City Council - Regular Meeting

[Music] welcome to the Bellingham city council regular meeting this February 24th 2025 call this meeting to order uh Bellingham city council meets all requirements of the state of Washington open public meetings act uh before we begin we acknowledge that we are gathered on the traditional and unseated territory of the Lumi noac samish and seamu people who have cared for and tended this land since time in Memorial truth and acknowledgement are critical to building mutual respect and 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 uh Elders past and present please take a moment to consider the many legacies of violence displacement migration and settlement that brings that bring us together here today and please join us in uncovering such truths at any and all public events 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 remote viewers can log on to cob.org frcc zoom and click on the language icon at the bottom of the screen to listen listen in Spanish and I'll go ahead and let our interpreter repeat that thank you roll call please Hannah Stone here Dan Hamill here skipe Williams here Lisa Anderson here here Michael lillquist here Jay scotton here hly Huffman here all council members are present and first up we have a

public hearing um this is a public hearing for an ordinance relating to the preservation of landmark trees and extending the interim development regulations with respect to Landmark trees throughout the city on May 20th 2024 the city council adopted an emergency ordinance relating to the preservation of landmark trees and established interim develop M regulations with respect to Landmark trees throughout the city on November 4th 2024 the council extended the emergency ordinance for an additional six months the city council will hold a public hearing to consider a six-month extension and minor clarifications to the interim rules the extension will allow for time to go through the type six legislative process and just a reminder we do have some guidelines about public hearings regarding public hearings and um in public comment tonight each speaker is allowed three minutes uh if giving comments in Spanish please pause every sentence or two see interpreter can say your comments in English sign up sheets were available uh at the start of the meeting people may not sign up on behalf of others um all remarks should be addressed to the council as a whole and speakers should refrain from uh comments and behaviors that are disorderly and such be respectful um and I'll should be given at the microphone if you walk away from the microphone people watching can't hear you uh and your time will end and do we have signed up oh presentation first yeah do you mind if I give a few comments yeah

jumping right ahead Thank You Blake lion director of planning and Community Development um I won't go through uh all the presentation that we did uh at your last meeting on February 10th but I did want to respond to a few things that are in this version of the ordinance in response to some of the questions that you all asked during the study session so we can give a little bit of that on page 15 of the staff report um there are some edits and that address council member Stone's uh comments there was a little bit of additional language added that added in whole or in part um and use the word structural to address some of the concerns about failure and then council member Anderson you had asked questions about the fees and I mentioned it was a $16 for the clearing and Grading fee that we were proposing and then council member Huffman president Huffman you had asked a question about whether um trees could be delisted and there is a provision in Section 8 where the uh Bellingham Landmark tree committee has the opportunity to remove Landmark trees from the inventory if any tree individually listed on the landmark tree inventory is no longer deemed appropriate for designation to the inventory and then the committee May uh initiate removal from such dedication by the same procedure uh provided for establishing the designation so I just wanted to clarify that for you as well um there are we did add in the whereas uh that council member Anderson was requesting on page n of the staff

report and then we also added back in the whereas with regard to the type six process on it's at the on top of AG 10 so I'll um remind you again that what one of the things that we were asking for along with these additions to the revision is the extension of the interim ordinance to give us the time to uh do two things one is to see where some of the state legislature is going to go with a couple of bills that are currently in session you may recall last time when we spoke there was a bill that was talking about urban forestry and whether the Department of Natural Resources was going to pursue kind of a model code it doesn't look like that one's going to pass out of the committee of origin but the one that does also beg a question that we would like to consider in full consideration is the wooi code which is the wild Urban interface and what that does uh and where that may go with some of the defensible spaces so we feel like that because that bill is still alive it's important for us to understand what where the state may go with that and how that may influence um our actions in the future when we go forward through the type six process so with that I'll conclude uh my remarks and we'll look forward to hearing from the public and happy to answer any questions if we need to thank you director lion uh any clarifying questions from the council before we begin okay go ahead and open up the public hearing okay uh first up we have Adam bellingar uh Robert Thames and Bill guy

evening Council my name is Adam Bellinger and uh I wanted to um I spent some time I like to spend a lot more time thinking about something before I comment on it so I haven't really commented on the landmark tree ordinance but um I I have uh I read an article from investigate West that came out I think last month um and it uh talked about the uh similar ordinance in the city of Seattle um in that passed in 2023 three um and the article was pretty critical of how that uh tree ordinance was implemented uh there seemed to be uh quite a bit of failures in that ordinance um as it was implemented uh somewhat reading reading between the lines things became unworkable when there tended to be the conflict between um development and uh protection of trees um some trees that were supposed to be uh earmarked for um protection weren't and then likewise trees that were never in any danger of being uh removed were then uh uh uh classifi as saved through the the ordinance so I think there needs to be um um uh maybe looking at some of the other ordinances in the state that have been um uh implemented uh Seattle is the one that I know about but um it would be I think it would be useful for U as we go through this longer process to look at how the Seattle program might have had some failures um you know my personal uh experience with trees and and the protection of trees in Bellingham has actually been pretty good um over the my lifetime where I've I've lived here my whole life um the tree

Canon cover is much uh stronger and and more developed than what it was when I was growing up when I was a kid and and as I remember it so um I I would like to con uh continue with that uh spirit of of protection of the our trees but then at the same time we also need to address our uh housing uh shortages and anything that makes uh director lions like life more challenging for uh uh getting housing built is uh something we need to you know balance so thank you thank you Adam robiner Bill good evening council members Bill Guyer owner president guy and Associates for the record um I'm certified by the American Institute certified planners with 4 5 years of professional experience want to comment on the draft ordinance before you tonight um I think it's very helpful that in your whereas Clause where you inserted a goal that speaks to the balance of residential needs to the um tree protection and I believe that's in your section two your last item that you inserted so that's a good indicator of of having some um uh objective oversight to the implementation of these codes and how they'll get reviewed I'd also like to suggest when you get into the definition section particularly between the we have owner and site defined that I would ask that you insert the definition of project permit as it's identified in 2-10-2 in the existing land ordinance it helps to give a definition to what a project permit is you'll you'll see very quickly here why I would request that you do that when

you go to um section seven section seven of the exemptions you have just two components in there right now normal maintenance and also work performed by any state or federal agency granting essentially card blanch because this ordinance uh began of concerns of of not having appropriate canopy cover as discussed as a policy component by the council I would request that you add item C to section 7 as follows work performed in accordance with an approved and adopted project permit where the resulting tree canopy is greater than 45 % of the site and of course I'm benchmarking from the aspiration that the council mentioned with the tree canopy of having 45% I think that outcome would speak to having a greater preservation of trees in the uh in the area than going onesie Tuesday as this ORD attempts to do I would also request in the OR note that in your section this is a long one it's almost on your last page section nine where it says review required and you go to a d Delta it identifies exempt activities and again it refers back to section 7 goes to the language just suggested the final thing would be G gam gamma of that same section you have incentives and I would add under G if you can have section VII um where the where preserves the tree canopy greater than 4 45% or greater of a site defined and a project permit in other words you're providing incentives to achieve what you've identified as a prospective aspirational goal for the community and I think this ordinance would go

a great way to to doing that and I thank you for your time thank you Bill okay let me have uh Robin they're here or next up we have Michael fer Laura Weiss and Jim Smith hi my name is Robin Thomas and I live in the seahome neighborhood uh my neighborhood is one of the fastest growing areas of the city and we have welcomed a lot of new housing and expect that we will continue to see density increase in the near future during the years of development of the urban forestry plan I've witnessed many large trees um being cut down in anticipation of new rules our part of the city was entirely logged off in the 1890s and the largest trees we have now are typically 100 to 130 years old and predominantly are already in the city right of way and along property boundaries virtually all the trees that we lost between 2018 and now were not in building Footprints and the loss of those trees did not appear to me to result in more housing I'm grateful that the city adopted the emergency ordinance to protect the largest of our Legacy trees Sustainable Building methods and valuing green infrastructure appropriately can help us get to more housing and protect us from increasing Urban heat Safeguard air quality and provide the climate benefits of trees in the proposed changes to the lto abroad and unclear statements been added that would seem to have us considering far-flung impacts in exchange for the loss of Legacy trees in our city it states balance the need to protect Urban trees with the

climate benefits of increasing density in urban areas considering the hypothetical preservation of trees and open space in any location outside of the city limits when looking at a decision about a single significant tree seems to add a lot of ambiguity that is not measurable or enforceable by Statute U the the intention of the urban forestry management plan is to meet climate goals and to contain policies about the best ways to increase density and I believe this kind of statement is best worked into a full program and not included in an emergency ordinance intended to protect a small number of Irreplaceable trees please uh consider removing this statement from the update um the the ultimate Arbiter of decisions to protect Legacy trees is the hearing EX examiner their role is to strictly interpret the law and ambiguity only leads to loss of trees a Legacy tree that is assumed to be protected will be cut down through this process and folks are left wondering what happened I thought that tree was protected only people seeking to remove the trees can come before the court and potential alterations to development plans are not typically part of the discussion there's no path for adjudication of administrative decisions which are made without public knowledge unless it is instigated by a developer please consider consider strengthening this aspect of the ordinance by including more transparency and adjudication of administrative decisions yeah people really want more democracy

Now the theme thank you Robin hello I'm Michael fear founder of w million trees project thank you for this opportunity to speak we share staff's goal to improve the clarity and appropriateness of the landmark tree ordinance the new revisions however do not address six issues we detailed in a three-page letter that we sent to all of you and staff uh last week our suggestions are a for improved transparency and accessibility a simple publicly posted up toate score sheet of landmark tree results is needed showing all determinations this will be useful for everyone including Builders and developers e for improved accuracy and accountability tree dbh diameter breast height spot checking when needed and penalties for repeated arborist Under reporting of a tree size spot checking a few trees on site can be quickly and easily done by almost all any staff C for improved Clarity a reworded purpose statement is needed that we again detail in the letter D include black cottonwoods as Landmark trees when they are in hazard-free site locations and E for a fair or due process have the hearing exam examiner review all Landmark tree determinations including a one-page summary in the staff report describing what site plan options were specifically considered to better accommodate Landmark trees that are proposed to be removed within a project site again all the details are in our letter all require minimal or no staff time or funding besides these suggestions it's important to understand that

the potential housing impact of the landmark tree ordinance is very small the data is in our letter there are only a few hundred landmark trees on private land not 150,000 like some have publicly said and by far most Urban lots have no Landmark trees the ordinance's impact also will be small because it provides several ways to balance Urban canopy goals of the city with housing goals here's three one a fair use Clause ensures there will be no reduction of a site's development potential particularly on small private Lots two Hazard or unhealthy trees raid by an arborist will not be retained period this will rule out 10 to 15% of the large trees three site planning options are already I mean in stivs are already available such as adjustments to setbacks lot coverage and open space standards to ensure increased housing density and continued profitability for developers the point of the ordinance is to design better projects that meet multiple City goals not the block projects many other cities have done this Bellingham can too thank you thank you Michael good evening uh my name is Laura Weiss and I live in the sunand neighborhood um I appreciate the opportunity to share my thoughts on the landmark tree ordinance tonight there are just two issues that I would like to address um the first is to recommend that we have more transparency and accessibility through the use of a simple public score sheet of landmark tree decisions since transparency and accessibility are City goals the

ordinance should ensure that there's an ongoing accessible big picture view of landmark tree processing and results and not just one little thing at a time therefore I'm suggesting that the landmark tree committee should maintain a simple upto-date publicly accessible score sheet of where and how many Landmark trees have been nominated how many are currently being considered and how many have been approved or denied the second issue is one of proper documentation of site planning options when Landmark trees are recommended for removal in a proposed development hearing examiner should be able to clearly review all site planning options that were jointly considered by the applicant and the planning department staff and be able to see why certain options were rejected therefore I suggest that the ordinance be amended to require that the staff report to the hearing examiner includes a one-page summary of site design options that were considered to potentially retain any Landmark trees and specifically why such design options were rejected the goal of this would be to clearly answer some key questions such as can this project be altered and still go forward but save trees and if not why not if lack of project profitability is claimed budget documentation by the applicant should be included to substantiate that claim unwillingness excuse me the bottom line is that an applicant's unwillingness to agree to an achievable alternative site plan should not be allowed to justify Landmark

tree removal thank you for your efforts to protect bellingham's Landmark trees thank you Laura all right and then after Jim we'll have uh Rick edar Brooks Anderson and then we'll go online to Perry Eskridge and Carrie Burnside good evening my name is Jim Smith I'm grateful for your work for the city of Bellingham and I appreciate this opportunity to speak to you directly for the last several decades I've worked as a garden designer and Landscape contractor I'm experienced in selecting planting and caring for trees especially on Residential Properties I really appreciate that you're seeking to clarify the terms of the landmark tree ordinance I've reviewed the letter sent by the watka million trees project to the council and I support all the points raised in that letter but I want to speak to one particular Point raised in the letter which is the proposal for changes to the landmark tree survey process unfortunately Under reporting of large tree dbh is a problem here but this is a problem that can be fixed the current lto survey system does not deal with an inherent conflict of interest for arborists developers would typically have an interest in minimizing Landmark tree identification on a project site their hired arborist may want future survey or other work from the developer and worry about having a reput ation for being a stickler in the development Community arborists who are more flexible are more likely to get that work the current system does nothing to counteract

this pressure to fudge dbh measurement The Landmark tree dbh reporting will be more accurate if the city exercises more effective oversight and if there are negative consequences for Under reporting City staff can quickly review already available liar data and in a short site visit quickly check the dbh of any suspected under reported trees arborists who have repeatedly under reported dbh measurements should have their B business license revoked for up to three years no rational arborist would risk repeat Under reporting these simple changes will improve the Integrity of the LT survey process and will make the ordinance more fair and accurate that's good for everybody in our community thank you Jim mayor lond council members and staff thank you for the opportunity to speak regarding the Legacy trees ordinance I am Rick edar and I'm here tonight on behalf of the watcom environmental Council thanks to all concerned in putting the Legacy tree ordinance together it is an excellent start toward a final document that we all hope to be proud of but we do acknowledge the concerns expressed in the February 20 2025 letter to you all for Michael fear of the W million trees project and we support his suggested additions to the lto to the extent that they can be made to comply with all applicable laws regulations and ordinances but in focusing on Legacy trees we urge you and this pun is very intentional not to lose sight of the forest for the tree by that we mean the need for abundant

Urban forests and tree canopy as well as green belt and Open Spaces we have previously written letters to you and the county urging your attention to these vital needs just today we wrote to the watcom County Council supporting proposed changes to the forest advisory committee because since the fac was created the county and Bellingham have continued to acquire more Forest lands and there's a growing recognition of the need to manage our forests to mitigate and offset the effects of climate change and in our February 19 2025 letter to Mayor lond and the city council we recalled the growth management act mandate that Urban growth areas quote shall include green belt and open space areas unquote we expressed appreciation for adding to the comp plan draft a specific reference to the need for an open space Corridor between Bellingham and F burndale and continue to look forward to that Corridor being specifically identified as required by the GMA the GMA also requires that the land use element of the comp plan designate quote Urban and Community forests within the urban growth area unquote at this point the land use element materials do not yet specifically designate or describe the distribution location or extent of urban and Community forests while we appreciate the City noting in various documents the need for Community forests trees vegetation climate adaptive plants free canopy and natural features we still await public material specifically explaining the city's plans for

such natural features given the GMA mandate for designating Urban and Community forests in the land use element we look forward to the city's required designation being detailed in the near future for public Rie thank you for your time and attention thank you Rick good evening my name is Brooks Anderson and I'm just really um plain person I don't have all of the uh details and the information that many of the previous speakers have about this ordinance I really came because I love trees and I love trees that have been able to grow and become mature and give us lots of benefits in our city so I'm here tonight to speak to that I am in favor of the six pointed letter three-page letter that the Wacom tree billion Tree Project sent to you I want to thank the staff for all the work they've been doing I know they have more than a full plate and uh really appreciate the work however and this is really important to me in terms of preserving The Landmark trees so I came out in the dark rainy night to make my comment to you about this this ordinance protects trees that have grown for several decades providing benefits to our community that have would tragically be lost if cut down while there is a requirement for Builders to plant small young trees to offset the loss of established trees the benefits of that size cannot be begin to replicate the benefits of a tree that is decades old and mature as we all know it takes decades for the young trees to become part of the grownup trees the

mature trees well some don't agree the point of this ordinance is to design better projects that meet multiple city of Bellingham goals not to block projects the the Wakka million Tree Project letter offer six key issues and I'm only going to speak in my limited time to just a couple of them one of them is that I've been concerned about the accountability uh no one disp disputes the um need to have developers build more housing it is regretful that there have been some misinformation about the amount of reduction of developer profits it is also concerning that a few a few arborist have managed to under report the size of trees and again I refer to the Wacom tree projects letter to you that there is a remedy for those people who can't abide by truth thank you Brooks your time is up oops I'm finished thank you thank you Brooks all right next up online we have Perry ESD good good evening council members this is Perry ESD uh represent the building industry Association of wam County and for the record our address is 1650 Baker Creek place here in Bellingham um I submitted to you a couple days ago and I apologize for that um many suggested Corrections um most of those you'll see are clarification in nature and I'm not really sure if they fit within the ability to change it during the interim ordinance but I think when you read through those you'll see that um there are clarifications that really need to be done in this the the primary reason I'm testifying tonight is to urge you to

um encourage staff I guess encourage the administration to begin this type six process to get to a permanent ordinance as quickly as possible um many of our members are already talking about the impacts that they're running into with regard to projects and I can tell you personally I've been um been consulted at least 12 15 times um on sales of property um you know through my role as the real in the Realtors as you know and we've actually been seeing situations where properties that were sold thinking Some people could do one thing on a property actually were put up for sale again because it was not possible um we've been working really hard to educate Realtors about um this this interim ordinance and clarifying it for them so that people that are out there looking for land looking for development opportunities know what they're getting into before they actually make the purchases so in that regard please make the um suggested changes that we that we made so that you can um bring some clarification to this process but more importantly I know some of those suggestions we we um made are not going to be able to be done to an interim ordinance and that's why this type 6 process getting started and completed as quickly as possible I think with benefit everybody that has testified here tonight thank you so much and as always if you have any questions please don't hesitate to contact me thank you Perry all right Carrie Burnside you're up next good evening Council mayor l City staff

and commune members I'm Carrie Burnside president of the Silver Beach neighborhood association and I'm advocating for revisions to the Legacy tree ordinance I Echo the comments from wome million trees project and I'm focusing on two points from their letter transparency and the inclusion of black cottonwoods the city of Bellingham has shared a goal of increasing transparency and accessibility of its operations and decisions enhancing our local democracy currently the Legacy tree ordinance process is buried in staff reports and attachment reviewed one perm minute at a time without an accessible big picture view of the lto processing and results this information is vital not only for developers but for the public as well I propose an addition to Section 8 C additional responsibility for the Bellingham Landmark tree committee maintaining a simple to dat publicly accessible score sheet of where and how many Landmark trees are nominated currently be being considered or have been approved or denied for proposed developments the score sheet show how many trees The Landmark tree committee and eventually the hearing examiner have decided to retain or remove secondly I ask that certain black cottonwood trees be included Section 3 and section 4A of the lto exclude all black cottonwood trees from Landmark tree status most of the estimated 100 to 150 black cottonwood trees within the city are on public land near streams lakes or wetlands and do not pose a high risk to infrastructure or

people black cottonwoods play a crucial role in stabilizing stream Banks reducing erosion and maintaining water quality for Lake watcom their extensive root systems filter runoff trapping sediments and pollutants including phosphorus before they reach the Water by reducing phosphorus levels these trees help prevent algae blooms and other harmful effects to the to like wacom's ecosystem the Silver Beach neighborhood has has many black cottonwood trees that meet the criteria to be a Legacy tree especially on properties with unmitigated storm drains when they do not create infrastructure conflicts or hazards or in a low or moderate risk location they deserve land mark tree status so please do not exclude them in conclusion transparency in the lto process and the inclusion of low-risk cottonwood trees are essential steps towards protecting our environment and enhancing in community engagement I urge you to consider these points in your final decision thank you very much thank you Carrie that concludes our sign up thank you so I'll go ahead and close the public hearing uh Council council member list let me start with something uh kind of easy some people have asked for more transparency about the number of trees being considered and decisions um now and going forward what uh what does the staff think they can do just in terms of just making that information available to the public we s we have the process right now where somebody's able to nominate it uh a landmark tree or it's by

default if it's over the 36 Ines and we go through the process of of considering that through the um Landmark tree committee we've been working through um some of the technical components of it so we can try to map some of those things out so as we get further in that process and Define that I don't think there's any reason that we can't make that public facing uh so we can identify where the trees are located and uh which ones have been in included in that we've just been kind of working through the technical details of developing that piece of it at this okay so what I guess them saying is if if we can assure the public that we'll try to create a a public facing publication a website or whatever I don't think there's a need to amend the ordinance which is really about the rules rather than about the administrative procedures but I I agree with the idea and I'm glad you're willing to make that public council member Anderson tying on to that I think it's a little bit more expansive than just what trees have been nominated it's also what trees have been taken out through development um so I kind of see it as there's multiple pieces of information being requested so I guess I'm wondering is there a commitment from uh staff that not only the trees that are designated is being listed that they've been accepted or they've been denied in the reasoning that as development comes forward if there's a review of a Legacy tree or uh you know that a decision was made that through

development or whatever the reasoning whether it's um an arborous determining its Hazard but that the tree has been taken out of of that inventory that that is also listed um and I my reasoning of wanting that is because if someone should do a public information request and ask for one year's worth of data then staff are having to go back individually through all those plans to find it in order to provide that report whereas if that timing happened that a decision's made that that tree is going to be taken out for whatever the reason it is cataloged on that uh dashboard then it can just be referred to here's your information if I can um jump in I know what you're looking for is a commitment because the landmark tree ordinance is a multi-departmental interdisciplinary group I don't think it's fair necessarily for Blake right now tonight to respond on that behalf what I've written down and heard tonight is that we're looking for more transp parency and a public facing way to communicate nominations considerations denials and violations and so I think at our after action review tomorrow that will be part of the conversation how do we incorporate that and we'll make sure it's not just planning but that parks and Public Works um legal are all part of the thought process for that uh fair enough and when I I think some of the things that are being requested now and perhaps for uh continued you know as we go through these items um some of these things may not necessarily be for um

the short term but to be implemented in the long term so if between now and then as we go through the type six if that information can come back and there is kind of a nod that this will happen if not that'll give um maybe some are all Council further consideration on the permanent what we're going to want to codify it in the code council member Hamill yeah I think it's uh clear that there's plenty of work to be done here um like you said mayor uh this involves multiple departments within the city so there's a lot of um coordination that needs to to happen um and some of the ideas that were brought forward here uh tonight uh and expressed uh through the the letter uh from million trees project um I think those all you know need to be considered to some extent um and so with that I think the extending this um doing the six-month extension provides for the type six process to continue on and the coordination between departments to continue on so I'm going to vote to approve the ordinance as it as it's amended in the packet knowing that there's going to be some changes that will be happening so that's my motion a motion second motion by council member Hamill and a second by Council member Williams council member list so there were a lot of excuse me uh comments um seven Page Letter Mr esri sent with some small but maybe important definitions having to do with critical root Zone versus tree protection Zone and what topping is and in terms of tree pruning um you know there's a

William there's a letter from Happy Valley neighborhood association has several suggestions um may make a request of the administration this is something Mr nabel familiar with in some larger projects in the past we've created comment trackers and this one seems to have grown large enough that maybe it's time to create a comment tracker you basically just log the comments there's a a staff that either notes a response maybe there's a change maybe there isn't um just a suggestion that maybe a comment tracker would be a very public way of handling it that we've done in the past any further discussion council member Anderson I was hoping to accomplish one at least one revision that I think even in the next six months should um any development be coming forward that I I agree with what million Tre says is a fuzzy statement um it's the um I was trying to put my fingers on it because I was going to talk about another thing first um in section two do it [Applause] I apologize maybe it's yeah section two um J where it was um added from the original um where it says balance the needs to protect Urban trees with the climate benefit of increasing density in urban areas I think we all agree that um the idea of tree preservation is not to extinguish the ability to develop but it is to ensure the site is looked at and if there is the ability to amend a plan slightly by giving them height or a different setback or let them change the envelope if the development can still happen um with some

slight revisions and still protect the tree that's a win-win but if not and that work has been done then the tree can still come out and then they have to plant additional trees and stuff in order to offset that so it truly isn't about eliminating the ability to develop but I think this is kind of vague and creates a shortcut that someone can just say well can't do it so they haven't done the work to see if there's a way to do the project you know the next step to ensure that um if it's achievable so million trees um had suggested a revision which would be um re uh Revis section 2J to State um basically um leads to better development designs that balance the need to protect mature Urban trees with other community goals as increased Urban density occurs so I would prefer um it written with that statement because it's still leads to that you know increased density it's not prohibiting it so I make a motion to uh revise Jay second and I can reread that statement because you might not have it in front of you I do so the currently the statement in the book hopefully you know page 11 J you have it there so I would suggest a revision that leads to better development designs that balance the need to protect mature Urban trees with other community goals as increased Urban Development occurs okay we have a motion by council member Anderson and a second by council member list council member Chris one reason I appreciate this language is it it talks about Community goals plural uh when

it comes to climate benefits yeah there's some climate benefits to uh denser closer living which reduces Transportation impacts but there's also climate benefits to having trees in terms of heat island effects and better control of hydrology to deal with you know the increasing variations in in you know rain cycles that are different so I mean it's really it's not just like this versus this it's this this this this this so it's a it's a more complicated statement but I think this more realistic and inclusive statement that that recognizes the value of density and the value of trees without making a a simplistic uh equation between just two aspects of those benefits okay comments seeing then oh council member cotton I mostly a question here um and this is maybe this a novice legal question but uh does the intent section when does that come into play because the hearing examiner is still going to be bound by the um the the op other operative sections of the of the ordinance so I guess I'm just trying to understand this the stakes um appreciate the value discussion one I think it's staff the hearing examiner only uh gets involved when there's an appeal by a project proponent um but in in areas that are gray those purposes would come into play so if there's some uh where there's room for discretion um and I can't give you an example of that but those purposes would come into play thanks for answering my dumb question for another way of saying that is if you have a if you you know

if you have a tree that is outside the building envelope and it's a landmark tree you don't have discretion you have to you have to uh save it but there could be places where there is the exercise at discretion address yeah yeah so for example this afternoon the street vacation Street vacation criteria include things like is it in a public benefit and the council can consider the future uses to which something would be applied it's a way of guiding future people's decision making by telling them the the range of things who want them to consider so it's no it's not like the the hard and fast code portions but it's a those sort of guiding statements are common when it comes to complex decisions because we will all be gone staff and our interpretation of this and somebody will look at this document and what was the intention and so spelling it out that it is multifaceted gives sorry for speaking out of turn but um I've been in situations where there's that dialogue and we all wish that statements were a little bit better written because some of us knew the intent but the hearing examiner wasn't able to decipher that any further discussion on the amendment council member uh Stone so I just want to make sure understand because the amendment that was presented by council member Anderson then basically strikes the climate benefits in that section with Community goals right and I understand that there are other references say in subsection D um of section two that talks about climate

resiliency and maybe other right climate aspects in that final section J the way I was reading it was climate benefits of increasing density in urban areas right so as opposed to sprawl increased density um right done in a deliberate way could have climate benefits as well I'm just wanting to be clear whether or not the amendment here includes that or not C member Anderson so that's the thing about interpretation because I didn't interpret it that way so um and I don't know if this is allowed at this point but I'm not opposed to um adding K and then adding this language if you think interpretation of this is the climate benefits of higher density I I considered it higher the climate benefits of preserving the tree because that's what the ordinance is and I don't recall where the because J is a new section so how that came right that was an amendment since the last um version it was an addition right and so but I just want to be mindful that I don't think what's outlined in J the way I'm reading it is included in what you've presented so maybe adding an additional k for clarity would be but I would defer to staff legally at this point does it have to fail and then I request to instead of striking making it a or can I amend that and see if there's support and we shortcut you can if you're willing to amend just amend your okay I amend to make it K leaving J in place but uh just in case leave it open for other interpretation second okay council member Williams I guess I am

agreeing with my colleague here to the left this is a six-month ordinance and um and I am and there has been an an an awful lot of input and suggested uh uh clarifications and uh changes and I'm sure that those are not falling on deaf ears as we go down the path path to the permanent um uh ordinance um I am not terribly inclined to amend this this way but I am more inclined to discuss with the planning director and whoever else is involved in this to see if there's a way to address some of these concerns and the final permanent ordinance as opposed to this six Monon Let's uh get the ball rolling ordinance um and I think that would be a better use of our time and efforts to see if all of these suggestions can be incorporated into the final document as opposed to us up here trying to deal with it at the last minute and and let's let's check change this or let's change that or let's do this without in my view giving it a lot of due process so I'm not so in inclined to amend this tonight for the next six months but more um coming at it from a point of view of let's see if there's a way to incorporate these suggestions in the final um in the final ordinance so that's my uh three cents discussion um and I'll just add I I'm not opposed to the additional wording in the the under the purpose section it um I think it does that section is for giving folks in the future a sense of of maybe what we were thinking and our intentions um with this ordinance in the future it is just a

six-month ordinance at this point though it's temporary and so I agree that that getting into the Nitty Gritty is probably not the best use of our staff's time um but that said I'm not opposed to this amendment so I'll I will be voting yes but um any further discussion oh director lion I appreciate where um council member Williams is generally going with that kind of stuff in this instance I don't think that's going to be overly problematic we tried to respond to a similar uh discussion that you all brought forward in Direction and added the whereas uh statement which really gets to the intent so adding this additional language in the in the body of the the text I think achieves that similar intent behind that whereas and so in this case I think adding a k would be entirely appropriate and we can certainly support uh that direction branderson and I appreciate that support because this is how legislation happens um up until the last minute we are making changes um otherwise we kick it back to committee again um in six months um in all due respect a lot can happen and there will be plans coming forward and much like the junk fee ordinance that we're working on um there were some things that we put into it before it went to um advisory and that's because if we're leaning One Direction it's best to try to get it fit into that direction so that the public has those documents so that we're not here at the final making those changes um so I mean there was other things that I wanted

to add but I'll work with staff on that coming forward in six months because there probably a little more subsid change but when I think of providing direction for the next six months of what the intent is it helps the developer to know as they're bringing plans forward so the more clarity we can provide um what the intent of this is by bettering the definition I think is um terribly valuable um so I do appreciate the the support and the realization that um this is doable so thank you any further discussion on the amendment council member m coton I think it's maybe technically on the amendment I just want to say I really look forward to the type process beginning in Earnest and just to have such detailed comment letters on on this interim ordinance is such a gift and I'll just Echo council member List's comments about um like to see um in a even a public facing way detailed responses to that I know in other rul making processes or legislative processes that's a norm and um we don't usually have such substantive thoughtful feedback from um so many parties and so yeah we love to see that um and a it's difficult to amend on the fly but um yeah my two my three sents okay any further okay this is vote on the amendment all in favor say I I I I any opposed or abstentions the amendment passes 70 back to the original motion any further discussion on the original motion seeing none all in favor say I I I any opposed or abstentions that passes 70 council member list this is a one more

question this is one more uh suggestion requests inquiry about how staff will handle it one of the suggestions is it might be nice to kind of Truth test or field test some of these determinations um I'm sure for many of the things that come before us there's a little bit of field testing truth testing um am I am I correct in that that there there's always room for and there is not uncommon to do some field testing yeah that's typically and again as the mayor pointed out there's multiple departments involved in this both parks Public Works uh planning staff but certainly as we go through the review of development proposals there's always an encouragement and a desire to go out to the site see the property for itself understand uh the different specific aspects of what's being proposed seeing it uh in person is certainly a lot more beneficial than looking at a maybe outdated aerial or something along those lines so we we absolutely encourage that where we can and that is a sort of thing that might find its way into the decision record yes council member Anderson thank you um I just wanted to um I had conversations with multiple people um before this came forward and um some of the content we we discussed is in that million tree letter these are quite a few of them are areas that I was very vested and interested in seeing and the long-term plan so um I'll look forward to a conversation with you about what can possibly go in what might not and see what we can look at before it

fully comes to to Chambers um but just kind of indicating where I'm my area of interest uh this letter really does uh hit all the main points of things that I'd like to to see improved upon I certainly Echo uh council member Cotton's I mean it's a gift it's an opportunity to start from that vantage point to look at the um detailed concerns and on varying different sides of the issue and use that as a way to as stepping stone to hopefully get to a find an ordinance that reflects what we need as a community because ultimately we do want both a win-win development and trees and I think it's possible in many of the situations so I appreciate the staff's work on it okay moving on uh up next is the mayor's report we have to vote on the amend I thought we voted on no we we had okay okay so we have an amendment to the amendment I think I didn't catch that yeah all right all right the the original motion then the main main motion any further discussion seeing none all in favor say I I any opposed or extensions that passes 70 okay and now moving on mayor's report good evening Council good evening staff members of the community that are here here tonight I have some appointments to the Water Resources Advisory board for council's approval this evening I am seeking to appoint Alicia Tony and Carl Benson to their first full terms to that group and seeking to reappoint Brett boopin to a first full term second motion by council member Anderson second by council member Hamill for the

discussion seeing none all in favor say I I I any opposed or extensions that passes 70 thank you I'd like to announce that we have some growth draft uh planning chapters being posted for review we are moving into a new phase of the Bellingham plan which is our project to update bellingham's comprehensive plan which will guide how we grow as a community over the next 20 years and after much Community input we've developed a draft plan based on what we've heard while incorporating changes required by state laws and beginning now and continuing over the next several months we are releasing draft sections of the plan for public review for the Planning Commission and this council's discussion this is your chance to provide feedback before the plan is finalized and brought forward for adoption and you can learn more and engage in providing feedback on engage Bellingham I also wanted to share that there's going to be a ribbon cutting upcoming for a new park in Bellingham there is a ribbon cutting ceremony for our newest Park the Northern Lights Park it's set for Wednesday March 5th at 400 p.m.

it's located north of Costco and west of Northwest Avenue this new neighborhood park was built and dedicated by the RJ group as part of the Aurora Court development and I hope the community and all of you can join Us in celebrating a new North Side park I also wanted to share that sometimes in times of uncertainty we can find soulless and inspiration and art so I'm going to focus my last two updates on Art opportunities for the community and I want to share that this is a last call to celebrate the work of Thomas wood on display at the Wakka Museum through March 2nd is an Exquisite exhibition titled under the inspiration tree celebrating the work of Thomas wood it highlights key works of this Bellingham artist's Dynamic 48-year practice the exhibition showcases more than 300 artworks in a wide range of media wood was a beloved member of our creative community and he collaborated with an expansive network of artists and organizations he had an affinity and an aptitude for Old World print making and classic Renaissance traveling frequently to Italy to both exhibit and to teach there the exhibit at the Museum is an extraordinary opportunity to view the pristine beauty of our own Region's forests rivers and Islands through his Lush paintings and pastels I also wanted to share that you can visit The Verdant exhibit at the first free Friday upcoming March 7th First Fridays expand and the WKA Museum's accessibility to all with no Admissions and extended hours the community's next

chance to partake will be on March 7th and while the thomaswood show will no longer be there it is still an opportunity to view verdant which is a new exhibition that includes paintings by Pierre August Renoir Paul Saison and Henry matis the Waka Museum was just one of 10 museums nationally to be invited Ed to curate an intimate show from the National Gallery of Arts extensive and iconic collection as part of the Across the Nation program radical in their day Renoir saeson and matis helped shape the trajectory of Modern Art this exhibition invites visitors to explore movement defining pieces and consider how their Lush and emotive subjects call to mind the verdy treasured here in the Pacific Northwest and that's the end mayy report tonight thank you thank you mayor and with that we will move on to committee report outs uh first up is Public Works natural resources and that was chaired by council member Stone thank you very much president hman so this morning I was joined on the public works and natural resources committee by council members Anderson and cotton we had a number of items before us this morning um the first was agenda bill 24444 this is a Washington State Department of Transportation Grant acceptance regarding Squalicum Creek Estuary restoration this is project en060 so the city has been awarded a Washington State Department of Transportation local agency agreement for the Squalicum Creek Estuary restoration project design phase in the amount of $1,840 th000 the

project addresses three partial fish passage barriers at the mouth of the Squalicum Creek hindering access to more than 40 miles of Upstream habitat the three barriers are the city-owned rotor Avenue CT the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad owned CT and the Port of Bellingham owned Bridge these barriers are named in regional and local fish barrier priorities as the highest priority the wash dot Grant requires a 20% match which totals $460,000 the matching funds are comprised of a $300,000 Department of ecology Grant $80,000 from the Port of Bellingham and $80,000 from the city of Bellingham so this total design cost is $2,300 th000 and the city anticipates future grants for construction um just wanting to note that this morning we were joined by interim Public Works co-director Joel fun and Analise Burns habitat and restoration manager for the city of Bellingham um just wanting to note that so the scope of this grant will take the city from the Alternatives analysis through the 60% design which is expected in 20127 so it's be quite an undertaking to span a couple of years um just wanting to also note that the federal highways grant money um again is through wash dot covering the bulk of the cost um for this project so before the committee um this morning there was a motion to approve the local agency agreement and I so move second motion by a chair check second by council member Anderson further discussion seeing none all in favor say I I any opposed or abstentions that

passes 70 okay thank you very much so the next item before the committee was agenda bill 24445 this is a bid award for indefinite delivery indefinite quantity fence installation and repair services this is Bid number needs arise by issuing individual work orders um for each discrete project each work order is priced based upon the labor and materials markups provided in the contractor's bid proposal the city received one bid that was publicly opened on January 21st 2025 discount fence was the responsible bidder who submitted the lowest responsive bid of $24,105 the bid amount is based upon a hypothetical set of jobs for bid comparison purposes and does not establish a contract maximum the contract provides for a three-year term and a maximum price of $335,000 the contract is below the $1 million threshold for Apprentice utilization however I just wanted to highlight that um with an idiq this provides again the city efficiency for small projects that may come up in the need for fencing without needing to go out for a bid individual for individual projects um but at the same time the city reserves the right to bid a larger project um if the need arises and if an individual project did exceed the million dollar threshold then obviously the apprenticeship utilization requirements would be triggered um wanting to note that although there was only one um bid received that the city has had extensive work in the past um with this particular company and the work has been satisfactory

so there's no concern um in that realm and just wanting to note that we were joined this morning by Mike Olinger so interim co-works um public works co-director as well as um Mike Parlin was with us as well natural resources field operations manager um to answer questions if they had Arisen um but the committee moved to approve Award of the idiq fence installation and repair services contract under bid number 75-24 and is so move second motion by the chair and a second by council member Anderson any further discussion seeing none all in favor say I I any opposed or abstentions that passes 70 okay so the next item before us was agenda bill 24433 this is resolution adopting the 10-year fiber Network comprehensive plan so the proposed resolution included in the packet of adopts the city of bellingham's 10-year fiber Network comprehensive plan the plan is the culmination of a multi-year effort to study the city's fiber Network including future needs and opportunities the plan focuses on improving redundancy reliability and future proofing the city's fiber Network to better support City operations including Public Safety emergency response and other essential Services city council approved the substance of the plan in resolution 2024-25 and directed staff to prepare a formal plan document for adoption by followon Council resolution um so just wanting the report out will be a little more complex than normal but just wanting to highlight a couple of things first that we were joined

this morning by Joel fun in on Public Works co-director um as well as John Gavin who's the fiber optic network engineer for the city of Bellingham in public works um so for this item just wanted to note also that with the um Broadband Advisory board workg group that online through the city of Bellingham website there is history available um that aligns with the history that was covered in the presentation today so initially there was um a presentation regarding the work and recommendations that had brought been brought forward by the Broadband Advisory workg Group and there was a request from Council to turn that into a more formal report that could be referenced um through City business um and by the public and so that formal report was brought forward at our last meeting on February 10th um at that time there was a motion in committee to bring the plan forward for consideration um by the full Council in the evening at that time the motion was um table well the motion was brought forward and then the vote was Ted to come back forward this evening um so typically the tabled vote comes forward at the next opportunity um for the vote to be picked back up which would be this evening so there are a couple of items one is that motion which is for consideration of adoption of the plan as presented in the February 10th meeting packet so at this time that motion is back on the table so there was already a motion um and a second at our last meeting and so it's open back up for

discussion any further discussion on that motion okay seeing none all in favor say I I any opposed or abstentions passes 70 okay so then today there was also and then I'll get to the next motion that was tabled but today during committee there was also a motion from the committee to move to approve the resolution which was included in today's packet February um 24th and so that resolution simply references adoption of the plan as presented in the packet um the plan presented in the packet today is the same as at our last meeting on um February 10th but this is a formal resolution moving to adopt the plan so that's what was voted on this afternoon for reconsideration this evening and Isa move second motion by the chair second by council member Williams council member list I don't see a resolution in the packet other than one which was already voted on that resolution was not included in the last packet when we were last before Council when this item was brought forward at our last meeting there was no resolution included aeny resolution this is an old resolution previously passed so where's the new one so the new resolution is on page it's immediately following the presentation and prior to the plan on page 93 nope got to go back right there right there ah thank you very much yeah okay so that resolution in the therefore simply states that the city of Bellingham hereby adopts the 2025 to 2035 fiber Network comprehensive plan attached here to as exhibit a further discussion 9

all in favor say I I I any opposed or extensions passes 70 so during our last meeting there was also a second motion that was tabled um that motion is coming back before the council this evening um so that motion was made by council member lillquist and seconded by council member Anderson the move was to request to reconvene members of the Broadband workg group to address digital equity and affordability of quality Broadband so that item will come back before the council at this time for discussion council members council member list so um five years ago when we uh formed the advisory work group we were not aiming to come up with a fiber comprehensive plan to figure out how to make the city's fiber Network more reliable and stable and useful which is what we did we accomplished that we have that plan it's a great outcome but that was not actually the outcome that was being sought we were looking for broader issues having to do with Community benefit and one way we might have got the community benefit is to be able to use the city's fiber Network as an Open Access resource or a dark fiber leasing model or even Direct Services to premise model those were also reviewed but again those weren't necessarily the goals the goal was many members of our community have complaints about affordability and equitability and access to high quality Broadband sometimes have Broadband but it's really not high quality it's it's below the old Federal standards and it's which is well below the

current federal standards so those issues of access and affordability remain and so I would like and I think the best some of the best people situated to revisit that issue based on the current report and and the many answers we do have which have closed off some Avenues is just not feasible well what what Avenues remain that might be feasible and the work group is I think best situated to not have to go back to zero and re-educate themselves they are the most educated on this issue uh in our community so the fastest way to get to a shortterm revisiting of those questions I think is to reconvene the Broadband Advisory workg Group my understanding is the majority of the members are interested in reconvening this in part was based upon one of their own recommendations with that is that the city can consider ways to continue using the work group in the future well this is the future and I think this is a way we could use them um I'm open to the mechanisms I'm open to whether or not we want to add new voices to that work group um I'm thinking something short and focused and the reason why I would like to use the work group is so that it is short and focused that a new group of people doesn't need to re-educate themselves on these issues we already have those educated people we can add to it but I I really hope we should would take up the work group on their own offer which is please use it sometime in the future when you see a need ccil member Anderson um the reason why I support

this is um and and I don't think it's exactly defined what this work group would do but I've had a couple of people who participated who were very interested in looking at now that there's all this information available from the research and the study and the the folks that we did pay for Consulting some of the um community members really wanted the city to be in the business of providing broadband and we've got the numbers back and that's not possible I'm curious in an official capacity or giving individuals a a vehicle to be able to be uh heard um of course each person could send us an email but like we can't all necessarily all discuss it unless there's maybe a presentation by a group um I'd like to do something where we're not hiring a facilitator it's not going to be a couplee process we're not starting from scratch one but kind of picking up where they left off with the new information about what is possible um some of the conversations I've had there's like they believe there are ways to bridge the gap of of digital Equity without it necessarily having to be a high cost performance I know that um City staff are going to come back and share with us about you know what the library does and some other areas and I think that would be useful to have as part of that data um data toolbox but I would like to be able to give um those working members and then perhaps if there's a couple of people that join to it to talk about Equity I'd like to be able to to give them an

official vehicle to come together have that discussion over the course of a few meetings um it could be assisted by either depart our departmental staff or council members under three who are interested but then after the conclusion of that if they are able to pull together some suggestions because it was kind of an Advisory Group they would have that ability to come back and share that information so um some of those members supported a tremendous amount of time and effort and I kind of feel like the we haven't concluded and I'd like to give them an opportunity to um come together officially um to maybe conclude some of that work so we can look at the other part that really hasn't been addressed in the fiber plan council member Stone yeah I'm not I mean I don't object to the underlying what I hear the underlying intent to be right for the city to address digital equity and affordability for Quality Broadband clearly I think we saw the um you know the inequities front and center during the pandemic right and you know community members whether or not they had access to broadband and whether um it was quality access and certainly those are issues that need to be addressed my question is within a motion form the way it's written here is it's not clear to me what the scope of work would be and maybe that's to be determined by staff but also whether or not the Broadband work group members right are the best suited individuals to address this issue in particular um as you mentioned

there was a report from staff that four members said yes they would be interested in reconvening one said no one said maybe and one the city was unable to to reach um but I'm just recognizing as well the number of boards and commissions that the city has which I know that internally there's been interest in you know addressing that not to underestimate the work that it takes to right reconvene a group it might sound easy but reconvening that group and then scheduling and Staffing and supporting that work I just want to be sure with you know reduced resources those being you know time money and and people power um that that we're doing so in a mindful way so that it's the best use of everyone's time including the you know Broadband Advisory board members and whether or not this would be the most um yeah appropriate way to move this work forward and whether it be the most um in most efficient and and productive as as well and so I would be more inclined for you know direction to the administration to come back with some ideas about how to yeah how to move this work forward because it is does feel like unfinished business um but I've certainly am supportive of the underlying intent I would be interested in hearing from staff um I guess twofold first I just the logistics of a work group The Broadband work group was it disbanded or does it exist indefinitely and so can we reconvene it or are we asking to form a group a new um even though it could potentially be the same members um

but then also just general feedback about the idea of convening a work group regarding these issues if there is any feedback um from staff so earlier today in the committee conversation uh I shared that when the original broad Broadband Advisory Group was formed the resolution that's um created it set it up as a limited term with language that stated the work group shall terminate and dissolve upon presentation of the final report and policy recommendations described at section three to city council and so by your previous vote just this evening it seems like we might be at that point and so if we wanted to um consider how to move forward I think staff could come forward with what that looks like but I want to create space for Mr fun to weigh in on on the staff perspective so uh like I went over this afternoon in a bit more detail during the committee um the you know final resolution had a number of um to-dos in it and uh that came out of the report recommendation and staff feels like we are at a point where we have completed many of those those were based on the final report for the from the Broadband Advisory workg Group and um one of those that remained was for us to uh work on um negotiating agreements with our partners which is our next step based on the plan that was adopted this evening and then um there was a item in there about continuing to look at uh at um ways to provide better access to the community for people who are underserved or unserved and uh you know at

that time we offered to come back with more information and feel like that would be a a good Next Step before um re reconstituting a a group um that uh when we talked to them there was certainly some interest but some members um you know we had strong interest from four of the Seven original members um that were part of the Broadband advisory work group so at that point it does seem to us to be you you wouldn't necessarily just get it's not as simple as getting the same group back together because if if it is the four um that's a you know relatively small group council member Stone I just want to thank the mayor for reading the resolution I guess I'd push back and I think it's open to discussion about when right when that was completed it doesn't sit well for me right now to say oh it was completed with the vote we took a couple minutes ago and now therefore this can't be considered because it's been dissolved I mean it feels to me then well if I brought this motion for first would that have been then in a held in a different light to me the way I read right the progression of the work from the Broadband advisory um committee and you know those observations and recommendations right were brought forward and the city council adopted them as part of resolution 2023-24 and then that information and um formal you know comprehensive report was brought forward August 5th of last year but I feel like the work of the group had you know concluded long before our vote this evening so I

just want to air that because to me that that feels like more semantics about how we you know conducted business this evening versus I feel like the the work of that group may have concluded with the presentation of the report which was um some time before discussion Council Williams uh when do you uh uh Joel when do you anticipate being able to make the presentation about what the city is already doing because I wrote a note down about that but I didn't get a timeline for it about we plan to come to Council next month either the first or second meeting in March and it will be a presentation from both it and Library staff on digital Equity efforts so uh don't go ahead so I I I'm feeling a little unsure about the idea of reconvening a work group um I think it's clear that we are still interested in making progress on digital equity and getting an update making sure that the city is still um got that in mind as a goal as it is very important um but I the idea of reconvening the work group doesn't sound as simple as maybe one would think it sounds like it would be a new work group um that that four people at least are are interested in perhaps um and and I don't know that the direction of that work group is has been made very clear so I will be voting no on the motion um yet am still interested in hearing about the presentation um and and what next steps we should be making as a city but also I mean there is the potential that that a work group like this would be beneficial in

the future on this particular subject counc mem list um I think the purpose is actually not unclear if would you mind reading the motion again the motion was to request to reconvene members of the Broadband workg group to address digital equity and affordability of quality Broadband to address digital equity and affordability of quality Broadband that is the topic it was the original topic so I don't know it's not like we're getting together and they're going to say why are we here that's why they're here council member Stone I guess the way I'm reading it is that to address digital equity and affordability of quality broadband I feel like there's been um agreement that yes that's something we want to address and then I feel like that gets passed on to the administration of direction of saying this is right priority of interest and to come back as it sounds like is going to happen with it and library to review and analyze what are the resources we currently have how can those be right leveraged to try and meet those needs and then if there's additional work to be done hopefully we would have a clear view on um where to direct right that work to ensure that if a work group is going to be reformed um that we would have members best suited to address that work specifically right with that Equity lens I don't know personally the members of the Broadband advisory work group and whether right Equity would be um yeah something and that they would be coming to the table with either

shared personal experience um and or expertise um and are there other partners within the city's work that we would want to have as part of that group or as ex officios and I feel like it's a broader conversation and I'd like to hear from maybe Staff first about right what are the resources we currently have that we can leverage differently and where do we go from there member list to be clear the the work group did spend several meetings exploring what actually was meant by the ideality of digital equity and equitability of access and quality so um again these people aren't novices to these issues um they're not going to spend their time saying well what do we mean by Equity because that's already been it's part of the report part of the report we accepted part of the report that we adopted so I I do think they're really well suited I'm not saying they're the only people suited to address these questions but we rely on outside work groups precisely so we don't do everything inhouse so that we can crowdsource some ideas so it isn't just our good ideas but other good ideas outside of us so I support advisory groups I support this one um if we don't reconvene these people we need to do something and whatever we do if it doesn't include these members who are the most up to speed in this issue of anyone in the community well almost the most but some of the most um that would be a mistake so we need to include these people one way or the other and this is I see seems to be the

most obvious way to do itone so I guess the concern that I have is the when we think about the scope of work and what's actually feasible so when I'm looking at the budget and right constraints that we're focing across the board yes we could convene a group that I mean I could list a million things that are on my wish list that I would love to see with respect to digital equity and Broadband I think we heard from the group that we'd like to see right a public network that provides service to the entire city for hundreds of billions of dollars it's not right going to come to fruition right now or in the near term and so I guess I'm just wanting to be realistic about what are some things that we can do in the short term to help leverage the resources that we have to serve the broader community and those who may be unserved or underserved we've already highlighted that we don't qualify for federal right grants or additional Aid or Revenue because we don't qualify as unserved or underserved Community because there is broadband accessible I mean it's available within the city whether or not it's truly accessible to every member of our community is another question there are obstacles right with respect to um yeah finances infrastructure within their right home and other things is there a way similar to other utilities that you know the city um provides to the community are there other ways where we can help to bridge that Gap do we have Partners in the community that we can lean

on to help also you know bridge that Gap I just don't know what more we're going to learn from convening a work group I feel like the work that we receive the recommendations and the information from the work group over the years that they um you know were convened was valuable um but unfortunately we're facing some pretty significant constraints that are going to limit What's um what's possible so one of my concerns is that the um the consultant looked at that big picture and only one aspect how does the city municipes fiber and it's not doable but there's a lot of other possibilities that were not part of that that work and so the questions you're asking is the exact reason why the work group these people who spent two years who are very knowledgeable about what is out there in the community and it is like crowd sourcing so we have great staff who can accomplish a lot but they're you know they're not all plugged into the digital world in the sense of fiber and the wireless and I mean there's a certain capacity but these individuals are specialists in that area and I wanted to give them an opportunity to be at a table again um with clearer direction of these are the things and and this is something I mean if we agree that we would like to bring them together then the focus of what they're going to work on and the timeline and the resources can then be um addressed and so the questions that you're asking those would be the perfect questions I would want to ask them like how

can we create better uh digital or wireless access for individuals who can't afford you know the typical how do our homeless plugin I realize the city's going to come forward with some of that but I imagine that's not going to be um across the entire city the work group or the individuals um to consult maybe there isn't anything there and then and then I feel at that point then we're kind of at the end of the road but if there are things I want to give the opportunity for them to speak to ity killer I'd like to recommend that when we when we come back and give a presentation from it in the library and probably others about work underway already in the digital Equity realm that we um think through a clearer scope of work and a clearer purpose I hear you Michael that you think it's clear and it's a it's a very wide open door and I'm also hearing you say that you want us to put put together the members who are already who have already been involved and you want to do it quickly and I'm just concerned that that's not as quick and easy as as it sounds like it should be I agree that it sounds like it should be I think we also want to think through how this might dovetail excuse me with some of our other Equity work and some of the work that dbor de Bena in the mayor's office has has started to map out in her role as e equity and belonging manager um so there's just a lot of this this feels like it could go in a lot of directions again I'm hearing you want to hear from the other

members and do something quickly and I'm concerned that that's not as realistic as it sounds so let us hear you and scope this out a little bit and come back discussion motion okay seeing none all in favor say I I all oppose no no no extensions I'm abstention okay that is two yes four no one exstension so that's the third end of the third item in our committee um anything further on this from staff okay so the next item before the committee was actually the largest item um as far as time so this was agenda bill 24446 this was a presentation and outline of the nutrient reduction evaluation at post point so the postp point resource recovery plant treats and cleans waste water generated by the resident of Bellingham sewer service area prior to discharging the treated liquid effluent into Bellingham Bay so the Puget Sound nutrient General permit issued in 2022 requires the city to prepare a nutrient reduction evaluation report known as NRE carollo Engineers is preparing the nutrient reduction evaluation for the city the purpose of this presentation this morning was to outline the decision-making process and framework associated with selection of preferred treatment Alternatives within the NRE and to report on input received from the city's Water Resources Advisory board so this morning we were joined by interim Public Works co-director um Mike Olinger as well as um Tad gesb who is with Corolla Engineers so he provided um the report in quite a lot of detail um this morning so

wanting to make note that the nutrient reduction evaluation um will include evaluation of the cost and feasibility of reducing um the effluent total inorganic nitrogen um so the city right now is going through the process of selecting um an alternative for what's known as acart which is alln available and reasonable treatment as well as um regarding water quality um looking at 3 milligrams per liter um seasonally and so with respect to um what's happening in the decision-making process wanting to highlight that there um is sort of scored criteria regarding our Community Values um here locally in addition to critical consideration of the financial costs and implications um as well as the performance of any um system that would be put in place and so um with respect to the analysis just wanting to highlight that this work will be moving forward we need to um have approval by well the end of the year going to ecology so the presentation was made to the water Water Resources Advisory Board in January um and the Consultants will be going back to the Rab in March and then returning to the council in May for consideration of the recommended um Alternatives and hoping to send that to acology um for permitting around the end of the year November but that would need to be finalized by um the end of this this calendar year so I would encourage members of the public who are interested in this topic to go back and watch the presentation that's recorded and will be available online through

our meetings um website through the city of Bellingham um and to track that for further discussion um or for further developments but today the information presented again was just for information and discussion only there was no action taken um but we will look for um again a followup in approximately May um after the work goes back to the to the rav so at this time again just for information and discussion only there was no action taken um and with that that was end of committee and I'll send it back to you president Huffman thank you council member Stone and up next this morning was community and economic development uh chaired by council member cotton um and first I will actually need to recuse myself for this one because I own a business that could potentially have a conflict with one of the agenda item uh agenda items under this committee thanks president hman um and it'll be a short one so don't go far um we had one agenda Bill item before us today this was consideration of the lodging tax advisory committee recommendations uh the city council approved the lodging tax um committee recommendations for 2025 including a line item for a new signature event um precious uh pre well precious but previous Awards have launched uh bellham seafest and Northwest tuneup and at their January meeting the lodging tax advisory committee voted to award the next signature event Grant to artist home to produce a music festival at existing venues in downtown Bellingham and um in addition

and separate from the signature event funding uh the advisory committee recommends a $50,000 Grant to the Bellingham bells to present a softball tournament called all all night ball in Bellingham both events are anticipated to take place in the spring of 2026 and I'll just note this is dedicated funding and our role is to either approve or not um these recommendations um and there is unanimous recommendation and committee to um approve and ISO move second by council member cotton to adopt the lodging and tax advisory committee's Grant recommendations any discussion seeing none all in favor please say I I all opposed motion carries six z um and end of commit report you council member Williams and cotton up next uh we had a special meeting this was a closed record hearing for consideration of a street vacation petition the petitioners um Morris and Deborah Arthur have petitioned the city to vacate a portion of an unimproved Alleyway abing their property located at 16014 Street the hearing examiner held a hybrid inperson virtual public hearing on August 14th 2024 on August 2nd 2024 the hearing examiner issued a recommendation of approval with conditions on the street vacation petition the hearing examiner's findings of fact conclusions and recommendation are provided uh in Exhibit C attached to the the packet if you look uh online the petitioner submitted the appraised fair market value amount of the finance department on January 16th 2025 there was uh a recommendation a vote to

recommend approval and I so move second uh motion made by the chair second by council member Hamill any further discussion counc member list does this count as third and final reading no you actually this this afternoon voted to approve the vacation and also he did a first and second reading on the ordinance so you just you don't need to revote you just need to report it out okay thank uh uh did you mention the the um the um 46,000 motion you you also voted to uh require uh compensation for the right way of $46,400 thank you Mr Mariner yes okay anything further to discuss on that item we can move on next up we had Committee of the whole oh council member Stone so I just want to make sure I understand the um the first and second so you were saying that because typically we will have a first my understanding is the first is in committee and then the second in the evening right I mean typically when something comes forward but in this case with the special meeting is that sort of like when the vacation when we have a public Hearing in the evening and there's a vote taken that's considered first and second at one time during the same presentation yes okay glad I'm not the only one that's not all right uh next up was Committee of the whole uh we had three agenda items first was agenda Bill 24449 watom County 5-year homeless housing plan development update staff from Wacom County introduced the process for updating the five-year homeless housing plan the plan guides the County's

goals and strategies for reducing homelessness and Associated harm counties are required to develop such plans every 5 years the watom County Housing advisory committee supported by the health and community services department will spend 2025 updating the plan plan targeted for adoption by the County Council in November there was a very long presentation lots of questions by Council um we had uh Janie and Chris from the watom county health and Community Services um department and um I would certainly recommend reviewing that presentation on uh meetings.

ob.org it's the way that you can access that video um one um one point you can help with with this survey uh which can be found on the health and community services website there's a real short little survey you can give some of your input about um homelessness issues in our community um that was for information and discussion only no action was taken up next we had agenda Bill 24451 an update on the 2025 State legislative session with City lobbying activities City staff and contracted lobbyists presented an update on the 2025 legislative session um so we heard from our uh our our new lobbying Partners um about for the first time presenting the council with with what they have been up to and what we uh as a city have been up to in terms of lobbying in Olympia um again a nice one to view uh if you if you'd like if that's something that you're interested in um and then uh myself council member Hamill and council member son are part of that lobbying team and so I I give updates as to what what's been happening in the last week um as as an addition to this agenda item so uh council member Stone testified in support of Two Bills related to real estate excise tax also known as Reit Reit one RE 2 council member Stone testified in support of House Bill 1791 which would harmonize the the applicable uses of re 1 and RE 2 right now there are different definitions of what types of capital projects are eligible for reate 1 and RE 2 it also eliminates the 2026 sunset for use of Reet funds

for affordable housing and makes the authority to use 35% of re funds for operations and maintenance permanent council member Stone also testified in support of house bill 1867 which would provide an option for cities to go to the voters to establish a0 5% reate for for affordable housing if the county has not done so by 2027 thank you council member stone for doing that uh the city also signed in support of House Bill 1515 which is having a hearing this week the bill would allow cities and counties to create uh libation zones and would benefit the city during the FIFA World Cup in 2026 it also aligns with the port of bellingham's priorities um and that was that item was for information discussion only no action was taken next up we had agenda bill 24450 it was a study study session regarding middle housing on November 21st 20124 mayor Len issued executive order 20242 with the express goal of expanding housing options in Bellingham the executive order provided direction to accelerate consideration of middle housing ordinance of a middle housing ordinance that would be ahead of State mandates through adoption of the infill toolkit Citywide the study session would allow the study session uh allowed city council to consider the matter before conducting a public hearing on an interim ordinance again a nice presentation to review if you are interested in housing issues um and uh no action was taken on that item as well with that uh anything for old and new council member Stone so

I just had a question um actually related to our agenda today I know that under community and economic development in that committee there was an agenda item that was pulled that was the presentation by the port of bellingham's regional economic partnership and I believe that was just with respect to time today and the agenda was full do we know when that item will be coming back don't think we have a specific date but the intention is in March okay great thank you for that anything else for old and new council member Hamil I just wanted to mention that on Fe February 14th uh Chief merzig uh mayor lond and uh C fber Williams and many many others um went out to the opening for the DJ E Mobile Medical units out on Division Street um this is a tremendous gift for this community the Sous tribe has gifted um Bellingham and wam County two Mobile Medical units that uh treat opiate use disorder and they will be able to treat at full capacity over 400 people per day um that need Suboxone or methadone um I was honored to uh be called as a witness which meant I got to sit on the stage with um tribal Elders uh including uh those from our neighboring tribes from lemi and noac as well as s uh elders and I just want to provide that update that those Mobile Medical units are beginning to get get up and running they are uh the tribe is providing I think it's 24 or 25 full-time equivalent employees uh to um to assist with um the dosing and security and all the things that you would think a uh

a clinic would have so good news for the community just going to pass along thanks anything further F new all right with that I'll move on to the executive session report we had three items today first was a litigation matter with uh Kirkham versus city of Bellingham with good staff provided information on a litigation matter I will now entertain a motion to authorize the mayor to retain keing buckin and McCormack Inc PS to represent the city and individually named officers in the pending litigation so moved second motion by council member Williams second by council member Hamill any further discussion seeing none all in favor say I I any opposed or extensions that passes 70 next up we had a potential litigation with staffs stamps staff provided information on a potential litigation matter it was for information and discussion no action was was taken and third we had a labor relations matter with sulliv Sullivan staff provided information on the proposed 2025 to 2026 collective bargaining agreement between the city and the American Federation of state county and Municipal Employees local number 114 uh Prospect Communication Center will now entertain a motion to ratify the agreement reached with the following general terms duration January 1st 2025 through December 31st 2026 wages and compensation effective January 1st 2025 4% Cola effective January 1st 2026 3% Cola effective following full ratification Implement 3.5% 4.5% and 6.5% long longevity premiums at 10 15 and 20 years

of service respectively in conjunction with implementation of the longevity premiums eliminate 10year 1% and 20e 2 % service quality steps effective following full ratification increase the employer match to deferred compensation to 2% medical insurance increase the city's contribution to medical insurance by 6% each year other significant issues increase life insurance coverage to twice the employees annual salary collapse vacation acral schedule to allow dispatchers to earn vacation leave at a higher rate earlier in their career move approval second motion by Council member Williams second by council member Hamill any further discussion seeing none all in favor say I I any opposed or abstentions passes 70 consent agenda move approval second motion by council member list and a second by council member ham Hamill further discussion see n all in favor say I any opposed or abstentions that passes 70 feel like I'm been talking a lot all right final consideration of ordinances agenda Bill 24434 an ordinance amending Municipal Code chapter 9.12 to align with updated waste management practices State legislation and the city's climate action plan have third and final second motion by council member H Hamill second by council member Williams roll call please Hannah Stone hi Dan Hamill hi Skip Williams hi Lisa Anderson hi Michael liquis hi hi Jay cotton hi Holly Huffman hi the ordinance passes 70 all right thank you and I usually have a little sheet to read Jackie was saying Jackie