Name: Bellingham City Council - Parks and Recreation Committee meeting, May 11, 2026
Start: 2026-05-11
End: 2026-05-11
Location: City of Bellingham

City Council - Parks and Recreation Committee

Mon, May 11, 2026

Agenda PDF Minutes PDF Watch Video

Agenda items

Vote records

Discussion summary

Transcript

Meeting summaryAI-generated

City Council Parks and Recreation Committee — May 11, 2026

This was a single-item committee meeting chaired by Council Member Skip Williams, joined by Council Members Dan Hammill and Jace Cotton. The session featured an extensive presentation by Parks and Recreation Department staff on the city's updated long-range parks plan before the committee voted to advance it to the full council.

Resolution Adopting the 2026 Parks, Recreation & Open Space (PROS) Plan

What it is: The 2026 PROS Plan is a comprehensive 20-year vision for Bellingham's park system, representing a complete rewrite of the previous plan. The plan's central theme is "access to recreation, nature, and play," and it signals a strategic shift from aggressive land acquisition toward stewardship — improving and maintaining what the city already has while filling specific gaps. The plan was developed with input from over 2,000 residents, four public meetings, five targeted focus groups (including Latino community members, adaptive/inclusive users, young adults, recreation providers, and the SEEK community), and nearly a dozen sessions with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. The Park Board formally recommended the plan on April 8, and the Planning Commission reviewed it on April 23.

Key findings and priorities presented by staff:

*Access and geography:* 70% of Bellingham residents now live within a 10-minute walk of a park or trail, up significantly from 54% in 2016. However, gaps remain on the north side of town and in the Samish neighborhood. The plan proposes four new neighborhood or pocket parks, one new community park, 120 acres of new open space, and 30 additional trail miles — primarily by working with developers and utilizing existing rights-of-way.

*Amenities vs. quantity:* Bellingham scores exceptionally well on raw quantity — roughly 30 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, nearly three times the national average, and 85 miles of trails. However, the city lags peer cities in the Pacific Northwest on amenities such as sports courts, indoor recreation space, skate parks, disc golf, and aquatics facilities. That gap is a central focus of the new plan.

*Recreation demand:* Recreation Manager Melissa Bianchi (name approximate from transcript) reported that over 60% of city recreation programs are running at full capacity, with a 90% fill rate overall — far above the industry standard of 75%. About 25% of enrollments are on waitlists, compared to an industry norm of 5–10%. Volleyball, soccer, cricket, disc golf, and dog parks were among the most requested amenities. The plan includes a long-term vision for an indoor community recreation center and expanded aquatics, consistent with the recently adopted Civic Master Plan.

*Operations:* Parks Operations Manager Steve Janashesky highlighted resident priorities including maintenance and repair of existing facilities, safety and lighting, stewardship of natural landscapes, street tree care, expanded community gardens, and volunteer engagement. The department is also pursuing a 50% reduction in irrigation water use through drought-tolerant landscaping and updated irrigation systems.

*Funding:* Over the 20-year life of the plan, estimated costs total approximately $225 million in today's dollars — $122 million attributable to growth (funded partly by park impact fees), $80 million for a future community recreation center, and $24 million for repairs and maintenance. Roughly 20 additional staff positions would be needed to manage new facilities; that staffing cost is separate from the $225 million figure. Current annual operating costs are approximately $18 million. Funding sources include the general fund, the Greenways Levy, REIT grants, park impact fees, and Golf and Cemetery dedicated funds.

Discussion highlights:

Council Member Cotton praised the plan and raised questions about park impact fees. Staff explained that existing rules — requiring fees to be structured by land use type — are no longer compliant with new state law, and that the city is actively working with the Planning Department to redesign the fee framework, possibly shifting to square footage or bedroom counts. A more detailed briefing on impact fees will come later.

Council Member Lilliquist pressed staff on whether the plan goes beyond geographic equity to address social vulnerability — i.e., whether parks serving lower-income or otherwise vulnerable populations are being prioritized over those in affluent areas. Staff explained that the department has replaced its previous Park Enhancement Prioritization (PEP) tool with a GIS-based scoring system that combines three factors: level-of-service gaps, population served, and a Social Vulnerability Index score. Each project in Chapters 3 and 4 carries an equity score. Lilliquist encouraged staff to weight the equity dial higher, noting that Bellingham is already strong on geographic distribution and that the marginal gains from equity-focused investment are likely greater. Staff confirmed the analysis exists internally and that strong equity policy language is in Chapter 2 of the plan, though the scoring tool itself is not published as a plan exhibit. Mayor Kim Lund highlighted recent examples of equity-oriented investments, such as new LED lighting at Roosevelt Park, which extended usable hours and improved community safety.

Council Member Lisa Anderson asked about expanding trail use of road rights-of-way in underserved neighborhoods like Happy Valley, citing a letter from community advocate Alex Mlan identifying specific road corridors. Staff confirmed that right-of-way trail development has been standard practice for years and that several of the corridors Mlan referenced are already completed or planned. Anderson also raised the possibility of activating underutilized facilities like Woodstock Farm and Maritime Heritage Park through school and nonprofit partnerships. Director Nicole Oliver confirmed that partnership outreach is ongoing daily, including discussions with the school district on grief programming, corporate sponsorships (such as a recent scoreboard donation from Walton Beverage), and regional trail coordination with Whatcom County.

Council Member Stone asked about potential park closures, given some facilities have high maintenance costs relative to visitation. Staff said no closures are under consideration; instead, the focus is on increasing programming and activation at underutilized sites.

Council Member Hammill noted the importance of framing parks investment as crime prevention and positive youth development — relevant context given ongoing community conversations about the criminal justice system and the voter-approved Justice Project sales tax.

Vote: Council Member Hammill moved to approve the resolution. The motion carried unanimously (3–0: Williams, Hammill, Cotton in favor). The item will be reported at the full evening council meeting.

Key Takeaways

The 2026 PROS Plan sets a 20-year, $225 million roadmap for Bellingham's parks, shifting focus from land acquisition to stewardship, amenity upgrades, and closing equity gaps — particularly on the north side of town and in the Samish neighborhood.

Recreation demand is outpacing supply significantly: 60%+ of programs are at full capacity, waitlists are five times the industry norm, and the plan calls for major new investment in indoor recreation, aquatics, sports courts, and a future community recreation center.

Park impact fee reform is coming: State law changes require the city to restructure how it charges developers; staff are working with Planning to redesign the fee framework and will bring a more detailed proposal to council later.

Equity scoring is now built into project prioritization, using a composite of social vulnerability, population served, and level-of-service gaps — but council members signaled interest in weighting equity factors more heavily going forward.

The committee voted unanimously (3–0) to advance the plan to the full council for adoption.

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

A resolution adopting the 2026 Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan

# Summary: 2026 Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan Resolution

Staff presented the 2026 Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, a 20-year vision prioritizing equitable access to parks and recreation while shifting focus from expansion to stewardship of existing parks. The plan was developed through extensive community engagement with over 2,000 residents and establishes key priorities including trail connectivity, park amenities (restrooms, lighting, wayfinding), accessibility improvements, and a long-term vision for an indoor community recreation center. Major initiatives include adding four neighborhood parks and one community park, 30 additional trail miles, and 120 acres of open space, with geographic coverage increasing from 70% to a target of 80-90% of residents within a 10-minute walk to parks. Staff emphasized addressing gaps in amenities compared to peer cities and demonstrated significant unmet demand, with over 60% of current programs at full capacity and 25% of enrollments on wait lists. The $225 million 20-year capital investment plan includes $80 million for a recreation center and incorporates a new prioritization tool that evaluates projects through equity lenses including social vulnerability analysis, geographic access, and level of service, with Council members emphasizing the need to prioritize equity heavily given Bellingham's already-strong geographic park coverage. The motion to approve the resolution passed unanimously.

Agenda items (1)

Procedural (1)

24926ProceduralA resolution adopting the 2026 Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan

The city is adopting its official plan for parks, recreation facilities, and open spaces through 2026, which guides how the Parks & Recreation Department will invest in and manage public outdoor areas and programs for residents.

What happened

Additional votes recorded in minutes

Recommend approval of resolution adopting the 2026 Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan

aye 3

Daniel Hammillaye

Edwin 'Skip' Williamsaye

Jace Cottonaye

Verbatim transcript available

194 transcript segments indexed

City of Bellingham Parks and Recreation Committee minutes May 11, 2026, 2:55 PM Chair: Edwin H. "Skip" Williams Phone: 360-778-8200 Members: Daniel Hammill, Jace Cotton Email: ccmail@cob.org Web: cob.org/council 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.

Welcome back. Um, so the next committee meeting this afternoon is Parks and Recreation and that committee is chaired by Council Member Williams. So I will turn it over to him. >> Thank you, President Stone.

There is no public comment period during committee sessions. Call to order and roll call Council President Stone called the meeting to order at 3:32 p.m. Present: Committee Chair Edwin H. "Skip" Williams, Fourth Ward Committee Member Daniel Hammill, Third Ward Committee Member Jace Cotton, At-Large 24926 1.

Today I am joined by Council Members Hamill and Cotton. Anyway, and we have one item on our our agenda today, which is a resolution adopting the 2026 parks and recreation and open space plan, commonly called the pros plan.

The parks and recreation department staff have been working on updating the parks and recreation and open space plan since the beginning of 2025. The updated plan represents a complete rewrite intended to reflect the needs of the community for the next two decades.

A resolution adopting the 2026 Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan Summary: Nicole Oliver, Parks and Recreation Director, Peter Gill, Park Planning and Development Coordinator, Melissa Bianconi, Recreation Manager, Laine Potter, Park Design and Development Manager, and Steven Janiszewski, Park Operations Manager, presented the resolution, which adopts the 2026 Parks, Recreation & Open Space (PROS) Plan.

The plan represents a rewrite intended to reflect the long-term needs of the community. Council Members discussed the resolution and PROS Plan, and asked questions. Action: Daniel Hammill moved to recommend approval of the resolution.

The theme of the plan is access to recreation, nature, and play. So, uh, we have several presenters, I believe, today. And uh starting with uh Nicole Oliver, parks and recreation director, Peter Gil, planning and development coordinator, Melissa Bianone, the recreation manager, Lane Potter, uh the parks design and uh development manager, and Steve Janiski, parks and operations manager.

So, I'll turn it over to you, Nicole. >> Thank you, Council Member Williams. Um, we're going to, uh, share this presentation and I'm going to kick it off. So, the 2026 parks, recreation, open space plan establishes a 20-year vision for equitable access to recreation, nature, and play across Bellingham.

This plan is shifting the focus from expansion to stewardship, improving and maintaining existing parks and facilities while strategically adding new parkland, trails, and open space. Access continues to improve.

70% of our residents now live within a 10-minute walk of a park or a trail, up from 54% in 2016. It's a pretty big change. Our community feedback helped shape our key priorities, including trail connections, accessibility improvements, wayfinding, restrooms, lighting, and expanded recreation opportunities.

The plan also advances investments in amenities like sports courts, skate parks, disc golf, and a long-term vision for an indoor community recreation center. Environmental stewardship remains central with continued emphasis on habitat preservation, open space acquisition, and caring for Bellingham's natural landscape.

Overall, this plan delivers a sustainable, inclusive, and communitydriven version for Bellingham's park system over the next 20 years. We're going to give you an overview of the plan, how the public engagement um played a part, what our service standards are, some projects, and ending with funding.

This plan was guided by the Bellingham plan. It also maintains our eligibility for our grants from the state. Um and it, uh, as you may recall, we set all of our goals and policies in the Bellingham plan.

And then this is a standalone plan. Um it is going to be implemented um with our capital improvement plan and um we had the park board officially gave its recommendation on the plan on April 8th and it went to planning commission for their review on the 23rd.

With that I'm going to turn it over to Peter Gil. >> Peter Gil, planning and development coordinator. I'm going to provide a little bit of context for the plan. Um, most residents have some attachment to parks, trails, and open space in this town.

Whether you grew up here or you moved here for the recreation, uh, it is a defining characteristic of Bellingham. This, uh, this photo is great. This is, uh, Sinclair Park in the 60s and it kind of demonstrates that overall um, commitment to parks in this city.

Uh, this quote is great, too. Uh, Bellingham's long taken pride in its parks. As far back as 1935, Bellingham Herald wrote that no city of its size in the Northwest had a finer system of public playgrounds.

Legacy has only grown since then. This chart uh shows the growth of parkland over time, starting back in 1884 when Rotor donated land for Elizabeth Park. That was roughly the same time that Central Park in New York opened up.

So Bellingham was right there with the rest of the country in terms of park movement. And that uh continued in Bellingham into the 40s uh with the New Deal where things you can see that orange line. It kind of flattens out from 1940 to about 1990 when the first of five uh greenways levies were approved by the voters.

You can see the rate of land acquisition from 1990 until today has really gone up. And that big jump in 2018 is the purchase of the Galbreth Mountain easement. And uh that growth has only continued in the last 5 years.

We've purchased roughly 16 properties or roughly 300 acres of new open space lands. Uh, not only has it been lands, but we've also built new amenities like Little Squall Comp. We've done restoration work in 100 Acre Wood and on Boulevard Park.

We've built new trails around Sunset Pond. We've added new parks, Cordata, Phase 2, and Storybrook. So that the park legacy continues with this plan. But this plan does moderate that growth. So that that shift is also reflected um based on what we've heard from the public.

So this plan focuses on improving what we already have by adding new amenities. Um increasing the access to yearround amenities, whether that's indoor recreation, aquatics, or yearround athletic fields.

providing equitable access, whether that's building new parks in neighborhoods that don't have them or uh improving the trails to access parks that already exist. Um trail connectivity is a big part of this plan.

We have a new trails uh map in chapter 4 and then providing service improvements uh through our recreation and operations section. So, I'm going to hit high level on some of the public engagement. You probably remember in 2025, early 2025, we heard from over 2,000 uh residents on what they would like to see uh for the park system moving forward.

Since then, we had four public meetings in person. We held five uh focus groups to hear from um members of the community that were not did not participate in the uh survey or in the public meetings as as much as uh we would have liked.

So, Latino community, the adaptive inclusive community, young adults, recreation providers, and the seek community. We also had almost a dozen meetings with the park and recreation advisory board to go through every step of this plan along the way as well as work with the greenways advisory committee.

So what did we hear? We heard first we heard that people in Bellingham love trails in natural areas. I think that's not probably new to most of us, but want to see some of the gaps filled, especially on the north side of town.

Uh, second, residents also asked for basic improvements like restrooms, improved accessibility for all uh lighting, and better signage at parks and trail heads. Third, there's a strong demand for more family events and year-round recreation space, particularly indoor aquatics, a community recreation center, and all season athletic fields.

So, service standards are important because they establish what we are going to build for the next 20 years. And we looked at four different um criteria in looking at our service standards. We looked at quantity, how many do we have, the distribution, so how well are they distributed across the city?

What is the overall condition? So we did a condition assessment with this update to look at all our park facilities and figure out the consist of the condition. and we looked at amenities compared to uh peer cities from the Pacific Northwest as well as national cities of our size.

So on the quantity side uh we we do really well. We score very high. We have roughly 30 acres of parkland per thousand residents. That's almost three times the national average. We have 85 miles of trails.

Um the only city that comes close in the northwest is Bend, Oregon. Um so we do really well on quantity distribution. Uh we have made significant strides as Nicole pointed out. We are now we now serve 70% of the population with a 10-minute walk.

Uh where that was 54% in 2016, so 10 years ago. conditions well, but on amenities, uh, we do not compare to many of our peer cities in the Northwest, and that's where our focus is. So, we're going to go start high level.

Um, this is for future parkland. And in the figure on the right, you see the green area, that is the 10-minute walk to parks currently. And that's 70% of the population is in that 10-minute walk shed.

And that is our level of service standard for parks. 10-minute walk. And you can notice on the on the north side of town, we have a large red area or circled area in that hashing. That is a gap. We also have gaps on the south side in the Samish neighborhood as well.

So with this plan, we have proposed to or add four neighborhood or pocket parks depending on the context and one community park in the future. On the open space side, uh we're proposing to add 120 acres of new open space and that would be within uh new potential trail corridors as well as wildlife habitat areas and other ecologically significant landscapes.

and on the public trails facility. This is a a snapshot from the uh plan showing the trails on the north side of town or future trails on the north side of town in the orange dotted lines. We propose to add 30 additional trail miles that would somewhat exceed our existing level of service slightly.

Um, but we plan on doing so by working with developers as they subdivide land as well as utilizing rightaways wherever possible throughout the city to make those connections. So with that, I am going to turn it over to the area managers to talk about future projects and actions.

Good afternoon. I'm Lane Potter, the design and development manager for the parks department. I'm going to go over some of the planning and prioritization that gets projects and actions into our six-year and 20-year plan.

So, just a reminder of how that selections process and prioritization works. Um, Peter mentioned our inventory. So looking at what we have both by a quantity, conditions assessment, geographic distribution, where are things across the city and then layering on top of that what we hear from the public, what feedback are we hearing about where things are, the condition, what else we need, what are growing recreational trends, and then looking at those goals and policies from the Bellingham plan.

So, making sure we're going back to those seven guiding principles and um going into a criterion matrix of how each project and action fits into all seven of those goals and priorities and ranking them and um looking at where things shake out in terms of prioritizing projects and actions that meet more of those goals and policies of the city and the parks and recreation department.

We then look at our available resources, whether that be um in the six-year or 20-year work plan, looking at where we have um partnership opportunities. Is there private development happening adjacent to projects that would make us want to prioritize something or um put it in the work plan sooner?

Are there other projects being done by other departments where we could potentially partner and um you know do more for our public funding? Looking at grant opportunities. So looking at all those different resources um to get a sense of what should be prioritized in both an annual basis, six-year and 20-year basis.

And then those recommendations come out into our final pros plan and our annual capital budget. So, something um that was kind of that we um added on to with this plan over some of the past pros plans was really um doing a lot more geographic based analysis of um all these projects and actions we have listed in our 6 to 20 year plan.

How well do all of those further our goals to really increase that um 70% service area to something like 80 or 85 or 90? and then looking at an actual population assessment of where are the uh more urban village developments happening, where can we provide more park amenities that serve a greater number of people in the community.

And then partnering with our um other departments to look at social vulnerability data to um better serve communities and putting more amenities or targeted amenities places where we're not serving uh the city equitably.

So on top of the geographic analysis that we've done, we also took a lot of public comment. Peter mentioned we had several open houses, we had those focus groups and we've also done a lot of um engage Bellingham kind of open commenting and we heard um some common themes.

So these were the primary themes that we heard about parks and trails projects and actions. And so while we have a lot of parks, trails, and programs, and recreation facilities, they're not all evenly distributed throughout the city.

So looking at better distribution of each different type of facility, basketball courts, playgrounds, restrooms, and making sure that we know where each of those things are throughout the city and that we're doing a better job of evenly distributing those facilities.

Um looking at furthering wildlife movement corridors throughout the city and urban growth areas. And then looking at where we already have parkland that's owned by the city and making um more accessible open spaces to neighborhoods, whether that's some new pocket parks where we have small open space areas within smaller subdivisions or a big open space area that has um a small developable area where we could put a smaller tot um fill in some of those service level gaps.

Um Peter mentioned those basic amenities. Again, we heard that a lot. We also heard a lot about trails in terms of wayfinding. So those green gray connections, better wayfinding throughout the city. Um looking at a mix of trail surfacing types.

We had a lot of requests for some more natural surface trails. We also had more requests for paved trails, multimodal type um transportation trails. Um completing trail corridors. So really finishing missing links through some of our big arterial trail corridors, north, south, east, west.

then adding better signage so that users of the trail know where they can go um where there won't be accessibility um conflicts or gaps throughout the system. So, putting that all together, uh chapter 3 and four goes through the specific projects and actions for both parks and trails.

I've just pulled out a few highlights from each of those chapters to talk about. Starting off with parks, some of these are already well underway, but they'll still be in our six-year plans as they're happening over the next few years.

So, Salish Landing Park, that's already um underway down on the waterfront, the new 17 acre park, getting phase one built in conjunction with the cleanup. Um partnering with public works to design, fund, and develop the waterfront skate park.

working closely with the library to master plan and provide amenities at Lee Memorial Park and then working in the Happy Valley neighborhood. Um their playground is up next for replacement when we look at all of our playgrounds for age safety.

Um we prioritize them in Happy Valley is up next. We purchased some property several years ago so that when we did replace that playground, we would also be doing access improvements um to the park. and then also looking at uh improving the usability of the fields at Squallum Creek Park.

Several other um highlights of park projects, continuing the work at East Bakerview Neighborhood Park. Uh the little plug, the park naming is open right now on Engage Bellingham if you want to go in and uh add a name or vote.

We're working to finalize the master plan over the next couple months. adding some amenities at Little Squalling Park where we've seen uh usage and visitors skyrocket since the pier opened. So, making sure we have some amenities there.

Then working on better water access for all user groups at Bodell Donovan and then implementing some of the great work that we have out of the recreational assessment at Lake Padden Park to look at um doing some shoreline uh enhancement and rehabilitation and then um better distribution and and use of some of the recreational amenities there as well.

Jumping into trails, again, this is just a highlight. There are um lots of trail segments in the pros plan, but these are some of the the big ones that'll make it into the work plan over the next couple years.

You're seeing a screenshot of the Cordata connector trail, which is a really critical east west trail segment that will um it's part of the larger kind of east west connection all the way from King Mountain through Cordata and eventually over to Bear Creek open space.

will connect the whole Cordata neighborhood out to the intersection of Stewart and Meridian to a safe crossing of Meridian at that intersection. We're working on getting the 100 acres of open space between Northwest and Aldrich open up on the north side of town with the trail head, some parking and trails, and then making um continuing the connection that Sunset Pond started to really connect the Barkley neighborhoods to Irongate and King Mountain with the Jills Court Trail.

And then um working with public works on the whole squall creek corridor, working on the Beta Baker trail in conjunction with some of those projects like improvements at Rotor, the um Baker Creek fish passage improvements all the way up to the new roundabout.

And then last but not least, um working to get a trail plan in place for Samish Crest now that we have all the property in place to make that full connection from Watcom Falls Park all the way down to Lake Padden.

And with that, I'm going to turn it over to Melissa. She's going to get into some recreation. Hi there. I'm Melissa B and Coney, the recreation division manager for Bellingham Parks and Wreck. The public feedback we received during the parks recreation and open space planning process is really similar to all of the feedback we have received in the recreational needs assessment in 2022.

We heard that we need more indoor programmable space either in the form of recreation centers um or other reservable spaces. The expansion of aquatic programs and facilities comes up consistently, as is the demand for races, parades, concerts, and other familyfriendly special events.

We have a lot of adaptive programs and equipment right now throughout our programming and and facilities, but the need continues to grow. So, we continue to look at ways to provide adaptive opportunities for our community.

And then reservable spaces which aren't directly managed by recreation but um recreational things are taking place in our reservable spaces. So we play a role and we do need more of those shelters and event spaces.

We also heard a lot about bikes, skate parks, disc golf, dog parks um but probably even more about sports courts including soccer, volleyball and cricket. Um, cricket is specifically missing for our system with the exception of one location.

And volleyball is um, one of the most popular sports we have. We have over 600 people actively participating in our current volleyball league and hundreds and hundreds on weight lists. So, we heard that we do need to add programming in underserved areas.

Um, we have already taken some actions to, um, add programming to the north side of town. The Santa 5K is a good example. We've also been permitting more special events and community celebrations on the north side of town.

We need to add amenities in existing parks. Again, hitting on those more active recreational opportunities such as volleyball, disc golf, soccer, and again, cricket, which came up pretty consistently.

And the expansion of those reservable spaces. It's important for you all to know that we currently have over 60% of our programs operating at full capacity, meaning that they are full at 100% or with a weight list and we have about a 90% fill rate on most of our programs.

Just for perspective, the industry standard for that is about 75%. So the demand is really, really big for recreational opportunities. We have very much learned that if we offer it, people come and no matter what we offer, people come.

So that's a blessing and a curse for us in our division. Uh we also have 25% of our existing enrollments are weight list enrolles. So again, the industry standard for that is closer to 5 or 10%. So that really demonstrates the clear need and demand we have for more space.

We've heard very loudly and consistently that we need a a community recreation center. One of our projects is to continue to work towards our implementation of the civic master plan which was recently adopted and to continue to partner with our public and private entities to develop this center and expand aquatic opportunities.

Cost recovery is a really important part of what we need to do to stay sustainable in community recreation. So we over the last two years have worked to implement a cost recovery program which focuses on establishing subsidy levels based on the beneficiary of service.

So we have this continuum here and it goes based on common good. So the higher the common good, the higher the subsidy. The more the individual benefit rises, the higher the cost recovery should be. That's all I have.

Good afternoon, council members. I'm Steve Janashesky, your park operations manager. So, I just have a few slides um with some of the feedback regarding park operations that we heard from our residents.

These are some of the main themes that came out of the pros plan surveys. Number one, maintenance of our parks and facilities. Not just maintenance, but repair of what we have is really important. Also, being good stewards of the landscapes, whether they're landscapes within parks or landscapes within open space is very important as well as safety and rules enforcement.

So our residents feel safe in our parks um all times of the day and even in the early evening hours. Street trees also came out as a very high uh value and we are actively maintaining 5,000 street trees but there could be places where we could establish more street trees within Bellingham.

And then lastly here you can see uh engagement on all levels through the park parks volunteer program, community gardens, school outreach and just uh providing places for people to volunteer. So these are some of the operational projects and actions identifying uh street tree maintenance needs in an annual work plan whether that's preserving street trees, maintaining them, replanting or planting new trees.

Uh a park condition assessment was also another project uh to to undertake um to budget for needed maintenance of our portfolio. And then completing a crime assessment of community parks and we've also done this in some of our parks.

For example, at Roosevelt Park, we've added new energy efficient lighting which also extends the park use into those uh later hours and helps people feel safe. and then expanding community garden plots.

We now have a community garden coordinator that is looking at different neighborhoods where we can possibly add more garden plots and then really leveraging our volunteers more than maybe what we have in the past to help with our problem with invasive species.

And then uh building that community connection and then lastly developing a water conservation plan to reduce um irrigation use. And we've already started this in this budget cycle. We're looking at reducing our water usage by 50%.

Looking at things like drought tolerant plants as well in our parks. And lastly, this is just an interesting data poll that compares visitation in the green bars uh compared to annual maintenance hours.

So it kind of shows you the community parks on the left of the line and the neighborhood parks to the right of the line where we're maybe investing too much time in a park where it doesn't get the visit visitation and parks like Lake Padden where we're right on target.

So that just helps with looking at the resources we're expending across the city and seeing where there might be some gaps where we can maybe reduce a little bit and expand in other areas. With that, I'm going to turn it back over to Peter.

So, that's just a a taste of what's in the uh 20-year plan. There's a lot of things in there. Uh it is going to be the basis of all our six-year capital plans coming forward. And so, I'm going to give you a taste of how you can get more of that information.

It's all in chapter 7 of the plan. Uh this is just a sample of the funding chart that's in there. On the left hand side, you have the park facility. whether that's a trail or community park or signage or whatever it is.

And then on the right you have the new growth related costs where impact fees come into play. And then further over you have the total project costs for things that includes things like repairs of facilities that we don't charge impact fees.

And then that final column is part of the new plan where we actually plan for how many FTE uh would take to um to manage new facilities as they're brought online. Um and so that I would encourage you to take a look at that if you haven't already.

Um and so if you add up all those columns um you get to the um full costs. Um, for context, we we brought in our co-worker's child here. Um, he's two, so by the time he's 22, uh, these project costs would be about $225 million in today's dollars.

Uh, 122 of that is associated with growth from new population coming into town. 80 million is in there for recreation center and 24 million is in there for repairs and maintenance related. And then uh total staffing for all the new facilities is roughly 20 employees.

And so how do we pay for that? Um the existing plan um does not significantly change our annual costs. Right now they're roughly about $18 million. 10 to 12 of that is staff related operating costs. And currently we have different funding sources uh that we plan for to use to pay for these things.

General fund, the greenways levy, REIT grants, park impact fees, and the Gulf and Cemetery dedicated funds. So with that I will um we'll stop talking and uh take any questions or feedback you have. >> Okay.

Thank you very much for a wonderful presentation. It's always good to see a whole department make a presentation to us. It's something to be admired for. Okay. Um I'll uh have uh committee discussion.

Uh Council Member Ham. >> Yeah. Just a few slides back there was the the growth slide and it uh it had the number the 225 and I think it said 20 employees underneath that. Is that 20 new employees to help accommodate for that growth?

I'm sorry. >> That is and that is not part of that 225 million. Okay. Uh, Council Member Cotton, >> I think the parks team might be the most badass um department. I'm sorry. Uh, but what an impressive statistic.

Sorry, other departments. You're great, too. Um, but, uh, what an impressive um, amount of work and exciting plans for the future. Um, so the statistic that 70% of the I mean, I didn't know this. This is an amazing fact.

It's with 10-minute walk. Um, I also just think that is uh also an opportunity just to try and get more people living close to all these amazing amenities that we have. Um and um I wonder if you could speak to analysis that we've done on park impact fees and the degree to which that might impact feasibility in development and um uh and we talked a little bit today about this.

So and then just some of the future um updates and conversations that might be happening Sure. Uh we did mention um that park impact fees are the way that we deal with them right now is by land use or is by a housing type and that's no longer allowed under the state uh new state rules.

So we are working closely with planning. Um we just had a meeting uh this morning on this topic and um we're we're really trying to work with planning closely because we want to try and um change the framework to be something that uh we already collect.

So we're not creating a new thing that we haven't collected before and we want to look back and see um how the fee might change under a new framework. So it's kind of between right now square footage or bedrooms.

Um and that the analysis is not done. Um what we do uh what we do know is that um we we have benefited greatly from park impact fee credits. When developers have subdivided their property, they are part of the public infrastructure is to dedicate and build whatever park amenity is in our pros plan that's needs needed in that area.

Um but sometimes they get a little bit padded. the park impact fee credit. We also end up with credits that are bigger than the actual improvement, but we have been able to um create a lot of connections through development working with us so that they're instead of paying the park impact fee, they're actually building the amenity that's closely associated with their with their development.

Um so it's basically it's still coming. Um we we do we've done some of the analysis and some of the basis for the park impact fee is in what our growth related costs are. So that would be and then you take a percentage of that and we've changed that percentage over the years as a city about how much we expect growth to pay um for the growth related costs.

So we'll be bringing a more robust conversation on that topic uh when we're a little closer. This is the first time that we've estimated staffing um in this plan. Uh it's something that I think is really important.

Um we we we did not do a good job of adding staff with amenities over the years except for the most recently with the fifth levy. We were really able to beef up some of the staff. But we want to be able to make sure that when we're building new things that we can actually staff and take care of them.

And so that will depend also on the economy and the choices we make as a community and leadership. Did I answer your question, Jace? Yes. Well, it was a rambling question. So, thank you, Director Oliver.

Um, is a followup. Okay. Chair. Um, uh, so even though I've been here for two years, I still kind of have the fresh fresh eyes. And so, my one of my questions is like why do we um go the route of impact fees with credits as opposed to development regulations?

If there's a trail, you got to provide the connectivity or a fee in L. the the latter sometimes seems like it might give us more flexibility. So, I'm I'm curious the history of that. >> So, just to be clear, um any development that actually you want to explain it, you're better than me.

You do, >> please. >> And Ellen will correct me if I botch this, but there's a there's an RCW that we have to follow. Um and I I think the two criteria that have to be met that if you know in the land use decision they are required to dedicate this facility and it's in our capital facilities plan.

We we have to give them park impact fee credit if they request it. And so I don't know that we have as much flexibility. Um it's something we're continuously talking amongst ourselves to um to try to figure out how we can maybe make some small improvements and and better utilize um PIF credit.

>> And the other thing to keep in mind if something is fully zoned and they're not doing any land use enablement to build something they it's just a park impact fee. And so at that point they're not dedicating anything.

They're just um building a new building in an urban village and then they have to pay per unit. So if there is something nearby that they want to build for us, they can get a credit on their park impact fee for doing that.

But it's when it's a land use enablement, it's a dedication. And then if it's just a regular building permit, it'll be more likely a fee. >> Okay. Any other questions from the committee? Uh anyone Oh, Jace, go ahead.

>> Just a quick one. Um, how many trips are short trips to parks and how many trips are long trips to parks? Like is there do we have data on that? Um, are people mostly walking to neighborhood parks or are most trips going down to the you know the big community park?

>> We see the community parks are bar by far more visited than any neighborhood parks or all of the neighborhood parks put together. um Lake Padden, um Lodell Donovan, Boulevard Park, you know, Civic, the Civic Athletic Complex, those those parks take the bulk of all the visits.

Um Civic gets roughly a million visits per year. So, Civic by itself exceeds most almost all the neighborhood parks. So, I guess to answer your question, I think most people are still driving or commuting to to a a park, but not for everyday things, right?

For walking the dog, taking the kids, whatever. >> Okay. Any other questions from from the rest of the council? Michael, >> um, let me start with a small question for you, Nicole. We used to have a park equity planning tool or something, PEP.

Does that still exist? Are we still using it? I'm going to ask a bunch of questions about equity and measures and levels of service. And I I haven't I'm sorry I did not actually read every page, so it may be in there.

>> I'm going to jump in for Nicole here. So, our last pros plan had the park uh equity, the PEP the PEP tool, park enhancement prioritization, I think is what it stood for. and we primarily used it for neighborhood parks for playground replacements to add on to the safe just purely going off safety and age to add an equity component to it.

Um some of the data that we were using was a some sensitive data that since then um we were asked not to use um >> census level track data on incomes or school lunch >> was some of the school some of the school data um and so we have transitioned um we're uh mostly trying to be consistent with the other departments in the city using the social vulnerability index um which includes a lot of different factors all into a you know a weighted zero to one ranking and so we're doing that with all of our projects.

We're using that the social vulnerability kind of in lie of the PEP tool this time around. >> Okay, that would help me make ask a much better question. um tell me how we're using that social um vulnerability tool because in here we most of the conversation about access is done in purely geographic terms and equal access geographically equal access is not the same as equitable access and one of the reasons why I've been speaking about this for years and why I was pleased with the the equity planning tool is that just Knowing your near houses doesn't tell you who you're near.

So we talk about demographics, we talk about use, we talk about location, but combining it together, who are you serving at the places? And the equity planning tool said we are serving uh vulnerable communities.

Therefore, we're going to prioritize and make sure that um that these are in good condition because frankly, if you live in a crowded apartment building, you don't have a yard and you're probably not going skiing because it's expensive.

However, if you I mean, by the way, one of our least served areas, which you no one ever calls out, Edgemore because I think we realize Edgemore is not actually an underserved on vulnerability index. It's not, right?

Um, so how are we using equity in more than geographic terms? Because I think we really ought to be thinking in more than geographic terms. >> Yeah, I'm so glad you asked this question. Um so we are using this new prioritization tool that mostly um Peter and our greenways project manager Paul have developed where we are um putting project areas into a criteria where we look at things like actionability, complexity, cost and um equity.

And we're looking at equity from the level of service, from the population served, and from that social vulnerability. We're putting all those three into one equity lens. We then get this giant table of rankings where we can either weight the equity higher.

We could weight the level of service filling a gap higher. We could weight population. And so we can play around with that to start to get a sense of what projects are rising to the top of let's say we weight equity, you know, 60% and this we basically get a number for each project.

We could weigh that way up and then look and see where are the top 10 projects we could do in the city that would have the biggest impact on the social vulnerability index, population served, and gap in level of service or some kind of physical barrier between a neighborhood that can't get to a park.

And so for the first time, we've been putting every single park project and all of our planning documents into a GIS tool and running those numbers and actually starting to look at where things >> uh that is very encouraging.

I didn't see it in the document. Um again, I hadn't read the whole thing. So two, one, could you direct me to what I might have missed and we could do that offline. two, when I look at the the broad equity language, it also doesn't refer to equity in with with regard to social vulnerability.

So, I think there's missing policy language and it's also a policy question. If you're turning up the dial on equity to see what happens, that's a policy question. And as a policy maker, my input is, yeah, crank that dial.

And the reason I say that is is the the good news that that Jake's already referred to. Geographically speaking, we've done pretty good through legacy of neighborhood parks and the community parks. Geographically speaking, we're ahead of the the curve on these things, which is why I would crank the dial on equity more at this point.

>> I think you will see that there is very strong policy language on this topic in the plan. it's in there and we're not going to be sharing internal analysis >> Excel spreadsheets in the planning document.

That's how we implement the plan. So, um, and it changes, you know, we ran we ran different scenarios. We ran like, you know, we have little trail segments all over town that are kind of those missing links.

we just picked those trying to look at kind of similar types of things because it's hard to compare um a a total a totally outdated playground with a unbuilt trail connection. So, we're trying to compare the same type of thing when we when we analyze which ones should be prioritized.

So, we're looking at playgrounds for in general or we're looking at trail connections or we're looking at um you know more like actual neighborhood parks. So we're not comparing uh you know apples to oranges when we're trying to prioritize those things.

But ultimately you guys are the policy makers and you approve the capital plan every year. You're the ultimate decision m maker on how you and how we spend our money. >> Well, but if I don't know how it scored equity, all projects look good.

There's not a I never seen a project project I didn't like, but I don't know about maybe the one next door. I guess my question, I'm sorry Kim, I don't want to take up too much time, but if if I searched social vulnerability in a word search of this document, would I find what I'm looking for?

Because like I said, I I missed a lot of things >> right there. >> Well, that's not the same as >> I believe I was just asking Peter, I believe it's in chapter 2 that you would find. You'll find a heat map.

Um it's it's kind of orange and yellow and pink. I feel like it's chapter 2. Yeah, you'll find chapter 2 and we have all the policies around equity in chapter 2, but um chapter 4 or three and four have an equity score.

It's a it's called a service score that has some of them have little stars around them if they were super good. Um but so all the projects in there have that actual score as well. So you can check that.

But that that score is a composite of these three things which is how many people would benefit, what is the equity, and does it fill in our level of service. >> Okay, I'll I'll look at that further. Thank you.

>> Thank you, Mayor Lond. >> I was just going to highlight I appreciate um Council Member Lillquist's inquiry about equity and how we're looking at that right now. I just want to say that there's so many conversations and factors that go into that are nuanced around that.

And an example can be um you know ways that we can draw more people into the existing neighborhood parks that we have. And I think about recent lighting upgrades at Roosevelt Park and the tremendous feedback we've received from the community about how it's expanded access for later in the evening.

People feel much safer in that park. Um and so you know that's part of what equity looks like too is how can we make investments in existing assets and be responsive adding more bathrooms so more people can stay longer.

um that is a big part of the conversation. So, of course, we're looking at where do we need to grow, where do we have service level gaps, but also how can we make it a better experience um in the neighborhoods um that we know we can do better in.

>> Okay. Are there any other questions? >> Council member Anderson. >> Thank you. um love the plan and I appreciate I'm I don't want to say nuances but really the lens of you know winterizing some of the bathrooms so that they could be open you know year round really looking at the assets that we have and maximizing them and um I was really happy to hear um in the um presentation maximizing assets that we have like the rose especially in the northern section of town, being able to use those to put in trails.

Um, but I'd be aiss not to um reference one of the letters that we received in the packet from Alex Mlan who specifically um called out three rows um to be trails. And we all know Alex and we all know he's he's been a true champion of working on this aspect for um Happy Valley which really is underserved in my opinion because they I'm glad their park is going to be updated.

We purchase land so that there'll be expanded parking. but he specifically calls out um the 27th and Douglas Road Trail, 21st and Larvy Road Trail, and the 21st and Douglas, and then also a few others.

And I'm wondering as we're hopefully now accepting that roads can be used for transportation in the form of trails, are we going to reexamine that lens of looking at roads and additional areas like Happy Valley and utilizing them in order to be able to create better connectivity, especially in neighborhoods that don't have sidewalks.

I think some of the trail connections using roads is probably much more economically feasible than public works going in and putting in a lot of um sidewalks for people to be able to use to navigate around their neighborhood.

So um are we looking at more of an expansion of utilizing roads in neighborhoods like Happy Valley? >> Yes, I will take this one also. Uh yes. So when we came to you all in 2023 and did we we came with an amend amendment to the pro plan in 2023 to update the recommended trails layer and it was um one of the biggest drivers of that update was some of the rightway assessment work that had been done by public works.

Um we were able to then take that assessment with more of a like you mentioned less of a road and infrastructure lens a little more on a low impact trail. um neighborhood connector lens. And so a lot of the trails that were added in 2023 were reflective of that work um to find the places that were appropriate for that for trails.

So there were a number of those trails in 2023 that um came from that. And then I think there's a handful of new ones um that we primarily worked through the greenways advisory committee to update this current um trail layer.

And same same thing looking at that that lens of where it might be appropriate where perhaps the grades or vegetation doesn't lend itself to a road but would be appropriate for a trail. So several of those have been added.

Um and in terms of some of the specifics that were called out in that letter um two of those we we've either already done the trail improvement or they're in our plans to be done. And I I just want to add one more thing when you say change to embrace right ofways that it is not a change.

We've been building trails in the right of way for many many many years. >> Okay. Uh um I'm going to come back to you >> follow up >> President Stone and then um Council Member Hamill. So, as we're thinking about the budget and moving forward things, um, one question is how much thought or at what point, right, are we looking at or considering at all potential closures of areas?

Um, wondering, you know, when I think about places like Woodstock Farm and, you know, that may be underutilized or looking at the cost versus usage, right? Maritime Heritage Park is a huge facility in downtown.

it's beautiful. But when you think about the usage being low and the cost being extremely high, um sort of how we approach that analysis, >> we've not um we we've not quite evaluated closing anything as of yet.

We have limited hours on things. We've stopped um locking gates when we were understaffed. For instance, some of those gates we were trying to lock and unlock. Um, I think we're trying to actually expand some programming use and we're working on um, uh, some of that for Woodstock Farm and for Maritime.

What we're trying and we just launched this a few weeks ago is um, you can rent any you can use the space for free and we have now uh, dedicated that as our central rally spot for any large community gatherings because it's really it works great for the police.

It's it the I think the hours are high because it's a complicated park to take care of. We've also done several projects down there this last year which might have contributed to the high hours. We refabbed the b the um the boardwalk and um decommissioned that lower trail.

But I think I think we would never want to turn away from ma basically our central park in the community. And instead what we really want to do is try and drive more activities and um positive use there as well as Lee Memorial.

That's another um high priority project this year. But Woodstock, we would love to get more programming. We did change the cost. We're trying to recover more cost and um we're charging quite a bit more to use that facility for venues and then we're trying to get get some partners to do some placebased programming there.

>> Hey, Council Member Hamill. >> Um yeah, there's a um there's a another conversation that's happening broadly in this community right now and that's around investments in the criminal justice system.

Um a couple years ago the voters passed the the Justice Project. um two tons of 1% sales tax. And it's I think it's really easy to overlook and lose sight of investments that we're making here in Bellingham in what I would regard as positive youth development, um community building, uh social determinance of health.

The the Alice conversation came up in a previous uh committee. that's the asset limited income constrained employed um folks that live in our community who have access to um to these parks and trails for free.

And I just think it's important that we we balance our thinking when it comes to, you know, we have we have to do all of these things to some degree. And I'm just really um really pleased um with the parks department.

I'm not going to use my colleagues language. Um, and when it comes to how much in what esteem I I hold the parks department and and all the work that you all do. So, with that, um, I'm going to, um, vote to approve the the resolution of the packet.

>> Okay. Before we vote, I'm going to call on Council Member Anderson one more time. >> Thank you. Um, a little bit of what Council Member Hamill stated. Um, when I think of partnerships and activation, um, and I was thinking of the property that hospice had purchased over, um, near Joe's, and at one point we had discussions of maybe partnering to be able to get a little bit of a park or additional trails, not just that location, but I'm thinking of activating areas like, and it's funny that I think there's this like weird telepathy going on because I was thinking of Woodstock like how do we activate that more?

Good to hear that as a gathering place. Marine Park is being looked at that. But like the effort in this plan to create larger partnerships um not only to activate but to be able to like the the hospice property or um even going towards the north of the county.

I I know there's going to be a lot more development. Can you speak a little bit about how that outreach and partnerships are happening in order to be able to um address a little bit more of the equity in areas where we really do need to um address um more access and especially um for those who are um income um constraint because I know we're charging more for Woodstock but that could just eliminate individuals being able to utilize that.

So, are we also looking at partnerships um where like schools might be able to use Woodstock for an educational aspect at a reduced rate in order to activate it and bring field trips and things? Does that >> we we build partnerships every single day.

We have people contacting us all the time and we have multiple different ways that we can partner to bring programming into parks with reduced uh use and reduced reduced fees and share in um helping them advertise what the program they want to do and then register.

So we have a whole bunch of I just talked to a association of women's university women on um Saturday morning and I have a woman who wants to teach meditation classes. We're working with the school district right now to do grief programming, a grief circle for the community.

It's something we really don't have in Bellingham and I think it would be a really neat thing. So people do find us, they reach out and then we try and examine what it is they're trying to do. Um, as far as equity I and access, um, one of the things we're also looking at is why aren't some of those neighborhood parks used as much?

Why why aren't the people in the neighborhood using them? What could what could we do? Do they know the parks there? Is it because there isn't adequate parking, signage, wayfinding? So, we're trying to figure some of those questions out.

Bathrooms. Um, and then some of our regional partners, you know, the school district is a huge partner. um their their their user groups, their their students are what is the main users of Civic Complex.

Um and then we just got the scoreboards um donated. We just got a donation from Walton Beverage and they're going to advertise on our scoreboards. That's something we'd really like to do more of is some corporate sponsorships, especially when it comes to athletics.

Sometimes people don't even know in the community that City of Bellingham owns Joe Martin Stadium. They think it's the Bells. So, like how do we do a better job of partnering and getting some of that advertising dollars to help with some of the upkeep of these big facilities?

And then we're also um making some good strides on regional trail planning with the county um uh coordinating our engagement efforts um pulling together um key stakeholders. We had a trail summit a few months ago with just the land managers and we're making some real key strides to try and get that Lockwood property out Marine Drive all the way to through Ferndale and and um and up.

So there's it's all the time every day we're we're working on partnerships. >> Okay. Uh before we vote, I just want to say it's been a real pleasure for me to work with you all and and uh observe and watch all these things develop and uh come to fruition.

So I'm going to offer you my congratulations on a job well done here. So, that being said, there's a motion on the table to approve the resolution adopting the um 20 uh 26 parks and recreation plan. So, all in favor, please say I.

>> I. >> All opposed. And that will be summarized and reported at the uh evening meeting. Anything else for your committee? >> Uh, no. And the meeting is adjourned. Great. >> Thank you so much. So, we'll take just a brief recess and we'll be right back with committee the whole which will consist of old new business.