All right.

I would like to call to order the city council study session of October 21st, 2025.

Clerk, will you please call the role?

Councilmember Bushnell.

Present.

Deputy Mayor Daniels.

Here.

Councilmember Diaz.

Here.

Councilmember Heinz.

Councilmember Rumba.

Here.

Councilmember Sidalgay.

Here.

Councilmember Scott.

Here.

Councilmember Walker.

Mayor Woodards.

Absent the material sent to you at 1101.

Okay.

We are going to start study session today with our middle middle housing permit program.

And for that, I would like to call on Planning and Development Services Director, Peter Huffman to begin that presentation along with Corey Newton, our division manager.

Planning and development services.

Yeah, thank you, Deputy Mayor.

Peter Huffman, I'm the director of plan development services, and to my right is Corey Newton.

He's the division manager in planning development services of the development services division.

And we're here to I guess introduce you to a proposal that we've been working on with the city manager's office on how we can streamline the permitting process for what we call middle housing.

Next slide, please.

Perfect.

So we're gonna start with a little background on how we got to where we're at right now, a little overview of what the pilot program will be, and then what we really want at the end is some feedback from the council on your thoughts on this proposal, and then we'll adjust accordingly.

Next slide, please.

So at the request of interim city manager Kim, um he he he approached me and said, Hey, is there a way that we can look at how we can um expedite or streamline or make more efficient the permitting process for what is commonly referred to as um middle housing?

And he and he asked us to think big and and challenged us to really try to do something that's a little bit innovative and different, um, something that might um be you know um a stretch, but um try it out and learn from it and go from there.

And so we started thinking about what a scope of that type of process could be, and so we really looked at that middle housing, those aspects of housing that were really a focus of the home and Tacoma um process, those those you know, traditional, not large multi-family, but basically between six, you know, six units up to like 10, 20 units, and we thought, okay, is that something that we could really kind of focus on and look at the approaches that we've been doing for um fourplexes and sixplexes, and can we expand that forward?

And so we thought, all right, well, let's let's try to attempt to do this as a pilot for one year, um, starting in uh 2026, January 2026 through um January 2027, and try to explore different ways that we can work more collaboratively with everybody and do some different things uh as far as how we actually process and review permits, and Corey's gonna talk about that.

Um I really want to give a shout out before we get into this presentation to the leadership and the staff of um public works, environmental services, uh Tacoma Public Utilities and IT, all of those um partner departments are integral to making this work, and um especially right now with IT because IT is scrambling to um do some reconfiguration of the Excel a software program so that we can um track the metrics that we want to track um through the pilot program so that we can come back to the council with some data on how it's working and discuss with the council next steps.

Next slide, please.

So what exactly is it?

So uh what this would be is like I mentioned it would be a one-year pilot and we would be focusing on um 20 units or less.

And of course, the first question is is well, why 20?

Um so first what we've done is under home and to comas we looked at this approach for uh six units or less, and it's it's working.

Um, and we thought, okay, well, let's expand that.

And of course, our first thought was well, why don't we go to 10?

But you know, getting back to the city manager's request, think big and challenge ourselves.

We thought, well, let's go to 20, because really when you think about middle housing and all the discussions that we had with the community and the council through the home and to comba process, it's really like 20 units or less is that middle housing, that flexible housing type.

Um that would include townhouses and and other types of projects that you think is middle housing.

I think the other aspect of it is when we did go through home and tacoma, if you recall, we did a series of tests, and so we sat down with the service providers, uh TPU, environmental services, um, public works, and we ran these case studies.

And so we sat down with the service providers, TPU, environmental services, public works, and we ran these case studies.

And those case studies are okay, can this work?

How much stuff can we get on a lot?

Will it work?

And we did that up to 20 units.

So we thought, okay, well, we've done sort of the civil engineering, if you will, in the land use analysis for 20.

So we've got some good data there, and we're comfortable that we can go up to 20 and make that work.

So that's kind of where the 20 came.

And then we thought, okay, knowing that the high priority, there's a high priority of council for home ownership, and there's this new tool called unit lot subdivision.

We thought, all right, well, let's let's try to get it for unit lots subdivisions too, which are basically between 10 and 20 units.

And so we thought if we do up the 20 and focus on unit lots subdivisions, we can you know meet a lot of policy objectives of the council of seeing that middle housing get built as well of home ownership.

The other scope that we put in place is 12,000 square feet, and so it's got to be 12,000 square feet or less.

And the reason that we did that is that's just the threshold for us to sort of I don't want to say avoid, but stay clear of some of some other regulatory complexities associated with such things as stormwater, um traffic, and other regulations.

So if we keep it at 20 units, focus on 20 units, unit lots subdivisions and on 12,000 square foot lots or less, we think as this pilot, we can make a go of this and come back with the council with some good data and some good experience on how we perhaps could expand it in the future.

Uh and I might add to this slide too, this would only apply to projects that don't require what we call discretionary permits.

So variants, a conditional use permit, a critical areas permit, or SIBA.

Those are all land use permits that are required to go through different sort of review and appeal processes, public comment, notification by state law, and so our our objective of trying to get to basically two reviews or less is what we're really talking about, can't really be accomplished if one of those types of permits is in play because we have to follow these other statutory requirements for uh public comment and notice.

Next slide, please.

So what we're talking about here is not just basically trying to get permit reviews down to two review cycles, which could be um as quick as 30 to 60 days, um, depending on the responsiveness of the applicant.

So that's kind of the time frame that we're looking at to try to get these projects out the door.

Um, but we're also talking about free pre-application meetings, which would be required if you want to uh participate in this pilot.

Um, and we would launch that in 2026.

So you'd come in for a pre-application meeting to make sure that when you do submit what you're submitting is complete and well thought through so that we can assure uh success on both sides.

Um there'll be a pre-submittal checklist that will be required, and we're working on developing that, um, and that would also be launched in January.

And then we'll do a what we call a consistently prepared applicant.

I would use an acronym there, but CPA gets confusing with other folks, but consistently prepared applicant, that's a program that we're in development right now with the development community that if somebody comes in as an applicant and is consistently well prepared, does the pre-application meeting, does the pre-submittal checklist, and demonstrates that they've really put the work in and the thought up front and can consistently do that, then they would get um basically a uh credential with the city that would allow them to perhaps even go quicker than the two, maybe one.

But we're not we're trying to figure out right now with the development community on what exactly that program would be, the details of that, and what would be the value to them to go through that process.

And anecdotally, what we're hearing is some of the value would be just to have that certification as part of a business would be valuable to them attracting clients.

Um so it's very it might not just be the speed of it, but it might be there's some value there of just having that sort of recognition by the city that you're consistently prepared.

So we're working through that process.

That process is going to take a little bit more time.

So our planning on launching that in the in third quarter summer of 2026.

And then the bigger one is pre-approved townhouse plans.

And I think some of you recognize in the interim city managers mid-mod um budget proposal that there is 200,000 from the permit enterprise fund, and that's what that 200,000 would be is to hire a consultant to work with us on developing pre-approved plans for townhouses, which again ties back to that unit lot subdivision.

And that's what that $200,000 would be is to hire a consultant to work with us on developing pre-approved plans for townhouses, which again ties back to that unit lot subdivision.

We do have pre-approved plans for detached ADUs.

And so we've got some experience there.

And so what we'll do here is then we'll work with the development community over the next from you know, basically from once the mid mod is uh adopted and through next year to scope out what exactly that is, what are the issues that need to be done in pre-approved plans, what does that mean, and then hopefully launch those in uh next summer.

Um so that would be launched in the you know, so implementation would be uh in the summer because the first part of next year would be more of a development stage.

Next slide, please.

And I'm gonna turn it over to Corey, and Corey's gonna get in the nuts and bolts of how this is gonna work.

All right, thank you, Director Huffman, and good afternoon, mayor, deputy mayor, and council members.

My name is Corey Newton, I'm a division manager in planning development services.

And before I get started, I just want to quickly recognize the city manager and deputy city manager.

Without their leadership, this project wouldn't even happen.

Uh, when we first met with them, and they really kind of challenged us to look at our permitting program to see what we could do differently.

They didn't want us to just do anything, they wanted it to be meaningful and have a positive impact on our community.

And so uh what we we went to the drawing board, and what we put together is basically what we're gonna present today.

So, one of the already early indicators of success is when we met with TPU water and TPU power to kind of go over this pilot process, they instantly were on board with the situation.

And so hopefully that's a positive indicator of success going forward.

All right, so how's this gonna work?

Well, the first big change is really consolidated authority.

So, as Peter mentioned, the directors of public works, planning development services, and environmental services got together and they kind of developed an MOU about how we're gonna operate and kind of consolidate and delegate authority within PDS to allow uh quicker decisions, right?

So uh part of the issue we hear from the development community is that it gets confusing, right?

You have all these different issues and disciplines that you really have to find a resolution to, and so by the city creating a single point of contact and a designated authority for these, it'll help expose expedite decisions.

The next real big change is the accommodation permit.

So, as we were meeting with staff and our inspection team in particular, they said, hey, the existing process is kind of confusing already.

And so we yeah, exactly.

So we kind of went uh back to our residential process, and so what we did there is we actually consolidated uh the permitting process.

So right now, when you go to do a middle housing project, you're probably looking at between eight to ten permits already, and so that gets confusing.

And so if we can allow a single uh permit for this review to happen under, uh it creates this point of contact or the single source of truth, kinda.

So if you're looking for a specific plan, it's easy for staff to recognize and our customer to recognize.

And so with this, we're hoping to consolidate it, make this process a little simpler.

The next leg is really about faster level of service.

So not only are we doing significant changes to the process, but we're also planning on going faster.

So we've reduced the level of service from these type of projects uh down to four weeks for each review, as Peter mentioned, about a month.

Uh and not only are we looking at a faster level of service, we're also looking at trying to keep it to that whole two review cycle.

That's really important to us.

That provides consistency for the applicant, and we're really hoping to drive more housing out of this.

Next slide.

I just can I add something there, Corey.

Yeah, and so one of the things I mentioned was this Excel software program that we use and reconfiguring that.

And so we're gonna do is set that up so that we're we're we're tracking the reviews.

And so when we get to that project, inevitably that we're gonna have that's gonna want to go to that third review, it's gonna raise it and elevate it and escalate it to not only to Corey's level, but perhaps even to the director's level, and we're gonna try to understand, okay, why does the staff believe that this needs to go into three reviews?

What's the issue?

Is it is it is it something internally administratively that we need to fix?

Is it something that the applicant doesn't understand because we're not communicating clearly?

Is it because the complexity of the site, because you could have a complex site and there just might be those types of issues, and whether those issues are, you know, so we're gonna learn from that why it goes into third review, but then also if it's a de minimis, if it's deemed to be a de minimis um issue that can be resolved at either Corey's level or the director's level will resolve it.

And Excel will get us to that point as opposed to, and I don't want to sound you know too negative here, but we don't want it to languish at the staff level for too long.

We want it's okay, it's going in the if someone's deemed it to go in the third review, boom, it flags up, and then there's an immediate decision-making process at an escalated level.

So that's key to trying to make that work.

It's and we bought the software program back in 2016 to allow us to do that.

Um it's gonna be very transparent, and that's what we want to do.

We want to understand where the pinch points are, we want to understand why that is a pinch point, and then we want to understand okay, how can we fix that pinch point so that in the future um, as the interim city manager said last week, perhaps we can expand this to other permit types.

And so, as uh Director Huffman mentioned, this really is a wholesale change to our permitting process.

So, as we were looking at the technical changes that we submitted to IT, the Excel sheet, I think had something like 540 lines of changes on it.

And so while there were some merge sales and stuff like that, that really is a good indicator of the vast uh fast changes that this program is going to have.

So I look at the changes in and two folds, it's really about accountability and efficiencies.

So on the accountability front, we've definitely added responsibilities to our staff.

So the way this is gonna work is we're gonna have primary reviewers and secondary reviewers.

So the primary reviewers are gonna take on increased responsibilities, they're gonna kind of act like project managers now.

So if you think about the disciplines that we have in a permitting project, we try to consolidate those disciplines into higher level categories, and the reviewer responsible for those disciplines are really gonna have new responsibilities to ensure an accountability to ensure that those disciplines that fall within their scope have completed the reviews on time and that everybody is in the same communication about what's going to happen as part of that permitting process.

So that's part of the added accountability.

The other thing is as we dedicate a team, and we're gonna have a dedicated team for this permitting process.

As we have a dedicated team, it's gonna provide efficient communication and a faster resolution of the issues.

If all the reviewers know what the issues are and they know who each other are, it's gonna allow for quick, easy communications, not only with themselves but also with the applicant.

And so uh we learned this lesson from the residential process.

Uh, we we dedicated a team to the residential process, and we have seen over the years our success is very high because we have a dedicated team associated with that scope of work.

The other things that are going to be doing done differently is uh we're gonna try to provide more review or more assistance as part of this review process.

So, one of the things or issues that often gets escalated to me now is confusion over what the comments are.

And so we're gonna provide an opportunity to do post-review meetings to really understand.

So if a designer sees a comment and they have questions, we're gonna allow our staff to meet with them and really understand what those comments are and dive through them.

That way, when we get to a second submittal, everybody understands the issue, and hopefully it's a quick review and approval.

Another assistance change is the escalation process.

So the way the system, one of the 540 lines of changes, is that there's a new step in the process.

So as soon as a review is complete, so let's say you have the initial review and then you have a second re-review.

On the second re-review, if a reviewer still has concerns or comments, that is gonna automatically get escalated to the division manager to look at.

The division manager is gonna look at those comments to see if they're reasonable or if there's another way to resolve that issue.

We might redline the plans, we might uh overturn the decision or request an additional enhancement or something later on in a plan.

And so that really is we're gonna focus hard on completing the review in two cycles, and again, our whole thought process behind this is if we go faster and have a more uh consistent process and predictable process for the development community, we are really hoping to have more housing built as a result of this pilot.

Next slide.

And with that, I'll pass it over to Director Huffman.

Yeah, I think just a few comments on that last slide.

I think one of the key aspects to this, and we all might think I mean we do operate in a very collaborative um approach now, and we do, as Corey mentioned, we do have teams, we call them studios of different um professions, planners, engineers working in a group that's um physically together so that they can review uh plans and have that communication, and we've expanded that a little bit with home and to comma, but there's still a lot of touch points.

Um, and when I say touch points, that means there are plans that are going through planning development services, they're going to public works, they're going to TPU, they're going to environmental services, and so this is an effort to try to bring all of those reviews and those authorities in to one group.

And so I really want to applaud the those departments that are willing to go through this exercise, because it does take trust, it takes trust, it takes collaboration, it's going to take a lot of communication, and that's why it's a pilot.

And so it's going to be a learning thing to see how this works, and hopefully, what we can find out is that we do trust each other.

We are not um stepping on each other's toes.

We're not trying to.

There's a history in the city, unfortunately, and I don't want to get into my historic story mode, where there were um officials with authority, building officials particularly, that waived a lot of requirements from different departments, and it created a culture of lack of trust.

And so we are now trying to get back to where we can have that consolidated authority and that trust as a pilot for one year on this limited scope and to see how we can um be successful on that.

So our plan is is to launch in January.

Um we have working, we're working right now on the Excel modification, so we're hoping to have those all set up by January.

Umce the um mid mod is proposed and if the 200,000 is proposed, we will work on hiring a consultant to do the townhouse pre-approved plans.

Um in the next few months, we'll be working with MCO and CED on getting the word out so that the development community and and the community knows that this is an option that's available to them and what the particulars are on that.

Um, like I mentioned, we're right now having conversations with the development community on what exactly is the consistently prepared applicant program, and then we come back to the council in June and we would share in June the data that we've collected on the collaborative approach and the delegation of authority, and then also roll out to the council um our proposals for the um pre-approved plans and the um consistently prepared applicant and get council's feedback on that, and then the final step would be um as we progress through June to January.

If this is successful and we're seeing um the efficiencies and the collaboration that we think we will see, then it'll be a discussion going into the 27-28 budget on if the council wants to expand this to other permit types.

How do we resource that?

And so, really, what this is going to do is inform us in that conversation, and we will start that conversation with the council.

Obviously, we'll be working with the city manager's office through the whole entire pilot program.

But really, what we're hoping to do is be able to come back perhaps with a proposal for 27-28 to look at how perhaps this can get outside the 20 units and less um and go from there.

So that concludes the presentation.

Again, as I mentioned at the beginning, one of the key aspects of why we're here is to get your questions and your feedback.

Does this sound something that is um uh acceptable?

Does this sound something that is um cool because we think it is.

We we we think it's a pretty good challenge, but I really wanted to get the the council's feedback on it and get your thoughts on it before so we got time here to to adjust it, like I said, because the launch doesn't happen to January.

So with that, Mayor, thank you.

Um thank you, Peter, and thank you, Corey.

Yes, it's cool.

It's a I I I let me be the first away, and I think it is a cool anything that we can do to speed up the ability to build more housing in Tacoma is a good thing.

Um, you know, we have our young people here today, it's student government day.

Um, and I was with them this morning and they asked me, what are we doing to solve homelessness?

Um and and and I talked about home and Tacoma and I talked about our affordable housing action strategy, you know, in terms of the housing piece of it.

Um, but it'll be great to add this to the list because this is something that will allow us to build more homes faster so that we can get so that we have more homes online so we can make more homes available.

I also am really excited about this because it will continue to enhance our reputation.

I know a lot of people say there are some people, and I find that a lot of people who say that are actually from Tacoma who say the permitting process is so difficult, and so this and so that.

And every time I meet somebody who's coming to Tacoma for the first time, they rant and rave about how great our our um our permitting um process is and how accommodating we are and how we work with people.

But I think this will just give us another opportunity to improve that customer service.

So thank you all for thinking about this and bringing this forward.

I know I'm really excited, but I'll open it up to council members, and we'll start with council member Walker.

Thank you.

Um very excited about this.

Thank you for putting the work in, and I know many other folks.

Um, this is really clear.

Uh I just had one thing that I think you talked about, but I missed.

And that is the pre-approved townhouse plans.

So we already have the pre-approved DADU plans, or at least we have the consultant on board that's working on that.

That was right.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Uh, we do have the pre-approved DADUs already launched.

So we launched that in February.

Uh so we have four different versions of pre-approved DADUs, and we also have a duplex option available.

Okay, and so this would be adding the third set of pre-approved plans.

Okay.

So in our budget, I'm skipping ahead to the next presentation.

It says something like expansion of the DADU pre-approved plan.

Um, does that mean we use the same consultant and it like it feels like we're adding a lot of money to that pot?

Is this a totally different ask of a consultant to do townhomes than to do DADUs?

How does that work?

So the exact details of how we proceed, we'll wait till January after the budget is officially adopted.

But uh initial thoughts are that we'll probably modify our existing contract with the existing consultant services and add to that to create more plans.

It might give us an opportunity to maybe utilize some of the existing services they've already provided.

Uh, but really the the thought being here is okay, so we've got to, I mean, we're really focused on making or operationalizing home and Tacoma, right?

How do we make it successful?

And so one of the things that we think will be a um a highly utilized portion of uh home and Tacoma is the townhouses.

And so if we can create a pre-approved townhouse that could be utilized successfully, uh that's kind of our goal with this uh budget.

Great, thank you.

Yeah, I would just add it is a different scope, it's an expanded scope.

Um obviously a detached ADU is less complicated than 20 units or townhouses on a 12,000 square foot lot.

And so, yeah, that 200,000 would um allow us to expand the scope of those consultant services to look at that different development type and all the issues associated with that.

But hopefully, what we would have is the same thing that we have for detached ADUs is we'd have a set of pre-approved plans.

Um now these are building plans, so we're not talking about site development.

You still have to go through the site development, but you'd have a set of pre-approved plans that you can pull off the shelf, and it would at least save you that engineering aspect of the building stuff, and then you would submit.

So that's what that 200,000 dollars is for.

And again, that's not general fund money, that's out of the permit enterprise fund.

Um, and so those are dollars that um are dedicated um through permit fees and things like that to um you know make permitting more uh efficient.

All right, council member Sidalgay.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Uh, thank you, Peter.

Thank you, Corey.

Uh, and thank you, City Manager, for making the direction to get this started.

I'm really excited about this, actually.

Um this is uh as the mayor mentioned, um, the lack the severe lack of housing is is just exacerbates every single thing we try to do for all sorts of things in the city.

So anything we can do to make that faster is something I'm excited about.

Uh a couple of things I've wanted to um comment on.

I did really like the there's a statement you made, which is this is about it's not about the level of what you would, but you used the word don't let it languish.

And I think that's that's a lot of the frustrations we we hear from the community out there, not just developers but private um just residents that are trying to improve their home is they feel like it's languishing or taking too long.

So anything we can do to move that along and be better partners, I think uh is gonna be uh really important.

So I I like you stating that.

Um I also want to point out that this isn't just for private developers because the way we designed Home and Tacoma uh too was to incorporate bonuses, you know, the bonus ones and bonus twos.

So when you get to a sixplex or an eightplex in your ones, twos, you are going to be having to incorporate affordable units in there.

So anything we can do for a lot of these organizations, and a bonus too is 100% affordable, right?

So anything we can do for any of these uh organizations that would want to do uh a bonus to uh eightplex, eight town homes together that makes it easier for them to get through the permitting process.

This would help those nonprofits to come in that that create affordable housing because we've expanded our ability to do that.

So that's uh I just wanted to point that out for my colleagues.

Um I think council member uh uh Walker asked uh my question because I did see that it says DADU and you talked about townhomes, and I wanted to make sure this is really about town homes, uh the 200,000, not just a new type of DADU, right?

Okay.

Um lastly where was my last comment there?

Um I wanted to understand in the unit lot subdivision, which is something I am interested in because it is home ownership opportunity and how it intersects with town homes.

Um is that about just reducing the time it'll take to get through that process of subdividing, or or maybe there's a little color there that I'm trying to understand what we're trying to do there.

Yeah, so uh the reason we included the 10 to 20 unit ULS as part of this pilot project is we really did want to focus on the homeownership component of uh home and Tacoma.

So right now with our existing residential process, we already allow uh one through six units to be submitted as part of the consolidated residential process.

So what we're trying to expand with this is to make that 10 to 20 unit type development uh quicker.

Uh we want to include the ULS, the actual land use entitlement portion uh in this pilot.

What is ULS?

Uh the unit lot subdivision uh platter.

I know exactly gotta get it accurate.

Uh the actual plating and creating a fee simple lots.

We wanted to include that as part of the pilot because we thought that was really important.

Uh I guess to entice a developer to really go after that style of development.

Got it.

And then the last question on the combined permitting.

Um will this also include like TPU and other entities or not?

Is it just gonna be all the city stuff and TPU still separate?

It includes uh a limited portion from TPU.

So uh I want to echo Director Hoffman and thank TPU Power and Water for participating in this program.

What they're really focused on with this pilot project is getting and looking at these projects and making sure that they can be approved.

And so their portion is going to be limited to really that quick approval.

Um if a project requires uh design work, for example, for a new water main or something, that that'll be handled outside of this pilot.

So I guess limited services is how I would handle it.

But will we be tracking if it is a TPU delay, let's say absolutely the metrics.

So we've built in a lot of metric point to this specific permit.

So we're creating a whole new record in the cella.

Uh the details are kind of boring, but um every exactly right, every metric is going to be tracked.

So if it is uh hang up from this particular scope or entity, we will track that.

Yeah, council member, I might add this is gonna be this is gonna be a data-driven exercise.

Um we're gonna we're gonna track all it's gonna be transparent and we're gonna track um what is allowing us or what is preventing us from achieving the goals of this pilot program.

And we're gonna learn, it's gonna be iterative.

Um, we're gonna learn, and so what we're hoping to do is really come out of this exercise with a process that is acceptable and works for all parties involved.

Um, like I said, we've done it for like six units or less, but this is expanding it.

Um we've had multiple conversations with Tacoma Public Utilities over the years of having consolidated permitting, um, and we've made great strides in that, but we just still don't really understand specifically data-driven what are the issues that need to be addressed to really make that work.

Um, and I think this is the the one of the goals of this exercise is to understand that and come back to the council in June and say, you know, here's what the data shows.

How do you how do you want from a policy perspective, from a code perspective, from a budgetary perspective, from a resource perspective, how do you want to um continue this and perhaps even expand it?

So my suggestion was if there are findings about this, that'd be great to also do in a joint um uh session with the TPU board because quite frankly, the regular even developer or resident really has no difference between what is the city and the permitting and what is TPU, and getting to that is gonna be amazing.

So I love the fact that you guys uh are gonna be uh uh tracking that so we can we can talk about it next year.

My last comment.

Um I I really do like that you intentionally put in uh communication and working with MCO.

Uh I think that's gonna be really important, maybe a month or two into the start of your uh pilot to really communicate out to the the correct audiences out there that hey, you know, Tacoma, we're trying this.

Please come and put your permits in.

We want you to be part of this solution.

And I think that's absolutely gonna be important to collect even more data once you're ready to expand it.

So uh I thank you for adding that as well.

Um that's all I have.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

Um, Councilmember Diaz.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I think I would just reiterate, and this sounds very cool, and I'm very excited about it.

So thank you both for your work on this and for all the teams who are gonna get to do this work.

Um, I have a question that I'm not sure if it's for you guys, for um someone else.

I thought I saw CED director walk in.

Um, do we have a sense of beyond just individual families in in Tacoma of how many businesses or nonprofits actually are looking to do this specific type of plan?

Like, is there a sense of a cue?

It's okay if the answer is no, but I just was curious if anyone has uh we don't track that data.

Um we do know that there are certain um obviously habitat.

Uh there are some there are some programs that do come through um TCRA that do this type of development that we would certainly work with CED on getting them out, but I don't know exactly what the cue for this is.

I mean, home and to coma is pretty new.

Um we do have a lot of interest and there's a lot of um applications in play, but we've never really done something like this before, and so I'm not quite sure if this will expedite or bring interest to those groups, but you know, certainly we'll work with CED on making sure that those nonprofits are aware of this program and participated because we want that feedback.

Great.

Um, I think that is maybe then my sort of next question or request for Q4 is how do we actually advertise that these plans all exist to community, either individuals or or private developers or whoever it is who might be building these so that once we have the template we know I think it's fantastic they were gonna build it, but if they're gonna build it, we have to tell them it's there.

So I just I think this is that's that's the big piece that I think is um I would love to see as as we're getting there.

Sure.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Diaz.

Deputy Mayor Daniels.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, and thank you, Peter or Doctor and Corey for putting this together and all the work that I know you've that you've done on this.

I'm really excited about it.

I was really excited about the last one.

I feel like I've been advertising the pre-approved plans that we have already to people that want to know about it and people that don't care to know about it.

Um, but these are the things that really excite me.

Um I had a couple of questions um just to make sure that I understand some parts of this the right way, um, and then um some appreciations also.

So let's see.

On the um where it says single structure, 20 units or less.

Are we talking about single structures or like a single structure on a so our intent with this uh I guess twofold.

So the ULS uh conversation what that is trying to encourage is town houses.

Uh and so that might be, I guess, technically multiple structures, but really what we're trying to do is the 12,000 square foot lot is one large structure.

So uh we're trying to try trying to target the exact uh type of housing where it's like one structure, many units, typical residential lot, and that's the type of info we're really looking to promote, with the exception of townhouses.

Got it.

So, like um an apartment, maybe you're gonna be able to do that.

Yeah, it could be up to uh a small apartment, small apartment.

Uh yep, exactly.

Got it.

I think that um developers are always interested in doing what the city wants to see so that they can make it easy on themselves and make it easy on you at the same time and kind of just do what we want to see.

So I just wanted to make sure I understood that because I think in my mind I was thinking cottages, multiple structures on like a smaller plot of land.

Um, Deputy Mayor, the reason we excluded that is we already think it's covered in our res existing residential process, and so we're like we didn't want to duplicate efforts.

For sure it is.

That's that's super helpful for me.

Okay.

Um, let's see.

Um, and then on the pre-application um meeting.

I know right now the pre-application meeting is split from the pre-application in and of itself.

Um is the meeting portion the part that's gonna be free, or is the whole thing going to be free?

So the whole thing is going to be the well, not the permit cost itself, but uh the whole pre-application.

The pre-application process.

Pre-application process.

Oh, free, but required.

Wow.

Yep, so we are gonna right now it's optional.

And one of the roadblocks we see in approving permits fast is that those who don't go through the pre-application process don't understand a requirement uh or something they can do, and so we are gonna make it free but required.

And there's also gonna be that pre-submittal checklist, and that's really important to make sure that when we start reviewing it, it really is a complete package for all reviewers and all disciplines to look at.

Okay, that makes sense.

Um, I think that there's um the the pre-submittal checklist.

Will that be for the pre-application or for the permit?

For the actual permit.

We actually considered doing a pre-submittal meeting and actually meeting with the designer to go over the requirements.

But we didn't want to burden a designer if like they knew what they're doing, like kind of like a consistently prepared applicant.

And so we're gonna have a checklist there.

Uh and as long as that checklist is satisfied, we'll accept the plans.

We're gonna try to make sure all of our ducks are in a row, the that everyone's on the same page, so that when it gets in the system, we're not worried about what we missed on the front end.

It's like what's happening in the review process that we need to work on and improve.

Appreciate that.

Okay.

Um I just want to just you mentioned a sell up earlier, and I just am really impressed.

And the way that we're trying to use data.

Like I first of all, I just really really like the system.

I love that you can go in and literally look at any piece of your permit, and you can tell exactly what is missing, what's responsible, who's responsible, so that I know that there's a way to collect that data and to be able to like see any kind of consistencies, but more importantly, be able to follow up on the exact it's so granular.

I just it's I can't tell you enough how like how critical that is in knowing where you have problems in your um plan before it you you know it comes out.

Um let's see.

Um question I have one thing that I've seen people kind of communicating about is the work order system and how we site development is just the thing.

I don't know, there's no way around it to make it there's probably ways to make it easier.

Um and I guess my question is uh right now is the work order requirements, are those part of the pre-application, and if not, do we see a point in which they might be a part of that so that we can avoid some of these like hiccups or surprises near the end of a project?

So, Deputy Mayor, that's a good question.

Uh, and so I wasn't quite gonna roll it out yet, but I'll I I'll try to explain what we're trying to do.

So, part of the changes we submitted at IT was to do something called a modified work order.

So there used to be a thing in the city called a modified work order, and it was really a step between uh kind of an over-the-counter style simple approval permit and a more complicated, complex work order permit.

So uh there is reasons, there's a lot of reasons for health safety reasons why the city needs to have detailed designs, but there's also some risk that the city can take, and that's one of the things that we're exploring right now is the possibility of maybe taking on some additional risks in the right-of-way and doing what we used to do as a modified work order process.

So the way the pilot is set up is that uh it's basically all your utilities included in the right-of-way, driveways included, so a lot of right-of-way work is included, but we are excluding things that might be required in the right-of-way that are more complex.

So let's say you have to do some paging or um like extend a road or something like that, or set established line or grade or something for for something that'll be excluded for now.

Uh, but we are looking at a modified work order process to maybe enhance this uh sometime next year.

So our priority priority was really on just launching this program on time in January, and then there might be some additional components we add to it later.

Yeah, I think that that's one of the things that I've been hearing, particularly, and you know, we have a lot of like families I think that are interested in home and Tacoma that um if they're not building a house in their backyard, or maybe they are building a house in their backyard, or maybe they're wanting by their neighbors' lot, it's like a small tiny lot, and they think it's gonna be really easy, but it's not because there's no house on it, and then they turn then they end up becoming a developer and having to do this kind of like intense site development project that they don't know that they or they're just don't they don't know what they're getting into in terms of like just trying to purchase something, maybe they want to build a house for their mom or dad or something like that, and then um they just don't know how to go about that process, and that's kind of what I'm thinking about as um Councilmember Diaz brought up of like just wanting fam like not just family members but community members wanting to like make cottage housing and want to be a be a part of the housing solution.

So um I don't have an answer or a solution to that.

I'm just putting that out as a thing, and it sounds like you are already working on ways.

I'll I'll add a little bit of comment commentary on that, Deputy Mayor.

Uh the city is really committed to continuous improvement and doing things differently.

So we get feedback all the time, and one of the things that feedback doesn't go unheard.

We we constantly are listening and trying to do things differently.

I had a meeting this morning with Director Chavez about this exact issue uh about how can we do things differently and and really um I guess encourage certain types of housing uh exactly in the situation that you mentioned.

So a homeowner trying to add a DA to you, but not needing to become a developer to do that.

So, how do we keep it simple while still protecting the city's interest and everything?

Okay, um structure.

That was all of them.

I think the last one that I had, um I think it kind of goes along with council member Walker's question, and I had the same question about design and just sheer cost of design and what you all explained to me, which now makes sense is that it's not just the design that we are paying for, it's the licensure of that design, which really costs, which is where a lot of the cost comes from.

And so that helps me understand why we have to pay hundreds of thousands of what an individual would pay five or ten thousand dollars for.

So that was really helpful for me.

Um a question I had on to that was um if somebody, if an engineer wanted to, or an architect excuse me, wanted to donate plans.

Is there an opportunity or is there a barrier to them being able to do that?

So I'll I'll jump in a little bit.

Uh so uh try I'll preview another thing that me and Peter or Director Huffman is working on.

Um we're looking at the possibility of allowing something called base plans.

And so I think what you're kind of referring to is more of a base plan situation where so a base plan, just uh quick overview.

Um certain jurisdictions do this now, and they basically take uh a certain plan and they'll say, hey, this will be a pre-approved base plan, and that base plan can be used in multiple locations across that jurisdiction.

The challenge in doing that greater than just one jurisdiction is uh lateral forces.

There's different wind speeds across different jurisdictions, and there's different, I guess, engineering standards that we'd have to make sure comply um across multiple jurisdictions.

There is a situation or scenario uh in the future where we could have a base plan approved, and so a designer could basically uh donate that.

I guess um one of the things that we do as part of our permitting process is check to ensure uh I mean it's an intellectual property, right?

So we make sure that if someone's using a particular plan, they have permission to do that.

Uh usually designers stamp it or something for this address.

And so I think the scenario you're looking at is maybe like a base plan scenario.

And director of the case.

Yeah, we'd want to make sure that we have a base plan that meets the city's standards and codes, not just you know, all engineering standards.

There would also have to be a conversation I think we'd need to have with the city attorney's office about exposure to the city on liability, just because somebody stamps something because they're a professional engineer or licensed architect.

In theory, that stamp means that the liability goes to that individual, but now the city's accepting that and then letting somebody else use that plan.

And if that plan is so there'd be some checks and balances there and some discussion about that right now, we're controlling, if you will, yeah, through the consultant, the design of the process to make sure that when it is something that we put on the shelf for others to use, that the city has reviewed it and that it meets all the city standards, and so that's kind of part of that process.

So, I mean, again, we're open to look at all kinds of stuff, and so this is the process to help us get there.

And then when we find out what these issues are in questions, we'll just work through with the different departments and the council and the city manager's office and addressing them and then figuring out what the resources are to make them go forth as the you know the council and the manager wants to do it.

So I appreciate that.

Um just super impressed by this.

I'm I'm super impressed by how far we've come just in my time here of um and and where it looks like we're going.

Um I you asked if we had any feedback or anything to add, and I think for me, the one thing that I would add is just a way for people or well, great meaning um architects to be able to um give something to the city for other people to be able to do because it saves so much money and time for regular people to add.

So um thank you so much for the presentation.

Thank you, Deputy Mayor.

Are there any other questions?

All right, I don't see any more questions.

Um City Manager, thank you very much for for making this a priority, and um thank you to the two of you, Corey and Peter, for bringing this forward and look forward to getting the update about how well it's working, how many permits we've received.

And when will we so it kicks off in January?

Is that correct?

And so first court into first quarter?

June.

Julie, so you're the first six months.

Yeah, June is when we come back to the full council and report out.

Um obviously through that six-month period, we'd be working with the city manager's office and other departments on understanding what's going on, but the full report out would be to the council in June of 2026 and then January of 2027.

Can a regular citizen request that report?

Sure.

Great, I'll make sure you have my email.

Yeah, certainly.

You and deputy mayor, I'm sure will be very interested.

Yes, we'll be very interested in hearing the update.

All right.

Thank you all so much.

All right.

Um, our second agenda item today is a 2025-2026 uh mid biennium uh budget modification.

Our second agenda item today is the 2025-2026 uh mid biennium uh budget modifications.

So we've got a few changes they're gonna come forward with, and then invite you all of I haven't heard of anybody bringing forward any any amendments tonight um for the budget.

Um and so I will turn it over to um to our city manager and to Andy Chirillo, our finance director.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um, deputy mayor and members of council.

Um we have some um one material change from what we've shown you before, and then just highlighting across where uh we've had some dialogue.

I've had some dialogue with with council members individually.

Um we just want to highlight those and just from an iterative process, we use that word a lot of times.

I would say from a version control standpoint, this is probably the most easily read document, I would say.

So I just want to put that a note and then just open up for questions.

Yeah, this is really good.

And with that, I'll just pass it along to Director Trillo.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, City Manager.

Um, so yes, I'm Andy Trullo, the financial director for the city.

As you can see, this is the summary you have we've been giving you the last couple of weeks here.

We have highlighted the changes on it so you can see where we've made some slight changes to account for some of the proposed additions to this.

We have the um advocates for immigrations attention northwest up under the city manager's office, because there's an existing contract under the um Center for Excellence up there.

We added the uh youth competitive state conference support in our CED department to work with the school district to make sure that gets done down under neighborhood and community services.

Uh the biggest change is there was some concern about the reduction for the youth violence reduction and prevention grants that were in there.

So we've restored that 180,000, and we've also added the grant to the boys and girls club for the mayor's youth commission in there.

Uh and the last place down there in police, you will see we added a uh $25,000 line item for uh community sport programs in the police department.

So those are the four five changes that um we were told to make to this.

They're highlighted on that sheet.

Um this is what is prepared to be presented tonight at the public hearing on the uh mid-mod proposal.

Um there will be a PowerPoint that is very similar to the one we provided you last week and the week before here at study session.

We've grouped these items slightly differently.

We've grouped all the public safety items together and then all the access and health and housing stuff together.

So it'll look slightly different, but it's the same material.

With that, happy to answer any questions you might have.

I want you all to know I told them not to do the presentation again because I think you've seen it several times, and I wasn't sure you needed to see it again.

But if you'd like the presentation before tonight, they stand ready to give it, but you will see the same presentation tonight.

Are there any questions or comments?

Um, yes, uh, we'll start with council member Bush now.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, thank you uh for putting this together, and I I appreciate the how you changed it up.

Uh, it makes a lot of it flows really well in my mind.

Um, also really appreciate the um restoration or or putting kind of adding back into the the youth uh stuff.

I think that's really important for our young people out there, um, as well as the community support.

I know the police department's been doing uh a ton of great work, Bourbon in particular out there.

I think this um this small amount of money is gonna be very, very helpful and uh and really encouraging a lot of more um collaboration with the police department and supporting uh our community out there.

Um just kind of on the budget total specifically, uh just trying to understand everything.

So the the the red brackets is a reduction.

Um and so if I'm looking down here, are we looking at uh so the grand total amount is that how much in addition we're adding to our general fund budget, or is that uh I just I'm trying to understand a little bit more.

Really good question.

So if we start on the far right hand side of this spreadsheet, you will see that's that column is titled Grand Total.

The next column over is the other funds, and that first column there is labeled general fund.

So if you go down to the bottom of the column labeled general fund, you'll see that number is 17 uh 17,819,000.

So that's what we're doing to the general fund.

That number is net, so it includes all the ads and all the reductions.

Um there's about 20 million dollars in ads, there's about three million dollars in reductions, hence we get to that 17 million dollar number in the other funds.

So that's our uh permitting fund as Director Hoffman was just up here talking about the 200,000 dollars that's in the permitting fund.

We have a lot of activity in our environmental services fund for for things.

So the other fund totals 17 and a half million, and you add both those to the other, you get the 35.

But the general fund impact to get to your questions, only the 17, eight in that first column.

Okay.

Um, and so is this uh I don't what is the baseline that we are expecting for the mid mod.

So are we in line with that 17 million with where we expected during our biannual budget process, or is it more or less?

Yeah, that's a great question, Councilmember Bushnell.

Um if you look at the additions that we're bringing for your consideration tonight, um about 11 plus million or one-time additions align along our health premiums, our workers comp and um third party liability.

So you put that aside, uh, that probably gets you to closer to what baseline.

We always set a budget for council to pass that we want to live with for the two years.

This is not baseline.

This these are ads.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Great.

Deputy Mayor Daniels.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I just had a couple of questions um about the CED reductions uh that I didn't get to ask last time.

Um, and I want to make sure I understand what they mean.

Uh the reduced to public art maintenance budget.

Uh what is that?

I mean, I know what it is, but what does that do effectively?

Uh it's a really good question.

You got a phone of friend back there.

Otherwise, I'm gonna go.

The detailed explanation really is still in the information we gave.

Oh, we gave you you all um uh a week ago.

Uh but I will look that one up in CED and see what that is.

Oh, she might be able to but maybe Tanya can can bail me out and answer that.

I didn't want to ask you earlier because I knew that this is not the the granular pieces is not your lane, so I figured I'd better ask it today.

Thank you, Chair Jones, for the question.

Um I can't give you a detail on exactly what the art pieces uh that would be maintained that would be reduced, but it would just be an overall reduction in um you know how often and how much we could maintain uh certain art projects.

Got it.

And are those external or internal?

I don't understand the question.

No, so internally we maintain art.

You know, we have the I'm sorry when oh, like inside the building.

Yeah, oh um, I believe it would be outside external.

Okay, but I can 100% clarify that for you.

Great.

Yep.

And the description provided by the department earlier was this reduction will limit the program to emergent and high priority maintenance needs only.

So the routine deferred maintenance, including traffic box wrapping replacements will be suspended.

So it's a good thing.

Oh, so it's our internal program that are fits our external art proper.

Okay.

Yes, and it cleans like graffiti off murals and replace damaged traffic art box wraps, so it'll be a reduction to that program.

That's what this proposal would do.

And then Tacoma Arts Month, is that is ten thousand dollars the whole budget, or is that um a portion of the budget?

It is a portion of the budget, and it talks about again in here uh reduction would um reduce kind of the event planning budget and reduce the printed and promotional materials related to that.

Okay, thank you.

Um when I instructed our departments to come work with our finance director for reductions, there was not a reduction that was devoid and um devoid of impacts um to the community, and so um I think there will be a bigger conversation as we um pass mid-mode February March, April that time frame on additional reductions because there is that overriding.

Um, what we're using for for ending fund balance cash on hand, um, there's still the structural uh that we're still trying to drive down.

We were successful in bringing to you about three plus million dollars in reductions of that, a third of that is ongoing.

Um, and unfortunately, uh two-thirds of the reductions in three million, so two out of the three million are one time reductions.

So we still have much to do on reductions in the coming days.

I just want to moderate.

Yeah, I really appreciate it.

I think I was just concerned because I see an addition here, and I just there wasn't an addition before, and now there is an addition, and they only had reductions, and so um now that there is a I'm just glad that everything is here in one place so we can see what we're asking for as it relates to what we are um asking our departments to reduce.

Um so and it really to think if there's any other creative ways to kind of meet some of these um smaller needs.

I haven't made any asks from the um from our um our uh contingency pot.

So I was thinking maybe I would um see if my colleagues would entertain one of those.

All right, any other questions?

All right, thank you all very much.

Appreciate you.

All right, other items of interest.

Our um, our third our third agenda item is a council action is a CAM, um, which which is a resolution directing the city manager to seek partnerships to create a new low barrier shelter site.

Um this uh amendment um or this resolution um was the idea of council member um Rumba, and I fully support it.

Um this direct directive represents a continuation of the important work of our staff and the and our partners that have that they've already been doing to address homelessness in our city and not an addition, but really just to highlight um and raise the profile of our of some of our efforts.

Um as many of you know or may even recall uh when we first got to the first camping band that came forward.

Um I was very insistent upon the fact that I couldn't support any changes until we had a low barrier site, and that's when we stood up the low barrier site on Pacific Avenue.

Now, some call the stability site a low barrier site, but it still has a lot of rules.

So I consider a low barrier site to be a place where someone who is on the street can pick up their stuff and move and not deal with you gotta be in by this time, you can't use drugs on site.

Just all of the rules that come along with being in when being some of our tiny home sites in our congregate shelters.

Um and so when we had to close that project down on Pacific Avenue, um, we lost our very low barrier site.

And so the Pacific site served more than 215 in 250 in 215 individuals, um, and 48 of them exited to permanent housing.

Um, which is a reminder that if we meet people where they are, we can create pathways to stability.

Um so my hope is in in signing on to this and supporting council member Ramba, and thinking that this is really important is just to shine a bright light on what staff does every single day.

Staff is continuously looking for um additional low barrier sites.

Um, and so this won't change the work, but it does um renew our commitment to doing the work and making sure that the city manager knows and staff knows that it's not just their priority that's the priority of this council.

Um so I hope that as that comes forward um tonight that you all will support that, support that.

Um and I want to thank our city staff and our partners and my colleagues on the council for your continued dedication to addressing this challenge both with urgency and compassion and appreciate um and hope we have your support tonight.

If you have any questions, uh councilmember Rumba and I stand ready to take them.

Um, but look forward to bringing this forward tonight.

Councilmember Walker.

Thank you, Mayor.

And just one clarification.

Um, I am very supportive, obviously, of finding new options for people to go.

Does this proposal dictate that the site is outside the city, or is this we need to find a site if it's in the city or out of the city?

It is either or or or or it's either or or both both and okay.

I would say it's both and not either or.

And um the this document says that it's identifying funding options.

And maybe this is a question for the city manager.

What does that look like?

We've just looked at our budget.

There's not like any extra money sitting around.

Um so what do we mean by identifying funding options like non-city funding options, income option?

I or or are we just starting that conversation?

We're just starting the conversation.

It could be a I mean, if let's say we find uh uh a partner in it in a neighboring city, I won't name a city for fear that they'll feel like they got obligated today, but let's say we find a partnership with a neighboring city and they're real they're willing to use a location, or and and and so then they would partner with us for that location if if Tacoma people go there's if Tacoma people could use it.

There obviously is going to be some costs associated with it, but that is for the that is to later be determined because this is just the start of the process.

Super supportive of making this happen and finding money for it.

Um who knows maybe the federal government won't be shut down and maybe they can maybe there'll be some federal options available to us.

Mayor, can I just say what back to what Council Mayor Walker asked about?

Yeah.

Um one of the things when I brought it to the city to the interim city manager was the idea of finding a way to use right-of-way dollars, which we had tried to do with a with uh with people who were moved somewhere in the city, and we tried to get right-of-way dollars and it didn't happen in time.

So trying to work with that pot of money and trying to get that to happen if it works in a certain place that would fit the right-of-way dollar use.

That would be probably my first choice because I know that bucket is available, but that that's the first good.

All right, council member Scott.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Um I think a couple of my questions were already answered.

Um I guess just to clarify, like, I guess I have two things.

Um, one, like as we are identifying the funding options for this.

If I guess I'm just wondering, like, I I don't know if it's the if this say the low barrier site is we find it and it's another city.

Um are we like as part of this kind of negotiating, like whose responsibility, like I get why you know, we're kind of seeking this out and you know, why we're paying in on it, but I guess like if it's in another city, is it gonna be on them one to pay for it to go up, but then to two maintain it in their budget because we all know that like most of these sites are not just a one-time cost, they're ongoing.

So yeah, again, I think that's something to later be decided.

I think that would come out in an MOU or or you know, that we could look at that.

There's also like there's also this regional um homelessness authority that's being stood up.

So eventually there are going to be dollars for that.

So maybe if we're doing a regional partnership, there might be regional dollars available through Pierce County.

So this is just again highlighting the work that this is just bringing to the forefront the work that we're already doing, and as we get there, as we find a potential site, then we would negotiate all of all of that.

So I don't have a I don't have a what what would the answer be at this point.

We we'd have to find a site and see what works out with the partner that um that we find the site with.

Yeah.

Um, and then thank you for that.

And then I think you know, I I know that there are low barriers, like that low barrier sites often are some of the most appealing.

I just are we in this process um is there flexibility that like say if we get new information or there's new data out or and doing the the search for this site that we figure out that maybe it's not a low barrier site that we need and it's something else.

Is there flexibility to kind of pivot to that or like just in case we figure out that like or if maybe in the time like there is a low barrier site that does get open somewhere else and we decide, okay, well, maybe we're looking for a space for tiny homes or something like that.

I that is and I and thank you for the question, Councilman Scott.

That is always happening, right?

And it but but but certainly um it's up to this council to always be able to put pivot to what you know what the most current information is.

Um but um if if if if we get a site stood up in the beginning of the year and or someone stands aside for the beginning of the year and that need is taken care of, and you all need to pivot.

I I I will um I would expect that the city manager would then bring that forward to the council and you all would make a decision.

And is that just that would just be kind of like sharing, like kind of giving that direction, or do we like need to go through another?

No, that that what that's gonna happen naturally.

Again, this is just memorializing something that we already do.

The what we're not asking the city, we're putting a timeline on it.

Um, but we're not asking the city manager to do something that he's not that staff is not already doing every day.

Councilmember Albert, did you want to jump?

I just wanted to say that I think what what I see in this is if we actually do work with a partner that's outside of our city, it's an opportunity to take take advantage of what we are looking to do in the future with the unified regional approach, which is work with other cities and other entities that may not be in our city to stand up sites.

That's what's gonna happen with the unified regional approach, and I think that if we could lead with that as like a pilot program to see how that might work.

I think that that would that's what I envision in this, if that could happen.

Um, like I said, I don't know if it if it will happen with the the entity I'm thinking of, but I appreciate interim city manager having conversations about that, and I appreciate us trying something new that hasn't been really tried.

Um, and with with us working with another um city possibly to make something happen.

So the idea is to get there, and I see us doing more of that, and I hope to have Pierce County leading in that way as well.

I know that they just did their rezone and now they have um zoning so you could do tiny homes before they didn't have any way to do temporary housing, and it wasn't it was a legal, and so I'm ex or I just would am excited to see this happen, and um I think this is how we get what we need in our county is by working with other um municipalities to make this happen.

So I really appreciate the mayor being interested in being involved in this, and I like she says, we're already doing all this work, it's just sort of I think bringing it to the top so people understand how important and significant it is to our city that we do this work.

Thanks.

Deputy Mayor.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, and I think I even have more questions now.

Um I really appreciate the work um to do this, and I know that you said that it's a new and um a reminder of kind of the work that we are already doing, and I guess I just wonder if this is if finding low barrier sites is a cornerstone of our homelessness strategy.

Um, I don't know how this is different, and I guess I wonder what is different from the strategy that we have and doing this.

What problems or answers will we find now that we haven't been able to find over the last kind of years that we've had this homelessness strategy?

Um, I think like having to do a resolution signifies to me that we've lost energy around our strategy, and I wonder why that is or how that is, how that came to be and how we see this being different than the last kind of four years.

So if we find it, um that, yeah, and then I have another question as well.

Okay, well, I'll I'll start with that.

So a lot of times, and there that's the reason it's a resolution.

We've we do a lot of resolutions that sometimes lift up work that we're already doing.

We do resolutions to ask the city manager to do something that they're already gonna do, like to bring a report back to us, even though they're gonna re bring the report back to us.

It's a way to kind of memorialize or to heighten um the issue, and that's what this resolution does.

It just heightens the issue and it and it clearly communicates that this is a priority for the council.

This is the only tool the council has because we're not changing anything, we're not changing the plan.

We're we're reiterating what the plan does, but we're taking a piece of the plan and lifting it up and saying to the city manager of all the things you're working on in the plan now that we've lost this this um low barrier site, we want it to be a priority.

Um, when everything is a priority as it is in the affordable as it is in the homelessness plan, you know, you're doing all of those things at once.

They're still gonna keep doing those things, but the city manager is gonna say, while you're doing all of those things, please make sure that you're focused on this as well.

Um, and that you put just a little bit more emphasis on this because this is really important to the council, and it became really important to me, especially when I realized we lost our low barrier of site.

So, my first question when council member Rumbard and I talked is why are we gonna do it in the resolution?

We could just tell the city manager to do it.

And if she and I talked, I was reminded, and of course, none of those are going to come to me in this moment, but I could go back and give you examples over examples of how we've said, you know what?

We just we just did it with Tacoma Creates.

We said, well, when you when you get done um laying out your criteria for capital projects and for um and for the unspent dollars, we put it in writing and bring it back to the council.

They were gonna do it anyway, but putting in writing just assures that it happens, and so this is just a way of assuring and raising up the issue so that people know, not just the city manager knows, but the community knows this is important.

That makes sense.

I think the other question that I have is because I hear you saying like this is just to renew our efforts and something that we are saying that we've been doing, and so it's okay to do and to expand a ban because we've been doing our strategy.

Um so I just have concerns about this.

This because I think this is alarms me to say actually we haven't been able to focus on our strategy because we've been doing other things.

Um, and this is this makes it more clear to me that that has been the case or that could be the case because we might be directing people to do too many different things at the same time, and so I have concerns not about this, but just overall.

Um, the other question I think I have is we're talking about renewing our commitment, but then also talking about giving funds to other jurisdictions.

That's a little bit concerning to me if we're talking about this.

Well, if we're Mike, that's more of a question.

So if we find a site in another city and they want to stand it up and they need right-of-way dollars to do it, or they need the right-of-way dollars that are out allocated to Tacoma.

Do we give them our funds to do this?

I I I hear your question, and what I would say is that I think that's putting the cart before the horse.

I think we have to have those conversations first to determine what the ask is.

Um, again, with the regional with the regional authority being stood up, there could be if if cities enter into a partnership naturally and not under not under the auspice of having to do the work through the regional authority, then this is a great thing.

And uh, the perfect example of this is SHAP.

Is all the jurisdictions coming together and working on affordable housing.

Now, we pay membership into shape.

It is not likely that we will get a project anytime soon out of shape, but we benefit by by being a part of SHAPE and putting money together so that smaller cities and jurisdictions around us can benefit from that pot of money and build more affordable housing because if they build more affordable housing, it helps the city of Tacoma.

So I would say I understand your question, I understand that concern, and I think that that is a concern that can be addressed when the partnership is found, but it doesn't make the need for the partnership any less necessary.

Just if we find one how it's paid for, will then be a decision that the that the council after you and I will have to make because this will happen next year.

Yeah, I think I just have concerns um if we are shutting down our own shelter beds um year over year because we can't afford them, and we're already providing over 90% of the shelter in the whole entire county.

It it seems a little bit concerning that we would even consider giving away the dollars that we absolutely still need here to another county.

I just I think that concerns me.

But outside of that, like I think we should absolutely be focused on finding a low barrier site here and elsewhere in whatever kind of partnership we can, particularly one that's not financial and not us over extending ourselves as we continue to do.

And I don't and I'll and I'll be honest to say I don't I don't think there is there's at least from my viewpoint um in this resolution, there's nothing that commits us to spending money anywhere else.

It's just a matter of saying this is a huge because we lost our low barrier site.

If if I had realized that and I I I missed that we lost our low barrier site, I would have been screaming this from the rooftops long before now.

Um, because I've been a huge proponent of making sure that we have the right places for everyone.

And I use the example, not everyone wants to live in a single family home.

So not everybody wants to go to congregate shelter, not everybody wants to be in a tiny home site.

Not everyone wants to live in a tent, you know.

I mean, so so having all the necessary um options for people who are homeless is super super important, especially because you heard the number of people that we were able to move from the low barrier site into housing.

If they hadn't gone into the low bear, if that low barrier site wouldn't have been available, and they kept asking if they and someone kept asking them, um, well, here we've got a tiny home, and I kept saying no, we may not have never we may not have ever transitioned them until we gave them an opportunity that resonated with them so that they could get into a place and begin begin to get the services they need because not every it's not not everybody will go from um living on the streets to a tiny home into permanent housing.

Everybody takes a different some may go to Tacoma Rescue Mission, some may just stay on the streets for a long time, some do better in a low barrier site, some will do better when we have safe parking, right?

So people need all of those options, just like those of us who can buy our rent have options.

Okay, any other questions?

Perfect.

Thank you all so much.

All right.

With that, I will move on to the uh item number four, which is agenda review in the city manager's weekly report.

Thank you again, Madam Mayor, uh Deputy Mayor Members of the Council.

I am here to talk uh continuation from an item from last week.

Um, you had a chance over the last week to review my work plan as tentatively approved by the OSAC committee.

Um I wanted to just field any questions or concerns or additions.

Um, but before we go there, I just want to make sure I do have a working title for our second pilot program over this work plan.

Um we are now we're calling the pilot program for the tree canopy project.

It's actually titled South Tacoma Tree Canopy Enhancement Project.

So I want to ride for the brand and uh what South Tacoma Tree Canopy Enhancement Project, no acronym.

Yeah, because I will acronym.

And that really is to just so we want to be really uh focused on the fact that um if we are able to partner with the Department of Ecology for the state of Washington, um this is a project and project dollars that would be coming in the form of settlement dollars um that are to be for the settlement area in South Tacoma.

So we're gonna be calling that.

And uh I look forward to reporting back on that pilot program and having staff come to you, hopefully one of our two meetings in December uh to talk to you talk to you about what the status of that interlocal agreement might be looking like, um, as well as some hardships that might be there uh from partnering with the state.

So we always partner well with the state.

Let me just make that for the for the record for the public record.

But mayor, I just want to turn this back to you and before I go to the agenda review.

Uh if there's any questions, concerns, modifications.

Any questions, concerns, or modifications to the city manager's work plan?

Like you said, us on OSAC had an opportunity to review and work through it a couple of times before we got the final draft.

Um it doesn't look like we have any questions, so city manager, I will let you go into your uh agenda reading.

Perfect, thank you very much.

For tonight, uh Madam Mayor, we have two ceremonials uh on the agenda, uh proclaiming today as uh October 21st as student government day, as we have 80 students from TPS here with us, and also proclaiming October 2025 as domestic violence awareness month.

Um no proposed modifications to tonight's agenda and two public opportunities uh for the public to comment under public comment as well as a public hearing for our mid-mod budget.

So with that, I'll turn it back to you, Mayor.

Great.

Thank you very much, City Manager.

I also want to remind everyone that um in your weekly packets, you received um the um uh public works department was gonna come today and give a street initiative update.

Um and because we've had so many things on our agenda, I asked them to to put that to put that report in writing.

So please review it.

It is in your packet, um, and you'll get up-to-date information um from public work somewhere on on how we've invested um the dollars that we've received from the streets initiative.

And I will assume as I'm looking out at Jeff, and Jeff's like I won't be here after January with you, mayor, but I'm looking at Jeff and the city manager um that sometime in the first or second quarter of next year, you all will come back and wrap up the whole program of what we've been able to do for the last 10 years.

Jeff gave me a thumbs up.

So please review that.

And if you have questions, please be sure to ask staff.

All right, city manager, let's review the agenda.

Oh, you already did.

Sorry.

Okay.

With that, I will entertain a motion to convene to an executive session pursuant to RCW 42.30.1101 II and II to discuss potential and pending litigation not to exceed 30 minutes.

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, the motion is declared adopted.

I will also entertain a motion to convene to a closed session pursuant to RCW 42.30.1404A and B to discuss labor strategy.

So moved.

All those in favor signify by saying aye.

All those opposed.

All right, we will come back and adjourn the study session once we've completed the executive session.

Um, and when we do that, there will be no further business um conducted except for to go back into closed session.

So with that, we stand in recess.

Thank you.