Mayor Prom, can you do a mic check?
» Mic check. >> Thank you. Gracias. Um, what else? Thank
you. See,
after two years of doing
All right, it is six o'clock. Are you ready, city manager?
» We're ready. Thank you. >> Perfect. I would like to call to order
the city council meeting of July 28th, 2026. It is 6 p.m. and we will start
with the pledge of allegiance. And I I can't believe if it's council member
Allison or council member um Duk. I mean um Keski. Council member Allison, would
you like to lead us?
» I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the for
one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
Leah, could you do roll call, please? >> Mayor Vignell
» here. >> Mayor Portm Duk
» here. >> Council member Cavaleri
» here. >> Council member Stler
» here. >> Council member Allison
» here. >> Council member Paddock
» present. >> Council member Goies
» here. >> Next up, we will move to audience
communication. The city welcomes public comment at the beginning of our
meetings. Public comments are on the official record. Council does not
respond to comments at this time um or questions. So, make sure that you give
your contact information to the clerk if you would like us to reach out to you.
Um please make sure that you um do not address one individual and address us as
a whole. Please limit your comments to no more than three minutes. Any written
comments received will be added to the official record but will not be read
aloud. With that, I have someone who has signed
up this evening to start off with. It's Linda Schulman. Is she here? Hi, Linda.
If you want to come up to the microphone there and you can give us your your
name, even though I just read it and um your city and you have three minutes.
I will hurry. I am Linda Schulman. My husband Neil and I are here. We have
lived in the Highlands for 20 years and been very happy with most everything.
But right now, we have a couple things going on in our area that are upsetting.
We have some young people on motorbikes and they are very fast and they are just
on the verge of having an accident someplace because we have young children
and we have older people who are walking around and we need some help. We need
the police or someone to come up and go around and make sure that these that
these young people know they can't go fast on these streets. They also are
going on the trails and I am very concerned along with the rest of the
people in our HOA that there will be an accident. That is my first thing. The
second thing is that we have been working with the city for 18 years to
replace our trees on the medians and we had part of them at our block on the
median 29th to 30th done I think about 18 years ago and the rest was promised
us for within five years. Didn't happen. Last year we were supposed to have them
put in and they told us that the trees had not been ordered in time. I am
hoping that they will take care of this and order the trees so we get those
trees in our medians. And so that is really all I wanted to
say. So thank you very much. >> Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the audience that would like to speak tonight?
Is there anyone online that would like to speak this evening?
Barb has a different name tonight. Throw me off, but keep going once more. Is
there anyone in the audience that would like to speak this evening?
All right. There will be another chance for public comment at the end of the
meeting this evening. So next up we will move on to
presentations. I have a proclamation for National Night
Out.
Whereas the National Association of Town Watch sponsors a national community
building campaign on Tuesday, August 4th, 2026 entitled National Night Out.
And whereas the National Night Out campaign provides an opportunity for
neighbors in Mil Creek to join over 38 million neighbors across 17,000
communities from all 50 states, US territories, and military bases
worldwide. And whereas National Night Out is an annual community building
campaign that promotes strong police community partnerships and neighborhood
camaraderie to make our neighborhoods safer, more caring places to live and
work. And whereas neighbors in Mil Creek assist the local law enforcement agency
through joint community building efforts and support National Night Out 2026.
And whereas it is important that all neighbors of Mil Creek come together
with police and work together to build a safer, more caring community. And now
therefore, I, Stephanie Vignell, the mayor of the city of Mil Creek, on
behalf of the entire city council, to hereby call upon all of our neighbors of
Mil Creek to join the Mil Creek Police Department and the National Association
of Town Watch in support for National Night Out on Tuesday, August 4th, 2026.
Further, let it be proclaimed that Tuesday, August 4th, 2026 is National
Night Out in Mil Creek. And tonight I have members of our
citizen patrol here to um accept this wonderful proclamation. So I have Diana
is is it okay Leopa?
I'm saying it wrong. And Samantha Barry and Monique Morgan and Cindy Pasco if
you all would like to come up. And um maybe the chief would like to come up
too, I don't know, and um meet us and have a photo.
Yeah,
» seriously. >> Okay.
I don't think
» so.
Thank Thank you. Our citizen patrol is so amazing. So, thank you all for all
you do. I was having lunch recently with a with one of my girlfriends and we were
we walked out and saw a couple of you were just walking down the street and
looking in on things. We were like, that's is so nice to see you out there.
So, thank you for all you do. >> You too.
» Thank you. >> All right. There's no old business and
no new business and no proposed new initiatives. So we will move on to study
sessions. So next up we have a study session on initial annexation scenario
analysis and key updates. City manager Martin Yamamoto and Rob Finty from 1961
Consulting and Sarah Emmensme Consulting will guide us in this
presentation tonight. >> Thank you Mayor Council. Just want to
say a few things to kick this off before Rob comes up and starts presentation.
Um, just want to mention that the annexation scenarios uh that you're
about to review are a critical step in implementing council's 2040 vision and
strategic plan. I do believe the annexation is the
catalyst for achieving that vision by strengthening the city's long-term
financial sustainability and supporting
and supporting strategic growth. The
direction that council provides this evening will not only determine our path
forward for for potential annexation, but also help shape the city's physical
growth and also positioning the city with the financial capacity necessary to
support future long-term investments and deliver on those long-term priorities.
So, with that, I'll hand over to Rob Fenty, 1961 Consulting, to lead us
through the annexation scenarios.
Thank you, city manager, mayor, mayor prom, and members of the council. Thank
you. It's nice to be with you tonight. So, uh, as you remember at our last
study session, where we left off was the direction to staff to go analyze
specific blocks that we had identified as, uh, potential scenarios, uh, in a
first step of annexation. So, we're going to break this into three sections
tonight. Uh I'll go through a handful of slides just to get us back in the room
of where where we left last time and uh what the assignment was and then I'm
going to hand it over to Sarah so that she can walk through the financial
analysis uh that she's done um in the interim that uh really pulls together
the scenarios so that we can look at them and then we'll have a discussion
around four different scenarios that have come out of that based on the the
guiding principles that uh that you defined in the last session. So, just to
bring us back in the room, we started this conversation in May uh with just
getting ourselves grounded on a path to the fall. And the idea was that by the
fall, we wanted to have clarity from a go no-go perspective of whether you were
interested in pursuing annexation as a financial viability step for the city
and if yes, what were the most likely scenarios that you you would want to
pursue. So in June uh we came back and focused on uh making sure we had very
clear uh guiding principles for the decision-making that could guide us all
through the process both in analysis and decision. And we focused on
infrastructure uh because that was a big uh conversation and a big question mark
around what was going on in the different areas. And so we brought the
information from the county together uh and and talked about what was happening
infrastructure-wise across the the different um muga areas that we were
considering. Out of that we came up with uh five uh five different blocks
basically to the east and the south that we wanted to go analyze. So tonight the
the intent of tonight is to go through the scenarios that have come out of that
analysis that fit your guiding principles and to talk about those
scenarios with the intent at the end for you to give us guidance on which one
feels the most likely that you'd like to pursue. So this is not a decision night.
We're still in conversation. uh we still have a lot of room for analysis between
now and September to really dive down into the final details and the
implementation level thinking, but we would like your guidance tonight on
which of these scenarios uh fit the best with where your heads are at and what
the guiding principles are for the city so that we can narrow in our analysis
and bring you back uh more detailed information.
So, uh as a reminder of the guiding principles, we came up with three
guiding principles. Uh the first um and really the primary was financial impact.
What got us into this conversation was a was really discussion around long-term
financial viability of the city. And you're going to see the analysis
confirms that and we'll talk specifically about how how the analysis
confirms the the current state and point in time for Mil Creek and what the
options are to strengthen financial viability over over the the next um
period. The summary of this guiding principle
was really that we're looking for near-term substantive impact. And so we
defined that was within three years. And so that's what we were looking for in
the analysis. And we wanted it to be real. So those are the scenarios that
we're going to bring to you. The second was we wanted to retain the Mil Creek B
brand and vision, meaning that the neighborhoods that you think about
annexing should feel like they're a part of Mil Creek. um and may not be
immediately, but there's a path to to integrate them and have them be a part
of Mil Creek, and we want the city to be able to maintain its standards for
clean, safe, and well-maintained. So, those were the two really central
parameters within that one. The third was strategic value, uh which was a
should compared to the first two, which were really must. And what we were
looking for in the scenarios is do the annexation scenarios give us more
influence or control over the entry points to the city. So the so the places
where people have that first experience of the city. Uh do they give the city
any influence over what's going to happen to the west in terms of the 164th
and light rail development? And does it provide any benefits in terms of
financial capacity meaning bonding, grants, legislative funding, etc. So we
had our eyes on those things as well. So as you remember uh this is where we
left left the last conversation and uh we looked at four different MOA areas
all around the city and narrowed in on five blocks and we specifically as you
remember narrowed them down to for to blocks so that we could analyze them and
really look at how they m mix together how they match together to provide the
the the right and appropriate steps for the city. We're going to be talking
about four scenarios. And so as you as you listen to Sarah's analysis, Sarah
broke them down by blocks so that financially we could mix them together.
Uh what I'm going to be presenting to you is there are combinations of those
blocks that form the scenarios that meet the guiding principles that you've
talked about. The first is A plusB. So that is the scenario of going east uh
which we've talked about as um annexing neighborhoods that feel um very
appropriate and and and some of which already feel a part of Mil Creek. The
second scenario is CDNH which is the corridor to the south. Um the 527
corridor goes right between DNH. Um council member Cavaleri
» Rob as you give those can you give the population uh numbers in there as well
please? I'm going to come back and I'll give you I'll give you specific numbers
for each of the scenarios as as we talk about them. Um the third scenario is
AD&H. So that's picking up the block to the east and coming down the power lines
uh to include the the 527 corridor uh between D&H. And then the final scenario
which some of you brought up which is let's state the intent to do it all. And
that would be the caveat of that scenario is that effectively it would be
a staged implementation scenario that would take multiple years and uh we
would go off as a next step with staff and come back with the staging of that
but it would take but but the assumption of that is it's not one swoop it would
be it would be over multiple segments and multiple years. So I just want to
give you a little bit of framing and reminder so that when you're listening
to Sarah's analysis uh you can fit that together. What we're going to do after
Sarah runs through her numbers is I'll come back and take you through each of
these scenarios uh with population, with what's the financial impact, with what
the pros and the cons are. Uh we'll do a quick run through of each of the
scenarios and then we can talk about which ones feel like the most
appropriate to consider. Okay, great. So Sarah, I will hand it
over to you and let you run uh through your numbers.
» Great. Uh good evening everybody. I'm sorry I'm not there in person. Although
I'm probably more useful to to you tonight as a computer head on the wall
in case you have questions because I do have a lot of backup that I can refer
to. I think Rob will do a really good job of keeping this high level. Um so
just to kick off the analysis that I did um I should have probably zoomed in on
the blocks that we'll be looking at so you can see the colors better, but I did
cost these out uh and and estimate revenues for each block discreetly. um
which means that I'm relying really heavily on on this future land use uh
assumptions or the designations from the counties as well as as uh assessor data.
So this is not you know I it would have been great if I could drive through and
make a count of every retail store in each area but I didn't do that. Um so
you know this these again are estimates. Um, just before we start, the blocks A
and C, as you can see, are really highly residential, and there's very little
commercial activity that's assumed to be happening or to happen eventually in
those areas. And that's really important from a fiscal analysis standpoint, but
because it means those two areas are um there's a lot more reliance on property
tax. Property tax and sales tax being the two primary general fund revenue
sources. So those are the areas that when you see a red numbers on the next
page um that's really why that that's happening as well as the fact that
because there is population in those areas there are staffing assumptions and
other costs that are assumed to scale with population in those two areas. So
we can skip to the next slide and and because I can't see your faces except
very tiny on my screen please just shout at me if you um have a question and want
me to stop. Um so this view is the first year the assumed first year which would
be 2027. Um and of course that number could change based on what actually
happens but it's just kind of helpful to have an assumed year to start uh for
inflation purposes. And then 2044 is shown on the right and the top half of
this screen is the revenue side. So you can see general fund revenues and the
composition there. Um the second line is the sales tax. You can see it is assumed
to be uh relatively lower in in block C and and block A, although I don't have
the populations on this view. Um they're they're on a later page. Um compared to
sales tax and property taxes, as you know, also grow more slowly than sales
tax. Uh it's it's based on uh the 1% plus new construction. So in those two
areas where there's relatively less development that's assumed to happen, uh
revenues just tend to grow more slowly. Uh on the bottom half of the screen you
can see the expenditures. Oh, I'm sorry and I skipped over the other funds. So
we have street REIT and road fund revenues. That's the real estate excise
tax. Um there's some multi uh motor vehicle fuel tax portion that's that's
distributed largely based on population. Uh there's a car tab estimate in there
as well. Um and and so forth. And and even though these funds uh tend to pay
for different things, I thought it would be helpful to kind of have them all
together just so you can see the the top line bottom line um view here. And then
on the bottom part of the screen, we have all of the uh ongoing operating
expenditures as well as some u road fund maintenance and operations expenditures
uh for each of the areas. police being the largest portion of costs especially
in blocks A with its high population and block D with just a lot of of stuff
going on. Um so this this staffing model that is underlying these these numbers
um is is largely based on the ratios that I developed for the first phase of
this analysis and presented to you back in the winter um with some review of by
staff just based on the fact that you know instead of taking those full muga
areas we would be looking at sub areas um so that's kind of where those numbers
came from. There are also assumptions based on uh the previous model about
overhead, about non-personnel costs, vehicle purchases, uh and so forth. And
so all of those together uh give you the bottom line net surplus or deficit in
the cases of of blocks A and C. Um and you can see how those uh grow in either
a negative or a positive direction uh from 2027 over to the last year that I
costed out, which was 2044. And again, this is just kind of to give give you a
sense of the relative scale of the details behind the numbers. Uh, so
there's a lot of talking here. I think I'll pause and see if you all have any
questions about this detail um before I move on.
» Um, yes, Council Member Allison has a question.
» Thank you, Sarah. Um, on the the the revenue sides, what is in the other
taxes bucket? >> Sure. That's a portion of the um c the
county criminal justice sales tax that's distributed to cities. Uh there are also
utility taxes that are um I did an analysis based on current taxes in the
city of Mil Creek and then I just kind of scaled things based on parcels with a
lot of assumptions behind it.
» Any other questions? Um Council Member Seckler.
» Yeah, I uh I have a couple questions. This might be better to wait till later
or we could do it now because it's on the screen.
» But I have a a number of questions about the expense line.
» Yeah. >> Yeah.
» All right. So, I'm I'm looking at some of these numbers and and I I don't
understand where these expenses come from. For example, in uh this district
A, which is a strip that runs alongside our current border. It's not a a deep
penetration of area. It's just kind of a slight expansion of the area that we
already are covering. We've got a $1.6 million increase in the police
department, which I didn't quite understand how that could be where that
number came from. I just need answers on, you know, where these numbers come
from. In the first year, I've got a $950,000
expense for surface water. And I don't understand where that number comes from
or where that that expense is was created, as well as each one of these
expense lines. And uh I I'd like to understand
you know what what drives these numbers. >> Sarah, I might I might jump on in on the
staffing part and then um you can talk about surface water. So, um so I engaged
with staff uh after the last study session to go block by block so that we
could sit down and make staffing assumptions. And the guidance we used
was the effectively the guidance you gave us to use the existing Mil Creek
model to stay lean. And so we were sanity checking the staffing based on
the current ratios uh that Mil Creek uses. Now we made a judgment here that
we were going to wait until implementation planning to push on any
of that. We could have a conversation that says a if we go into a that there
may not be as much necessary staffing. Uh but we just use the guidance you gave
us in terms of the current Mil Creek ratio as at this point so that you can
see the financial estimates and then when we get to the the nuances of
exactly how many staff we we'll we'll pick that up in implementation planning
is the next step. So you so you'll have an opportunity to push on some of that
block by block based on what guidance you give us in terms of which area you
want to pursue. The challenge is that we're looking at these numbers now and
going to be making decisions you what looks better, what looks worse, and
we're all looking at the bottom line. And if these numbers aren't necessary,
then the bottom lines are all going to change. Or if some areas are actually,
you know, going to need lot more expenses. I I I would what I'd like to
see is an analysis that's based on probable expenses on these particular
areas. What makes sense? For example, I picked the biggest one of all because
it's it How how in the world are we going to spend a million dollars on
surface water? What what have we seen in there that would justify that projected
expense? >> So So I think we have followed that
guidance that the probable expenses based on the existing level of
resourcing that the city uses. We have not we have not used other cities
benchmarks. We've used Mil Creek's benchmarks.
And and the reason we've done that is that over time what that's borne out is
that's the appropriate level that the city has found in order to support the
services that it needs. Now it may be that we would push and say in year one
or year two we could go in with less but we chose to give you numbers that were
more of a sustainable number so that you could see what the financial the best
guess of what the financials would be. Now from that perspective remember these
financials at this point are estimates. So you will get to a budgeting process
every year. Uh but what we've done is is is integrated all the different
assumptions from staffing, infrastructure,
equipment, etc. to give you guidance on on which which of these areas are
effectively financially accreative and and to what level is. Are the numbers
down to the $10 accurate? No. But they're they're directionally going to
be correct for you. >> Yeah. I'm worried they're kind not even
down to the $10, down to the million dollar number because you know if if
we're 20 if if for example this area A is 25% of our population increase we're
going to increase by 25%. Then we're taking 25% of our current police 25% of
our current surface water and adding that on. Well, that makes no sense to me
because we don't know if that particular area is going to need that additional
police coverage if it's going to even need the surface water. But it will
affect our decisions going forward. And more importantly, there are certain
areas where our current numbers are not going to make sense. You know, we're
we're going to look at some areas where we're going to need higher numbers than
we're currently, you know, and our that are that are that are based on our
current population distribution. In other words, some areas are going to
need more police than the current uh Mil Creek model. Correct. Some areas going
to need less police than the current milk truck model. So, I really think we
need to I I would really love to to scrub each one of these numbers and say
where does it come from? Where would we need it in the first year? And if we
don't need it, the good news to that is after the first year instead of being
down 147,000, we may have a couple million dollars which will help us to
fund other areas as we move down the road that will need si significant uh
increases. >> So, so as we get to the next level,
we'll push on that. I I would caution you is you've been very clear in your
guiding principles. We want to maintain the standards of the city. So one of the
assumptions that we used is to maintain the standards of the city. We're going
to use the current city's rubric in terms of staffing to thousand citizens
and we'll apply that in the numbers so that you have you have a good benchmark
collectively in terms of this is the staffing we'd go in with to maintain the
standards of the city at the lean model that the city is using. Now I think it's
a dangerous path for you to start going down and picking on every single one. Um
there are there are ch there there's potential we might be able to gain some
synergies but at this point I would guide you that there's been a lot of
discipline put into these numbers from from an analysis perspective I would use
these numbers and then let's get into implementation planning and see if we if
there are any other gains >> once we dig down not to interro once we
dig down to the areas that we're most interested in I'm sure the numbers are
going to change and so to council member Steph's point so these are just I
wouldn't say they're wags but they're just kind of you know what the numbers
bear out currently. >> Yeah. And and just to be clear, there's
nothing finger in the air about these numbers. This is all the available
sources from the county. Uh Sarah has gone into the the line item detail
around the revenue numbers and the expenses from everything we know. So
these these numbers are pretty borne out. Um and yes, to council member
Cavaleri's point, as as you give us guidance on the areas that we'll go
into, we will go down one more level and really start pushing. So do you feel
confident that your this number for uh area A is a realistic expense number
that we would incur in the first year >> based based on the current ratio of
employees FTE to thousand people? Yes. >> So the $950,000 is just based upon our
current surface water program. >> Can I answer the question, Rob? Would it
be helpful? Um, can we go to slide four on the presentation
because I think this might help clear things up. So, this is where we have the
personnel. This the assumed per staff spread for each of the departments and
you can see for area A there are two FTE that are assumed CD and H each have 1.3.
So the 900,000, you know, there are assumptions about
salaries and benefits and about vehicles per FTE that we get from the from the
the scrub of budgets that we did over the winter in Mil Creek and and other
like communities. Um, as well as talking to the county, if you're talking about
an A plus B scenario, that 900,000 would be split across the two blocks. Um, and
we did talk a lot about surface water infrastructure in the last meeting.
there there is quite a bit of infrastructure in all of these areas.
There weren't as many culverts that were identified, but those wouldn't be in
this cost anyway because those were assumed to be capital. So, I do feel
pretty confident after going through the the infrastructure for for streets and
roads and surface water at the last meeting and having worked with the
operating budget for, you know, eight months now that that we're getting we're
a Mil Creek is staffed currently. Um, but looking at these numbers and scaling
as best as we can. But does that answer your question about kind of how what's
what what's driving the the difference here?
» No, I still see confusion because in in area A, you've got an FTE increase of
two on streets and two on surface water, right? These are FTE counts. Am I
correct? >> Yes.
» Okay. And then over in uh area D, which is a larger area, you have a smaller
number of FTE counts. So how could they be based on population? And if the
population is bigger in D, why is the number of FTEEs lower?
» So this this is kind of back to Rob's this is sort of a directional
conversation because what staff did with Rob's guidance was walk through the two
sets of blocks, not in each one discreetly um for the purposes that he's
going to show you next where he has the different scenarios of of two or three
blocks. And what I did because I'd already built a revenue model that went
block by block was I spread them based on this just so I could show you an
individual bottom line knowing that when you were were going to be discussing
scenarios you'd be combining them. So I think that you know that like if you
were to I don't think anybody would assume you would just have one you know
a third of an FTE on one area. It would be more sort of as you're considering
these what would the appropriate staffing level be?
Yeah, it still doesn't add up for me, but I know we're I'm saying the same
thing, so we can move on. >> Yeah,
go ahead, >> deputy director.
» So, I know on this, but I did want to point out that the FTE figures were
configured to be used in block scenarios and not individually. So, we identified
the need based in A. If you did A and B together, that scenario is a little bit
different. And more than likely, you're not going to be able to do
just B because it comes down and with the um
the boundary review board, they likely won't approve that because of the flag
annexation. >> Um so these are all considering the
different scenarios that are likely. So don't just strictly say, "Oh, we're only
looking at A or we're only looking at B." Because you're not just going to be
annexing B. >> Laurel, you may you might talk the about
the multiple rubrics too that some of them are based on thousand people, some
of them are based on road, you know, numbers.
» So the other piece, so pieces of this, um, so like your streets, we're going to
have expenses more than likely based on street mile.
So, your staffing is going to be tied to that or the number of parks that we're
going to be taking in based on the different areas. And then we also have
police. The easiest way to get your police number is going to be based on
population because that's historically what we've used. Um, so that also plays
a big role in how we came up with these numbers.
I I promise they were not wax.
» Any other questions?
Yeah, I'm I'm I I I still would would like to reserve my opinion on these
expense numbers and you know, not related during this meeting right now,
but based on moving forward, I'm not I'm not I'd like to spend more time with
them, but maybe at a later date when we get to a decision-m stage. Okay.
» Yeah. And I think specifically if you guide if you guide us to go look at a
that's one that we can really dig in with you.
» Yeah.
Um, excuse me. So, uh, just before we turn off of this slide, actually,
there's a pretty big update that I meant to give when we were looking at the map
earlier. Um, so the one kind of major change from the presentation I gave in
June was the population for block H, which um, originally I'd done just sort
of scale kind of a rough cut uh, based on purely on parcel analysis and the
uses of parcels in the assessor data. But after looking at it more closely,
there is some fairly large uh multifamily housing in this area. So
I've updated the estimate, it was about 1,000, which I believe was too low. Uh
and it's about 2600 now. So you can see the the population of of H has assumed
to be bigger at this point. So maybe the best thing to do would be
to go back to slide three or two. That gives the or sorry uh go one more
back. Yeah, there we go. That one. The big table.
Uh this one. Yes. Can you zoom in a little
bit? Um and again, I hope you know I don't
know how useful this is. Maybe I can do a quick math exercise and add these up
for you while you're talking. But um this is intended to show the lifetime of
each of these blocks. um and kind of what's you know what what what the
tipping point would be. Um the expiration of the assumed annexation tax
credit is what's causing a to go kind of closer to zero and then back down again
in 2032. That's a six-year tax credit that's assumed to expire at that point.
Um but everything else should hopefully be be pretty straightforward. I have the
assumed growth rates there and um you know population growth is is assumed at
the same rate as last presentation. Um is there anything else I can provide to
be helpful here Rob or do we want to go into go back to your conversation?
» Council members, do you have questions for Sarah?
Did >> Council member Pedic did you have any
questions? Okay, we're good. >> And Sarah will hang with us.
» Oh, wait a minute. You know what? Because I granted she could yell, but I
cannot see. >> No, no questions for me. Thank you very
much. >> Okay, just want to make sure. You're
welcome. >> Don't worry, I'll yell.
» I'm looking out for you. >> Okay, Sarah will hang with us uh as we
go through the scenarios if there are other questions uh that we can use her
uh phone a friend um expertise. Um I I want I want to just call out Sarah.
She's done an immense amount of work to really tie all these together and has
done a really great job. So Sarah, thank you for all the the background work
you've done on this. >> No problem. If you had questions about
housing units or retail sales square footage, that's in the assumptions page,
which I know you had some questions about last time.
» Okay. So, so you saw the analysis by block and and the the caveat that to
call out is when we did staffing assumptions, we were looking by these
scenarios because sometimes the the staffing it was hard to do by by the
little block C as an example. uh that um so uh so Sarah amvertised those. So if
we start to look at them as scenarios, you start to see the financial picture
of what it might look like when they're combined together.
And there was a theme that I want to call out to you which I found very
interesting in the analysis as as we got it back. And the theme was that the
areas that are residentially centric, especially single family home centric,
those are the areas where costs over time will outpace the revenues. And we
knew we had we had that hypothesis going into this. And it was actually the
problem statement which led us into this because that's the Mil Creek footprint.
Uh pre going into the South Town Center and and and having higher density. uh
the the city faces that scenario which puts us in a situation where we're
setting ourselves up to increase taxes down the road to maintain services. So
that bore out in in in the analysis and so you saw blocks like A follow that
pattern uh where low growth single family centric and over time the costs
outweigh the revenues where what that led to a conclusion was
that the center of the annexation scenarios that are the most financially
accreative follow one of two things. The first is the commercial corridors. And
so you saw that in this case you're looking at D and H as the most
financially accretive of of all of these blocks and it also follows the pattern
of higher density. And so where we saw those dynamics running uh those were the
the blocks that actually you could put together as a first step because that's
all we're talking about here uh that provide the the biggest financial
benefit to the city in the short term. So there are four scenarios that came
out of this analysis that met your criteria in terms of that financial
creativeness plus fit with the city. The first is A plus B. So that is the
scenario going east and so I'll pull up each of these. U that's the least
financially accretive as you'd expect because of the of the dynamics.
» Sorry Rob. Council member Cavaleri has a question.
» Yes, Council Member Cavaler. >> Thanks Rob. So just a quick explanation.
Why would the residential outpace um anything else to the negative over a
period of time? Because are you factoring in in like those homes are
going to be sold over time and the city's going to collect revenues from
that, they're going to be renovated and all those things.
» So Sarah, I'll I'll turn this one to you in terms of what's behind in the
numbers. >> Yeah, sure. So yeah, we do have an
assumption about how much of the market the market value as a as a whole turns
over each year. We um stuck with three and a half% for all the areas which is
pretty much in line with Mil Creek for the last five or six years. Um and I
think part of it too is that those residential areas do they're they do
turn over um which drives REIT revenue, but there's not as much new development
that's assumed in terms of like additional properties that are built. Um
really the growth in those areas that are um going to have more high density
residential uh industrial and and commercial development and mixeduse
development will just have new construction which adds to the property
tax roles more than like a kind of stable single family residence uh
dominated area. >> But those but is aren't those just
one-time collected fees? >> Yes, on the REIT yes I mean we do you
know we have make an assumption that there's some portion that turns over
every every year. Uh but the new construction is added as assessed value
that's in then in the tax base from there on out. So it's above the 1%
growth in your property taxes every year. So it's an ongoing increase if
there's new build. >> Thank thanks sir.
» The other dynamic in there council member Cavalier is is the growth. So so
the areas that have low growth associated with that will obviously have
that dynamic. >> Any other questions? Okay. So, I'll run
through each of the scenarios uh fairly as a high level because you've all seen
these in the packet and then uh and then we'll stop and talk. So, the first
scenario is what we've been calling Mil Creek East which are blocks A and B. Uh
you can see from the the top it's Seattle Hill Road, uh which is coming
between the existing city boundary and A. Uh B is bordered on the south by
180th and then 35th uh Avenue Southeast on the on the western border.
So if you look at uh the summary of of this the population is about 10,700.
Uh it is primarily residential. Um it is financially accretive when you combine
the two and it does be remain financially accretive through year 18.
Uh this is the one scenario where the u benefits to the city decrease over time
rather than increase. So, it starts to uh be about $1.1 million uh net to the
city, revenues minus costs, and by the time we get to year 18, it's about
$500,000 net positive. So, it's um it basically becomes uh becomes less
accretive over time. The benefit of this is that many of these neighborhoods
already think of themselves as Mil Creek and as many of you have pointed out, uh
citizens in these areas are already using the services of Mil Creek. So,
they feel integrated with the city. Uh so there are lower identified risks uh
with uh with with this going this direction and there's the potential to
leverage REIT dollars. Um and uh in this process we looked at parks um and Tanark
park is in this area. When we look at the cons of this relative to the other
scenarios um it doesn't gain any significant commercial activity or
corridor. So um this is primarily residential. uh we've talked about this
as being easier uh but we don't get the commercial uplift or the industrial
uplift and as we saw in Sarah's initial analysis that we looked at earlier in
the year this area has lower growth uh and lower growth capacity compared to
the other areas. Um the other thing that I would say is just to call to your
attention is there is some signaling that's going to happen in whichever area
you choose to move forward around and uh there's different signaling by moving
down the commercial corridors and the entrances to the city versus simply
moving into some of the residential areas to the east. So I think this is
less of a signal to the region uh in terms of the intent of the city if you
are thinking down the road that you may want to uh move farther south or or or
even move west as as a as a possibility. The one thing that we did want to call
out here is obviously we have to have conversations with the boundary review
board. Uh the bottom part of B in this picture does provide a non-ontiguous
border. Uh so we believe that we would have there may be some conversations
with the B boundary review board and they may even have concerns about the
bottom part of B in this scenario. Any questions on that scenario?
Okay. Scenario two is uh is Mil Creek South. Uh there are two um scenarios two
and three where we'll be looking at DNH as the as the main commercial corridor
blocks. This is the first of those. So, uh, uh, block C is bordered on the east
by 35th, uh, and the south by 180th. And then you can see it follows the power
lines, uh, down to 196, uh, uh, at the bottom of H.
So, this population is about 11,700 uh, between those three. Obviously, it
does gain the the Highway 527 corridor uh, down to 196th.
Um, blocks D and H, as you saw in the packet, are the most financially
accretive. They're accretive from year one, and they actually grow in
positivity over time. So, for CD and H, you would expect about two thou $2.7
million net to the city in year 1, and that would grow over time to be about
5.3 million in year 18. >> Um, Rob, I actually have a question. Um,
and I apologize for not thinking of it till now, I guess, but is there a reason
that we're not just looking at DNH as one of the scenarios? Are we throwing in
either C or the other one? Um, because we think they want the boundary review
board or for some other reason because to me it would make sense to look at
» those two. So that's certainly something that you could guide the the rationale
between putting these blocks together is there's some residential connection
between C and D. And so uh as going south and and with contiguous borders
going down, we expected that this would be a more acceptable option.
» Okay.
» So this Yes, Council Member Steckler. So uh um again I'm looking at the D and H I
see on the revenue side under sales tax um A has a projected sales tax of 747
and just D alone has a projected sales tax of almost 2 million with almost the
same number of people. What what is the driver for the $1.2 million in
additional sales tax revenue in D? >> Sarah, can you jump in on that? Sure.
Yeah. If you in the packet um look at the um assumptions and notes page
there's I think it's page five. You can see how I split out the taxable sales
amounts. Again, these were from the department of revenue um that were
provided for um so the department of revenue provided us estimates or
actually they provide us actual uh sales tax revenues collected in the full muga.
And I used parcel analysis based on the use of parcels and where they were
classified as um retail or other type of other type of taxable retail sales
activity to split out the in-person sales based on these different blocks.
And there wasn't really any activity occurring in B and C and very minimal in
block A which is kind of what we expected after looking at the future
land use and where we think that um development will occur. So uh based on
um that I portioned the activity that's occurring in person largely to blocks D
and H where we have a lot of industrial and commercial um sales activity that's
that or uses that are happening in those areas.
» I imagine that in H I was just surprised with D when I looked at this sheet um
you have a significant increase in in in D for uh retail sales tax of 1.8 8
million versus uh 55,000 for A. So that's where the the driver is. It's in
I assume that's retail building, not um I mean the retail sales for the
residential should be the same because you got
basically the same population, right? >> Yeah. So um
» what businesses are driving the increases in D? Indeed, it's the the ret
the um parcels that are classed as re classed as retail services or um I you
know even the industrial was I made an assumption about taxable uh host
wholesaling activity that might be subject to retail sales. Um so I I lean
pretty heavily on the land use here. Um, in terms of the remote sales, there are
also assumptions about per household and then per um, some businesses do, you
know, have have remote taxable sales as well. So, that's kind of where those
numbers came from. >> So, for example, in A, you've got 55,000
in retail sales. That's all residential retail sales.
» So, on page five, if you look in the middle of the page there, it says
taxable sales. And then you can see remote construction or in person.
Um so in the assumption is in 2026 in block A there's about 24.2 million in
remote taxable sales from deliveries in that area. In block D there's an
assumption about 38 million. Part of that too is based on the per household
versus per um h per per housing unit versus per um uh person. So there's um
you know more housing there more housing units in block A, but the population is
a little higher. There's also just more businesses in block D that might be uh
you know ordering things and paying remote taxable sales. So that's kind of
where those numbers came from. And then the in-person is is pretty based
primarily on where businesses are assumed to be located and where they're
collecting sales taxes. >> Well then forgive me for asking again
too. I I apologize for this, but when I look at that what you just mentioned,
that one area in the middle, um A is a population of 6,61
with remote sales of uh 24 million, correct?
» Yes. >> Okay. And D is a similar size area of 6
uh 6,325, but their their remote is 38 million in
sales versus 24 million. Uh but the commercial is separate from that. This
is just remote. So this 24 to 38 for the same size population
» population, isn't it? >> So the the other thing is that the
remote taxable sales base um for blocks A and B was based on Mil Creek East and
what's happening there. So Department of Revenue
gave us the number of the amount of remote sales activity that's occurring
in block A and part of block B. So that came from the Department of Revenue. It
was a lot lower on a per household basis than what's happening in Mil Creek South
of which blocks C, D, and H are apart. So the per when you look at it on a per
household basis in Mil Creek East, and this again from the Department of
Revenue, it's about 11 or 12,000 per household. In Mil Creek South, it was
higher. It's about 18,000 per household. There's also an assumption about taxable
deliveries to businesses that are happening in D that are not happening in
A. So that's why even though the populations aren't that different, the
numbers are are higher. >> So A and B was based on a different
analysis. It was actual sales numbers and I assume CD&H you said were based on
a on a on a formula. >> They're based on my estimate based on
Department of Revenue Actuals. So, Department of Revenue actual gave us
after like four months of waiting actual taxable sales information in Mil Creek
East, Mil Creek South, uh, Marth Martha Lake and Larch. So to get to this level
of analysis rather than go back to the department and you know not be able to
get you what you needed for this meeting, I made assumptions about what's
happening in Mil Creek East, which was relatively easy because it's just A and
then like half of B. And then Mil Creek South, which was harder because there's
areas that you're not looking at with more scrutiny. So I tried to make
informed assumptions about the Mil Creek South activity and aortion it to each of
the blocks that you were interested in based on what we learned in the last
analysis and what we see and think might be happening now.
» What what I heard you say sir is that the average was higher in south from the
do data than in east which >> yes that is one of the factors. Yep.
» Okay. So it's the same analysis in every block.
» Right. But for some reason they gave a much the people in D are remotely
ordering significantly more almost 40% more
» that's what it says >> sales tax revenue versus the people in
east >> I also think the casino was a big
economic driver at the time as well but that would be in person.
» Yeah that's um I had a question on that. Were we able to look at that data for or
to pull out data for the casino? I know I'd mentioned it to Martin and I don't
know the way the do gave us the information because we we can't know
which individual businesses are are we able to
in any way extrapolate how much would be coming from the casino since
they're closing? >> Yeah, thanks Mayor. I did I did
extrapolate that data and I did send that to the group. I I I can pull that
up and and recall that information right now probably online, but
» and we we actually have a line item list by casino of what of what they've been
generating, so we can incorporate that. >> Okay, perfect. Thank you.
» Okay, so uh financially accreative approximately $2.7 million uh starting
off in year one. It grows over time. Uh obviously uh this gains the commercial
corridor. The other thing that I would highlight is there's industrial zoning
as we go south which provides additional economic opportunity that's not yet
embedded in the numbers. Uh this also does gain um additional influence over
the entry points to the city which aligns to that part of your guiding
principles. Uh on the con side we we know that there
may be some resistance. uh we're starting to get into the difference
between whether this is the right thing and how because a lot of wh where we are
going to hit some neighborhoods where they need to be educated or brought
along uh th those are things that are controllable. Um uh we do know that
there is part of this segment that crosses into Northshore School District.
So, uh, if you look at this little triangle right here at the bottom of D,
we actually start to cross over into a different school district and and that
will be a dynamic as you look at at at different areas around the MOAS. Um, and
we know that there are some some continual unknowns. We've actually done
a lot of analysis around Maze Pond and uh and North Creek Park. Uh, it's
something we continue to have our eyes on as we go forward. So, if this is if
this is the guidance, that's one of the things we'll continue to dig in to make
sure that there aren't any unknowns that we're not accounting for.
Okay. The next scenario is AD&H. Uh this was a spin on DNH that you suggested
that we look at uh which was to incorporate the areas to the east uh
which um again already feel uh somewhat part of the city and then run down the
power lines uh to the the southeast border of DNH down to the same point at
196. So if you look at the financials, this
is actually very similar to CDNH. Uh this is larger in population because of
incorporating block A. So this is about 15,000 in population. Um and it is a
combination of the the neighborhoods to the east that are are um you know that
that should feel fairly natural to assimilate with that commercial corridor
down 527 to 196th. Um again because of blocks DNH this is financially accretive
from year 1. It's about uh estimated to bring a net of 2.8 8 million to the city
in year 1 and then grow over time slightly slower than the last scenario
of CD and H to 4.8 million um uh just because A grows slower uh or or A has a
an influence to that effect. So this has the benefit of uh of naturally
assimilating areas that feel like a part of the city. It has natural assimilated
borders along the power lines and you gain the commercial corridor and the
industrial opportunity going south. Um it continues also to signal to the um to
the to the region your the city's interest in influencing the entry points
to the city. The cons on this are are very similar to CD&H uh and the unknowns
um are are very similar. So um there isn't a lot to add in terms of um risk u
that we didn't talk about in the last scenario.
» Um Council Member Cavalary. >> Thanks Mary. I I think the
the one thing I know I know council member Paddock and I um we kind of like
pieced together this hybrid idea of of this uh D&H and how that comes together.
Well, one of the things for me is that that strikes me is that that A is going
to always be there. There's no one from the east looking to annex towards Mil
Creek. So I you know what I mean? So it might be a safe I was I was under the
impression initially that that it's probably the best safe first step but
due to the population number I think it's it might be something we would add
later. Just I'm just throwing that out there. you and I had I think we all had
our own private discussions with Rob our Zoom meetings and so so I've evolved a
little bit on that that that a will always be there and so what is
the best case scenario to put your toe in the water and test now so
» I I will tell you there's very good continuity across the council around the
blocks D&H uh there's there's one council member thinking there's a
different first step uh but the rest of you think that DNH is the core and and
now you just have slightly different uh points of view around staging and where
to go first and how to piece this together. So, it's an appropriate time
to to add that into the conversation. Okay. So, the final scenario is the
let's do it all. Uh this is the stated intent that you believe that uh that
these borders will actually be a part of Mil Creek over over the next several
years. Uh the caveat to this is that we would do this with a staged
implementation approach. So we would go into staging um and and likely this
would happen over two or three blocks and over multiple years. So we're
talking five, six, etc. years. I'm not giving you those numbers as planning
vehicles, but to say that we would we would come back with this is the
staging, but it would happen over time so that these areas could be assimilated
into the city naturally and give staff time to hire appropriately because
there's staff that will be ha have to be hired to support each of these. So in
this integrated scenario, uh effectively it doubles the size of the city. So it's
22,400 people. Um it uh effectively has both the pros and the cons integrated of
all the other scenarios. So it integrates the east neighborhoods that
already feel a part of Mil Creek and that use the services today with the
commercial corridor going south and the economic opportunity uh associated with
that. The thing that is is an additional note about this is that larger scale
means increased regional influence and so this larger scale does increase the
city's bonding capacity uh the ability to go get grants the econ potential
economies of scale. So this is this is the one additional benefit if you will
of this scenario that is that is it does increase the the influence and the
capacity of the city uh in terms of future investments. So from a financial
perspective uh in year 1 it brings a net 3.8 million to the city uh and grows
over time to 5.9 million in year 18. So uh it it it continues to grow creatively
throughout that period. Um and as we've talked um it it integrates both the the
residential sections to the east and the commercial corridor of the south. This
is effectively a step to accelerate the path of ex annexation. So rather than
you having to come back to the table and make multiple decisions around an intent
that you already feel like this is where you're going, this is the statement to
say this is where we're going and now let's manage it appropriately and
smartly in implementation and do it and do it over stages. If you look at the
city uh footprint, it also creates uh continuous borders um and um and
certainly sets up whatever additional conversations that would come after this
whether you would want to talk about going further south or west if that's
something if uh that that you choose to do. The con on this one is that doubles
the size of the city and therefore uh it does um uh require it to be staged in
implementation and it just increase risks along the way in terms of uh
things that could come up in the process.
» Um council member Cavaleri has a question.
» So this has been one of my biggest worries because what this also does is
ties us to some of the latest legislation on mandatory growth for
cities with certain u population numbers. And so would that have the
potential to like we want D&H to be a a commercial powerhouse at some point,
right? We you know, we want them to really generate money. Um would that
force us into a um situation where we're having to put more apartments in there
just to accommodate the current laws that exist, kind of like we're doing in
South Town Center at this point. Now, that's that's one of my biggest worries
about this one big swoop, this one big bite. we'd be we'd be pushed into that
corner uh almost immediately. >> Okay.
» Any other questions on this scenario? And then and then I will open it for
discussion uh around uh which scenario uh you're thinking about.
» Any other questions? Um council member Paddock. Yeah, I guess a [clears throat]
point of clarification just that each one of these that have multiple blocks,
the idea is is that it would be a single block that would go first,
second block would go second, etc. It wouldn't be grabbing all of it at once.
There's no none of these scenarios say we're going to go after all of them in
one fell swoop. >> Correct? So se separate the intent for
what you want to do with the how we will do it because we will come back with
then detailed options and recommendations on here is even if you
chose this one we'll come back with here is how to stage through this start with
this block and then we'll take time and then we'll do and then the
recommendation is these so we'll we'll come back with that level of analysis.
» Great. [clears throat]
» Any other questions? >> Okay. So what we are looking for is
guidance. Uh and um based on the guiding principles that you laid out, the
scenarios that fit best with your guiding principles uh are effectively
two, three, and four. Um we can change that, but those are the ones that fit
best. And so uh really what we're looking for here is is guidance around
your preferred scenario uh for us to do that next level of planning and and
implementation staging so that so that you are when you get to the point of
let's make a decision you actually are eyes open. That's what that's what we're
looking for is to get you that next level of detail. So based on the
financials and based on the analysis that's been brought to you, this is the
point we're looking for guidance on on where where you want us to focus.
» Does anybody um have any comments? It's a study session, so you can have
comments. >> I guess I have
» or question if that's okay. >> No, go for it.
» So um I know these scenarios we've talked about going through which one
which package here um or we want to talk through. Is there any reason what would
be the downside of just saying we want to look at one of the sections
rather than two, three, four, five, six or all of them? Is there any
do we are we locked into anything if we say look we just want to go into I'll
I'll because I don't want to jaice the jury. We want to go into zone Z and
start there and see what happens. Is there any downside to that?
» So I I would bring you back to your guiding principles uh which which uh
were meant to guide us in the process of if we're choosing a a scenario or
scenarios that actually are substantive substantively financially creative and
can be maintained with the brand and the vision and give you that next step of an
example then there's no reason it shouldn't be on the table.
» Okay. Okay. I thought I might have be missing something. Thank you,
» Council Member Stuckler. >> Well, when I um look at the numbers here
on the on the chart, it would seem to make sense to me and one of our guiding
principles was economic viability. That was really the number one driver. We
have some concerns about the future and we wanted to look at annexation as a way
to generate additional income for our city. You mentioned we could take all of
these regions and generate 3.8 8 million, right, in first year. Or we
could just take D and H and generate almost three million, which uh is going
to be a lot easier to do, just two little regions, DNH versus adding on A,
B, and C. So, if economic viability is number one, um I I would I would vote
for the for uh D and H and definitely not A because A never makes us money. A
cost us forever. So it's not a vi according to these numbers I would you
know and if I really want to believe in economic viability I don't want to go
into a ever that's that's a that's a killer to that's a loser. So um the
other thing is it does give us what six 8 9,000 additional residents against our
21,000. So we do increase significantly without overloading the number which was
some of the concerns of other council members that you know we don't want the
tail wagging the dog here. we'd still have the majority of our population
within the Mil Creek proper area. And it provides us, you know, a a somewhat
contiguous uh border, not as good as the power line, I thought, but you know, I
think it's something a lot easier to explain. So, DNH um gosh, generate 3
million the first year. Um that seems to be the the most viable. And if we
started with council member Paddock's comment, what if we just do D first and
then H? I'm having a problem with that. But those two would be the easiest two
areas for us to handle and the best possible return.
» Council member Cavaleri also has >> Thank you, Mayor.
Um, yeah, I agree with all the council members. Um, our bullet was strategic
value, right? That's that was our main goal here was to have strategic value.
Um I also think it has to have the ability to pass um boundary review board
scrutiny uh uh with council member Steckler's
plan. I think I if you eliminate C from the from the uh model um which 180th is
a you know is really the I guess the delineating line that really runs
through there. I think we'd have a difficult time just simply annexing D
and H without C. And so with with those three and a population of 11,700,
I don't think we lose much. I think we I think it provides a lot more opportunity
and like I said before a A and B will always be there. I don't think anybody's
going to be annexing, you know, towards us from the other side. So I, you know,
while it's still in our muga, I get that. But but um I I think I think those
three together and again keeps us in line with with with our the other vision
other thing we talked about is not wanting to be reverse assimilated or or
like you said have somebody just said the tail wagging the dog. And so, um,
I'd like to keep the population numbers down with our combined cities just for
that other reason I specified before so that we're not moving into next level
where we have to have a certain amount of density and certain amount of regions
that we cannot utilize this for commercial at some point. Does that make
sense? So, so I my personal opinion is the CDH approach would would probably be
the most viable and bear out the least amount of scrutiny from the boundary
review board. >> Great. Thanks.
» Um I'm going to speak real quick and then um Council Member Gobeski and then
I was double checking um Melissa, but I um I'm going to agree with um Council
Member Cavalerics. I technically agree with um Councilman Stler. If it could
pass the design review board, I I would say let's just move down into DNH
um and just go down and add commercial space because we are really needing
commercial space. And it brings in the financial viability that we need some
more stability and another tier, if you will, of of revenue coming in that's not
totally reliant upon our residents having to have property taxes go up all
the time. But that considered, if we're going to need to take in one other spot
in order to be able to get it approved, I I would prefer to go with C rather
than A. So, I would say CDH would be my preference as well. Um, and then Council
Member Golki has lit up. I'm looking at um
what I'm hearing from our long-term conversations that we've had about this
and if we're looking at taking these steps
long term, I think that the long-term effect of taking ABCDH,
saying we're going to take it now and then implementing a phased approach
versus saying we're going to take part of it now and we'll probably take part
of it later. The end result from an operational
standpoint is the same, but the process is more complex and doesn't signal to
our neighbors that we're taking this process as seriously in terms of those
intangible things we talked about like um influence to the west if that's our
eventual goal. So I feel like inevitably we're going to take these areas and for
us to signal now we would like to take them knowing that we would stage the
implementation allows us to stage the implementation in the best possible way
across all five of those areas instead of
the easiest that we think is the easiest now because sometimes there's an economy
of scale in those steps also right that like if you take a tiny bit and you take
a tiny bit and you take a tiny bit, you're creating a process each time you
take more and that costs money and time. So to just make the decision, this is
what we want to do and then we're going to go ahead and do it correctly over
time seems like it would be better for all of us and send a signal
to our neighbors that we are serious about uh growing and we're serious about
having influence in our region. We're serious about our borders and our entry
points and these neighbors that already feel like they're part of our community.
» Can I just make a comment? >> Well,
council member Paddock was lit up though.
» So So in that not to pick on your scenario, but but it's really useful and
thoughtful the way you laid that out. If we were to not just signal but and
you know announce our presence uh to do these these these um all all of the
above if if if you will starting with one of the six or one of
the five [clears throat] but then we learn that hey we're not good at this
and and and this is not as accreative as we'd like it to be or whatever the or
it's it whatever the problems Right. What's our backout?
I is there and I and I'm I don't know. Is there a backout once we've said we
want ABCDH?
So then I'll just I guess go finish the thought a little bit because if there's
a backout then I would agree with what Council Member Golioski was saying. um
it may not be exactly that but you know some combination of them because it
would make sense to say to the community etc that this is where we'd like to go
but I'm very very conscious of we need to be iterative in this process
and we have a by design we have a threadbear staff
and asking
that threadbear staff to even bring new people on to go out and and grab a big
chunk of population and have our community absorb that population
on the hope that it's going to work. Man, I that'd be hard for me to sign up
for and I think it would be hard for our community to sign up for. But if we
could iterate on it and do I'll use numbers so we don't get into the do
section one first and then two and then three and then four.
If we are successful with number one, that seems like the prudent path, the
safest path to go down. Even if it costs more to do in the long run, it will save
us from not making a big mistake if we are not good at step one. And um there
was one more thing I was thinking about that that I've completely lost. Um so
I'll leave it at that. >> So So let me
» Well, Rob um Mayor Prom is had her hand raised and hadn't got to speak yet. So
if you want to answer him and then let her and then let her talk. So
» that's okay. Let's let's go to Mayor Prom and then I'll come back.
» Okay. Yes. >> Okay. Mayor Prom,
» thank you very much. Um, I really it's it's I I um after much consideration,
I'm actually very much aligned with what the way that council member Gobieski
phrased it and framed it in the conversation of the signaling that like
this is our larger area and now this next step is what are the which ones
make the sense? How are we going to do it? what are the nitty-gritty of like
what is that communication with these areas and really hearing about it and I
really appreciate council member PA comment about like if we're not good at
it but also what happens that we haven't done any um external communication with
these neighborhoods right and with these communities so what about when we go out
there and we find out you know there's a huge opposition we had someone come to
council at the last meeting talking about a particular service and how they
would absolutely be going out there publicly to be talking about um the what
whatever they feel about the the services that might be provided and how
it would be impacted. And I think we can't really go into that discovery
without um making this statement of this is the area that we're going into. I do
want to say that for myself personally, I think to understand if we
can do it, if you know, what does this look like? How does this impact our
staff? What is the process like? Is it a vote? Is it ILA? Like what all that like
nitty-gritty it seems the safest and the most you know maybe conservative in in
thinking for time cost opinion is to go with um scenario one which is um A and B
understanding I heard what council member Cavaleri said about like how that
area is you know not like we can come back to it but I do think there's
something to going there first to get the kinks out of this process and what
we're questioning what we're asking about to learn more but um um fully
supportive of of signaling that this this area we're looking at not to the
left, not further south, but this is the area we're looking at. And now what does
that mean? Because it does make they all do as individually grouped together all
make sense. Um but if there is um a specific conversation about what areas
within if it's not that larger signaling um I might be on by myself on the AB but
I just wanted to flag my thoughts on it. Thank you.
» Um Rob, if you wanted to go ahead and go back and answer that and then council
member question. >> Um
» actually I'll council member Goby. Everybody has questions. I'll I'll defer
to the council members and then we'll and then I'll
» then you >> I'll provide input at the end.
» I respect >> all All right. Um so I just he he pretty
much iterated exactly kind of my thoughts on the matter maybe more
eloquently than I would have. Uh we the things that we do know uh about A and B
is that they're effectively built out and they're residential, right? So
they're not there's no there's night no light at the end of the uh of the
rainbow because we know uh over time it loses money, right? though. Um,
those numbers are already factored in, which is why I I said I reassessed even
though it was the safe bet. Once I saw those numbers and then and then Sarah
reiterated them again this evening with um with the longer term data, you can
you can see that they're always going to be there. We'll always have that option
if it's something we want to do later. So, um I I I like the small bite for
that reason. And I and I think and the fact that A&B is is like I said like you
said is completely it's it's residential. We know exactly what it is
and it's built out. It's not going to change. So um I I think that's probably
the makes the better case I think for HDC or
or or whatever hybrid we come up there. But but all at once and the last point
I'll make is that A&B is still in our muga. So, we we will always have the
opportunity to go back and get it if we want to. So, it's not going anywhere.
» Um, Council Member Allison has something to say, too.
» Yeah. So, to, you know, to carry over that point, A and B are up against an
area that is not in anyone else's MUA. So, um, it's boundaryless basically. Um,
at this point in the game, I would rather us just keep looking at the whole
area. all of them with possible staging of
those elements. Um I think the assimilation factor for A and A and B
would be very easy. I'm not so sure about the other areas. Um but the
revenue D&H, you know, that's it's a no-brainer. We somehow have to go after
those areas. And I don't know if right now is the right time for us to be
cutting off our nose despite our face. we've gotten a lot of data collected and
going one level down so that we can make a good decision
seems like the right thing to do. >> So, so I am hearing a two strains or two
themes in this conversation there. there is a theme across most of you around
CDNH or D&H that this south corridor is very important and and that uh is where
the financial gains come from both from a strategic value and a financial value.
Um the second theme is there are um about half of you that are thinking that
the city ends up with all of these and so it's so in that council member
Paddock back to your comment I think there is the potential for this to be a
distinction between intent and actual first step uh actual staging of this is
what you're going to do and so it's something that we'll go off with as as
we go into staff the next level is look at that staging of exactly how that can
be and what does that mean for what you come back to the table in terms of the
language of the resolution or what you would um what you would uh
» Yes, Laurel. >> I just wanted us to consider so we're
all thinking about this at the same time. Um as we talk about breaking it
off into little bits, I don't think the boundary review board would ever allow
us to just take H. I don't think they would let us just take B. I don't think
they'd do C. And honestly, I don't know if they'd even say D the way it is would
work. So, we're going to have to work in scenarios for them to be okay with this.
So it would probably be some kind of combination of if we were to do it all
HDC and then BA
maybe in a phase like one and then the other just logically where I would think
that step would go >> and and that maps to the themes actually
that I'm hearing from you that there is a block that's centered in on CDH and a
block that's centered in on everything which is just simply a staging
conversation between CD and H versus A and B. So, I think I think we can look
at it that way. >> Um, Rob, Council Member Paddock had
something else to say and then Council Member Stler.
» Okay. >> Go ahead, S.
» Yeah, I I defer to Martin first. That's fine. Yep.
» Thank you. Uh, one of the things I wanted to mention too is is that part of
the the how is how we uh structure the interlocal agreement with with the
county as well. So maybe not get maybe not get too hung up on um you know
blocks because part of how we can get out of it to to council member Paddock's
question is could be structured within that agreement or how we move forward.
So um I think that's something important to consider as well.
» I've I've um heard a couple of comments about the boundary review board and I've
I don't know where they lie and what the you know and whatnot. However, I've been
around long enough to know that let's not put that onus on us,
let's if we want to go for section one and we're afraid that they might say you
got to take two and three. Let's ask for section one and then let them tell us
nope, you're going to need two and three >> and and that's why we're asking for your
guidance of what you want. Then then we can start to have those conversations
» to give you feedback. >> And thanks for listening. The mayor told
me to say that council member Stinkle, you're next. [laughter]
» That was really well done. >> You know, uh, one I'm in agreement on,
uh, uh, H, D, and C. That's what the boundary review board tells us we need
to do. I'm that's that's going to be small enough that the the C numbers here
don't don't deter that much. The concern I've got with A and B is unless we can
come back with some different rationale numbers analysis. I mean, a is just not
in in I don't see the benefit to us. I see an economic deterrent to us and b
the only benefit there was really the projections here for for B is a a a de
um the expenses are $ 1.5 million less in in B than in A. So they have like I'm
I'm worried that that may not be a reality that we might not get that low
of an expense number. So if we go into that that area that that could be even
also more negative for us. So for me I would I would rather have us put put a
plan forward on HD and C and you know we haven't talked about west. Would we want
to go west before we go into A&B if we ever went into AM? I don't see the
reason for A&B. I do see the the reason for south and we've had lots of people
Hi Jeff, how you doing? uh promoting going west [laughter]
for for understandable reasons and and so would that be more important to us in
the timeline to go west before we go to A&B. So I I'm definitely focused on
south. Focused on south is what I would recommend. East it could be a discussion
down the road if the numbers ever change. But you know that's why you know
people we ask for these numbers to make sense and we get the numbers and if
these are true numbers it doesn't make sense to go in that just doesn't make
sense. It makes more sense to do the south and go to the west than to take
advantage of Martha Lake and take advantage of that development that's
going to be going on up by the freeway. And also we said something about a
entryway to our city. You know, there's other challenges with going west. We've
talked about those at length in our other meetings, but there there's some
some some great logic and cost uh uh revenue opportunities for us as a city
to go west. So, the thing that I would play back to you is that the glue
between all of the options that you're talking about really does center in CD&H
or DNH. And so, what I would suggest as our next step is we center in on that
block to get more specific around what it would mean. And we will alternatively
look at the full scenario of if we're if we were going to think about the ABM
block as well of what guidance would we give you in terms of staging and and how
that would happen over time. But I think we start with the center of CDNH as uh
as the glue that seems to be running through through all of your
recommendations. >> Um council member Stler,
» I'm sorry. I just wanted to bring up one other point. I I'll I think I'm hearing
the council more majority not in support of AMB and maybe I'm wrong but that's
kind of what I've been hearing to the comments down the line and so
» though I don't know how many people are really in in into AM.
» So what I what I heard in all my one-on- ones council member Steckler is that
there is half that are really thinking about CDH and half that are thinking
about everything and that's where A&B comes in but the glue is CD&H as the as
the financial viability engine. I just didn't want you to go to all that re
research and then have find out that it's not supported. That that was my
concern. >> Um does Mayor Pertim have another
comment? No. Okay. Just checking.
» Okay. So, so in terms of guidance does that uh let me just sanity check that
we're uh so we're going to focus on the next step as CD&H and we'll go down to
that next level and start to reach uh see what boundary review board and what
type of feedback we can get to answer your questions. Um alternatively we will
think about A and B as a as a staging scenario of what that might look like
» and and the information will come back in the blocks not not the in the D C
» in the scenarios. >> Copy. Okay. Yep. Does that play back uh
correctly as next steps?
Okay. Um the other thing that I would tell you is I actually think we're at a
big a pivotal moment in the process. Uh because we talked about multiple go
no-go uh that we would hit in this process and one of the humps that we
would hit is the realization of we actually need to do something and uh and
and that is aligning. And so we're we haven't made decisions yet. You'll get
to that point where you formally make your decision. But I would say in my
conversations with you, there is great alignment across the council in terms of
the need to to to look at these and actually take some sort of action to to
uh enhance the the financial viability of the city. So that's a big step
forward. Um and now we can get much more into the details of the how and the
which ones and and in what time frame so that uh so that you can make eyes open
decisions of what is that appropriate first step that you want to take.
Okay. Any other questions or thoughts, Martin or Laura? Yep. Perfect. I think
one thing I want to comment on too is staff, we consider all the different
strategic priorities that council has on the plate as well as a lot of the CIP
projects and the M projects that we're starting to discuss and internally in in
stage and sequence. And one thing to consider as you grow, so is our bonding
capacity. So nothing to really get dive into at this point in time, but with
growth comes your ability to increase sales um bond um you know general
obligation on property or if it's revenue on storm water and so forth. So
just something to think about as you as you start to think about not necessarily
which block but as you get bigger our ability to borrow. And so we'll start to
more align our projects with um Rob's uh helping us kind of stage things out
going forward. So I just want to bring that up so council starts to think about
that as well. >> And Sarah, just uh again, thank you very
much for all the analysis and depth of work in the financials.
» No problem. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you.
» Thank you, Rob.
Next up, we have another study session. We have a review of the final South Town
Center Master Plan draft. And tonight, we have Justin Horn, our senior planner,
and GGLO.
All right. Good evening, Mayor Council. I'm excited to uh present the uh review
of our Southtown Center subary plan. Um you know, we had a lot of touch-ins over
the past few months, but we have a final draft here and uh excited to go through
it. The goal this uh presentation is to
review the South Town Center subarial plan and associated uh zoning
commitments to implement that plan. We'll go over the background and guiding
principles, redevelopment framework, design and development guidelines,
implementation recommendation, and next steps.
All right, so I have I have quite a bit of material to go through, so I'm going
to go pretty quickly, but just tell me to slow down if I going too fast.
So from the start, we've had three main project goals. The first is to extend
and enhance town center. The second is to support long-term
community and economic vitality. And the third is to align growth with
infrastructure, mobility, sustainability.
Paired with those project goals, we also had uh came with four community
priorities. These are developed uh in um the are our two joint volunteer board
workshops. Uh the first is pedestrian flow. Want to make sure the sub area is
safe and accessible for pedestrians. Um the second is community activation
space. We want to have more community areas people can gather and uh have
community. Third is diversity of retail. Won't
there be a big mix of businesses um that active street life? And lastly um
nature. We want to make make sure that the the green belt is uh preserved and
um the trails maintain accessible to everyone.
Here's a summary of our previous actions uh so far. So, sort of the the the start
to this entire project was the Mil Creek Boulevard study that uh started prior to
COVID and it finished up in June of 2022.
That led directly to the creation of the uh Southtown Center sub area as part of
our uh comprehensive plan adoption in uh 2024.
Uh we started working with GGLO um on our to develop the plan in May of 2025
and expanded their scope in December 2025 to include additional financial
analysis for the financial or the environmental
planning. Um we had a public comment period from January to March where we
received quite a bit of public comment and then in March uh planning commission
recommended a preferred development alternative and then city council um
selected that preferred alternative in April 2026
and then just this month we issued our final environmental impact statement.
And then we um last month uh reviewed the initial draft of the subaria plan.
And then this month we um we reviewed the design guidelines with the design
review board. And the planning commission recommended the adoption of
the subaria plan and amendments uh last night.
All right. All right. So, we got a quote here from Daniel Burnham, the father of
American planning, which is, "Make no little plans. They have no magic to stir
men's blood and probably themselves will not be realized." So, we have tried to
implement this in our se planning. We think we have a good plan. It's
ambitious but manageable and I think it's uh you know, it's a has potential
to be a great asset to the city. The plan itself is divided into six
parts. There's an introduction, an existing conditions, a redevelopment
framework plan, design and development guidelines, implementation strategies,
and appendices.
And then here is the vision statement of South Town Center. And it is Southtown
Center is envisioned as a vibrant, walkable, mixeduse extension of Mil
Creek Town Center, expanding opportunities for housing, jobs,
shopping, public gathering, and access to parks, trails, and open space while
supporting a more connected, resilient, and community oriented future.
You can see on the right, we have some images. These are pulled from the
Subbury plan. I think they look pretty nice. I'm pretty happy that turned out.
So here's sort of the the main um aspects of of the plan. First is having
a walkable core. Um we make sure there's pedestrian first streets uh better
connection and parking along the edges rather than on those active streets.
There's an activated public realm which includes new city parks for for people
to use. There's a vibrant retail mix where we require um certain commercial
uses on our main corridors. There's an integrated green network where we have
North Creek Trail um the green belts uh parks and stormwater features all
connected. There's a little balance where there's
active corridors which a lot of with a lot of um activity and commercial and
then quieter areas for the more residential focused and then it's also
uh coordinates growth for housing jobs and infrastructure.
All right. So the redevelopment plan section the plan
um starts with what exists. So currently the entire sub area is zoned in the town
center zone. There's no required commercial. There is no maximum density.
Um the maximum height is 60 ft for residential buildings and 50 ft for
non-residential buildings. And there's 250 square ft of required open space per
dwelling unit. And then for um parking um there's a requirement of one space
per 250 square feet for retail, one space for every 100 to 200 f feet of
restaurants, one space per every 400 square 400 800 ft of office and 1.5 to
2.5 spaces per unit based on how large uh the dwelling units are.
So the sub areas exist now on the left here. You can see that there's very
large blocks to 900 ft. They're not great to walk around in and there's uh
no parks, but we have a new proposed framework where we have broken up those
big super blocks into smaller manageable blocks about 350 ft. So it'll really
increase the um the walkability of the area. We also have that new central park
and uh gateway park.
The neighborhood would then be organized uh along these lines where you have the
main street which is highlighted in red that goes through the center of the sub
area. Then in pink you have the central core which would be the new uh central
park and then the uh dense commercial areas surrounding it.
The yellow highlighted areas are more residential focused. Uh commercial is
allowed there but just not required. And then in blue you have the primary
gateways to the sub area. So you know Mil Creek Boulevard, uh Main Street,
164th, 161st. These are the primary entries to the city or to the sub area.
And then in gray, it's a little hard to see. um you have a transition zone
around the border of the sub area along the north end along 527 and 164 and in
those transition areas there's extra design guidelines to make sure that the
buildings uh seamlessly blend into certain areas
» Justin going back to that uh existing and proposed framework slide it's about
two or three slides back um the photo on the left u doesn't have
the walkability because the majority of those structures are commercial for
commercial use. So, uh that that's always been my biggest worry is you're
replacing the commercial with uh I believe uh 5,500 apartments was the
number I heard last time. So, um, while I appreciate the walkability, I'm very
concerned about the lack of commercial that's that's going to be eliminated
from the from the city's corridor there right on
both Libert Highway. >> Yeah, it's a great point. Um, we've
tried to address that in a couple ways. One of them is that, you know, the the
existing zoning has no require commercial requirements. So, if it were
develop redeveloped now, you could end up with 100% residential. So, one thing
we focus on is making sure that all these key corridors were requiring
commercial and specific kinds of commercial that are um generate sales
tax and a lot of pedestrian activity. Um, I can show you we'll get to a part
where that's where those areas are required. Um,
but it's it's a balancing act because if we were to require ground for commercial
across the whole area, we may end up with no development. So, um, but it's
it's it's a good point. >> I I really What what was our target
number by the state? Minimum 26.50. So, we're effectively doubling that.
» For apartments and so again, it's been a concern, always been a concern of mine
and it and it remains. So, >> yeah. And one motivation to allow that
much housing was that um when we talked with GGLO
um the consensus was that if we allow more housing will end up with more
commercial just because you have the bodies to support the that additional
retail. Um
so here is where we're requiring um ground level commercial. Um you can see
these red highlighted areas is where we require uh commercial to happen. The
yellow areas uh are flexible areas where commercial is encouraged but not
required. And one thing I'll get into is we have
developed some development incentives to to uh encourage additional commercial as
well in these these yellow areas.
Here's the street neck work street neck proposed. So um the red is the
commercial main street. This is uh you know it's the the heart of the the sub
area where we require a lot of active commercial uses. Um it has um on street
parking and uh two-way cycle track. Uh purple is Mil Creek Boulevard. It's a
similar street. It's also has those nice wide sidewalks and a cycle track.
Um dark blue are these are secondary access streets. This is where you would
have access to uh parking and um um service access. Then orange around
Central Park. This is a these are pedestrian oriented streets that can be
turned in uh um used during festivals or events. They can be converted to
pedestrian only areas. And then green are pester only paths or fire access
roads.
Uh, one nice thing about the sub area is it has great access to transit. Um,
there's two bus rapid transit lines, the orange and the green line that go north,
south, and um and then east or sorry, and then west. There's also an east west
uh local route, route 166.
Another focus of the plan is to increase uh bike and pedestrian facilities. So,
we've increased uh bike safety by adding protected bike lanes on Main Street and
Mil Creek Boulevard as well as on 161st. Um there are several pedestrian oriented
streets that can be that are designed to slow down cars and make it a safer place
to walk around and also um can be potentially converted into pest only
areas during certain uh events. And then we also have a new intersection
uh or new a new intersection on 161st and highway 527 where people from
outside sub area can then uh cross the street safely and enter the sub area.
Possibly I think the most exciting thing for me is the new parks and open space
that we're proposing. So there's going to be uh three parks in the sub area. Uh
number one is a central park right in the heart of sub area. Adjacent to it is
our sponge park which is uh uh a combined facility that incorporates both
open space and uh storm water facilities. And then three are North
Gateway Park which connects Mil Creek Boulevard to North Creek Trail.
As I mentioned, um the the um the sponge park is a combined facility. So, one
aspect of the plan is developing a regional storm water facility. Instead
of having every development have its own uh detention vaults and storm water uh
management, we're combine it all into one facility. So, the entire sub area
drains as one spot and it's just easier to manage and maintain um and will
improve our water quality uh before enters North Creek. So what that
involves is a large vault underneath the central park which then drains into
shallow chambers um in the sponge park and then during storm events the sponge
park is designed to fill with water for additional storage capacity.
All right. So now uh I'll go over our design and development guidelines. These
are meant to establish a walkable human scale town center that integrates with
existing town center and starting neighborhood context.
It'll create a defined and engaging public realm. Uh transition from
autofocus to pedestrianoriented development pattern over time. Reinforce
a cohesive Mil Creek town center character. Support mixeduse development
and housing diversity. And prioritize multimodal mobility and integrated
parking housing diversity. So what does that what does that boil
down to? Um one of the things design guidelines focus on are the street
frontages. There are several different frontage types. One is the primary
commercial frontage. That's this red red highlighted areas that are focused on
especially active commercial uses that have a lot of pestern activity.
uh pink is a secondary mixed frontage which allows um some non-active uses but
it's still commercial focused and then uh the uh the yellow is
residential frontages um on other streets although again if
commercial develops in these areas they would be required to um utilize a
secondary frontage um were commercial proposed
and part of those frontages um focuses on pest design. So, it should be great
for pedestrians walking. It should provide street definition. So, we want
to make sure that as you're walking down the street, there's defined edges and
it's very uh comfortable. Weather protection. So, awnings, arcades provide
protection from rain and sun. Um, and frontage continuity. So, making sure you
have don't have big gaps in the building frontages as you walk along.
So the streetscape is designed to be walkable and human scaled. There was a
big focus on um the ground level. So as pedestrians walk
along, we make sure that the buildings are designed especially in the ground
level so that they are really inviting to pedestrians uh with um uh building
articulation, lots of transparency for uh commercial windows, um trees,
landscaping, lighting, furnishings, protection.
um curb cuts along the uh the main streets are minimized. So we'll focus
all the parking and service areas at certain locations
and um several streets pri prioritize pedestrians and bikes while safely
accommodating vehicles at intersections.
[clears throat] So here are some of the architectural
standards that are in the the plan. So buildings should be scaled for comfort
at the street level with varied heights and upper level setbacks.
Um this bottom picture here shows an example of that. You can see the the
first 60 feet of the building here or above the first 60 feet there is an
upper upper level setback. So once you reach 60 ft you have to set back the
building by 10 ft. Um there's also proposed floor play reductions. So if
you have a building along the street you can only have 70 feet of building before
you have to have a 50ft gap. So, um, this provides, you know, it breaks up
the building so it's more manageable. It feels less imposing.
We want to make sure the ground floors are active, transparent, and weather
protected. Um, we also require durable, high quality materials, especially on
the ground floor. And we make sure that um, roof lines, mechanical screening,
service and parking are integrated and um, screened from view.
We've also looked at parking parking areas. We're envisioning a lot more
structured parking uh in the sub area than surface parking although surface
parking is allowed uh with some limits.
And then we are proposing um changing the minimum parking requirements
slightly and I I'll get into uh some more details of that on a a following
slide. So implementation recommend
implementation recommendations there is near-term, medium-term and
long-term um things that need to happen in the near term. We need to adopt a sub
area plan. We adopt an urban form overlay district. We need to adopt and
apply the design and development guidelines. We need to prepare a public
improvement and funding strategy. We need to initiate right-of-way and
property acquisition planning and conduct additional property owner
business and developer outreach. And the lead department for the most of
these is community development and planning, but public works is also
heavily involved especially in the the public improvements and right ofway.
In the medium term, we'll need to um um reconfigure Main Street and Mil Creek
Boulevard. We will plan priority transportation
intersection improvements along major intersections. Prepare a basin level
storm water and green infrastructure plan,
secure future park and open space opportunities,
establish development agreement and binding site plan procedures and update
capital planning and funding programs. In the long term, we want to coordinate
with developers uh on long-term private development. We want to build out the
entire open space trail and public rail network. We want to monitor the EIS
assumptions to make sure we don't uh uh exceed them. And we want to evaluate and
refine our tools over time to make sure development is happening as we intended
it to.
So to make all this happen, we need to pass some zoning code amendments.
Um and the way we are anticipating that is with an overlay zone. So, an overlay
zone, um, I guess, let me back up. So, every
every parcel in the city has as part of a a zoning district, in this case, South
the town center zone. We want to add what's called an overlay zone, which
adds additional regulations on top of the underlying zoning. And these overlay
zones are they're targeted on specific issues like form or streetscape or
parking. and they provide um additional tools to implement these goals.
So the overlay zone you have your you have your you know your your zoning
regulations in the town center and the overlay zone will add additional ones on
top. Um and if they are more strict the more strict zone uh requirements will
apply. So here I'm going to run through what
those standards are for the overlay zone. uh first active
commercial standards. So we have designated specific corridors where
these standards apply and uh for now it's Mil Creek Boulevard and Main
Street. Although once we have plans for Central Park that are um you know firm
plans, we can add that as an additional corridor
in these corridors. Any commercial uses on the ground floor have to be
commercial recognition commercial recreation assembly, food and beverages,
retail, personal services or lodging. And then um along the street frontage,
at least 70% of the frontage on these corridors has to be these active uses.
And at every intersection corner, you have to have these active uses as well.
And that aligns with these go back a little bit. these um these red areas
here.
Okay, we have modified the parking standards
slightly. Um not huge changes but we are reducing the minimum parking. Um
so commercial recreation assembly actually no proposed change. Food and
beverages have um four stalls per 10,000 square feet down from 5 to 10. Retail
services and sale retail sales and services three per 10,000 ft down from
3.3 to 4. Lodging unchanged offices uh now two down from a range of 1.25 to
2.5. And multi-unit dwellings are down to 1
to 1.25 down from 1.5 to 2.5. We also have a maximum on the amount of
surface stalls in any one parking lot of 100 stalls.
» All right. We also have >> Justin, why such a drastic um Can you go
back to There it is. Why such a drastic reduction in the commercial parking? I
mean, if if we're hoping this for to cost out and not just be for apartment
parking um by reducing it, I I don't don't you think that's going to hinder
everything we're trying to do here? >> I mean, I if we want to encourage more
commercial, this is one way to do it. Um so, these are the the minimum
requirements. Um developers can build more than that if they want. If they
think this is enough parking for our our youth, we our restaurant needs more
parking, they can add more. We're just we're trying to make the floor low. that
those the businesses that want to come and they don't think they need as much
parking are able to um develop affordably. Structured parking is up to
I mean ballpark around 50,000 bucks per stall. So you start thinking you know um
it's it's quite expensive to build up the parking. So um
» yeah the reason I say that is I don't I don't know any businesses that would say
I want less parking. >> Right.
» Right. And this this isn't saying they this
isn't there's no caps here. They can build as much as they want. We're saying
the minimum the floor is lower.
We also have provisions for um shared parking. So it could be that um per uh
businesses can that don't have overlapping time of day uses. Let's say
you have a business that has it's focused on let's say uh like a church
would be on has most of its parking requirements on the weekend and you have
say an office which has most of requirements on the weekdays. They can
then share parking. Um we have those provisions as well. So they can um you
know uh you don't we need need as much because you have to share when there's
offset time of uses.
We've also added a a housing standard. So, one thing we're worried about is we
don't want to develop all these plans for these great, you know, all these
design guidelines for these great beautiful buildings that that work well
and have support a lot of housing growth. Uh we didn't want that to turn
into all town homes, uh which wouldn't support the commercial we want or the
housing targets we need to hit. So, we have a limit of up to 20% of units can
be middle housing. We want to allow some just not the entire development to to
happen like that. Um we have setback standards where the
front setback at the street is 10 ft from the sidewalk. You have to be within
10 ft of the sidewalk. Um and then there's no setbacks for the side and the
rear. Our open space standards have also
changed. So the minimum open space now is 250 square feet per unit which works
well for lowscale development. Let's say if you're building a small apartment
building or town homes 250 ft per unit it's great but if you are developing
larger multif family buildings you reach a point where the amount of required
open space is larger than the lot you have which is obviously not developable.
So we have decreased the minimum open space to 100 square feet per unit and
then up to 25% of the site and then we have some provisions for
allowing building common areas to be used as open space. So imagine if you
have a a green roof or um uh indoor amenity rooms like a you know you have a
movie room or shared areas that every like a exercise room those can count
towards your um your minimum open space.
Next up we have requirements for the the building massing and materials. So the
first is we will limit the maximum building length to 180 ft. So since the
block size is around 300 feet square feet, you end up with a minimum of two
buildings per block. You don't end up with, you know, one building consuming
the entire block. You're going to have numerous buildings. So it breaks up that
um the mass there. Upper level stepbacks. So above
the second or third floor, you have to step back the uh the wall by at least 8
feet along active active commercial corridors
requiring primary and secondary articulation. So primary articulation is
major shifts in building massing and those have to happen every 100 ft. And
secondary articulation is smaller things like um adding balconies or bays or
windows and it has to happen every 20 to 40 feet.
And it's just to that's just to break up, you know, the building mass, add add
more articulation. As I mentioned before, along the edges
of the sub area, there are transition zones where you have to do at least one
of these two things. One, you have to reduce the floor plate. So if you have
70 ft of building, you have to have a break of 50 ft before you can have more
building. Or you can have an upper level step back. So above the 60 ft you have
to bring it the walls back by at least 10 feet.
And then we have required materials on the lower levels. You have to have
something that's durable um and looks nice like brick or stone or you know
wood or timber. And it has to be 75% of the facade. And if you use fiber cement
you can only use those on the upper floors.
And uh we also have standards for ground floor frontage frontages. So that's you
know we want make sure that when you're at ground level it's really nice. It's
pleasant place to walk around. So part of that is frontage continuity.
This means that along a street at least 70% of the
frontage on that street has to be occupied by building. You cannot just
have uh a blank blank spaces. The ground floor has to be high. There's
a 18 foot ground floor to floor height for non-residential uses.
Um non-residential uses also required to have 75% transparency on the ground
floor while residential has to have at least 30%.
Um, residential areas or buildings must also have an 18inch um, elevation from
the street level so that there's a a separation between residential areas and
um, and and the active street life. [clears throat] And you required to or
you can't have blank walls that are wider than 20 feet on active commercial
corridors or 30 feet on other areas.
Um, along active commercial corridors, you're not allowed to have parking
entrances. And then along other streets, you're allowed up to 60 ft of width for
those those parking and service areas. Um, and it has to be uh screened with a
low wall or vegetation. Um and then
at uh there's a requirement for primary entry frequency. So that means every 75
ft there has to be a building entrance. So you don't have long stretches where
there's nothing going on. And then there's also along active
commercial corridors a requirement for 75% of the frontage to have overhead
weather protection. Um, other commercial areas had to have 50% weather protection
and then at every public entryway you're required to have some sort of weather
protection.
All right, the next piece of the code update is going to be a development
incentive program. Um, developments that qualify for the program are given a 25
foot uh height bonus. And to qualify, you have to either have 70% of your
French used for commercial uses, 30% of your dwelling units be three or
more bedrooms, or 20% of your dwelling units as for sale. So, um these came
from the um the workshops we did with the planning commission and with uh with
council. Um these are some of the these are three of the most important
priorities identified. So, you know, um encouraging commercial, encouraging
familysized um h homes and encouraging for sale homes. We also uh plan to look
at additional incentives at a later date, but these are the easiest to
implement now before we develop the entire incentive program.
We also have the option of expanding this development center program to other
areas if council decides. For instance, if we want to um extend the development
center program uh elsewhere in the city, we could for instance um allow the
forale condo um provision to be used for that height bonus.
Here's just summary of changes between the current zoning of town center and
the proposed overlay. Again, we are adding required commercial areas.
We have similar height except that with with the incentives you get an extra 25
ft of height. We've reduced the uh open space requirement
and then slightly reduced the minimum parking standards
» and the and the height additions would be for
commercial use and and home ownership dwellings only. Correct.
» Exactly. Yes. >> Thank you.
All right. So, next step, um planning commission actually recommended the
draft and amendments last night. Uh we are reviewing um here at council tonight
and then we would like to have formal adoption in September.
Are there any questions? >> Any questions?
» I can't see. Um, Council Member Dukay, do you have any questions?
» Nope, she's not lit up. Okay. And Council Member Paddock does have a
question. >> Not a not a question, but just an an
accommodation. So, um, all this work was done in a pretty
relatively short amount of time. It probably felt like a long long time.
And, um, Chair Hamilton had a a email that he had sent around to the crew and
I just want to read part of it. said, "My hats off to Serena, Justin, and
Jeff, and the company that created this this product. It's a top-notch and was
done in very short time. Kudos to the whole team, and just wanted everyone to
hear that from from the chair. So, well done.
» You >> Thank you for sharing that." Um, council
member Cavaleri and then council member
Gobeski. >> Thank you, Mayor. So, a lot of this
looks going looks like it's going to require a large investment from the
city. So, um if if we go with the vision that you have here, um changing road
directions and uh maybe purchasing land and whatnot. So, where's um where are we
thinking that money is going to come from?
» That's a wonderful question. We I mean that's not we haven't fully explored all
the options. That being said, it kind of depends on how fast we want it to
happen. Um, all of these, if we look at some of the street network, um, if we
wait for private development to build these areas out, all these new streets
will be built by the developers. They have they'll have to build their half of
the rideway up to our standards. So, that would be paid for. Um, the regional
storm facility, um, we are looking at having an inloo fee. So we would build
it but then when development happens they would pay us back for their
portion. Um so that's those are some of the ways we can you know we can have
development pay for itself but again it's uh some things I mean it's be
expensive building the the parks for instance could be expensive. One
alternative we've explored but haven't instituted yet would be having um
perhaps um an inloo fee where if they don't have the minimum open space they
can pay an inloo fee to us that would go towards building park space. Um we've
also looked at increasing our park impact fees to pay for the central park
um as well as um updating our transportation impact fees um which are
both both those impact fees are quite out of date. So, we want to make up uh
update those so we get more revenue coming in to pay for these projects.
Um, as far as the other, you know, the other expenses, uh, a lot it's going to
be part of our capital improvement plan, um, which, uh, Dan's up next to talk
about,
» Council Member Gobies, >> thank you. Um, this entire process is
clearly a lot of work, so kudos to the whole team. I think it's a beautiful
vision. Um, I just have a quick question on the process because I haven't been
doing this for very long. As individual development
projects come up, >> they meet these requirements, do they
still go before the design review board for the specific
» Yeah. So any um any buildings that are built have to be reviewed by the design
review board? Okay. >> And they would apply these the the DRB
would apply these standards. Um Okay. >> Yeah. So these standards are across the
whole thing, but individually somebody still has eyes on their Okay. Exactly.
» Thank you. I thought so, but I wanted to double check.
» Um, Council Member Allison. >> So, I had a very specific question. Um
the light at 160 first >> is that traversible with cars and where
do they go when they pop out into the central park area that's
walking only? >> Great question. So the light the light
164th um yeah it is patrolled by cars cars traversible by cars. Cars can enter
the sub area there. Um the biggest in fact there's all you can already access
there. It's an existing access point. Yeah. You just it's not safe pedestrians
because there's no requirement. >> There's no light. Yeah.
» And once they once they come in um they'll be able to go north or south
along around the central park. >> Okay.
» Although the southern route will be slower because it's one of those
pedestrian streets. >> Okay. Thank you.
» Anybody else have any questions?
» I don't think so. >> All right. Well, thank you so much for
your time. >> Thank you.
Um,
okay. Next up, we're go Well, let's before we move on to item H,
let's go ahead and just extend the meeting to um 9:00 to be safe.
» So moved. >> Thank you.
» Second. I have a motion and a second to extend the meeting to 9:00 p.m. All
those in favor say I. >> I.
» Any against? Any extension? Motion passes 6 because council member Stuckler
has stepped out for a moment. >> I mean Kevlar, I'm looking at you. I'm
sorry. Oh, I just realized I forgot that. I think um Thank you. And I also
think that um I forgot that you um city manager had raised his hand and I think
he wanted to comment it, but I accidentally moved on. Did I? Is it too
late? Sorry about that. Um okay, next up we have the introduction to the 2027
2032 capital improvement plan and city manager Martin Yamamoto and Dan Cardy,
the city engineer are going to lead us in that.
» Thank you, mayor. Uh just before we get kick off this uh draft of the CIP, I
just wanted to kind of set the stage for not only how the CIP is part of the
budgeting process, but it kind of reflects that balance
um we're trying to strike between what our limited funding capacity is uh
across maintenance operations as well as all the critical capital investments
that we want to make going forward, including uh the Southtown Center as
Council Member Cavaleri had brought up and also the um Mil Creek Community
Center or i.e. the DRCC. Um
as we start to talk about this budget process, I want to also mention that,
you know, staff also internally starting to discuss how we
draft and stage kind of a lot of these projects. And as as as council member
Cavaleri had a question about how we're going to fund the Southtown Center. Um
after we approve that master plan, the next step is to start discussing
um uh the percentage of infrastructure costs that the city will possibly incur
and that will come uh as the next phase of the discussions with council. So
you'll get more information uh as we move forward. Uh same applies to the
DRCC after we complete that master plan as well. Um but internally staff has
been work is going to continue discussing. We started one meeting uh to
to just start to brainstorm and figure out how we're going to fund these
product projects and uh as we bring on the municipal financial advisor as well.
That's a key component to um uh working with staff and also bringing um probably
eventually kind of a draft scenario of how we think we can fund these all these
projects. We do believe that it's not if but how we do it. Uh time is on our side
and I think um um we'll just rely on our subject matter experts and then probably
formalize this beginning the next year on how we're going to stage everything
going forward with our with our consultants. So uh with that I'll hand
it over to our city engineer to cover our draft CIP.
» Good evening. Excuse me. Good evening, Mayor, Mayor Poten, Council. Um, I am
here tonight to uh do our introduction to the 2027 2032
capital improvement plan. So, I would like to use this opportunity
to give you a background on the preparation of the plan um the updates
that we made to the layout um versus the previous issuances and the proposed
programmed and non-programmed projects. Um, also in coordination with finance,
we would like to get council's agreement on the uh priority projects for the 2027
2028 bienium.
For background, I've gone over this with you guys
before, but what is the CIP? What is the capital improvement plan? This is
primarily a budgeting tool and a budgeting exercise. It says, it looks at
what our um capital income is and our expenditures and tries to set the
projects out in the future. So, it looks at our upcoming projects, looks at the
forecasts for our budgets, and then it also presents a rough schedule, and
that's um I'll get to that a second. Sorry. Um it
what it isn't, it's not a work plan. So this is us preparing it and saying we'll
get we anticipate and hope that um the projects will hit in this year or we'll
need this funds in this year but maybe the funds don't show up or maybe another
project goes along or we find a problem with this. So projects may need to shift
based on the funding or the staffing that we have uh because we may not it
maybe something came up and we have to uh fix a thousand catch basins all of a
sudden and our staff needs to jump on that right away. So um
or there could be that council changes their mind and if you guys want to go in
a different direction then we go ahead and pivot and go where council would
like to go. Um, and then as far as the schedule goes, I did a lot of looking at
other cities CIPs just to see what kind of a layout they have, what kind of a
um, how they do it and just to get some ideas. And one of the things I found is
some cities don't even put projected schedules in there. They basically run
and have these on the shelf and when they have the funding, they'll pick them
up and go.
um which [clears throat] projects are in there. So these are based on um council
priorities that have been passed by ordinances and resolutions primarily. So
the comprehensive plan, uh the council's strategic visions for 2040 and the 3 to
five year uh strategic priorities. Um our municipal storm water permit, our
safety action plan that council adopted last year, uh the midbian update to the
capital improvement plan. Um, and then other ma major maintenance items that
have shown up recently. So, we all sat down and took a look at this. Um, staff,
management, [snorts] executive, we all took a look at it and tried to put
everything together in a way that still met the council's priorities, but also
addressed what funding we did have. That being said, I want to talk about
what we have going on and what we've done. So
um in the current CIP we have the highway 96 storm storm project which has
been completed and then by the end of the year we are projecting that
Sweetwater Ranch, the 2026 paving project, the Veterans Monument and
Library Park, uh Mil Creek Elementary crossings, Trillium Boulevard and the
City Hall North projects will all be completed. So we're projecting that by
the end of year and Trillium Boulevard design of course, not the actual
construction of it. Um and then we are also ongoing will be going that projects
that will be ongoing into next year are Silver Crest Drive design uh citywide
catchbas uh repair and the public works facility.
So the timeline um today I'm giving you the introduction to the CIP. Um
September 22nd I will deliver the actual document to you for your review. We will
have a study session. It's currently scheduled for October 27th along with
the budget. Um the first public hearing is November 3rd. Final public hearing is
November 10th and December 1st is our projected adoption date.
So one thing I did when I came into here is there's a couple things that we had
been running into that were not clear in the capital improvement plan. Um the
first one that I wanted to get out of the way is something that we've been
talking to you guys a lot about. we've been trying to focus on is phase gating.
So, periodically we'll check in with you guys to on the direction of a project,
the funding, the schedule, all those kinds of items. What we want to do with
more of our projects is bring them to 30%. Then we stop for funding because
30% is a good place to go and say, um, Federal Highway Administration, we
have this awesome project. Would you like to give us money? And so that's a
good point that we can say we have a good amount of knowledge and information
on the budget and the requirements for this project so we can go and get
funding and then the projects won't continue until we get funding. So that's
the thought process we we're going into with this. So we will have projects
prepared to go out and find additional funding.
Um, another one in there is that I added a new B a new in coordination with
finance, we added a new uh budget line item in the CIP. It's called unfunded.
So that way the impact of the project are
build appropriately. We assume that the design and 20% of the construction phase
will be paid for by the city and this works out to a standard grant match
rate. So most every grant that you go for, they'll say that the city needs to
show that they have interest in it. So we have to show we have to put up at
least 20% of the cost. The remainder of the project cost is
called unfunded. That just means that the source of the funds has not been
identified. Um and the project will not go forward without those funds. And the
funds can come from any source. They could be standard funding for our CIPs.
They could be grants. We get appropriations from um higher
legislative bodies, uh debt issuance, public private partnerships, P3s or uh
community based public partnerships, uh special districts, levy lid lifts, tax
increment financing. There's a ton out ton of options out there and we're not
experts at that. So we have uh engaged a municipal adviser to help us understand
the best way to leverage our resources to get projects done.
The other thing is that we've moved more projects to being non-programmed. So
that just mean that doesn't mean they're dead or anything like that. It just
means they're on the shelf ready to get going when we when we can do it. This
provides the information on project costs and schedules and it allows for
the funding to be sought for those. Many um
many grants and other opportunities require you to actually have your
project in the capital improvement plan in order for you to go for them. So if
they're in there and they're not programmed, it's in the capital
improvement plan. So that way we we have the opportunity to go and seek funding
for these projects.
The other item is that studies used to be in the capital improvement plan, but
we've gotten um clarification on the rules and regulations about studies and
they can't be in the capital only uh budgets. So going forward um
transportation studies will be funded by the streets fund, facilities will be by
the general fund and surface water will remain in the 401 fund.
All right, budgeting. So one of the biggest things we've seen
um as we have been advertising for um design services, for construction
services, for consulting is costs are going up everywhere and everything the
costs are increasing. To put it in perspective, we did our
midbian update at the end of last year. Um that had a total cost of $15,425,000.
Um, our proposed six-year budget has a programmed budget of 165 million and a
non-programmed of about 79,500,000.
Um, now that being said, council has given us direction to go for some big
projects and so that is accounted for in there. So that that is also a part of
the reason that the prices have or the overall budgets have gone up.
What we did when we are were evaluating this and trying to think about the way
we were going forward with it is that we took the capital plan and broke it into
smaller buckets. The first one was the 2027 20228 bianium. Then we also did two
unfunded buckets the active and the long-term.
For the 2027 2028 bianium um we looked at the money we had. So it is the REIT
capital fund, surface water fund, bonding um and so that's the focus of
this. So we're focusing on the high priority projects that must be done. So
there's a lot of maintenance in there. There is a lot of um catching up on our
projects that we just have to do from regulatory items.
This is a wall of text, but it is for your reference. all of the projects. Um
we're um both Silver Crest Drive and Trillium.
We are including those for the outstanding um budget authority that we
have on those projects just in case uh Trillium goes long and Silver Crest
Drive will continue with its design. But that is only for design. We are not
proposing any construction on those uh the upcoming bienium. Um, the next two
projects are the safe streets for all projects that we I I will be coming back
to you in September most likely to ask for permission to sign the grant
agreement for that. So, we'll be accepting the funds then. Um,
» is is that the crosswalk? >> The crosswalks on the 35th Avenue. Quick
quick. >> That's what I was asking. Thank you.
» Um, the traffic light program, roads, curbs,
and markings. Uh, sidewalk maintenance program. Um,
and there was one other Oh, the parks facilities. Thank you. Um,
the parks facilities ones, these are programs that we created to be a hybrid
of capital and maintenance. So, as we go through, there's a lot of deferred items
that need to be done. Some of them are smaller, like let's go replace all the
benches in Hillside Park, and that's great, but some of them are larger,
like, oh, hey, we need a new play structure. And so the larger ones can go
and tip over into capital, while the smaller stuff our maintenance operations
group can go ahead and handle in house. Um, so we're asking in a lot of these um
h 100,000 or a million dollars a year in ongoing costs so that we can go ahead
and catch up on this deferred maintenance and catch up on these items.
And so in the future, if it gets better and we don't need this much money, then
we can scale it back. But for now, we're planning that for the entire um six-year
program. >> Dan, I have a question.
Why on earth are we thinking we're going to have to spend $300,000
on the Penny Creek Natural Area Master Plan?
» That's the beginning of the designs for that. So, in the future as we are doing
that, it's figuring out what we want it to be, how we want it to look and go
forward with that. And then I believe it's also the the beginnings of the
first stages of that. >> Okay. I think I'm still struggling on
this one because I feel like it's supposed to be left mostly natural and
so I'm still struggling on um but maybe this is a different discussion on a
different day. But >> I I can
» I have some questions on that because >> yeah because I I feel like if we're
supposed to leave it mostly natural and not have that much changing in there,
the 300,000 seems quite a bit. What we were thinking with that is uh things
like we need to expand the parking area so that it can potentially have uh
school buses visit and also there's a burm there that's uh was intended to
keep people from driving through the property and it wasn't really working.
So we're looking to put rocks along there to have have it be more natural
things like that. Um so we're trying to keep it natural but get it so that it's
working better. Mayor, there might need to be an part of
that's environmental assessment that needs to happen probably before we
acquire it as well. And there's a few other things in there that city engineer
put in. I can't remember the other one. >> Okay.
» That that's assuming we take this. >> Assuming we take it.
» Correct. >> Um
so these are the items that are that are in
our plan. Uh did you guys have any questions on the ones that we included
on here so far? Okay. So for the bianium we are projecting
$17,370,000 of capital expenditures. We are
estimated to have 12.4 million available. Um the surface water items
specifically the catch basin repairs came kind of out of left field for us.
Um, we are actually looking to get a rate study done with that as well as
engage a bond council to reduce the impact on the rate payers so that they
don't get a sudden $1,200 surface water fee for two years. Um, so we're trying
to make it uh easier on them for that. We're anticipating a pro just over $5
million of that to be um bonded and so that would bring our total expenditure
down to 12.3 million. So we worked very hard very hard all of
us to get this within budget. Um so our next bucket of projects is
unfunded active. So these are priority projects. These are the ones that you
guys want to have done. They're the ones that are the clean, safe,
well-maintained. They're the economic growth projects.
We have not identified a funding source yet. Um, but we're actively working on
it. Once again, grants, public private partnerships, legislative agenda, and
the projects will proceed once the funding is procured.
So, these are council goals like Southtown Center, DRCC,
um, the public works facility. Um, and so for these costs,
we're looking at a city share of of about 13.25
million with about 144 million over the six years for those. Um, we do not have
firm numbers for all of these, but these are based off of um, estimates from our
consultants. Um, the one thing I do want to note is that the Southtown Center
related costs, as um, Justin mentioned earlier, they're potentially recoverable
through latecomer fees and other items like that.
» Um, Council Member Cavaleri has a question.
» Yes. >> Thanks, Mayor. Um, going back to the
proposed projects, um, I I I the big ticket items, uh, city operations
facility. I know what that is. So, DRCC campus phase one, six million. What does
phase one consist of? Uh that one is projected to be the design for the um
the preliminary design for the first phase once council authorizes it.
» Okay. All right. Thank you. And just so you guys know for the
calculations for that I took um about 40 I took about 40 million no 30 million
and added 20% cost for design 20% cost and then 15 for uh construction
management and 15 for contingency.
» All right. Then the other section of unfunded projects are the are the
long-term ones. These are still important projects. It's just that not
right now. they can wait a little bit while we search for other funding
sources. Um, and then once again, they'll go once the funding's procured.
So, these are things like Trillium Boulevard, Old Seattle Hill Road, Dumas
Road. Um, we identified both 41st Avenue and 9inth Avenue as major projects need
to get done. Uh, 41st needs to have a half street improvements and, uh, 9th
needs to be fully rebuilt. Um, and that's 9th south of 164th.
Um the 133rd Street rightaway extension
improvements, Brighton Kosure Trail, um Nickel Creek uh fish passage, um and
then additional water quality retrofits and um a deeper look into Nickel Creek
Park were all identified for that. >> Um Council Member Allison has a
question. >> Are these in priority went through in
order within this grouping of unfunded long-term projects? No.
» No. >> Okay. So, which is worse shape, 9inth
Avenue, South, East, or Trillium? >> Ninth.
» To be honest, I would say Ninth is worse. Um, we're actually looking at as
part of the pavement preservation program, we're going to look at uh
heavily patching Ninth so that it can survive until we can do this whole
project. >> Thanks.
» But also, that is not to say that Trillian is not in desperate need of
being repaved. Yeah, I was going to say I think the
residents are really um frustrated and pushing for us um to get that done
sooner rather than later. So, I'm not sure.
I mean, obviously we need money, but I'm not sure how we managed to get that
moved up. Um also, I see that Mayor Prom just raised her hand.
» Mayor Prom, >> thank you. I'm sorry. This I just cannot
find it and I I apologize for not remembering for project numbers. What
does NM stand for for bright and coherent trail pavement?
» That's non-motorized. So it's >> I knew I knew it was going to be
something I knew. Thank you very much. Apologies.
» Okay, no problem. >> I saw that you had them in order by
obviously project number and so I was trying to remember what that one was.
Thank you. >> I thought it stood for no money also.
[laughter] >> Yeah, exactly.
All right. So the the [clears throat] next steps, so I've mentioned it several
times, funding alternatives. So there are a lot I've just listed the ones that
I could find in a quick web search. And so there's a lot of things that we can
do. There's a lot more that we can do as well. Um, so that is why we've engaged
help of a municipal consultant, a rate analysis, and a bond council to to help
us figure out all of this and help us be smarter with the money that we do have.
Um, so the council input that I would request is, do you agree with the 2027
2028 CIP projects? First question. So, okay.
Um, are there other priorities we haven't included, either short or long
term? Okay. Um, if you wanted us to, we could
return for a second round on August 11th. Otherwise, we'll proceed with
these projects to, um, get the budget built and we'll bring all that to you at
the end of September.
» Okay. All right. >> I think we're good. that. Thank you very
much. >> Oh, um, Mayor Pro Tim, is your hand
still up from before or [clears throat] did you have another question?
» I can um follow up separately. Thank you very much.
» You're welcome. >> Can you bring up the uh 2728 project
list? >> Yeah. Um,
» just because it sounded like there might be some
» The second to last slide, please.
specifically the funded piece
» because if there are concerns or maybe differing priorities on council, these
can be pushed into another bienium. So just for instance, I heard some uh
questions around Penny Creek. So maybe if
council didn't feel like we wanted to spend 300,000 in this bianium, that's
something that we could push out. Um we just want to make sure that we're in
alignment on all of the projects so that when we do bring this up in budget,
there's less movement then versus now.
And some of these things like the catch basin repair may not be as flexible
versus some of the other projects.
» Yeah. Uh yes that is um road repairs the uh replace of RPMs the
um uh striping and also crack sealing thermoplastic as well.
» Thank you. >> And um I had a quick question. What's
the village green drive quick build? >> That is the safe streets for all. It's
basically the same thing. It's looking at um adding a couple temporary RRFBs on
Village Green Drive as well as uh bike lanes.
» Okay. >> And yeah, I'll get I'll explain more
about the safe streets for all when I come back for the uh with the contract.
» Mayor, if I may. And there's one comment on the Trillium 9th tradeoff. We will be
working on Trillium prior to 9inth Avenue and the implication there
patching Ninth until we're ready to make a bigger decision on
that road till Trillium is a priority overnight.
» Okay. >> And there are a development process
tradeoffs for that as well on 9inth. um where we could if there's additional
developments along Ninth as part of this uh in reaction to the Southtown Center,
we could do um we could force them to do some of the work for us.
» The only thing I would ask is that that any proposed budgets going forward never
say Sweetwater Ranch on them again. [laughter]
» I'm hoping I can take that off before the end of the year. I think that
» All right. Thank you all very much. >> Thank you.
» All right. Next up, we will move on to the consent agenda. Myself and council
member Allison were on the audit committee.
So we have item I, approval of checks number 77 70563
through 70643 and AC wire transfers in the amount of
$440,49049.
Were there any exceptions? >> No exceptions. No exceptions. In item J,
payroll and benefit AC payments in the amount of $374,68140.
Any exceptions? >> No exceptions.
» No exceptions. And then item K, city council meeting minutes of July 14th,
2026. Do I have a motion to approve the consent agenda?
» So moved. >> Second.
» I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I.
» I. I. >> I. Any against? Any abstensions? Motion
passes. 70. Next up, we'll move on to reports. City
manager. >> Thank you, mayor. A few reports here. Uh
I have one and then PD as well. Uh first one is well only one that I have is is
to cancel the August 4th and the August 25th council meetings. If we can move
forward with that, mayor. >> Yeah. Can I have a motion to cancel the
August 4th and August 24th council meetings
» or 25th? >> 25th. I'm sorry.
» So moved. >> Second.
» I have a motion and a second. Any discussion?
» All those in favor say I. >> I.
» I. Any against? Any abstensions? Motion passes. 70.
» Next is police updates. Good evening, Mayor, Mayor Potum, Council. I
have a just a couple of updates for you. Um, Tuesday, August 4th is National
Night Out at Buffalo Park. Hope to see everyone there. Um, we will have a lot
of the same entertainment that we have typically.
Um, we will have the motorcycle there with for the kids to take photographs
with. We will have our drone demo uh with Detective White. Um we will have
the speed pitch in line dancing and story time for the kids. Um with
partnership with Kowanas, the chamber, um Starbucks and Nothing But Cakes,
there'll be some uh refreshments there as well. Um one of the big things that
we're asking for this year is so we will be collecting donations for school
supplies as well as the Mil Creek Food Bank will also be in attendance. So
anyone that could bring items for those two uh to benefit from, we'd really
appreciate it. Um and second uh before the meeting
tonight I handed out to the dis uh our stats for Q2 2020 or sorry it should say
second quarter 2026 on there. Um those are the correct numbers that are listed.
Um a couple of points I wanted to make is the reduction in property crimes um
that we had in in the second quarter of 2026. It's really promising uh the
reduction in vehicle crimes. there is a reduction in traffic contacts and
infractions, but that is because we had our motor officer in training um during
that time frame. And so, uh with his absence, it took a bite out of some of
that enforcement action. So, other than that, if there's no questions, we'll
move forward. >> Any questions?
» I have a question. >> Okay. Neighbor,
» the um the um school supply uh at National Night Out. Who is the
organization that is um either collecting it or that you'll be giving
it to? >> I believe I believe we're accepting them
at our booth, but I'm not 100% sure on that. I can get that information to you
uh as quickly as possible. >> Thank you. I just, you know, I know that
there's the big one, the the stuff the bus through the ever um foundation, but
I didn't know if there was another organization. It looks like I got my
answer from the other virtual person on here. So, I will say that it is the
Everett um uh schools foundation who is will be receiving that. Thank you for
doing that. That's great. I know that stuff the bus is a huge thing in the
community. So, thank you very much. >> Yeah. Thank you to our volunteer
coordinator uh Barb name called something else tonight.
[laughter] >> Um Council Member Cavaleri.
Yeah, Chief, are we going to start like um I know what the citizens said earlier
about the folks speeding with the ebikes and everything. Are we going to start
tracking those on here? Collisions and am I missing it on here?
» They would be invol included in those collisions if there were actual
collisions with vehicles. Um so they're a little bit different. Uh if they're
actual ebicycles, it's different than a motor vehicle collision,
» right? Um so that would be a different type of uh documentation. So we are
working on how do we chart those more accurately.
» Okay. >> Um we're seeing a lot of complaints uh
regarding the ebicycles and electric motorcycles. Um but truthfully um we
haven't seen a lot of actual contact or collisions should just a lot
of near misses. >> Good
» which is still a concern. >> Thank you.
Um, council member Allison. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, do those calls
come in and get registered under the assist calls in your
» They can come in in different ways. Okay. So, thank you.
» It could be a traffic hazard, it could be an assist, it could be different
different uh what do we call them? Type codes.
» Okay. There's just a big uptake in the assist calls on your
» a lot [clears throat] of those are assists to other agencies and things of
that nature as well. Um, council member Steckler. Hey,
» quick question, Chief. Um, I've heard some rumors. You can tell me if they're
true or not, but um are we with the e cycles, which there definitely a lot of
ordinances now that they are are breaking on those that is our police
officers confiscating those and taking them back to the making the parents come
down to the kid to pick them up. >> So, the real concern with ecycles is how
the what the operation that occurs with them. Um most of the time the officers
go to contact these individuals and they run. Yeah. So and we are not you know I
it's it becomes very uh dynamic situation where the officers have to use
sound judgment uh as to which which way they take that enforcement action. So,
with dealing with juveniles a lot of the time and their ability to evade us on a
two- wheeled uh bicycle or motorcycle, >> it makes this situation very difficult
and they're aware of this and so it's it's very difficult situation and
» uh I we are meeting with uh representatives, state representatives
to discuss uh legislative action that might help us in the future. That's
really we're doing our best to contact as many as we can and educate them if we
actually do get the opportunity to to talk to some of them and there has been
a few confis confiscations. >> Okay.
» Based off of our new ordinance and the changes,
not not as many as we would hope to see even after some of the education that we
put out via social media and think other other ways.
» So reality is you got a lot of people you know taking on the on the lamb. It's
kind of hard to catch them. >> It's just a
» when you can you can confiscate, you can, but you know, a lot of times I
think that's a better use of our officers than racing through the woods
going after get. >> Very much a balancing act.
» Yeah. Thanks.
» All right. I think that's it. >> No other staff reports, Mayor.
» All right. Thank you. Um, next up, I will move to council reports. So, um,
the only thing I want to say is I had my, um, mayor meeting, the one that
Mayor Naring holds every month and really still the topic of conversation
still is, um, very much the public safety texts that the county is
discussing. So, um I think we are kind of recommending that everyone, all of
our council members, everybody reach out to our county council member and maybe
even all council me county council members and let them know your thoughts
um on that ahead of when they vote on it, I believe next month. So, um, once
again, it's really important because this is a councilmatic public safety
sales cell tax that they can, um, that they can implement and it was already
voted down by the voters and we'll still have to pay for it and we won't be
getting anything in return for help for us. So, please
let them know how you feel about that. And after that, I will call on Mayor
Part. >> No report. Thank you.
and Council Member Cavaleri. >> Thanks, Mayor. And just to quickly
piggyback on what you just said, it's my understanding um the sheriff sent an
inner office memorandum which pretty much implies that
uh especially with the conversation I had with two other council members that
this councilmatic tax will pass. We will not see a penny of it. Um so that that's
going to happen. and and my other piece, my two cents is um hearts and prayers go
out to the victims of the bite of Seattle um who were um gunned down by
thugs in the middle of a what we have come to know as a traditional beautiful
event in our community and um it's just really unfortunate. Prayers to the
family. Thank you. >> Council member Stler, any reports?
I do, mayor. Thank you. Um, couple things I wanted to mention. On on the
16th, I went to the Snowish County City Dinners County City's dinner. Um, it was
all about um how cities are coming with ideas to uh generate more income because
it's we're all in the same boat. Everybody's has a shortfall. So, there's
a lot of discussion. Um, uh, the additional auto fee that we passed was
was something that a lot of other cities have already done. Uh one of the things
that was unique was that um couple of groups like uh Muckle Tio brought in
city groups to brainstorm ideas and actually help to implement ideas. So
they went through some some of the discussions they had and some of the
success that they've had. Uh the big one was annexation. Uh spent most of the
time talking about that. Everybody's looking at it. Everybody's talking about
it. um and more so just knowing that they're going to pick up additional
numbers anyway on on their comp plan, but just to come up with with additional
um um additional revenue. Um the one idea that I heard that I thought was
kind of neat was there's going to be a lot of development going on in the next
few years and all these cities because they're building all these houses to
make their comp plans. So, a lot of the cities are talking about substantially
increasing their development fees um because they it's a great revenue stream
for them. And of course, what they really want is all the cities to develop
to increase their development fees. So, there was kind of a plea across the
board. You know, it'd be great if we all did this so the developers would see
that it's not just a one city deal, but all cities. Just thought that was
interesting. Uh, also want to put out a uh, special thank you to our marketing
team and everyone else uh, that helped put on Party in the Park. Um, extremely
well done. It was it was an interesting event this year. It was um, it was so
well organized that they moved those kids through on the run and they got
them back in the car and they got them home. And you know, before it was kind
of a conglomerate of kids and time and so there's these big crowds milling
around. It was it was really interesting that it that the crowds didn't seem as
big although we had a lot more people running in the in the events but it was
just because it was extremely um well organized. Um I will say that Kuanas
because yeah I'm going to say something about Quanis you know me um actually
Quantis uh p had three booths at this event which was really big for for us
plus an open space for some some games for the kids. Um, and it was extremely
positive for your Kuanas organization. They got a chance to, we had a chance to
meet with a lot of the citizens that came through. The kids played the games
and got tattooed and everything else. And but it was really nice for to meet
the community and get the community to meet um, uh, Kana. So, uh, kudos to, uh,
Party in the Park. And that's it. Thank you.
» Um, Council Member Allison. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, we had City Chat
on Saturday,
uh, 10 to 11. Um, that Starbucks is really busy.
Um, not too many people stopped by to talk to us, though.
» And we had probably, I don't know, six or eight kids from the student advisory
council. So, it was an interesting interesting morning. lot of a lot of
people running in and out of there and that parking lot's not big enough for
them. >> On a side note, Councilman uh Council
Member Alderson and myself were extremely well-dressed up for this event
and uh it's kind of like remind you when you went to the prom and your date
dumped you or whatever. We had nowhere to go. [laughter] We did talk to one
citizen though. That was very nice. >> Um all right. Um Council Member Paddock.
» Yeah, just a [snorts] couple things. Um one of them actually is about uh ebikes.
So, um, Deputy Chief, uh, Chartran joined, uh, the board meeting for the,
uh, Parks at Mil Creek HOA, uh, this last month, and there's been quite a bit
of ebike activity, uh, in uh, in the in the parks. And, um, any event, uh, from
what the board president had said, um, and I'm almost glad that Eric's not here
because he said it Eric could not have been more charming or insightful.
uh he um he had said uh the deputy chief had said um in no uncertain terms to the
to the community, hey do not engage, do not chase the writers. It just
encourages them. Um it's dangerous for you, it's dangerous for them. Call 911
um without hesitation. It's increasingly a problem. We know it's happening
everywhere like like we we're hearing. So um it was great to have that that
kind of um engagement. Uh, I think the the parks folks really really
appreciated that. Um, so well done. Uh, second, um, the monuments, um, at least
my coming back from vacation and seeing those monuments up, they look fantastic
and, uh, um, I'm disappointed Jod's not here or excuse me, um, Jody [snorts]
Hawkins isn't here because the team obviously did a great job with those
monuments. They just look fantastic. So, well, well done. It was nice coming into
the city and seeing something like that new.
» Council member Goeski. >> Yes. Um I attended the Rya 8 uh meeting
on July 16th. We were able to do a in-person meeting down in Maple Valley
uh with a meeting followed by a site visit to one of the projects that's
being funded. Um, it was fascinating to see in person some of the things that
are being done to reclaim a site. They've they're purchasing
purchasing land in flood planes from um residents and reclaiming them, allowing
the flood plane streams to go through. They're creating
artificial dams with old timbers. It was fascinating. It was great to be able to
see it in person. Um, I'll be joining the budget discussions in the month of
August and then that'll come back to a vote in the month of September when I
don't think I can make it to the meeting, but um, council member Duk said
she could take my place that time and then their grant round will start up
again towards the end of this year, beginning of next year. So, that's when
we would be looking for if we have projects that are would fall under those
umbrellas. It was on the Cedar River. Yeah,
that's all. Thank you. >> Perfect. Thank you. Um, before I move
forward, could I go ahead and have a motion to extend the meeting? I'm going
to say 9:30. I don't think we need that long, but just to be safe.
» So move. >> Second.
» Second. >> I have a motion and a second to extend
to 9:30. All those in favor say I. >> I.
» I. >> I have a motion, a second, and
I can't even think straight anymore. Or seven. Seven yeses, zero nos, zero
extensions. Motion passes. Um, all right. Next up, we will move to
audience communication. Is there anyone in the audience?
Well, sir, will you please give us your name, city, and you have three minutes?
» Mike, residents of Mills Creek for more than 43 years.
» Uh, a couple comments. The, uh, annexation discussion is great to have
Rob Fenty here and and Sarah online. Excellent work by staff and consultants
and good discussion. I really liked how that went. It's interesting. It kind of
aligns with where we were probably 10 plus years ago talking about going south
as a way to get more commercial and an industrial property. So that that idea
of doing the whatever the letters were again. Uh that makes a lot of sense and
I think that not not trying to take the D but not C part of it would be very
tough. And so I think that kind of makes some sense. Uh, couple things I noted. I
already mentioned to uh to Rob. You may want to take a look at it. The
scenario 2, three, and four all talked about.
I can't remember what letter it was now, but the uh the section going down B
highway. The Muga goes to 196. Those diagrams all had about 188th,
which is by the new warehouse labeled as 196. I don't think it changed your
strategy, but you might look at that. I'm sure Sarah probably did the numbers
right, but don't think about that as being a way to control that entire uh
corridor. That's some of the bullets where we control the corridor all the
way to the south end and you don't that way. So, that's something to think about
and that may be something the boundary review board says, why are you stopping
a 188th versus 196? That's kind of towards the close of the edge. But
again, as Council Member Paddock pointed out, you don't have to tell them that
upfront. Make them ask, but I think you might have to think about what would
happen if you were forced to go clear to 196. you probably might might not be
able to stop there. Then wanted to make some comments on um capital plan. I'll
try to keep it quick. You think about why we're a city. We're a city be
because of public safety and because of the public infrastructure that we all
want in terms of roads, sidewalks, parks, and facilities and those kinds of
things. And so uh city engineer did a good good job of the kind of the things
we've been talking about the last couple years. The capital plan is a budgeting
tool and it's kind of scary big numbers. And I really got to thinking about this.
The biggest project we've ever had up to this point in time, one project has been
the 35th Avenue Bridge at about five to six million bucks. There's a lot of
projects on that list that are a lot bigger numbers. That's scary. It's
because we've gone from being a young city where the developers built
everything. Things were cheaper back then, too. But now we're faced with
maintenance issues and with dreams that are pretty big. And so, it's not a not a
bad thing to think about borrowing money, bonding monies. We've never
really bonded for anything as a city. It's okay to bond. It's okay to borrow.
You didn't buy your house with cash. You didn't wait to buy your million-dollar
house that you're living in until you had a million dollars. You you bought
that when you knew you had the capacity to pay for the mortgage, the down
payment in the mortgage. So, think about it that way for all of these things
we're doing. Um, I will say that funding wise that I think there's been more uh
attention by council recently and by staff recently in ter terms of looking
for other places for funds. Don't think you just go to your favorite legislators
and ask them for a line item of appropriation. You need to stay involved
with the regional programs, the federal programs, the state programs, the
regional programs that are programmatic. And so we need to have a pres, we as a
city need to have presence down at PSRC. You don't have to go there, but you need
to be watching what's going on at the transportation policy board about how
the FHWA funds come through the system to us, and you need to get in line
because everybody else is already in line. So, make sure that you as council
members are paying attention as legislators to what's going on down
there. Don't depend just on the representative for from SEC to to tell
you what's going on and not uh snag the night money before it gets to you.
» Get involved with TIB. Watch what they're doing. Look what's going on with
it. ICC is the group that Dan would intend or city engineer would attend to
to be county uh county staff things, but also the skit group that we used to go
to. Uh somebody should be going to the skit. It could be elected, it could be
staff, it could be both. But Skid is a Snowish County Committee for improved
transportation. And they together with ICC put together a regional
transportation priority plan that is put in front of the legislators and put in
front of everybody every couple of years as a way to say these are the
priorities. And so we need to be on that list uh so that Mil Creek doesn't get
neglected because everybody's waiting. Everybody else, all the other cities
have dreams about big projects too. So that's the advice I've got for tonight.
Thanks. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the
audience that would like to speak? Right. Name, city, and you have three
minutes. >> Hey, my name is Jathan. Um, I'm a I just
graduated from Jackson High School. Um, I live in the parks. Um, I've been here
since kindergarten. Um, yeah, one, I really appreciate all you guys do. Um,
yeah. So, on behalf of my family and everyone I know, um, I think there's
just a couple things I heard that maybe I could add to, um, I think for the
annexation stuff, um, especially like B, C, D,
um, I went to Cedarway Elementary, so a lot of those guys I was friends with and
we went to Jackson High School together. And then we I feel like a a lot of us
feel like we're just part of Mil Creek. Um, so if you're part I feel like a lot
of the people in BC and D already feel like they're in Mil Creek, part of Mil
Creek because they went to Jackson. Um, and because they went to like Heather
Woodford Middle School. Um, I think the Southtown Center stuff is really cool
for like teenagers and stuff. Um, I feel like right now, um, like sometimes like
if we want to go somewhere, we like can have to go like down to like both or go
up to Alderwood and stuff. Um, so really, um, this gives us a chance to
take the bus from the parks, let's just say, go down on like I think the 166 to
like where the Safeway is now, and then immediately be able to shop and never
use a car. So, that would really be awesome. Um, yeah, I think that's it.
Thanks. >> Perfect. Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the audience that would like to speak?
Is there anyone online that would like to speak? H
» Barb aka Amy Butcher. >> Yes. Uh
I lost you. Can you hear me? >> We can hear you and see you. So you
can't see us. >> I can't on the screen. Okay.
» Okay. You're there. >> Uh thank you, Mayor Barb Hidle. usually
uh Mil Creek resident, not for a couple days here. It's a little bit hotter over
this eastern Washington. I'd just like to make a few comments in regard to your
annexation scenarios. I was noticing you had dropped all the discussions about
going straight across 180th to make a nice clean block of
u inexation. Um, I gather it's because you want to add more commercial
properties for greater revenue. I sort of like the looks of straight across
180th. Just my comments. I would sincerely hope
you, the city, will take on the Penny Creek Nature Area.
It is such a wonderful asset. The cost on the budget presentation was a bit of
a surprise to me, too. I hope a search is still actively going on looking for
grants to take care of that money if it really is needed. Lastly, I hope to see
many of you at Buffalo Park for National Out a week from tonight on August 4th
from 5 to 8:00 p.m. Thank you. Thank you, Barb. Is there anyone else
online that would like to speak? >> Get out of here.
» All right. Is there anyone else that would like to speak?
All right. Thank you. >> Nope. Nope. Nope.
» Lost you. >> Barb is having a hard muting.
I know. All right. So, with that, we will now move into executive session. We
will go into executive session to discuss potential litigation pursuant to
RCW42.30.1101
I. No action will be taken. We have an estimated time of only five minutes.
Okay. So, let's say we will we will be back from executive session. I'm going
to say 9:08 because it takes us a minute to get back there.
personal. >> Sure.
C.
Thank you so much. Have a great evening.
» I'm sorry.
That's awesome. >> Yeah, I mean
it
is 100%. >> Okay.
Excuse
me.
Nice.
» Yeah.
Yes,
it's
All
right. Nice work.
That's what happens when you're the oldest child.
» I teleported quickly. [clears throat]
All right, it is now 9:08. Council has returned from executive session and
there was no action taken. With that, we will adjourn the meeting at 9:08
p.m. We will see you back on what? August 11th.
» Perfect. >> Everybody has gotten silly because
they're also tired. So, good night everyone.