Good evening.

It's 6 30, and I'm calling the March 5th Environmental Services Commission meeting to order.

Start off with a roll call for the commissioners.

Commissioner Lutterman.

Present.

Thank you.

Commissioner DuPirtis.

Present.

Thank you, Commissioner Hainash.

Present.

Commissioner Laxon.

Present.

Commissioner Margolis.

And Commissioner Tyson.

Present.

Thank you.

Welcome to the March 5th Environmental Services Commission meeting.

We will start off with the uh agenda.

We may have a motion to approve the agenda.

Move to approve the agenda.

Thank you, Commissioner Lutterman.

We have a second.

Second.

Thank you, Commissioner Hynosh.

Are there any changes or modifications to the agenda?

Many of the commissioners.

No, hearing no objections.

The agenda is approved as motioned.

We'll first move to the oral and written communications.

Oral and written communications are now open.

Remember that there is a three-minute time limit per person and 30 minutes total per meeting.

Public comment shall be limited to matters relating to the city of Bellevue government and to subject matters encompassed within the power and duties of the commission.

Persons participating in commission meetings must not engage in speech or conduct that disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of any meeting.

Disruptions may include and are not limited to failure of a speaker to comply with the commission bylaws concerning public comment.

Joe, are there any written communications?

There are no written communications.

All right.

And we have two members of the public registered for oral communications.

I'd first like to invite Wendy Welker.

Good evening, Commissioners.

Thank you for having me here tonight.

My name is Wendy Wiker.

I'm the municipal services manager for Republic Services.

And I just want to uh thank you for your time in reviewing the upcoming solid waste procurement process the city's about to go through.

My company's been your service provider for many years, and we're looking forward to submitting uh significant and uh competitive proposal for for this process once we get there.

Uh in the meantime, I just want to tell you that we are proud of our service record and proud of our safety record in the city of Bellevue.

Uh, we have the uh least missed pickups uh in the history of the time that we've been serving the city.

Our operations are flawless.

Our net promoter scores, which is a third-party survey that we do for random sampling in Bellevue residence, is excellent.

That means most of the people who make the response say they would recommend us to their uh neighbors and friends.

I also want to say we're proud of our customer service.

Any inquiry that comes in from our residential and commercial customers, we respond to within 24 hours, reserve uh the the need for people when they need vacation homes, replace bins, uh respond to when they have uh late pickup and they need us to come back because they didn't put their carts out.

My team takes their commitment to service absolutely seriously.

Um, and we're proud of the work that we do with the city on the pilot projects that I think you've heard a little bit about from uh my staff counterpart at the city here.

Um, and then our community engagement.

We're thrilled to take advantage of every opportunity we have to talk to the customers and community members that might want us to do some tabling around how to recycle right, how to conform with the organics management law, or just hear what's going on in the industry around recycling, whether there's a problem with the glass market, or how to help uh customers uh do the right uh behavior with their recycling when they're not sure what to put in the blue bin because recycling can be simple or complicated, but all the materials we buy every day, it's not clear sometimes what goes where.

So we do our best to do all the education outreach we can around that front.

Um so with that, I just want to say when you think about Republic.

I hope that you'll think about reliability, affordability, sustainability, and innovation.

We are doing a lot at the national level too around building polymer centers that take plastic and keep it in domestic markets here rather than overseas.

We have an EV fleet deployment that's happening in several cities around the country.

We love to bring that to Bellevue.

Not every company can do that, so I don't expect it'll be part of the standard RFP, but it's something we can certainly talk to as part of the process down the road.

Um, and I'm here then again just to say thank you so much for the partnership we've enjoyed for all these years, and we look forward to being uh an absolute competitive respondent to the RFP when you guys get there.

Thank you for your time.

All right, next up uh for oral communications is Mr.

Zimmerman.

Yes.

Bastard, yes.

Can I explain to you why?

Number one, it's not too much comfortable.

Yeah, why you don't show us faces?

I spoke about this for many years, and I spoke from Takomayovaret 5,000 times.

I speak every week approximately five, ten times everywhere.

You only one who don't show us faces.

Why?

Why is this trick with this screen?

Huh?

Are you freaking a real Nazi Gestapo, fascist bastard?

Why are you done doing this?

You have sense?

No.

You're doing this, and nobody, everybody quiet.

Maybe you mentally sick with down syndrome.

Twelve year ago, council.

Cat us right freedom of speech.

Yeah.

Stop and I speak in Bellevue from 96 for 30 years.

So 12 year ago, they stop and this because Alex Zimmerman, bad boys.

You can find this in internet.

Yeah, this uh meeting.

So right now they cut this to 30 minutes and then people.

So right now, 150,000 people in Bellevue cannot speak because you have one dory boy, Alex Zimmerman.

What does this mean?

Who are you?

And I talk about this to every committee, and everybody quiet.

Why are you quiet?

Because you dory Nazi bastard, uh, people be down syndrome.

I'm not too much sure about this.

It's number one, and number two right now.

We have new mayor right now.

Mo Muhammad, Iranian Muslim with dual citizenship.

And I cannot go inside because he give me trespass for six months.

Support, but Mayor Robinson, yeah, absolutely.

So my question right now, very simple.

When Iranian come to meeting council, and talking about free them for Iranian Muslim, why Iranian Muslim mayor don't give freedom for Jew like me.

Oh, can you explain to me what is going on?

Uh, mayor from Iran, who only 10 years here.

I'm so sorry.

I'm 40 years here.

So gives right speak for freedom, Iranian Muslim.

A pure bandita anti-Semite.

You know what this means?

In Alex Zimmerman pool, poor old Jew cannot go for six months.

Who can answer me?

What's going on, huh?

So Viva Trump, Viva New American Revolution, stand up, slaving happy cow.

Guys, stop enacting like a dirty dem Nazi bastard.

Thank you very much.

Oh, yeah, I'm sorry.

Sorry, they cut for me.

I'm so sorry.

Oh, and all right.

That's the uh all everyone who's registered to speak.

Uh would anyone in attendance who hasn't registered like to speak?

Uh and if you are attending remotely, please use the raise your hand function in Zoom, or if you're joining via phone, please press star nine.

We have three attending remotely, so I'm just gonna give them a second to see if anybody all right.

Nope.

Okay.

Uh and I understand uh council member new enhouse is not able to attend today, so we'll move on to um any staff reports, Joe.

Uh just touching base, the boards and competit uh commissions appreciation event is scheduled for Monday, May 11th, the that evening from six to eight.

The boards and competit uh commission's appreciation event is scheduled for Monday, May 11th, the that evening from 6 to 8.

So if you can get that on your calendars, we'd love to see you there.

And that's it.

Okay.

Very good.

Thank you.

Next item on the agenda is the approval of the February 5th, 2026 meeting minutes.

May I have a motion to approve those minutes?

Move to approve the February 5th minutes.

Thank you, Commissioner Letterman.

May I have a second?

Thank you, Commissioner Tyson.

Are there any uh changes or modifications to the minutes from any of the commissioners?

All right.

Hearing none, the minutes are approved as motioned.

We have no unfinished business, so we will move into the next section of our agenda, which is the new business section.

We have two items on the agenda, and just to remind the commissioners that after the staff presentation, we will they will be seeking um motions from the commissions to make recommendations or concurrence with the um items that they are presenting.

Uh and um so that will be what we'll do tonight for the solid waste contract procurement and then later on for the policy options to expand the utility bill assistance program.

And first up is the solid waste contract procurement.

Thank you, uh commissioners, and just give us one moment.

Okay, thank you for your patience.

Uh good evening, commissioners.

Tonight, John and I will provide an overview of utility solid waste contract procurement process, focusing uh specifically on key objectives for developing the solid waste services package.

With our presentation tonight, we're seeking the commission's feedback and concurrence on recommended objectives for developing the future solid waste services package.

And although it's not explicitly stated here, we are also seeking the commission's concurrence on maintaining existing weekly collection service levels and embedded rate structure, which has served the city well over time.

So you'll see that coming through then the presentation, and we'll touch on this again at the end.

Uh, from an agenda perspective tonight, uh the presentation will include a high-level background on Bellevue's current solid waste services, rate structure, and contract terms.

We'll also review the anticipated timeline for completing the contract procurement process, as well as review the recommended objectives to inform and guide services package development.

Although we have an opportunity for discussion on our agenda, as you can see identified uh to discuss the objectives, we truly welcome any questions or feedback throughout the presentation uh at any time.

And then finally, you see uh following the commission's action this evening, we'll briefly cover the next steps in the process.

Uh this slide presents a high-level background and overview of Bellevue's current solid waste service schedule, rate structure and contract terms.

Looking first at the service schedule section on the left.

It's important to note Bellevue's uh solid waste services include garbage, which is your gray container, the recycling, which is your blue container, and compost in your green container.

There are currently more than 30,000 single-family residences receiving weekly collection and about 2,000 multifamily and commercial properties with varied collection schedules.

Moving to the rate structure section in the center, our current contract charges are based on the size of garbage service, meaning the more you throw out to the landfill, the more you pay.

This creates an incentive to reduce waste and maximize recycling and composting, which are services that are embedded in the rate at no additional charge.

The contract covers all operational elements of solid waste services except garbage transfer and disposal, which is provided through a separate agreement with King County.

The costs related to King County services are passed through via the solid waste contract and make up a about a third of the contractual cost.

And finally, looking at contract terms on the right, uh the current contract began in 2014.

It was extended in 2021 and is now slated to expire on June 30th, 2028, after 14 years of service.

Uh currently our community collectively pays about $37 million for these services each year.

And again, before we move on from this slide, I would note that the weekly collection service and the embedded rate structure that we noted here are two existing elements that we do intend to maintain in a future contract.

And although it's not explicit in our requested action of concurrence this evening, we would ask for the commissioner's concurrence to maintain those elements as we develop the solid waste services package.

The RFP process, uh one second.

Yeah.

This next slide provides a high level timeline for the solid waste contract procurement process, beginning with tonight's ESC meeting on the left.

We're seeking the commission's concurrence, as we've said, on the objectives that will inform and guide development of the services package.

The services is what solid waste vendors will bid on.

Following ESC concurrence, we'll bring this to the City Council later this month, as you can see, as part of a study session on March 24th.

Moving further to the right, the RFP process does require a few months after we develop the services package.

Uh, the RFP process itself requires a few months to receive, evaluate, and score vendor submittals.

And by November, we anticipate returning to the ESC with an update on the RFP process.

That said, uh, we are mindful of additional opportunities to update the commission prior to November wherever possible and appropriate.

We anticipate seeking the city council's decision on an apparent successful bidder in the November timeframe at the as you can see in the council meeting RFP update there on the right, uh, with an expectation to award the agreement in early 2027, and that should ensure sufficient time to prepare for future services before the current contract expires in 2028.

This next slide identifies our key objectives, which will inform and guide development of the solid waste services package that vendors will bid on, as I said.

These objectives are all considered equal in priority, and we'll briefly cover them moving from left to right before John reviews them in greater detail.

Looking first at alignment with best practices, utilities fully intends for the services package to align with various regional and national best practices.

Utilities will also ensure the services package complies with state laws, local policies, and plans that are relevant to future solid waste services.

The next objective to the right is to be responsive to community needs.

Utilities has used multiple methods to engage the community, and we'll share with you the themes and priorities from their input that we received.

And then finally on the right, you see the technology, uh exploring technology and data.

And it's just important to note that the technology available to the solid waste industry has evolved significantly over time during the current contract.

And we're reviewing key technology and innovations we're considering for future services.

And with that, I will turn it over to John, who will review each of these objectives in greater detail.

Thank you, Scott.

And thank you for having us tonight.

It's an exciting topic.

You know, it comes up once every decade.

So, you know, this is an important opportunity alert.

Um, so I'll take you through the objectives in a little bit more detail.

And uh this is an opportunity to ask questions, uh, clarify any clarifications you have or um any feedback.

So feel free to uh raise your hand and jump in uh and I'll stop uh you know, talking so we can uh have a little bit more discussion and uh fueled questions.

So it's really we want to get feedback and discussion as we get into this part of the presentation.

So over the past five years, many competitive processes have been conducted in our area to procure solid waste contracts.

And you can see that on the map up here.

It's Rinton, Redmond, Kirkwin, CTEC, Maple Valley, Des Moines, North Bend is the quaduckwheel.

The city plans on leveraging the outcomes of these efforts to benefit from the latest developments and local service provisions.

In addition from learning from our neighbors, uh, we are also considering best practices on a national level.

We are fortunate to have expert consultant and new gin strategy and solutions to bring lessons learned from experiences from solid waste contracts across the country.

Another objective of the services package is to comply with recently adopted policies on both the state and city levels.

It will be important for future solid waste contract to align with these emergent requirements.

First, let's start with the state.

So the solid waste policy landscape has significantly evolved since 2013 with two major transformative laws uh recently passed.

The first is organics management laws.

That was three sets of laws, and they aim to reduce organic waste and landfills by 75% by 2030, promote food waste prevention, recovery and composting.

And the laws are meant to help residents and businesses divert food and yard from the landfills and to reduce methane emissions and slow climate change.

The recycling form act requires producers to of residential packaging and paper products to be responsible for the end-of-life management of their products.

The law is also looking to harmonize the recycling list.

So I think one of the issues the state identified is when I go from city to city across the state, what goes where, every list seems to be different.

So they've really heard that from the public that frustration from the public.

So not only are we looking at harmonized list, the color of the containers are now going to be harmonized across the state.

And the good news is Bellevue is all aligned with green for compost, blue for recycle, gray or black for garbage.

So we are it with that portion of the law, we're looking pretty good.

But a lot more to do on that front to get into compliance.

And then the last one I'd like to highlight with the Recycling Reform Act that I'm very excited about is there's also a requirement for the facilities that sort and process materials to ensure that all the materials are going to responsible in markets.

So we are really looking for that line of sight and transparency to really prove that we know they're going to get it recycled and/or public has demanded that type of uh verification.

So that's another cool part of that law.

Now let's uh move to the city side of policy.

Uh two updates uh especially relevant to solid waste.

I'd like to cover is the Diversity Advantage Plan 2035.

It's a citywide strategic plan designed to embed diversity, equity, and inclusion into every faucet of Belleview's operations, services, and culture.

Specifically, objective E5.9 is to provide reliable, high-quality, and affordable utility services that improve public health and ensure equitable access to all residents.

Next is a sustainable Bellevue plan.

This charts the next phase of the city's commitment to a healthy, resilient, and thriving community for generations to come.

The plan includes a materials and waste action area with a 50% recycling goal by 2030 and a long-term zero waste goal or 90% recycling rate by 2050.

Within this plan is also a strategy to leverage to leverage the solid waste contract to advance goals for zero waste and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

So a couple examples of how that could work under this strategy would be exploring alternative fuel vehicles and new educational approaches to improve access and participation in recycling and composting services, especially in the multifamily and commercial sector.

As Scott mentioned, uh we've been very busy engaging the community about our future services.

And we've done this using multiple methods that have included uh surveys, workshops, listening sessions, and a user experience research uh conducted by the University of Washington human-centered design and engineering.

And we will continue to gauge over the next few months as we have an ongoing dialogue with the Bellevue Diversity Advantage team.

And finally, I'd like to highlight the importance of uh working with city departments.

We have a one-city motto here in Bellevue, and we are going to lean on experts across all departments who touch the different service areas within our contract to really kind of bring it bring this back to them and see if there's any updates that they would suggest to really have us improve their operations and really get their input as well.

So, based on this input uh received, uh we found three key themes from the community on what is important and top of mind for these services.

And ta-da, there are the three that uh kind of came out of our engagement.

And I'll uh first start with reliability.

Community feedback emphasized the importance of having regular, predictable service with strong provisions on how service disruptions like ice and snow that comes up from time to time here in Bellevue should be handled.

When collections don't happen as scheduled, the public expects credits on their bill.

There's an opportunity to evaluate when and how these credits work to further incentivize reliable collections.

Finally, real-time performance data is becoming available on platforms accessible to both the public and the city administration.

Think about uh what we can do these days where you can look at your pizza driver and how the delivery status is.

That's also happening in solid waste.

Pretty amazing.

You can you can find out when your pizza is coming as well as when the garbage is truck is gonna come to pick up that empty pizza box.

So uh the future is here.

And then uh finally, real-time uh with this real-time performance data, not only is that that there it on the public-facing side, but more and more cities are also trying to get visibility into this real-time data.

Currently, our contract requires a monthly report that I receive about a month after the services happen.

And that's my visibility on performance and seeing how things are going.

But with technology now, there is an opportunity to kind of see how it's going as the days and the weeks go by, and we can be a little bit more responsive and uh have that more transparency and accountability into how our services are going.

So, next up.

You may uh it's probably not a shock, but affordability is also top of mind for folks.

There's a uh desire for the public to have some levers to allow uh cost reduction by participating in recycling and composting.

Scott mentioned that pay as you throw model that we're currently using to reward that uh folks who put that effort in.

And then uh there's also opportunity to kind of think about the steepness of this pay as you throw rate structure.

So, you know, how much how how big are these steps between the different sizes of the garbage?

That all cities kind of have different approaches on that.

So we're really gonna look at how we've done that in the past, how this has evolved over time, and if we feel if that steepness, what what does that look like?

Does it make sense to go steeper or keep it the same or or whatnot?

But that's also going to be an important part of our evaluation for future services.

Can I ask a question about that?

Yes, please.

Um, so the pays you throw is for the trash, I'm presuming, not for the recycling and uh compost as much, right?

Yeah, so it's based on the trash can size, and then the other services are included or embedded with with that.

So one possible effect of that is it creates an incentive for people to put more things into the recycling bin, which often is seems aspirational of things that people put into their recycling bin.

Um how do you how do you uh account for that?

How do you think about you understand what I'm saying?

Yes, yes.

That's an excellent point.

And I think uh getting into that steepness, that is gonna be one of the things we would want to think about is what at what point is it too steep where you would motivate that behavior, and where's that sweet spot where it's like, okay, I can save some money, but it's not gonna change my behavior to a point where I'm doing the wrong thing, or wish cycling, or uh kind of hiding garbage at some point, or what not in another container just to save money if it's too steep.

But that's that's an excellent insight on that dynamic is uh where as you're looking at that rate structure, you know, if it's too steep, you get into that.

You could uh potentially get into that uh kind of uh yeah, issue.

So yeah, thank you for that question.

John, I had a question since we're talking about the rates, and I wasn't sure if it's a good time to ask now, but um, you know, since the contractor is such a big part of the costs, you know, how do we get I mean, do they divulge a lot of the ins, you know, uh nuts and bolts of how they come up with their rate to us, you know, like sort of a little cost of service of what their functions for collection and disposal are, I guess disposals king county, right?

But the collection piece, right?

Because that's a huge part, I would imagine of the rate.

So, how does I mean that work, I guess?

Yes, good question.

I guess just generally for RFPs, uh, the the way that it would typically work, and we're still building out the service package and the procurement process, but this is just a general kind of a how other cities have done it.

Is typically these companies will are gonna bid on the full value of the contract, and then the city, based on their community needs and their priorities will decide how that is implemented through the rates.

So it is most typically within the cities uh working with the contract, the successful contractor to really finalize it.

But uh the cities typically will kind of determine, you know, how does this overall contract value translate into how we implement our grids.

So, in other words, we do we kind of look at these set whatever you know, separate um proposals and say, okay, if we choose this, this is what our rate will be.

Kind of I mean, does it go to that far?

Yeah, so there's typically two sides to it.

There's gonna be a qualitative side and then a the quantitative side that's based on just what what is being proposed on the on the for uh okay for the cost, basically.

So those are the kind of two sides that get evaluated.

Okay, great.

Thanks.

Yep.

Okay.

And then uh sustain on affordability.

Uh one item I I this is a teaser for later tonight.

So just try to remember this one.

I don't want to spoil it.

I don't want to steal uh Mr.

Hobson and uh Miss Hannah's uh thunder here, but I'm very excited about this one because I had the opportunity to collaborate with my staff members there uh to kind of really think about this new idea that could really help our community.

So but I'll be brief because I don't want to, I want I want them to cover it later.

But we are looking at ways to expand our bill assistance support and solid waste.

And this is a resource that's currently available only to single family customers.

But uh we've really work together to find a way that we can extend this out to our multifamily residents as well.

So we're going to be exploring that and uh really trying to make that work uh going forward in the future.

And then uh finally, uh, we want to continue to ensure uh city administrative costs are as lean as possible going forward, just so that that is a minimal impact on our rates as well.

Okay, uh last priority to cover here.

Uh there's strong interest in self-service tools to allow for more convenient on your own time customer service experience.

Customers have also provided positive feedback on text alerts and notification notifications.

So we look to expand that option in the future.

Just kind of visualize uh a day that where the snow starts to fall, the ice is coming in, you're oh, is my are they gonna come or but getting that alert just on your phone through text versus having to go into a website or or whatnot, it's it's a really that's it's a helpful experience to when you're everyone's trying to figure out what's happening.

Do I put my container out or not?

So gotten good feedback on that.

We'll be exploring to expand that in the future.

And then uh ensuring citywide access to compost collections is not only the state policies I mentioned, uh, but it's also an important part of the user experience.

There's currently uh currently one of the largest gaps we have in our services we provide in Bellview is compost at the multifamily and commercial sector.

And just to give you a quick kind of high-level number here, uh when I say service gap, it single family is pretty much completely rolled out and available for compost.

Multifamily commercial, it's 50% at this point access and participation.

And that's actually we're leaving the way in the county with that number.

So, but there's still work to do in Bellevue, and that's one gap we're looking to close with the future uh contract.

And then finally, I mentioned uh the University of Washington and the research we did with them on user experience.

And one of the big findings from uh from our work together with uh with the uh with the University of Washington was the public is really interested in a more dynamic public educational experience when trying to figure out what goes where.

If you have an item, does it go in the blue container, the gray container, the great, where is it what am I supposed to or it do I take it to a special facility or drop off?

So we have guides in multiple languages.

We try to keep it simple and straightforward, but a lot of times that's just the question that you're faced with.

I have one item, what do I do with it?

So that we we we really felt that was a helpful recommendation to come up with a more dynamic lookup tool that could be offered to the public, so it's just easier to answer that question of where does it go.

So next uh we'll explore uh next we'll cover uh technology and data.

So as Scott mentioned, a lot's changed since 2013 uh with the technology available in solid waste industry.

You know, one example I'm sure we've all heard of and seen a lot more around on the highway is EVs.

And uh that technology in solid waste, it's readily available for the support vehicles.

So think about the big pickup trucks and smaller lightweight vehicles.

Uh those are readily available.

But and it's also emerging for the larger collection vehicles.

So the big trucks that you see now going around picking up the containers, uh, those are now starting to emerge as well, is all electric.

So we'll be looking at that and uh potentially what's available there and if it's feasible.

With it with any technology, you're really thinking about feasibility and cost.

You have to kind of balance that as you're looking into uh these innovations.

And uh another uh kind of uh new technology I'm sure uh with a lot of EVs, we've heard a lot about AI.

So uh it's been around in the solid waste industry for a while now, but mostly deployed at the facilities to help with enhance the sorting.

So there's uh robotics, both robotics and uh a lot of the different uh machines there do use that machine learning and technology to get all that material into the right bales.

So that that's been happening for years now.

Uh but there are new uh new areas with customer service billing, uh where this could possibly extend to.

So as a city, you know, we're working on AI policy and uh evaluating how that works and what's appropriate to do.

So we are gonna be paying attention to that in our contract as well because one side there's opportunity, but on the other, there's also ethics and what's appropriate.

So that's gonna be a balance as we evaluate how AI works, and that's gonna be something we want to make clear in our contract on what's how it's gonna be used in our community.

And then finally, uh, we do want to keep it uh the opportunity to pilot uh technology and innovation in this contract as we go forward.

We do have that opportunity now in our contract.

So we're gonna want to continue to have that available because as we've seen in the past 10 years, technology can evolve quickly.

So uh with these solid waste contracts typically being around the 10-year time frame, uh, you know, a lot can change.

So we want to be able to have that ability to test new things and uh research as we go through this contract.

And with that, I'll hand it back over to Scott.

Thanks.

Right.

Um so appreciate the questions and comments thus far, but I do want to take this opportunity to see if there's any other questions or comments from the commission.

Um if not, um, you do.

Okay.

So um, I guess I was thinking about planning.

And you know, we've heard about master planning from the water side, stormwater, wastewater.

Solid waste has their own planning, you know, their integrated solid waste management plan sort of um tool, I guess.

How does that work with the city that you know we don't do our own collection, we don't do our own disposal, you know, we do the administration of those contracts.

So, how do we do integrated solid waste management planning here?

Excellent question.

So that is uh handled through our uh inter-local agreement with King County.

So we're part of that solid waste system, and we work with uh the county and 36 other cities uh to do our comprehensive planning, and then the county uh also operates uh the factorial transfer station in town.

So those uh two major components of our system, the the planning and the the waste uh transfer and disposal is ran through that agreement.

Oh and and so is that uh exercise that the city, I guess, engages in whatever five years or 10 years or something.

Exactly right.

That and then we take whatever comes out of that and incorporate it into the RFP requirements.

Yeah, that will be important.

Exactly.

That'll be one of the documents in Forbing the requirements as well.

Okay, yep.

Thank you for um and the other thought along those lines in terms of uh, you know, I've just done a really little bit of solid waste planning, but it was always the um the bins and the space, you know, is there enough space for all these bins?

You know, we used to have all these different things to throw stuff away.

And I'm just thinking now we're gonna be having increased density in the city, middle housing is coming.

How you know, are we seeing where other cities have dealt with this already that we're gonna be prepared to um provide these new, you know, denser, I guess, areas with reasonable accommodations for all their bins.

Yeah, and I think uh you know what we heard from downtown association in the chamber, they were echoed exactly what you just mentioned on those challenges of of the density and the curb space available and have how do all these containers uh how does it work to get those out and uh so that there's enough space for still for the sidewalk and everything else.

So one theme we're learning from other cities, especially Seattle and others that are uh really pushing the compost and adding containers is uh keeping it with the smaller plastic plastic green containers instead of the large metal dumpster style is really the it's seen uh proven to be operationally efficient because they take up less space, they can go inside and outside.

And uh so we we kind of see that as uh a good tool uh versus adding another gigantic metal container.

Right, right.

Okay, great.

And just lastly, I just want to say I'm familiar with new gen, so great.

I'm glad to hear that we're working with them.

Great thanks.

Any other questions?

Nerdy researcher request.

Um I don't know if it's in the RFPs or wherever it fits, but as you talk to some of these vendors, if you can urge them to measure customer satisfaction and not to rely on net promoter, um, and I won't take the time here to bore you on that, but um, that would be very valuable for us as a city to measure that as a way to see how people actually are they satisfied or not.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah, thanks for that input.

Yeah.

Uh Commissioner Laxon.

Oh, okay.

Um, so I think John, you mentioned about I think 50% of multifamily commercial properties doing composting or participating in that.

Um, I'm just curious, like what the current constraints are to preventing 100% and then kind of what the resources are, what resources are needed to get to that hundred percent.

Because I think at least for me, my apartment community, we don't do composting and um that's kind of a bummer.

Um I think also kind of on another note, like we're not seeing like the way that the solid waste rate is passed on to us.

Um we don't see the direct correlation between usage and our rate.

And I'm thinking that if there's more transparency there, that might also um affect our behavior as residents um to try and recycle and comp or potentially compost more if there's that opportunity.

But um without that transparency, there's no at least it's not super conscious and or in the back of everyone's mind to try and reduce their rates by recycling more so they just throw away in the trash a lot more than they should.

Well, thank you for for that question and and also for your patience as your your waiting compost your multifamily uh property.

But uh, you know, one of the the uh dynamics that we're working with on that uh compost front is it is a relatively newer service to the multifamily commercial sector compared to single family that's been around for decades.

So there's that component to it.

And another is uh that we've seen in some of the newer contracts coming out in the in our area is just a lot more on the ground technical assistant for the proper uh for for property managers for residents at multifamily because it is such a different dynamic compared to single family.

So uh for example, uh you know, one of the the key things we heard from uh from the multifamily association was we are so busy and we need this to be easy, simple, and we need help.

And we need just not come up come one day and help us, just a consistent presence.

So we currently don't have that type of requirement in our contract, but some of these newer contracts, and what we're we would certainly explore in this future contract is how do we provide more ongoing technical assistance across properties.

So there is that convenience and ease and support so that uh more services can continue to get rolled out.

Yeah, that'd be great.

And I feel like like the increased density and more multifamily housing, that's gonna be even more important.

Um, make an over the past 10 years.

Uh I that it's uh Bellevue used to be mostly more single family units than the multifamily over the past 10 years, that gap is almost completely shifted.

So that's another dynamic we have to think about in our contract is and it's I think that shift is going to continue to move toward that multifamily side.

So excellent, yeah, excellent point.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my reading of the organics management law of the state level specifically excludes multifamily from requiring to have to do compost.

Excellent point.

The first two laws did, then they came through with law number three that closed that gap.

So that is on the horizon.

The first phase is going to be commercial and then I saw that commercial above a certain volume.

But it still said nothing about multifamily.

Exactly.

And that was the last piece that they they to close.

So it is on the horizon.

Yeah, after the commercial phase in, it'll then go to multifamily for thank you for that clarification.

That's a good question.

You know, I I just want since we're talking about the the compost.

I think you know, the yard waste elements of it, those are pretty easy.

But it doesn't matter what day of the week you you rake your your leaves or mow your lawn, you know it's fine.

The food compost is, you know, uh in a single family home, I find it tricky to time when am I putting it out there?

And you know, I don't want it in the house too long, but I also like it causes problems outdoors.

And and I just wonder too, you know, I I um in visiting multifamily uh units in Seattle as an example, they have some composting, but you can tell when composting day is arriving because you know, you kind of stay clear that part of their parking lot.

And I think, oh my gosh, it's enough, you know, in a household where I can control that, but you know, all these people with different standards of I'm gonna put you know, chicken out on you know, the day after collection and let it sit there for you know six or seven days.

So it just seems like that's also a user experience to really consider we want people to not put it in the trash, and yet it takes a lot of patience and perseverance and understanding, and yet it's hard to give them better tools, or is it you know, is that something that can be explored to make it easier somehow?

Yes, good good point on the uh the technical term in solid waste is called the ick factor of uh so um yeah, so currently in our contract, we do uh have uh the food bucket container for kitchens available.

So um, yeah, so currently in our contract, we do uh have uh the food bucket container for kitchens available, uh, but it just comes it just the bucket by itself.

Uh we don't provide the liners or bags, and uh some cities uh have explored uh providing that along with the buckets, just so it's a little bit more clean and also just providing guidelines and tricks.

One thing I've heard is you know, put your if it's a few days away from your your pickup day, you know, you could freeze your compost, uh especially in the summertime when it can get especially uh have some interesting aromas going on.

Um so that you know that's a tool, but yeah, I think the education and getting people giving people up the options and tools to be a little bit more comfortable because that certainly is one of the barriers, uh just industry-wide as far as uh promoting participation in compost uh separating, especially with the food scraps.

Like you mentioned the yard waste, no problem, but that's one area that we're looking at.

And and just uh just a quick highlight from our current contract.

We are collaborating with our our current contractor on piloting and a kind of new marketing approach on the food buckets and compost with this uh new organics management law.

That's top of mind for us.

So we're really excited uh to get that going.

Commissioner DuPartis.

So I have a Av Lovian response when I hear the word lean in a in a footnote.

Uh what did we mean by that?

There is no detail too small.

2.99% is uh the the precise number of our current um administrative uh fee in our contract.

So uh we're we're gonna be looking at that number uh to see uh you know, as we go forward here uh to keep to continue to keep it lean and and really evaluate uh all those costs.

I see.

And are there targets and thresholds related to that?

Yeah, yeah, the fee uh it basically supports the the oversight of the contract and in the city kind of management cost is is what that is what the fee goes toward.

And yeah, so it kind of oversees the performance of the contractor is as uh it is kind of what it what it's funding.

We and we think that's high, we think it's low.

How are we assessing that?

Yeah, good question.

I think uh, you know, one thing we're looking at is uh uh you know, balancing how much we're expecting from the city internally, as far as uh you know, beyond just the oversight of the contract, um, and in how much can we look to the contractor going forward for for some of the the outreach and education?

So I think that's one opportunity uh we'll be looking at as far as balancing uh you know the the city cost uh versus what we're expecting out of the contractor.

Scott, do you have anything to add one?

No, I was about to make that point, so thank you very much.

It is a balance between how much the city undertakes and how much the contractor may on our behalf.

In a prior presentation, we were we were referring to uh contractual penalties and their frequency and magnitude of those.

Do we have an update on that as well?

Yeah, good question.

I think you know that that is one provision we'll be exploring in the future contract, is uh what's called performance fees, and and those are intended to really uh have accountability for the contractor's performance.

So we we currently have that in our contract, and and we'll certainly be evaluating uh both the effectiveness and looking at the other cities who've updated their contracts, if they have any uh good uh good tools and examples to further uh get after uh some of the key priorities we covered, like reliability, especially uh those collections, you know, what else can we do to really make sure that's uh gonna be uh on point throughout the life of the contract?

Yeah, I think one of the really interesting view would be the contractual penalties over time, because if we look historically, if if those if we've if those contractual penalties kick in and we've been doing that year over year, then it just becomes part of the contract costs.

They're no longer penalties, they just get built in and understanding that I think would be a super interesting view.

It was 50,000, you know, something like that.

Yeah, I I hear you kind of as we're looking forward, kind of look back at what was effective and and and if it kind of got the desired result that we were hoping for for our community.

Yeah, I think that's an excellent excellent insight, Commissioner, on uh, you know, as we're planning for kind of learning our lessons on on you know how our current uh tools are we're working over time.

Yeah, I think we what the the intent of of that kind of penalty and threshold is is to induce pain to drive change, right?

So if it's stable and simply being paid year over year or contract over contract, contract period over contract period, then uh it just becomes baked into the all-up cost.

It's no longer creating pain and driving change.

And I think that would be a really interesting thing to look at if we're simply assuming if it has become, and and I don't know, but the data will tell us if it has simply become part of the contract cost.

Uh I would rather just adjust the contract cost than shift uh money.

I know it's not a PL, but uh those are my words.

Uh rather than shift money around the PL uh to actually look at uh what kind of shift we can make to make sure that the optics are clear.

Yes, thank you, Commissioner.

And yeah, and I think that's exactly gonna be part of uh looking back at our at our data and also is part of our benchmarking to other cities, uh what they found effective on on driving change.

So yeah, thank thank you for that for that insight.

Commissioner Marcellus.

Um a couple of years ago, I think Tacoma did a pilot with um like in-home dehydrators, the mills.

Um, is that I don't know how it turned out.

Is that the kind of thing that would be considered as part of that?

Have you guys looked at that?

You know, uh pretty uh awesome uh level of technology in solid waste.

So kudos, kudos to you, commissioner.

That is a uh really cutting-edge technology on essentially cutting out the ick factor of food waste by dehydrating it, and then instead of it getting collected, it actually gets mailed uh for processing and uh it can even be chicken feed uh for some uses of it.

So yes, uh the answer the quick answer is yes.

Uh I would love to talk more about it, uh, could talk about this all day.

But um, the quick answer is yes.

Uh the county is actually piloting it now with multifamilies across our service area.

So they're uh collecting data to see exactly what to uh Tacoma is looking at.

Is this a tool that could be feasible?

Is it is a you know, can it actually work?

And and uh a lot of folks are interested, especially in the multi-family setting where it's difficult where you have those constraints on space and difficulty with participation.

Can we give folks a tool that's easy to use and a little bit of a uh kind of avoids that ick factor?

Yeah.

Yeah.

Um any other questions from any commissioners.

I Scott, do you have an answer to something?

Uh oh, thank you.

Well, with that, I just want to say that uh the action required this evening.

If there's no other comments or questions, well, I do have I have a comment, so I'd like to, I'm just gonna yield.

I want to speak first.

Um two things.

One is I just want to make a comment that I'm really happy to see on the user experience study from the University of Washington that the education component is identified, because that is one thing that for me, I think we really need to ramp up.

We're in the modern day and age, and we still send out pamphlets of what goes in what bin.

And I see Amazon and you can take a photo of something and it can tell you where you can find it as a user.

It's a split-second decision.

Do I does it go in the blue bin or the gray bin?

And if I can just look at my phone, take a picture and say that's that, and it goes in that bin, then I will do it.

Otherwise, it worst case, I'll just throw it in one or the other and just hope it's right.

So I'm really glad it's in there.

And I hope you guys really use because you talked about AI and other technology.

I hope you really ramp up the I mean, it's just information data.

We know what sits uh in households, what people use their milk cartons, their plastic clamshells or whatever.

So we should be able to provide that data.

Any company should be able to to tell us which bin to go into.

That's just point number one, something a comment there.

My second is a question.

I didn't maybe I didn't see it, but is there any um desire to expand the recycling collect what we collect for recycling?

Uh and so for example, and I don't know if this has changed with Republic, but for example, styrofoam.

Um I know Republic, you can go to their local Bellevue area and drop off block styrofoam, but I don't think they collect like, you know, day to day you go to the grocery store and your meat sits on a styrofoam tray.

That can't get collected.

You can't drop it off.

I have to drive to Kent to recycle it at styrocycle.

Are we trying to expand the uh type of materials that are being recycled in order to hit our goal of increasing recycling within Bellevue?

Well, first, thank you for your dedication to go that far to recycle cycle.

My wife thinks I'm crazy.

Yes.

And the answer is uh absolutely that's gonna be part of our benchmarking uh with not only our neighbors, but working with our consultant, Nugin, who's seen a lot of these contracts uh throughout the nation is to really think about uh you know, are we doing everything we can as far as what's collected, but also just balancing that with practicality and what's operationally possible.

You know, we we do want to be mindful of cost to the contractor.

So just kind of wish cycling or hoping something can be recycled is also not the best thing either.

So that will be part of the benchmarking is really figuring out what makes most sense uh to continue as a drop-off potentially, and where can we have opportunities to expand?

Uh one one point of guidance we will have is with the Washington state law, that recycle reform act that is intended to have a more harmony across cities.

So we'll be looking they'll be developing that list fairly soon, and we'll be keeping our eyes on that as well.

Thank you.

Do you have a comment?

I have a motion.

If oh well, I'll let Scott finish and then we can move.

So uh again, we are seeking the commission's concurrence on the staff recommended objectives that you see here for developing the future solid waste services package.

And beyond these objectives, we are requesting that your motion include maintaining weekly collections and the embedded rate structure previously noted.

All right.

Thank you.

All right.

So just to repeat what Scott said and what's on the screen, uh staff are seeking commission's concurrence on the staff recommended objectives for developing the future solid waste services package, including the four objectives up there on the screen, align with best practices, compliance with state laws and local policy, responsive to needs, explore technology and data, and then adding in the weekly collection and the existing rate structure.

Embedded rate structure, sorry.

Uh and then with the commission's concurrence, the proposed objectives for developing the future solid waste services package would be presented to city council in March this month as well.

So with that, may I have a motion for concurrence as outlined?

I move for concurrence as outlined since you said it all already.

All right, thank you.

Commissioner Lutterman, may I have a second?

I second.

Thank you, Commissioner Hynosh.

So with the motion on the floor, um, if any commissioner wants to further add comments before we take a vote, now would be the time.

I mean, I'll I'll just add that I I thought it was helpful that people were suggesting keep pushing to look, you know, with the 10-year contract, it's a long-term horizon, it's a long process to get to the next contract, and in this time, just kind of take all of the data insights into consideration for the user experience.

Um, you know, advances in technology and other areas that can further improve this work at home too.

So I think I'm excited about the ideas we're hearing, and please take those and run with them further.

So thank you.

I think I have a follow-up question to Scott and John.

Are the um objectives up here weighted at all?

They were they are not, they're equal priority.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Any other comments from any commissioners before we take a vote?

All right.

So with that, I'm gonna do uh roll call vote.

So if I may have a yay or nay, uh Commissioner Letterman.

Yay.

Thank you.

Commissioner Tyson.

Yay, Commissioner Margolis.

Yay, Commissioner Laxon.

Yay, Commissioner Hynosh.

Yay, Commissioner DuPertis.

Yeah.

Thank you.

And uh I'm a yay as well.

So uh it's a seven-zero vote.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioners.

We do appreciate your concurrence on that.

And over the coming days, we'll uh move forward to memorialize your recommendation.

And we'd like to prepare a uh memorandum for the chair's signature, which we would include going forward just for awareness.

So thank you.

Thank you.

All right, and as we uh wait for our next presenters to come up to talk about expanding the utility bill assistance program, I will just remind the commissioners that are present in the room.

Sorry, Commissioner DuPertis, that the cookies are at the end of the table.

Should you need any refreshment, take one or half as you wish, please.

Thank you.

Good evening, commissioners.

Um, I want to point out that uh usually Mr.

Scott Edwards is sitting next to me, keeping me in line, but you can see he's not here, so the training wheels are off.

We're gonna see if this is a bad idea or a good idea.

Um so the presentation that we have teed up tonight is a follow-up to our January Commission discussion.

Um, at that meeting, just as a quick reminder, we provided the commission with an update on the 2025 improvements to the bill assistance program and planned improvements in 26 to it.

At the end of that meeting, we introduced the policy question, the broader policy question of expanding our long-term assistance program and requested feedback from this group on criteria, information, um, outcomes that they would like to see in the evaluating those policy options.

So we are here tonight to provide those options.

I am joined tonight by Hannah Abdul Rahman.

I'm gonna have her introduce herself and then we'll keep moving forward.

Hello, everyone.

Uh, my name is Hannah Abdarhaman.

Um, I'm the program administrator for the utility bill assistance program.

Um prior to joining utilities, I was at Mini City Hall with community development.

And so I was sitting on the other end of the program, sitting with residents as they apply for the program.

And so seven years later to be on the other end of that process is full circle moment for me.

So looking forward to today's discussion.

Thank you.

Yes.

So our goal tonight is to request a recommendation from the commission on one of four options to expand the long-term utility assistance program.

Um we are also looking for direction on two policy recommendations that essentially would align our short-term assistance program and our solid waste rebate program with the decision that you all make tonight on your long on the long-term program.

Essentially, those two programs would follow the same income requirements and um and eligibility requirements as our long-term program to create uniform consistency in the administration.

The discussion tonight is part of a comp larger and more comprehensive um work plan for the commission in 2026 to address the affordability challenges in Bellevue as it relates to utility bills.

Um, and that included the sewer cost of service analysis and rate design that the commission already made decisions on in January, our discussion tonight on the bill assistance program, and then later on in the summer, um, on the um operating and capital budget and the resulting um uh rates from that.

So our discussion, our roadmap for tonight's presentation will go as follows.

Uh, we'll first outline the key framework that we use to develop the four policy options, and that framework consisted of four design decision criteria and and focus or revolve around how customers are eligible for assistance and the level of assistance that is provided to them.

Hannah will then take uh the reins and provide a primer on our current program, industry best practices for administering assistance programs, and a general overview of the affordability challenge here in Bellevue.

And then I'll uh take the mic back and talk about some of the data that we've used both at Bellevue across the region and really at the national level, um, in terms of informing uh the options that you'll see tonight.

And then we'll present those four options with the idea that they are grounded in these best practices, they're grounded in the regional survey that we did and in the affordability um policy issues specific to the city of Bellevue.

Um recommendation from the commission at the end of the meeting on one of those four options.

Go back and actually always there we go.

I we rearranged these slides, so I'm gonna go to this one and then we'll go back to the last two.

So the four program options that you see are going to see pivot on four program design decisions.

Right now, the program, the long-term assistance program is only available to low-income seniors and individuals who are permanently disabled.

The first design decision is do we drop the age and disability restriction for the program and open it to all customers based on income only?

The city's assistance program has a relatively strict income restriction.

It's about $55,000 for a family of one, about $80,000 for a family of four.

What we'll show later on this evening is most assistance programs in the region have a higher income threshold to qualify.

About $85,000 for a family of one and $120,000 for a family of four.

So the second design decision criteria is do we raise the income threshold in Bellevue to be more on par with what we see in the region.

Now the city's assistance program provides a relatively high level of assistance.

So if you do qualify, um, we provide a higher level of credit to your bill relative to other agencies.

The third design decision criteria is do we lower the bill credit to be on par with other utilities in the area and by extension allow us to use the same amount of money to reach more people.

And then finally, the final question is it refers to the pace by which we expand the program.

We can make an immediate impact in 2027 by rolling out these changes all at once.

Alternatively, we can phase in improvements to the program over time to mitigate the funding requirements.

And so the option you'll see later on tonight kind of pivot on these four design decisions.

Now with that, I'm going to pass it on to Anna.

Perfect.

Thank you.

So as we go on this journey to create the best possible UBA program and craft it to meet the needs of the community, we look to local and regional programs to learn best industry practices to improve our program.

And according to the U.S.

Water Alliance, best practices for utility assistance program include some of the following that are listed up here.

So it's essentially simplifying the application process to ease accessibility for residents to apply, proving uh providing various avenues and venues for a resident to apply, whether that's digital or paper form, um, assisting and supporting residents when they come across uh barriers such as shutoffs and providing that assistance through that process, um, and then also having reciprocity across other agencies to approve them for other assistance that they may uh qualify for all of these practices or strategies increases accessibility to assistance, um, it lowers barriers and facilitates enrollment.

And with that, we decided not to do a pop quiz on our programs, and so I'll give you a general overview of the five programs that we currently offer.

So uh we have five programs in utility bill assistance.

Uh, those five programs can be categorized as long-term assistance and short-term assistance.

Um, we have on the blue side here on the left-hand side, we have our utility discount program and our utility rebate program.

Both of these programs are for residents who are at 50% of area and median income, uh, at or below 50%.

Um, you do have to be 62 years or older or permanently disabled to qualify for these two programs.

Um, the way that a resident would experience that uh benefit would be 70% directly on the bill if they are in single-family um housing, and then a 70% rebate check to residents who are in multi-residential um households.

And then we have our short-term assistance programs in the green.

Um, it is also at 50% of area median income or lower to qualify.

And that is our emergency assistance program, which uh provides a uh up to four bills, um waves up to four utility bills, and then for our neighbors helping neighbors program, um, it waves up to two bills.

Um then our last program is our long-term uh assistance utility rebate program, which provides uh a rebate on the occupational taxes that a resident pays on their water bill.

Um, and it is for low-income multi-residential and single-family um residents as well, still at 50% of area median income as well.

Perfect.

Okay, how many of those can an individual participate in?

So if someone qualifies for the long-term assistance program, so the discount or rebate, um, they can't uh be approved for our short-term assistance.

But anyone in the short-term assistance program can later qualify for our long-term assistance programs.

But you can't be in both at the same time.

So as we began to analyze the best approach to meet the unique needs of Bellevue residents, we work closely with our parks and human services department as well as neighborhood services division and community development.

And so the next few slides is going to cover the 2025 human needs survey results so that we can understand the current needs and the services available to mitigate that need.

Of the 10, the top three needs included housing and shelter, food and basic needs, and financial assistance.

Utility bill assistance falls under financial assistance.

According to the needs survey, financial instability translates across all service areas.

And so if someone's unable to pay their water bill, they're left with the choice of what other expense should I pay instead?

Should I buy food?

Should I pay for my rent?

And so this can lead to food insecurity, mental health strains, prolonged, and if all of these needs are prolonged, it can lead to homelessness.

We know that according to the Human Needs Survey, 23.8% of low and moderate income households in Bellevue are cost burdened and at risk of homelessness.

Homelessness impacts individuals and families and especially children.

And the need survey also showed in 2025, one in four Bellevue School District students qualify for free and reduced lunch.

And so the need survey also addressed that even if funds were available to address the needs in the community, there's still barriers that residents run into as they try to access these resources.

And so the three top barriers that were listed in that need survey were long wait times, language accessibility, and lack of culturally appropriate social services.

And so we take all this information as we try to craft the best program and best possible options to expand the program to create multifaceted approaches to prevent this financial instability across the threshold.

And so in the next slide, if we try to translate this need survey to everyday customers in our community, this is what we find.

So as we take a closer look at the thresholds, 50% versus 80% of area median income, what does that exactly mean?

So on the left-hand side, we you have a family that's at 50% of area median income.

That's typically $55,000 a year for one individual.

In this case, uh an individual would qualify for food assistance, housing assistance, case management, health care, and utility bill assistance.

So this is layers of stabilizing support that would protect someone from falling into homelessness or other situations.

On the right hand side, we have uh someone at 80% of area median income.

That'd be about $85,000 a year.

Um what we see with with this population is they're they're that gap population.

They make too much to qualify for the stabilizing support that someone at 50% would would qualify for, but not enough to meet the high costs and expenses that they would need to live in Bellevue, such as housing costs.

Um and so, for example, if we look at housing, um, there are 49 senior and subsidized housing uh rental properties offered according to Arch, which is a regional coalition.

Um, of those 49 uh properties, only 18 properties currently serve residents who are at 80% of area median income.

Um, and then from that 49, the senior specifically section the properties that are met for seniors, um, none of them uh support seniors who are at 80% of area median income.

And so we're seeing that as someone who is a senior, um, typically they're on a fixed income and it's not going to rise.

And so if they're not finding these support services, then they won't be able to age in place.

So we had a product and examples at the at our customer level.

I want to come back.

Thank you.

The mortgage lender is going to check to see if their income is at least three times more than the mortgage.

In the electric industry, there's a standard that a household should space pay no more than six percent of their annual income towards their electric bill.

In 2024, the EPA conducted a water affordability study and came up with another metric in line with that.

And it was that a household in this country should spend no more than three to four and a half percent of their annual income on their water and wastewater bills.

We're using that estimate or that guideline and applying it to Bellevue, we would estimate that between 10 and 14,000 households in Bellevue have a water affordability burden.

That's all that's a useful metric for for gauging the overall number of households, but that becomes very difficult to administer a program because we would have to look at a household, get their W 2s, and then compare it to their water bill and say, what's 3%?

Okay, there's your credit.

And so we're not recommending using the box on the left as the as the criteria by which to measure affordability.

Rather, um, we are recommending using an approach commonly used across the region and also here in Bellevue, um, which relies on federal definitions of very low income and low income.

Very low income is as Hannah mentioned in the example, is equivalent to 50% of the area median income.

Whereas low income is equal to 80% of the area median income.

Using that metric, um, we estimate between 10 and 15,000 customers uh would have some form of assistance need.

Two main observations.

Numbers on the box on the left and the right, they're about the same.

We get to the same place using different metrics.

Um the reason we're recommending the last that the approach on the right is it's much more easier to administer.

Um it's less confusing to the customers, it's less cumbersome to them, um, and it and it provides just more predictable um credit to a customer.

Matt, just a question.

When I'm looking at the 10 to 15,000 customers, we we have how many are total customers of 30 something?

Yep, yep.

Sorry.

Uh total households in Bellevue about 60,000.

Okay.

Because we count multi-residential net numbers well.

Okay.

And then single family about 30 to your point.

Okay, so single family is 30.

Okay, great.

So that is looks like about 25% if we're talking about 15,000.

Thank you.

So to put these these figures into context, um, as I mentioned, there's about 60,000 households in Bellevue.

And if you focus in on that smallest circle, um, we have about a thousand customers currently enrolled in our long-term utility assistance program.

And by comparison, um, the current program is available to about 4,000 customers.

Um, so we have about a 25% participation rate, which believe it or not, is on par with many low-income affordability programs in in the region.

Um, Seattle hover between 25 and 30, depending on um enrollments at larger multi-residential facilities.

Um, if we were to expand our program to 80% of AMI for low-income seniors, we could expand to 6,000 households.

If we were to drop the age and disability restriction and but keep our current income in place, the criteria of 50% AMI, we could provide or offer the program to 10,000.

And then if we were to increase that to 80% of AMI and drop the age and disability restrictions, we could reach the 15,000 households, the roughly 25% of households that have an affordability burden here in Bellevue.

What would it take to change that subscription rate?

Why is that hover?

It sounds like consistently at that 20 to 25% rate.

Yeah.

Um, you know, I I'm gonna I I hope this is a proper John's metaphor.

It's it's akin to the multifamily kind of recycling program.

It's it has been a barrier trying to increase it above that 25%.

There's a lot of reasons why it could be.

Um I talked with Seattle SPU's um finance manager, and they spend literally millions of dollars on outreach, um, bus raps, um, billboards, and uh so that there's an investment there to get the outreach.

Um, something that we have found useful here in this city is actually going to complexes um and holding um work sessions where you sign people up um on the spot you know if they have their if they have their their tax documents.

So it it does take work even to sustain that 25%.

What to do to raise that?

Um, we have some options we want would love to share with you all.

Hannah mentioned um as a best practice, this idea of auto enrollment.

If you are enrolled, if if you can show that you're enrolled in some other program, like with PSE, and we have the same restrictions as PSC in terms of income, why would we go through the same, have you submit the same documentation?

That's an that's an avenue to bump up our participation rate.

Um, so some of it is is um making the program easier to get into, removing the barriers that that may either financial or otherwise that may prevent people from from signing up.

So as you're planning this, how do you account for the possible success of that?

Because if you do that and it goes up to 30%, let's say you're right, magically get this to work.

That's going to drive the like changes all the dynamics of what you're describing here pretty significantly.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So first of all, let's acknowledge it would be a wonderful problem to have.

So point number one.

Point number two, the department does maintain operating contingencies that we talked about last month during the financial policy discussion, which could help to absorb that initial surprise shock of more people signing up than necessary, and then we could readdress it from a rate perspective the following budget cycle.

No, I'm glad that you brought that up, Mike, because I was looking at the subscription rates also.

And I, you know, I just noticed that they're 25% for all four of the options.

And I was wondering myself too, why wouldn't it be higher?

Oh, well, maybe for the senior and disabled, it's a lower 25%.

If you open it up to everyone, you know, to all households, maybe that's going to go up.

But what you just answered my question about SPU, if they're only getting up to 30% in their all households, I'm thinking all, you know, it's not just seniors, right?

Then they're not getting a better rate either.

So, you know, uh that the volatility of that of that rate, I was just sort of wondering, do we need to make it higher or plan for a higher rate if we open it up to all incomes or all households?

Yeah.

So SPU is does not have an age restriction to their low income program.

Okay, and they're still getting just 25 or 30.

Okay.

Thanks.

So, in the same vein, are there projections on the how the percentage of eligible households may change over time here in Bellevue?

As costs rise in Bellevue, is there a projection that like, yes, in fact, it's becoming less affordable and more and more people.

So it's still 25%, but the the pie grows.

Yeah, yes, yeah.

So we we have forecasted, just like we do with our rate setting, we do forecast growth in our customer accounts and including our multifamily units.

Um generally, this is I'm not in a popular position to say this, but our utility rates are rising faster than wages.

Um, and so yes, as over time, just even if people's wages increase based on wage inflation, our utility bills will increase likely faster than that.

So we would see a higher level of eligible customers over in the long run, I would say.

Yeah, yeah.

So I was just going to um hearken back to a previous uh commission meeting where we were talking about the change in the cost of service.

And you know, we propose adjusting that.

And so something like this, like getting more participation in assistance programs, you know, timing it to when there are changes in the rates, rates will get a lot more attention.

The bill will, you know, kind of catch people's eyes when they open it the first time, and it's a much higher number than they recalled from the previous two-month cycle.

So that can be a really great opportunity when people, you know, because in marketing, we look at when are they interested?

It's when you've caught their attention, and then that's really when you can reach out to those who need it most.

So that's what my suggestion would be.

Thank you for that.

Yeah.

And we often coordinate with our billing team whenever there are changes to meet that need as it comes in.

Okay, so let's move on.

So um in evaluating the the policy options, um, we did review other assistance programs both here in Bellevue as well as across the region.

And you can see the list of those agencies in that first column.

Um, in general, most assistance programs do not have an age or disability criteria.

You can see that uh many of those programs, it is based on income only.

Um, and many of those are utilities.

The other main observation is that the most common income threshold is higher than what we have here in Bellevue.

The most common metric that is used by other utilities in the region is 80% of area median income, and we're at 50.

We also looked at the level of assistance provided if you are eligible for an assistance program in the region.

And as I mentioned, Bellevue has one of the higher credit assistance programs in the area, 70% of basic utility costs.

What I mean by that is it's essentially the cost of your domestic water use, the corresponding sewer flows, and the typical stormwater bill.

That 70% of basic utility costs is generally higher in terms of the bill assistance amount than any of these other metrics you'll see by other cities, where they're generally a percent of a portion of your bill or a waiver of certain part of your bill.

We also relied on the American Waterworks Association annual benchmarking survey to look at what is being done at the national level.

Just gonna point out a couple um observations here.

Roughly six and 10 water utilities across this country have some form of assistance program.

And the median discount if a if a utility has a discount program, the median discount is 27%.

And once again, benchmarking, we're at 70.

Many areas in this in many utilities in the region are at 50.

The median across the country is 27.

There is no standard way that utilities get that assistance to their customers.

It can become in the form of a fixed dollar amount, a percent of their bill, or a waiver of certain part of their bill.

And perhaps most importantly for this discussion, um, these programs are not funded by grants or tax dollars or any type of free money.

Um, they are funded by utility funds.

And the reason that's important is to fund these improvements will require a corresponding increase to other ratepayers.

So let's talk about the options now.

So we leverage the local, the regional, and the national data to develop these four options to expand the long-term assistance program, consistent with the commission's direction.

The next slide will show you some of the outputs in terms of uh the cost, the rate impacts, and the number of households that would be um uh positively affected by these changes.

As a reminder, a very low income household in Bellevue is defined as 50% uh area median income, about $55,000 for a family of one.

80% is defined, so low income is 80% of area median income, 80,000, 85,000 for a family of one.

So a family of one.

A family of four, it's uh 85 for 50%, and then 120 for 80%.

So the status quo, we put that there just for context.

Option A expands the program to low-income senior disabled households with incomes at or below 80% of AMI.

It maintains the assistance at 70% of your basic utility costs and would evaluate expanding the program beyond that in future budget cycles.

Option B retains the existing income threshold at 50% of AMI, but it also but it expands the program to all low-income households.

We drop the age and disability criteria.

This program, this option does include a decrease to the credit from 70% of your basic utility costs down to 50% of your basic utility costs.

Option C expands the program to all very low-income households at or below the 50% of AMI, but it maintains the assistance at where it currently is at 70% of your basic utility cost.

And then finally, option D expands the program to all low-income households and maintains our assistance at 70% of the bill of the typical bill.

And as a reminder, we're also seeking just recommendation from the commission to whatever long-term option you select that we align our short-term assistance program to that as well as as well as our solid waste assistance program.

So we have a uniform program available to our customers.

Now, um I realized when I got up here that the presentation is a couple minutes outdated, and had put together a better table than this and sent it to me.

And I had put it in here, but it is this is an older presentation, but um we maybe we can distribute it after the um, but but both tables are designed to do a similar thing, which was to give you the options in the first column, and then the outcomes that you all had requested back in January.

So you can see the number of eligible households by option in the second column, based on a 25% participation rate, the number of households we'd expect to subscribe, the additional annual cost for those participants, um, and then the bill impact measured as a percent increase, a one-time rate increase in 2027, as well as how it would look like on a typical single family monthly bill.

In in broad kind of uh interpretation here, um the options we've shown can increase our program eligibility from 4,000 today to up to 15,000 based on a 25% participation rate, we could um reach up to an additional to about around 4,000 households, and the annual cost increase would be anywhere from one and a half to six million dollars per year.

The vast majority of that cost is the cost of the credit program.

Um there are some staffing costs including that, but in terms of the impact to the numbers and the rates, I'm gonna tell you right now it's more than 90% of that is just the cost of the credit program, the the rebates or the bill discounts.

And then um you can see the rate impacts anywhere from seven tenths of a rate increase next year to as much of as a three percent rate increase next year, between a buck 70 and $7.25 per month.

Uh before I open it up for discussion here, I want to just outline that we did run several other scenarios.

Um, we think these cover the bookends though.

Um we're happy to, if there's more discussion on the design decision criteria we introduced, and if there's other ways that things you want to look at, happy to do that.

But we think this pretty much covers the the entire spectrum.

And so any other option would land somewhere in the um just before we open up, I wanted to remind the group these are the four design decision criteria we looked at, and then to hopefully help you all with your discussion.

Want to just to leave with our requested action as we're looking for recommendation from the commission on one of these four options.

And with that, I'll conclude the presentation.

So uh I think they're uh a wonderful set of four that kind of covered the range.

So I I don't have any questions about that.

I did not hear in your presentation just now or in the packet, how staff came to recommend A?

Like what uh what was what was it about option A that pushed it over the line for staff to recommend?

Yeah, I uh this is where it'd be helpful to have Scott up here, you know.

He would kick me.

Um I will say that um we we acknowledge that there are other significant rate pressures heading into the 2027-2028 budget cycle.

Some of those we've known for about a year, others we have known for about a month.

Um, and as we're deliberating the budget proposal we'll be sending to you all um in the next couple of months, that is top of mind for us is rates are going to increase next year, and we are having pressures from our wholesale, both wholesale providers.

And so, really option A is what can we do immediately to do something right away and give us flexibility in the future to continue expanding the program.

I'm gonna look back at Scott to see if he oh gosh, okay.

Is that helpful, Kurt?

Uh not terribly.

So I I guess I'm what Y A versus B versus anything else.

I mean, is the total fiscal impact in that in that second to last column the primary driver that drove you that way?

Well, I don't have Mike, it's okay.

Um so I will to some extent reiterate what Matt was saying because I think he was spot on, quite honestly.

When we are evaluating what is possible, I think there is a general consensus and understanding that something is needed if we can at all possible assist the community.

There is a greater burden out there than we're currently reaching.

So we recognize that, but we are trying our very best to balance it against the other compounding rate pressures that are coming through the system that are very real.

We know that we have WTDs coming through with near 13% roughly uh for multiple year over year over year.

That's a real impact.

We have Cascade Water Alliance that I think we spoke to recently that is now proposing double digit rate increases that will be year over year over year compounding.

So when you're facing with the rising costs, we recognize that's only going to exacerbate the issue.

So what can we do without adding insult to injury, if you will?

That's my term.

Um and so our little foray here into what can we reasonably offer over the next biennium to begin to move the needle in addressing this issue, recognizing that we are up against some rising rates and impacts across the community.

So we landed on the concept of something is better than nothing.

And it's something that we can build over time incrementally.

That is helpful.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Thank you.

So I do have some c some questions.

Um can you just give a sense of what is the current program cost?

I I will, and I also will say, you know, there's a reason why Lucy is the boss because she told me to have that ready to go.

So we we so we fund the program through two ways.

Uh for our uh single family residential customers, uh, we essentially uh give them a credit.

So there's not an expenditure on our side, we just don't get the revenue.

So we incur about $600,000 in lost revenue for providing credits to our single family customers.

And sorry, Matt, is that and is that for the utility tax rebate?

Yeah, no, this is for the um utility credit, the 70% credit on their bill.

Discount program.

Okay.

Oh, you have those.

Thank you so much.

Um the bill discount program, about $600,000 in essentially deferred revenue.

We don't collect that revenue.

Our rebate program, which is the 70% credit available to multifamily cost funders, they don't get a bill from us.

So we essentially give them a send them a check, and that becomes an expenditure for us.

That expenditure is about $600,000 per year.

That's $1.2 million total.

Um, and then our utility tax rebate program.

So that's where we send folks checks to pay for the cost of the taxes that the city and the state assess us.

Um that's the $200,000.

So in grand total, our long-term assistance program on an annual basis about 1.4 million dollars.

And so then if you go to option A, we're basically doubling that cost.

It'll go from one current 1.4 to another.

Okay.

And it's fifty, you know, we're we're saying you're gonna serve 50% more, right?

From a thousand to 1500.

Okay.

So I see that.

When you say multifamily and single family, I guess those are still seniors living in a single okay.

Yeah, so half of our long-term assistance program participants today, so seniors, age two or over, live in multi-family housing.

Yeah, okay.

And and I'm looking around, I'm sorry, but I was curious about this rate increase impact, okay?

Because I I read that a little differently.

Um I was thinking of it as a subsidy kind of thing, you know, like if we increase our assistance to folks, then um, well, I guess the subsidy is like the 168 or the 288.

Is that are those the subsidies?

Yeah.

So in order to generate 1.4 million dollars in additional revenue, um, we'll have to raise the rate of everybody else by seven tenths of a percent or about a buck sixty-eight on a typical combined utility bill.

Okay.

Okay.

That's fine.

Like Commissioner Lutterman.

But so you talked about the admin, I I guess here's my looking at option A.

There's about 500 additional households you're planning on, and each of those are about $1,600.

So that total is about $800,000.

Whereas where's that other 0.6 million coming from in the total cost?

I wrote this in the email to Lucy earlier this week.

Um, and now you're asking it, and I can't remember what I wrote down.

Um, can I return?

Can I respond?

I have yeah, I can provide the answer.

Um just not right now.

Yeah.

I I I guess my my the broader aspect of my question is is that um administrative expense or is it something else that's going on there?

Yeah, so so that um go back here.

The 1.4 million dollars, uh it is primary almost majority of that is the credit program.

There is the equivalent of two limited and time limited term employees in that.

Oh yeah, okay.

And that's I'll get you the I'll I'll get you the numbers for it.

Okay, okay.

I just yeah, I just was looking for the category of the the kind of expenses.

Yeah, and I'll yeah, we'll provide that for each of the options.

We can give you the split between the cost broken down by staff uh additions versus the cost of a diminished of the credit program.

Okay.

Any other questions from commissioners?

One uh I forgot to ask about a clarification, and uh it was brought up at the Solid Waste um presentation.

So we provide long-term utility bill assistance that says to single family residential households with a solid waste account.

Is that also age uh limited?

Okay.

Yeah.

So if someone qualifies for our utility discount program, uh directly build customers who are in single family housing, they're automatically approved for a 70% discount on their republic services bill as well.

Okay.

Um and so that currently is only for our single family residents.

And so the plan is to expand that to our multi-residential households as well.

And so if they're approved in our rebate program, they would also get a rebate check of that amount.

And again, still just age limited.

Yeah, so still our seniors and permanently disabled residents.

Thanks.

You're welcome.

You remind me what a typical um monthly bill would be.

I have three computers at the side.

I'm gonna get you over there.

Just grab it.

Um the typical bill would be uh about 2400 every two months right now.

Or a year, 2400 a year, 2400 per year.

And so divide.

Yeah, maybe um so let me get you the monthly numbers.

I'm sorry, I got uh for single family.

Two two to three hundred a month.

Yeah.

Typical bill.

Okay, here we go.

All right, I was just wondering like the 288, what is that?

So it's another $15 on top of 2400.

Yeah, or $200 a month plus 288.

Yeah.

Okay.

All right, I have you have the answer for Commissioner Letterman's question.

I got answers to life now.

All right, yeah.

So the the by typical bi-monthly bill is about 421 dollars and 48 cents.

That's the total water, sewer, stormwater.

Um if you take that over 12 months, you'll get pretty close to 2,000 and some odd dollars.

Um is that answer your question?

Okay.

And then um Kurt, your question on helping understand the 1.4 million.

So when we look at the program, one our 1.4 million dollar program funds it today.

We're increasing rates in next year, and we're increasing rates the following year.

And so the cost of the program will increase.

That's that's kind of observation number one.

Our 1.4 is not going to cover the cost of the program two years from now.

And so um I'll give you the that's a big answer right there.

That that's yeah, so it's uh in because we're looking at the future, it's it won't be 1645 per year per additional customer in 27.

It'll be more because of that.

Got it.

That makes sense.

Yeah, and the overall of that 1.4 million incremental uh about 250,000 is the cost of the staffing.

Okay.

Um based on that 27% um average that you found from AWWA.

Did we look at going debt lower than 50%?

You know, why or why not?

I guess.

Yeah, so so um, no, we did not look at a lower answer.

We and that was really driven by those regional results that we saw a lot of folks were were providing around that 50% bill credit.

Um the other challenge becomes is as we currently have about a thousand customers who are currently getting a 70% credit.

And if we went anytime we go lower, we do it immediately, they're gonna see a net pain.

Um and so the part of the recommendation of moving to an 80% AMI is just in line with the other agencies, and and I found that too in my research.

Um would that simplify our administration because we can piggyback on those other agencies.

In fact, I found um I I forget which one of it was one of the Redmond or Issaqua requires you to be in the Puget Sound Energy program, and that's how they pre-qualify you.

So that's a great observation.

And um whether we stay at 50 or we go to 80, um, because we know that PSE, we know that every customer here in Bellevue who's our a water customer generally is a PSE customer.

And if they're qualifying for assistance, that means they're at at least 80.

And if we're at 50 percent, we know everybody who's getting a PSE eligibility, they're automatically at least I'm eligible for our program.

So we can do that auto enroll, I think either way.

Um whether we stay at 50 or bring it to eight.

Well, for any of these options, um, the idea of reciprocity with PSE.

Um does PSC have an age requirement though?

They do not.

So we are not if we go with option A, it's not an apples to apples.

Oh, yes.

I agree.

I'm sorry, that's a good observation.

I was referring to more just the income um criteria.

We which is the the administratively difficult piece is is verifying the income.

It's much easier to verify disability or age.

Any other questions from any commissioners?

Um I think I'd I'd like to focus a little uh less on the benchmarking.

Uh it's interesting, but I don't I don't want to base our decision on it.

Uh let's go out and set the set the pace.

I think this is an area that is worth investing in.

I think we have uh an obligation to do it.

Um one of our more prominent residents once said, if you uh if you have an opportunity to the to do the right thing, you have an obligation to to do the right thing.

And I think this program is is the right thing.

Let's go figure out uh how to do the most good for for the most people.

Commissioner Laxon, you have a question.

It's more of a comment.

Um, and I completely understand like why obviously you're facing all these pressures and stuff like for this upcoming biennium.

Um, I just want to I guess I'm kind of I just worry that like the same thing is gonna pop up in the future bienni, and that's gonna keep pushing out further expansion.

Um so I guess that that's just my worry, is that obviously we're dealing with stuff now, but who knows if we're gonna be dealing with stuff in the future, and that will just continue to delay and delay and delay adventure expansion um password we're wanting, but just wanted to just wanted to express that.

I have a question, Matt Hannah.

Do you know why our current uh eligibility has senior and permanent disability as a criteria, as opposed to just relying on AMI?

That is before my time.

Yeah.

Um just very brief.

They're the most vulnerable population.

That was the primary driver there.

Okay, okay.

Thank you.

All right.

Any other questions, comments?

I mean, I guess like this is a comment.

Um and so I appreciate Scott, your your answer.

I I just think that there are even younger people who are are quite vulnerable.

Um, we're trying to increase, you know, growth in Bellevue.

I think there's and it's just so high.

The costs here are just so high to try to get um younger people to come in here and really make it it's a challenge for me.

Uh and so I would like to expand the pool, um, but also take into account um not just seniors and and disabled folks, you know.

And I see that's an option.

So I'm I I appreciate that.

I really do.

And I and I and I appreciate all the uh the great work that you guys do, honestly.

So that's just a comment.

Scott, would you like to respond to that comment?

Since you've moved up here.

So I may, I may, I'm getting puppy.

Um no, I I would just add that that these are long-term programs.

We do offer short-term programs that are open to everyone.

So so it's not as if there is not assistance opportunities.

Um it's just this is an expansion for long term, which is a little bit of a different view.

That's all.

That's the only comment I'm gonna see.

Sure.

And and I would wanna I'm I'm not sure if I'm in the same place where Commissioner Heinoch is, but yeah, my general feeling would be to make the program wider, but not as deep then as that.

So um, you know, maybe at the 50% AMI for 50%, so at a lower uh benefit level.

So that in general, I would say that's my uh gut feeling.

But all right.

If there aren't other comments, I'm happy to make uh uh a motion on one of the options.

Please, Commissioner Letterman.

Okay.

Wait, hold on.

Uh are you done with your presentation?

It's in the email.

So you're done.

I am I am done.

All right.

You are done.

Commissioner Letterman, will you make a motion, please?

I move that the commission recommend option A to expand the uh assistance program with a view to expanding the eligibility in the future.

All right, may I have a second?

And just to be clear, this is second just means we're opening the floor for have a discussion for that option, and then we can take a vote.

And if we don't have but if there's not a second person that that likes that idea, correct, then we move for another option.

That's how it works.

So we're not making a vote at the moment.

We're just seeing if anyone even wants to entertain option A as moved by Commissioner Lutterman.

All right, I hear no second.

All right.

Second.

Okay, very good.

Option B is now on the floor for discussion uh before we take a vote.

If any commissioners would like to express their comments, uh for the motion.

I appreciate all the what you guys have just presented, all the thinking you've done behind it.

I guess I'm eager to push us a little bit to expand it a little bit.

Um yeah, if you probably presented us three, I would have picked the middle one.

Um yeah, it's just cover a little bit more without that much more expensive.

Appreciating that this is gonna grow.

I understand that it's also gonna get harder for more people.

So I don't, yeah, it's a hard balance.

I guess I'll ask the the utility staff here, even though option A is the only one that says evaluate expansion in future, I assume all options have that ability, correct?

That's correct.

The intent for option A was kind of the the most um gradual first and conservative, yeah.

Okay.

I I do have a question um regarding the difference between the 70% discount that the seniors would receive and then going to the 50%.

Do we have an idea what that dollar amount per month would look like now?

Uh do you smell smoke?

Yeah.

So so right now, and Hannah, do you you probably know best?

I'm gonna put you on the spotlight.

Um so today our typical uh 70% discount.

And I'm gonna I'm gonna estimate at this point.

Um we can always come back and refine these results, but um I gotta do this.

So right now I uh the typical size of the discount expressed in a bi-monthly bill is about is about 219 dollars.

That's the that's the credit against their bill.

Um if we went to that 50 percent the credit it would drop to um sorry okay let me give you so yeah right now the credit is about 220 dollars it went down to the 50 percent um the size of their credit would be about 196, so about a 24 dollar decrease to their current credit today.

That's the okay, thank you.

That's it, that's every other month.

Okay.

Scott, I have a question for you.

You I think you just said that what we're talking about is the long-term criteria that it doesn't apply to the short term or that the short term is still exists.

Well, I think the distinction that I was trying to make is this is available to senior and disabled, but short-term program, although income restricted, maybe it applies to a broader group.

Okay.

But will whatever we vote on here, so since option B is currently on the floor, um, if we if that prevails in a vote, then will the criteria apply to the short term as well?

Because I think that's what staff's asking.

Is that correct?

That's part of the additional recommendation.

Okay.

Yeah, if I can just uh bring that so so our current program, our short-term program is currently available to any customer with income at or below 50% of AMI.

So if you chose option B, our short-term program basically is already aligned with that direction.

Good.

Thank you.

All right, any other comments from any commissioners before we take our vote.

All right.

With that, uh, we will uh go with the roll call vote on uh the motion on the floor, which is option B.

So um sorry, Commissioner Tyson?

Yes, may I um pose one more question to stack before um I'm just reflecting on what Scott shared and and processing the the concept as well that um seniors and disabled um are the most vulnerable community, which you know kind of in my background, that's what I find as well.

Um I'm just wondering how the data bears out of um so we talked about 25 percent of eligible households participate in the program.

Do we have access or insight into the data of you know, is of disabled households or disabled individuals, is there a higher um enrollment rate among those groups or is it among septigenarians or octagenarians?

Do we have any other insight?

Because as we consider option B, where we're not treating them kind of in a unique manner going forward.

I'm just wondering what insights we have so that we can still keep an eye on that population if we move towards something that is no longer tailored specific to them.

I appreciate the question.

Not that I have seen is my short response, but I also know that I don't know if the human services needs look they look at a very granular level in terms of the demographics that we have.

I don't know if Hannah, if you've seen any data in that report.

Um they do break it down by household uh income and then as well as disabilities um and seniors, but I don't think they got too specific into that population for our program.

Most of the people qualify qualified because of age.

Um I don't have the exact number for you.

Um if we move forward, um, just with the way that we collect the data, we would still be able to specify that um if we're wanting to tailor additional resources to that group.

Um I believe that could be really helpful.

Um if we if we did change the scope and manner of this program, I think it'd be helpful to have that so that we see if there's some impact on them that's more detrimental than what we might estimate at the time of the proposal.

So thank you.

Welcome.

Uh okay.

Then with that, I think we're ready to move on to a vote.

Um so uh with that, uh a yay or nay, please.

Commissioner DuPertis.

Yeah.

Yay, thank you.

Commissioner Heinash.

Yay.

Commissioner Loxen?

Yay.

Commissioner Margolis?

Yeah, Commissioner Lotterman.

Yay.

And Commissioner Tyson.

Yay.

Wow.

Okay.

And I am a yay as well.

So uh we are a 7-0 vote on option B is the Commissioner's recommendation.

Commissioner's Commission's recommendation, sorry.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

And Scott, was there?

Was there another part of that we wanted to get onto the record to get the short-term in alignment with this?

Very well.

Yes.

Okay.

Okay.

So that was that.

I move that the short-term assistance programs be made in congruence with option B.

One additional.

Okay.

The solid waste program being expanded.

In in so I'm not sure I understand what you there it is.

They're bringing it up for reference.

Oh yeah.

Our solid waste program can rebate program kind of lives separate from our long-term assistance program.

And so we want to whatever change we make, we want to make sure it's aligned.

Yep.

Okay.

So Commissioner Ludmann would you restate the motion?

I move that other policy recommendations, E and F as outlined, be adopted.

All right.

Thank you.

I have a second.

Thank you, Commissioner Hynosh.

Okay.

Do any commissioners have any questions regarding uh these two policy recommendations before we take a vote?

Okay.

If not, then we'll go ahead and take a vote uh for this motion.

Commissioner Tyson.

Yay.

Commissioner Lotterman.

Yay.

Commissioner Margolis.

Commissioner Laxon.

Yay.

Commissioner Hynash.

Yay.

Commissioner DuPertis.

Yeah.

Okay.

And uh yay for me as well.

So uh a 7-0 vote in this motion as well.

All right.

I think I'd just like to make a comment.

Thank you, staff, for uh the the breadth of those options, and I think really looking hard at uh uh the best practices and the the other regional agencies practices and so um it was a very uh comprehensive package that you delivered to us and I think made our decision very easy.

So thank you for that.

Thank you.

Right.

Before we move on to the calendars that Joe will walk us through, I just want to make a comment and thank all the commissioners for such a robust discussion tonight.

And I also thank you for doing all the prep work that you clearly have done, whether it's independent research or reading the materials or both.

Uh, which I think is a wonderful how this commissioner commission is performing.

So with that, uh Joe, let's go over the calendars.

Thank you, Chair.

Um April Financial Performance for 2025, the year end.

That'll be a written brief.

Uh followed by CIP.

Um talking about the 275 years.

Get that right as a five or six anymore.

Bouncing around on me.

So this uh six years, five year CIP.

Um review of that, then solid waste contract procurement.

That will come off.

Um this calendar has been an admitted flux.

What I want to say about the April 16 possible second meeting is we will be talking over the next two weeks on whether that meeting is needed.

We recognize you have uh calendars to keep as well as we do.

So we're gonna be looking at that.

We're gonna be looking at that throughout the whole year on the other ones to make sure you can count on the first.

I think you can count on the um May 21 field trip.

We know that's uh highlight for us, and we hope it is for you as well.

Um, so I'll just leave it at that on the uh ESC calendar for now.

You can read ahead further if you'd like.

Um but you can see the flavor is around budget and uh solid waste and system plans.

So I'm gonna jump down to council and I wanna just orient you to the yellow uh boxes.

These are presentations to council um that will be made.

March solid waste, April, King County What Wastewater Treatment Division rate forecast and regional wastewater services plan.

Um and then May is the COSA for sewer.

Tonight's presentation on bill assistance will come to the council in May, according to the schedule.

And we move on into October budget and rates.

And then Scott hit on this earlier, the solid waste contract procurement in November.

And then in January of next year, there's a placeholder kind of reading ahead on solid waste.

So it's a full year.

I'm not going to dive into some of the engineering projects because that would take us a while, but um it's a full year and uh for both council uh with the the number of presentations going there, and then of course here.

So I'll just leave it at that.

Thank you.

Great.

Okay, April 28th.

That is April 28th.

Let's see here.

Just make sure.

Yeah, it's a Tuesday.

Okay.

Thank you, Joe.

And I guess just to reiterate to the commissioners, it was May, what was it, 11th, Joe?

The board and commission appreciation.

It was May 11th, May 11th.

Yep.

So if you are available at the end.

Yeah.

That's it.

And would you like our R SVPs for that?

Would that be helpful?

Okay.

And there was a separate email sent out, I think, right?

About that.

And more details to come.

And probably we should RSVP when we get those more details.

Okay.

All right.

With that, may I have a motion to adjourn?

Make the motion we adjourn.

Thank you, Commissioner Tyson.

May I have a second?

Second.

Thank you, Commissioner Lutterman.

We are adjourned at 8 36.

Thank you.

Commission meeting is