it’s just
[17:50] increase.
[17:51] >> Okay. And then I did have a
[17:53] question. I saw that we also
[17:54] provide this service for
[17:56] battleground and Kamea
[17:58] Washougal. And do they
[17:59] contribute to the cost of this
[18:01] service?
[18:02] >> Yes they do. And
[18:04] additionally, because we have
[18:07] an agreement with the
[18:09] Administrative Office of Courts
[18:11] and we meet specifications w
[18:15] a language access plan, and w
[18:17] have staff interpreters and we
[18:19] have some meetings. We meet
[18:22] their requirements in order t
[18:24] receive reimbursement for some
[18:25] of the services that we are
[18:27] providing.
[18:29] >> Great. Thank you. Okay. If
[18:31] there’s no further questions o
[18:33] comments, I’ll enter. Oh yes.
[18:35] Please go ahead, counselor.
[18:38] >> Sure. I have a question. And
[18:39] I think I asked this the last
[18:42] time I had you guys in front o
[18:44] us for a similar ask, but I’m
[18:46] going to ask again because
[18:48] things have changed. But with
[18:50] the technology that we have
[18:52] nowadays with, you know,
[18:54] instant translation, that is
[18:56] able to happen using AI, are w
[18:59] like waiting for the state to
[19:02] approve that? Or where are we
[19:03] at in terms of, you know, being
[19:05] able to use technology to
[19:08] address this issue?
[19:10] >> That’s an excellent questio
[19:12] counselor. We did. And I guess
[19:14] it also goes to the the
[19:16] question of there is some of
[19:19] this grant funded. We do have a
[19:22] small grant for these things
[19:25] that are called pocket talks,
[19:28] but they’re not something that
[19:29] we can use for court. So say if
[19:32] someone’s in trial, we can’t
[19:34] use this for, say, a five day
[19:36] trial in Superior Court. And
[19:39] it’s something that we can use
[19:40] say, if if we know what
[19:43] language somebody is using, but
[19:45] it’s also not something that w
[19:46] can use with American Sign
[19:48] Language. And that this isn’t
[19:52] an important obligation that we
[19:56] have, because it is a mandated
[19:58] service that is in our statute
[20:00] And so it is important for u
[20:04] to do so. I don’t know if that
[20:07] specifically addresses what you
[20:08] are looking for with respect t
[20:10] AI.
[20:12] >> Well.
[20:13] >> When you say we can’t, you
[20:15] know, is it because the
[20:18] technology is not there or is
[20:19] the technology is there and
[20:20] we’re just not legally able to
[20:22] use it?
[20:25] >> I am not specifically
[20:28] familiar with AI technology
[20:30] that would meet our statutory
[20:32] requirements.
[20:38] >> Okay. Thank you.
[20:40] >> Okay. If there’s no other
[20:43] questions or concerns, I’ll
[20:45] entertain a motion to approve
[20:48] >> So moved.
[20:49] >> Thank you. Second.
[20:50] >> Moved and seconded. All
[20:52] those in favor, say I. I I.
[20:56] thank you. Motion carries.
[20:57] Thanks very much.
[20:59] >> Yes. Thank you.
[21:02] >> Okay. I think you’re
[21:03] sticking around for the next
[21:04] item too. So yes. So this is
[21:09] the electronic monitoring. So
[21:10] please go ahead.
[21:12] >> Thank you. And I, I wanted
[21:14] to thank you. When Diane
[21:17] Rathburn was present in front
[21:19] of you on August 4th with a
[21:23] grant application request, I
[21:26] wanted to thank you, council
[21:27] members, for the permission to
[21:29] proceed with the application.
[21:31] The application was submitted
[21:33] and we are optimistically
[21:36] waiting to hear back. I spoke
[21:37] with Diane this morning, and w
[21:40] are hoping that within about a
[21:42] month and a half, we may hear
[21:44] back on the funding request
[21:46] that we’re hoping that we will
[21:48] be funded for this. On the
[21:53] possibility that we will not b
[21:55] funded. I believe. Council
[21:57] Member Fuentes, you had asked
[22:00] what would happen if we are n
[22:02] funded. Mr. Zimmerman had
[22:07] projected that we will run o
[22:09] of funding in October of this
[22:12] year, and. While the programs
[22:18] would still exist, the program
[22:21] would not be affordable for
[22:24] many individuals in our county,
[22:26] and that would mean that peo
[22:28] would remain in our facility,
[22:31] the Clark County Jail. And so
[22:36] there are several programs in
[22:39] our electronic monitoring
[22:41] programs. They are. Required.
[22:46] So when someone is sentenced o
[22:49] a DUI, there is a requirement
[22:52] for them to be able to be o
[22:57] electronic monitoring. And some
[22:59] of this funding goes towards
[23:01] that. And if some individuals
[23:04] are able to be out on
[23:05] electronic monitoring and
[23:07] transdermal, then that becomes
[23:11] a question of fairness. If s
[23:13] people are able to do that
[23:15] because they can afford it, an
[23:16] other people have to sit in th
[23:18] Clark County Jail because they
[23:19] are unable to afford that. So
[23:22] this this program actually
[23:24] allows all of those people to
[23:27] be monitored, to be home, to b
[23:29] working, and to be adequately
[23:32] monitored. This also funds the
[23:36] electronic monitoring with
[23:37] Victim Notification Technology
[23:40] Program, which is the GPS
[23:42] program that we are familiar
[23:44] with, as well as Scram and the
[23:49] urinalysis testing for those
[23:51] who are pretrial when that i
[23:53] ordered by the court as a
[23:56] pretrial condition of release.
[24:02] >> Okay. Thank you. Are there
[24:04] questions from the council
[24:05] chair?
[24:05] >> Do you have a really quick
[24:07] question? Thanks for
[24:08] remembering the conversation.
[24:10] You you mentioned that if. Wel
[24:13] first of all, when do we
[24:15] anticipate to hear about
[24:17] whether or not the grant was
[24:19] approved.
[24:20] >> In round one? We heard
[24:22] within two months. Okay. And
[24:24] it’s been a couple of weeks. S
[24:26] we’re hoping that within abou
[24:27] a month and a half, we would b
[24:29] able to hear, okay.
[24:30] >> So that will probably it’ll
[24:32] take us up to October, right?
[24:33] >> Yes. And should we be
[24:35] successful, then we would no
[24:37] longer need the funding.
[24:39] >> Okay. I we’re going to be
[24:40] successful. Right? I think yea
[24:42] I’m pretty sure you guys
[24:43] submitted an amazing grant. You
[24:44] mentioned that there are folks
[24:46] who can’t afford to pay for t
[24:49] monitoring services. If we
[24:50] don’t get approved for the
[24:52] grant, what is it cost for
[24:54] those who could afford it?
[24:55] What’s the daily cost?
[24:56] >> It depends on actually whi
[24:59] condition and which program
[25:01] they’re ordered. So it could
[25:03] $15 a day. It could be $21 a
[25:06] day. It depends on what is
[25:09] ordered. So whether that’s
[25:10] scram or GPS monitoring, it
[25:15] depends on the program.
[25:16] >> So a lot a lot cheaper than
[25:18] incarcerating somebody for
[25:20] almost $210 a day.
[25:21] >> Yeah. $216 a day.
[25:24] >> 216 okay, I was looking at
[25:25] the top one here. Oh, that was
[25:27] 2025. So inflation. 216. Gre
[25:29] Thank you.
[25:31] >> Other questions. Yes.
[25:33] Councilor young.
[25:36] >> Yes, thank you chair.
[25:38] Similar to my last question, I
[25:40] think the last time this came
[25:42] in front of us, we had a short
[25:44] discussion about how we are
[25:46] determining whether people can
[25:48] afford this on their own
[25:49] without. It or not. And if I
[25:53] remember correctly, I think you
[25:54] were maybe in process of
[25:58] developing a way to make sure
[26:02] or to can’t afford to comment
[26:05] on.
[26:07] >> Did you hear that question?
[26:08] Because I think he was asking
[26:10] about how do we how do we
[26:11] determine whether or not
[26:12] someone can afford it, whether
[26:14] or not there’s a financial need?
[26:18] >> That need, I believe, is
[26:19] based on whether or not someo
[26:21] is determined to be indigent,
[26:24] being indigent by the court.
[26:26] And one of the things that w
[26:30] wrote into our grant
[26:31] application is that we would b
[26:32] working with all of our
[26:33] partners. We’ve been focusing
[26:37] on in the last month and a hal
[26:39] since I have been here as the
[26:42] district court administrator,
[26:44] on being really collaborative
[26:45] with our partners and trying to
[26:46] figure out how can we look at
[26:49] our programs and best use our
[26:52] resources that are available,
[26:55] been working with Vancouver
[26:58] Police Department, who they’re
[27:00] working with. One of the
[27:01] programs, which is the MVNT o
[27:04] the electronic monitoring the
[27:05] GPS program. They did write a
[27:07] letter of support for the grant
[27:09] application and wanting to loo
[27:13] at. She’s offered to do some
[27:17] training or refresher training
[27:18] for the courts, and I know has
[27:20] already worked with the
[27:21] prosecuting attorney’s office
[27:23] in terms of how the programs
[27:25] work, really looking at how c
[27:28] we best use the resources and
[27:32] not overuse the resources, but
[27:36] use them the way they are
[27:37] intended and, and preserve our
[27:40] cost and the life of the
[27:42] program?
[27:44] >> That all sounds great. I wa
[27:46] wondering, I was wondering
[27:47] about that. So it’s the courts
[27:48] that decide whether or not
[27:49] someone is indigent, and do
[27:52] they base that on some data
[27:55] there?
[27:56] >> There is a form that is
[27:58] completed at the beginning of
[27:59] the hearing.
[28:00] >> Okay.
[28:00] >> Is it just self-declare?
[28:04] >> If people are just self
[28:05] declaring that they can’t
[28:06] afford this.
[28:08] >> I will say yes. There are
[28:10] specific questions that are
[28:12] asked and it’s based on the
[28:13] answers provided.
[28:15] >> Okay. And then I was, you
[28:17] know, I noticed that there’s
[28:18] been a sharp increase and, you
[28:21] know, how do you how do you
[28:23] account for that, that increas
[28:24] And I think this started as a
[28:26] grant funded program not too
[28:30] long. When did it start that
[28:32] were picking up the cost of
[28:35] this? So I think there was a
[28:37] time when we didn’t.
[28:40] >> That’s correct. We had
[28:42] various grants for various
[28:43] components of this program,
[28:45] some of them from the
[28:46] administrative office of the
[28:47] courts, others by the
[28:48] Washington Traffic Safety
[28:50] Commission. Both of those gra
[28:53] funding funded components have
[28:55] expired now, and the last one
[28:57] is expiring this October for
[29:00] the electronic monitoring for
[29:02] DOI, and that is provided by
[29:05] the Washington Traffic Safety
[29:07] Commission. And hence we
[29:09] projected out until the end of
[29:11] the year. There is not going t
[29:13] be any more funding for that
[29:15] component of the program. The
[29:17] other component of the program
[29:19] was GPS with victim
[29:20] notification, and a lot of tha
[29:22] was recommendations from the P
[29:25] office to. For for that part of
[29:33] monitoring.
[29:34] >> I can see where that would
[29:36] be really very important. Chair
[29:39] Yes. Go ahead.
[29:40] >> April 1st, for the record,
[29:41] Deputy County Manager. And I
[29:43] think that the program is only
[29:44] like three years old, and we
[29:46] were one of the first in the
[29:47] state to do it. And so I think
[29:49] the rapid increase is just
[29:51] recognizing, I mean, our courts,
[29:52] we all believe in it. The court
[29:55] systems, VPD, public defense
[29:58] and Pretrial District Court.
[30:01] >> That was my recollection t
[30:03] So I just wanted some
[30:05] confirmation. You know, I’m I
[30:08] appreciate that you’re looking
[30:10] internally to see if there’s
[30:12] ways to prioritize or how the
[30:14] system is working. And I would
[30:16] just request when you begin to
[30:18] figure that out, or if you hav
[30:20] recommendations, if you could
[30:21] share that with the Law and
[30:22] Justice Council or even, you
[30:24] know, kick it around with the
[30:25] Law and Justice Council to try
[30:27] to figure out how we can make
[30:30] this most efficient, because I
[30:32] see it as part of the justice
[30:34] part of law and justice. It’s
[30:36] critically important. Any other
[30:38] comments or questions from the
[30:40] Council?
[30:40] >> Just one really quick
[30:41] question, chair. The grant tha
[30:43] we’ve applied for that
[30:45] hopefully we get approved. For
[30:48] How long is the grant for year
[30:49] two? Three?
[30:50] >> It would fund us through
[30:52] June 30th of 2028.
[30:54] >> So a couple years. No, yea
[30:56] and a half. Yeah. Okay. Thank
[30:57] you.
[30:58] >> Great. Well, fingers crossed
[31:00] on that. If there’s no other
[31:02] questions or comments, I’ll
[31:03] entertain a motion to approve
[31:04] >> I move to approve separate
[31:06] business item number two.
[31:07] >> A second.
[31:08] >> Moved and seconded. All
[31:09] those in favor say I I I. Okay.
[31:13] Motion carries. Thank you very
[31:15] much.
[31:16] >> Thank you. Okay, let’s move
[31:19] on to item three public works
[31:22] Sterling and others. Thanks for
[31:30] being here. Okay. Please go
[31:44] ahead.
[31:46] >> Good evening, Council Chair
[31:47] councilors. For the record, my
[31:49] name is Tyler Bennett. I am th
[31:50] fleet manager here for Clark
[31:52] County. Here today. I have
[31:54] Sterling Kessler, the fleet
[31:55] program coordinator for
[31:57] acquisitions and disposals, who
[31:58] is going to present our request
[32:01] today.
[32:05] >> Hi. Good evening, Council
[32:07] chair and councilors. I’m
[32:09] Sterling Kessler, the fleet
[32:10] program coordinator for Clark
[32:11] County Public Works. Tonight,
[32:13] we are requesting that we get
[32:16] approval to preorder the
[32:18] replacement vehicles for the
[32:20] 2027 model year fleet services,
[32:23] reviews and analyzes assets
[32:25] managed within our air and our
[32:27] program to ensure compliance
[32:30] with the fleet utilization and
[32:33] replacement policy and
[32:35] determine when replacement is
[32:37] necessary. The attached list t
[32:39] this staff report identifies
[32:42] the vehicles and equipment tha
[32:43] we are planning to replace in
[32:46] 2027. This request comes
[32:50] through due to the fact that
[32:51] order windows for original
[32:53] equipment manufacturers open u
[32:55] at different times of the year
[32:57] and do not necessarily line up
[32:59] with our budget year starting
[33:01] January 1st. This has created
[33:03] problems in the past, procuring
[33:06] replacement equipment, causing
[33:08] the equipment that has been
[33:11] identified to be replaced to be
[33:13] in service longer, driving up
[33:15] maintenance costs, creating
[33:18] additional administrative
[33:21] burdens, tracking replacements
[33:24] that pass through the. The nex
[33:28] year’s. Fleet services as
[33:32] requesting approval to place
[33:34] the orders for these vehicles
[33:35] and equipment. Deliver. The
[33:38] delivery of these assets will
[33:40] occur after January 1st in 202
[33:46] >> Okay. Thank you. Are there
[33:48] any questions from Council? I
[33:53] don’t hear any questions or
[33:56] comments. If not, I’ll
[33:58] entertain a motion to approve.
[34:00] >> So move.
[34:01] >> It’s been moved. Second,
[34:03] moved and seconded. And all
[34:06] those in favor say I I I motio
[34:10] carries.
[34:10] >> Thank you. Okay. Moving on
[34:16] to and this is public works
[34:18] also. Professional consulting
[34:23] services related to regional
[34:24] solid waste system steering
[34:26] committee. Welcome.
[34:33] >> Good evening Council. I’m
[34:34] Joel Loescher. I’m the division
[34:36] manager for Clark County Publi
[34:37] Works. Today we’re requesting
[34:41] council approval for a
[34:42] professional consulting
[34:43] services agreement with HDR
[34:46] engineering to provide
[34:47] consulting, facilitation and
[34:49] technical support to the
[34:50] Regional Solid Waste System
[34:52] Steering Committee in
[34:53] evaluating regional governance,
[34:55] public ownership options and
[34:58] operational changes to the
[34:59] regional solid Waste System. So
[35:01] we came and did a work session
[35:02] in June to talk about the cost
[35:04] benefit analysis and what
[35:07] resulted in that study that w
[35:10] did was that we really neede
[35:11] to move forward in evaluating
[35:13] the governance structure for
[35:15] what a regional ownership would
[35:16] look like, and then factor int
[35:18] costs would follow that this
[35:20] work is going to this work was
[35:22] modeled after the discovery
[35:23] Clean Water Alliance formation
[35:25] And so when we did the RFP for
[35:28] this consultant contract, we
[35:30] borrowed the RFP from that
[35:33] discovery Clean Water Alliance
[35:35] work. And so we really modeled this off of
[35:38] the success of that alliance
[35:40] formation. And we’re going to
[35:41] look forward to moving into th
[35:44] discussions with the cities o
[35:47] how they envision the system.
[35:49] So I’m happy to answer any
[35:51] questions that you have.
[35:52] >> Okay. Any questions or
[35:54] comments? What would be the
[35:56] timeline?
[35:57] >> So this contract is for
[35:59] three years. Right now we
[36:01] really have to discuss with the
[36:02] cities what what availability
[36:05] they have. We’ve discussed
[36:07] maybe a compressed timeline
[36:08] where we just meet more
[36:10] frequently and get something,
[36:12] an MOU and an interlocal
[36:14] agreement started right away,
[36:16] or we might have to extend i
[36:17] out a year. It just depends o
[36:19] what everyone’s 2027 looks lik
[36:21] So we did the contract
[36:23] initially with the consultant
[36:24] for three years, but we’re ope
[36:27] to any, any number of options
[36:30] in terms of the timeline. We
[36:31] need to commit to some or s
[36:35] decision by December 31st, 202
[36:39] That’s that was committed to
[36:41] via interlocal agreements with
[36:42] all of the cities that we d
[36:44] during the solid waste
[36:46] management plan that we did
[36:48] last year.
[36:50] >> Okay.
[36:51] >> Just really quick question.
[36:52] So other jurisdictions have
[36:54] have had similar presentations
[36:56] in front of the council to
[36:58] discuss the potential future
[37:01] partnership of acquiring waste
[37:03] management. Is that correct?
[37:05] >> The transfer stations are
[37:06] owned currently by Waste
[37:07] Connections of Washington.
[37:08] >> Waste connections. Thank you
[37:09] Thank you. So but they are
[37:11] they’ve been in conversations.
[37:12] Yeah. Okay. Thank you.
[37:13] >> We were just at battleground
[37:14] last night, in fact.
[37:15] >> Okay. Got it. Thank you.
[37:17] >> How how are those
[37:18] conversations been going? Is
[37:19] there an openness interest?
[37:20] >> I think there’s a varying
[37:23] level of interest. I think
[37:24] everyone’s excited about
[37:26] evaluating the options. I would
[37:28] say there’s a spectrum on
[37:30] interest in terms of, you know,
[37:33] just wanting to make sure tha
[37:34] the rates are going to remain
[37:36] stable and that there’s going
[37:37] to be some. I think the most
[37:39] exciting thing is just the
[37:40] opportunity to competitively
[37:42] bid for pricing. And so I thi
[37:44] everyone’s said that there’s an
[37:45] interest in that regard. And
[37:48] just any opportunity to, you
[37:50] know, have lower rates for
[37:52] residents and then, you know,
[37:53] better system outcomes, better
[37:57] opportunities to manage the
[37:58] system so that we can have mor
[38:00] control over the types of
[38:02] materials that are going
[38:03] through it.
[38:04] >> Great. Well, discovery,
[38:05] clean water is a good example
[38:07] to model after. Go ahead.
[38:11] >> Yeah. Just curious, how doe
[38:13] the regional governance
[38:15] structure work in other
[38:17] counties and how is the
[38:20] liability risk shared amongst
[38:22] the different jurisdictions?
[38:24] >> Washington has so many
[38:25] different examples. When we did
[38:27] our regional system study, w
[38:28] had J.R. Miller and Associate
[38:30] perform that study for us. The
[38:32] we did a presentation in 2023
[38:34] on that. There was pretty much
[38:37] four different models that wer
[38:39] referenced in that study. We
[38:43] went over each of them. But the
[38:45] model that the Discovery Clean
[38:46] Water Alliance uses is we’re
[38:49] not sure that we’re going to be
[38:50] exactly able to do that, which
[38:52] is a joint municipal utility
[38:55] services configuration. I think
[38:57] what we’re looking at is doing
[38:59] something with Interlocal
[39:00] Cooperation Act, which is wha
[39:04] other counties do in Washingto
[39:06] I think typically the county
[39:07] either owns or they have it.
[39:09] It’s either privately owned,
[39:11] and then if they own it,
[39:13] sometimes they contract out
[39:14] those services. In terms of a
[39:17] regional structure, there’s
[39:18] really nothing I don’t think
[39:20] that can compare. Maybe Metro
[39:23] over across the river is
[39:24] probably more similar. And whe
[39:26] we did the regional system
[39:28] study in terms of what the
[39:30] other cities kind of envisione
[39:32] there wasn’t anything that we
[39:34] could model that was an exact
[39:37] replica in Washington. We had
[39:39] some examples in California,
[39:41] but really we leaned on the
[39:43] Discovery Clean Water Alliance
[39:44] as that’s the vision that all
[39:45] of the cities and the county a
[39:47] the time really thought was
[39:48] what we wanted to do.
[39:51] >> Okay, thanks. And so the
[39:53] liability is shared amongst t
[39:55] jurisdictions. You know, do
[39:56] they get insurance jointly or
[39:58] how does that work?
[39:59] >> You know, it’s a good
[40:00] question. There’s so many
[40:04] different responses in the
[40:05] sense of if it’s a complete
[40:09] separate entity, the liability
[40:11] would fall to the entity.
[40:12] There’d be they’d have their
[40:13] own separate insurance, they’d
[40:14] have their own attorneys. So
[40:16] it’s just, it’s really going t
[40:17] we’re going to have to really
[40:19] lean on our legal services to
[40:20] decide like what that structure
[40:22] looks like.
[40:22] >> But our attorney is leaning.
[40:24] >> Yeah, I was going to say. To
[40:26] make.
[40:26] >> A comment, please go ahead,
[40:28] Amber.
[40:28] >> Thank you. Chair. Good
[40:29] evening Council. Amber Smith,
[40:30] Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting
[40:31] Attorney so with respect to
[40:33] these types of things and wit
[40:34] most of our agreements that we
[40:36] have with the county, when
[40:37] we’re dealing with inter local
[40:40] or kind of joint collaborative
[40:42] work, we often have language
[40:44] there about mutual
[40:46] indemnification. Washington
[40:48] state has proportional
[40:49] liability for a lot of things.
[40:51] So depending on the actors and
[40:54] whether or not we have sold
[40:55] negligence language, there’s a
[40:56] lot of opportunities
[40:58] contractually that we can do
[40:59] for liabilities to help reduc
[41:02] and also offset those maybe n
[41:05] necessarily eliminate, but mak
[41:07] sure that there’s language in
[41:08] there, that it’s proportional
[41:09] based on the parties.
[41:11] >> Okay. Thank you.
[41:14] >> Other comments or questions
[41:15] from council? Hearing none,
[41:20] I’ll entertain a motion to
[41:21] approve.
[41:24] >> I so move.
[41:26] >> Second moved and seconded
[41:28] for separate business item
[41:30] number four. All those in favor
[41:32] say I I I motion motion carri
[41:36] Thank you.
[41:37] >> Thank you counsel.
[41:38] >> Thanks a lot. Then moving
[41:40] to the Treasurer’s office
[41:43] mirror and Sarah who are coming
[41:46] forward. And Michelle is comin
[41:47] forward also the whole gang,
[41:51] the whole gang is here. That’s
[41:52] great. We’re glad to see you.
[41:58] >> Good evening Council Sarah
[42:00] Low, chief deputy treasurer in
[42:01] the Clark County Treasurer’s
[42:03] office. I am here tonight wit
[42:06] some colleagues on the dais
[42:08] here or on the table here.
[42:09] Michelle introduce themselves.
[42:11] >> Thank you. Michelle Schuste
[42:12] director of internal Services.
[42:15] >> And Omera. I’m the finance
[42:16] and investment manager in the
[42:18] Clark County Treasurer’s office.
[42:20] >> Thanks. And there’s also a
[42:21] couple of folks online. It
[42:24] looks like our financial
[42:26] advisor PFM is online. Is
[42:30] Maggie online? Just wanting to
[42:32] check and confirm. I can’t see
[42:34] everyone. Yes. Okay. Wonderful
[42:39] Thank you. Wonderful. So if
[42:40] there are any questions that
[42:42] come up for PFM, they’re onlin
[42:44] And then we have a couple o
[42:46] folks in the audience. Marc
[42:47] Gasque. And then our bond
[42:49] council is actually in person
[42:50] this evening. So Mark Gernhar
[42:52] from Foster Garvey. So Mark
[42:55] Gasque will also be coming up
[42:56] here to replace me for the
[42:58] slides. So thank you, Council
[43:00] We are here this evening to a
[43:02] for your approval of a
[43:04] resolution delegating the
[43:06] Treasurer’s Office authority t
[43:08] issue $44 million in bonds to
[43:12] execute several projects at the
[43:16] fairgrounds. We do have a short
[43:18] presentation for you this
[43:19] evening that just kind of
[43:20] explains the projects that will
[43:22] be funded with those bonds, t
[43:25] financing plan, and what
[43:27] exactly is in the resolution.
[43:29] The resolution that was poste
[43:31] originally has been amended.
[43:33] And so that is up for adoptio
[43:36] this evening. There are some
[43:37] just minor modifications to add
[43:39] the word fairgrounds to the
[43:42] resolution, so that it syncs u
[43:45] with our original agreement
[43:46] with the Public Facilities
[43:48] district. So with that, I am
[43:50] going to turn it over to my
[43:52] colleagues in the Treasurer’s
[43:53] office and internal services s
[43:54] they can go over the
[43:56] presentation for you this
[43:57] evening. Thank you.
[43:59] >> Thank you. You can go to the
[44:02] next slide. Thank you. Okay.
[44:08] Can you hear me? There we go.
[44:10] Okay. In this presentation
[44:13] we’ll review one the
[44:15] fairgrounds projects. There was
[44:16] some updated final cost to the
[44:18] second phase that Michelle is
[44:19] going to cover for those future
[44:22] projects. And we’ll also
[44:24] provide an overview of the
[44:25] resolution and the key details
[44:26] of the financing. And we’ll
[44:29] also go over the updated debt
[44:30] service projections with
[44:33] updated rates and including
[44:35] those updated costs as well for
[44:37] those future projects. And the
[44:39] the auditor’s office will cover
[44:40] the exhibit hall fund forecas
[44:43] We’ll also go over the debt
[44:44] issuance timeline. And then
[44:45] also just next steps in the
[44:47] financing proposal.
[44:52] >> The slide before you is the
[44:54] updated master plan project
[44:57] financing. And so when we had
[44:58] brought this to you before, w
[45:00] did not have the construction
[45:02] costs for the 2030 to 2032
[45:05] portion on there. And so sin
[45:07] then, we have fleshed out tho
[45:10] estimated costs and added them
[45:11] in. And we also added the bon
[45:13] issuance cost, which you’ll see
[45:14] at the bottom, which now gets
[45:16] us our new total of the 44
[45:18] million. Previously, what you
[45:19] had seen was just over the 3
[45:22] million, which included the the
[45:24] phase one bonding, the 2026 to
[45:27] 2029 plus the A and E force, o
[45:29] the phase two 2029 bonds. But
[45:32] now we’re coming back with it
[45:34] all wrapped together as one t
[45:36] get it into the bond resolutio
[45:44] >> Okay. And then just an
[45:45] overview of the resolution. As
[45:46] Sarah mentioned, we are
[45:48] requesting council approval to
[45:50] delegate authority to the
[45:51] Treasurer’s office to issue
[45:52] bonds up to 44 million to
[45:55] finance those projects that
[45:56] Michelle covered. This also
[45:58] allows us to do financing up
[46:00] a maximum term of 30 years.
[46:03] Typically, our debt policy is
[46:05] our standard term is 20 years
[46:07] unless there is compelling
[46:09] factors. One of the main
[46:10] advantages of doing a 30 year
[46:12] is really maximizing that sales
[46:14] tax credit that we receive f
[46:16] the state that will allow us t
[46:18] collect that sales tax credit
[46:20] through 2058. And also just to
[46:24] state debt is required to b
[46:26] outstanding on a public
[46:27] facility district in order to
[46:29] receive that sales tax credit.
[46:31] And the county only has one
[46:33] Ph.D, and that is that the
[46:34] fairgrounds. Other items in the
[46:37] resolution also include the
[46:39] interest rate parameters on o
[46:41] a tax exempt basis, it may not
[46:44] exceed 6%. And on a taxable
[46:46] basis, it may not exceed 7%. I
[46:50] also states that all bonds must
[46:51] be issued before December 31st
[46:54] 2029. And then just part of th
[46:56] process, the county will
[46:57] receive a credit ratings
[46:59] through Moody’s on this
[47:01] issuance and most likely again
[47:03] when we go out for issuance in
[47:05] 2029. The next couple of sli
[47:10] are updated. Debt service
[47:12] payments that PFM provided.
[47:14] This is, as of last week,
[47:16] August 13th with rates updated.
[47:18] It includes the 26 and the 202
[47:21] debt issuances. And I’ll just
[47:23] state for the 2029 interest
[47:25] rates, it is increased by 1%.
[47:28] This would put annual debt
[47:29] service payments starting in
[47:31] 2026 at about 1.9 million, and
[47:33] then increasing another 830,000
[47:37] in 2029 to about 2.7 annually,
[47:41] 2.7 million annually. And the
[47:43] next slide shows what that
[47:45] would look like at a 20 year
[47:47] term. While you can see the
[47:48] interest rate costs, we would
[47:51] save an interest rate cost. T
[47:52] interest rate is lower. Our
[47:54] annual debt service payment is
[47:55] much higher. That’s about 2.3
[47:57] million starting in 2026. And
[47:59] then bumping up about another 1
[48:01] million starting in 2029. I’ll
[48:06] also just state, too, that the
[48:08] county does have the option to
[48:09] refinance at a future date i
[48:11] rates lower. I know right now
[48:14] interest rates are a bit
[48:15] volatile, and like, I think we
[48:16] just had the highest 30 year
[48:19] Treasury yields are at the 30
[48:21] year Treasury is the highest
[48:22] it’s been, I think since 2007.
[48:25] So we are closely watching tha
[48:27] and monitoring that and working
[48:29] with our financial advisor.
[48:34] Next slide. I’ll hand it over
[48:37] to Mark.
[48:39] >> Excuse me. Mark Gasque,
[48:40] Clark County finance Director.
[48:42] I just want to just briefly
[48:45] explain the financial analysis
[48:47] that we did to determine
[48:49] whether we could afford to d
[48:51] the repayment on this debt. S
[48:53] what you have before you here
[48:55] is an example of the what we
[48:57] call the 1026 fund or the deb
[48:59] reserve fund. There are several
[49:01] funds associated with the
[49:02] fairgrounds, and this one is
[49:04] primarily focused on paying o
[49:08] the the outstanding bonds. And
[49:10] you can see the revenues coming
[49:11] in. The revenues from the Ph.D
[49:14] sales tax credit would be put
[49:16] into this fund, along with the
[49:19] revenue sources from the hotel
[49:20] motel tax. And then they would
[49:23] primarily be focused on payin
[49:25] off the existing bonds, as w
[49:27] as those new bonds that would
[49:28] be issued under this debt
[49:31] issuance. We also have some
[49:34] maintenance and operation
[49:36] expenses that we run through
[49:37] this fund as well. We recentl
[49:42] had council approve a fund
[49:44] balance policy for this fund
[49:46] under the current terms. Excus
[49:48] me, under the current terms
[49:50] that were discussing the 30
[49:52] year bond, you can see that as
[49:53] we go out six years, we do
[49:57] spend down that fund balance a
[49:58] little, actually quite a bit,
[50:01] but we still maintain our
[50:02] minimum fund balance and some
[50:04] extra at this point. And then
[50:07] if you go to the next slide.
[50:16] The next slide is an example
[50:19] what the difference would be
[50:20] between a 30 year issuance an
[50:22] a 20 year issuance. With the
[50:24] most recent rates that we have.
[50:27] This slide actually has been
[50:29] updated. But the outcome the
[50:32] the difference at the end of
[50:34] the life of the bonds is stil
[50:36] the same. There’s about a $34
[50:38] million increase by issuing t
[50:40] 30 year bonds, because we’re
[50:42] able to qualify for that sales
[50:45] tax credit for an additional
[50:47] ten years. And so although th
[50:50] the amount that would
[50:51] accumulate is, is lower than
[50:53] what this slide indicates, tha
[50:55] difference is still there. And
[50:57] so the recommendation right now
[50:59] is to maximize the the ability
[51:03] for the county to collect tha
[51:05] sales tax credit. So.
[51:12] >> And then this slide just
[51:13] goes over the proposed timelin
[51:15] and key dates. We are hoping
[51:16] receive council approval
[51:18] tonight on the for
[51:19] consideration on the resolutio
[51:22] August through October we will
[51:23] be working with Department of
[51:25] Commerce on a Ph.D feasibility
[51:27] review. The Washington State
[51:29] Department of Commerce does
[51:31] require an independent
[51:33] feasibility review for all
[51:34] public facility districts.
[51:36] These reviews ensure objective
[51:38] analysis of a project’s costs
[51:40] and expected revenues. They a
[51:43] required before issuing any new
[51:45] debt, so we would have this
[51:46] fully completed before we went
[51:48] out for the bonds during that
[51:50] same October or August through
[51:52] October time frame. We’re also
[51:53] going to be working on draftin
[51:55] the preliminary official
[51:56] statement and then October
[51:58] applying for the credit ratings
[51:59] with Moody’s. And then
[52:01] hopefully well receive the
[52:03] rating and finalize the
[52:04] official statement sometime
[52:05] between October and November
[52:07] with the final bond sale
[52:09] sometime in November and
[52:11] closing everything by the end
[52:12] of the year. So as far as next
[52:17] steps, as I mentioned, we are
[52:20] hoping to receive council
[52:21] approval on the resolution
[52:22] facilities and SMG will
[52:24] continue to work on the A and
[52:26] on the projects that are
[52:27] included in this proposal. Our
[52:29] office will continue working
[52:31] with PFM, our financial advisor
[52:33] and Foster Garvey, our bond
[52:35] counsel, who will assist
[52:36] throughout the process. We’ll
[52:39] also help facilitate an
[52:41] interlocal agreement for a
[52:42] feasibility review with the
[52:44] Ph.D and the Department of
[52:45] Commerce. Of course, we’ll kee
[52:48] council informed throughout th
[52:49] process, both of the
[52:51] feasibility study and that
[52:52] final report, but also with t
[52:54] bond closing for the 2026 and
[52:57] again in 2029. And a final step
[53:01] also, just making sure all the
[53:03] budget packages will be
[53:04] submitted this fall in
[53:05] alignment with these proposals.
[53:09] With that, I’ll ask if there’s
[53:11] any questions.
[53:12] >> Great. Thank you. I just
[53:14] want to thank you all. We all
[53:17] received individual one on
[53:19] several of you briefings, so
[53:21] that was very helpful. Any
[53:23] questions or comments from t
[53:25] council?
[53:26] >> I have a comment. Is, is
[53:27] Larry online? There was
[53:28] something that he said in
[53:30] particular during my one on one
[53:31] that I thought would be helpful
[53:33] for the public to know, and I
[53:35] cannot recall. Do you remember
[53:36] what Sarah?
[53:37] >> Oh, could you please come.
[53:39] Up or you could stand right
[53:41] there.
[53:41] >> I just thought it was a
[53:42] helpful comment.
[53:43] >> Good evening Council. Yes, I
[53:44] do actually remember that. And
[53:46] I think it’s in one of the
[53:47] slides. But and we did try to
[53:49] add it just that debt was
[53:51] required to receive the sales
[53:52] tax credit. We did think that
[53:54] was an important point. And so
[53:56] we did add it to the slides. I
[53:58] is actually a requirement to
[54:00] continue receiving that sales
[54:00] tax credit and to continue
[54:02] receiving it for the maximum
[54:03] amount of time of 30 years. A
[54:06] that’s why we wrote the
[54:07] resolution as we did.
[54:08] >> Thanks for the clarification
[54:10] >> You’re welcome.
[54:11] >> Thank you, thank you. And
[54:12] just to follow up, you
[54:13] mentioned that we only have the
[54:15] one Ph.D and that’s the Fair
[54:18] Fairgrounds. Is there any
[54:19] chance to get another Ph.D? Oh,
[54:24] there’s a nod in the audience.
[54:28] >> This is our bond council.
[54:30] >> Mark Gernhart with the
[54:31] Foster Garvey law firm in
[54:33] Seattle. Counties are allowed
[54:34] to create as many PhDs as they
[54:36] like.
[54:38] >> Okay.
[54:38] >> The sales tax credit window
[54:41] has closed. So if you create
[54:43] new Ph.D, you would not be
[54:45] eligible to receive that state
[54:46] sales tax credit. You could put
[54:48] before the voters a sales tax
[54:53] up to 0.2% on the ballot. And
[54:57] so that’s what we’re seeing
[54:59] happening around the state now
[55:00] >> Okay. That was kind of good
[55:01] news, bad news really quickly
[55:03] there. So thank thank you for
[55:05] clarifying that. Any other
[55:08] comments or concerns? Hearing
[55:12] none I’ll entertain a motion t
[55:13] approve.
[55:14] >> I so move.
[55:15] >> It’s been moved. Second
[55:17] moved and seconded. Thank you.
[55:18] All those in favor say I, I I
[55:22] okay, motion carries. Now
[55:25] moving on to our final item
[55:29] under this category, Internal
[55:33] Services. Michelle, you’re
[55:35] still here. And Ryan Bird is
[55:37] maybe is online or he. Maybe
[55:41] maybe okay, okay. Please go
[55:44] ahead. This is a fair master
[55:47] plan. Engineering and design
[55:50] services.
[55:50] >> Before we get started, if
[55:52] could clarify for the record
[55:53] that you’re passing the amended
[55:55] resolution.
[55:55] >> Oh, okay. And then I did
[55:57] have a question about that. We
[55:59] should say the resolution
[56:01] number probably as well. Or
[56:03] that’s.
[56:04] >> We.
[56:04] >> Can understood. But it’s
[56:06] it’s is it corrected or is it
[56:09] amended?
[56:09] >> It’s as amended.
[56:13] >> Would we need to pass the
[56:15] amendment?
[56:15] >> I would I would say it’s
[56:17] passed the resolution as
[56:19] amended.
[56:20] >> Amended?
[56:20] >> Yes. And the amendment you
[56:22] can see the change on your
[56:23] screen right now.
[56:24] >> Right. And just for the
[56:25] public, the amendment is really
[56:27] just correcting the language
[56:28] from event center to the
[56:30] fairgrounds to be consistent
[56:32] with other documents related to
[56:34] the fairgrounds. So let’s,
[56:38] let’s, let’s take that vote
[56:40] again. Is that what you’re
[56:42] looking for? So the motion
[56:43] would be approval of the
[56:47] amended resolution. And I’m
[56:49] just going to say it. 2020 608
[56:53] ten.
[56:54] >> I so move.
[56:55] >> Thank you.
[56:56] >> Second.
[56:56] >> Moved and seconded. All in
[56:58] favor. I, I I okay, thanks. All
[57:05] right then back to item six
[57:07] here internal Services.
[57:09] >> Thank you again. Michelle
[57:11] Schuster Director of Internal
[57:12] Services before you tonight.
[57:14] Now that you’ve proved the bon
[57:16] resolution moving forward, is
[57:18] staff report to ask for the
[57:20] architectural and engineering
[57:22] design services for the the
[57:25] fairgrounds projects on the
[57:26] master plan to be moved to thi
[57:29] bond. Currently we have three
[57:31] two approvals in the 2026
[57:34] annual budget for $1.7 million
[57:37] to start the A and E and a lot
[57:39] of these projects. But that was
[57:41] to be funded directly out of
[57:42] money coming from fund 1026,
[57:44] which is now where the bond
[57:45] debt will be paid from. And so
[57:47] we’re wanting to move these
[57:49] projects now and the other
[57:51] projects and have them funded
[57:52] against the bond in fund 302
[57:55] which is our Bonded Bonded
[57:58] Projects fund, where these
[58:00] projects will now reside. And
[58:01] so this is for approval of
[58:04] amendments 4 to 14, which
[58:06] covers all of the different
[58:08] projects you saw in the
[58:08] previous slides, and moving the
[58:12] expense for those into the
[58:14] bonded funds to be paid out of
[58:16] that. And because that hadn’t
[58:18] been approved in the original
[58:22] contract, we had gotten
[58:23] permission from the council for
[58:24] the county manager to sign
[58:26] amendments. But since we didn’
[58:27] have the funding set aside yet,
[58:29] we were bringing these back to
[58:31] you to get the approval to make
[58:32] sure that you were all right.
[58:34] With these amendments now going
[58:36] off the new bonded funding and
[58:38] total cost for these is. Is
[58:46] $4,676,001 plus other
[58:48] reimbursable expenses that are
[58:49] outlined in the original
[58:51] contract for a total not to
[58:53] exceed 4,914,000. So just abo
[58:57] 10% of the overall project
[58:59] budget. So. Any questions?
[59:04] >> Thank you. Are there any
[59:05] questions from Council? No
[59:10] questions. I’ll entertain a
[59:11] motion then to approve.
[59:13] >> Move separate business ite
[59:15] number six.
[59:16] >> Thank you.
[59:17] >> Moved and seconded. Thank
[59:19] you. All those in favor say I I
[59:21] I motion carries.
[59:23] >> Thank you.
[59:24] >> Thank you counselor young
[59:27] then that concludes that
[59:29] section. Let’s move on. County
[59:31] manager report. Do you have
[59:32] anything to report tonight?
[59:33] >> I don’t have anything
[59:35] tonight.
[59:35] >> Thank you. Okay. Well, there
[59:37] We’ve completed our meeting in
[59:39] one hour. I would just note