Name: Bellingham City Council - Committee Of The Whole meeting, Jul 13, 2026
Start: 2026-07-13
End: 2026-07-13
Location: City of Bellingham

City Council - Committee Of The Whole

Mon, July 13, 2026

Agenda PDF Minutes PDF Watch Video

Agenda items

Vote records

Discussion summary

Transcript

Meeting summaryAI-generated

Bellingham City Council — Committee of the Whole — July 13, 2026

This was a full Committee of the Whole session, the first in some time, covering four substantive agenda items plus old/new business. The meeting concluded with a notice of executive session covering litigation, property acquisitions, and a quasi-judicial appeal.

Agenda Item 24973: City Council Communications and Community Engagement 2026 Work Plan

David Bron, the City Council Communications and Community Relations Manager, presented a proposed 2026 work plan designed to expand and formalize how the council communicates with residents. The plan builds on a communications charter passed by council in April and updates a 2017 plan.

The proposed tactics fall into two broad categories. The first covers largely staff-driven, budget-neutral efforts: email newsletters, social media content, regular op-eds written by council members in rotation, and improved email responses to constituents. The second covers in-person and online engagement options, including "conversation circles" (structured small-group discussions), joint open office hours, an online forum where residents can invite council members to community events, and informal "coffee with council" sessions hosted by individual members.

The most debated element was a proposed change to the public comment period: moving it to the beginning of meetings, capping total public comment at 30 minutes, and reducing individual speaking time from three minutes to two. Bron noted that public comment periods have averaged about 33 minutes since 2023, though one recent session lasted over three hours and fifteen minutes. He cited Seattle, Bellevue, Yakima, and Kennewick as cities with similar front-of-meeting comment structures.

Council members were largely enthusiastic about the communications and engagement elements. Council Member Anderson noted the council's prior lack of coordinated communication — particularly around responding to constituent emails — and praised Bron's work since joining staff. Council Member Lilliquist expressed particular interest in short-form video content and op-eds, noting that more frequent pieces would carry less individual weight and allow members to speak naturally about issues. Council Member Hammill suggested the plan should also acknowledge council members' service on external boards and commissions — noting he sits on approximately eight — as an underrecognized form of community engagement. Council President Stone flagged that the current Spanish-language interpretation during evening meetings does not appear to be well-utilized and suggested exploring more targeted interpretation options, including advance-request interpretation for specific events or listening sessions.

On public comment, council was divided. Council Member Williams came around to supporting the proposed structure, seeing it as one piece of a larger engagement ecosystem. Council Member Hammill opposed moving public comment to the front, arguing there is civic value in residents observing council business before speaking. Council Member Lilliquist said he valued the ability to speak briefly with commenters after meetings — a two-way connection that would be lost if speakers leave right after commenting at the start. Council Member Anderson supported earlier comment for accessibility reasons (families, early work schedules) but also saw value in the current end-of-meeting placement for staff who can leave before comment. Council Member Cotton noted the council has been discussing public comment placement since he joined and suggested the body just commit to a decision.

Council President Stone proposed moving forward: bring the work plan back at the next meeting with Section E (public comment) set aside for further work, and approve the remaining sections to allow Bron to begin implementation without delay. Council broadly supported this approach, with Lilliquist emphasizing that rolling out other engagement opportunities first would make any future constraint on public comment more credible and acceptable to the public.

Outcome: No formal vote taken. The work plan will return at the next council meeting (July 27) with an addition addressing council members' board and commission service, and with public comment treated as a separate item for continued deliberation.

Agenda Item 24974: Initiative No. 2026-01 — Prohibiting Algorithmic Price-Fixing in the Rental Market

Interim City Attorney James Herb presented the status of a citizen initiative that prohibits the use of algorithmic "coordinating services" to set rental prices. The Whatcom County Auditor verified that petitioners gathered signatures equal to at least 10% of votes cast in the last mayoral election (approximately 3,167 signatures), qualifying it as an initiative bill. Council must act by July 27, 2026 — either adopting the initiative, sending it to voters, or rejecting it and proposing an alternative. If council takes no action, it goes to voters automatically at the November general election. Importantly, if passed by voters, council cannot amend the ordinance for two years.

Council members were broadly supportive of the initiative's intent — limiting algorithmic rent-setting tools used by companies like RealPage — but several raised concerns about specific language. Council Member Lilliquist said he would have preferred the ordinance target "price-fixing" or "anti-competitive collusion" rather than the vaguer phrase "coordinating services," but did not consider it fatally flawed. Council Member Anderson raised concerns about a provision allowing up to 90 days in jail as a penalty for violations, and about an employee retaliation section that awards $7,500 in damages upon "alleging" a violation — language she found potentially too vague. She acknowledged there likely isn't time to rewrite these sections before the deadline. Council Member Cotton noted that criminal enforcement would almost certainly be handled by public prosecutors exercising discretion, and that the ordinance language says "may" — not "shall" — impose criminal penalties. He also reported meeting with lobbyists for RealPage, hearing their preference for a narrower model like Spokane's, and remaining unconvinced. Council Member Williams expressed a general preference for legislating through normal processes rather than initiatives but acknowledged the options are limited at this stage. Council members also discussed how state preemption legislation, if passed, could supersede the local ordinance even within the two-year amendment-restriction window.

Outcome: No formal vote taken at this meeting. Herb indicated he needs direction before the end of the evening session to prepare the appropriate resolution for the July 27 vote. Council will also discuss the matter in executive session.

Agenda Item 24977: Charter Amendment — Streamlining the City's Contracting Process

Deputy Administrator Forest Longman presented a proposed charter amendment that would (1) allow the mayor to designate someone else to sign contracts on the city's behalf, and (2) eliminate the requirement that the Finance Director physically attest to the mayor's signature and affix the city's official press seal.

Longman explained that the city processed nearly 1,200 contracts in 2025 — more than double the volume of ten years ago. The current requirement that every contract pass through the mayor for a physical wet signature, followed by the Finance Director pressing the city seal, creates bottlenecks and prevents the city from adopting electronic signatures. The State of Washington no longer accepts wet signatures for certain transactions (including Commerce Department grants), meaning the city is technically violating its own charter when it complies with state requirements. Longman noted that electronic signatures are federally and state-authorized and are generally considered more secure than ink signatures, with digital authentication trails down to the IP address used. The amendment would allow the city to move to a fully electronic contracting system.

Council Member Lilliquist noted that the Finance Director's attestation role dates to a time when that was an independently elected position serving as a check on the mayor — a structure long since eliminated — making the requirement obsolete. He asked how threshold limits (contracts above a certain value still requiring the mayor's personal signature) would be maintained; Longman confirmed those thresholds could be set in city policy or code without requiring another charter amendment. If approved by council and voters, the mayor's designation authority would replace the current requirement that the Mayor Pro Tem travel to sign contracts during the mayor's absence.

Vote: Moved by Council Member Cotton, seconded by Council Member Huthman. Passed 7–0.

Agenda Item 24978: Charter Amendment — Independent Salary Commission for Mayor's Compensation

Longman also presented a second charter amendment that would remove the existing charter requirement that the mayor be the highest-paid city employee, replacing it with a process in which an independent salary commission — the same body that sets council member salaries — would set the mayor's compensation.

The current system causes the mayor's salary to rise automatically whenever staff salaries increase through collective bargaining compression, particularly in uniformed bargaining groups. This means mayoral pay is driven by labor negotiations rather than deliberate public intention. No comparable cities Longman surveyed had a similar highest-paid requirement. Council Member Lilliquist praised Mayor Lund for initiating the change, noting it took a mayor willing to relinquish automatic pay escalation to bring this forward — a politically difficult thing to do. Council Member Anderson noted that the current structure also creates upward pressure on director salaries whenever a highly compensated candidate is hired, making the city less competitive for executive talent.

Vote: Moved by Council Member Cotton, seconded by Council Member Lilliquist. Passed 7–0.

Old/New Business

Public Development Authority Research: Council Member Lilliquist noted that the council's policy analyst has completed background research on using a Public Development Authority as a vehicle for housing development in the city. He described the memo as excellent and encouraged members to read it, with further discussion to follow.

120-Day Rental Notice Ordinance — Technical Fixes: Council Member Lilliquist moved to direct the administration to review and propose fixes to three technical language issues in the city's 120-day rental increase notice ordinance: (1) defining a legally sufficient method of delivering notice consistent with state law; (2) addressing how the ordinance applies to subsidized housing where tenant rent doesn't actually increase when base rent rises; and (3) closing a workaround where landlords issue renewal offers months in advance with short response deadlines, effectively circumventing the 120-day notice period. Lilliquist noted that planning staff was already planning to address some of these items in an August agenda, but that council direction via formal motion was the appropriate process. Council Member Cotton suggested the council should also consider aligning no-cause non-renewal notices (currently 60 days) with the 120-day standard. Council Member Anderson credited community member Carrie Birdside for raising the issue and emphasized the real harm some tenants have experienced under the current ambiguous language.

Vote: Moved by Council Member Lilliquist, seconded by Council Member Anderson. Passed 7–0.

Movable Dwelling Units: Council Member Cotton flagged that he will present informational materials on movable dwelling units at the July 27 meeting before the full Committee of the Whole (rather than the Planning Committee, since Cotton does not sit on that committee). A 12-page staff memo and slide presentation will be circulated in advance.

Tenant Engagement Survey: Council President Stone confirmed the council's preference for a digital outreach strategy (rather than mail) for a planned survey of renters, consistent with the recommendation from policy analyst Iris. The digital approach is more cost-effective; mail outreach to all registered rental units was deemed too costly.

Lobbyist Working Group: Three council members were selected by lottery to participate in the city's legislative lobbying group for the upcoming state session: Council Members Cotton, Lilliquist, and Williams. Deputy City Administrator Janice Keller noted an organizing meeting will be scheduled within the next month to prepare for fall 2026 and winter 2027 sessions. All other council members remain free to testify in Olympia or sign on to legislative positions independently.

Key Takeaways

Communications work plan moving forward, public comment on hold: Council broadly supports rolling out newsletters, op-eds, coffee hours, conversation circles, and other engagement tools. The contentious question of whether to move public comment to the front of meetings and cap it at 30 minutes is being set aside for a separate decision, likely at the July 27 meeting.

Algorithmic rent-pricing initiative headed to voters: Council appears set to refer Initiative 2026-01 to the November ballot rather than adopt it directly or substitute an alternative measure. Several members noted imperfect drafting but acknowledged no time to rewrite it before the July 27 deadline.

Two charter amendments approved for November ballot: Voters will be asked to allow electronic signatures and mayoral contract designees (streamlining ~1,200 annual contracts) and to have an independent salary commission set the mayor's pay rather than tying it to staff compression — both passed unanimously.

Rental notice ordinance fixes directed: Council formally directed staff to close loopholes and clarify technical language in the 120-day rental increase notice law, which some landlords have used to effectively reduce tenants' planning time.

Lobbying group set: Cotton, Lilliquist, and Williams will represent the council in coordinating with the city's state lobbyists for the 2027 legislative session.

AI-generated summary from voice-to-text transcript. Not the official record. Verify important details with the source documents linked above.

What happened at this meeting

Old/New Business

# Old/New Business Summary

Council Member Lopez presented two items: completion of background research on Public Development Authority use for housing opportunities, and a motion to investigate three technical language issues in the 120-day rental increase notice ordinance, including legally sufficient notice delivery methods, subsidized housing provisions, and response timeline loopholes. Council Member Cotton supported Lopez's motion and raised concerns about corporate landlords using pressure tactics like nine-month advance renewals, suggesting alignment of the 120-day increase notice period with the 60-day non-renewal notice period. Council Member Liiloquist subsequently moved to formalize a charter amendment request addressing tenant protections and lease agreement clarity, particularly the issue of tenants receiving only 30 days to agree to new lease terms without clarity on rent amounts—a concern raised by community member Carrie Birdside and seconded by Council Member Anderson. Council Member Cotton also flagged an upcoming informational work session on movable dwelling units scheduled for the 27th, which will include a 12-page memo and slideshow. Both motions passed with broad council support.

A presentation and consideration of the City Council Communications and

# City Council Communications and Community Engagement Work Plan Summary

David Braun, the City Council Communications and Community Relations Manager, presented the 2026 City Council Communications and Community Engagement Work Plan, which proposes a shift from explaining government processes to sharing council members' priorities and decision-making rationale through budget-neutral tactics like newsletters and social media, as well as in-person engagement options including conversation circles, listening sessions, and coffee hours with council members. The plan recommends moving public comment to the beginning of meetings with a 30-minute overall time limit and 2-minute individual limit, based on averaging 33 commenters per meeting since 2023, though Council Members raised concerns about potential disadvantages to individuals with disabilities and the value of end-of-meeting comments for follow-up discussions. Council members discussed implementation details including staff time requirements for listening sessions, the distinction between rapid Zoom-based sessions and formal town halls, and clarifying whether op-eds should express personal council member opinions or formal council positions. Council Member Liquist advocated for approving all elements of the plan except the public comment section to allow implementation of other engagement strategies first, while Council Member Anderson requested a work session to finalize details about public comment format, listening session frequency, and implementation schedule before a final vote.

A discussion of initiative no. 2026-01 prohibiting algorithmic price-fixing in the rental market

# Summary: Initiative 2026-01 Discussion

Staff presented Initiative 2026-01, which prohibits algorithmic price-fixing in the rental market, after it gathered sufficient signatures (3,167 votes, meeting the 10% threshold) and now requires Council action by July 27th, 2026. Council Members Liquist and Hamill supported deferring the initiative to voters without a competing measure, though Liquist expressed concerns about vague language around "coordinating services"; Council Member Anderson supported deferral but raised concerns about the penalty provisions (90 days jail and $5,000 fine), preferring compounding fines instead. Council Member Cotton rejected Real Page's lobbying for a narrower approach and supported the initiative's broader language addressing shared coordinating services and price-setting architecture, though Cotton and others raised concerns about criminal penalties and the retaliation provision's use of "alleging" versus "proving" violations. Council Members Liquist and Cotton expressed general concerns about governing by initiative and noted a preference for state-level action on this issue, while the acting city attorney clarified that state legislation's preemptive effect would depend on how it is written. The Interim City Attorney requested Council direction by the end of the session on whether to defer to voters or adopt the measure themselves.

A resolution proposing amendments to article 5, section 2 and to article 8, section 6 of the City of Bellingham's charter to allow the mayor or the mayor's designee to execute contracts in the name of the City and to eliminate the related requirement that the finance director attest the signature of the mayor

# Summary

Staff presented charter amendments to streamline the City of Bellingham's contracting process by allowing the mayor to delegate contract-signing authority and eliminating the finance director's attestation requirement and physical seal affixation. These changes would enable the adoption of electronic signatures, which are required by Washington State and other agencies, and are necessary given the city's increased contract volume (1,200 in 2025 versus 550 a decade ago). Council Member Liquist supported removing the finance director attestation, noting it was designed for an independently elected position that no longer exists, and recommended establishing approval thresholds so larger contracts require direct mayoral signature while smaller ones can be delegated. Council Member Anderson sought clarification on gatekeeping procedures and whether mayoral approval requirements are in the charter or code, and staff confirmed that electronic signatures are legally authorized and more secure than traditional wet signatures. The council unanimously voted 7-0 to recommend the resolution to voters in the November general election.

A resolution proposing an amendment to article 2, section 9 of the City of Bellingham's charter to assign responsibility for reviewing and fixing the mayor’s salary to an independent salary commission

# Summary

Deputy Administrator Forest Longman presented a resolution proposing an amendment to Article 2, Section 9 of the City Charter to assign mayoral salary review to an independent salary commission rather than allowing staff salary compression to drive increases. Council Member Lilquist praised the mayor's leadership on this proposal, citing a previous example in Watcom County where unintended salary increases occurred due to compression effects, and supported having citizen representatives set salaries rather than elected officials deciding their own compensation. Council Member Anderson raised concerns about salary compression issues when hiring new executive and director positions, noting that other municipalities sometimes have fire and police chiefs as the highest-paid positions. Council Member Cotton moved to approve the resolution, which passed unanimously, with discussion focused on separating executive-level salaries to attract high-caliber professional employees over the next 10-20 years.

Agenda items (5)

Procedural (5)

5ProceduralOld/New Business

Council members can raise any remaining agenda items or discuss new business not covered earlier in the meeting.

What happened

24973ProceduralA presentation and consideration of the City Council Communications and

The city council will review and consider adopting new communications and procedures policies.

What happened

24974ProceduralA discussion of initiative no. 2026-01 prohibiting algorithmic price-fixing in the rental market

City officials will discuss a proposed initiative to ban algorithmic price-fixing in Bellingham's rental housing market.

What happened

24977ProceduralA resolution proposing amendments to article 5, section 2 and to article 8, section 6 of the City of Bellingham's charter to allow the mayor or the mayor's designee to execute contracts in the name of the City and to eliminate the related requirement that the finance director attest the signature of the mayor

This resolution would allow the mayor to sign city contracts without requiring the finance director's signature verification, streamlining the approval process.

What happened

24978ProceduralA resolution proposing an amendment to article 2, section 9 of the City of Bellingham's charter to assign responsibility for reviewing and fixing the mayor’s salary to an independent salary commission

An independent salary commission would take over reviewing and setting the mayor's salary instead of the city council handling it.

What happened

Additional votes recorded in minutes

Approve resolution proposing charter amendment for mayor/designee contract signing authority

aye 1

voice voteaye

Approve resolution proposing charter amendment to assign mayor's salary to independent salary commission

aye 1

voice voteaye

Direct administration to review and propose fixes to 120-day rental notice ordinance language

aye 1

voice voteaye

Verbatim transcript available

332 transcript segments indexed

City of Bellingham Committee Of The Whole minutes July 13, 2026, 1:55 p.m. Chair: Hannah Stone Phone: 360-778-8200 Members: Hollie Huthman, Daniel Hammill, Email: ccmail@cob.org Edwin H. "Skip" Williams, Lisa Anderson, Web: cob.org/council Michael Lilliquist, Jace Cotton City Council committee meetings Standing committee members receive reports and information, ask questions, and vote on a recommended action for consideration by the full Council at the regular meeting.

Good afternoon and welcome back. Our next committee meeting this afternoon is committee of the whole. Um we have a number of agenda items before the committee this afternoon. I know that we haven't had a full committee of the whole meeting in a while.

There's been an intentional effort to send work to the individual committees when the the topic is um relevant and on point. So excited to have a full meeting today. The first item before us is agenda bill 24973.

There is no public comment period during committee sessions. Call to order and roll call Council President Stone called the meeting to order at 1:55 p.m. Present: Council President Hannah Stone, First Ward Council Member Hollie Huthman, Second Ward Council Member Daniel Hammill, Third Ward Council Member Edwin H.

"Skip" Williams, Fourth Ward Council Member Lisa Anderson, Fifth Ward Council Member Michael Lilliquist, Sixth Ward Council Member Jace Cotton, At-Large 24973 1. A presentation and consideration of the City Council Communications and Community Engagement 2026 Work Plan Summary: David Brauhn, City Council Communications and Community Relations Manager, presented a draft City Council Communications and Community Engagement 2026 Work Plan.

So this is a presentation and consideration of the city council communications and community engagement 2026 work plan. The proposed city council communications and community engagement 2026 work plan lays out recommended tactics for the council to consider implementing.

These communications tactics are designed to increase and improve community engagement with the council. The work plan addresses priorities that council members identified at their April 20, 2026 retreat.

Council Members discussed the plan and asked questions. This item will return for further consideration at the July 27, 2026 meeting. 24974 2. A discussion of initiative no. 2026-01 prohibiting algorithmic price-fixing in the rental market Summary: James Erb, Interim City Attorney, presented an overview of initiative no.

2026-01 prohibiting algorithmic price-fixing in the rental market. Council action must be taken by July 27, 2026 to enact the initiative, defer it to the voters, or reject the measure and Page 1 of 3 propose an alternative measure that would appear on the ballot along with the initiative.

The city council communications workg group provided input on the work plan and will help guide its execution. The city council communications and community relations manager will present the work plan and outline options for the council to consider implementing in 2026.

So for this item, I'm going to turn to David Braun, who is our city council communications and community relations manager. So thank you for joining us this afternoon, David, and I will turn it over to you.

Council Members discussed the initiative and asked questions. 24977 3. A resolution proposing amendments to article 5, section 2 and to article 8, section 6 of the City of Bellingham's charter to allow the mayor or the mayor's designee to execute contracts in the name of the City and to eliminate the related requirement that the finance director attest the signature of the mayor Summary: Forrest Longman, Deputy Administrator, presented the resolution, which amends the City Charter to allow the mayor or the mayor's designee to execute contracts in the name of the City and eliminates the related requirement that the finance director attests the signature of the mayor and physically attaches the City seal.

>> Thank you, council president. I'm David Bron, city council communications and community relations manager. And I want to start out by saying it's this has been a long time in the making. It's taken many years and many people's efforts to to get to this point.

Council Members discussed the resolution and asked questions. Action: Jace Cotton moved to recommend approval of the resolution. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. 24978 4. A resolution proposing an amendment to article 2, section 9 of the City of Bellingham's charter to assign responsibility for reviewing and fixing the mayor’s salary to an independent salary commission Summary: Forrest Longman, Deputy Administrator, presented the resolution, which amends the City Charter to assign responsibility for reviewing and fixing the mayor’s salary to an independent salary commission.

and it's a privilege to carry this work forward. Um, over the years the momentum has has waxed and waned with people coming and going in these offices and as times change. Um, but there have always been voices on the council who have advocated for greater initiative and more independence and more connectivity with the community and I think this is the right council to bring that to fruition.

Council Members discussed the resolution and asked questions. Action: Jace Cotton moved to recommend approval of the resolution. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. 5. Old/New Business Summary: Council Member Lilliquist encouraged Council Members to read the memo and recommendations developed by their legislative policy analyst regarding using a public development authority to create housing and development opportunities for the City.

Page 2 of 3 Council Member Lilliquist highlighted modifications he would like to address in the rental notice ordinance. Action: Michael Lilliquist moved to request the administration research and bring forward possible changes to the current municipal code to address the form of notice required, a technical issue with subsidized housing where tenant’s contributions are capped, and challenges with the timing of the notices and requirements.

So, council staff is at the point where we can provide support to foster and grow that connectivity with the community. And um I'm going to present some options for you to consider. And all of these align with the city council communications and community engagement plan and the city council communications charter that you passed in April.

MOTION CARRIED 7-0. Summary: Council Member Cotton will provide information on movable dwelling units to Council in anticipation of discussion at the July 27, 2026 meeting. Council President Stone followed up on the desired approach for the tenant engagement survey.

and all of those broke up the city council communications plan that was passed by council in 2017 um with council member Liiloquist uh being a big part of that. So what I'm asking you for today is to uh approve this work plan and with the acknowledgement that this is the start of an iteration and also with the acknowledgement that progress does not require perfection and we're going to commit to uh using metrics and feedback to improve as we go.

So, this plan adds a significant number of opportunities for council members to communicate and engage with community members. And these options are really about adding regular touches with the community.

Council supported a digital engagement strategy. Council President Stone drew names in order to appoint three Council Members to serve on the lobbying workgroup. Council Members Cotton, Lilliquist, and Williams will serve on the workgroup.

Janice Keller, Deputy Administrator, shared that members should expect a workgroup invitation soon. Council moved into Executive Session at 3:47 p.m. to discuss five items until 4:45 p.m. 1. Potential litigation 2.

And they're also about sharing with community members who you are, what's important to you, and why you make the decisions that you make. And that's a a shift. So if if government is a car and council members are driving, it means sharing more about who you are, what's important to you, where you're going, why you're taking that route, and less about how the car works.

So that shift is going to be a part of all of these efforts. There are a number of logistical considerations for each of the options and those include when and how often, how many council members participate, how to ensure the safety of elected officials and participants, and where these take place, as well as how much they cost.

Potential Property Acquisition 3. Potential Property Acquisition 4. Potential Property Acquisition 5. Quasi-judicial matter: Discussion relating to an appeal to the Bellingham City Council of SUB2022-0011, VAR2022-0002, and CAP2022-0005 relating to the Woods at Viewcrest Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:55 p.m.

So, council members have different personalities and styles. They have different schedules, different demands of their time. And so what you as a body decide will ultimately be a compromise. There are some options I feel we can get off the ground sooner than later and those are email newsletters, social media content, regular op-eds and email responses.

And I hope we can commit to those as they are largely council staff driven and budget neutral. And inerson public engagement and public comment is where I think we can spend more time with public engagement.

These aren't either or options. I think we can execute all of these with different cadences and I'll go through those here. Those are conversation circles which are basically talking in groups for an hour or so with a couple of musical chairs moments to make sure that the dynamic uh we have dynamic conversations and no one can hold forth and no topic dominates the discussion.

A joint open office hours and those are chances for one-on-one conversations with community members and an online forum to let people invite you to their gatherings. Um and also a coffee with council members which would be up to you to invite a small group of people to an establishment of your choice.

I also make a good cup of coffee too. So um again these options add a significant number of ways for comm community members to hear from council members and engage with them. For public comment, council members have expressed a desire to make public comment periods more accessible to more community members, sharing a wider variety of concerns and perspectives.

And for that, I propose the following three things. Moving the public comment period to the start of the meeting. This would give people a chance to address issues before council makes a decision. And it would also reduce the time commitment that people must make to participate.

For instance, more people with families or early work days could consider speaking. Number two, setting the overall public time period to 30 minutes. This would reduce the demand that long public comment periods have on council members and staff time.

Recently, we had one public comment period that lasted about 3 hours and 15 minutes. And three, reducing the time per commenter to two minutes. A two-minute time limit allows a person to read about one page of typewritten comments.

So a 30 minute overall time limit would allow the average number of commenters we've had at meetings since about 2023. They've averaged about 33 minutes. Um other cities with similar public comment structures at the beginning of meetings include Seattle, Belleview, Yakama, and Kenowick.

There are many more cities who have a 30 minute limit, but we'll have comments at the end. And I know that we don't always hit the average. We don't we're not going to hit the average. We're going to have many fewer or we may have many more, especially on topics of intense public interest.

And for those, I would recommend having listening sessions. Um, and also none of this precludes our regular ways of getting in touch with you. email, call, mail, or requesting a meeting with with any of you.

And I've listed listening sessions and the work plan as future public engagement considerations. Um, just talking about those a little bit. They're similar to they would be similar to public hearings.

um give committee members an opportunity to speak to topics of intense public interest and they they wouldn't have the same procedural requirements as public hearings and we could change those according to the situation or council's direction.

For instance, you could you could speak to the people talking. You could you could do a wrap-up at the end um or reflect in response time. I've also added block parties as a future consideration. Um, these could possibly be conducted with the mayor's office and could change uh I'm sorry, would create community centered events that council members can join in.

Um, so that's that's what I have and uh looking forward to your questions. If you have questions, I may have answers. >> Great. Thank you very much, David. Um, I know that internally the communications work group and David and I have had an opportunity to just try and bring forward, you know, a general framework um, with some of the ideas that have been highlighted by council members.

I just want to recognize that, you know, a number of these individual engagement opportunities are things that I know council members are already doing, right? meeting with small groups of constituents or um having coffee chats or right I mean these are things that number of council members are already engaging in but I'm looking at the work plan as as a way to really formalize that for the council as well as for the broader public to be able to point to you know where are those points of engagement and how does that engagement happening um but then with respect to you know inerson public engagement and the public comment specifically wanting this to be an opportunity for feedback from council members Um and just wanting to provide one additional piece with respect to the public comment and moving that to the beginning.

So from my experience serving as chair of the council back during COVID when public comment was suspended for a period of time and we had a hybrid and other things happening. there was discussion about our YouTube channel and you know sort of the archiving of of meetings and how to preserve that access um and concerns about maybe medical misinformation right or other things coming forward before public comment and so for that reason we have had up to this point public comment really separated from the general meeting you'll notice at the end of our meetings right there's that change over to to YouTube um from YouTube to um the Zoom meeting and so this would also in discussions with legal as well as you know BTV and others confirming that those risks are minimal and at this point feeling confident that we can sort of rejoin those those meetings um but wanting to make sure that we do so in a very intentional way and that we you know check off all of those points.

That's why there was some delay articulated in the plan that if there were changes adopted, right, allowing us a couple of months just to make sure that we have um everything in in alignment, but wanting the broader council to know that um that those concerns have been for the most part um addressed and that we don't have concern in in bringing those meetings back back together.

Um, so anyways, wanting to open that up for a broader discussion from from council members. Council member Williams. >> Thank you. One of the things I like about this is that it creates a framework for us as a body as opposed to seven individuals going out and doing their own thing.

Um, I like the concept of the listening sessions. I think that's a valuable process. Um, I also like the although at at first I said I don't know about moving the public comment uh period, but the way that you have mapped it out, I really like that and that um and that um it doesn't necessarily limit No.

Well, it does limit the public comment in terms of length, but it might focus it more on meaning um focused comments rather than an hour and a half of listening to the same comments over and over again.

It kind of gets to the point of th this is here are the issues we have to think about. Anderson. >> Thank you. Thank you, David. Um, I was one of those folks that when I came on council, I was really shocked how in a way unorganized our communication was because we couldn't talk to each other to know who was responding to an email.

And so when somebody would send it all to council, some people might get five responses and others would get none. But there based on volume because it was COVID and there's a lot of people who were home on the keyboard, there was no way with hundreds of emails coming in a day everybody could get a response.

And so since you've come on staff um being able to take a look at those um those more highinterest areas and having more of a consolidated response of facts and direction um so that people can you know feel heard.

I mean I in talking with fellow council members I know we read I would like to say a majority if not all of the emails but it is very difficult to respond to each person individually. So the work you've done since I've started as council to the time you're hired to where we are now has just been a tremendous growth for our communication.

This plan excites me because I think it takes us to the next level. Um, I do like the idea of moving public comment to the beginning because when I was a parent coming here and my kid had school the next day, um, it would be very difficult sometimes to stay until 10:30 to comment.

So, I I think earlier um will allow people who have a life, a work life, a family life, or just frankly they they get tapped out like maybe we do um but they're not paid to be here. It would be nice to be able to hear those voices earlier.

Um, I was concerned about the twominut um going down to two minutes because of individuals who um might have a a speech or cognitive or a different disability being able to get their thoughts out or even people who are not public speakers and it takes a bit to get going.

But I think if um if we move to that, I'm really going to want to see either the listening session or um a different type of community forum scheduled that we can cite that now as we shift to this that here's an upcoming opportunity where more people will be able to have the ability to speak.

Um so I think the timing and tandem would be very important on my end and for the people that I've spoken to. Um, I do like that idea of formalizing some of this. I know I meet a lot of people for coffee.

I have a really bad coffee habit at this point and I probably need to pick a different location um or a different vehicle to meet with small groups or community members. But um I do like the idea of the rotation of like three counselors and kind of scheduling and having people come through.

I think that would help us um do the volume. I know I have a difficult time depending on the area of interest being able to meet everybody onetoone and I never feel comfortable asking six unknown individuals are they okay meeting together.

So then I end up just stacking an entire Sunday. So I think um more people and maybe less seating time to be able to have those points of interest. So, I like that idea and I hope other counselors will be willing to join in that kind of uh triad speaking, but appreciate all this work and I guess eventually I'd like to hear from council like next steps like do we approve this?

Um it sounds like a couple of months we might start implementing it but also what areas of like what type of vehicle to expand community engagement. um that opportunity if we're taking this down to two minutes for public comment.

>> Council member Liquist. >> Um thank you. First of all, David, excellent work. I'm very excited. I I don't see any idea in here that isn't worth trying. Um um I'm excited. I'm a little bit afraid because it it mentions some things in here that I've really kind of wanted to do.

and you you short form videos about a council member or you know 30 second video spots just ways of creating some live uh more personal media. Um I really think we need to do that for a long time. Um going back eight nine years we had a legislative assistant who tried to do some of that.

Um it was a little bit embarrassing. You may think it's weird I'm camera shy I'm on camera right now but it's a little bit different when like the camera's only pointed at you. Um, so I'm a little bit shy about that, but I think it's necessary and I hope I hope we'll all get comfortable with something like that.

So I look forward to that. Um, I kind of wonder about the photos of council members at community events. Is someone going to follow me around? I and I don't want to do selfies, right? But I mean, you know, we were at Pride.

There were actually we someone took pictures of of mayor, myself, other city employees and council members who were there. I mean, that's that sort of video, but that that's not the usual case when I go to community events.

So, I I don't know how that works out, but it would be really good um for myself and all the other events that that it'd be awkward if you were tasked us to each come in with a selfie once a month. Where's your selfie?

I don't. So, I don't know how it's going to work. So, maybe can answer that. Um I love the idea of doing oped pieces in rotation. I've done op-ed pieces, but I always feel a little bit funny. uh you know I always have to speak just for myself not for the council although I'm often reflecting and mentioning established um city positions or city policies or you know uh administrative uh plans or programs.

I'm not not speaking against the city but I have to be careful about that voice. um if there were more of us doing opeds and in a certain sense we kind of like uh by lowering the rarity of them I think we also kind of like lower the threshold that there's lots of useful things that we could talk about that council members are a natural spokesperson to talk about and I don't think we have to come out and declare a position so much as speak to an issue so for example when I wrote an op-ed piece on our um the uh beginning of mandator organic food waste pickup uh at at houses.

You know, I spoke to the fact that this is an imperfect uh solution responding early to a state mandate. It's not all worked out. It wasn't didn't have a neat bow on it, right? I think a lot of issues don't have neat bows on them, but they're very worth us talking about and acknowledging the areas where we have certainty as well as the areas where we don't.

We've talked about this before. I I would like us to do that and I would appreciate if we had an adopted strategy and then also professional support uh for council members uh to do that. I like the idea of these conversation circles that the joint office hours, the coffee with council members.

Again, these are things that I really kind of couldn't do all on my own or I could, but it was it's it's I I'd rather it was what I was doing was part of a practice. And um one council member may be interesting or attractive to members of the community, but two is more interesting and more attractive, right?

If Jason and I had an joint coffee hour somewhere, I think we would get a lot more interest and attention and I think the public would hear much more than one person's point of view there. I think there's more than double the value in having two council members present.

So I I like some of these uh things that have uh more than one council member present. Um the listening sessions uh well this is by the way can take a lot of staff time. I don't know if you're going to clone yourself or you're just like got plenty of time.

Uh so it'll be you know how that rolls out. I just say there's a cadence to these. I don't know what that cadence will be. And finally on block parties in the summer months uh or you said May through August there are a lot of neighborhood associations that also have kind of like annual summer parties.

Oh that would be a very natural marriage. So Sage neighborhood associations are having their annual picnic they always have at Lake Padden. What if we co-scheduled, you know, a featured guest and it isn't just myself or another council member who shows up, but maybe it was something more broadly advertised or more broadly attended.

Um, yeah, there's a lot there. I I I like so much. There's a lot of feedback. >> Yeah, my my my hard disk is full. I'll just unload right now with what you you've given me. So, um, videos, I know that it's it's really not natural for a lot of people and and if it were, then you might be in Hollywood, but and you don't have to worry because council member Williams said he'd go first.

Um, photos, I I I can't follow you around like um, you know, council paparazzi. Um, and you would see any photo before I would publish it. Um, and and it's not my intention either, like like you referenced the, uh, Pride photos.

I think Janice took a number of good ones. It'd be something of that nature. Um, uh, op-eds. Uh, what did you bring up about opeds? Um, >> I just thought it'd be nice if them in a certain sense. If they're more frequent, they're less weight on each one.

They're more natural. >> Yeah. Yes. Yeah. the the regularity of it. Um, and you don't, like I said with my analogy about cars, you don't have to talk about how it works. You can talk about something that you've been thinking about, something that you've been um that has moved you.

It's something you've done in the community, something you've seen, something you've witnessed. Um, doesn't really need to be something even you're working on. Um, but something that um, you know, speaks to you and speaks to your responsibilities.

Um, joint coffee times. I love that idea. I think that could be up to you individually. Um, and yes, the listening sessions. I mean, some of this is a lift, but I mean, I think establishing the the schedule for these is um fine, but also, you know, it's it's my job.

I think we have a good team in council. Um, I'm not going to speak for Jackie or or Iris, but um, I'm hoping they would help a little bit, but I think um, once we get into the routine of this, it wouldn't be a huge lift and it's not going to be so so regular as to be all allconsuming.

So, I'm not concerned about that. >> Member Ham, >> um, thanks for doing this. this long overdue and um I think a lot of pieces are they look very effective. Um there's some things I don't agree with and other things I one giant thing that was to me that was sort of missing was that every one of us serves on a board, a commission or a committee outside of our council work.

And so that's not this is the very public view of city council, but I just did a quick inventory. I think I'm on eight boards and commissions right now. And that's pretty typical for at least for me. And they give me a um an insight into parts of the community that I'm that I can learn a lot about and people can understand that we do um we extend out into the community on issues that are um gerine and relevant to to broad um parts of the community.

Um, so I just want to signal that. And then the op-ed piece, um, I used to to do an op-ed pretty much every other month or every three months before COVID and it was, um, an expression of a lot of the work that I was doing in the, um, incarceration, prevention, and reduction in that world.

So, um, maybe I just said everything I had to say in those op-eds, but I I do think bringing those back would be valuable. Um, and I do I think that there might be an issue with are you expressing your personal opinion or perspective or are you are you speaking for the council?

How would that part work? And I know that you started to address address that here in the plan. As far as the public comment period, that's one method of a way for the public to uh to engage. I don't support moving it to the front of the meeting.

I've been on council long enough to to see both how that happened when I first started and then now at the end of the meeting. And part of the reason, maybe it's just a philosophical um perspective, is that I don't know how well our public education system talks about like civics and how small governments or how how a like a city government works.

So when people come here into chambers and they watch us before they make a public comment, they're seeing the the everything, the good, bad, the ugly of how um how local politics and local decisions and policies um are created.

And I just I think there's value in that. And I and I don't think that that's a perfect way to do that, but I think that's a way to for people to become more informed about um how how their local government works.

And often times um we're not making a decision that evening, especially for an ordinance. There's got to be a first, second, and a third. Those happen on two separate days. Resolutions different. I I acknowledge that.

Um but I I do think that I think I see the value in having it at the end of the meeting. Um and as far as like time constraints, I don't want to I I want to think about that a little bit more. We have talked about that about a twominut.

I think that maybe that's the way to go. Um, as far as um, a 30 minute for the for the entirety, the totality of a public comment, I'm not quite sure about that one. I'd need to think about that one a little bit further.

But overall, I do I do want to acknowledge the work that you put into this. This was this is a big body of work. Um, and then there being seven of us, it makes it probably, you know, to some degree more um, complicated that way.

So, thank you for the the work that you put into it. Appreciate it. Anderson, >> just wanted to follow up on a thought. Um, as far as like the oped, everybody may not be comfortable or feel that they have the skill level really to do the concise oped that, you know, we send a paper, but I was also thinking another branch of that would be interviewing a council member where, you know, somebody could speak to something and then have it consolidated.

But I think it's a perfect opportunity, the interview a council member to really for the community to understand a lot of the additional work in the committees that we're involved in or the nonprofits because there's a whole another section that isn't being televised that people don't really know the work that we do unless we're talking to them personally about it.

So, I think that aspect um I would hope would be interesting to the public, but also educational on more of the the branching that we do. Um there's a lot more than just our Monday committees that we're all involved in.

So, having the opportunity to have that information go out would be wonderful. And I I my hesitation to I like the idea of the beginning of the meeting for the public comment because I think of the people who can't stay until 10:00 because it's late.

But there is value in having it at the end because then our staff um and the directors and stuff can can leave during that section and then we're not putting a time limit on. I I know some people haven't always been been thrilled when we have that three and a half hours and I do feel for our immediate staff that have to be here supporting council through that.

But the other side of that is if people are here I I feel like we should listen to them all and that's kind of at least the seven of us up at this dis get paid and I hope everybody else who has to stay they get the release time in order to make that up um for that endeavor.

So, I I do understand um some of the I see value on both sides. And I wasn't going to pitch it, but I was like, it'd be great to have 30 minutes at the beginning and then have public comment at the end if it needed to be extended because there was a lot of people, but I didn't think that would be a popular thought process here.

Council member Loquist, >> I've suggested that same unpopular idea to have a limited uh period of of public comment at the beginning to address issues that are on the agenda and then have a more open forum at the end.

I'm I'm very conflicted about this. One of the things that's most frustrating to me is when someone comes up and speaks and I would like to reach out to them or contact them or respond to them in some way.

If the comment occurs at the beginning and we go right on with our business, they're often gone. Even when we have comment at the end, they'll say their peace and then they're out the door and that's really that's it's really sad for me because I had some way to connect them.

when they're at the end of the meeting, one of the things I've discovered a value I did not know was there is I will often get up and there's like one or two people who said something and they're still here in the audience and I can do some kind of a little followup or a thank you or something and then it creates a two-way situation but it's a two-way like one-on-one private situation which is I don't want to get into a a back and forth with an audience over a microphone but I really like the after the meeting uh opportunity.

So there was a value to the end of the meeting public comment that I had no idea existed. So I'm very conflicted because I want to give people an opportunity to speak to items on the agenda and and and have that be nice and timelmited and focused.

So the only way I can get that is to have both which which would be a lot more time for us and and for staff who would stay around for that. >> Hudson David, thank you for putting this together. Um, I know you put a lot of work into it and I think it's a really important point to note that this is um, a starting place and that we will adapt and learn and um, can change this as as we learn more.

So, um, I think one of the frustrations that I had starting out as a council member was realizing just how much the general public didn't know about the good stories of the city, of the good work that happens here, of the people uh, that work here that do great work.

um we weren't very good at celebrating the accomplishments um that that this the city the city was undertaking all of the time. Um and and so I think that that had there was a general just discontent amongst the public um because I just think they didn't know they didn't know how much good work was going on.

And so I'm so happy to see that our communication staff has grown and that we're we're um writing plans and and that that communication really really has improved that we are telling our good stories more and more rather than just talking about the things that we are going to do talking about the things that we have done um just as much um and so that the public understands what their government is doing for them.

Uh I think that that's really important. So, I really appreciate and that that you know, we as a as a city council can also be a big part of uh telling those stories and talking about who we are as people and what we do.

Um because a lot of it isn't on camera, I think, as the the point was made, it's not on camera. It's there's a lot of work that that's being done um that that people don't hear about necessarily unless they're interacting with us one-on-one.

Um and so so thank you for this. I'm excited to to try some of these things. So, I think as far as the uh public comment, which is always the controversial subject, um I generally I'm I'm fine with trying just about anything.

We've been through so many different iterations of how public comment looks. Uh I think that I'm interested in the idea of limiting to 30 minutes and uh overall in two minutes a person. Um I think we have seen in other situations where two two minutes has been quite sufficient.

uh for somebody to to convey what they need to. Um, of course, it's not going to be for for every situation. Um, I I don't know that I would like to see public comment at the beginning of the meeting.

Again, I think that one thing that I consider is just how much staff time uh there is involved in a a city council meeting. It's it's a lot. And um and not every staff member needs to be here for public comment.

I uh though I will note that that as somebody who gets to look out on the gallery, I do see pretty much every department head um sitting through the entirety of public comment every meeting. And so I think that you know people can be assured that that is happening.

Um so I I I hesitate just because of mostly that staff time consideration. Um and I think there is there is a lot of value in both um the general public that is interested enough and engaging to come speak to us.

Also seeing um the ordinary business of the council. Um I think that there's probably a lot of learning and insight that's gained by people uh if they if they're interested to come and talk if they're that interested.

Um that also spending some time listening is is probably pretty valuable to them as well. Um, and so those and I, you know, Michael, I think your point of of being able to talk to people afterwards if they stick around has also been really really helpful and um, helped with understanding and and communication.

So, um, I'm assuming we're not going to make a decision today about the public comment period. Maybe we can have a little more time to talk about that. But those are my initial thoughts. So, in response to a couple of those, um, I know that we have other items on the agenda.

One, I guess I would request and follow up with David for us to add under the public engagement priorities. Perhaps another subsection that addresses Council Member Hamill's item that just speaks to the, you know, service of council members on external boards and and commissions.

sort of generally just acknowledging as a part of this work plan, right, where those points of contact happen. Um to council member Lillquist's um comment about the attendance at community events, right, that are already happening.

I think that's something that is already happening, right? The neighborhood association has a picnic and and we go as a council member and the rep maybe for that particular part of the city or within our ward.

Um but formalizing a process where right we're able to also keep track of those events and when they're happening and you know Jackie's done a great job of you know keeping us up to date on events but I think having a more formalized process so that we're all aware of when those are happening and um can choose to to attend.

With respect to the council voice when you're talking about opeds as well as in the email responses, I think what's been helpful this year that we've been trying to really clarify is what is the council's voice and how do we how do we speak with that that voice?

And so part of the collaboration and help, you know, between um Melissa and the broader communications team is recognizing, right, when are there inquiries for members of the public that really are better addressed by staff?

are these questions really about the nuts and bolts of city operations and you know a particular project or plan that's being rolled out. And so being able to coordinate that and you know pass that off to staff to be able to respond directly versus you know where are the places and points when council members you know can weigh in on policy discussions and um and facilitating that that communication with with members of the public.

So that's an ongoing body of work, but appreciative for David leading that and really helping to hone right where's our our lane in that work. Um the listening sessions and the ability to have again a more focused opportunity for topic specific opportunity for community members to come forward and speak.

So I'm thinking when we do have those long comment periods where there's a particular issue that's bubbled up in the community and there are strong opinions maybe on all sides or on one side being able to have a listening session or a public hearing that is topic specific right and not having that monopolize the entire meeting but having a dedicated time and space for to hear those comments and to have that that come forward.

Um some of you may recall during COVID we did have off Monday right comment periods where it was not part of the regular council meeting which we've heard those concerns addressed before like we need to do city work during our council meeting and that should be the priority to make sure that we're addressing that and you know um recognizing council members needs also and staff to be sharp um and attentive to the to the work that's before us during those meetings.

So that remains right another consideration is you know having um comment periods that are outside of that that formal meeting. Um so what I would oh and there was one other piece I wanted to bring forward as far as interpretation.

So one of the pieces right now is that during evening meetings right we have Spanish interpretation available and that is you know live streamed through zoom. at this point we don't have data to support that that is being utilized by the community and even in my role in the community as much as you know as um someone who yeah values that access to you know to language in the community I don't know that that's the best use of our resources right now thinking about the money that we're spending as well as the time for that to be um a part of the evening meetings also thinking about other opportunities within the community when there are public events um or community meetings that maybe community would like to be able to access in other languages and thinking about multiple languages that are spoken within our community.

And so as part of this discussion with public comment, also wanting to address how we grapple with the ability to provide interpretation and if that's something where um really promoting a formalized process if someone needs interpretation to contact council staff in advance and be able to make those arrangements.

um or coordinating listening sessions that are in particular languages or when we have interpreters specifically available. Um but right now I don't know that that's the best use of resources and I don't believe that it's really serving the community that we're um attempting to serve through the you know those changes that were implemented.

Um, so at this point I would propose whether or not there or I guess ask if there's support from council to consider adoption of the work plan if we took out at this stage the section E right public comment and thinking about really providing additional work and consideration on how to address public comment having heard responses from the council IL today as well as other considerations with interpretation and coordination with BTV and sort of what that would entail if there were changes formal changes being proposed um is if that was section E was taken I don't know how to address that but sort of taken aside for further consideration but asking whether council has if there's support more broadly for the rest of the work plan, I guess.

And it wouldn't have to happen at this meeting. We could delay it for consideration for a formal vote at the next meeting, but I don't want to see the work that could go forward, right, in this work plan, thinking about newsletters and um some social media posts and other pieces that um David is really excited about moving forward on.

I don't want to see that delayed because we are going to go back and forth about public comment perhaps for a couple months. Um, so that would I guess be a proposal for consideration by by council and whether there's a feeling from council right now would be okay moving forward with this at that time or we'll complete a sentence.

Um, I guess at this time maybe I would propose that we bring this back at the next meeting incorporating the change that I was mentioning with respect to council member Hamill's comments about boards and commissions just highlighting that work um and maybe making an amendment to address how we can set count public comment um give that a separate space for for further work um and then bring that forward at the next meeting for formal consideration as a work plan with public comment sent aside for now.

Council member Liquist, >> I'd like your suggestion of approving everything but public comment because I think there's less controversy there and we need to see it start rolling out before we can reach final judgment on how workable and which ones are most workable.

Um but also um it's also because before we touch public comment which may step on a few toes or if whichever way we go we're going to like displease some aspect or whatever. I want us to move forward on something.

I want to do the the forward moving parts first. Let's say we decide to move it to the beginning and limit it to 30 minutes. That might be seen as a constraint. Well, that constraint is acceptable if people have already seen us start rolling out all the other opportunities.

Oh, there's a listening session scheduled for Thursday evening. Now I understand why public comment isn't the only opportunity. Oh, there's a joint coffee hour occurring uh the first Monday of next month.

Okay, now I know I have another opportunity, right? So, so any way before we touch um public comment too much or in a way that might be seen as going in the wrong direction, I'd really like to see us start moving forward on these other opportunities.

Um because that will make our commitment to communication tangible and credible. Um and that that was why I think we delayed working moving forward on on public comment alone. We say, "Well, okay, let's talk about public comment, but I want to see a broad general communication strategy that moves forward and creates so many more opportunities for in-person and and birectional communication.

So, yes, let's do that." So, I'd be happy even today moving forward on that or waiting two weeks and moving forward on it, but I would love to move forward on all those sections. Williams, did you >> I really think that we can't lose sight of this whole plan is something that in our institution as a council is going to guide our communication efforts with our constituencies.

And if we get bogged down on every little piece of this has to look like this or do this or that, I think Michael's right that if we have all these other options for engagement with the public that are moving forward that would perhaps from the public's point of view see the public comment as a piece of a larger larger pie as opposed to this is my only chance to come in and I've got to do this and so on and so on.

And um when in fact there may be other ways to communicate about an issue with us that would more than likely be more effective in terms of giving us food for thought. And um so even though we have our thoughts about the public comment section, we have to approach it as one piece of a puzzle, not the puzzle itself.

So um personally I wouldn't have any problem adopting this but only from the point of view of that if we do and through the experience of implementation just like we do the like the the approach we're taking with ordinances.

We do it for a period. if it needs to be tweaked here and there, we can do that. And so, um, with that under understanding, I think moving forward with these suggestions is a great thing. And if we find the public comment section or any other section isn't working, we can always come back and change it.

So, >> um I agreed, Council Member Lquist, that I think that this this document as a whole is really important. Um to to communicate the different ways that people can communicate with us that the and and the opportunities.

I think many people don't understand that that there are so many other ways to communicate with us other than public comment. Um sometimes that that can be something that has a lot of layers of um layers of problem for folks particularly if they're they don't like public speaking uh for one or that makes them very nervous or um this is a time you know Monday nights are are difficult uh for a lot of people uh including me sometimes um and so I think as a whole I think it's important that we're presenting to the public here are the many different ways that you can communicate maybe there is one that suits you better um than than others and we are open to to all of them and we'll be working on all of them.

Um and so I think for me I think it's important that we approve this as a whole. Uh but I I don't I also don't want to hold up everything else that that um that we seem to not um have any disagreements about and that David's ready to go on.

So, um I and even the suggestion that we are thinking about changing public comment, we're going to hear from people telling us that they're disappointed that we changed public comment even though we haven't yet.

Um and so it's I think it's also important that we have a finished product that we're voting on and and discussing before before we vote and on anything. So, my two cents, >> member Cotton and then Anderson.

I'm heard on all of that. I think my thought would be implementation can happen when that makes sense and it can be in tandem with other things. It seems like there's just some decisions that need to be made on before after the meetings time limits or not.

So I think like we should at some point soon just like vote on those things and we can wait to implement until it makes sense. But um I don't know, we've been h I've been h we've been having this conversation since I joined the council and it feels like we could continue uh until I'm not on the council and that um and I'm sure we will um as we should because this is an important topic but um it seems like we should just like align on what we want to try next and um and maybe do that uh well in advance of that implementation goal date.

Um, so I I think maybe if we're to bring this back, that should be a goal for that discussion. >> Council Anderson, >> thank you. Um, I was ready to move with the suggestion of um striking um section E, but listening to a couple council members, I'm I would make a request that at our next council meeting that we have a work session on this um to bring it back and one of two things.

one hammer out what the public comment's going to look like and hopefully have a vote and then we can either accept it as written or amend it to make a motion. Um something I would also like to discuss is like with a if we do go forward with the listening sessions which is in the plan um perhaps coming to an agreement are we going to do this quarterly?

Are we doing it monthly? Is it going to be just by yearly? kind of coming to that decision so that we know how often and what that would look like and then you know if and then commit are we going to does this start at the first of the year does it start in two months kind of some of those nuts and bolts and if and hopefully if we all chew on it and think about it the next couple weeks maybe we'll be able to come back at the next session approve it it's done and now we know what we're doing going forward and if not consider um moving what we can work on forward and then admit D and or I mean E and continue to work on it because I see the value in getting this approved sooner than later so some of the work can start happening.

We've been discussing the like where public comment goes and how long we would talk since I've been on council and I have a feeling we could keep talking about it until I'm off council and I'd like to see this work happen sooner than later.

So, I'm okay deferring it for one um meeting. Um, but after that I'm gonna want to take a vote so that we can at least uh give David enough stuff to start knowing what he can work on and roll out some of these good options.

But hopefully we can come back at the next meeting and come to decision. >> I appreciate it. Thank you all very much for the feedback. We'll take that into consideration, bring it forward at the communications workg group meeting and we will hash out a revised um work plan and bring that forward at the next meeting.

So, thank you, Council Member Liquist. Quickly, >> I like where you're going like you're going with this. I just one question came up and I want to ask it here with regard to the listening sessions. How quickly can they be spun up?

So, for example, I think tonight we're again get a lot of attention to the uh parking ordinance. How quickly could we have spun up a listening session on that? And also, we got a flood of emails with regard to a campaign seeking transportation improvements.

There you go. How quickly could we have spun up um a listening session on those issues? Again, the idea is to take public comment, you know, offline out of this meeting, but online to some other occasions.

How how quickly could we respond to those? Those are two things that we could see coming only a week or two or maybe three away. >> Um I think the bigger the biggest thing would be the the pace at which we can let people know about it.

um you don't want to just turn around and have a listening session in two days or three days and and not be able to reach people. So I think there needs to be a sufficient lead time. I think we also need to figure out whether we want to have this um broadcast right.

So working with with BTV and their schedule. Um if we want to if we need security that's another consideration. Um that's there are other other things to kind of think through on how we do these things.

But I think that, you know, it would make sense to do this here. I think that's we're we're wired for it. Um people know where to go. Um if you add a different location, I think that's just another another consideration.

So I think it'd be faster to do it here. Um work through some of those things of like what shape you want to have, what kind of investment you want to make, and you know what that would cost. Um and then move forward from there.

I that wasn't much of a response. I don't know. I would I would say if if you um I think it would need I would love to have like at least two weeks in advance to promote once you have those other things nailed down.

>> I think it depends. I mean once once certain um of those you know certain logistics are put in place and if there is a a cadence to things I think then maybe flexibility would be greater. also if there's a channel for communications where community members are able to find that information and to you know receive more timely updates um you know that could be but definitely a lot of pieces that have to be finalized beforehand.

I would just add depending on um the topic staff may need to be prepared to help all of you in the conversation and so that looks different depending on the complexity of the conversation. So >> and that is one of our goals is right to not I know prior listening sessions and coordination with staff and having a presentation and then community members able to speak and staff there to respond is really to again figure out what is the council's voice and the council's role and to as much as possible to have these be engagement opportunities that are not taking on sort of that additional placing that additional burden on you know on staff to to do that work if that's not you know not necessary but again it would depend on on the particular um situation and topic and obviously needing to coordinate with with staff so it all yes feels easy and then is very complex and I know that we have multiple items still to cover and a lengthy executive session so council member Anderson >> just real quick I think um the idea is the definition so listening session we did those during COVID where there was three of us and it was listening.

It was a chance for the public to come forward. Um it was on Zoom. We were at home. Um those could be probably scheduled in a shorter notice. It could be an on call situation off council Mondays. We kind of know that there is a rotation um that we may very well ceue up a Zoom session that you know the community can come and speak longer because we had a hundred people here wanting to speak and there's only a certain limit versus a town hall where staff would have to be ready to queue up that we're kind of prepared with more information which those could be scheduled and they don't have to be a hot topic.

So, I I think part of it is making sure that our ideal of what it is we're talking about is better defined because I'm thinking a listening session can queue up pretty quickly if it's on Zoom. Um, you know, whatever our public notice uh requirements would be would be as much time in advance.

providing council had written in their calendar, there's a possibility that they're on call for that particular Monday if we weren't doing a full session versus more of a town hall situation that might be scheduled quarterly.

And that's a topic that we choose to communicate out to the public, but it can be more of the back and forth dialogue kind of like the town halls the mayor has been doing on specific subjects within the community.

So, I think we have more conversation on what our thoughts are, what these meetings are, and we can have both. Um, but it's like make sure we're talking about the same definition. >> Thank you very much.

Um, so we'll take those notes back as well to the communications work group. Um, thank you very much. I know that this is a big topic and a um heavy lift for the council and something new um and also a a first glance from all of you at at what David's been working on.

So, thank you very much for the the feedback. So, we will be um bringing this topic forward at the next meeting again for for followup and further consideration. So, thank you very much. Thank you, David.

I appreciate your time. Okay. So, the next agenda item before the council is agenda bill 24974. This is a discussion of initiative number 2026-01 prohibiting algorithmic price fixing in the rental market.

So, City of Bellingham initiative measure number 2026-01 concerns the prohibition of algorithmic price fixing in the rental market. The Wakom County Auditor has verified that the petitioners collected signatures equal to not less than 10% of the total number of votes cast for the office of mayor at the last preceding municipal general election.

That was approximately 3,167 votes. In this work session, council will discuss how to respond to the initiative as required by the charter and the municipal code. Council may enact the initiative, defer it to the voters, or reject the measure and propose an alternative measure that would appear on the ballot along with the initiative.

Council action must be taken by our next meeting, which is July 27th, 2026. If council fails to take action, then the initiative bill shall be submitted by the finance director to the county auditor's office for submission to the qualified electors for approval or rejection at the next general election which will be this coming November.

So for this item, I'm going to turn to James Herb, who is a deputy city attorney. >> Hey, good afternoon council. I don't have much more to add uh beyond the summary statement. Um the initiative sponsors community first uh welcome gathers different number of signatures.

So now the initiative has become an initiative bill and you have to choose what you want to do with it and let me know so that we can take the necessary steps before the next meeting. Happy to answer any questions.

>> Thank you very much. And I just want to correct as well interim city attorney um James Herb correct the the title as well. Um, so yes, for this item, I just wanted to note we also have an executive session this afternoon um to be able to discuss this item if there were any other concerns um that would meet the requirements under executive session.

Otherwise, wanting to bring this forward before the vote is required, which is at our next meeting on the 27th to just gauge where council members are at regarding the options. Right. The options could be adoption of the initiative as presented um by community first watcom again deferring it to the voters without any um input from council or the final option is submitting this to the voters along with an alternative that would be you know drafted by by council or the city.

So I'll open it up for discussion. >> Council member Liquist. I've supported this uh idea and concept for a while and I I've I asked at certain points the council to consider drafting our own ordinance to accomplish this and we did support um efforts in Olympia to address the same issue uh in state law.

Um so I'm in support of it. Um at the minimum I would like to move this forward to the voters. Um, I think the idea of a competing and slightly different ordinance that achieves more or less the same goal is just hopelessly confusing.

It's a fork I think we'll probably never want to take. Um, I think this is an imperfect um, uh, initiative. I I talked to the initiative people about it. I just don't like the idea of outlawing something they call coordinating services because it's a vague phrase.

is why don't we outlaw price fixing and then define price fixing or outlaw anti-competitive collusion in the rental market then outlaw anti-competitive collusion. So, you know, that's maybe a quibble um how I would have written it and I think there's no reason for us to try to um that I know of to fix this as fatally flawed.

I'm I'm prepared to move it forward um to the voters and I'm prepared to uh support it uh for passage as well. I guess just for those listening as well, confirmation that an initiative that's brought forward and then if it were to be passed by the voters that the council's unable to make any changes for a period of two years, >> two years we can't do it.

>> So just to to note that because sometimes people's question is like, oh well, can't you just make those those changes? So it has would have to be adopted as as is. >> Council member Hamill. >> Yeah.

Yeah, I just want to um go on record uh as agreeing with Council Member Liiloquist. Um the the group that gathered the the signatures, they met the threshold criteria. It's legal. Um I do agree that h having some kind of other similar um item on the ballot would just be confusing to voters.

Um I I would just defer to voters. >> Mary Anderson, >> I'm going to agree. I I part of me though wish that we did have the time. I just don't think we have the time to rewrite a couple of things for a better definition.

I'm also really kind of con concerned the deviant the deviation from uh Seattle's ordinance um under um their section three enforcement. I'm not comfortable with the 90 days in jail or both um for the $5,000 fine.

I think um given that for a second violation um the definition of that second violation, if I owned a triplex and a complaint was on all three, um is there going to be confusion that the second and third complaint is a second and third violation and that I could end up, you know, I don't know if a judge would actually put me in jail for it, but I'm never comfortable with something that I think should be in a penalty form for I like compounding fines, you know, so that that's it's not the price of doing business, but I'm just not comfortable with having a jail term.

Um, and if this the citizens do pass it, it would be something that I hope in two years is taken up by council to amend. Um, but I just don't think there's enough time to write it, go through legal, go through the whole process and meet the deadlines ahead of us um, to be able to do that.

And there's a few other little things that, as Council Member Liilquist had mentioned, um, I wish would have, uh, been structured and state stated slightly different. I support the the not having this, uh, price fixing.

Um, I wish the state legislation would have taken it up. Um, but I do have a question for legal. If the state does take this up and make a state law, will that then undo this as far as what's on the books and the state law would stand and not necessarily the city ordinance?

So, we want to pressure the state to do it slightly different and get it right. >> It depends. I mean, the state legislature may choose to preempt the field and not allow local regulation of in this area or they may allow for it to happen.

So, until they take action, I can't tell you. >> Depends on how they write it. Okay. Thank you, Council Member Williams. Yeah, I was I was just going to say I've been a long time person that doesn't like to govern by initiative mainly because um a lot of times there the either there's a certain agenda that that the that the person wants to wants to push forward.

Um, but for the most part, I'm I'm a real supporter of taking the time to write things the right way and cooperate or work with the city's structure to address the issue to make it something that would work similar to what Seattle and King County has done.

Um, I'm not saying that I am in opposition to the issue and our only options are to either write another ordinance or let this one go to the ballot and then after two years we can amend it or um but that's the only thing I'm not into criticizing what's in here.

Our decision has to be either we're going to rewrite it and submit a separate one or allow this one to go forward and so forth. Um, but the if if the state were to do something within the 2-year period, could we address it the same way that we did the um the gross misdemeanor for open drug use was as soon as the state passed it, we modified ours to support that?

>> Well, it's it's an interesting question. It's just we don't know what the state may do. Oh yeah. No, no, no. If the state um if the state adopts rules that are different than our rules that are preemptive in nature, >> you know, those state rules would control, right?

We we can't have rules that conflict with the state rules. >> Yeah. >> That's that's what I was asking. And and if it happens within the 2-year time period that we can't change, this would have to conform to state law.

>> Correct. >> Okay. Council member Cotton, >> you know, this was very near the top. Our lobbying agenda wasn't an order of priority, but it just happened to be listed near the top of that document. So, um, you know, this is something we've all thought a lot about.

Um, yeah, we did get that email with the concern about the criminal penalty. Um, so I just maybe want to ask the administration or acting city attorney, um, Herb. Um uh so you the only people that could bring a criminal case would be you know a like public uh prosecutor.

Um do you think we're chomping at the bit to um lock up landlords for subscribing to software? Um >> no. >> Um so thank you. Um so just to um maybe address that concern and and yeah it you know the language is May.

It's also the language on separation violations is also may and I think we had that conversation recently around the alley closure ordinance where like you know we really do have a team that's you know judicious and fair and thinking about good stewardship of public funds when we we think about what cases to bring in and under what um what framework.

Um and so I mean I do think if this is enforced it's almost certainly would be enforced through the civil um civil side of things. So um one other just comment is I really appreciate um meeting with lobbyists for real page this week.

Um I heard out their concerns. Um I was wasn't convinced and I I told them that but um I appreciate their engagement and um I think uh if this goes forward it will be with a commitment from me certainly to continue to talk to stakeholders and um as this I I'm assuming this will pass at the ballot.

Um and uh certainly I think Seattle and King County and Spokane and others would agree that I've done this that state level action is preferable. And so, um, I hope we can continue to lobby for the state to, um, provide a a consistent framework for compliance across jurisdictions.

So, um, that's all I got. >> Council member Cotton, could you summarize just for those who maybe weren't in that conversation with Real Pages what the concern was? >> Yeah. So um uh the lobbies for real page expressed a preference for Spokane's model which kind of narrowly targets the sharing of non-public competitive data.

Um, this ordinance prohibits kind of a a shared coordinating service from making rent recommendations to multiple landlords also just on the basis of private their own private data and like public data.

I think my concern is like just like regardless of the issue that I think clear antitrust issue with sharing competitively sensitive data is that like propagating shared um price setting architecture or like I'd be concerned if they're prioritizing certain rents over lower vacancies or avoiding concessions or like I think there's a kind of heterogeneity in like how landlords set rents that ultimately is beneficial to consumers.

And so, like, I just wasn't persuaded by that point. Um, and I'm not sure that's really clearly addressed by current antitrust law. I'm not an antitrust lawyer, so couldn't tell you. But, um, but I I appreciated that that question.

I hadn't thought about that. And so, um, I think they're operating in King County and Seattle with similar substantive or identical substantive requirements. Um so um but anyway appreciated them sharing their perspective and I'm sure they'll be happy to continue to engage Anderson >> just to share because I also um met with the lobbyists and I wish I had my notes in front of me so I could say the specific section so I'm just going to have to paraphrase the conversation.

They also um were concerned about like if I'm a landlord and I'm using the platform to be able to take a look at, you know, what public information is available. Um, but also if I have a vacancy rate, being able to use just for my own, not necessarily coordinating with people, but using the software to help me determine based on my history that I've got plugged in, what I've charged, what, you know, maybe I have a 100 units, what my vacancy rate percentage is.

So, I've been able to use the software for just helping to manage how I set my rents and not necessarily coordinating with any outside additional individuals. So, the there's concern about being able to just use the software in that capacity.

But, um, and I just wanted to speak to uh, Council Member Cotton. I understand that perhaps the likelihood of uh putting someone in jail is not high, but it is a law on the books and there are laws on the books in areas that more than likely would not be enforced, but we work on cleaning those up on, you know, what the expectation is.

So, as a landlord, when I see there's a law on the books that I could possibly be put in jail, that kind of puts a a feeling. There is another section. So, even if that wasn't a concern for other people, another section of concern for me was under um item eight.

Um an employee alleging retaliation in violation of this chapter is entitled to $7,500 in damages, reasonable attorney fees and costs, and additional um relief of law or equity appropriate to remedy of the violation.

It says alleging violation. And um that's a concern because to allege something versus prove um there's a retaliation is like how is a uh court going to look at that section of the law that based on how it's written.

If I'm to take it by its intent of how it's written, Dan could allege something on me and then perhaps the court says, "Well, they alleged it so therefore it's going to be paid." versus he didn't, you know, prove that I retaliated against him.

I just got terminated because of a bunch of other things that could be proven, but I've alleged it's because of this. And so I wish that was cleaned up a little bit better so that the intent of what they are driving for, which I think is just because nobody wants retaliation.

It's just the some of the word smithing leaves too much vagueness. And so I could pick through probably 20 of these items that I wish some of the word smithing was slightly different, but I I I support the intent behind it, but just some of the wording is concerning to me.

>> Any further discussion items? Again, not needing a decision um today on this. It will come back at our next council meeting for final consideration and needing action at that time. I guess I did have one question for um city at interim city attorney Herb is I know in addition we need to identify if it is going to the voters right someone to write a pro and con statement.

Um is that something that we should start sooner rather than later or >> Yeah thank you for that question. So, I I clarified with the county auditor a few years ago, the council doesn't actually need to formally appoint members to those pro and con committees.

That's something that, you know, in the resolution um directing the auditor to place on the ballot, you kind of provide that direction to the administration to take those steps because we have staff members that will typically like um issue public notices soliciting volunteers to serve on those committees.

we we very rarely get more than three volunteers to serve on either committee, right? So, it's usually we're we're scrambling just to fill the committees. Um, and we can we can do that administratively.

The council doesn't need to do that that step. But what I what I do need, maybe not right now, but during the evening session this evening is some direction about what to bring back to you on the 27th.

If council ultimately wants to defer to the voters, I will need to prepare that resolution to do so. if council wants to move to adopt it themselves. Right. There's there's nothing for me to prepare. Um so I will need that direction before kind of the end of the the evening tonight.

Thank you for that clarification. Okay. Any further action? If not, we can hold until executive session and then this evening make a decision. So okay, thank you very much. Okay. There's nothing further on that item.

We will move forward to the next agenda item. Next agenda item is agenda bill 24977. This is a resolution proposing amendments to article 5 section two and to article 8 section six of the city of Bellingham's charter to allow the mayor or the mayor's design to execute contracts in the name of the city and to eliminate the related requirement that the finance director attest to the signature of the mayor.

So, this resolution would put a measure before voters to streamline the city's contracting process and facilitate adoption of electronic signatures for city contracts. This includes two components. Allowing the mayor's designate to sign contracts and removing the requirement for the finance director to attest to the mayor's signature and physically attach the city seal.

If passed by council, this measure would go before voters at the November general election. Um and so for this item, I'm first going to turn to Deputy Administrator Forest Longman. >> Great. Thank you very much.

Um there are two charter amendments that we're proposing here. This and the next one. And you know, these are items um feel like are fairly minor changes to the charter that would improve um how the organization operates.

Um, these are items that have come up in various staff conversations and always been like over the past many years and always been like, "Well, we can't do anything about that. It's in the charter." And we said, "Well, let's take it.

Let's try." Um, so we uh we came up with a a a few other items beyond this as well, but these these couple items seemed like they were um easier to explain why they were a challenge and uh relatively straightforward.

We do think I think over the fullness of the next couple of years would look at potentially bringing back additional changes if if these are uh successful. Um so with that, this first item um has to do with the city's contracting process.

So you know the city processes a lot of contracts every year. Um last in 2025 we cont we processed over,00 almost 1,200 contracts. Uh that's up from 550 10 years ago. So um easily doubling the number of contract through mid June this year we are up to 625 contracts.

And so that represents um a lot of shuffling around of paper really more than anything else. And um there's there's two major components of this. The first is adding a provision to allow the mayor to have a designate for contract signing.

So right now every contract um has to go to the mayor for signature. Um that slows down the process that adds another step um that's related to the next item that also adds steps and we want to make that more efficient.

That step we believe that you know the mayor is ultimately responsible for everything that happens in this city. We already delegate a lot of important responsibilities to department heads and other staff members.

Um we don't think this really changes the operations of the city dramatically except for streamlining this process or changes uh who the responsibility ultimately relies lies with. And the related one that the second item is to remove the requirement for the finance director to attest to the mayor's signature and affix the official seal.

So the the major issue we're trying to do here is get to um get to electronic signatures. So most things out in the world now are using electronic signatures to process contracts. We actually are running into issues with this with other government agencies that require um us to do e signatures.

The state of Washington will not accept a wet signature anymore. And when we do that technically and we are violating the charter um but if we want to get our commerce grants and things like that that's the way we have to proceed.

Um so what the attestation and the physical seal means is if you have to attest that's a sequential uh signature and typically on uh an e signature they're all happening all the signatures can happen at the same time and you have a final document just once the last person has signed.

Um, there's also the whole notion of an attestation is the finance director is not grooving the contract but looking at the mayor's signature and saying yes that is the mayor's signature. I attest to that.

Um, and obviously if the mayor is having a designate that's not necessary but also if it's an e signature that step is absolutely not necessary because they're not attesting to anything that's already done by the system.

And finally, um, obviously affixing the city's seal, um, can't be done if there's not a piece of paper to affix it to. So, we have a we actually have a press seal that every contract gets pressed. And so, um, these items will create a more efficient city.

It'll allow us to go to a fully electronic contracting system with e signatures. the contracts can remain electronic from creation all the way through the process into um when they are archived. So we'll not need any paper in our contracting system.

So that's the ultimate goal is to make the city run better. So happy to answer any questions you might have about any of that. Council member Liquist, >> first of all, I appreciate you explaining the the complications with not being able to move into e signatures and I I I so I'm I'm very much in support of this.

I also suspect that the issue of having the finance director there is when the charter was written, the finance director was a separately elected official and the idea at the time the finance director would be like a a check on the mayor.

So the mayor didn't go crazy with contracts and money. Um, we got rid of that. It was a bad idea. It didn't work. Um, so there's no reason to have the finance director act as a check because the finance director is no longer independent official who can serve that role.

So getting rid of that makes sense. I do have one question about the mayor or the mayor's designate. Um, you know, uh, contracts of a certain size often have different requirements. you know, some need to come to us because they're larger contracts.

The same thing on WTA board. We give authority to the general manager to approve crown tax below a certain amount but not above it. Same thing here with like you know as good practice I would I would hope mayor all the important contracts would you would actually sign and not designate.

So, how how do you if that's a best practice, how could we initiate that best practice so that we can offload what can be offloaded, but that the mayor really has eyes on what the mayor needs eyes on.

>> Yeah, there's a there's a couple things at play there. First, we will need to revise all our city purchasing policies associated with this. So, we could identify what level of contract in our city policies um would still require a mayor's signature.

Um, we could also the city council could through a uh through the code govern that. So we could change some thresholds in there potentially as well or two approaches. Um, but the idea is to have the flexibility to create those more uh readily than to have it go to a public vote to change it.

Council member Cotton, >> I think I recommend I would like to move to recommend the resolution um both to save the trees and the mayors and Andy's time. >> Second. Motion's been made by council member Cotton and a second by council member Hudman.

Council member Anderson. So, um, with the mayor promp, I had that lovely job of having to drive across the county to come in and sign when the mayor was on vacation. Um, is that through charter that the mayor promp would sign contracts in the mayor's absence or is that in code?

because I'm wondering um because I I do like the idea of a threshold so that um if department heads are going to be signing contracts that there's there is a little bit of gatekeeping. Um just not worried about our current administration but setting things forward in decades to come.

You never know what um who will be mayor and are they going to show up and do the job. So, um, I'd like to make sure we're setting future councils in the city in a a good spot with this change. So, knowing more, is that code and is that where we would make a change or would it be a new code?

And does it change Mayor Prom? >> Uh, thank you for that question. Um, it's the same charter requirement that the mayor prom is acting under when they're driving across county to sign all those contracts in the mayor's absence.

It's the same requirement. So by eliminating this requirement, if council wants to put this on the ballot before the voters, it would also eliminate that requirement. items from so I guess the one question I had any concerns regarding I don't think at this point but any electronic signatures right and concern about potential fraud or identity theft or right things being how that's protected and ensuring that authenticity of the the contract >> yeah well I I don't have a perfect answer for that I don't know if >> I could jump in here So, uh, electronic signatures, um, are authorized under both federal and state law, and they are widely regarded as being more secure than wet ink signatures, uh, for for reasons that may be obvious to you, but, um, there's that digital authentication that goes along with it.

So, I mean, down to the IP address of the computer used by the person, uh, to do it. So, it's it's much more secure as a means of authenticating a signature than the pressed city seal on a wedding signature.

>> Thank you. I appreciate you addressing that. Okay. Anything else? Okay. If not, we have a motion before us by Council Member Cotton and a second by Council Member Huffman um to move to approve the resolution.

All those in favor will say I. >> I. Any opposed or abstensions? Okay. Seeing none, that passes 70. Thank you very much. And the next item um again related agenda bill 24978. This is a resolution proposing an amendment to article 2 section 9 of the city of Bellingham's charter to assign responsibility for reviewing and fixing the mayor's salary to an independent salary commission.

This resolution would put a measure before voters to eliminate the requirement that the mayor be the highest paid employee of the city. The current charter language results in a mayoral salary that is driven by staff salary compression instead of public intention.

The proposed new language would have mayoral compensation set by the same salary commission that sets city council compensation, increasing transparency and aligning with best practices. If passed by council, this measure would go before the voters at the November general election.

Once again, I will turn to Deputy Administrator Forest Longman. >> Yes, thank you. Um, so yeah, as stated, this would propose to have a salary commission set the mayor's schedule uh salary. Um, the intent here is to have a more transparent, thoughtful process for setting the mayor's salary for the city of Bellingham.

Um, right now the mayor's salary is set by a byproduct of compression that works its way through the organization. um typically driven by salaries in our our uniformed um uh bargaining groups, works its way up the tree and eventually pushes the salaries of the mayor up.

Um we looked at a handful of other comparable cities. We found this to not be the case uh of having this requirement in any of the other cities that I looked at. I didn't this is not comprehensive um but I looked at a handful of other cities uh and it wasn't the case in most places as in all of the elected officials at Watcom County and yourselves it's sit by set by a salary commission.

Um we think that would be more transparent and a more meaningful way for the public to participate in what the mayor's salary should be. So any questions on that one? >> Council member Lilquist. Thank you very much for bringing uh this forward.

I remember a couple years ago it had to do with how the rules were in Watcom County where there was a state effort to increase the I think it was prosecutor pay or something like that. So the state gave the prosecutor a $60,000 bump and the county executive got immediate $60,000 bump that nobody intended, nobody asked for.

Um I don't want that to happen over here. It's it's it's this idea has been talked about a long time, but frankly, it's not the sort of thing that the council can bring forward. It took a mayor to bring it forward.

So, I appreciate your leadership and your courage on doing this and having your salary set the way that makes the most sense the same way our salary is set as we throw it to a representative body of citizens and they decide for us rather than us being in the awkward position of deciding our own salaries or us being in another awkward position of deciding your salary.

Um, I don't think we should be put in that awkward position. Uh, this is the right solution and thank you very much for bringing it forward. Council Mary Anderson. >> Yeah, I wanted to thank you for bringing it forward.

Um the community's had this discussion, but it's also um I understand how why it was set the way it was long ago when the charter was set. um based on where the salaries were at. But as some of our um professional class employees, it is increasingly very difficult to hire really high caliber people that our community uh deserves.

Not that a high caliber mayor does not deserve the pay, but when it's at compression because I know um during the previous administration when new leadership, new um director positions were hired, it became that automatic pay bump in order to comply with the um with the charter.

And um but if you're looking at someone who is asking for a higher amount of money and you realize everybody's salary goes up, if if you look at other municipalities, sometimes the fire and the police chief are the highest paid.

Um and sometimes their executive assistants, too. Um so, um I'm happy for this change. I hope the public will also support it. um because I think over the next 10 to 20 years there is probably going to be more uh separation of salary for some of our um more executive levels um which I think would be appropriate.

So thank you >> member Cotton. >> Thank you for your leadership mayor. Um I move to approve uh the resolution. Second >> motion was made by council member Cotton and a second by council member Liiloquist.

Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor will say I. >> I. >> Any opposed or abstensions? Okay, seeing none, that passes 70. Thank you very much. Okay, so that is the last agenda item before the whole.

Um, we have old and new business. Council member Lopez. >> Two items. >> Two items under old and new. Uh, one is just an information piece. A while back, the uh, council agreed to have our policy analyst do some background research on the public development authority with the idea of exploring its possible use to uh, create housing opportunities and development in the city.

Um, uh, Miss has finished that work and I reviewed it. It's excellent work that she always does. Uh it's a short memo as a background work. Um please read that and then further discussion forthcoming on that issue.

a little >> next item. Also, um I brought it up a couple months ago based on issues that identified well over a year ago, actually were identified to me by by a community member. Um that had to do with uh technical and language issues in our city ordinance that requires 120day notice of rental increases.

And um so I've got a little memo that you can see and some maybe suggested language, but really my motion is that uh the administration look into the three identified issues that are fixes to the language of the rental notice ordinance that in no way are intended to change its purpose or intent or its outcome.

So for example, um what is a legally sufficient means of delivering the notice? Well, the state law defines what that is, but we didn't. So, technical fixes on notice, technical fixes, it has to do with um subsidized housing where if the rent goes up, the tenants rent doesn't actually go up because they're all under different sets of rules and their rent is capped.

So, Seattle ordinance deals with that. Maybe we should too. And the final one has to do with workarounds in dates and how you could require response sooner than 120day notice. So, maybe doesn't really function as a notice.

Um, I've already talked with planning staff about this. As a as a matter of fact, some of these issues are uh may be brought up uh on an August meeting that's already a planned agenda by the planning staff.

But as we discussed, city council shouldn't speak informally and you know to staff. We would the administration has suggested that it's far better practice if we do this in open motions. So, I would like to make a motion for the administration to look into the three issues related to the language in the 120day rental notice ordinance and to bring forward possible changes to the current municipal code that might address those issues.

>> Second. >> Motion's been made by Council Member Liiloquist and a second by Council Member Anderson. >> Discussion. Council member Cotton. >> Yeah, I think this is important. Um, I think there's kind of an unfair pressure tactic that some maybe corporate landlords have figured out, which you can offer the renewal nine months in advance and then give people 60 days to decide before other listings are available.

And so that does feel counter to our intent to give tenants time to plan and kind of just align market norms around something that's fair and workable for for everybody. Um, what the other thing I've just heard from landlords is it just they need to be able to issue a 60-day notice.

Um, uh, if the lease isn't going to continue, so just sometime in advance of that, um, the tenant would need to be required to respond yes or no to a to a lease renewal offer. Um so um and then just the one other piece is when we updated the rent increase notice period to 120 days, we did not increase it for no cause lease non-renewals, which it remains at 60 days.

And I just think would make sense to align those two numbers. um if we know it it's a lot of a lot of work to be able to find a place to move to regardless of the reason that's listed on the notice from your from your landlord.

So, um those would be my two thoughts. Um and I know we have an exciting work group um on the way to um maybe flesh some of this out as well. So, um supportive of the motion. >> Council member Anderson.

>> Yeah. Um, I want to thank Council Member Liilloquis for bringing this forward. I know, um, community member Carrie Birdside had identified some of this and has been on the back end kind of a a reminder and I I know Council Member Liilquist has been working with staff for a while on this, but I really appreciate formalizing to a motion.

We've talked about this in a a previous work session that um, even though staff has, you know, stated that um this is going to be coming forward next month. Um things happen, so it's really nice to formally have this on the books as being an official request in order to make sure that it doesn't necessarily always get put on the back burner because there's always something more pressing.

Um, these are they seem like really minor changes, but these potentially have really big impacts on tenants. And I've been talking with tenants that, you know, have been told they have 30 days to whether agree or not, even though maybe the rent increase wouldn't go up.

Um, but they don't know in 30 days if they want to agree and sign a new lease. So some of the ways people have landlords have worked around have had very negative impact. So the sooner we get this fixed I think the better for some of these tenants who really have had hardships because of um needing to get this clarification.

So I definitely support it. Further discussion. Okay, seeing none, um, we have a motion before us by council member Lilloquist and a second by council member Anderson and I believe clerk has a copy of the correspondence from council member Liiloquist.

Um, okay. So, nothing further, all in favor will say I. >> I. >> Any opposed or abstensions? Okay, seeing none, that passes 70. >> Great. Thank you. Other items for old and new. Council member Cotton, >> just a flag for council.

I'm bringing forward uh kind offormational information on the um some of the work I've been doing on movable dwelling units um uh on the 27th and look forward to um yeah that conversation and I'll um plan on emailing that out a little bit in advance to give you an extra 24 hours to look at it because it does include a 12-page memo which if you don't read I'll be very disappointed in you.

So just kidding. Um but a slideshow with pictures as well. So, um, and, uh, thank you for for staff, um, uh, both council staff and and planning and public works and the fire marshall and others for being some early thought partners and, um, I think a really exciting opportunity I'm excited to talk with you all about.

So, >> thank you, Council Member Cotton. I was just going to highlight that that item um, will be coming before committee of the whole. We typically probably send that to the planning committee, but council member Cotton bring this forward doesn't serve on the planning committee.

And so to me it makes sense um to bring that before. So a notable exception I guess to pushing work to the individual committee. So that will be coming before committee the whole um other items for old and new.

I have a couple. So one is just wanted to follow up on correspondence that Iris not our legislative policy analyst had sent out regarding tenant engagement survey update. So, she sent out um a brief update noting um the request from council to collect data from renters similar to the prior data collection that had taken place regarding landlords or in coordination with landlords um and property management um entities in that survey.

And so, she was looking at two different options, right? digital outreach versus outreach by mail and highlighted some of the um cost and other um obstacles related to outreach by mail. And so the recommendation from her was to follow up um a digital engagement strategy is the recommended option at this time.

It's the most cost-effective approach and while mailing all registered rentals would provide the widest reach. Um again it is costly and not recommended at this time and just wanting to confirm that I had not from council that that was that desired or that recommended approach was acceptable.

I don't think she'd received response from individual council members. So I just wanted to make sure that that was good to go go forward or if there was feedback to follow up with Iris directly but um okay.

So if that's acceptable then that will be moving forward um from her. So great appreciation for taking that work on. Um then I have one other item. So we need to appoint our lobby members of the lobby group.

Um so there was a recommend or I guess it was brought forward that oh this could be an opportunity to you know to utilize rank choice voting. I think when we have four names and three positions I don't think that's a great opportunity for rank choice voting.

I think that would just leave some really hurt feelings. And um so anyways, I've made an executive decision that we're going to revert to the bowl and um names. So I just wanted to confirm this is your business card.

Yes. >> I attest that as my card. >> Okay. I'm going to put that in the in the empty bowl. Okay. I have Council Member Cotton. Yes. Okay. Council member Hamilton that Council Williams. >> A good inspection.

>> Is it corner bent? >> Has this been her seal? >> I know. Really? Okay. And then I'm going to make >> what? Touch his card. >> Do you want to touch your card? >> I'm reading. >> I just don't want you all dog earing corners and making them.

Um, >> you know what? Okay, I picked some up. I'm going to have you pull one. Okay. The suspense. Council member Cotton. Okay, take another one. A little pissed. Okay, last one. Councilman Williams. Okay.

Um so for those who haven't been following along, we have a lobby group um that will be forming as we get closer to the upcoming legislative session down in Olympia. We keep it under a quorum of council members.

So there will be three representatives on that um working with that lobby group. So that will be council members Cotton, Liiloquist, and Williams. And so we will update the um roster and the city website to reflect that.

And just wanting to note that right those members have committed to attending those regular meetings and staying a breast of what's happening in Olympia and working with our the city's lobbyists. Um, but also recognizing that we were all, I anticipate, being actively involved and engaged in that process and it doesn't preclude other council members from providing testimony in Olympia or signing on to, you know, for or against items that are pending.

So, appreciation for your commitment and willingness to serve in that capacity. Deputy Administrator Keller, >> Janice Keller, Deputy City Administrator. I just wanted to add that um we we're planning an organizing meeting to get ready for the fall 2026 and winter 2027.

So you the three of you can stay tuned for that and we we're going to schedule that for about the next month or so. Okay. Thank you very much. So next we have executive session. We have five items before us.

So first is a potential litigation matter with Herb for approximately 10 minutes. The second, third, and fourth items are all potential property acquisitions with Rosenblat for approximately 3 minutes a piece.

And the fifth item is a quasi judicial matter. So this is discussion relating to an appeal to the Bellingham City Council of Sub2022-000011 ver 2022-00002 and cap 2022-00005 relating to the woods at Viewest.

This will be with stamps for approximately 20 minutes. So we are looking at roughly 45 minutes um for executive session and we are at quarter till we'll take about a 5m minute break to begin executive session.