OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Community Livability and Public Safety Committee Advisory Body Interviews - March 6, 2026

City Council & CommissionsFriday, March 6, 2026
BodyOlympia, Washington
SessionCity Council & Commissions
DateFriday, March 6, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 5:09:44

Transcript — Verbatim
0:01

All right.

0:03

Hello, everybody.

0:04

This is the community livability and public safety committee of the city council.

0:10

And this is a uh our second night of doing interviews for our advisory bodies.

0:17

And so this evening we'll be interviewing candidates for the Arts Commission, uh Cultural Access, uh, design review and uh parks and rec advisory committees.

0:25

So uh the first 15 minutes that we have here um is some check-in time with the chair of the arts commission, Kathy, Kathy Dorgan.

0:37

Hi, thank you so much for joining us.

0:39

And we can uh use this time here to do a quick run of show and talk about how we wanna move through.

0:46

Um we have one, two, three, four interviews with the cancellation of one person.

0:52

Um towards the end, we can talk about if we want to try to set aside some time to do a follow-up with that that one individual there.

1:00

Um and um yeah.

1:04

So sorry, I'm quickly transitioning between day job and city council role.

1:12

So that all my stuff here.

1:14

Um so uh Kelly and Young, I think that what we um did in terms of alternating asking questions worked well uh last night.

1:25

And then Kathy, you have a question specific to the arts commission, correct?

1:29

Yes.

1:30

Excellent.

1:31

So we will you know ask our questions first, myself, Ian, Kelly, and then you'll uh close us out with each interview.

1:38

We do only have 10 minutes for each interview.

1:41

Um so I'll just go ahead and introduce everybody.

1:46

Um Kathy, am I saying your last name correctly, Dorgan?

1:50

Dorgan, yeah.

1:51

Yeah, okay, just making sure.

1:53

Okay.

1:53

Um excellent.

1:55

Do you have any questions for us at all?

1:59

I don't think so.

2:00

Um if it's if they're going long, Danny, I'm assuming you're gonna moderate and sort of keep it moving.

2:06

So yeah, yeah.

2:07

If they're going long and I'm noticing after the first couple of questions that they're, you know, um very passionate and have lots to say, then at a certain point I'll jump in and be like, okay, we got two questions left and X amount of minutes uh left.

2:20

Well, I think what we found yesterday was that um by and large, 10 minutes, 10 minutes is actually a good amount of time um uh to to get through them.

2:30

Um and we did have one person who was so passionate about um you know being uh interviewed.

2:35

Um and after just letting her know that um that we you know we're coming up against time, she was very good at um you know shortening her uh responses to the next questions.

2:45

And everybody's seen the questions in advance too.

2:48

So um yeah.

2:50

Yeah, so the so you know, um uh so yeah, if they've seen them in advance, they've had the opportunity to prepare um for uh for a brief 10 minute window to check in with us.

3:01

So great.

3:03

Okay, excellent.

3:04

Kelly or Young, do you have any uh questions or feedback from yesterday?

3:12

Thought you did a great job of keeping us on track.

3:15

Oh good.

3:16

Excellent.

3:17

Sorry, Young, do I cut you off?

3:19

No, okay.

3:20

Um, no, I was waiting for you because I could tell you were meant to say something.

3:24

No, I thought yesterday was went really well.

3:27

Yeah, um yes.

3:30

There was a point yesterday where this is not really a you thing as a chair, but there was a point yesterday where there was kind of like uh one of the chairs was feeling really passionate.

3:41

Um I was worried they were they, you know, I didn't want to offend the candidates.

3:50

So I would I did think about that.

3:52

I thought, okay, ooh, that's a little strong for uh the candidates.

3:56

And so I think there was that I I think it all just came from a place of care.

4:01

And making sure that they were very clear on what the committee did.

4:05

Is that what you're thinking?

4:06

So I just think about like, you know, I think I think unless they have like there's a there's a time.

4:12

Well, I mean, I guess there's not really any time for them to ask questions, but if they do have any questions, they can follow up.

4:17

I just want to trust, you know, that all of our candidates are adults and they have read and know what they're getting themselves into.

4:24

I also um there is a little discussion about scheduling.

4:27

So I'm not trying to like you know point fingers at anyone here, but it's uh, but I also same thing with that too.

4:33

Uh if I'm honest, I'm like everyone that's applying is an adult.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Arts And Culture████████████████████████████28%
Community Engagement██████████████████████████26%
Procedural█████████████████17%
Parks and Recreation████████████████16%
Urban Design████████8%
Historic Preservation███3%
Technology and Innovation1%
Design Review1%
Summary of Proceedings

Community Livability and Public Safety Committee Advisory Body Interviews - March 6, 2026

Note on date discrepancy: The meeting minutes indicate the meeting was held on Thursday, March 5, 2026, but the source material provided with this summary specifies the date as March 6, 2026. This summary uses the date provided in the instructions.

The Community Livability and Public Safety Committee of the Olympia City Council met in a special session on March 6, 2026, from 4:02 p.m. to 9:11 p.m. to conduct interviews for vacancies on five advisory bodies: the Arts Commission, Cultural Access Advisory Board, Design Review Board, Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee, and Heritage Commission. The committee reviewed candidates, heard from chairs of the respective bodies, and deliberated to formulate recommendations to the full City Council.

Discussion Items

Arts Commission (3 vacancies: one 1-year term, two 3-year terms)

  • The committee interviewed four candidates: Mara Orenstein, Elizabeth Lord, Kelly Marie Murray, and Lauren Thompson. A fifth candidate, Donovan Hohola, was unable to attend his scheduled time due to an emergency but was later interviewed at 8:30 p.m. after the committee agreed to accommodate him.
  • Arts Commission Chair Kathy Dorgan participated in the interviews and provided feedback, noting that all candidates were strong but that Mara lacked a clear understanding of the commission's role, while Elizabeth, Lauren, and Kelly Marie demonstrated strong alignment with the commission's mission.

Cultural Access Advisory Board (2 vacancies: one 1-year term, one 2-year term)

  • Three candidates were interviewed: Morgan Montez, Ravi (Robbie) Adigarla, and Jennifer. Ravi also applied for the Arts Commission and indicated a preference for Cultural Access.
  • Cultural Access Vice Chair Ann Larson participated and provided input, ranking Morgan first, Jennifer second, and Ravi third.

Design Review Board (2 vacancies: one 1-year term, one 2-year term, with one architect position required)

  • Five candidates were interviewed: Travis, Derek, Regine Varugis, V Hoy, and Brittany. The architect position was initially misattributed to Travis but correctly identified as Regine, who is a licensed architect.
  • The committee discussed the value of architectural expertise and noted that Regine, V, and Travis were strong candidates.

Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee (2 vacancies: one 1-year term, one 3-year term)

  • Five candidates were interviewed: Grace Fletcher, Sophia, David, Will, and Emily Boone. Vice Chair Caroline Melore participated and provided feedback, highlighting Grace's focus on food resilience and Sophia's deep involvement with children's programming, and noting that the committee could benefit from younger perspectives and diverse user experiences.

Heritage Commission (3 vacancies: one 1-year, one 2-year, one 3-year term)

  • No new interviews were conducted for Heritage Commission; the committee relied on candidates from the previous meeting (March 5). The committee had previously expressed interest in two candidates: Kyle Kimball and Stephanie Nase, and had reservations about a third candidate. During this meeting, the committee considered Derek Foster (a Design Review applicant who expressed interest in other advisory bodies) as a potential candidate for the Heritage Commission.

Other Discussion

  • The committee debriefed with chairs of the Arts Commission, Cultural Access Advisory Board, and Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee after their respective interviews to gather input on candidate strengths and gaps on the boards.
  • The committee also discussed whether to offer an interview to the candidate who missed his slot (Donovan) and decided to offer a later time at 8:30 p.m., which he accepted.

Key Outcomes

Motions and Votes: The committee approved a motion (3-0, with all members voting aye) to recommend the following appointments to the City Council for final approval on March 31, 2026:

  • Heritage Commission:

    • 3-year term: Kyle Kimball
    • 2-year term: Stephanie Nase
    • 1-year term: Derek Foster (if he declines, the committee will offer the seat to Travis Mantic)
  • Arts Commission:

    • 3-year terms: Elizabeth Lord and Lauren Thompson
    • 1-year term: Mara Orenstein
  • Cultural Access Advisory Board:

    • 1-year term: Morgan Montez
    • 2-year term: Robbie Adigarla
  • Design Review Board:

    • 1-year term: V Hoy
    • 2-year term: Regine Varugis
  • Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee:

    • 3-year term: Grace Fletcher
    • 1-year term: Emily Boone

The committee also agreed to maintain a list of alternate candidates (e.g., Travis Mantic) for future vacancies.

Next Steps: Candidates will be notified within one week by Don (staff) regarding the committee's recommendation. The City Council will make final appointments on March 31, 2026.

Meeting Transcript

All right. Hello, everybody. This is the community livability and public safety committee of the city council. And this is a uh our second night of doing interviews for our advisory bodies. And so this evening we'll be interviewing candidates for the Arts Commission, uh Cultural Access, uh, design review and uh parks and rec advisory committees. So uh the first 15 minutes that we have here um is some check-in time with the chair of the arts commission, Kathy, Kathy Dorgan. Hi, thank you so much for joining us. And we can uh use this time here to do a quick run of show and talk about how we wanna move through. Um we have one, two, three, four interviews with the cancellation of one person. Um towards the end, we can talk about if we want to try to set aside some time to do a follow-up with that that one individual there. Um and um yeah. So sorry, I'm quickly transitioning between day job and city council role. So that all my stuff here. Um so uh Kelly and Young, I think that what we um did in terms of alternating asking questions worked well uh last night. And then Kathy, you have a question specific to the arts commission, correct? Yes. Excellent. So we will you know ask our questions first, myself, Ian, Kelly, and then you'll uh close us out with each interview. We do only have 10 minutes for each interview. Um so I'll just go ahead and introduce everybody. Um Kathy, am I saying your last name correctly, Dorgan? Dorgan, yeah. Yeah, okay, just making sure. Okay. Um excellent. Do you have any questions for us at all? I don't think so. Um if it's if they're going long, Danny, I'm assuming you're gonna moderate and sort of keep it moving. So yeah, yeah. If they're going long and I'm noticing after the first couple of questions that they're, you know, um very passionate and have lots to say, then at a certain point I'll jump in and be like, okay, we got two questions left and X amount of minutes uh left. Well, I think what we found yesterday was that um by and large, 10 minutes, 10 minutes is actually a good amount of time um uh to to get through them. Um and we did have one person who was so passionate about um you know being uh interviewed. Um and after just letting her know that um that we you know we're coming up against time, she was very good at um you know shortening her uh responses to the next questions. And everybody's seen the questions in advance too. So um yeah. Yeah, so the so you know, um uh so yeah, if they've seen them in advance, they've had the opportunity to prepare um for uh for a brief 10 minute window to check in with us. So great. Okay, excellent. Kelly or Young, do you have any uh questions or feedback from yesterday? Thought you did a great job of keeping us on track. Oh good. Excellent. Sorry, Young, do I cut you off? No, okay. Um, no, I was waiting for you because I could tell you were meant to say something. No, I thought yesterday was went really well. Yeah, um yes. There was a point yesterday where this is not really a you thing as a chair, but there was a point yesterday where there was kind of like uh one of the chairs was feeling really passionate. Um I was worried they were they, you know, I didn't want to offend the candidates. So I would I did think about that.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com