Kirkland City Council Regular Meeting – July 8, 2024
Kirkland City Council Regular Meeting – July 8, 2024
Note: The agenda, minutes, and transcript indicate the meeting was held on July 2, 2024. The date provided in the instruction (July 8, 2024) is used here per the request, but this discrepancy is noted.
The Kirkland City Council held a study session starting at 5:30 p.m. and a regular meeting at 7:30 p.m. on July 2, 2024 (per source material). The meeting was conducted in‑person only due to a network disruption caused by suspicious activity. The council discussed the Juanita Public Pathway Feasibility Study, a city flag process, approved the consent calendar, heard public comments, received a biennial community survey report, and advanced items on council operations and the Neighborhood Safety Program (NSP).
Consent Calendar
- Approved minutes of the June 18, 2024 regular meeting.
- Acknowledged payroll ($5,760,050.04) and bills ($5,313,215.03).
- Acknowledged claims for damages from Min Jie Kim, Brandon Shuman, Yi Xie, and Yunyi Zhang.
- Awarded a construction contract for the Annual Street Preservation Program – 2024 Street Overlay Project to Lakeside Industries, Inc. (Issaquah, WA) for $2,226,937.50.
- Approved Resolution R-5637 ratifying a proclamation of emergency related to a significant technology disruption.
- Acknowledged a Park and Recreation Month proclamation, the 2023 Parks & Community Services Annual Report, the May 2024 Sales Tax Report, and the Procurement Report.
- All consent items approved by a 6‑0 vote (Councilmember Pascal excused).
Public Comments & Testimony
- Jim Hoff (South Rose Hill) opposed sunsetting the Neighborhood Safety Program (NSP), recommending a one‑year hiatus to improve the process.
- Mike Vanderslice (Houghton Park area) highlighted dangerous driving and safety issues on Lake Washington Boulevard, urging stronger enforcement.
- Evelyn Blatt (same condo) described excessive car and motorcycle noise on Lake Washington Boulevard, requesting a noise study, speed bumps, and a lower speed limit.
- Patricia Loring (109th Avenue NE) opposed the Juanita public pathway through PSE property, citing security, privacy, and property value concerns.
- Jeanne Large (Fourth Avenue) expressed support for affordable housing, citing the community survey, and suggested using the city hall parking lot property for housing.
- Kira Krimkevich (Norkirk area) spoke against the proposed upzoning a quarter‑mile into residential neighborhoods, warning of traffic, parking, and service impacts.
- Scott Brady (Finn Hill) criticized the city’s density plans, citing the failure of Totem Lake to lower rents, and warned about job losses from AI and loss of light industrial space.
- Kenneth Lin (20th Place West) opposed the city’s densification plan, arguing it would destroy Kirkland’s character without creating affordable housing.
- Jennifer Loy (Caroline Woods Park) alleged that the Parks Department mismanaged maintenance of Caroline Woods Park and misled the public.
- Barbara Ross (109th Avenue NE) objected to the public pathway through PSE right‑of‑way, citing safety and electrical hazards.
- Liz Hunt (neighborhood) supported the NSP, advocating for studying improvements, increasing the budget, and enhancing DEIB outreach.
- Alex Tsimmerman (unaffiliated) made a general statement criticizing government overreach and restrictions.
- Kyle Sullivan (neighborhood) spoke in favor of more dense development to improve housing affordability and reduce car dependency.
Discussion Items
Study Session – Juanita Public Pathway Feasibility Study Transportation Planner Victoria Kovacs presented the study, which found the proposed pathway from Brickyard Park & Ride to the Cross Kirkland Corridor to be low feasibility and high cost (estimated $17–19 million total). The study recommended placing the project on the Transportation Strategic Plan unfunded list. Council discussed potential next steps for specific segments, particularly segment 4 (near Juanita High School), and staff noted that further discussion could occur during the fall CIP process. The council expressed appreciation for the study and acknowledged community disappointment, but supported the staff recommendation.
Study Session & Business – City Flag Process Communications Program Manager David Wolbrecht outlined a draft community engagement process to create an official city flag. Council provided feedback on the advisory group composition, emphasizing broader community involvement (including youth, seniors, and underrepresented groups), smaller group size (10–12), and a prize for the winning design. They also discussed the final decision‑making process (community vote vs. council selection) and asked to refine the resolution criteria to reflect “city values” rather than only DEIB. The item was continued from the study session to the regular business meeting, where further discussion resulted in a directive to staff to revise the resolution and process for future adoption.
Business – Council Operations Continued Discussion Deputy City Manager Julie Underwood presented draft amendments to council policies, including travel guidelines, special projects reserves, the council coin process, and rules for items from the audience. Council approved the changes and directed staff to bring them forward for final adoption at the July 16 meeting. They also identified future topics: updates to the social media/communications policy and a review of the three‑speaker rule for audience items.
Business – Neighborhood Safety Program (NSP) Evaluation DEIB Manager Erika Mascorro reviewed a Legislative Request Memorandum outlining five options for the NSP. After discussion, Council rejected options 1 (reinstating RRFBs within NSP) and 5 (retiring the program). They approved a motion to evaluate options 2 (create a separate RRFB‑only program), 3 (increase the program budget to account for inflation), and 4 (enhance DEIB implementation by expanding neighborhood representatives and including underrepresented locations). The motion passed 6‑0.
Special Presentation – Biennial Community Survey Final Report Devin Bales of DHM Research presented findings from the statistically valid survey (1,000 respondents) and a community engagement survey (362 respondents). Key results: residents are generally satisfied, with the top concerns being growth/overdevelopment, traffic, and affordable housing. The community engagement sample showed lower satisfaction and higher concern about crime and public safety. Council discussed strategies to improve communication, especially to residents who rely on social media.
Key Outcomes
- Vote (6‑0): Excused Councilmember Pascal from the meeting.
- Vote (6‑0): Approved the consent calendar, including the street overlay contract, emergency resolution, and various proclamations/reports.
- Vote (6‑0): Approved the motion to evaluate NSP options 2, 3, and 4, directing staff to return with a revised program proposal.
- Direction: Staff to bring updated council operations policies (travel, reserves, coin, audience items) for final adoption on July 16.
- Direction: Staff to revise the city flag resolution and engagement process incorporating council feedback (community‑driven, inclusive advisory group, “city values” criteria, prize, and iterative community input).
- Unfunded List: The Juanita Public Pathway Feasibility Study was placed on the Transportation Strategic Plan unfunded list; potential further discussion during fall CIP.
- Executive Session: Held as authorized by RCW 42.30.110(1)(a)(ii) and (1)(i) from 6:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., with the regular meeting reconvening at 7:30 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 10:05 p.m.
Meeting Transcript
Sorry, Benny. I'd like to call to order this council meeting, city council meeting of July 2nd, 2024, before asking the clerk to call roll for tonight's regular meeting. Is there a motion to excuse Councilmember Pascal? So move. Second. It's been moved by Councilmember Falcone, second by Councilmember Black to excuse Councilmember Pascal from tonight's meeting. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries seven zero. Oh, I'm gonna have to break that habit tonight. Um clerk, will you please call a roll for the meeting? Councilmember Tim Chizen. Here. Councilmember Black. Here. Councilmember Falcone. Here. Councilmember Sweet. Here. Deputy Mayor Arnold. Here. Mayor Curtis. Here. That's me. That's it. That's me. To begin, I want to note for our audience that as a result of suspicious activity on the city's internal network last week. City staff proactively shut down access to the network out of abundance of caution. Because of this network disruption, the city council meeting is being held in person only. We are going old school. The meeting is not being streamed live and is not available for remote attendance. The meeting is still being recorded and will be posted online at a later date. In addition, before moving to our study session items, unless there is an objection, I will move the executive session on our agenda to begin at 6 30 p.m. instead of at the end of our regular meeting. We will still expect to reconvene our regular meeting at 7 30. I see no objections. Our study session tonight is on two items. The first item is on the feasibility study for the Juanita Public Pathway. The second item is on the city flag process draft resolution. City manager. Okay. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Welcome everybody. So we are going to try to keep each of these to half an hour. If the conversation is still going at 6 30, we do have a fairly short business agenda, so we'll just roll over any topic to the evening meeting if necessary. But so our first topic is a check-in on the Wayneta public pathway feasibility study. We are not seeking counsel action at this point. Our action would be to place this in the transportation strategic plan unfunded list, but we wanted to uh fill you in on the results of the study and see if council has any questions. So here to make that presentation as Victoria Kovacs, our transportation planner.
openpublica.com