City Council - Regular Meeting

[Music] all right good evening welcome to Bellingham city council regular meeting this February 10th 2025 call this meeting to order uh the Bellingham city council meets all requirements of the state of Washington open meetings act a couple of announcements before we begin we acknowledge that we are gathered on the traditional and unseated territory of the Lumi Nooksack and samish and samyu people who have cared for in tended this land since time immemorial truth and acknowledgement are critical to building mutual respect and conect a connection across all barriers of Heritage indifference We Begin this effort to acknowledge what has been buried by honoring the truth we pay respect to their Elders past and present please take a moment to consider the many legacies of violence displacement migration and settlement that bring us together here today and please join us in uncovering such truths at any and all public events the Bellingham city council provides Spanish interpretation at all regular evening meetings interpretation can be accessed by in-person attendees by utilizing the headsets located at the front of the room uh and remote viewers can log on to cob.org SLCC zoom and click on the language icon at the bottom of the screen to listen listen in Spanish and I'll go ahead and have our interpreter repeat that or thank you on February 24th 2025 at 1M the Bellingham city council will hold a special meeting to conduct a closed record hearing to consider a street vacation

cob.org 5 days prior to the meeting this closed record hearing is open for the public to observe either online or in person roll call please Hannah Stone here Dan haml here skip Williams here Lisa Anderson here Michael lillquist here jce cotton here Holly Huffman here all council members are present and first up tonight we have mayor's report thank you Council good evening good evening to staff and members of the community that are here tonight uh want to start off mayor's report tonight by sharing that I had the privilege of spending all day Saturday alongside council member Williams and part of Sunday uh we were together with other members of the Wacom racial Equity commission and I want to express my gratitude that I live in a place that has done the critical Preparatory work to have a body like this especially right now and um it is important work that we're engaged in on behalf of all of watom County and then I left our two days together feeling both inspired and energized by The Passion of the commission I also wanted to share that something extraordinary happened shortly after the last time that we were all together and that is that for the first time in several decades decades we had an alland staff meeting at the Mount Baker theater on Friday January 31st we had more than 400 people attending in person with dozens more streaming on live the purpose of our meeting was to celebrate city employees throughout the organization set the tone for a great year ahead and also

to share our one city approach to how we work together and for members of the public who may be just hearing about one city for the first time one city is a vision for a Cooperative Community First approach to providing excellent local government to the public to the people that we serve each day and to each other we are one one city is a value statement it's a value statement that we are developing to guide City culture and what it means to work here together it acknowledges the interconnectedness of our work and our actions because we are all part of a bigger ho and one city is also importantly an ethos of service service to the people who live here and service to one another it also re reinforces that the choice to become a public servant especially right now is a noble and a meaningful choice and my heartfelt thanks to everyone who worked so hard to plan this event and for all of those who participated I also want to talk a bit about improving communication and engagement regarding Council agenda items uh my time in office I have heard from community members about the challenges with when and how we publish our Council packets and indeed members of council all of you included share this concern and are similarly advocating for some changes and in response my office has been taking a closer look at the timing and the sequencing of the legislative process in light of our shared goals to Shared goals to make engaging in City business more accessible and easier to follow this

includes working with staff to adjust the timing for Content submissions and the calendar for our agenda Bill meetings our goal is to publish packets with more time for review by all and to expand the ways that we communicate what the upcoming work of the council will be we are evaluating how we will structure the content of council packets and we're assessing other Washington cities to inform this restructuring this is all part of a larger body of work to adapt and modernize our processes as we transition from a small municipality to a midsize local government that is more visible efficient and accessible we're committed to moving this work forward this year and also want to highlight that we are making strides and accessibility especially in terms of our language access and improving virtual participation including renewing the option for virtual public comment at tonight's meeting and last but not least I want to give kudos to the public works Crews for their sustained and excellent snow response and also a thank you to the public safety employees and the plant operators who keep our essential Services running no matter what the weather that's the end of mayor's report tonight thank you thank you mayor uh next we have our Council standing committee meeting reports first up was Public Works and natural resources and that was shared by council member Stone thank you very much president husman um good evening everyone so this afternoon I was joined on the Public Works

committee by council members Anderson and cotton we had two items before us the first was agenda bill 24433 this is regarding the 10-year fiber Network comprehensive plan adoption the city of bellingham's Municipal fiber network has been developed opportunistically and economically to support city services as well as those of agency partners including Bellingham Public Schools watcom transportation Authority watcom Regional 911 services and the watcom unified Emergency Operations Center the city has concluded its work to inventory existing conditions identify resources and opportunities and perform financial analysis to develop a comprehensive Capital operations plan for its Municipal fiber Network the resulting 10-year fiber Network comprehensive plan provides a blueprint to impr improve fiber Network redundancy and resiliency and it outlines the city's future fiber Network needs um wanting to note that this afternoon we were joined by interim Public Works co-director Joel fun as well as John Gavin who's the fber optic network engineer for the city of Bellingham um this afternoon there was some discussion regarding the um fiber plan that was presented so noting as well that this was coming back there had been a report um delivered to the council and a request from it was council member Lil Quist to have that formalized into um a plan for consideration and possible adoption by the city since the work had concluded um just noting that the study thus far had indicated that

right Carrier class Broadband Services um for the community was really infeasible based on the dollar amount of what would be required um to get our infrastructure and services um up to to that capacity and um to provide that level of service so there hasn't been a change to the content of what was provided previously and sort of the report out um but it has been more formalized um and outlines the next steps going forward which include um obviously the need to secure additional funding um but the first step will be fiber testing and fiber augmentation in the southwest segment of the city as well as infrastructure upgrades again along that Southwest segment um that work will take place over the next 1 to six months um and has been the cost estimated $421,500 um to and the anticipated funding source being the street fund unfortunately there's about $8 million worth of work to again bring the existing um infrastructure up to meet the needs of again that resiliency and redundancy throughout the city to make sure that we're responsive and able to keep operating systems functioning um even if there is a cut in the um in the system and so with that this afternoon as I said there was some discussion and ultimately the committee did have a unanimous recommendation to move to approve adoption of the 2025 to 2035 fiber Network comprehensive plan and ISO move second got a motion by the chair and a second by council member Williams any further discussion council member Anderson thank you

um I was a council member earlier today who had moved approval to bring this forward for vote and since then I've heard from multiple community members who felt that the timing is pretty quick succession from again the time the packet came out the ability to read through this an ability to send us communication about their thoughts on the plan and um earlier today staff had noted that there wasn't a urgency that this had to be voted on today to meet any timeline and public participation is I think essential and a goal of all of ours and I might have hastened to um bring this forward for a vote I see this really as a plan that is strengthening the city's infrastructure for the city's use of our municipality resources it's not um a it's not everything that the Broadband Advisory workg Group had brought forward in the essence of looking at items that might be for public good I think that is something I addressed this plan as being just a slice of the pie not the whole pie um hopefully there's more to come that will address the greater public good but um at this moment in order to allow more time for those who have committed thousands of hours to that work plan who would like to have the ability to weigh in and send communication to us and feel that we've had time to read it and consider in case there are some uh very valuable kernels of adjustment that might need to come forward I'm going to make a motion that we delay the vote on this until February 24th so that the public has

ample time to send Communications to us um to provide feedback on this plan second motion to table by council member Anderson and second by council member list council member list so I'm not sure 24th is the right date and procedurally I'm in a little bit of trouble because I actually like this plan but I do appre I do think that uh it's important to get more feedback I think that feedback won't find any particular flaws what's what's in the plan but I think there are shortcomings about what's not in the plan um I was prepared to offer a companion motion which would basically say that there's some unfinished business and what I would like to do is reconvene the Broadband advisory work Group which is pretty much what they asked us to do uh in their final recommendations which we adopted my concern with the date that was suggested here is I don't think we can reconvene The Advisory work group and hear from them in that shorter time frame so whether or not we delay this vote I will still want to go out to the advisory work group so just because I agree that the work's not done that's why I C call it a slice of pie and I know that you were going to bring something forward during old and new and I limited some of the ideas that I had that I'd like to have more information on asking staff because the work group might be appropriate do you think that um if said group or like a work session um or just a meeting with counselors or something that's officially recognized um do you think

that would change this part of the plan the feedback because I kind of see at least the things that I'm hoping for and what you're suggesting might be augmenting other aspects of um public benefit versus just the nuts and bolts of the city's infrastructure of replacing boxes and things along those lines I I I don't know with Direction I'd like to go if it would substantially change this just feedback CC M cot was sorry and just another newbie question still um so the if we were to vote tonight there's that we don't do a third and final for for plan adoptions okay thank you for clarifying council member Williams think you just answered my question so no I will I will I will pass okay council member loquist in response to in response to councelor Anderson's question I don't know that's sort of the point um I don't know if there's further public feedback that might lead us to alter this plan I kind of don't think so I also don't know if there's herther public feedback on issues outside of this plan I don't know that's sort of my point I would be uh I'm I'm particularly interested in returning to the question of digital equity and going back to the original charge that uh we wrote for the Broadband advisory work group to look at ways of addressing equitability and affordability and quality of access across the community I think there's some unanswered questions there I don't think the plan the plan definitely doesn't answer them but it also doesn't try to answer them so I'm want

to go back to those original questions but I can't answer your question because I don't know because I haven't heard yet from the public council member Stone yeah I just wanted to highlight so the report was presented to the city council in September and so it's been five months since that report was presented to council and as was highlighted by staff this afternoon the content of what was provided in the report has not changed from what's provided in the plan the formatting is different and there may be some right um additional verbage right to make things clear and fit into that plan format and so moving forward I believe that I mean we've received some response from the community since September and in response to that report right prior to it being presented and then since that time I don't know delaying it I mean I'm happy to continue hear from people what would change that report but I believe that there is right additional work to be done um but that would be separate and apart from from this report so unclear on what would be um achieved by the delay and what council member list was speaking to as far as what your motion would be Anderson so I've received about 15 emails about this in the last 24 hours and I've skimmed through them all um and some of them are really broad picture f they wanted direct service and so I feel like perhaps they didn't watch that meeting in August where the price tag was given to us um some of it may actually have to do with the specifics

of this that's why I wanted more time to be able to read it before we make a a decision so that at least the community knows that we are responsive to the time and effort that they've put in for feedback and there may be more feedback that comes forward because again this you know just became on people's Horizon over the weekend and they may not have been able to send something so I don't see harm in waiting until the 24th I think there's a much larger picture and if there was something of substantial that impacts whether or not we go below six inches for those boxes then there's always a possibility of bringing those amendments in the future but um my motion was really to just allow a little bit more transparency and not put this on a fast bus where the the public feels like we make decisions without input um I just want their voice to be recognized and have them feel that um Community input matters on decisions we're making um I think there's a lot more to come which may come through council members um request in the future but um I I can separate the two out um and that's why I had a shorter time line because I'm hoping they focus on specifically the plan and then we can look at a bigger picture of other things um through next steps Williams just I just have a question uh that I need an answer to what what would be the impact if we delayed the vote on this I think as staff indicated early today there's there isn't an imperative that it is voted on this evening so if it's

council's will to allow more time for public comment on this matter to what the substantive impact of that would be and um is up for you to decide but I think we're fine in terms of timelines uh waiting right now so there's no contract or anything that's pending this motion tonight okay uh just another comment we're we're voting on delaying the vote but what council member lillquist is talking about is coming up later I would need to make because because it seems like it kind of combined the two issues right now so we're just voting on delaying the uh the vote correct yeah um K mber Stone so just one item and I don't have any opposition to I mean delaying this to receive additional feedback I did just want to highlight again you know responses we've received about Community Support and interest in having a you know public fiber Network and being a a carrier for the city right beyond our internal needs is of interest and I think that was of interest for the council as well which is why this work was started but at a price tag of you know last $150 million and likely going up by the moment right it's not it's not feasible um and so although that's something I think many of us are supportive of unfort fortunately right the dollars aren't going to aren't going to pencil out um no matter how much we want it so just wanting that part to be to be clear that it's not a lack of Desire from Council or staff or I don't even believe the administration right um I think there's support

it's just financially an impossibility at this point um and I would say yeah as Council council member Stone mentioned the timeline presenting this information has has not been a very quick one we've had been presenting this information several times um but at the same time there's no hurry I I don't have a a strong opposition to to delaying either so uh any further discussion Council M Williams yeah I I think one of the things that I've heard um from my colleagues here a a concern is that the public did not necessarily get the information we got in September or August or uh whenever that was so that some of the emails we're getting is um in the absence of that in information the perception that I've read in the ones that I've read is well we can we can do this or or we're just pushing it under the table when in fact we're not but what I do see is that that is an indication of what you mentioned in your report that we as a city are in the transition of getting bigger and more sophisticated and uh we didn't have those resources available to send out that info in August and so um I'm just looking forward to getting to a point where we can have a response it um communicates to the public the reality of what we are dealing with on issues like this so have motion on the table or on the table to table the motion uh council member Hamill just to clarify we have two motions on the table one was the motion coming out of the the afternoon committee which was uh made and seconded and

now we have a separate motion okay just clarifying okay thanks further discussion seeing none all in favor say I I I any opposed or extensions passes 70 council member list as I indicated I think there's some unfinished business um so back in 2020 uh in the resolution which created the Broadband Advisory workg Group um it included the language which I remember because I wrote it it says that we want the work grroup to further the goals of Greater availability affordability and equitability and quality access a Broadband access across the community this is an excellent report but it doesn't address that need um so the Broadband ADV workou work group's charge was to look for ways the city's Network as assets could be used for public benefit but again I don't I don't really see that and what we were told by the work group among many things is for our Network assets to be useful to the public or useful to another carrier who might lead R fiber is it needs to be of a level of robustness and resiliency and redundancy what they called Carrier class we don't have that it's not a bad Network as far as cities go but it's not Carrier class the $8 million we're spending is to get us some basic redundancy and basic resiliency even that doesn't get us anywhere near Carrier class that's still millions and millions of dollars away so we have to back away from the original idea and if you want to look know the details of why uh creating either a dark fiber or Open Access model wouldn't work

go back to the July work session and wave through a very thick report if you want the details um but what I want to do is I want to return back to another recommendation in 2023 when we adopted the Broadband advisor work group's recommendations their final recommendation is please look for ways to continue using us the work group members in this endeavor I would think we adopted that recommendation and I think we should to take them up on their offer I would like to reconvene whichever members of the work group are available and ask them the original question or actually I've reformulated it I said you know considering um the oh gosh I wrote down some version of a question I would ask them no I think it I it didn't print out my point is I think we should go back to the work group and say given the current study this one the previous study in August and given this report um we still have interest in addressing digital Equity are there areas where affordability and quality of access of broadband still suffers and if we're not going to use our City's Network to run a carrier class Network are there other ways we can address Community needs are there other examples of inequities in digital access that we could address in some other way so if we can't go big is there a way to go small are there targeted ideas I don't know again I'm just speculating because I'm not the work group I'm one mind and I'd like to reconvene the work group and get more Minds to look at this issue and

revisit that basic fundamental policy question and again this is not a flaw in the plan it has to do with things that are not in the plan so I would move that we reconvene the Broadband advisory work group and and ask them for further advice on the original issues of uh equitability and affordability of access to Quality Broadband I second and I'd like to speak to it council member Anderson thank you um I kind of mentioned earlier today that I was going to have questions for staff um some community members and I have over the past several months kicked around some possibilities and one of the questions I was going to ask staff today is if they could take a look at the possibility of using um Wi-Fi singling units in areas of lwi income near our um low income housing units near our tiny homes so that people would be able to if they don't have internet access because of stability or access would they be able to use Wi-Fi um the Community College where I work during covid um our tech services handed out hundreds of hotspots so students across the community who didn't have stable um Wi-Fi were able to um or they didn't have internet they were still able to participate in their education by hooking their laptops to the hotspot not suggesting that the city checks out a whole bunch of hotspots but one of the questions I wanted to ask is the feasibility because it's not a huge price point but what's the feasibility of being able to hook up um signaling and uh booster units in order to

be able to provide Wi-Fi um to the community much like some of our um community members who don't have internet they go to the food co-op to be able to attend meetings or they go to the library when it's open or they sit here in City Hall and access ours is that something that could create a community benefit at a lower price point in order to bridge the digital inequity and that was a question I was going to ask staff to take a look at and then perhaps bring back to us what would that look like but when Michael um excuse me council member Lilo Quist had said maybe reconvening one of my concerns is going to be staff resources so how because it's what we did previously was rather large I don't think it has to be on that scale again and I don't think it has to be fully that much staff and I think council member Lil Quist might have some suggestions on how that could happen but first is there interest in reconvening to be able to address like the question that I just posed is that something that we could Implement and if so what type of funding resources an individual I talked to said would do the fundraising to do a couple of signaling units if that's what it took so I think there's Um passion in the community to try to make this work but I want to give them an opportunity to have that discussion with knowing that the city is going to listen in whatever capacity that we can do that so that's why I'm supporting this and I didn't make my request earlier today to the staff to be

able to look at it because I think this one little idea amongst many others that perhaps we haven't considered given that when the workg group convened there was very lofty goals and then after we did the study there was a bit of a reality check because of the price tag I'd like to give them the opportunity knowing that information now that can be provided to look creatively at what other kind of options might be available um to do a 2.0 version of creating more digital Equity I'd like to give them an opportunity it might be successful it might not be but I also want to be mindful of Staff resources member Williams um I have a question about the original convening of this group um when they did their work were they just singularly focused on what we can't do so to speak or did they recommend VAR levels of um coverage for this for for the for the access were they just singularly focused on just the the big Broadband picture or did they make other recommendations I hesitated to summarize 18 months of work that began by backing up it began by backing up very far and even considering what is meant by equity and what is meant by affordability um and then it went deeper into looking at various models of performance and if I recall the recommendation and the resolution it had like eight or 10 parts to it so I mean they they they focused in you know narrowly and they brought it back out and went back in narrow um they went they they looked at this from a bro many numbers of angles

but as I said one of their conclusions um was that for anything to be useful it needed to be our Network needed to have a certain uh Carrier class quality to it and that's the the part that I was focusing on but there were other parts to the recommendations mayor uh few things to add to the conversation one is that um while this conversation has been happening Library staff has let me know they would love to come and make a present ation to Council on their digital and Equity work that is currently ongoing um in terms um of what they currently do what they'd like to do and they do do digital hotspots so uh we can make a presentation to to Council on what work we currently do the other piece is that um in terms of reconvening the workg group while I've received comments over the last few days about this plan and the adoption of the 10 your plan currently I have not received Communications expressing a desire to reconvene the work group so I would like to connect with former members to see if that's still of value and feels appropriate at this time knowing what we know now and the the cost figures that have been presented before the city the other piece is even if the scope is small um you know there's an opportunity cost for staff time to do that work and even small Scopes have real costs associated with them um and so I just wanted to throw that out there it would be the recurring theme of my messages just reminding about where we're at in budget thank you so along those

lines I mean one of the other pieces that was highlighted during the report this afternoon and the cost of right getting carrier service was also um the fact that city of Bellingham right is not eligible for federal funding that would come to provide service to unserved or underserved right communities which means that here within the city of Bellingham there is service available and so it's really that access point is access limited mostly because of financial right constraints um or if someone's unhoused I mean what are those obstacles and barriers and so I feel like assessing our internal um structure one of the direction it was no formal motion but Direction requested earlier was to look at right our utilities and services that the city provides and how we um assess and address right need for assistance or reduction in price and so those types of right subsidies are their potential Partnerships are there hotspots that you know the city already has I was going to mention as sitting um as leis on with the library about the the hotpots um and so I don't I feel like that's more of an internal conversation about what resources we have and I'm not certain I'm not clear at least on what the what the work would be for the Broadband advisory work group if it was to be reconvened but I do see value in right continued discussion and work about how to address what we see as ongoing needs right if we can't get to Carrier class and we can't provide public um the public infrastructure

and and service then what are the other options to help bridge that gap for digital equity council member list so a couple things thanks for reminding me um there was a covid related financial assistance program that is now expired that helped uh very low-income families be able to afford um you know higher higher bandwidth access that they would need for example for the children to go to school there are other programs and other ideas as ways to address digital access I appreciate the mayor bringing up the issue of Staff timing um I forgot to mention it but in my email I suggested that this would be a very Tim limited Endeavor one or two meetings whatever the advisor root group uh saw fit and I also suggested uh that we consider using city council staff to do the Staffing for that um we certainly was not looking for the work group to repeat its last work or even to go over its its original work um but rather just to kind of uh looking forward say is there something left on the table or other ideas that could be explored um also you made another good point there about convening a group that hasn't agreed to be convening um I would amend my motion if there's no suggestion to say that we request the Broadband advisory work group reconvene rather than just simply order it to reconvene so if there's no objection maybe you could you could see if there's no objection to that any objection uh council member Williams and then cotton um I keep thinking once again what is a problem

that we're trying to solve here and it sounds like the problem that we are in General trying to discuss is affordability and alternative options and um and your motion to reconvene the committee at this point for me is um immature meaning too soon after um what I would like to see before I can make that decision is what the work of the previous committee did and what kind of recommendations did they make and does that meet our our our needs or are uh did they recommend things that we as a city can jump into without having to Recon being the committee so I I see there's a document over there that I haven't seen council member cotton I actually really enjoy talking with you all about big problems and and brainstorming and um I'm certainly not allergic to doing that but um I I do think I'm not prepared at this point to say we should reconvene a work group and I just want to see if this is a a friendly uh suggestion but since we will be voting again on the plan in on the 24th to table this motion as well and hear a little bit more from perhaps work group members and more from staff and just I do not feel prepared at this time to say if this is a makes sense or not so um but I really appreciate um yeah your interest in this council member little question so is that can I make that motion you be mad at me my permission um well I'd go ahead and move to table this motion um until the 24th second okay we have a motion to table by council member cotton with a second by council member

Williams council member list I will support I will support the tabling of my motion with the understanding that we should probably do the work that the mayor mentioned to actually pull members of the work group that that's important information and we'll have that information in hand also for by then so it's it this work I've been talking about this work for many years two more weeks to do it right is not a problem so I appreciate the motion to table I think that might make a better process we'll have both pieces of information in front of us in two weeks council member Anderson this is how I used to hate when people said this but this is how the sausage gets made we can't have these discussions together until we're in front here so it always seems a little awkward but it's the public process but I'll I'll support it and just hope that in the interim for the council members who weren't part of the Inception and life of the work group um to read up on what their recommendations were so you could kind of see or be prepared to ask what the city has or hasn't um worked on but I know there's some holes and so that's why I was comfortable moving forward I also agree that the individuals that I've spoken to I hope that they'll email the value of why they would like to reconvene as kind of a work session and so um I didn't see consultants and staff in an 18-month process it was more of with now the information that you know what suggestions do you have for us to be able to go forward

and look at and I saw value in all of us having an opportunity to hear it versus these individuals trying to schedule individual appointments or emails to try to communicate what they think might be able to be done I think um the public process aspect or kind of a a work group would be beneficial um and I'm sure that certain individuals will be prepared to bring that information forward if we give them an opportunity council member Stone NOP okay okay I'll I'll support the motion to table as well I think um I would really like to hear from the administration uh on this idea uh I think as we have talked about almost every council meeting we have limited time and resources and we have a priority list that has already been established if we're going to move something up in that priority list um I think it's it's a it takes a serious conversation so um but at the same time I think that keeping digital Equity access digital access Equity at the top of mine is kind of maybe what we're really ultimately concerned about and so making sure that that is something that doesn't get that that doesn't fall by the way side um is important so okay further discussion on the amendment or the motion to table the motion seeing none all in favor say I I I any opposed or extensions that passes 70 okay we're still we're still in committee report aren't we halfway there half take it away halfway done okay so no action we will reconvene on the 24th on that topic um the next item before the committee

this afternoon was agenda bill 24434 this is an ordinance amending the municipal code chapter 9.12 to align with updated waste management practices state legislation and the city's climate action plan in order to comply with Washington State House Bill 1799 as well as goals outlined in the city of bellingham's climate action plan portions of the Bellingham Municipal Code chapter 9.12 require amendments House Bill 1799 requires the diversion of organic materials from landfills through prevention food rescue and Organics management facilities the city's climate action plan requires sustainable waste management practices reduction in landfill contributions and to establish clear and transparent rate setting processes the Amendments will also ensure consistency with the city's residential collection contract with sanitary services company effective January 1st 2025 implementing mandatory Organics management Food Plus services for all residential customers and a transition to single stream recycling so today we were joined by Mike Olinger and Sean O'Neal um from public works department for presentation and also wanted to note that um Ted Carlson from SSC was also with us this afternoon um through the discussion just a couple of points of clarification one I know there's been a great deal of discussion about possible exemptions to the mandatory Food Plus thinking about the base rate for service and service including garbage as well as Recycling and compost um within that we're

hoping to divert right the waste that's um produced and created from the landfill as much as possible to recycling and and compost um in looking at exception potentially for individuals who are already composting on site um and or made arguments that they don't need the service wanting to note that at the state level through the department of ecology there will be considerations for exemptions um in the future we don't know as of yet if those would be mandatory um or not for adoption by the city but acknowledging that such an exemption in the enforcement process to right inspect and collect um data from residents to determine whether or not they would be eligible for the exemption would in um require staff increasing um and obviously the costs associated with the additional staff to carry that out um which would result in right tax rate increases um to customers Citywide so need to balance the cost and benefit of of that as a community um a couple C of points of clarification wanting to note that so with respect to reduced rates and eligibility based on right age and income Andor disability just wanting to be clear that that reduction in rate is possible for all levels of service um so that would be handled through the city and that application process and also wanting to be clear that owners and or renters um who are you know the rate payers for the service can request um a reduced rate so wanted to make sure that it's not just the homeowner um but a rental tenant as well

could request that reduced rate so one of the discussions this afternoon was about the city looking at how those reduced rates are handled throughout all utilities um and with respect to this specific ordinance there was just one amendment made this afternoon and that would be on page P 42 of the packet this is section 9.12 60 section a number two which would Now read um the final sentence of that section if rate increases are approved the city will provide a 45-day notice to rate payers via Direct Mail comma billing statements comma electronic notice or by publishing the rate increase in a local newspaper her RCW 157 um and the discussion surrounding that amendment was just to ensure that um notice of rate increases would not be solely through publication in a newspaper just wanting to make sure that rate payers receive that direct notice um if there was going to be an increase and again that that notice is provided at least 45 days in advance so with that Amendment to the ordinance there was a motion from the committee to adopt the ordinance amending Bellingham Municipal Code chapter 9.12 and I so Move Motion by the chair and second by council member Hamill further discussion seeing none all in favor say I I any opposed or abstentions that passes zero great and with that that was end of committee and I'll send it back to you council member loest yeah before we leave that topic I've received a lot of um public comment on the mandatory food compost and how that cost people

extra so here's the logic of it it cost the city $128 a ton to for landfill but only $72 a ton for Organics so in terms of waste production we save a lot of money and the way you could see that is if you could use one less or if you could reduce your garbage collection because of your food compost collection so if you can go down from every week to just every other week you will make up for you will actually come out ahead if you could go down from every every other week to once a month again you can come out financially ahead if you're one of the people who's already composting at home and you can't reduce your garbage well then no you're not going to come out ahead so it doesn't work for everyone but for the majority of people if you can find ways to reduce the frequency of your garbage collection you will save the entire system money and in the end it won't cost you more money because you will you have a reduction in the waste collection even though you have an increase in the Food Plus cost that's the hopes so we're not just adding a cost without thinking about what it means to you and what it means to the system as a whole thank you council member list okay and next we move on to Parks and Recreation committee and that was chaired by council member Williams thank you president Huffman uh uh we had a meeting and we had had a onepoint agenda today which was agenda Bill two 24435 and we got a an overview of the process to update the 2026 parks recreation and open space plan

commonly called the pros plan as it was so eloquent stated earlier today it used to be called the Pro Plan and the S was silent so now it's been added and acknowledged and uh and uh here we go the parks uh Recreation and open space plan is the long-term planning document that prioritizes improvements to the city of bellingham's parks facilities open space trails and recre Recreation programs this is required by the Washington Recreation and conservation office for State grant funding and it is updated every six years and is part of bellingham's comprehensive plan the pros plan functions as a development and Improvement strategy for the Parks and Recreation Department and we received a rather um thorough presentation by Peter Gil who was our our Bellingham Parks and Rec Department Planning and Development coordinator where he he actually described the updated process previewed potential changes and discussed the public engagement procedure that we're going to use the final version of the plan will represent a slight change from past plans in that it it separates the goals and policies or or at least eventually it will celebrate separate the goals and policies which will be in in uh included as part of the overall City comprehensive plan from the actual implementation plan which will guide the actual work to be done the required elements for this from the state in includes developing an inventory having a public Outreach process developing a demand analysis developing a capital

Improvement plan and then ultimately final adoption by the by the city council as as a plan is developed there will be a significant public Outreach process for Community engagement which will be guided by the following principles Community experience program strengths what are they identifying key areas for improvement and does does the plan meet the needs of the community the public Outreach activities will include a Community survey which is open now having a virtual open house or multiple virtual open houses public meetings uh in person and virtual uh a a couple of which will be on February 13th at cordada Park and February 18th at Fair Haven Pavilion also there will be Contin continued discussions about the plan at The Parks and Recreation Advisory board and the green waves advisory committee and uh meetings with neighborhood associations and and the mnac uh committee and interest group listening sessions as well as hearings at the Planning Commission and the city council meeting so further information about this can be found by viewing the committee meeting from this afternoon and the engag Bellingham page so this item was for information and discussion only and no further act action was uh required by the committee so there was no further business therefore the meeting was adjourned thank you council member Williams and final committee meeting uh was Committee of the whole chair by myself uh we had one agenda item it was a agenda Bill 24436 a study session regarding

modifications 2 and an ex and an extension of the interim Landmark tree ordinance on May 20th 2024 the Bellingham city council adopted an emergency ordinance relating to the preservation of landmark trees and established interim development regulations with respect to Landmark trees following the adoption of the emergency ordinance the city held a public hearing on July 15th 2024 after receiving public comment city council chose to retain the interim ordinance and extend the and extend extended the interim ordinance for an additional six months following a second public hearing on October 21st 2024 City staff are now requesting the ability to revise the interim ordinance to refine some of the development regulations and provide further as well as extend the interim ordinance for further 6 months to allow for time to go through the type 6 legislative process um so the the council uh ask questions and discuss some of the changes the Amendments um edits to the ordinance um no action was taken it was for information and provide Direction uh I believe for those who are interested there is a public hearing that will be scheduled I don't think I caught the date on that is that correct there's a public hearing next meeting 24 24 24th okay so for the public who's interested and would like to provide your input uh public hearing the next meeting um old new business council member Hamil yeah just uh we we've got both uh Chiefs here thanks for coming and being here I just want to take

this very brief opportunity to acknowledge um some of the um excellent work that I saw happen on Friday I was driving through a neighborhood and I saw a man who was in um medical distress and I just wanted to compliment the um our fire uh Personnel who responded very quickly and really helped out um this person who needed to probably go to the hospital and then the other thing I wanted to mention to our other chief chief Mig is that um I've been hearing a lot of really good compliments on the bike patrols that are happening in in downtown Bellingham and and surrounding um neighborhoods I think this is working um I wanted to pass Those comp compliments along to just appreciate the staff that we have that work um as our First Responders so thank you both for for the work that you do and the work that your cruise do thanks thank you council member HL I have got one uh just a quick update on uh our lobbying efforts as a city so the lobbying team meets weekly with our contract lobbyists Luke Esser and Nick federici this group includes myself council member Stone and council member Hamill along with the mayor deputies Keller Longman uh and City staff each week we receive updates from the previous week and look at the schedule for the coming week in the last couple weeks our lobbyists have had conversations with legislators about the top budget requests including funding for the skate park the library and the Municipal Court um Library director Jed visited Olympia for Library

lobbying days and chief merzig visited for law enforcement days this year there are lots and lots of housing bills so our planning community community development department has been diligently tracking dozens of bills and identifying which ones align with our legislative agenda director lion and his staff is work have worked with the lobbying team to provide feedback on the bills and for example provided testimony for SB 5184 related to parking requirements I believe council member cotton also testified on that one as well um that's just a quick overview of what's been going on anything that council member stone or Hamill would like to add no okay and uh our our lobbyists will also be presenting to to council uh in the near future too for a more in-depth review um anything else for old new okay with that we'll move to the executive session report we had six items the first was a cyber security item with verdict staff provided information information on a cyber security man matter it was for uh information and discussion only no action was taken uh next we had a potential property we had two potential property Acquisitions with stamps staff provided information on uh potential Lake walkom water Watershed property Acquisitions those were for information and discussion no action was taken fourth we had a uh potential property acquisition with Mariner staff provided information on a potential property acquisition I will now entertain a motion to authorize the mayor to close the

real estate transaction described in the city's executed purchase and sale agreement with the property owners tal property LLC Mickey and Carol guo and Cal uh Cal and Berra lstra no Cal and bernetta lstra to purchase approximately 66 Acres on samish Crest with a purchase price of $4 million and closing date on or around March 7th 2025 so moved motion by council member Williams and a second by council member lillquist further discussion seeing none on favor say I I I all oo I all opposed or abstentions that passes 70 next up was a potential litigation matter with Mariner staff provided information on a potential litigation matter no information uh for information and discussion only no action was taken uh uh finally we had a litigation manner uh Bellingham Police guilded U McGinty grievance with chaplain staff provided information on a litigation matter I uh will now entertain a motion to authorize the mayor to enter into a settlement agreement with the following terms withdrawal of grievance and waiver of all related claims for a payment to the grievant of $140,000 move approval second motion by council member Williams and a second by council member Anderson further discussion seeing none all in favor say I I I any opposed or extensions passes 70 uh consent agenda approval second motion by council member Williams second by coun council member motion by council member Hamil second by council member Williams okay any further discussion seeing none on uh all in favor say I I any

oppos or extensions that passes 70 we have no final consideration of ordinance so that means we will move to want to make sure on the on the executive session items I didn't hear the potential litigation with chaplain I think it was for discussion only but I didn't hear it on the report out yes it was a potential litigation with Mariner okay yeah well okay yep thank you um okay we will move to public comment so that that concludes the regular business of the meeting and we will now move to the public comment session if you are watching live online or on BTV the broadcast will now end however you can continue watching via Zoom at cob.org CC Zoom or listen via Telephone by dialing 253 215 8782 and entering meeting ID 820-8245 2733 and password 9 again that cob.org /cc Zoom or dial 253 25878 to and enter meeting ID 820 2733 and password 9 to continue to watch our listen live if you're watching a recorded version of this meeting you can view public comment videos at cob.org CCU comment all one word and we'll take a brief pause to change technology [Music]