Meeting for November 12th, 2025.

Um City Clerk, who do you do the roll call, please?

Mayor Robinson.

Here.

Deputy Mayor Couldson.

Councilmember Markabat.

Yes.

Councilmember Hamilton.

Here.

Councilmember?

Yes.

Councilmember New England?

Councilmember Simadwari.

Thank you.

Councilmember New in House, could you please lead us in the flag salute?

I'd like to read this to the flag of the United States of America.

And to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

We have one proclamation tonight that will be read by Councilmember Hamilton for Transgender Gender Awareness Week and Transgender Day of Remembrance.

Whereas more than one million adults in the United States identify as transgender or non-binary, an estimated 1.6% of the adult population, according to recent national data.

And whereas transgender non-binary and gender non-conforming people contribute greatly to Bellevue's culture and community, enriching the city's diversity and helping advance equity, inclusion, and understanding for all.

And whereas, despite continued progress, transgender and non-binary people still face discrimination, barriers to opportunity, and acts of violence, underscoring the need for awareness, acceptance, and collective action.

And whereas each year, Tranton's gender awareness week raises visibility and promotes education about the experiences of transgender and non-binary communities, while encouraging allies to take part in building inclusive communities.

And whereas first recognized in 1999, following the death of Rita Hester, a black transgender woman, transgender day of remembrance, observed on November 20th honors the lives of transgender and gender nonconforming individuals lost to violence and calls for reflection, compassion, and change.

And whereas the City of Bellevue reaffirms its commitment to fostering a community where every person is treated with dignity and respect.

Each year, city staff and residents gather to observe Transgender Day of Remembrance and to read the names of those lost to violence, standing in solidarity with the transgender community.

Now, therefore, I, Dave Hamilton, on behalf of Lynn Robinson, mayor of the City of Bellevue, Washington, and on behalf of the City Council, do hereby proclaim November 13th to 19th, 2025 as Transgender Awareness Week and Transgender Day of Remembrance in Bellevue, Washington, and encourage all residents to participate in ceremonies and activities that promote understanding, visibility, and respect for transgender and non-binary people in our community.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Um I'm just gonna say I see Karina Elakis signed up for public comment and wonder if she would like to speak at this time to the proclamation.

I don't know who you are, and I know this is kind of unexpected, but if not, that's okay.

All right, um, let's go on to joining us virtually.

Oh, virtually.

Well, if you would uh I'm gonna give her that option.

Karina, can you hear me?

We can awesome.

Uh thank you, Council members.

Um, I really appreciate um this day of remembrance.

I have uh very close ties to those who have been lost in the transgender community and seeing such a large city uh represent and remember those uh who we have lost is a very meaningful gesture.

And I really appreciate you for continuing this tradition and pushing it forward into the future.

And my emotions um great significant um just gesture and bringing their struggle into the public conversation.

Thank you.

Thank you for speaking.

I appreciate that.

Okay, so on to oral communications.

City clerk, do we have anybody signed up?

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

Uh, there are 10 pre-registered speakers this evening.

So before I start going or calling the names, I'll go over a few of the rules that the council has in place.

So the total time for oral communications is for a period not to exceed 30 minutes, and all topics must relate to City of Bellevue government.

People speaking to items on tonight's agenda will be called first, and then if time remains, people speaking to items not on tonight's agenda will be called.

In both of those categories, the presiding officer is authorized to give preference to those who have not spoken to council within the last 60 days, or who will be speaking on items that will come in front of the council within the next 60 days.

Each speaker is allowed to speak up to three minutes, and only three speakers are allowed to speak to any one side of a particular topic.

And then finally, in compliance with Washington State campaign laws regarding the use of public facilities during elections, no speaker may support or oppose a ballot measure or support or oppose a candidate for election, which includes one's own campaign.

Any speaker beginning discussing the uh topics of this nature will be asked to stop.

And with that, I'll call our first speaker who is Tim Hay.

Okay, it doesn't appear Mr.

Hayes here.

Our next speaker is Jessica Rowe.

Okay.

Um mayor, deputy mayor, council members.

I'm Jessica Rowe, my land use attorney with McCullough Hill.

Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak tonight on the Critical Areas Ordinance Udate.

Um, we're here to say we support the Planning Commission recommendation with one minor revision, hopefully.

Um, in 1970s and 80s in Bellevue, before critical areas regulations protected our wetlands, development was allowed to be placed in the middle of wetlands.

Unfortunately, this is the case in much of East Maine TOD zone and some parts of Bell Red.

As a result, old commercial parking lots exist in what used to be wetlands throughout Bellevue that would never be allowed today.

These TOD areas are now zoned for the addition of housing around transit.

The planning commission's recommendation goes a long way in addressing legally established nonconforming sites so that redevelopment of old sites may occur so long as net ecological gain is achieved.

This is the right policy choice.

By allowing for flexible redevelopment of non-conforming sites, both housing and net ecological gain can be achieved.

We recommend or we commend the planning commission and staff for that great work.

However, the current draft ordinance requires a minor revision to allow for some parking lots that include degraded wetlands areas to be redeveloped.

This concept is particularly important to address in TOD zones where housing should be prioritized near light rail.

If this policy issue is not addressed in the current critical areas code, existing 1980s commercial structures and service parking lots that currently harm the surrounding critical areas will continue to remain.

We would ask that council please direct staff to repair minor amendment to the allowance that allows degraded low-quality wetlands to be modified, reconfigured, and replaced.

So known net loss of wetlands occurs with the following required outcomes.

One net ecological gain, meaning replacement of any modified wetlands or restoration of higher quality wetlands, and two new housing.

This amendment should be directed to TOD areas.

We hope this is a minor, we believe this is a minor in nature and believe that staff could work on such an amendment in time for you to pass the ordinance in December.

Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you for speaking.

I'm going to put you down as opposed actually to the proposed um critical ordinance.

Thank you for that, Mayor.

Uh I want to make one additional announcement about tonight's meeting and uh that I forgot to say earlier, which is there is a public hearing this evening under item 9A.

A few folks did sign up for oral communications with clearly um an intent to speak about the budget.

So you have been moved to the public hearing list.

Um and also a reminder, council will not be able to hear comments about the budget during oral communications.

So if you if we didn't catch you and I call your name, if you can just say please move me to the public hearing list.

Um, with that, I will call our next speaker who's a Anthony Avery.

Good evening, Mayor, Deputy Mayor, City Council members.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight.

And I'm here on behalf of Respace to provide support for the city's co-living legislation, particularly the proposal to include homeownership in the legislation.

Respace is a Washington-based housing innovation company dedicated to expanding the homeownership accessibility and housing choice within existing neighborhoods.

We recently received permits to construct our first project in Crown Hill, and we have four more on the way.

Fully aligned with the spirit and goals of Bellevue's housing efforts.

One of our most successful products is our selling stay model that allows residents to remain in the home they've lived in for decades in the neighborhoods that they know and love and access the equity in their home all at the same time.

Well, we have a primary focus on single family products.

We're in early development stages of a transit oriented development and multimodal product or multi-u-family model that would provide opportunities for transit-oriented development and for sale co-living in the appropriate locations.

We are grateful that city staff has proposed to include a for sale co-living in the proposed code change to provide residents and workers of Bellevue to provide greater housing opportunities within the city and support existing middle housing policies that you've passed in the in the past.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speakers are Phyllis White and Linda Ulrich, I believe are coming up together, but just a reminder you only get three minutes total.

Thank you.

Hello, thank you for the opportunity to speak.

I mean, say her speech.

And this is in regards to the critical area ordinance update.

I have lived here for 70 years and 42 of that on Kelsey Creek.

And some of the things that I just want to make sure that are heard is the concerns that we have as residents on the severe impact to the native habitat, the floor and the fauna of the area in the critical critical areas.

These decisions are huge.

One, um, already we're already encroaching on the wildlife food and shelter resources.

Um, as native trees are removed, which I think is very important.

Um the there's a series of events that evolve certain trees, how certain insects, certain birds feed on those insects, and then removing the habitat that's close to it, and including the trees, results in consequences impacting the viruses, et cetera, that destroy the native trees.

Then scrub trees replace the those natives that have built up the biologic defenses, um, and it simply can't be rebuilt.

And I'm sorry to be reading this, but I'm really nervous.

So the pollinators, the streams, the birds, the deer, the coyotes, the bobcats, all these things that that move about in our neighborhood in our yards.

I brought pictures of all the deer that are eating off of my apple tree and the birds.

I have that um an app that you can listen is called Merlin, and I've had all the different birds, and I thought it's really important that people know the different birds that live here, and those birds will not be here if those critical areas are impacted so that we have certain insects that aren't there.

Um, I know that sounds silly, but it's true.

Let's see.

Um, I think as human beings, we're we're charged and encouraged to steward these resources, and I thank you for letting me share that because it's a lovely place to live.

Yeah.

So Linda lives right next to the stream.

And we often go there to see and sit and talk, and it is such a great feeling.

So we would like to have, if not, you know, just keeping it the way it is right now.

Um, or protect it even more because the fish are we're losing fish in this area.

And uh we love it so much.

We love to see the wildlife.

It's part of our enjoyment and well-being.

Thank you.

Mayor, I'm also going to include that in concerns for our opposition.

I heard support.

Okay.

All right, Jennifer Robertson.

Hello, Mayor and Mayor and Helsinki.

Welcome.

My first time back in two years.

Um, good to see you all.

I'm a resident in Somerset, and I'm speaking for myself as such.

Housing, affordable housing, market rate housing.

That is something the city has been working on as a goal and major work plan for at least a decade or more.

The East Maine TOD area update was part of that effort, and we had all hoped.

I'm speaking for myself and as council member, I think I could speak for the council at that time, that we would see housing.

It was a major point of discussion.

At that time, I was unaware that there was a provision in the code that would prevent turning some of those big parking lots into housing.

We now know that there is a blind spot in the Critical Areas Code that does prevent that.

The draft CAO update during the process, it was that was discovered that there were buffer and creek issues that would prevent redevelopment in Bell Red.

That has now been fixed in the draft.

Yay for that.

That's a the draft is wonderful.

There's just a little blind spot in it.

Now we're I'm asking the council to fix uh the blind spot of wetland category three wetlands to allow increased environmental benefits to offset development impacts on those parking lots, the same as was done for streams and buffers in the Bell Red area.

These are needed to make sure that East Main TOD develops into housing by allowing the moving of the class three and four wetlands to make waiver housing on the condition that the wetlands are enhanced is being performed.

There's no net loss, it's consistent with best available science.

We can get both improved environmental outcomes as well as making more housing, both affordable housing and market rate housing.

That will help implement the goal that was done with the East Maine TOD.

I would encourage the council to take a breath and get the CAO done right.

In my 20 years serving Bellevue, we did the CAO twice, and now it's the third, so you do it about once every 10 years.

It's important now that we know that there's this blind spot, it's important to do it right.

So that does not, you know, the left hand doesn't frustrate what the right hand wants to do with housing.

Yes, there is a deadline at the end of the year.

We I, you know, I hope that you can make that deadline, but if you can't, and many cities who were busy with middle housing are not going to make that deadline.

It's okay.

You can finish it in the first quarter of 2026.

There's no automatic penalty that will, you know, ask your city attorney this, but there's no automatic penalty that's going to come down on Bellevue if you finish the work in January or February.

So please don't let the critical area ordinance frustrate the housing goals that I know this city holds so dear.

Take a breath, take a little more time and harmonize the CAO so that it doesn't stand in the way of the housing goals for the city.

Thank you so much.

And good to see you all, and thank you for your service and for listening.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Barbara Hughes.

Good evening.

My name's Bob Rahuse, and I live in bridal trails.

I'm sure we all agree that Bellevue's trees, plants, parks, lakes, streams, and wildlife make Bellevue an amazing place to live.

The proposed critical areas ordinance update appears to weaken our environmental protection.

We know that replacing a hundred plus year old tree with a six-foot sapling is not a satisfactory solution.

The 10% canopy in our downtown is an emergency, not a goal for the rest of Bellevue.

As our recent bridal trails candidates for all candidates supported tree preservation.

We together as a community should be focusing on supporting fish returning to our streams rather than downgrading streams to allow sort of buffers.

The trees that keep us cool in the summer also keep our streams cool.

Bellevue can grow, but that growth must be intelligent and protect our environment.

Let's take the time to get this right.

I'm asking you to please refer this matter back to the planning commission for further review.

That makes me a concern, by the way.

Okay, Pam.

Okay.

So I want to remind you that the Growth Management Act does not say you have to grow and you have to take over the critical areas.

It's a do no harm.

So it doesn't make you do more than you need to, but it does no says do no harm to what's there.

So you could be an even or net plus there, I think.

In our comp plan, we have provide to the private property owners to achieve specific habitat improvement goals, including retention and enhancement of native vegetation.

Encourage property owners to incorporate suitable indigenous plants in critical areas and buffers consistent with the site's habit type and successional state, and considering species climate resilience.

Anticipate a plan for decreased in access to green and natural spaces, including critical areas in ways that protect the health ecological function for those areas for future generations.

Identify and prioritize projects to improve habitat, preserve hundred year front lane, restore and maintain the shoreline, stabilize stream back base and well, anyway.

This staff is telling us that we want to improve, not just take what do what we can because we have to manage growth and make growth go where it is.

We need to increase our our health of these areas.

And I think that when um Phyllis spoke, you know, they're saying that they're gonna deduct that river because it doesn't have salmon now.

Well, it does might not have salmon now, but that's where we've restored things over and over again in Bellevue.

That doesn't make sense.

Thank you.

Mr.

Zimmerman, I'm going to warn you to keep your sign down so that you don't block people and to please not speak during public comment.

That's a warning.

Our next speaker is Charlie Baumanister, well, good evening, Mayor, Deputy Mayor, Council members.

My name is Charlie Bauman.

I'm a Bellevue resident working on development options for over a thousand units across our city, with most located in Bell Red next to Light Rail.

I want to start by thanking staff, the planning commission, and this council for the thoughtful work that has gone into the draft critical areas ordinance.

It represents a major step forward, especially for areas like Bell Red, which for years has been trapped in a kind of paradox.

It's one of the most transit-accessible housing ready districts in the state.

It has also been one of the hardest to build housing.

Not because of a lack of will, but because of degraded stream corridors and rigid code provisions that left no feasible path forward.

This draft begins to change that.

It finally acknowledges the reality that not all streams in Bellevue are the same.

Bellevue is home to many beautiful functioning streams that deserve protection.

But the half-mile stretch of Gough Creek running through a sea of Bell Red asphalt pipes and drainage ditches is not one of them.

These are very different conditions that require very different solutions.

The former should be protected.

The latter needs every opportunity to be brought back to life.

And that only happens if Bell Red properties have a viable path to redevelopment, which will then serve as the vehicle for restoration.

It's important to be clear.

Combined with the forthcoming land use code amendment, this framework could enable thousands of new homes around light rail while restoring nearly half a mile of degraded stream all through private investment.

This is exactly the kind of balanced modern policy Bellevue needs.

One that makes the right outcomes achievable, aligns housing with restoration, and turns long stalled properties into drivers of ecological recovery.

Thank you again to staff and council for leading both with vision and pragmatism on this issue.

It's a thoughtful forward-looking framework that deserves full support.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

So I've counted three opposed and two four.

So we have room for one more four.

I see Mr.

Hayes is here, and I don't know if you want to.

Mr.

Hay is here, but his comments were more an opposition or concern.

I do.

So I think we've reached our limit on that.

Yes, I have I've indicated to him that we okay to her limit.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Uh the next speaker is Nahal Sarao.

Uh good evening, Mayor Robinson and Council members.

My name is Oscar Munn, and I'm a seventh grader at Chinook Middle School.

Thank you for letting me speak tonight.

I'm here to respectfully ask for the development of an asphalt pump track in our community, like the one in Leavenworth.

Right now, we don't have many places made for teenagers who like to ride bikes or skate.

A pump track would be a safe, fun, and healthy place for kids and teens to ride.

Um practice new skills and spend time outdoors.

At the moment, if we want to ride, we have to drive all the way up to Ducey or take the train to Redmond.

Having a local pump track would give us a place to ride close to home and help our community be more active.

Thank you for listening and supporting the idea of giving youth a great uh space to stay healthy and connected.

Good evening.

Good evening, Mayor Robinson and Council members.

My name is Nahal Sarau, and I am an eighth grader at Chinook Middle School.

We have collected a petition signed by many teenagers from Chinook Middle School.

We have a hundred signatures with proof of identification showing strong community support for building a pump track.

We have also sent an email, a memorandum, and petition for the city for your review.

We believe this project would make a real difference for local use.

Some possible locations would be Wilburton Park or Surrey Downs Park.

Both are easy to reach and would be great spots for this type of facility.

We respectfully ask that the city consider this proposal.

Also, a part of our Bellevue Scout Troop, we would love the chance to visit departments to learn more about how local government and community service works.

Thank you for your time and considering this idea.

We hope to work with the city and parks board to help make the project a reality.

Sincerely, Nahal Sarau and Oscar Munn.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

I'd like to ask the city clerk to have them follow up with emails to all of us and also to follow up on how they can connect their group with a city hall for a tour or something.

Connect with them.

They did a good job.

Our next speaker is Maria Hudson.

Hi.

Okay, Mr.

Zimmerman.

I warned you not to put your sign up.

You're doing it anyway.

I'm gonna ask you to leave.

Okay.

Please leave the council chambers.

I'm sorry, Maria.

Just hold on for one second.

Because I warned you not to put your sign up.

People behind you cannot see, and you're doing it anyway.

No, you're not right this moment, but you definitely were I'm sorry.

I made it very clear that I'm private people here.

Anyway.

Out you go.

Why are you doing this in the media?

Why are you doing it?

Okay.

So we're going to ban him from the chambers.

Thank you for escorting him out.

I appreciate us escort out.

I especially don't want him approaching the daisy.

Have Samuel Playoffs.

Ms.

Hudson, I apologize.

Go ahead.

Um I wanted to advise this council that on October 2nd.

Uh the document that I submitted pertaining to the subpoena do say ticum.

Uh the same perpetrators that are the subject matter of these both of these subpoena do say ticum to Judge Tanalen took my daughter and Bellevue Police Department failed to respond for over three hours.

She almost died.

Okay.

She almost she was also she received alcohol poisoning from these perpetrators.

Your police officers didn't show up for over three hours, and when they showed up, they directed the medical team to leave.

If it had not been for me taking my daughter to a secondary location to Washington State Patrol, and calling medical again when my daughter was non-responsive in her vomit.

Your police officer showed up begrudgingly, assaulted my daughter who was non-responsive to do an ITA.

Then they obstructed a sexual assault kit and concussion MRI workup because they directed over Lake Hospital not to let me in.

Subsequent to that, I had to take her to Evergreen Hospital to do an SAU kit and to get her properly worked up for a concussion.

This complaint and also the October 8th findings, the disposition about the violations of the Adam Walsh Child Protection Act.

If you look at the subpoena do say Tikum 1212 23 to October 8th, 2025.

And I want to additionally say that I've gone before this body repeatedly since 2014 about ongoing child abuse that has transported itself to child sex trafficking and now commercial sexual exploitation of the same perpetrators.

If you do not respond with the appropriate measures with your police department, I will be filing state ethics complaints on individuals that sit atop this body.

You need to take it seriously because their priority are black girls identified demographics in the school district law, Aaron's law.

Priority, prosecution protection.

Ms.

Hudson, your time has expired.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

We do have time for one additional speaker.

There was a late registration, and that's Jennifer Fisher.

But Ms.

Pitcher, I have a clarifying question.

It appears that your comments might be budget related.

Are they budget related?

No.

Okay, go ahead and come to the table.

Good evening, Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and City Council members.

I'm Jennifer Fisher.

I am a 32-year resident of Bellevue and also the executive director of Bellevue Life Spring.

I'm here tonight to thank the council for recently allocating an additional 150,000 to the human services team for community food assistance.

As one of 11 recipient agencies, we received over $13,000, which we immediately used to address immediate needs.

Earlier this month, when the SNAP benefit distribution was delayed, we used these funds to support a $200,000 emergency food distribution program for families right here in Bellevue.

Our board authorized driving drawing from our reserves fund to make this happen.

We are grateful for all of the support and including that of the council, the Human Service Commission, and the staff.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That is the end of our pre-registered list.

So at this point, Mayor, I'll turn it back to you.

Okay, thank you.

Um is there a motion to approve the consent calendar.

Am I wrong?

Agenda member first.

Oh, we skipped uh skipped.

Okay, let's go back just a little bit and may I have a motion to approve the agenda.

I move to approve the agenda.

Second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay.

Now, is there a motion to approve the consent calendar?

I move to approve the consent calendar.

Second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Thank you.

Okay, we have um a public hearing tonight.

And um, I'm going to let our city manager introduce this, but we're gonna I don't want to take the words out of your mouth, but just so council knows there'll be a staff presentation.

We'll go ahead and open the public hearing for public comment.

Uh we'll have a conversation as a council, and if we're ready, we will be giving directions.

So uh Deputy Mayor and Council members.

So tonight we're continuing the discussion about the mid-biennium budget process.

And um Resha, oh John Richard Chief Financial Officer and Evan Phillips, our budget manager, we'll give you a very brief overview of what they presented at the last council meeting.

And you'll have an opportunity to discuss it and can consider providing direction tonight for um legislation to be developed for uh next week to adopt the mid-biannium budget, and then additionally um opportunity to discuss providing direction on allocating council um contingency funds as you raised at the last meeting as well.

So, with that, I'll hand it over to Evan Phillips.

Thank you.

Um, Mayor, Deputy Mayor, Council members.

Um, we are asking you to consider two actions tonight that you see before you.

The first is considering directing us as staff to provide the appropriate legislation as part of the mid-biannium update budget package on November 18th for its final adoption.

Again, this is in advance of the King County property tax deadline that we are um obliged to meet.

So it's really important that we approve this mid-by package by the end of the month.

The second thing that we are asking for you to consider providing staff direction on tonight is the 2025 council contingency, and as Diane mentioned, there will be more information provided on this item after the public hearing.

Very quickly, this has been a very abbreviated mid-biennium budget update with just a couple of touches on October 28th.

Staff provided uh mid-by overview as well as some additional information about sewer rates, development services rates, and some other miscellaneous items, as well as a mid-by-overview.

Tonight we are having the public hearing and then your potential uh direction to direct staff to come back on November 18th for a tentative adoption date.

And with that said, Mayor, I turn it back to you to conduct a public hearing.

Okay, great.

So um, when we get to the point where we're giving direction, do we need to do two separate motions?

One on the budget, one on the contingency if we have a decision on that.

Okay, I just want to make sure.

Do you have language for that?

Is that I don't think you have language for this one.

I just wrote something quite a bit.

Okay, perfect.

Okay, so is there a motion to open the public hearing?

I move to open the public hearing.

Second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Is there anybody here to comment?

Signed up.

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

There are four pre-registered speakers to speak on the public hearing.

And before I start calling names, I will just indicate to the council that you did receive a 15 written comments that were emailed to the council on this particular topic.

So with that, I'll call our first speaker who's Reverend Lisa Clark.

Hello, my name is Reverend Lisa Horse Clark.

I'm the lead pastor of First Congregational Church Bellevue, which is just a few blocks away.

Um, and I'm a resident of Bellevue here.

I'm grateful to raise my child here because of our communal values.

That Bellevue welcomes the world and diversity is our strength.

As a Christian pastor, alongside people of conscience, we ask you to join with other east side cities who have already taken action to use emergency funds to create a rapid response fund on behalf of our immigrant neighbors.

One of my friends growing up was born in India and moved here to the United States as a child.

And she named that in case of fire in her house, if things were in peril, the first thing she would run to get was not family photos or heirlooms, it was her immigration paperwork.

The most precious thing for her to save was what was going to allow her to stay with her family, to work, learn, and be connected in community.

And that threat was deeply personal.

Bellevue is a community of global diversity with 40% of our residents who are born across a national border and now call Bellevue home as our neighbors.

And as we have been seeing, the escalating and brutal tactics of immigration enforcement, including here in our city, have created fear for immigrants at all stages of the immigration process.

In the last weeks, we have witnessed footage of immigration enforcement forcibly removing a parent as she was on her way to drop off a child at Dairy Care in Issaquah.

This parent was a Bellevue resident.

This is our people.

Small organizations that already hold places of trust that are better able to respond to changing frameworks.

Bellevue welcomes the world is a promise, and we ask you as city council to do all that you can to keep it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Kelly Spencer.

Good evening.

I am Reverend Kelly Spencer, and I'm the pastor at Newport Presbyterian Church here in Bellevue.

I'm here tonight to also speak in favor of the council's allocating of contingency funds to organizations serving immigrants targeted by federal immigration enforcement.

I cannot sit idly by as my immigrant neighbors are terrified for their lives, and the organizations that most directly support them don't have adequate funding to face the current moment.

To quote a friend and fellow pastor, Reverend David Black, I am weary of bystanders who wait for heroes and kings.

People who watch and comment but do not seize their agency to become ministers and leaders as we are all called to be.

Stand up for peace and justice that's in the heart of all of us.

And I'm here tonight on behalf of the children.

As a new parent, I cannot imagine making a copy of my child's birth certificate and emergency plan to go in her backpack at daycare in case something happens and I'm gone when it's time to pick her up from school.

Our job is to protect the vulnerable among us.

And it doesn't get more vulnerable than our children.

Our children who can feel that something bad is happening and who will ask us what we did to help.

Our children who worry their families will be taken in the middle of the night.

Our children who are terrified that they might be next.

If nothing else calls us to act, let it be the children.

So I'm here tonight to ask this council to make rapid response funding for our immigrant neighbors a top priority.

We need to treat this as the emergency it is and step in to provide the attention, care, and support that no one should ever need, but has now become necessary.

We are the ones called to help right now.

So let's do that together.

Thank you for your time and energy tonight on this life or death matter.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Mike Stewart.

Good evening, Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and Council members.

I am Mike Stewart, CEO of Kindring, founded more than 60 years ago.

Right here in Bellevue, Kindering annually serves over 600 Bellevue children with developmental delays and disabilities.

Tonight I'll share how Kindering advances the city's goal of supporting thriving people and communities.

As you know, many Bellevue families are struggling, including many we serve.

More than one third of kindring families rely on Medicaid to access care.

We never turn a family away due to financial need in a budgeted over $3 million for uncompensated care this year.

Although Kindering is not a direct beneficiary, we really appreciate the city's swift action to support families affected by SNAP reductions.

More than half of SNAP households include a person with a disability.

So your support makes a huge difference.

Kindring also helps families meet their basic needs in partnership with KidVantage and others.

Kindering distributed over a hundred thousand dollars worth of diapers, formula, clothing, and other essentials to Bellevue families last year.

We deliver these goods right alongside our regular pediatric therapies and families in transition or our fit program.

Bellevue is a key funder of FIT, and we are deeply grateful.

This program supports families experiencing housing instability and refugee and families through developmental therapies for children and case management and resource navigation for caregivers.

Homeless children are four times more likely than their peers to have developmental delays.

But in but in fit, 83% of children made measurable developmental progress, demonstrating the power of this care based model.

We also appreciate your commitment to child care and early learning.

Kindring's child care and preschool consultation program equips Bellevue's child care providers and preschool teachers to meet children's developmental and behavioral needs.

Last year, 95% of children served by CCPC stayed in their classrooms instead of being expelled, keeping parents working, easing financial stress, and supporting equity as black boys and children with disabilities are most at risk of expulsion.

As many have said, child care is the work that makes all of their work possible.

In closing, we thank you for supporting our programs and families and urge you to keep investing in services for Bellevue's youngest residents with disabilities.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Adam Dibba.

If you're joining us online, could you raise your hand, please?

Okay.

Um I do not see a hand.

So at this point, that is the end of our pre-registered list.

And I would ask I don't see, I didn't see a hand.

Ms.

Dibba, if you're joining us, could you raise your hand?

I don't think so.

Um but if there is anyone else joining us this evening who would like to make a comment to the council regarding the budget under this public hearing, please raise your hand.

That goes for those online as well.

Okay.

No additional hands, Mayor.

I'll turn it back to you.

Okay, thank you.

Um is there a motion to close the public hearing?

I move to close the public hearing.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Okay, so we have um two directions in front of us.

One is for the um 2025-26 budget and 2025 to 30 CIP plan mid-biennium update.

And the second is a discussion on our council contingency dollars and what we may want to do with them.

So I'd like to open this up to talking about the budget first and not the council contingency, and then we'll go back around and we'll discuss the contingency.

Um we'll start with um councilmember Hamilton.

There you are.

Any comments or questions on the proposed budget?

No, none.

Thank you, Mayor.

Okay, great.

And I'm gonna go to me, and I don't have any comments or questions either.

Um Councilmember New in House.

None for me as well, thank you.

Council Bargava.

Not me.

Councilor Sumer DeWiria.

None for me either.

Councilmember Lee.

Um I see that uh we are talking about property tax levy ordinance.

Uh and also bank property resolution.

I think I'm okay with the bank property resolution.

We talked about this last time we were briefed.

Um I do have some questions regarding tax levy.

I was asking specifically, do we have some specific area where this money would be designated?

Uh you said that maybe or yes.

So maybe if you can just clarify it a little bit for me, that would be helpful.

Yeah, I could provide a quick answer on that.

Yes, the one percent increase levy goes into all the funds, all pieces of our general funds.

So that covers all general government services and public safety, um, but it isn't directed into one specific one specific bucket.

That said, the one percent um increase also applies to the voted tax levies.

So about 40-ish percent of our property taxes are voted levies.

So when we're adding in that one percent, we're not just um adjusting the base levy, but we're also adding additional funding for the levies that cover fire transportation and our two parks levies as well.

So it's spread it out around uh various needs.

Correct.

Okay, so it's designated.

Yes, okay.

It's not just sitting there.

No, of course not.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, uh, Deputy Mayor.

Uh I don't have any questions.

I just wanted to take this moment to thank you all uh for uh great work on this.

Is a technical adjustment is really uh it takes a lot of time.

Uh you are coordinating with all of the departments and make sure we are um applying all of the requirements that we need to.

So appreciate you all.

Thank you.

Okay, great.

So let's move on to the council contingency.

So I'm gonna ask for two things from staff.

One, I'm gonna ask for somebody to explain the council contingent contingency, how much it is, how we have already allocated if we have how much we have to spend for how long of the period of time.

Then I'm going to ask, we have Tony Esparza here from our um, and we have Michael Shiosaki from Parks and Community Services and Tony Sparza from the same thing, okay.

And um, I work with you directly through human services.

So I'm going to ask for an explanation on um, you know, what the human service funding is already paying for.

We've seen some recent additions.

Um we could describe that, and I think we'd all love to hear a little bit of detail on how Bellevue is addressing some of the um funding needs for immigrant and refugee services.

I know we do it a little differently than other cities before we start this whole conversation.

So let's start with the um contingency.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor, Deputy Mayor, Council members.

Um the council contingency is a long-standing practice that we've had here at the City of Bellevue.

There's approximately a million dollars a year.

Uh not actually approximately, it is exactly a million dollars a year that is appropriated for the council to designate um as they see fit when uh emergency or opportunities come up.

Um of that two million dollars for the biennium, so the two-year period, you in your uh budget process that we started with, allocated approximately half of that, those monies.

So you've allocated about a million dollars worth to date to very specific programs and services.

Um those are going forward as directed.

They've run the full gambit from uh energy studies to uh events to uh direct economic development and human services.

So there's a pretty broad breadth of investments that you've already guided uh portion of those monies.

There's approximately a million dollars left that is available for the remaining period of time through now and the end of 2026.

Um those funds are already uh out uh appropriated, so you have to make a designation of utilization of those funds.

Um we'll also offer that this is one of the most volatile times that we have seen in our economies in probably all of our lifetimes.

Um and so your actions to date have been supportive and helpful, and I understand tonight you'd like to consider a little bit more as we think about that volatility of today and the volatility that sits before us.

So does that help answer some questions about the basics of council contingency?

It does.

In my history on the council, and I haven't been here as long as Conrad, we've uh typically spent it at the end of the year.

We wait through the year to see what's going to come up.

And um, starting last year, we kind of spent it ahead of time, which is a little different.

So here we are ahead of time again for 2026.

So that just wanted to clarify that a little bit.

Any comments or questions on what has just been just um talked about?

Go ahead, Councilman Release.

Just clarification.

So actually, this is uh can be expended by the end of the year, right?

Council reserves for 2025.

And it's for 2025 and 2026.

Okay, so by the way.

So we still have one year to conquer.

So we still don't know if we may need this somehow.

It's a contingency.

Uh is it possible if we spend now because we need it?

I think we do.

Uh we can if we need something when we go into next year, we can maybe look at maybe have some money for council reserve for special needs.

Uh council member, these are how do we do agencies are those for those special needs as they get identified.

But we we would be expended uh 1920 uh 2026 money.

Uh is we would be your call as to how much of that remaining about million dollars you would choose to act upon and what would remain available for a later action.

So, what's your observational advice?

How much you think we'd be prudent to be in the budget that we may still have some other hold off on that until we have a little more conversation here.

Um thank you for that question though.

So uh Tony, can you talk and and Michael?

Sorry, I don't know why I gravitate to her.

Okay, both of you Tony has details.

So I'll turn it over to you then.

Okay, thank you.

So thank you, Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and Councilmember.

So I'll start with the overview you requested of funds already invested, and then I will turn it back to uh Director Shiosaki to begin to talk about some of the data for your contemplation this evening.

So already invested by our council for the biennium is more than 17 million dollars into human services.

That comes from a number of funding sources.

It comes from the general fund into a category we call the human services fund, and so that's built into our budgeting process every year to set aside funds to meet the needs of our community by contracting with human services providers.

In addition, that includes some funding from what we call our housing stability program.

Um sometimes gets loosely referred to as 1590.

Um a big portion of those funds go to the great goal the council has set of uh affordable housing, and we allocate a portion of those funds to behavioral health and housing related services.

So it's for a particular type of human services.

Um we also are using right now um community development block grant funding, which CDBG, and so those funds did come through for 2025, so that is included in that number.

And then um the council did choose to allocate one-time funding in 2025 and 2026, as you might recall, um, as we came to the end of 2024, there was a recognition of the end of federal investment in response to COVID.

The council acknowledged the level of need in the community and made a significant investment in response to that for 2025 and 2026.

So those funds are invested um throughout what we call the human services continuum.

So they fund any type of human services needs, those could include things such as um transitional housing, shelter, food, behavioral health, um, uh child care, early childhood education, so any number of things, and within those services, um the needs of several particular populations are also um particularly addressed, sometimes by one agency that serves everyone, sometimes by an agency that might have a particular emphasis.

So examples of community populations that are met through those contracts are individuals with disabilities, older adults, youth, and our immigrant and refugee population.

So we have providers that both um serve the uh uh just very broad services, um, and then we have providers that might tailor their services to a particular population, but all of our providers are um by contract required to serve any Bellevue resident.

Um, so there is not a provider that um would refer someone else away, so they will serve anyone that is a Bellevue resident.

So that is the baseline overview.

Does that meet what you were hoping for, Mayor?

Yeah, I um I know some people are are uh some the two cities that are been referenced or doing the the emergency um pot of money for immigrant refugee services.

Can you talk about how much money we have put toward things services like that that have just not been in one pot?

Sure.

Um we did a loose scan, so um, you know, more detailed analysis could absolutely be done, but programs that we were able to identify that would have a particular benefit for the immigrant and refugee community would come out to about $600,000 per year.

Okay, that's helpful.

So thank you.

Stick around.

Oh, uh Mr.

Siosaki, you wanted to add to that.

Good evening, everyone.

So uh this evening, in response to council members' expressed interest in exploring uh the allocation of council contingency towards human services, we bring several options for your consideration.

And these uh these options are based on needs as identified in, of course, the human services needs update that was recently completed.

As you may know, it's a comprehensive review of human service needs in our community.

And along with that, even more recent data from follow-up engagement, and you can see uh much of that on the slide.

And from that engagement, service providers have been reporting significantly higher than normal demand for their services this year.

The data and input indicate the highest emerging uh need categories are food assistance, immigrant and refugee legal assistance, rent and mortgage financial assistance, and uh and with that, I would like to hand this off to Tony who will provide uh the data that supports these needs, as well as the services that could be funded out of these need categories.

So, Tony.

Thank you, Director Shiosaki.

So, with the highest emerging needs in mind that Director Shiyasaki mentioned, I'll review a few options for the council's consideration of how you could choose to allocate dollars from the council contingency should you choose to.

Um, one option as noted on the screen, should the council choose to allocate $500,000.

You could choose to divide that equally between food assistance and immigrant and refugee legal assistance.

And I will spend some time in a moment describing what services these categories would cover.

Should the council choose to allocate allocate $750,000, you could choose to also divide that between those two categories equally of food assistance and immigrant and refugee legal assistance, or you could choose to expand to all three of the highest emerging needs that Director Shiasaki mentioned, which is food assistance, immigrant and refugee legal assistance, and financial assistance.

So a little bit of added context.

I'll provide you with some data for each of those service areas.

I'll also describe for you what services in those areas are funded by our existing contracts.

So for food, um, our contracts currently cover direct distribution of food to households, um, direct distribution of food gift cards, weekend meals for kids, so when they don't have access to food at school, they will have it over the weekend.

Similarly, food for kids over school breaks, and also some providers that rescue food is the term that's used, meaning they might go to grocery stores or restaurants and prevent food from being discarded and then taking them to food distributors that then get them out to our households.

Some data points for your consideration.

Um, we are hearing at a minimum that client demand has increased by more than 10% for food, and that includes providers reporting that they are seeing households who have never before needed food assistance.

Um we also have some providers that are reporting a very low inventory in their food resources due to the level of demand that they are trying to respond to.

And just for understanding, um, we know that the federal government shutdown is in flux as we speak, um, and that corresponding impacts on SNAP benefits.

While that has compounded the need, um, the need for food assistance would be one of the highest areas of need, even when or if SNAP benefits were restored.

Um, the another area, immigrant and refugee legal assistance.

So, for example, the things that are covered through our funded contracts for this would be educational clinics, assistance with preparing legal documents, um, supporting residents as they prepare for court hearings, and support for domestic violence survivors who are trying to navigate their immigration status while leaving an abusive partner.

Um some examples of data is that our immigrant and refugee legal providers also are reporting a surge in demand in services, reporting more than 15 times the number of Bellevue residents that are requesting immigrant and refugee legal assistance compared to prior years.

Our providers are also reporting that the level of fear and uncertainty being experienced by our immigrant and refugee residents is compounding their other needs in the areas of food and financial assistance due to their fear of accessing help when they need it.

Moving on to the third area of potential need for your consideration, financial assistance.

This is largely rent and mortgage assistance in our contracts.

There is a few instances of assistance for other bills that could jeopardize housing stability, for example, if you needed a car repair to maintain your job in order to pay for your rent.

Some data to support that area is that for one every one household that one of our agencies can support with financial assistance, they are reporting that there are more than 10 that they cannot support due to not having the funding to do so.

And then for context, low and moderate income households are those most impacted by the rising cost of living.

In addition, in Bellevue, our low and moderate income households are those who most experience being cost burdened, meaning more than 30 percent for some, more than 50 percent of their income goes towards their housing costs, and those households are those most likely to experience homelessness.

And in Bellevue, low and moderate income households make up 23.8 percent of our households.

So that's between one and five and one and four of our households that are experiencing that.

I'll briefly just touch on a process perspective for your consideration as you consider things this evening.

Um council would have the option to direct staff to amend our existing contracts with providers for any services that you identified.

Some history on that.

These contracts are in place after staff through the funding process screens agencies to meet the city's rigorous requirements.

And then the Human Services Commission reviews applications and forms recommendations to ensure that city policies and priorities are met.

Contracts with our human services agencies in Bellevue are specifically for services to Bellevue residents.

Agencies are required to submit a budget for use of funding along with their projected service units, which means something like the number of food bags that they would distribute, the number of legal consultation hours that they might provide, or the number of households assisted with financial assistance.

And all of these become a part of their contract.

Reimbursements to agencies are contingent upon meeting the terms of those contracts.

And agencies can choose to include subcontracting with other agencies in their budget if they would like, and this can at times increase the reach of funding to additional populations in Bellevue.

And then the last thing I'll touch on is just for your awareness and assurance that we monitor all of our contracts very closely to ensure good stewardship of city funding.

Agencies are able to request reimbursement for services provided within the current quarter.

So should the council choose to allocate funding from the council contingency, staff with them and inform the agency that they had been awarded funding, and the agency could choose to begin spending immediately, but reimbursements would not occur until after the contract amendment is completed.

Any newly allocated funds could be added to agency contracts that right now extend through the end of 2026.

And as with all of our existing contract agencies are required to report at a minimum of quarterly on how many service units they have provided and details on how they have spent any Cindy City funding.

And once a year we publish that data to our human services dashboard that's available for the council's review and the public's review.

I'll turn it back to you, Mayor or Director Risha.

Okay, excellent.

Thank you.

Councilmember Hamilton, do you want to start us off?

Sure.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thanks for the presentation and attention to this serious issue.

You know, as I see the council contingency fund, I see it uh to address the needs that we aren't able to know or anticipate at the time the budget is passed.

And I think the needs for legal assistance, food assistance, financial assistance are critical, and that now is the time we should act.

Uh deploying the council contingency fund uh for these purposes is what exactly I think it's designed for.

Um we've heard a lot of really compelling public comment tonight.

Um just to add on briefly to that, that um it is clear our vision is that Bellevue welcomes the world, our diversity is our strength.

As noted, a large percentage of our residents, 40 percent are born outside of the U.S., so this is an especially significant issue for us.

Um, also, too.

I think there's a number of due process issues to consider in our legal system, though many folks have no choice when maneuvering through it to do so without the help of legal representation.

And we've been clear that it is important to us that every community member feels valued and empowered.

Additional legal support and other financial supports helps ensure that we don't have wrongful deportations or any other family disruptions.

We also rightly prioritize thriving people in communities.

And I think we should act on this priority by stepping in to provide some additional resources so our community members can remain in their jobs and continue to contribute to their families and the community at large.

Legal services and other financial supports for those in our community and especially those targeted by ICE help ensure that our policies aren't just words, but put real protections into practice.

I also believe that providing additional legal support and other support will make our whole community more safe.

Helping to reduce the fear of unfair or illegal immigration enforcement, for example, helps our community members to remain engaged with the council and staff, report crimes when they see them, and continue to be a part of what moves our city forward.

And to use it in support of our immigrant and refugee community members and others, um is going to others that have need for uh food security and other assistance.

Um I think this is going to be a vital help to those, and and I think that now is the time for us to act.

So I'd be in favor of the second option, Mayor.

Okay, and the one on the right with the food legal and financial assistance.

Yes.

Okay, great.

Thank you for your clarity there.

Um I'm gonna go next because I am the liaison to the Human Services Commission.

And I just really appreciate even having this thoughtful conversation.

Um the needs in the community just cannot be underscored, and it's never enough.

You know, what we allocate to human services, it's usually typically half of what the agency is asking for.

So to be able to come back and add something to that, we know it will go to good use.

So um I'm going to modify a little bit what Councilmember Hamilton said.

I'm looking at 600,000 in those three pockets, leaving us with 400,000 in case there's an emergency in 2026 that we need to address.

And um, this is in addition to what we are already budgeting for human services.

But there's two things I would like some clarity on.

Um, what I my concerns are that we address is one when we do housing security, that we are not limiting it to organizations that own the housing.

Somehow that got thrown in last year and it eliminates a lot of partners that we have.

So I if we can not have that caveat, I would prefer not to, because technically, imagine housing doesn't even own their own housing and it would eliminate them too.

So I think that was um didn't come out the way it was intended to, whatever that was intended to do.

The second thing is for legal assistance.

You know, I always thought that ELAP was taking care of a lot of the community and especially the refugee and immigrant communities, uh, legal issues, and I understand they are not.

And uh forgive me for not knowing the name, but is it NWIRP?

Is that the acronym for there is an organization that has the acronym Northwest Immigrants Rights Project?

Okay, that is not an agency that we fund.

Oh, and they have not applied to funding from the Bell Vice.

Well, if we can somehow get some legal representation, a full-time employee in Bellevue, whether it be at Bellevue City Hall or it be at the ELAP office, but if there's a partner that we are already working for, working with that we can uh get a little more representation in Bellevue, I think that would be really helpful because I don't know that we actually have a full-time employee serving this community.

Um just for clarification, Mary, you mean a full-time employee from one of the agencies?

Yes, I see.

Um so uh for awareness, we currently contract with two agencies that um provide multiple forms of legal assistance, including immigrant and refugee legal assistance, and that's the Eastide or ELAP.

Um, East Side Legal Assistance Program is also Indian American Community Services.

I think I know you said that, and I had asked that we only work with agencies that we've already worked with.

I would like to just entertain the idea of maybe looking further for an organization that really specializes in this population that is not able to serve our east side community, and if we could have somebody from there full-time in Bellevue, it would really, I think, be a benefit.

So that's open for conversation, and of course, your feedback as well.

Would it be okay to entertain that notion of asking them to apply or something?

Yes.

Oh, go ahead.

I was wondering if Tony or Michael could expand just a tiny bit on what you noted earlier that the subcontracting option is available.

Exactly.

I believe as Tony mentioned that these agencies that we already have contracts with can subcontract with other agencies.

So yeah.

So I would be interested in seeing that.

And I don't know if we can direct money toward that, but my goal would be 200,000 for that as well.

So two, two, and two.

That's where I'm headed.

Okay, Councilmember Newenhouse.

Thank you.

Um thank you so much for bringing this forward tonight, giving us a little more context and data regarding the need.

I appreciate that.

I actually want to first start with um uh Mr.

Risha over here.

Um, because somebody just struck me when you're talking about volatile.

Um in your mind, what are some of the things that we should be cognizant of or considering in terms of volatility over the next year for keeping some funds in the contingency?

Um we've got a number of factors.

One, we have volatility with our federal partners and the availability of resources as their uh funding or dealing with their own government, open government, closed.

We have an issue that uh most economists are looking to is they're starting to see 2026 as a high inflation year, and we're watching the factors associated with that, and we're a little bit nervous about that because while there are some who are bullish on the idea that the Fed rate is going to drop multiple times in the next few months, um we can't count on that, and the data doesn't really point that that's really the the direction things are going to go, which means there's no question as to how no knowledge about how much consumer confidence will come back, and the tax revenues and opportunities are things that we worry about from a financial standpoint.

Um we're thinking about that invest and restraint concept, and in fact, it's one of the reasons why we even held on our forecast because we're watching for those key issues of volatility to see what stabilizes as we go into the first quarter.

And I think that's really our tell point is how do we make it through the uh holiday season and into Q1 where we understand how the the markets and consumers are starting to be affected and what kinds of other resources have come to play.

And the state and other cities in the county are also bringing resources to bear on this this conversation.

So there's a variety of pieces, and we're there's just a lot of not a lot of surety.

Um, and for those of us in the financial side of the equation, we're super nervous and are hoping that you keep, and the only way I can put this, keep some of your powder dry.

Um, it is likely you are going to be asked at some point in the next year for different kinds of resources.

It may be more of the same, it may be something different.

You are ultimately have to make the call on what level that is, um, but I would encourage you to make sure you keep some resource available because I'm getting worried, and I think that you will get the the knock on the door and the phone call and the emails and the community coming forth to share their need.

Well, much like we've got a recommendation here on the human services aspect.

Do you have a recommendation for us on how much powder to keep dry?

Um I sitting in your seat, and this is entirely yours, I would lean more towards the 500 to 600,000 range, keeping about half of your resources-ish available for them for that.

And you might have a conversation of Q1 or beginning of Q2 that might be more of an indicator of is there time for another set of investments in key emerging areas?

And I'm certain that our human service providers will and our parks and community services team will be monitoring what's most needed in the community.

Thank you.

Um again, great presentation on the human services aspect to this and the need.

Um Tony, especially I was gonna have a question for you if we um kind of piecemealed this a little bit in terms of um some of the money within the first quarter reassessed after that free first quarter.

Not only the economy and how well we're we're we're doing but also the need, and then releasing another additional set of funds after that, I guess touching base after the first quarter.

Would that hurt some of these trusted um agencies in order to deliver the services if we were to um let's take 500,000, we'd provide 25 uh for uh Q1 of 2026, and then we have another 250 or what whatever number we we land on uh for that uh next quarter.

Um would that hurt?

Would that be I mean I'm sure any money at this point is only going to help facilitate the need um and the services in our community, but what do what do you think um uh with that kind of approach?

What would be your your thoughts on that or recommendation?

Great question, thank you.

Um so I would say it kind of differs based on the service area that you would identify.

Um for financial assistance and food assistance, those are expended when they have them.

Um, and so it's it's about distribution directly to the community.

For immigrant and refugee legal assistance, those costs frequently go to the staffing that supports responding to the community, and so um uh you have many competing needs to consider.

Um they would not be able to, you know, providers would not necessarily be able to stand up as much assistance if they did not know an additional um distribution was coming than they did if they knew the amount they would have for the entire year when it comes to the immigrant and refugee legal assistance.

So I think it kind of differs by service area.

Okay.

And I'm assuming that um I I share the mayor's thought in terms of um kind of a big 10 approach, but I'm not sure that this is the right time to do it with these types of funds.

Uh I would prefer that um these trusted partners uh because I think they're probably in the best position as it is to take advantage of these additional funds based on your description of how uh they already have a relationship with the city they need to apply to it, and they can use their trusted vendors as well, right?

Which does expand the pie.

Um, but is there um I don't know a downside beside expanding it at this point for these types of additional funds beyond those trusted partners and vendors?

Or is this a good time to look at additional partners?

I could be wrong.

Um I understand your question.

I I believe that you're inquiring about the difference between um amending contracts with our existing providers versus publishing an RFP.

That's part of it, but I also want to make sure that this money is in the hands of those that uh can get these services or get the food assistance out to the community as quickly as possible.

They they know the need, they've identified the need, and they're ready to roll on day one when we make this available.

Yes, understood.

Um so amending current contracts would um have uh a benefit of um distributing the funds the fastest.

Um a drawback could be agencies that have pivoted and are responding in a way that they were not responding at the time that we did our contracts at the end of 2024.

Um emerging community means means our community-based agencies frequently identify a need and pivot and respond to meet it.

Um that could be mitigated by conversations with our um contracted providers uh about um their willingness and and I don't think there'd be a lack of willingness, that was probably not the right word, um, their ability to subcontract.

They recognize their colleagues as excellent response um to the community as well.

Um if we were to take the opposite direction of publishing an RFP and seeking and just opening it, who's doing this now versus who was doing this then, yeah.

Um that would have the benefit of um offering the opportunity to agencies that perhaps have pivoted and now are on the front lines of doing that work.

Um I I would just say it will take longer.

Um an RFP would take um at a minimum of about three months to get the funds out to agencies, and I would say that's a minimum.

Yeah, okay, thank you.

That's good information.

So um I would be leaning more towards the 500,000 in this case, and then the equally dividing it in this first option here in terms of food assistance and then the legal assistance.

Um I think um uh that hopefully will give, I mean, it won't solve everything as the mayor alluded to.

There's always more need, um, but I think um the 250 each into each of those buckets can still go a long way uh in addition to the money that we've already allocated and will continue to allocate.

Um plus it gives us maybe a little bit more breathing room on the volatility um for the rest of 2026.

So that's kind of where I stand right now.

Thank you.

Yeah, thank you.

Councilmember Bargada.

Yeah, thank you, Mary.

Thank you for the presentation.

Are you hearing an echo or is it just me?

Okay, just me.

Okay.

It's resounding.

Okay.

So I think immigrant communities in Bellevue right now are facing escalating issues with the ICE actions, and we do as a city need to take action to support.

Let me start by saying that and saying that emphatically.

But there is time now to take additional action, and I think I really appreciate the proposal brought forward in the contingency funds and the depth of your thinking and how we should be thinking about this.

Just a few clarifying questions.

Some of my questions actually got answered, which is really helpful in the discussion so far, which is uh just to reiterate, this isn't a one-time decision, this is a door we can go back to.

So if we were to allocate a certain amount of money now and give it to the trusted partners and these um organizations, we can come back in Q1 and do more as required and also have the benefit of additional information on where the best allocation goes.

So that was a very helpful clarification.

Um question for flexibility of spending.

So we allocate funds and whatever that number be for a second, uh, put that on the back burner.

But food assistance, legal assistance, dental assistance is what you've been talking about.

But if there are other needs that come up, is that clarity on flexibility and how this money is spent by those organizations, or do we hold very uh the breadth of things you called out, uh Tony is actually quite wide.

But if things were outside of those swim lanes, would there be restrictions on how this money is spent?

Um great question.

Um so the um cities contracting process uh has multiple components to it, and one of them is to um contract with human services providers in the same format we contract with any other type of service we provide in the city.

And so, much like we would contract with perhaps someone to do work in a park, um, we identify exactly the work that we are expecting them to do, and they do not get paid unless they do that work.

Um, a benefit of that is that we are able to assure the council that we are monitoring very closely that dollars are being expended in the way that you intended.

Um to your point, a drawback is that does limit flexibility quite a bit.

Um we uh do ask for them to project um specific service units, and they are only receiving a reimbursement based on the proportion of those service units that they meet.

And so if we contract with someone for food and they identify a service unit for food, we do recognize that all of our agencies do so much more than what we contract with them for.

So much more.

Um we are one funder amongst many, and our agencies are responsive to a variety of needs.

But our contracting in Bellevue is directed to be very service unit specific.

I see.

I mean, the reason I'm asking is because in this time, it's very hard sometimes to predict exactly what the needs will be within the community, and that prescriptive approach can limit the support you can provide to communities in need.

And that's why I was asking.

Also asking because you talked about the clarifying second clarifying clarification that was very helpful, is the ability to subcontracts.

So if you don't have the ability to provide a certain set of services, and you're able to find a trusted partner that you can subcontract that can do that, then that path opens up for a much wider range and maybe a more uh expedient way to provide support as well.

And so I would probably encourage you to think that some discretion and flexibility there would only be helpful in making sure that all the needs that are most urgent, obviously you have to be prudent about how this money is spent, those most urgent needs are addressed, and they may not cleanly fit into buckets, is what I'm saying.

Um the other thing is um when we do beyond the annual tracking and reporting of how this money is being tracked and put it on the dashboard you talked about.

Are there other mechanisms in place to ensure accountability of the spend, etc.

Yes.

Um so as part of the contracting process, um there are quarterly reports at a minimum, some report more often.

Um not just them telling us they've spent certain dollars, telling us they provided certain service units, they actually have to provide backup documentation.

Bellevue does uh enact strict uh very strenuous monitoring, perhaps even more so than our jurisdictional peers.

Um in addition, our staff in Bellevue do go physically monitor agencies at least once per year.

Um so they go in person to be able to see the services that are being provided.

Um that is intended for multiple benefits.

It is intended for relationship building.

Um, it's intended for us to be able to understand um how we can fulfill our commitment to providing um uh technical support to agencies.

Um part of the human services strategic plan adopted by the council included a commitment that we support more agencies and having access to funding.

So when we do monitoring, that is part of the goal of the monitoring visit is to understand if we need to be providing more support, and it's also to verify contract compliance.

Okay, great.

That's helpful.

Thank you.

Um the only other thing is in terms of where my uh suggestion is on how much we go with.

I would probably agree uh with the mayor that if we can do 200, 200, 200, I would support that, and then hold back the 400,000 remaining in the contingency fund, and we can reassess in Q1 or whenever the appropriate time is for support.

Um I would, I mean, my leaning would be to go in with the 750 even, but I think I hear the sort of prudent call that there is unprecedented volatility, lots of unknowns, and it's probably wise for us to make sure that we understand those unknowns.

And like we said in the beginning, uh this isn't all you know a one-shot, this is a process that can be repeated depending on needs as we understand more, and we have those funds uh to use.

So thank you.

Thank you so much.

Okay, council members.

Hi, thank you.

Um, I really appreciate you explaining the projects.

That was my biggest question.

How can we hold um have efficiency and accountability while have compassion action to help the people who need the most the quickest way?

Um I mean, as a first-generation immigrant myself, I think that our immigrant community is experiencing a quiet um scary time that we need to be there for each other and we need to be allies to each other to make sure that we feel safe because this is our home.

Everybody who lives in Bellevue should feel that they're welcome and loved and taken care of.

So I really appreciate we bring this in to invest more money back to the community who needs us right now.

Um something that I just I think that because I think in because this is like a fiscal budget where we are using money ahead, and then like John said, the economy does not look good.

And then I think there's a lot of uncertainty that we should be careful about how we are spending the money just in case something happens.

But even though the shutdown is coming back, it's reopening, we know that the SNAP benefits um recipients that they are now getting November money back.

So it's I think right.

I correct me if I'm wrong.

I think I was reading in the newspaper, even November they're losing the benefit, they're not getting that back.

I think they're just immediately starting the next round of payment.

So if they're owning money in their credit card per se to buy food, they are have to pay that back on themselves.

I believe that is correct.

Uh perhaps I can share information that I got from our intergovernmental relations to provide some up-to-date information on that.

Um, I would reiterate that um this aside, food remains a primary need.

Um, according to the website for the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services, about one quarter of the state's one million SNAP recipients, so about 250,000 received their full benefits during that short window between November 1st and November 7th, where there was allowance for full benefits.

Um the the rest are scheduled for future dates in the month and would not have received their benefits during that window, even during a typical month.

Um so there's there's no guarantee for the rest.

Um there is reports that the president has committed to um releasing those funds should he sign the bill that has been advanced to him as quickly as possible.

Okay.

I think that so for my my leaning towards being more conservative lending on the 500, but I do think that because we don't know when the president is going to sign the bill.

We don't know when's the month because there is back pay, they have to, there's so much allocation back paid to federal officers and the veterans too.

So that's like it's something that's a no, but we know that we have to do our best to support a community.

So I actually really agree with um the mayor and then uh council member Bagwell said the option of 600,000, because I think that I believe all three of these areas interconnected because food um scarcity and then um insecurity and legal assistance to immigrants or refugees, and then also to financial full housing, they all connected.

One can lead to the other two.

So they cannot just be separated because it done are singular issues.

Um I want to ask about the nonprofit partners' capacity, because we have very clear, transparent way checking how efficient they are, right?

So I love love um mayor's ideas of having a legal um designated legal assistant person.

So would that be something like uh more Pacific purpose grant that focus on that?

And then like, you know, for example, if there's a nonprofit, because not not every nonprofit is a built equal.

So if there's a smaller nonprofit, not a gigantic one, but they can how should you deliver the service quicker than any other ones?

Would there be a capacity building element where we can encourage them having the grant so they can build a amplified the process faster and then so they can help more people in the unique way?

Um let me make sure I understand your question um correctly.

So I think I hear you building on the mayor's question about exploring the opportunity for there to be a um kind of a full-time for lack of a better word, staff positions somehow employed by one of the agencies dedicated to service to Belgium residents.

Is that what I'm hearing you know?

Yeah.

So like I think that would be like I don't want to use the restrictive funding because I mean in the foundation capital, um, capital funding, you know, and foundation money when you're seeking for nonprofit that's restricted and it's uh interestricted grants, right?

So this would be Pacific use slash restricted grant that were specific for that use.

So it's only it's make sure that the focus is helping the comp community instead of using something else.

Um but the second element is because a lot of some smaller nonprofits, they're actually very nimble and flexible.

They're out there doing the outreach work.

Maybe there's one of them, I don't know, you can help me.

Maybe there's some of them having a great process that's so efficient.

And then you know, the impact they're making is so much faster with smaller budget.

I was just wondering if there is could be possibility of open room for us to encourage by having a capacity building grant that's looped into the restricted grant where encouraging nonprofits to work harder for the m work harder for the money they're applying, but also helping make bigger and long-lasting impacts.

Would that be possible?

Definitely um appreciate your acknowledgement of how hard our agencies work and they are and our smaller agencies as well as our large though, are very nimble and very efficient.

Um, you know, we stress how we hold them accountable.

I should also stress what a great job they do.

They do an excellent job.

Um I I think if I'm understanding the ideas correctly, the the thought I'd put forward for council's consideration is this is one-time funding for one year.

Um, and if we're talking about encouraging an agency to build in a new staff position, um, that takes time and takes time for hiring, and it also this is not a sustainable funding source.

And so for the impact for that employee, even or even for an agency to stand up a program and hire a new full-time staff member only to know that they don't have funding past the end of the year.

That, you know, I can't speak for agencies, but that is a challenge for the council to consider in that approach.

Do you think that we could come back in the future when the time is more rosy, we have more funding, we can have that kind of capacity building um attraction for our community partners so we can build a more robust partnership where you know the the model can be making really long-lasting impacts in the future.

I will acknowledge um I know um Council Member Simadwari, you were not here when the um human services strategic plan was adopted, but a number of your colleagues identified capacity building is a high priority when we were getting feedback for that plan.

So I would I would defer to the wisdom of the council, but I think there are many council members that see that as a need.

We'll have that conversation again when we start doing the budget next year.

So thank you.

That's not my question.

Thank you.

All right, great.

Councilmember Lee, we are talking about how much, if any, to allocate of the council contingency, and if so, whether it would go to all or some of the recommendations of food assistance, legal assistance, financial assistance.

Are you done?

Yeah.

You've given me enough instruction.

No, I'm not giving you instruction.

I'm clarifying what we're talking about.

Let me say a few words.

Uh human needs are always there.

And uh we're very fortunate that uh the city has uh nonprofits that help who serve the human needs.

Human needs has to be delivered with a lot of volunteer, uh, people who understand the human needs, people who understand the social conditions, people who can be on the ground with community to deliver those services.

And so it's a good thing that the city is not directly involved because we purposely are not involved because we have bureaucracy.

And we've got great nonprofits in the city.

They've been doing a great job.

But as we know, uh human needs keep on increasing.

It's going to stay, it's not going to go away.

Different forms of needs we all do have.

And we need to provide service, provide help for them.

And uh we know that you know the needs have been exceeded increasing more and more, more and more.

And we have never satisfied the needs.

You know, even the requests, the mayor said we only meet half 50% of the requests.

There are many people who even requested, because they know there's no way to get the needs filled.

So there's a lot of needs out there.

We never satisfy it.

So it is our hope that we can have build capacity.

One way to satisfy needs is help ourselves, right?

But if they have no capacity, they need help to develop that.

So it's a combination of that.

So it's a challenge.

It's giving and the city council really never had uh jump into uh directly involved with discussing what's the human needs as we're today today.

So I'm really happy that we are actually doing this.

In my third years on the council, this is the first time I believe the council is having this kind of conversation.

I think it's very important.

We see that the people who testify today, I appreciate the you know, the church, the religious circle.

You understand what the needs are.

You are you're telling us what the people you serve, you see them on the ground.

You know, they come to you.

You know, very seldom they come to the city.

The city probably don't have a hard time reaching out to them because that's a relationship.

The city hall separate.

So I think we hear the truth the real needs out there, we really do.

But you know, we have very limited amount of money, unfortunately.

So we need to figure out how we can meet the needs as we are capable of meeting it.

So we have a human service commission.

They they work humans' job.

You know, we basically pass the buck to them to make those tough choices.

If we have to make choices in the council, we will have tough time.

We'll be spending so much time talking to you and listen to the needs of the people, working with this the public agencies.

It's not impossible.

But now I believe that this is a real good conversation.

We actually can establish some understanding of what can we do.

We are working with limited money.

That's why it's important.

I'm glad you know Jared Neuhaus was able to ask you what I was gonna ask you, but I wasn't allowed to ask you.

So now I'm going to say that this is a real good question.

Because we need to make sure that we have the capacity, we have to prepare for what is going to happen in 2026, right?

If we spend it all, if it happens, what do we do?

So we can have some understanding.

So we have to understand, set some priority, talking to our service deliverers, public agency, talking to our people who understand, who know the needs from the public, talking out, knowing the public what they do really need.

And I like Garrett Newhouse's approach.

We don't know for sure.

We really don't know.

Okay, we can make some conjectures.

I do.

Number one, I like I like what you laid down.

Food resistance assistance, legal assistance, financial assistance.

I believe one of the most important things is immigrants, legal assistance.

They have no way out, no matter what.

If they are cannot be stayed, you cannot stay in this country, they are gone.

No matter how much money they have, it doesn't matter.

The food doesn't matter.

They can have lots of food, but they are gone.

You know, if they cannot have a status to stay in this country legally, or have the ability to stay here, to earn a living, do something, or even be assisted, they have no food.

They have no financial opportunities.

So I believe that the legal assistance is the most important.

We know that it exists right now.

We need to have those help those.

Food assistance, yes, absolutely.

But we don't know exactly how many, right?

We don't know how much, what's our what's our capability, how significant it is.

So we have to set some priorities.

So I think for me, food comes the next.

You know, that maybe combined with financial assistance.

Maybe.

I don't know how you define it, right?

But I would prefer to set in that kind of priority.

But so I prefer that we definitely legal assistance is immediate.

But you cannot hold on.

So let's figure out what we need.

But the others we can figure out by knowing what the demand is out there.

Then we need to figure out how we can spend the money.

And then we have to figure out how much money do we have, right?

If we have money left somewhere, we can probably figure out how to do it.

But to do this right, we really need to figure out the total budget we spend on human service needs.

We don't know.

But we have an emergency right now, we know.

SNAP cost us the emergency.

Federal government maybe cause the emergency.

Yeah, but we don't know in the future, like John Risha mentioned.

The economy might change.

The federal government might change in some way.

Inflation going up, going down, we don't know.

But things might change that we can have some flexibilities.

Our budget might change.

We may have more ability to have more money in our budget that we can allocate to human service.

Or maybe not, then we gotta figure out what else can we do.

But I think this is a priority.

So I think what we're like to do is if we have our say, okay, if money is not a big thing, 2026, we can come up with money.

If we have a million dollars now, right in the budget, why not spend all million dollars?

People are out there, they need it.

The only way is how to spend it.

That's important.

I don't want to just throw a million dollars out there and just maybe second guessing what people really need.

Let's do it in a in a in a logical way.

So we can tell people really need legal service.

Let's give it, help it.

People need food, help it.

So I would I would like to see that as a consideration.

Go ahead.

Um, so it kind of sounded like you almost want to do half of it to legal and then a quarter quarter to food and financial assistance.

Is that correct?

Or are you going one third, one third, one third?

I I well right now I would say that's okay, one third, winter one third.

But I would like to not just throw it out there.

We don't know exactly.

Let's figure out.

But I bet you though, if we spend money on legal, I'm sure that is the place that the most needs are.

I can tell you it's most needs are is it 100,000, 200,000, 500?

I don't know, right?

The nonprofits who can tell us.

The church can tell us.

People come to ask for the lead, they can tell us.

Okay.

So if we spend all a million dollars, we may need more, or maybe not.

We see, step by step.

But if we need more, we have time to see how the economy is going to happen.

How our whole total budget for next year, biennium.

We're gonna have a new budget.

Let's if we talk about this, if we think of human service being so important, well, let's do that in our budget consideration.

Maybe we need to expend it.

Maybe not.

I don't know.

Maybe we're capable.

So I'm just saying that whether we decide 500,000, 750 or million, I would just like to make sure that what's the what's the portion?

I I can't not say, but it's side priorities.

I think legal is important for our immigrants, because they're going to be first affected and they're going to be gone.

There's no sec, no, no, no, second.

The food, the financial, we don't know.

You know, maybe, maybe there are other nonprofits, maybe other companies, maybe Amazon can come up with some special thing, you know, that people can get food.

I don't know.

So that might ease off the needs, the needs, the demand.

Financial assistance, same way.

I don't know whether they all want to live in a million-dollar home or they want to squeeze into a you know, $2,000 a month rent.

You know, that I think that's some flexibility there.

But in legal, in immigrants, there's no flexibility.

They are either gone or stay.

So that's why I'm gonna propose is let the city through our nonprofits, figure out where the needs exist the most.

And let's spend money where it has to go.

Okay, thank you so much.

Deputy Mayor.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Uh I want to just first say thank you, Tony and Michael, for an amazing presentation.

And everyone who came for public testimony, Reverend and Pastor, your testimony.

I'm so proud of this body showing such an amazing compassion to the people we serve.

It is one of those moments that I feel the heart of this council that I'm proud to uh serve.

As everyone mentioned, our community has a need, and we have a responsibility to protect our people.

I can get fully behind mayor's proposal for the 200K across the three categories.

Our immigrants uh, of course, they need legal services, but they also need food under table.

They also need rental help, housing stabilization and basic needs.

Many immigrants' family unfortunately are excluded from federal programs, so uh our local dollars is going to truly matter for them.

Uh, like councilman Lee, if I were off to me, I would also allocate the whole one million dollar, but as discussed, uh we don't know what the future looks like.

Um none of us could imagine a SNAP would be at risk four months ago, I guess.

Uh, or um some of the actions are overnight, so we really cannot see the future.

So keeping 400,000 for now till next year, early next year, revisit this makes sense to me.

I also recommend we find other additional funding res uh sources that we can support our human services.

I'm sure you all are very creative, and there are somewhere some money that we can allocate for the most need that our people have right now.

Thank you, Mayor.

Okay, thank you.

This has been a really helpful conversation.

I'm seeing um, you know, there's lots of recommendations, lots of ways to go.

I'm seeing a majority um recommendations.

So I'm gonna ask for a motion for that.

Um go ahead, Tippi.

Yes.

If there were funds or the funds were not completely exhausted by the end of 2026, um, what would happen to those funds?

Would they roll into the human services fund for 2728, or would they revert back to the council contingency fund?

Councilmember, uh, at the end of 2026, all appropriation expires, and you would need to have made a decision to add additional appropriate add that in as appropriation for your 27-28 budget.

Um those are these dollars are coming in as general fund dollars.

Um, and they're they're clean and green, so to speak, okay and uh allocatable.

That is your preference as to where they go, but the appropriation has a legal expiration associated.

Gotcha, thank you.

Good question.

Um, can we do a motion first and then we can open it for questions?

So maybe I'm first making the actual budget motion.

Am I right?

Well, let's put them together.

You can put them together.

Okay.

I move to direct staff to finalize the necessary legislation to adopt the 2025-2026 budget and 2025-2030 capital improvement program meet bien update for council consideration and action on November 18.

I also uh move to direct staff to expand 600,000 of the 2025 council contingency and designate it to food assistant, legal assistant, and financial assistant each for 200,000.

Is there a second?

Okay.

So you had a question.

Thank you.

Just a couple of quick questions.

Um I'm just curious about the uh the amount here.

And so when I looked at this at the 500,000 that was divided equally between food assistance and legal assistance, I kind of looked at that possibly as a floor.

And so, do you have any thoughts on the difference between 250 versus 200?

Should we be thinking a little bit more about that 50,000?

And and is it as impactful, the 200 versus 250.

Um the recommendation for the 250 or the option that was presented for the 250 was just an acknowledgement that any amount is going to be spread across multiple agencies.

Um and so we were trying to offer the council an option that would allow meaningful impact as it was spread across agencies.

I think the um reality is um you have a lot of competing priorities and uh and very hard decisions to make.

Um so it's just an acknowledgement that whichever number you pick will be spread across multiple agencies, and so factor that into to your allocation.

Okay, and then two, just a quick question uh for Mr.

Risha.

I'm just curious.

So, you know, I think of it as the council contingency fund, not a council reserve fund.

And I know we have various reserve funds, and I wonder if could you just give me an idea of basically how much do we have in reserve that we can use, you know, if things get a little shaky next year.

I know so far we're talking about things are okay, but of course we always have something to worry about.

But the reserves, how much do we have in reserves generally?

And also clarify how we can use reserves versus how we can use the contingency.

So we have a number of different types of reserves.

Um they amount to not do math last year again.

Yeah, I council member, uh, it it is in the tens of millions.

Um we won't we'll get you the actual number, it is uh available, but there are very specific things like uh what essentially is our operating reserve, which in the event of a catastroph catastrophic event, we have funds to keep the city open for roughly two months.

We have specifically identified funds in reserve for um fire acquisitions, for park acquisitions, for dollars that are set aside.

We have utility dollars, which quite frankly are in the hundreds of millions, and those are set aside for specific future investments.

In the end, the dollars available have a little bit of color associated with them, but are available by council appropriation.

They're unappropriated dollars, so they're held back with specific assignments or commitments with them.

Um those dollars are not what we're talking about.

Contingency dollars are things that are dollars that have been appropriated for use and are ready to spend today and are part of our anticipated cash flows.

So we have the big stuff put aside for major events.

This is that in-between category of major storms during the winter that we need to allocate dollars for.

These are the events with our community where we need to, in this case, bring forward uh monies for food assistance and immigrant services or other types of things that happen where there is readily available um dollars for those that are in the mid-range of uh a few thousand few tens of thousands through a couple of million.

So you have the capacity, and our city manager has the capacity to support those types of needs if that helps answer.

Yeah, and there's something else I would add.

The reserves are usually something it's a kind of a break glass if needed moment.

We have a whole toolkit of budget and um management tools that we would rather implement before tapping reserves to make sure that we're managing the finances of the city.

So as we're monitoring the economy in these uncertain times, we would probably be enacting some of those tool kits before we went into the operating contingency or reserves.

So it's just something to be careful, keep aware of.

We have a whole host of tools that we could spend an entire hour going into, and we won't do that tonight, but we have a lot of tools at our disposal.

Thank you for the additional context.

Thank you, Mayor.

Okay.

I will come back to you, council member.

Yes.

Yeah.

So um one clarifying question actually, um, sort of building on Councilmember Hamilton's question.

Uh initially when you came in with the 250-250 recommendation, uh, I was assuming that you were uh basing it on the most pressing needs.

As we think about a $600, uh $600,000 allocation now, is $200, $200, $200 the rights split.

Should it be different based on the most pressing needs?

Is it better to do $250, $250 and $100, for example, versus the three equal components?

It's cleaner that way, but obviously I didn't think about that.

It could be more organic.

So uh just looking for your point of view.

I'm not sure that I'm in a position to provide that recommendation to you.

Um I think the three areas that we've identified, I would identify as life safety issues for our residents, and that's why they are the highest emerging needs.

They literally can save lives.

Um, and that's a hard decision for council to make.

Okay.

It's a balance, isn't it?

Okay, um, go ahead, council member Lee.

Specifically the question that I would ask.

I think that I think that's a good question.

That's something we need to consider.

Uh we just talk about that, you know, the emigrant legal that's immediate.

So I can cut the others we don't know.

So why don't we split that way?

If we find out we are not right, well, we can make judgments.

That's why you need to have flexibility.

Just because we didn't guess a right, we're not gonna spend it in that proportion.

So there should be some understanding, some intelligence in when we spend money, not just say, well, just throw it out there.

Okay.

So I hope that I hope one of the consideration in the proposal is that we do need to make some discretion as to where the most needs are or is and let's do it.

And if we do need money, let's figure out how we can get it with all the other contingency you're talking about in tens of millions.

We're not talking about lots of money.

Talking about what?

A couple hundred thousand dollars.

People need it.

We talk about it.

We have a council talking about it.

We're spending time to discuss it.

We're talking about human needs.

Okay, thank you for clarifying for the reserves and contingencies.

That's very helpful.

Councilmember New Enhause.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, we need to get that granular, my vote, and I'm not sure we need to amend, but uh 250 for food assistance, 250 legal assistance, and then the remaining hundred for the financial assistance.

Um speaking for myself, I would think that would be the most appropriate since we did have food and legal, um, as it's I think on the top there is some option one.

Uh, I'm assuming those are the top two needs.

They're all needs, certainly, and you put it in the right context, uh, Tony.

But um, those I think at this time seem to be the more immediate.

Um, Mr.

Risha, um question regarding uh comment or a question from Councilmember Lee earlier about the one percent uh property tax.

That's gonna be, and I've asked this before a separate vote, not tied to any other levy, not tied to any other fund.

That's a separate vote all by itself, the property tax.

Is that correct?

Correct.

Okay, and that'll happen on November 18th.

Not okay.

Just want to make sure since we're finalizing or asking you to finalize tonight uh the uh the budget.

So thank you.

I just wanted to clarify.

Thank you.

So good question.

So pardon?

Yes, go ahead.

Um so I'm just wondering because we have a pool of money, right?

Do we have to divide them equal?

Do we have to actually allocate them amounts to three pools?

Right now, because I mean, because the needs we don't know unless we see the application come in.

You know, I I would respond by saying the needs far exceed uh these amounts in any of those categories.

So I mean, I think we won't weigh in on those proportions.

I think we'll leave that to you.

But I'll say the needs are out there in all those categories.

So yeah, because one thing I'm afraid of if we cap it, for example, the legal assistant 200 is out then, but turns out the food assistant and finance doesn't need doesn't up, it's not as urgent as this one right now, then we we are capping it at 200.

What if what about the other people who need to help?

And then we have funds left.

That's that's my clarified question.

Um and then the other one is if there's a nonprofit can't offer services more than one area.

Are they eligible to apply both of them?

To whichever area they're applying for.

Um, if I could clarify, I I believe, but I might be mistaken that the consideration that is being discussed is just to amend our current contracts.

Um it sounds like you're exploring the idea of what if we accepted applications.

Um so amending current contracts would mean we already know the number of providers that these funds would be divided across.

And to Director Shiasaki's point, I can assure you however you divide this, the providers could more than use the funds.

Okay.

Um maybe I should clarify better.

So I'm saying like current subprovider, there's no cross of one provider offering multiple services.

I think that was more my question.

Sorry about that.

Understood.

My apologies.

Um, and yes, agencies can provide uh more than one service area, and they are contracted to provide each type of and and multiple agencies, as you know.

Okay, thank you.

So we have a motion on the table, and uh the motion would you go ahead and repeat it?

The whole motion.

Sure.

I move to direct a staff to finalize the necessary legislation to adopt the 2025-2026 budget and 2025-2030 capital improvement program, meet biennium update for council consideration and action on November 18.

If we don't, we can make a new motion.

All right, we are back in session.

And uh we have two study session items tonight, and I will let our city manager introduce the first one.

The first study session is related to the critical areas ordinance update.

Council did initiate this last February, and the purpose, of course, is to align our code in Bellview with the periodic critical update as required by the state.

And you received some information earlier tonight about the extensive stakeholder work that was included in developing this um this process and this proposed code.

And it um there was much work done with the planning commission as well to consider the effectiveness uh for both urban conditions and also environmental protection of our valued critical areas.

So you have tonight in front of you the planning commission recommendation.

Staff will review that.

We're joined by Chair Conloo as well.

And so Nick Whipple, Code and Policy Director, Kirsten Mant staff, um, who's our senior planner in code and policy, and then also uh Rebecca Horner, and who is the director, and with that, I'll turn it over to Rebecca.

City Manager Carlson.

Uh, as mentioned, we do have a team with us tonight, also our consultant uh Nell Lund with Facet and Robbie Seppler with the City Attorney's Office.

As mentioned, we were last year in February, where you gave us great direction, and we've spent a lot of time thinking very hard on this with uh stakeholder groups and also the planning commission.

Chair Kenlow's here to share the planning commission recommendation.

We bring before you a what we believe is a very balanced recommendation, and the team will go through that and hopefully at the end we'll ask if the council would consider giving us direction to finalize the Luca land use code amendment ordinance for action before our December thirty-one deadline.

And with that, I will pass it to Nick.

Great, thank you.

And good evening, Mayor Robinson, Deputy Mayor, and members of the council.

Um for our agenda this evening, we wanted to just recap the update process.

Um this is a every 10-year type process, so we wanted to help you understand what that looks like.

Um, and then Kirsten's gonna recap council initiation back in February when you all provided the lens that we should apply with this broader update, and then touch on the scope as well.

Then we'll touch on our engagement summary and then pass it over to Chair Conloo to walk us through the Planning Commission deliberation on this item.

So, first, just a recap on what are critical areas, what is the subject of tonight's meeting.

Um, so the Growth Management Act does require that we designate and protect five critical areas.

Um, so you can kind of look at these as two buckets.

So conserving the functions of uh critical areas, so wetlands, our fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, so think about our streams, and then critical aquifer recharge areas.

And then we also have a charge to protect the public from geological hazards, landslides, um, and flood hazard areas as well.

For the the critical area ordinance update process, this is something that all growth management planning communities are going through.

Um, it really starts with a policy directive from the state.

So it does require periodic review of our critical areas ordinance.

That review happens uh generally every 10 years.

It includes a review of best available science.

Um, so we have excellent consultants that we hire to document a lot of the scientific sources that will be informing our critical area ordinance update process is highly technical work that we've embarked on.

Um, and then we'll also to get a better sense of what the changes are that we need to address.

We do a gap analysis.

We review our current regulations, we also review policies, figure out what is the base kind of set of things that we need to adjust.

And then all of that will help inform a proposed land use code amendment.

And then in addition, as we noted, when we all initiated with you back in February, you had also provided the lens that we should be looking at our science through and really looking at the scope of amendments that we want to bring forward to commission for review.

So that work has been completed that led to that draft code that was discussed with planning commission and ultimately to tonight's uh recommendation that you'll be reviewing.

So I'll pass it to Kirsten now.

Thanks.

Um, so as mentioned, we started this off at the end of February at the council initiation in terms of some of the key themes that came out of that discussion that really helped inform the lens and scope of this project.

These are some of the main topics that came to the came to the fore, really centering on that finding that balance between housing and environmental protections that was really at the core of this project, looking for those flexibilities where we can, trying to figure out some really innovative strategies to find those flexibilities and provide that, making sure that engagement was robust with all of the variety of stakeholders involved in this topic, and then also keeping in mind climate change impacts and overall quality of life.

So these are really the key components through which we worked to develop this code.

In terms of engagement, as I mentioned, there was a really wide variety and depth of engagement with this project, uh working with a number of stakeholder groups and individual stakeholders in the development community, particularly in Bell Red and Wilburton, where we have a lot of this conflict, if you will, between our critical areas and areas that are really developed and also targeted for more growth.

We also did a lot of engagement with the general public.

We held a number of events over the course of the year, starting off with a booth at Earthfest.

We had an in-person open house, that's the picture on the screen.

And then we had a follow-up virtual open house for those who maybe couldn't attend in person or prefer online.

There is a lot of folks these days that really like to go to the online sessions.

And then we also had an additional virtual session after the release of the initial draft code to answer questions on the code, take comment, uh things like that.

And then we also had our uh check-in with council in a written-only briefing around that time as well.

Other really key stakeholders in this were state agencies and local tribes, including the Snoquami tribe and the Muckle Shoot tribe, different agencies we've been discussing this project with, include Department of Ecology, Department of Natural Resources, Department of Fish and Wildlife.

And then another really key component was other city work.

We know we have a lot of staff that work on our streams and critical areas in the utilities department.

We have a stream team.

I learned through this project we have a number of folks that get called in when there's beavers that happen to be on a site.

That was new to me.

Um so we also really wanted to make sure that's their work is ongoing, that we're not doing anything in conflict with that.

So the watershed management plan is still underway, the water plan, a number of other utilities projects that are, you know, directly need to be coordinated with the work that happens here with private development.

So those were all kind of taken on the balance together.

Obviously, a very, very wide range of input on this topic from folks wanting us to, you know, really really increase our buffers all the way to the Department of Fish and Wildlife recommendations.

And on the other hand, not really wanting any buffers at all.

So we're really looking to find that balance between the two, and I really feel we really feel strongly as a team that we've achieved that really found some really workable solutions.

So some of the key components of the recommendation.

The first area we really wanted to look for easy wins for development flexibilities.

Two of those have to do with what we would consider kind of additional restrictions placed on development after the critical areas delineations, buffer and setback are put into place.

One of those being what's called the density intensity calculation.

That's all to say if you have critical areas on your site in the current code, you have to reduce the yield, either dwelling units or floor area ratio based on the relative presence of critical areas to not critical areas.

This felt like an easy one to take out.

It didn't sound like it was reducing yield that much, but also creating a level of complexity that didn't really need to be there.

And similarly with lot coverage, right now in the code, you have to base your lot coverage after the site area once you remove critical areas.

Again, that felt like kind of an easy win to just say, we're already protecting critical areas, they have to have buffers and setbacks.

Why are we further kind of punishing, if you will, the remaining space?

So another kind of easy win.

Another one was a restriction we had to put into the middle housing code to address the complexity from the density-intensity calculation.

That calculation is based on a dwelling units per acre calculation, and since middle housing was based on units per parcel, we were kind of talking ourselves in knots trying to figure out how we would address that without having to remove the restriction in the critical areas overlay, which we knew we could address with this project.

So another just simple edit that helps provide some more housing.

So now critical area parcels can have middle housing.

And then some streamlining in the buffer setback section.

The current code is pretty complex.

There's a number of different types of structure setbacks based on a number of different situations.

So we decided let's propose to streamline that down to one standard and then allow some protrusions into that setback like decks, patios, kind of minor elements such as that.

The next two important sections, particularly streams, that was really the primary topic of conversation throughout the life of this project with the developer groups we've been speaking with in the Bell Red area in particular.

So again, looking through the lens of what are our really good high-quality stream systems that we want to make sure we're protecting and what should the buffers for those be?

And in order to better align with best available science, we did propose some increases to those, but keeping in mind that those are our good quality streams, they're not in a pipe or in some kind of a channelized condition.

And then looking, okay, for pipe streams or channeled streams, what are some flexibilities that we can build into the code to help provide some help to those sites that we want to see redevelop and improve those buffers, but might be hindered right now by the code, as was mentioned in some of the comments we received tonight.

So we added some flexibility for degraded and pipe stream segments, another option for some reductions and averaging as well just to get at that site geometry, but making sure that we can also encourage redevelopment so that those streams are in a better shape than they were now.

And then for wetlands, um, we didn't propose as many changes for this, that didn't end up being a big topic of conversation for most of the project.

But we did need to align habitat scores with the state standards.

We also added some additional mitigation timing and ratio language, and then we did add a pathway for potentially filling small category four wetlands, that's the lowest rating of wetlands, consistent with ecology guidance.

So that's a pretty simple fix.

I think it's 4,000 square feet or less, and you have to show some other reasons why you might meet that requirement, but it allows a pathway for those smaller CAT 4 wetlands.

And then two other kind of main components that were changed.

One of geohazards was a really big topic of conversation.

I know at the beginning of this project at initiation and with our staff internally.

Our code currently is pretty restrictive on touching a steep slope.

And we really wanted to make sure we were getting at the intent of why we regulate geohazards.

We regulate them to ensure public safety.

And there may be many slopes that in our current code meet the definition of a steep slope for regulation that aren't necessarily a hazard.

So we created some pathways in the geohazards code to really address what are the actual site conditions.

You can provide context via geotech report, whether or not these are actually a hazard or not, or you might be able to modify them in an you know through an engineering process that either removes or reduces that hazard and therefore reduces or removes the regulation of the hazard.

And then we also have some minor work exemptions.

This is really getting at some of the feedback from the general public who that they just wanted to come in and put in a small deck, and now they have to do a whole critical area's land use permit.

So really wanting to react to that for residents as well.

And then our current code doesn't have a section on critical aquifer recharge areas.

We don't have any like single source aquifers in the city of Bellevue, but we do have a number of these little wellhead protection areas.

So just wanted to make sure that we were capturing the needed protections for those groundwater resources.

So it's a fairly small uh section, was reviewed by the Department of Health for the county to make sure it was consistent with what they're looking for.

It's really implementing best management practices and stormwater infiltration, uh and then also prohibiting certain uses that we know can infiltrate the groundwater, like a dry cleaner or a gas station.

And then this section is one that we're pretty excited about as a really flexible pathway for those sites for which no one none of the other pathways just really aren't getting them to where they need to go.

Um, it's a little complex and confusing because it is very, very site-specific.

And this is the case for all critical areas regulations.

Everything you can potentially do is really based off existing site conditions and meeting your mitigation requirements.

Uh but what this does do, and this is critical areas code-wide, so it's not just for streams.

Uh, you can document why you might approach this um alternative pathway, uh, but utilizing the edge of existing improvements as your buffer edges, so long as you are providing compensatory mitigation as if the full buffers were in place.

Uh so that compensatory mitigation can take the form of a number of different things depending, you know, what they have on the site, what they're trying to do.

Uh, it could be some on-site mitigation, so beefing out some of the buffers from where they are currently.

It could be some off-site if they have a site that might be appropriate for that.

It could be uh through INLU fees uh or wetland mitigation banking or some other form of banking.

Um, so again, it's a pathway that we kind of developed with some of the stakeholder groups to address a lot of these areas that we know we have TOD, we're trying to drive growth, but there's fish bearing streams, and we can't just ignore that.

So looking for those flexibilities.

And then I will pass things off to Planning Commission Chair Conlu.

Hi, everybody.

Um, Mayor Lynn Robinson, sorry, I'm getting tired and just my brain stopped working, and Deputy Mayor Mo Marikotian, Council members.

Um, I just bring the uh planning commission uh recommendation to you all.

We um hold a public hearing on October 22nd, and uh we have recommended adopted without any modification.

But I just want to add something here that uh we did a lot of modification around the four or five other sessions we had it.

That's where when we had a public hearing, uh, we did not have um any modification.

And then in that session, one of the things that we had it that it was, I think it was really um moving for most of the planning commissioner was um we have a team member from uh utilities um team at Lauren.

Lori Devere.

Thank you.

And uh she showed us like all the um wildlife that is happening during our streams, and it was so many cameras that we have in um so many places, and we have volunteers who's watching salmon, as you know, we have um so um it was it was amazing.

I think for 10 minutes we were watching so many different streams and all the wildlife is happening there.

And uh that was really a good moment for all the planning commissioner to just hear from wild animals that we don't hear from them often.

Um, and that's our recommendation.

I think are you we ready for the questions?

Do you want me to read anything?

I I picked what I wanted to say.

We can't not much left.

Um, yeah, so this is just our next step slide showing we're gearing up towards the end of the process, hoping to adopt code before the end of the year deadline uh and wrap up the project.

Um, so as Rebecca mentioned, our ask tonight is to consider directing staff to finalize the Luca ordinance for action before the deadline at a subsequent meeting.

And that's all we have.

Great, thank you very much.

Uh we'll start with Deputy Mayor, and then we'll go councilmember Bargava, Sumaduria, Newenhouse, Lee, Hamilton, and me.

So let's start with you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh thank you, Rebecca, Neek, Chris, and our consultant sitting on the back.

Uh this uh has been a big and complex lift.

And I appreciate your very, very clear work behind both the science review and the public process.

Updating critical areas is never simple.

It touches environmental protection, housing supply, private property concerns, and state and federal requirements all at once.

And I appreciate the balance you brought to this.

I also wanted to recognize Planning Commission, Chair Chair Hanu, thank you for being here.

I see uh Chair uh Count Planning Commissioner Via Veses on the back, uh, one of the uh leaders of the planning commission.

Thanks for being here.

Uh, this work is highly technical, and it shapes the future of our city, and the commission has always put a tremendous amount of time and thought, and I'm grateful for their steady leadership.

And thank you for the community.

We see them on the back.

Uh and during this process, people showed up in many ways.

Uh staff were at Earthfest, as you saw the picture.

They held engagement sessions, met with development partners and estate agencies, and answered a huge number of questions.

I think as of the public hearing, I've heard we had 150 plus written comments, and every one of them was read, considered, and responded to.

The feedback, like everything else in our city covered the full spectrum from requests for much more flexibility to calls for stricter environmental protections.

Staff and the consultant team went through all of it along with the four planning commission study session and the public hearing.

What we have tonight reflects that full range of input.

It aims for balance, and it recognizes that Belleview has many different kinds of sites and conditions, and our code has to work across all of them.

Writing code for critical areas is hard and technical.

The requirements are getting more technical, not less, and supporting housing growth while protecting our waterways and habitat is a real challenge.

This natural system are part of what makes Belleview a special and we have a responsibility to protect them while still making room for needed housing that everyone on this body agrees.

This recommended LUCA gets us there, in my view.

It supports development, it protects our natural system, and in many cases, it will improve existing conditions and create a net benefit.

This is not easy to achieve, and I wanted to thank staff and commission and the community for the work that brought us to this point.

Of course, as always, I would love to hear from my fellow council members.

I always learn from you in this kind of conversation.

And I know we have uh all heard about the specific property in East Maine, and I'm sure there will be questions there, and I look forward to the discussion, Mayor.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you very much for starting us off.

Uh, Councilmember Bargava.

Yeah, thank you.

Um Mayor.

I also want to just reiterate the appreciation.

This is a long, complicated process you have been through.

I want to start by just giving some kudos to the staff.

It's just remarkable that you continue to work on complex topics and come with some really strong uh work.

I also have deep appreciation having spent quite a few years in the trenches with the planning commission.

Uh, deep appreciation for the work the Chair Kanlu and Commissioner Ves is in the back.

Thank you and to the rest of the commissioners as well for the incredible work and to the stakeholders in the back of the room and all the others who have participated.

This is just a sprinkling.

Uh, but this has been a really big team effort to get us to this point so far.

I do believe that the recommended LUCA is consistent with our comprehensive plan and delivers a thoughtful and balanced approach.

One that supports housing production and manages growth, while also making sure that we're safeguarding our environmental quality.

Uh plus one to uh deputy mayor's comments.

Um that's a very tricky balance, and there will be areas where there are high judgment calls required and additional information.

But I think my bias will always be to go to the best available science to make sure that we are having a positive net benefit while also making our plans, policies, and processes flexible enough to try and create the development uh intensity that we want, especially in you know, proxy to transit and key areas where the comprehensive plan is absorbed for that purpose.

So let me talk about uh some of the uh comments that we've received as well today.

Um I think we do need to find continuously always need to find creative ways to encourage housing.

And I know I'll take the case in point for that uh Project Nissan, for example, where there has been um sort of a uh position laid out from some of the comments we've received that hey um the current code may be restrictive to the place where it prohibits us from development, and um I think it's really important that from my perspective that we don't build policies or try to make changes that are very uniquely site specific.

I think it's important that we have an equitable approach to the process so that we're able to ensure our policy framework is scalable and consistent over time.

I think that is an important thing to understand and reiterate uh that we're we're we're in that process.

I'm sure that is the approach you have taken.

It should be uh citywide approach to ensure that that continues to work.

That said, um uh you know, I will say that there is also sort of a uh desire that we constantly challenge ourselves to say that the best available science is informing us, that we are understanding the situation on the ground thoughtfully, and uh moving forward with um uh an understanding that the balance that we're achieving is based on hard facts and data, and that we're uh you know, not taking sort of a uh designation at face value, etc.

That we do consider um the ecological value.

Now why I say that is because uh while right now I do believe I'm generally supportive of the proposed lucka.

Um one of the questions in my mind is for example, um we talked about our ability in Bell Red to think about streams in a way that we can enhance that capability and functionality ecologically.

Um I also want to make sure that when we think about our category four wetlands, that we have uh talked about filling them in if they're a certain size, uh 4,000 square feet or less.

Uh I think it would be helpful for us to sort of same use the same framework, not to say the designations are not right, and they are what they are, and then I truly appreciate that value.

But if they're serving that ecological purpose, and that can be a uh uh a process that can help not just one site but many sites as we think about making sure that the balance that we're trying to achieve between um development, being fostered and encouraged, but also being very, very cautious and and and clever about making sure that our ecological priorities are maintained, and that becomes really really important that we don't dilute that effort for ecological priorities to be maintained because that's sort of a one-way door and can have very significant repercussions.

And so very cautious about that.

And um, I'm sure you are as well, and so is uh I love to hear the rest of the point of view of the council.

But um, I would say that if there is an opportunity beyond what already is proposed, which I'm supportive of generally, I would say uh looking at that opportunity, uh especially in transit, to see close to transit in places where our development intensity is high.

If there is, for example, a size for category three beyond which, below which they don't function, their ecological purposes are not being met adequately.

Should we think about them differently?

That could be a study that we do uh going out from this uh and prioritize that, but otherwise, generally I really support the work that the commission and the staff has done.

So thank you for doing that.

Uh Councillor Mr.

Thank you.

Um first of all, I just want to say I appreciate you all doing the engagement, doing very deeper level very holistically, especially when we include a tribes, because as you know, we are under Devolution coastal tribe people, right?

We are ancestral lands.

So it's really great that we're putting that in perspective and respect um the original landowners.

Thank you.

I really appreciate that.

And also I think that this engagement part was very thought, thoughtful, and then um careful, and then you know, also planned it with the intentionality to hear the best from every stakeholder in the room, which is very important.

Because we know that the common goal we want, we want the best in Bellevue.

And then, you know, the thing that the really interested me was because we know the quality of life is not only one piece, it's all include economic growth and then the natural the natural abundance and also the satisfaction of our recurring residents.

These are the investors, and then who is taking the time and commitment into making Bellevue a great city together.

Um I thought it was interesting is because the time investment also, how much I think bright future we are pushing Bellevue.

I also would love to um overall, actually, let me go back a little bit.

I love the Jeto, the overall recommendation.

I do think is really well balanced.

Like deputy mayor and also um council member Bob, they are they're expert on planning commission.

They are so I really follow their expertise and I learned the best from them.

So I agree that the overall direction is highly recommended.

That's what I would love to see.

Um, something I do want to push is because we have these opportunities, and I think with the wetland and other innovative um mitigation opportunities.

If there's any opportunity, if we can push for more housing, I I would think that would be a really amazing because right now we are really at urgency cross-section that we the urgency of more housing is it cannot wait anymore.

So I would say if we can implement not only on the East Main TOD area and any other area, if we see opportunities, if we can work into it, being innovative and also create spaces where it's very doable and make it um clear on the matrix how you categorize between a category three versus a four, and then what is the feasibility behind how can we build um a safe and affordable or um useful housing that's gonna be really benefiting the public.

I I believe that would be really great.

Um I would love to learn more how we can achieve that, and also I think that I I believe that we are in the pioneer part of regional connection for affordability that make a change.

So I think I would urge and encourage we ask push to MLO more on that, and then finding ways how we can connect that um goal through the innovative uh mitigation ideas.

That's um that's a really good point, and I think uh Councilmember Vargaba kind of mentioned that too.

Nick or one of you, can you speak to how we might be more flexible to allow more housing?

If that's something you would recommend, what the impacts would be, what the process would be.

Sure.

Uh I can speak to maybe some of the flexibilities that are proposed in the draft, um, and then maybe how those interact with what you're hearing on the East Main site in particular.

Uh so in terms of the flexibility to support housing, um, as Kirsten mentioned, there are a lot of different areas that we are providing that at lots of different scales.

Everything from like a homeowner that just wants to add on a deck to someone in Bell Red that would really like to maximize their site, but not have to provide a hundred, 150 foot stream buffer.

And so um, for those sites, which is similar kind of scale as the East Maine um proposal.

Um, that's really where the innovative mitigation is going to provide the best path forward for these projects.

Um, as Kirsten noted, innovative mitigation is not limited to just streams.

So that can apply for all critical area types, and what it would allow people to do is take credit for the existing area of improvements, both the structures but also those um paved areas.

So a lot of conditions in Bell Red, you have service parking lots all the way up to the stream.

And there's not a strong incentive to redevelop the site because what happens um under our current code, not under the draft that you're reviewing.

Um, they would have to provide a pretty significant buffer, and there's no flexibility to reduce that buffer.

It's just a pretty cut-dry rule that we have in play.

But the innovative mitigation will allow them to a pathway to ask for potentially even a zero-foot buffer for that that stream, or if it's a wetland for a wetland, if we know there are wetlands in Bell Red.

Um, so people are excited that they can potentially take advantage of this flexibility as well.

It doesn't um uh mean that there's no protection for that critical area.

They actually have to demonstrate that there is um increased uh protection for the critical area through other means.

That's where the innovative piece comes into play.

So that could look like a lot of different things, um denser plantings within the buffer, it could be compensatory mitigation where they're maybe sending some of that obligation off-site, um, but within the same watershed.

So there's lots of tools available.

The project that you have been hearing about as of recent in East Maine, um, doesn't get the flexibility that they're looking for through the innovative mitigation approach.

Because what they are asking for is not only to reduce the buffer for the wetland down to zero, but to fill that wetland.

And by fill, um, we mean develop over it either with a parking lot or with a structure, and then replace it somewhere else on the site.

And that pathway is available under the code if it's a lower quality wetland of a certain size, which doesn't appear to be the case for this site, though we haven't received any wetland report, any delineation or any kind of really strong details that help us understand what are the conditions going on with this specific site.

So our current code, it does offer ample flexibility for buffer reductions and then limited flexibility for wetland fill, but not the type of flexibility that they're asking for with a category three is what they're labeling their wetland as and filling that.

And the category three is going to be a higher quality wetland than a category four, less easy to replace, um, but still possible.

A cat four is something that ecology says that's easier to replace, it has low function, low value.

Um you're better investing and improving kind of a nicer wetland in the area than continuing to make this one nicer, the cat four one that is.

Well, let me also clarify if anybody else, and because I mean, I think you know, Spring District is a TOD as well.

There's different locations, right?

If other area has a category four, I have no idea if there is.

Um, if they want to apply, we can communicate with them out actually have clear definition what is look like and uh how could how to qualify for that, right?

There's like a is there a um professional program that they are applying and then they can figure out how to be certified for category four.

So they would enlist the the support of a consultant that's going to go through a very rigid process of rating the wetland.

And this is all based on ecology standards.

We have our expert here, so I don't want to get out of my depth.

But if we want to get into the weeds, we've brought the person that can help us all understand kind of not only the difference between the wetlands, but then what's just the process to like define what is this wetland you have on your site, which then helps clarify what's the flexibility that's available to you.

Yeah, well, we while the experts here can you also help me to understand the net zero impact as well.

So is for my clarification, so I can understand the net zero.

Sure.

Impacts.

If it's helpful, I could explain briefly um what the categories are based on.

Um so Department of Ecology um developed the wetland rating system uh for Western Washington.

Uh it has the four categories uh with it is kind of a bell curve with one and four being less common across the state, and two and three being more common.

Um category ones are high functioning, usually relatively undisturbed, and cannot be replaced within a human lifetime.

Uh category twos perform most level most functions at a high level.

Um I should mention the functions that we typically focus on are water quality, hydrologic flunk functions that help with flood control, and uh habitat functions.

Um category threes uh provide moderate functions, they're somewhat disturbed.

Um they can often be replaced with well-designed mitigation, and category fours are um degraded, disturbed, usually uh more disconnected uh features that umogy says can be replaced or mitigated, or um, or the degraded situation could be improved.

They do emphasize in their guidance that all wetlands provide some level of functions and um warrant protection.

Thank you.

Yep.

Okay, good.

Um council member New Enhouse.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, plus one, all the comments about my colleagues, all wonderful, of course, but um thank you so much for all the great work by staff, um, by the planning commission.

Thank you, Chair Conley for being here.

Our consultants are all the great engagement too, which is so important.

It's great to hear the numbers and the amount of engagement that we did here.

We don't touch this very often.

Um, so it's great to hear all the different perspectives.

And you had uh a very big task of weighing all the all the different um opinions um and and and needs in our community.

I think I've had the majority of my questions already answered.

Um the fact that I agree that this really is, I think at the end of the day, a very balanced approach.

That it's a category three instead of a category four.

So I just want to dive into that just a little bit more to understand that.

Because when I look at that, it seems like it's a very limited value.

So I'm I'm really trying, especially when it's in a TOD area, especially when it's right across from the light rail station, uh especially given our um, I think as a council, our very strong um uh encouragement of more housing throughout uh the city, but especially in TOD areas.

Um I wonder if we could push a little bit more on the differences between category four and category three and how this particular area, and I completely agree with my colleague uh Councilmember Bragava that you know we we want a Luca that is consistent across the city, and I agree we don't want to start making a lot of um special conditions for different parts of the city.

But this one in particular, I think is um is is an interesting one and and and could be replicated in other parts potentially.

So uh want to drill on that a little bit more.

So that's my first question is what kind of you know, push this into that category three.

And I know you touched on that already, but if you could drill down just a little bit more for me, so I could understand it.

Thank you.

Just think uh the city has not actually um made any determination of the category of wetland that's property.

So the applicant has represented to us through a site plan.

Um we have not been in receipt of a wetland study or a delineation, and so we haven't been able to verify what the category is.

Thank you on that site.

Thank you.

Um then it's still I think helpful for Nell to relay I know 100% what those differences are.

I might as well make it, you know, it hasn't there's there hasn't been a complete submittal and a peer review process.

So um I I'm not uh intricately familiar with the rating on that particular site.

Um, you know, to do a rating, you usually it's a combination of boots on the ground time, taking notes and observations of site conditions as well as some desktop review of things like um you know the 303D list of waters that aren't meeting water quality standards.

Um so it's it's an in-depth process that just hasn't been reviewed for this site.

Um I am somewhat familiar with the general area.

I would know it's you know that Mercer SLU area, it's mapped by um NRCS, uh, their soil maps is Seattle MUC, which you know that's um that's a soil type that develops over hundreds of years, and so it's it's kind of a um that's commonly associated with a higher rating, but again, I don't have any more site-specific information.

Can we see higher leading?

Do you mean higher numbers?

Like four versus higher value, which would be one.

Um I just mean that um those muck soil types are um usually associated with a higher functioning wetland system.

Right.

So it'd be a lower number of higher value.

Yeah, I can't I can't I don't want to overstate though, because site specific conditions really have to be evaluated in total to determine.

So um the appro actually proposed some language here, and I think most of us are familiar with or seeing some of the correspondence, but I just like to read it and get your thoughts on what that would change to to the Luca and what um outcomes either desired or not that might mean.

So the amendment of degraded low-quality wetlands to a modified, reconfigured or replaced, so no net loss of wetlands occurs.

And so that there would be uh required outcomes.

So one, there's a net ecological gain if they were allowed to um build on this area, but then two, there's new housing.

And that three, this would be for TOD area.

So if that were to be incorporated into the LUCA, what would that mean beyond just this area, but in in general?

Yeah, I don't know, maybe start and Nel would love just your insights um just from what you're seeing maybe in other jurisdictions too, in terms of category three wetland fill, which is the request that's tied to the location of being in a TOD area.

Part of our challenge, um, the timing, which I know is always a difficult thing to manage, um, but the timing of the request just didn't allow the time that we needed to coordinate um with our consultants and then also with our our tribes and the agencies, so making sure that there's that transparency with the process.

So that's one kind of set of challenges.

The other piece is that what we would use during that time is of course engagement, but we'd have to go in and do some analysis too.

So understanding what's the impact of this change, how many potential wetlands of this category might we be thinking about with this policy choice?

So you all or planning commission has an informed recommendation on what's what's tied to this uh code change in that we just don't have enough information right now.

Haven't had the time to do that type of analysis.

Okay.

We'd also we understand there are some jurisdictions.

Uh Redmond has been cited as has some flexibility on wetland fill for category three wetlands.

Um that's something we'd love to discuss with them.

How is that being used?

It's also included in their draft code.

We're hearing um for the update.

We'd like to understand some of the origin there.

We also recognize Redmond's looking at us for some of our flexibility.

So it's trade-offs, you know, where we might be more flexible in some areas.

Um Redmond has tightened up and then maybe offered other flexibility in different areas.

So it's kind of that local balance that we were trying to find.

Um, and really regret not being able to get that kind of comment earlier so that we could give it the time that it needs.

Um, but that's just kind of where we're at.

Okay.

And then now maybe at a high level, if you have any insights on just what uh uh policy around filling category three wetlands um more broadly might require us to do in terms of some analysis.

Um I have corresponded a few times over the course of helping various jurisdictions with the CAO update.

Um the um ecology's CIO coordinator, Emily Atkins, um, and she's helped clarify some questions.

This particular one hadn't come up for me in any of my prior work.

Um, just I've just been following uh the ecology guidance, which is just limited to the exemption language that's included in the current draft.

Um we but we could certainly uh talk to her about that if that's something you want to consider um beyond the stakeholder process that's happened so far.

So we definitely want to be able to understand why that is.

And I appreciate that feedback and I appreciate the process uh that you've gone through and that you would go through.

I for one think it's it's um it's worth doing uh even if it's going past that deadline of the the end of the year, as our my or our former council member uh mentioned I'd rather get this right uh than then than rush it, uh, just because we don't touch it very often.

So um I I think it's I think it's worth doing and then coming back to us after you've been able to do that uh that due diligence.

Thank you.

Can I add something here?

I think I just want to share on behalf of Planning Commission that we talked about this a lot, like one entire session.

Um our sessions is five hours mostly.

It was four hours maybe that day.

Uh but um I think one of the things that we agreed on it as a planning commission was we can when we are in the policy level, we don't want to be CITA specific.

And that was what we were getting as a guidance, don't look at the sites.

And the other um thing was um we still receiving um emails from the um fashion uh wildlife um departments, and we were receiving from the Snow Qualmy, and they were against of what we are playing planning commission was recommending because we basically 50% reduced everything that they suggest that to us.

It means we already passed their red line, and they were sending us email continuously.

Still, we are receiving email.

I got this morning.

Um I just want to say from the Felix Beliffy that how much we balance between we want a housing and we want to stewardship our environment, and we already pushed the envelope 50% that what's um two of our biggest environmentalist stewardship institution, suggest that to us.

In specific TOD areas, in everything.

And everything, right?

Yeah.

I'm not talking about everything, I'm talking about TOD.

Nick, yeah.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Let me uh um ask you something to clarify.

I think what I hear you saying that I mean, first of all, this property hasn't been categorized yet, so we don't know if it's a uh a three or a four.

But I think what you're asking is that if a property is a three, it's in TOD, and they're building affordable housing or that we allow replacement at a category three level.

Just a minute, can I just get Claire?

Is that what you're saying?

Um, absolutely.

Well, housing slash affordable housing, especially if they're taking advantage of some of the other programs that uh that we offer, absolutely.

Yeah, because um I think this is a fairly significant property that could, you know, uh I think anywhere from 60 to 70 units is is is what I've heard, and um, hold you to the affordable housing.

Okay, I know you're trying to nail it out on that one.

Well, it it's a bit of a gift, and I'd like something in return.

And I think affordable housing is a great um negotiation for me.

Okay.

Um, Councilmember Barber.

That you would allow these kinds of exceptions on if we do that.

I'm not saying we're doing that.

This is in the land of hypotheticals right now.

Um in TOD only.

In theory, which is one of the qualifiers that uh Council Member Nun has laid out.

I want to ask, because I haven't had the benefit of sort of I'm not an ecological ecologist or don't have the expertise, but just like there is a square, this is what's throwing me off.

Just like there is a square foot number for category four, that below 4,000 square feet, you can fill them in, and it's okay.

Is there a minimum critical dimension?

Because not all category three battles would perform the same way.

Does there a size or the level of connectedness or other criteria?

I don't know what those criteria are.

The water table, the penetration or the runoff level, or anything else.

I don't know what those are, play into the ecological function and functionality of uh um category three.

When uh simply put, below a certain size threshold or certain kind of criteria, they don't add that much ecological value or hard to say um so that's a good question.

Um the rating system that ecologies developed, they acknowledge in their guidance that it has some limitations in terms of um accurately and effectively rating small wetlands.

Um so they they also, and we have in the draft the the buffer exception for for wetlands at thousand square feet or less.

And that's acknowledging that um uh sort of uh I guess less precision that the available rating provides.

Um that could be another question for ecology in terms of where the 4,000 square feet figure comes from.

I've I've never asked that question directly.

Um, but there's other criteria associated with that as well, where it's you know it's not associated with the stream, it's not uh part of a wetland mosaic, or um so those um you can have small separated wetlands that still provide greater function as a group in the landscape, or you can have an isolated small category of four that could just be easily replaced in terms of functions.

So I think that's that's really kind of the basis of that.

I appreciate that depth because as we set these criteria, uh taking a uniform approach to all category threes may not be the right outcome, but if there is a qualifier of size and if there's a qualifier of ecological functionality that needs to be studied and better understood, I think we will make a more thoughtful recommendation on where we go.

That's it.

Can I reclaim my time for a second there?

Yeah, thank you.

I just want to say, Chair Connor, I really appreciate that feedback though, what you've what you've heard and all the information that you've taken uh and at the whole commission, so I'm not discounting that at all, so I really appreciate that.

No, I just want to I just want to emphasize on behalf of planning commission that we were really talking and we were struggling to how we can include this or no.

And it was a it was a deep conversation with the city of staff and the stack.

Sure.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Councilmember Lee.

Thanks.

This is a really amazing UNE conversation.

I wanted to uh thank the planning commission chair for you know struggling with this.

And uh right at the opening, we talk about balance.

Oh I appreciate you know, Councilmember Barraga mentioned about science.

Uh however, we're talking about nature.

We're talking about balance of ecologically important environment versus human invention, intervention, not intervention, human invasion.

You know, we have to balance it.

And so, you know, it's very challenging.

How do you balance it?

Science, even science, move forward.

Science change.

Science doesn't stay still.

Science is a thousand years ago, it's horse and buggy.

Now we are talking about AI.

You know, that opens up all our experience.

How do we balance?

How do we experience?

How do we see human with environment?

It's it's interaction between human beings and environment.

I appreciate uh Councilman Sumadivari.

When she mentioned about the native Indians, you know, they have their own balance of their nature, their own science in the old days.

They didn't use slide rules, they didn't use calculators, but they know how to balance nature and human beings.

That changes also.

You know, science are enhanced by moving forward.

That means whatever we do, we have to look in that in the light of is nothing fixed, flexibility, change, recognizing.

So we need to figure all that out.

Ecology set a rule, well, just based on certain guidelines, certain science, maybe who knows when, 100 years, up to updated 50 years ago, maybe most recently 10 years ago.

But it's based on something.

But this all changed.

So I believe that's what we really need to be looking at.

So when Sue doesn't fit or shouldn't be, uh the Belleville Corridor, I think we we I met with some of the uh the development stakeholders.

I think they really appreciate the opportunity, uh, Rebecca, you set up, you know, have a conversation with them.

Uh, you know, we have to put in some new uh streams, unearth them, right?

And they're very narrow, they really probably doesn't matter much in terms of uh nature, you know, until up to now.

Then we are now trying to uncover them, which is okay, but its value, it's nature, its value may not be so substantial substantive.

Because some of the rules to protect uh nature's balance has been built into the requirement of your setback, of your development.

Uh you talk about innovation, right?

You develop certain ways of treating uh the flow of the stream, and that is kind of being offset.

So there's a way to look at that kind of uh critical area, you know, versus this East Maine's critical area.

So I don't I don't think we have a problem with the Bell Ray Corridor.

You've heard them, right?

They've been communicating with you.

I think that this is good.

But with East Maine, my understanding initially I didn't know.

I said, well, it's a natural stream, now you're going to uh disturb it.

It's probably not a good thing, right?

Because you're disturbing something that has value.

But the the current information I hear is that it used to be not a uh a stream, but it's a parking lot.

And they built a parking lot and created a natural area, I mean a stream.

So that stream is not really an original stream.

It's something that's created by humans for a parking lot.

So I see that from that reason, I think you are not trying to restore anything, you're not really trying to protect anything.

Basically, you're restoring the thing into what it was used to be, which is not a stream.

So I think by developing housing there, by utilizing the space, by turning parking lot into a useful purpose, which is what our new balance is becoming.

We need more housing.

We need more housing for human beings.

Okay.

So to me, I think that is not really invading into an original stream, which the native, you know, indigenous people value as a natural spring or stream, natural uh wetland.

They want to protect.

There's something that's created afterwards.

So I don't see the comparable value as a you know, millions of years of natural uh critical area that we need to protect.

So for that for that basis, I think we can apply the current science, the current needs, the current human need to provide whatever it's valuable to us now.

And it by and by doing that, we really don't disturb whatever the uh natural environment has been, you know, for for the last five thousand years or whatever it is.

So I I think that if that's the case, you know, we want we want to be mindful.

We have to protect the natural environment or create better environment in other areas that perhaps can not just compensate, but enhance a natural environment even more.

I think that's how I would like to look at it.

In terms I understand you have to go through the process.

We have to talk to the ecology.

What's the basis?

Whether this be category three or four.

So you need to go through that process.

So you don't have time to do it because you have to meet the deadline.

But based on what we heard from the speaker just tonight, you know, it doesn't really matter that much.

You know, if you don't get it done by the end of the year, uh you're not mandated to do it.

You're not going to be fined.

Many cities can live with it.

And I think if that's the case, there's no harm to take some time to make sure that we come up with a our own decision what this area should be for with the Bellevue for our own natural protection and balance.

Should it be a three or four?

Well, maybe it's not necessary.

So end of my speech.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um Councilmember Hamilton.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, thank you, Chair Conloo and Planning Commission members for all the hard work on this amendment.

Uh nine study sessions, a written briefing, and a public hearing.

That's a tremendous amount of effort.

And considering how important this issue is, I'm glad you put in all of that effort to ensure we get this right.

Also appreciate all of the time and expertise that our community members put into the update process.

After all, many current and future residents spend the majority of their lives in and near our critical areas.

Getting this update right for residents is the most important priority in all of this work.

Also appreciate the time, effort, and expense that our stakeholders put into the update.

We incorporated input and guidance from the Snowqualmie tribe, the state, and property owners and developers in the final recommendation.

Uh Nick and Kirsten, just tremendous effort here.

I keep thinking your list of challenging and consequential work should be getting shorter, but that doesn't seem to be happening.

I'm impressed with the quantity of great work that you two.

And I really appreciate the comprehensive public engagement process and how carefully you listened to the council, community, and planning commission in support of creating an update that worked well for everyone while also incorporating the best available science.

Um, with that in mind, I do have uh something I would like my colleagues to consider.

Um we've heard some talk about this uh already tonight.

Um some folks refer to this as the pavement to places um uh amendment.

Um and Councilmember Barga kind of hit on the fact that one standard for the whole city um is really important.

Of course, I think we all agree with that.

But with that in mind, I would just like us to consider asking staff to draft an ordinance for us to discuss and consider that allows the reconfiguration and movement of category three wetlands in TOD areas, so long as there is no net loss of wetland area and an overall net environmental benefit.

And ideally, I'd like to see this back to us by February 1st so that we can discuss it and consider voting on it by the end of Q1.

So really good work, ready to move forward with this, and would just like us to consider giving that additional direction on this kind of pavement to places idea that it's been talked about quite a bit tonight, and give you the necessary time, of course, to do the work, study, give us time to discuss, like has already been mentioned.

So appreciate all the comments so far, and would just offer that up to my colleagues.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

So I appreciate this conversation.

Um I want to thank Chair Conley and the planning commission, because I feel like you went through both sides of everything and and have presented us with a compromise and staff, all the of course, all the work that you have done.

I know that we're already on a borrowed time of a year uh with this.

We are a year past the original deadline.

If this was a property, first of all, I'm gonna clarify by saying I'm great with Bell Red.

Leave it at that.

But if this was a property that had gone through the process of being categorized, we would know what we're working with right now.

But we don't.

We're guessing it's c category three.

It could be four.

It could be two.

Um we don't know what we're dealing with.

So I have no appetite to craft legislation to address something that I don't even know what I'm dealing with at this point.

What I would like to see is is there a path for this property owner to get categories done so that we know what we're dealing with.

Is it possible to pass what has been proposed within the deadline and still have a path for that property owner to come back and say oh we had it surveyed or whatever it is that they have done?

And indeed I have a category four and a two, or whatever it's gonna be, or maybe it is just a category three.

Um and we can talk about how we might change what we had just passed to accommodate something like that in a TOD as council member New Enhouse proposed.

Um thank you, Mayor, for the question.

Uh so what that would require is council taking action um before the December 31st deadline and then initiating a different work program or new kind of work item for us to be able to process another amendment related to the critical areas ordinance, assuming you know that the information um provided uh is able to inform recommendations and then we look at those recommendations in connection with the package that you all are uh taking action on it in December to make sure we still balance it out because we do need to be able to coordinate with our agencies, make sure that we're also doing outreach, um kind of honoring the process that we took from the beginning, and then making sure um that we are able to defend any area that we're departing from best available science, which this would be one of those areas that we'd be departing.

So we'd want to make sure that we're able to build a strong defense on that front.

Um February is the first time that I'm hearing of uh kind of that uh request.

That's something we'd probably want to take back and understand if that's possible in the February time frame if we were going with the kind of alternate um request.

Um but our preference I suppose would be uh take action before the deadline, and then if the council wanted to initiate work, um we could have the planning commission uh review kind of a more narrow amendment, um, but that would also um you know pull focus from other code priorities.

Um the 26th work plan is pretty heavy, um, and then you'll be hearing about the 26th and 27 work plan soon.

Um, so it might be a kind of a reprioritization exercise for the council at that point, um, just to make sure we're still meeting other kind of council priorities.

I don't want it to be site specific personally, because if it's a good idea, if it's it's a good idea everywhere.

We don't even know if this would apply to this property, we don't know what we're dealing with.

Um I feel comfortable personally moving forward with the planning commission's recommendation if this property owner wants to have their site surveyed and then decides to go ahead and ask for an amendment.

There's a process for that, but it's gonna take what time it takes, unless at the council retreat we uh re-prioritize our priorities, which is something we can do.

So um that's where I am on this.

So um I've been keeping track of where everybody is.

We're all over the place.

So um let's just start with the motion that we have, and and we can vote against it and we can come back and amend it.

I move to direct the staff to finalize the LUCA ordinance for final action at a future meeting.

Is there a second?

Second, but then I have a question.

Yeah, thank you.

Can you explain what you said again?

Because I didn't fully follow your saying is just push this out and not take the decision today.

What I'm saying, what might well, do you want to know what I said, or do you want to know what the motion is?

The motion.

Ask and bring it back for passage within the deadline, but still have a path for our property owner to come back and ask for an amendment without you know, we can't give we can't give a date on that because that's something we have to address at the retreat in terms of priorities.

Understood now.

Okay.

Go ahead.

Um two questions.

One, what are the ramifications if we don't submit this by the end of the year?

Two, um, Nick, the process that you described in terms of um uh you know, working with the property, but this we all want this to be citywide as well.

But to go through that process to understand the impacts, etc.

and to work it into the Luca.

Approximately how long would that take?

Umbe I'll buy some time and ask the city attorneys on the deadline question.

And I'll I'll give the thought to how long it might take us.

Okay.

And we do have uh Robbie Seppler here, he's the attorney that advises code and policy.

So there's a good tactic, by the way.

Hello.

Council good evening.

Good evening.

You have a full table here tonight.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um Councilmember Newman House.

The answer to your question is that there are uh legal um repercussions if we do not pass the critical areas update by the end of this year.

Uh those are that will become ineligible for certain state grants, loans, and funding.

Um, the specific um funding buckets that would be ineligible for the our funding uh loans and grants from the public works board, uh certain grants or loans from the Department of Ecology related to water pollution control, as well as uh kind of general bucket of grants related to financing public facilities.

So that is what the GMA would set out as penalties for us failing to adopt it by the end of the year.

Um, as was mentioned prior to there's the practical thing of this is a 10-year update cycle, so we're at the end of a 10-year deadline for complying with uh state growth management requirements.

And do we have grants already in place or are planning on submitting to grants for those areas?

From our uh kind of preliminary research, we couldn't identify any grants currently in place, but it's unclear what uh grants we might be applying for going forward.

Okay.

Sorry, Nick, back to you.

Um so for I guess in terms of the timing, um, we're just sort of mapping out the steps that we need to do just anywhere from logistical, we've got to get FACET back on board.

Um we've had a good run with them.

Um we're at the end of the contract, we'll have to renew that.

Um, and then we'd likely need you know, time to do that analysis, which could take a few months.

Um, and then we also would be um asking Shermain for some time on your calendar if council wants to retain processing this amendment.

Um, and so that's likely another two touches with you all before action.

So that's probably anywhere from uh three to six months.

Um, and then uh Rebecca is noting too the the budget for the consultant has been expended, so we'd also um have to go um search a little bit um to get some additional uh budget for the consultant to stay on board with us.

We have four thousand left in the uh council can just kidding.

Okay, thank you so much.

That's uh helpful information.

Okay, we have a motion on the table.

I see council member Lee has his hand up.

I'm just curious, what would the uh applicants uh feel about this?

How the decision the the motion we're going to pass impact them in their activity to seek for this action.

Uh do we know?

Yeah.

Well, I mean, it's been explained to us that this amendment is important um for this East Main site in particular to be able to proceed um with their agreement that they're working through with the property owner.

But um, what we have also kind of requested of them is um to go through some of the mitigation sequencing requirements.

So that really is a responsibility of a project to show how they're minimizing impact, how they are um uh or sorry, avoidance is first, thank you.

How they're avoiding impact altogether, and then how they're minimizing the impact and then what they're doing in terms of mitigation.

So there's a lot of ways that they need to demonstrate avoidance and minimization in particular.

Um so we'd want to see some attempt on kind of push-pull around the footprint and see what might be possible to define you know what's really the problem here.

Um, and then also, you know, we have not um the the pre-application, it's not a project to be clear.

Um, it was a pre-application um meeting with the city, so very preliminary, um, just checking out um what might be possible.

So that pre-application conference um was developed under our current code.

So, as we discussed tonight, there's a lot of flexibility available under the new code and that you all are considering this evening.

And so we also would like to see you know how might their their issues change based on attempting to design a project to the proposed code.

Um so still in our minds a lot of unknowns on what's the problem that we need to fully address.

Um, we have heard a solution, which is a law fill of a category three wetland.

Um, what we're communicating is that that feels like an extreme solution, um, and we'd like to see if there were other suggestions they might offer for the council to consider to ensure that the housing can be built.

So if that's more height, if that's more floor area, if that's reducing setbacks, if that's reducing parking.

Um, there's a lot of other levers that the council might avail themselves to before maybe we um look at the fill of a category three wetland, which would require more process.

Sorry.

So this may not be uh necessarily a make or break action that we are taking.

It may be a moot if the applicants can go ahead with other considerations.

We don't need to make tonight's decision, right?

We don't know.

You're still in this negotiation stage with the city.

Yep.

It's we don't know.

Well yeah, we don't know.

Because it is it is a category or it already fits in within the confines of what we're voting in.

So that's why they don't know.

They don't even know what the classification is.

Yeah, but so we are making decisions in a void, not knowing that this will actually be.

No, we've had a ton of research done by our planning commission and our staff.

I would not call this a void whatsoever.

And from what we saw so far though, they wanted to have us do this.

Right now, it's a maybe not.

Maybe they can take live with.

Well, and comes really I'm not you know keeping score, but we have gotten a lot of positive feedback from the broader development community that this package is working well for them.

Um that was overwhelming feedback, particularly in the Bell Red area, and we have also gotten some really positive comments from the chamber plush um as well.

And so um, like with any policy decision, not everyone is going to be able to get exactly what they're looking for.

I think I remember we had um Charlie and Neil the um developers that own the land in Bell Red Um Road.

We have Imagine Housing that they shared um habitat.

Um who else I'm forgetting?

These are the one that I'm remembering at this time of the day.

Okay.

Okay, I'm really getting excited about a vote here.

Go ahead.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh this is uh this is very, very uh um amazing that how much this uh council loves about uh housing and affordable housing.

And it shows in this way that we have this ordinance that has been work since February.

Every single developer uh and business related are happy with it.

Uh it is somehow too good to be true because now there are some environmentalists that they are not happy with it.

So I think maybe we are even fur went furthered from the balance and the center that we always uh talk on this council.

In the last minute, we have one applicants that we don't even know the category of their wetland.

We don't know if they have exercise all of the flexibility in the new code, and now we are discussing to extend this maybe for three to six months to evaluate to see if we are going to be okay to feel wetland three.

And again, it shows that how housing is a priority for this council.

It is something that I think we should acknowledge.

If there is a ban weat, if we can't have three to six months added to the planning commission full plate already, and the development services plate.

And do we have the budget?

I think 400 units were to go through that process, maybe.

But do we have that?

I don't know based on what the line the motion is.

When are we deciding that?

I think as right now we cannot just sit here and say, let's just start filling wetland tree for the whole bell view.

It should definitely go to the process of the staff, technical evaluation.

It should go through the process of consultant.

If you have money to renew their contract, it should go through the process of talking to all of the stakeholders, estate agency, uh, and all of the tribes, every stakeholder that we have done so far for for this one from February to now, and then go to the planning commission, public hearing, and then come back to us.

If we can do that, I think maybe 400 additional units plus whatever affordable housing you want to get out of that vote and should be for the whole city of Bellevue.

I don't have the answer for that, uh, and I don't know when we are going to find the answer for that based on this motion.

Well, I think the it be it's initiated when the property owner gets their property categorized and then they know what they're dealing with, and then they know what they're asking for.

Um I'm hearing like a nice little song.

Okay, anyway.

Um, just hold on.

I've got two other people who want to talk down here.

I don't think have you a question or no question, but it's go ahead.

Actually, yeah.

So my question was because I think we were talking about developer and developing quite a bit.

Um I think finding that balance, we do need to hold like this land code use accountable for the goal of no net loss.

Um how are we uh monitoring it?

So part of the um update process, it's a charge from the Growth Management Act that our regulations have to provide that no net loss.

And so at kind of the policy level, that's the framework that we have to set up for ourselves.

And then on a site specific basis when projects come in for application.

Did you have professionals um that support their application that have to demonstrate that as well?

No, if anything there was needing correction or adding uh please help.

Yeah, I think that was all correct.

I would just add that you know, this draft code and your current code as well has uh you know mitigation ratios and criteria that need to be met to help demonstrate no net loss.

Is that gonna be public public information?

Like, you know, if for example, I live in Bridotrail, right?

So if I have some ideas, I want to figure out more about you know the implication, would I be able to find that information about the performance or like the results on the non-net loss?

Oh, like uh uh an inventory, yeah.

Oh, yeah.

Um that's not something that is maintained for all critical areas.

That's something an exercise that you go through when you do your SMP or shoreline update.

Um, I know that's part of the process, but um those sort of detailed accounting and records are typically not produced for all critical areas.

Okay.

Well, maybe we can touch base if how can I find that kind of data so we can share with you know the community.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Councilman Hamilton.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Um, I think I'm I'm pretty well uh aligned with the deputy mayor here, so I would be in favor of moving forward uh with the planning commission recommendation for sure.

I'd I'm not in favor of holding that up, but considering that we have one property that is not unique that could provide 400 units of housing, 64 affordable units of housing, and considering all the work that we've done already, what I think a draft ordinance would do would be to help us have a more full conversation about it.

It isn't something that that we have to pass, but it is something that we're really under GERD, kind of a wider range discussion.

So absolutely in favor of moving forward with the recommendation as is.

I would just like to have this uh draft ordinance come back to us at you know relatively quickly, um, using the the work we've already done as a basis for it, and then to have a discussion about it.

And if it makes sense to us at that time, we're just asking to look into it more fully, come up with something that could be a draft that um you know there's no net loss of wetland and an overall net environmental benefit.

Those seem like very good things and the housing, and we have a wide uh full deep discussion about it, and we do it quickly and get it done by the end of Q1.

That's what I would like to see, but definitely in favor of moving the planning commission recommendation forward uh tonight.

Okay, I I'm just gonna disagree with you here because we don't even know what they want.

They don't even know who they are, what they're dealing with with the property.

I'm not going to ask staff to draft anything until we know what we're dealing with, but I feel like we have a path to do that if the developer were to come back and say, okay, I've had the survey, here's what I want, and then we can decide whether that fits for all those types of properties across the city in TOD where we get affordable housing.

I understand.

I know that that maybe isn't something you and I align on, but I would just like to see if my colleagues would like to weigh in and if there is uh uh you know a general thought that we go ahead with that, then uh I would just like us to have a motion on the table.

Um I would suggest we vote yes or no on the motion, and then we can talk about a separate motion.

Is that is that possible?

Okay, Councilmember Bargava, you had a question.

Actually, it was very similar to Councilmember Hamilton.

I was gonna clarify that this work program that we're talking about is not specific to this site.

It isn't about the 400 units, it is about finding the generalizable criteria that we would use for level category three veterans in a situation which is close to transit that would create that sort of judgment call or trade-offs for housing and affordable housing production and what we would do, not specific to the site, but more generally.

That's what I thought the new work program was, and it could be 500, could be 5,000 units that actually become enabled due to that additional flexibility and not the 400, and that's what's at play here potentially.

Okay, so I'll let you all weigh in after we vote on whether or not we're going to vote for it against the amendment, which is go ahead and say your motion again.

I move to direct the staff to finalize the Luca ordinance for final action at a future meeting.

Which is the planning commission's recommendation.

So all those and it's already been seconded.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed.

Okay.

I'm gonna open the floor to whomever would like to make another motion.

Okay.

Yes.

Okay, and with this, I wasn't sure.

Do we need this in the form of a motion, or would this be more just of a head nod or oh, it wouldn't definitely need to be a motion, or it could be to have staff come back with recommendations.

I can the motion was be that because we don't even know what is intel.

I think the staff need to come back and tell us what is yeah, what it takes to do again.

They have a work back plan already.

I'm sure you are not going to Hawaii tomorrow.

You have work to do for 2026.

Uh Nick, are you going to do that?

You know, we do have the eight-hour rule.

Okay, and I think this may fall under that.

And so I'm gonna let our city manager talk about that.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, recognizing that this sounds like it is an interest of the council.

Um, I would like to give the staff an opportunity to do uh take a little more time to articulate uh for the council what would be entailed in this and bring it back to you so that you can fully understand what the work would be that's required, what the timeline would be, what the cost will be, and then as Nick pointed out, there will be trade-offs in terms of what work they will need to push um out to accommodate this.

So I think it would be very helpful if you can allow them a little time to bring that back.

Can we do that within eight hours and not go beyond the eight-hour rule for the first touch at this?

I believe they probably could do that within eight hours.

Yes.

We can report back at the summer night meeting, kind of what path might be available and what options in terms of the trade-offs you might need to do.

And hopefully this property owner can get a little more information, some clarity, because if there is something that we go the trouble of passing that don't does not apply to that property, that's gonna be kind of awkward.

So anyway, I I appreciate the recommendation for this.

Um councilmember Lee.

Thank you.

By the way, uh I have some concern for the conversation.

Nothing well, separate from their application.

So, how do we handle this?

Do we want to yeah, how do we handle this?

Well, I mean, I didn't hear a majority of council members who want to do something site specific.

I know, I know.

But I'm just suggesting I'm mentioning it.

Yeah, my only one that should be.

I know that.

I'm just asking a question.

What's your question?

My question is what do we do with the property owners?

Which uh asking for this action to add this today's tonight discussion.

Are you gonna tell them?

We're happy to continue to meet with them to let them know what information we need to be able to help them best with their application.

Okay, all right.

So we all understand that.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

Yes.

Going to be like if we were to move forward, this is with a budget, this is the time.

Okay, this is the you know, okay, what we would have to do.

So we can just plan the timeline, all that.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

But it's a step forward.

Okay, thank you very much.

Appreciate it.

Now, the last thing on our agenda is a state mandate dated item that we have very little over, to be honest with you.

And we have passed these before in the past.

Um quite easily because there's not a lot we can do about it when the state mandates what we do something, and this is one of those things.

So I'm going to have staff present this, and uh I'm pretty confident we can get through this quickly.

So just go ahead and thank you very much, Nick and um and Charlie for working on this, and a special thanks to Nick for championing through the community um some very difficult issues.

So hand it over to Nick.

Thank you, Mayor, Deputy Mayor, Council.

Uh, I just want to note with our team tonight, this is Charlie's first time presenting at council.

So she's new to the team, but they'll walk through what we've done so far and where we're going and ask you to consider giving some input and direction.

Great.

Um, okay, so uh tonight we are here to introduce uh the co-living housing land use code amendment.

We are seeking direction from council.

Um, this is uh an item that we are requesting you all make a finding of necessity to retain processing of this, Luca, and tonight also direct us to schedule the public hearing, um which we would then plan for on December 2nd, um, so that we can meet the deadline of December 31st to adopt co-living housing regulations.

For our agenda, um, we wanted to touch on uh the definition of co-living housing.

It is new to Washington state.

Um, we'll also talk about the driver behind this project that was House Bill 1998, and then um touch on the geographic scope.

Uh council may recall this was an item that was discussed as part of the middle housing code amendments.

Um, this was an area that was tied to wherever the council decided to um allow six units by right.

This would also be the areas that we uh must allow under House Bill 1998, co-living housing.

I also want to take an opportunity.

Um, the agenda memo that was published last week um did cite an incorrect dimension from our major transit stops.

It noted uh one half mile um from major transit stops, and the council decided on a quarter mile from the major transit stops.

Um we were able to catch it um to then re-issue a memo.

Fortunately, that error was only it was limited to just the memo.

So all of our public information, all our presentations to the public, um, we've included the correct dimensions, but it was unfortunate we included that as part of the agenda memo.

Apologies.

And then um Charlie's gonna touch on the bill requirements, our outreach approach.

This one, as um mentioned by the mayor, is a little more uh narrow in terms of what community influence looks like, and so our outreach approach has really been just to inform community and make sure everyone is up to speed with what's coming with this bill, and then we'll touch on our schedule.

So, with that, I will have Charlie give her first presentation to you all.

Thank you.

Good evening, everyone.

It's nice to be here.

While Nick mentioned co-living housing is a new definition for the state, this type of housing is not particularly new.

You may have heard of it be referred to as congregant residences, single room occupancy, rooming house, boarding house, lodging house.

It has a lot of different definitions and different names, but we do have a new state definition, which is individual lockable rooms that include private living and sleeping areas where residents share common kitchen facilities with others in the building.

And that is the key component of co-living housing as it retains to this bill.

In this land use code update is that shared kitchen.

I'll get a little bit more into the state intent of this bill in the next slide, but they do mention that it could be affordable for people up to 50% of the area median income.

Looking more into some of the intent of the bill.

This was passed in 2024.

Again, it's a new law that requires cities to allow for co-living housing anywhere where six units are allowed by right.

It's really intended to encourage additional housing options.

Anyone who might prefer shared social spaces, and it's also just a more private alternative to traditional rentals, excuse me.

So we're updating the land use code to comply with this deadline, which is the end of the year.

Here's some examples of what co-living could look like from around the area.

In the top left hand corner, we have the historic Wilson Hotel.

This is in Anaquortis.

There's co-living units on the second and third floor with ground floor commercial and retail on the bottom.

On the top right, this is in Seattle.

I think there's about 22 co-living units in this development.

In the bottom left, it's a unique style.

And then in the bottom right, another example from Seattle, again with mixed use commercial on the bottom floor and co-living units above.

For applicability to Bellevue and where we must allow it again, this is anywhere where six or more multifamily units are permitted.

We have the map here showing that in the dark purple, existing mixed use and multifamily areas where six units are already allowed by right, and then highlighting that light purple buffer within a quarter mile walking distance of those major transit stops and growth centers that was allowed through middle housing.

So in both cases, dark and light purple co-living housing will be allowed because that's where six units are allowed, just showing the difference between by right and by middle housing.

One thing to note is that when six units are only possible when building to affordable co-living is not required on those lots.

Required to be allowed, required to be permitted.

Excuse me.

Thank you.

Diving into more of the minimum requirements that are laid out in the bill.

These ones are surrounding development standards.

Firstly, we cannot have any requirements in the land use code that are more restrictive than the minimum of what the building code sets.

So things like room size, the most we can require is the minimum from the building code.

Similarly, any other development standards for other multifamily district multifamily uses in the same district must apply to the same to co-living.

You can't treat co-living more strictly than what applies to the other uses.

We can't require any specific unit mixes or bedroom counts, and we cannot require other uses in the building like commercial and the ground floor.

They can certainly provide it, but it can't be a requirement.

Coming back to this map, we'll look at the black crosshatch.

That represents where no parking is required per the bill, and that's within half a mile of major transit stops.

There are some areas that don't have the black crosshatch, and again, it's site-specific based on walking distance, so you would calculate that at the time of application.

But outside of those areas, the maximum parking we can require is a quarter of a parking space per sleeping unit, and that calculates out to one off-street parking space per four sleeping units.

And here's a last bit of minimum requirements laid out in the bill for purposes of calculating dwelling unit density.

We cannot set a higher ratio than a quarter of a dwelling unit per sleeping unit.

So on a lot where six units are allowed, that's a maximum of 24 sleeping units.

We can't require any extra review notice or public meetings.

Uh we must allow co-living housing to participate in affordable housing incentive programs.

And since this type of housing is really intended to increase the supply of housing for low-income households, it's proposed to prohibit them from being used as short-term rentals.

And the last thing on this slide is that the sewer connection fees must be less than or equal to 50% of a standard dwelling unit.

There's a cap there.

That was distributed in person at our residential permanent expo fair, and it's also been uh distributed online as well.

So for our schedule, we did the early information awareness, which I just covered tonight.

We're here at the study session.

We're hoping um for a public hearing in action in early December to meet that state deadline of the end of the year.

And with that, that's our ask our direction needed from council.

Excellent.

Thank you so much.

Let's just start with a motion, Deputy Mayor.

I move to inter a finding of necessity for council to process to process this LUCA and direct staff to schedule the public hearing.

Okay.

Thank you.

Are there any comments or questions on this?

I have go ahead.

I have two quick questions.

Yeah.

Do we know any demand for these kind of development yet?

Um Charlie and I uh have been approached by at least one uh person that does this type of uh development.

I believe they spoke tonight, have a comment as well.

Um, and so they are interested in kind of breaking into the Bellevue market.

They're currently only in Seattle.

Um, and then their niche is they provide homeownership options through co-living housing.

Um, and they told us it's different than a co-op model.

Um, it's a really technical model.

I'm sure they take you up on a briefing if you want to learn more about that.

But um, other than that, um, you know, we just don't have a lot of experience with this housing type, so it's unclear what the demand might actually be.

Um second quick quick question is can we encourage some operational standard?

Uh sorry, can we have a motion to extend the meeting for five minutes?

I make a motion to extend the meeting to 1015.

All those in favor say aye.

I don't have any oh, yeah.

No, no, I know.

Have can be encouraged for some operational standard, some you know on site management or any of those type of encouragement that it doesn't uh kind of um don't go against the state law.

Um we can certainly come back with a more full response, but the essence of the bill is that we treat this like we would treat any other housing type.

And so if that's not a standard that we have for other multifamily uses, and that wouldn't be a standard from our kind of early assessment of the bill that we could apply under this LUCA, but we'll be sure to have that.

Yeah, not required in Courage.

Or encouraged we can take a look at that nuance encouragement.

Yeah, thank you, Mayor.

Sure.

Any other comments or questions?

Yeah, really quick uh should be easy.

Um what is when you said three really quick clarifications?

What is uh what do you mean by short-term rental?

Like what is how does that get defined?

Uh less than 30 days, so like Airbnb type models.

Got you.

Second thing, uh, you talked about 50% AMI being achieved.

Is that based on the benchmarks you've seen, some of the examples that we've studied that that's where it lands for an individual co-living, you know, individual.

That's just um that was directly in the bill laid out as it's possible to support up to 50% AMI with the intent of the bill.

Okay, so that's not based on the data from the benchmarks in any way.

No, there's uh we did try and do an initial analysis of data.

There's not a ton out there.

Um so we are relying more on the bill and the legislative intent.

Um, and so to put in perspective, the 50% AMI for the Seattle region is roughly 1,300 um a month.

And so we think that based on Charlie did at least seven properties that she was able to find, it was about around that range.

Okay, great.

Um the last one is I actually maybe you don't have the answer for this.

I don't understand the ownership model and how that would work.

Um so if you don't have a good answer for that today, it's okay.

Yeah, it's complicated.

Um we were learning about it.

We can uh provide some response though at the public hearing.

Yeah, that would be really helpful if you can when you do find it to circulate.

I think everybody would be interested, and sure.

Thank you.

Council member Sumadouria and then Councilmember Newland House.

Thank you.

So my question with the 50% it's become more affordable than regular um apartments, right?

Is there a study shows the difference in pricing?

You know, this type of unit versus a market house pricing was the percentage difference.

Uh no official studies that I'm aware of yet, just that kind of preliminary looking into the ones that are around the area.

It's still relatively new.

Um I think we would need more time to, and also like time for this type of housing to be built to really know um what the impacts of that affordability are.

Okay, and I think there's more um this type of along the west coast, not like regionally, I think there's less.

Maybe we can expand the horizon and then yeah.

I think it seems like you should be able to compare it to like an apartment.

It's kind of similar of to some of the models that we've seen in Seattle where they have the co living spaces, and I think what we see there is that because of the small size, it's inherently more affordable, and especially with the 50% AMI if they use that.

But it's per square foot, it is not less expensive than a larger unit.

Yeah, there's yeah, we can we can bring back a little more on kind of the market just so the council has kind of an understanding of what's the demographic served here.

We don't have a choice on that, and state did not study this before they passed this.

Councilmember New Enhouse.

Um plus one to the deputy mayor's comments about standards.

I think something like this is somewhat ripe for abuse potentially for the short-term rentals.

Um, but we already have short-term rental in place.

Maybe we just look at that and how it applies to all housing.

But um uh would really like to see some level of standards be able to be applied to this, either directly or indirectly, um, would be would be something I'd be looking for.

Thank you.

And enforceable.

And enforceable, exactly, which is um really the important part of the concern about uh off-street or on street parking uh requirements because a lot of neighborhood streets, you know, they already lots of cost parked, you know, in front of the street.

Uh so is it the same requirement as we have now for uh six-person sharing or whatever?

Uh is this possible?

Is there any concerns over that from your uh you know, input or community neighborhood concerns about parking?

Uh I think parking is always um kind of uh a comment that we'll receive on really all of our code projects.

Um what we are proposing here though is is direct compliance with the bill, the minimum requirements of the bill and nothing beyond that.

Um what we often hear in outreach, at least with the development community, is that there's a market um for parking in Bellevue, and so if they want to lease up some of these units, it might require them to make choices to provide more parking, but we um to be clear can't require them to provide more parking than the 0.25 um stalls per sleeping unit or no parking if they are near a major transit stop.

You say we cannot it's the state law.

Yeah, that's the mandate.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yeah, okay.

Councilmember Hamilton.

Thank you.

Um appreciate the uh presentation.

I think this was one of the best presentations of the night.

So uh well done, thank you.

Um I'm all in favor of uh co-housing.

I think it's something we should really promote in the city.

So I think it's a really valuable uh housing type.

Considering we're not going beyond what the bill requires, um, I think this is an easy one, so fully support it and look forward uh to the public hearing.

Thank you, Mayor.

Okay, so um all those in favor say aye.

Aye, any opposed?

Okay, we have two written reports one on report of emergency procurement for public works contract for northeast 24th street sinkhole.

Woohoo.

Um and then an intergovernmental affairs monthly update.

And our next meeting is uh just please sit down, sir.

I'm just trying to just fix my shoes.

The next meeting is November 18th, and Councilmember Lee and Hamilton will be remote, and with that we are adjourned.

Thank you.