2026-11-02 - City Council Special Meeting

00:24I'm calling this meeting to order. This

00:26is a special meeting of the Redmond City

00:27Council held on Monday, November 2nd,

00:292026, commencing at 7:00 p.m. I will

00:32call roles starting with Council

00:34President Stewart

00:36>> here. Council Vice President Noea Camina

00:39>> here. Council member Foresight

00:40>> here.

00:41>> Council member Critzer

00:42>> here.

00:42>> Council member Parsy

00:43>> here.

00:44>> Council member Parkria

00:45>> here.

00:45>> Council member Sony

00:46>> here.

00:52>> She said here.

00:53>> Yes. Aller in attendance. Council member

00:55Pria, do you have a motion to rearrange

00:57the agenda?

00:58>> Yes. I would like to move um item number

01:01four on the consent agenda. I'd like to

01:03I'd like us to vote on that before we

01:05head into executive session.

01:07>> Right. Is there a second? Second.

01:09>> It's been moved and seconded. All those

01:11in favor say I.

01:12>> I.

01:12>> I. I.

01:13>> Any opposed? Motion carries. So, we will

01:16um we will move item number four, which

01:20is confirmation of appointment of new

01:22commission members prior to going to

01:24executive session.

01:28[clears throat]

01:29Let's see.

01:31Um, as a reminder, our ballot boxes at

01:34Redmond City Hall and the Redmond

01:35Community Center at Mary Village are

01:37open for the general election through

01:39tomorrow night, exactly at 8:00 p.m. In

01:42fact, they do an air horn. Please be

01:44careful in these areas and watch for

01:46cars and pedestrians returning their

01:47ballots. King County vote centers are

01:49available to voters who need assistance

01:51completing their ballot. Trained staff

01:53and specialized equipment are available

01:55to help voters with disabilities cast a

01:56private independent ballot. We encourage

01:59you to participate in our country's

02:00democracy and make your vote count this

02:02and every election day. The city of

02:05Redmond introduced new online forms that

02:08allow community members to register to

02:09provide remote verbal comments or submit

02:12written written comments directly

02:14through our website. This replaces

02:16community members emailing and to submit

02:18comments or register for remote comments

02:20and makes participating in city council

02:22business meetings more accessible and

02:24convenient for individuals who have

02:26difficulty attending meetings in person.

02:28Forms will be available from 5:00 p.m.

02:30on the day the agenda is published until

02:322:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting.

02:34You'll be able to access the forms and

02:36learn more about participating in public

02:37meetings, including decorum and language

02:39expectations, time limits, and allowable

02:42topics by visiting

02:43redmond.gov/addressing

02:44counsel.

02:46The first item on our agenda is a

02:48special orders of the day with a

02:50proclamation for Native American

02:51Heritage Month. Whereas November is

02:54recognized as Native American Heritage

02:56Month, a time to honor the histories,

02:58cultures, resilience, achievements, and

03:01ongoing contributions of American

03:02Indian, Alaskan Native, indigenous

03:05peoples. And whereas indigenous peoples

03:07have lived in relationship with the

03:08lands and waters of the Pacific

03:10Northwest since time in memorial,

03:11sustaining communities, traditions,

03:13languages, and knowledge across

03:15generations. And whereas the Seamish

03:17Valley, Lake Seamish, the Seamish River,

03:20Bear Creek, and surrounding landscapes

03:22have long sustained indigenous

03:24indigenous peoples and archaeological

03:26discoveries at the Bear Creek site,

03:28demonstrate the extraordinary depth of

03:30human history in the Redmond area. And

03:32whereas the city of Redmond recognizes

03:34the enduring connections of indigenous

03:36peoples to this region, including the

03:38Snowqualami Indian tribe and other

03:40tribal nations and acknowledges the

03:42importance of respecting tribal

03:44sovereignty, treaty rights, ancestral

03:46lands, and cultural resources. And

03:48whereas a city recognizes strength and

03:50continuity of indigenous communities

03:52while acknowledging the profound harm of

03:54colonization, displacement, and harmful

03:56federal policies whose effects continue

03:58to impact native peoples today. And

04:00whereas Native American Heritage Month

04:02provides an opportunity to celebrate

04:04indigenous leadership, arts, cultures,

04:06and contributions, deepen public

04:08understanding of native histories, and

04:10contemporary experiences, and strengthen

04:12relationships grounded in respect,

04:14education, and stewardship of the lands

04:16and waters we share. Now, therefore, I,

04:18Angela Bernie, mayor of the city of

04:19Redmond, Washington, do hereby proclaim

04:21November 2026 as Native American

04:23Heritage Month. I encourage all

04:25residents, businesses, schools, and

04:26community organizations to learn about

04:29indigenous histories and living

04:30cultures. Recognize the sovereignty and

04:32contributions of tribal nations and join

04:35us in fostering a community rooted in

04:37respect.

04:38The next item on the agenda is a

04:40presentation for the recognition of

04:42youth climate action fund awardees.

04:46Earlier this year, the city was awarded

04:49a youth climate action fund grant from

04:51Bloomberg Philanthropies. We were one of

04:54300 cities across the globe selected.

04:57Through this program, the city is

04:59awarding many grants to youth so that

05:01they can implement projects that create

05:04a more sustainable and resilient

05:06Redmond. The city received 22

05:09applications and requests totaled more

05:12than $76,000.

05:14Today we are excited to announce that 13

05:18projects were selected by our

05:20environmental sustainability advisory

05:22committee to move forward with

05:24implementation.

05:26This was an inspiring group of projects

05:28and project teams and we're looking

05:30forward to building connections and

05:32working with them over the next six

05:33months as they implement their projects

05:36across the city. And so after I announce

05:39your project, I'm just going to do the

05:42title of what uh what your project is.

05:44Please come forward and then we will

05:47have all of you stay up here and with

05:48council and me will take a giant group

05:50picture because we have around 40 of the

05:53youth here today to celebrate with us.

05:55So project number one, Snap Sort

05:59Redmond, please come up. Snapsort

06:02Redmond, come on up.

06:06>> [applause]

06:08>> Right down. Right down here. Thank you.

06:12Project number two, East Lake Native

06:14Plant and Pollinator Garden.

06:17[applause]

06:22You can stand in front of the table.

06:23Don't I know you're all by yourself yet.

06:25They'll come up and join you. Perfect.

06:29And also um soon we will have available

06:32all of the different descriptions of

06:34what these students have um proposed and

06:37are going to be working on so that the

06:39community can see exactly what each of

06:40these things are.

06:42Next is Sua Green Tech.

06:47[applause]

06:57Nest and Nectar is our next project

07:00awardees.

07:02[applause]

07:08Uh project number five is bike rack

07:10engineering and mural design challenge.

07:13[applause]

07:18Next is native plant fair.

07:23[applause]

07:28Our next project is supporting Redmond's

07:30nocturnal neighbors.

07:33>> [applause]

07:35>> I think we're gonna squeeze. I think you

07:37might have to stand in front of each

07:38other. We'll work all out all the

07:40pictures. Uh, next one is Aquaf Fusion.

07:44[applause]

07:50Next is Green Libraries.

07:53[applause]

07:59Our next project winner is Wild Yards.

08:03>> [applause]

08:08>> Oh, the next one. I love this title is

08:10Redmond Stoation Blackberry Busters.

08:14[applause]

08:19And next project is EcoBats.

08:23[applause]

08:27And finally, hackathon green code

08:30Redmond. [applause]

08:36And I just want to share I had the

08:38opportunity to talk to a couple of the

08:40groups as they were coming into chambers

08:42and um I am just so very impressed with

08:45the thought and um intensity of the work

08:48that they are planning on doing.

08:50extremely creative and I think uh we are

08:53just so fortunate in the city of Redmond

08:55to have such smart, engaged young adults

08:58who are willing to devote some of their

09:00time to making Redmond a better place

09:02and a more sustainable place. So with

09:04that, I want to thank you all of you.

09:06Stay up here and we're going to get a

09:08big group picture with the council. And

09:10uh once again, congratulations. Look

09:12forward to seeing more of your projects.

09:15[applause]

09:20>> [applause]

09:24>> It's okay. You're welcome.

09:46Go ahead and move.

10:08>> Okay. We're just gonna make sure we get

10:09everybody

10:23>> good.

10:35>> [applause]

10:40>> One more. Okay. Wait.

10:52And congratulations to all the moms and

10:54dads.

10:56[applause]

11:00Congratulations. I'm so excited to see

11:02what you all do.

11:05>> Thank you all. And then I think my

11:07team's gonna take you guys. Micah, you

11:09want them out in the hall? Jenny. Okay.

11:12We're gonna have all of you go that way.

11:14So you guys can come back here.

11:45All

12:00right.

12:29All right.

13:08That's a good one. Good one.

13:13Of

13:24course. Of course.

14:06It's the parks. commissioner that we're

14:09gonna

14:09>> Oh, right. Sign it.

15:02>> [laughter]

15:04>> That was very fun. What a great group of

15:06kids. Uh can't wait to see what they all

15:08do. With the rearrangement of the

15:10agenda, we have moved uh AM number

15:1321161, confirmation of appointment of

15:15new commission members. Is there someone

15:17who would like to move this item?

15:20So moved. Second. Second.

15:21>> It's been moved and seconded. All those

15:24in favor say I.

15:25>> I.

15:27>> Any opposed?

15:29>> Motion carries. And with that, we have

15:33um Do we have two members or two members

15:36here? Um one member from our parks,

15:39trails, and recreation commission and

15:42one person for our planning commission.

15:43If they could come up, um we will have

15:45you sworn in. And if you have any family

15:47or friends, they can come up and take

15:48pictures while we're doing this. And

15:49then we will congratulate you.

16:00>> Yeah. Yes. By me.

16:08>> I'll swear you in both at the same time.

16:10If you want to come over this way, I'll

16:12explain.

16:15Okay.

16:17I am the city clerk and I I'll be

16:19swearing you in today and I'll swear you

16:21in on both at the same time. I'll read

16:23it the oath. If you agree, then you say

16:25I will or I do at the end and then you

16:27sign your oaths and then after that

16:29you'll go shake hands with the mayor and

16:31council.

16:33Great. Okay.

16:35I have to be by the microphone. All

16:37right.

16:39Raise your right hands. Do you Jenny

16:42Baldwin having been duly appointed to

16:43the parks, trails, and recreation

16:45commission and Zishuan Hang having been

16:48duly appointed to the planning

16:49commission of the city of Redmond,

16:50Washington, do solemnly swear that you

16:53will faithfully and impartially perform

16:54the duties of your office as prescribed

16:56by law and to the best of your ability

16:59and that you will support and maintain

17:00the ordinances of the city of Redmond,

17:02the laws and the constitution of the

17:04state of Washington and the United

17:05States of America.

17:06>> I will.

17:07>> I will.

17:08>> Congratulations.

17:09>> Thank you. You are now sworn in. Please

17:11go ahead and sign. [applause]

17:15>> Yep. Just sign your name and I'll take

17:17care of the rest of it.

17:18>> Thank you.

17:19>> You're welcome. Congrat Congratulations.

17:20Please go shake hands with the mayor and

17:23counsel.

17:24>> Thank you.

17:50Thank you.

18:17The next item on the agenda is an

18:19executive session to evaluate the

18:20qualifications of an applicant for

18:22public employment RCW 423011G

18:25for 15 minutes. The executive session

18:28will adjourn

18:32at 7:40. Per state law, the executive

18:34session is close to the public.

18:36Executive session participants attending

18:38remotely, please leave this meeting and

18:39join the executive team's meeting.

18:42And we will be back in about 15 minutes.

18:56Heat. [music]

19:08[music]

19:15Heat.

19:20Heat. Heat.

19:28[music]

19:55>> [music]

20:04>> Hey, [music] hey, hey.

20:24>> [music]

20:26>> Heat. Heat.

20:32Heat. Heat.

20:42Heat. Heat. N.

21:11>> [music]

21:16[music]

21:32[music]

21:39[music]

21:59[music]

22:14[music]

22:20[music]

22:53[music]

23:10[music]

23:20[music]

23:27[music]

23:32[music]

23:51[music]

23:53>> I need

23:56[music]

24:01[music]

24:03you.

24:18>> [music]

24:33[music]

24:45[music]

24:56[music]

25:12>> Heat. Heat.

25:15[music]

25:20Heat. Heat.

25:35[music]

25:41Heat. Heat.

25:59[music]

27:00>> [music]

27:16[music]

28:02>> Heat.

28:05Hey, Heat.

28:24Heat. Hey, Heat.

28:31[music]

29:04>> [music]

29:15[music]

29:29[music]

29:39[music]

29:47[music]

30:11[music]

30:17[music]

30:24[music]

30:34[music]

30:45[music]

31:03[music]

31:24[music]

31:34>> Heat. Heat. [music]

31:40[music]

31:50[music]

32:03>> [music]

32:09>> Heat. Heat.

32:29>> [music]

32:45>> Heat. Heat. N. [music]

33:02[music]

33:20>> [music]

33:29[music]

33:35[music]

33:56[music]

34:10[music]

34:18[music]

34:32[music]

34:48[music]

35:08>> Heat.

35:20[music]

35:28Heat.

35:33Heat.

35:45Heat.

36:23Heat.

36:27>> [music]

36:34[music]

36:46>> The next item on the agenda is items

36:48from the audience. I have the sign-in

36:49sheet for members of the public to speak

36:51tonight. When I read your name, you will

36:52come up to the podium and have three

36:54minutes to address the council. Council

36:55members generally will not respond to

36:57comments or questions directly at the

36:58meeting. Members of the public are

37:00welcome to email the council anytime at

37:02mayor councsilman.gov. The views stated

37:04by members of the public do not

37:06represent the opinion of the city of

37:07Redmond. As a reminder, RCW29B45010

37:12prohibits any public comment during the

37:14council meeting in support or opposition

37:16of ballot propositions, measures, or

37:18candidates. All comments must pertain to

37:20the city of Redmond business as

37:21indicated on the sign-in sheet except on

37:24the subject of the public hearing. Um,

37:26and so we do have a public hearing

37:28tonight on the budget. And so I'll make

37:30sure um

37:33make sure that we're all signed up for

37:34the right things. Um, and we do also

37:36have two people signed up to speak

37:38remotely. Um, so with that, I will start

37:40with um Amanda and Eileene are the

37:45first. Uh then Laura Goodsell, then

37:48Aaron Hamilton, then Sandra Ruffner,

37:50then David Morton.

37:59>> Good evening. My name is Eileen Mcome

38:01and I am the director of housing and

38:03case management at Hopel Link. I

38:06appreciate the opportunity to speak with

38:08you this evening. Over the past year,

38:10Hopelink has served 1,688

38:13unduplicated families in Redmond.

38:16Included in that number are 41 adults

38:19and children who access housing and

38:21comprehensive case management services

38:24made possible through your continued

38:26investment and support.

38:28We have the privilege of walking

38:29alongside families, offering safe,

38:32affordable housing, individualized case

38:35management, financial coaching, and

38:38connection to community resources.

38:40Hope Link helps residents move from

38:43surviving to thriving with the goal of

38:45achieving stability and exiting poverty.

38:48Our partnership with the city of Res

38:50Redmond is vital. We are grateful for

38:53the city staff's recommendation to fund

38:55hope in the upcoming years. Thank you

38:57for prioritizing the basic needs of res

39:00Redmond's most vulnerable residents by

39:02funding housing for families

39:04experiencing homelessness. Thank you.

39:10>> Good evening. My name is Amanda Lopez

39:11Castanon and I am director of food

39:13programs at Hopelink.

39:16[clears throat]

39:17Hope serves individuals and families

39:19across North and East King County

39:21through through five service centers in

39:23Redmond, Kirkland, Belleview, Carnation,

39:25and Shoreline through nine programs

39:28including energy assistance, housing,

39:30transportation, and food assistance. Our

39:32mission is to equip people to exit

39:34poverty through comprehensive services

39:36and impactful partnerships like the one

39:38we share with the city of Redmond. Food

39:40is often a client's first point of entry

39:42into HopeLink services. For Redmond

39:45residents experiencing food insecurity,

39:47access to healthy, nutritious, and

39:49culturally re relevant food is an

39:51important first step toward stability

39:53and independence. [snorts] Not knowing

39:55where your next meal will come from

39:57creates tremendous stress. Our nocost

39:59self-choice food markets help ease that

40:02burden, allowing individuals and

40:04families to focus on other important

40:05needs and goals. Redmond residents can

40:08shop at our food markets twice a month.

40:11In fiscal year 2026, the Redmond food

40:13market served more than 3,300 res

40:16Redmond residents, providing over

40:19700,000 meals to individuals and

40:21families facing rising food cost. These

40:23numbers represent more than meals. They

40:26represent families finding relief,

40:28neighbors finding stability, and

40:30individuals finding hope. The city's

40:32continued support makes this work

40:34possible. While I work directly with our

40:36food team, I want to express my sincere

40:39gratitude for your investment in all of

40:40Hopelink's programs. The appreciation we

40:43hear from Redmond residents belongs in

40:45large part to you as well. Thank you for

40:48your partnership, your generosity, and

40:49your continued commitment to HopeLink

40:52and to the people of Redmond.

40:56>> Next is Laur Laura Goodsell, then Aaron

40:58Hamilton, then Sandra Ruffner, then

41:00David Morton.

41:07Like, am I short enough? Yes. Um, good

41:10evening, mayor and members of the city

41:11council. My name is Laura Goodsell, and

41:14I'm representing Kindering, a nonprofit

41:16neurode neurodedevelopmental center

41:18serving thousands of children and

41:20families each year, including more than

41:22500 from Redmond. Thank you for your

41:24long-standing partnership and your

41:25recent recommendation to support our

41:272027-28

41:29funding requests for families in

41:30transition and parent education and

41:33family support programs. Both programs

41:35share a fundamental belief strengthening

41:38relationships between young children and

41:40their caregivers builds a foundation for

41:43healthy development and lifelong

41:45well-being.

41:46Our families and transition program or

41:50fit as we call it supports the whole

41:52family so they can support the whole

41:53child. FIT combines specialized

41:56developmental services with

41:57relationshipbased care, care

41:59coordination, and resource navigation

42:01for families experiencing instability

42:04like homelessness. Last year, 88% of

42:07children enrolled in FIT's early support

42:09services for 6 months or longer made

42:11measurable progress in at least one

42:13skill area. The impact of this work is

42:16best told through the stories of the

42:17families we serve. One family came to

42:19kindering while living in their car with

42:21their infant. With no place to move and

42:24explore, the baby spent most of their

42:25time in their car seat. At 9 months old,

42:28the baby could not sit independently or

42:30crawl. Our fit team worked with the

42:32family to address their broader needs

42:34and adapted therapies to their

42:36circumstances and coach the parents on

42:38ways to support their children's

42:39development. Within six months, through

42:42the parents dedication and the

42:43partnership with our early support team,

42:46their child progressed from being unable

42:48to to sit to walking independently. Some

42:51fit families also participate in our

42:54free parent education and family support

42:56program, which is open to anyone who

42:58helps raise children through

43:00evidence-based traumainformed and

43:02culturally responsive classes and

43:04individual coaching. caregivers

43:07caregivers learned practical strategies

43:09to support their children's development.

43:11Last year, 100% of the survey

43:13respondents reported improvements in

43:15their parenting, teaching, and

43:17caregiving skills. Our classes also help

43:20caregivers understand the emotional

43:22experiences, motivations, and needs

43:24behind their children's behavior. This

43:26deeper understanding builds empathy and

43:28connection. It also gives parents

43:31practical ways to respond to the

43:33underlying needs rather than just the

43:35behaviors, strengthening trust in

43:37caregiver relationships. Together, these

43:40programs reflect Redmond's commitment to

43:42equity, reducing barriers to services,

43:44and investing in prevention. By reaching

43:47families early, and responding to their

43:49unique circumstances, we create more

43:51opportunities for children and families

43:53to thrive. Thank you for your continued

43:55partnership with Kindering and Redmond.

43:57for kindering and Redmond families.

43:59Thank you.

44:01>> Next is Aaron Hamilton, then Sandra

44:03Ruffner, then David Morton.

44:15For the next for the last nine years,

44:17whenever politicians come down from

44:19their towers to listen to the people, I

44:22bring up the topic of affordable

44:24housing. And I'm told the same thing

44:26every time. Be patient.

44:29Wait. And I hear you. [snorts] Like many

44:34people, I've been very patient and I've

44:37been waiting for a long time. [snorts]

44:42What? So what has happened during this

44:45patience of waiting? Rent [snorts]

44:48for affordable housing has skyrocketed.

44:50The area medium income continues to go

44:53up and the affordability level goes

44:56down.

44:57I'm done being patient and I'm done

45:01waiting and I'm done hearing we hear

45:04you. To tell someone on the verge of

45:06homelessness

45:08we hear you isn't enough. If you can't

45:11reflect back what people are upset about

45:14or struggling with, it show it sounds

45:16like you aren't listening.

45:19You have to show them what you are act

45:21what you actually heard.

45:25You have to show them what you actually

45:27heard and no one has been able to do

45:30that.

45:32I've seen the lists. I've seen

45:34representatives at council meetings and

45:37other areas from ARCH applauding each

45:40other for a job well done.

45:43They're so obsessed with data

45:46[snorts] that it makes them out of touch

45:50with actual reality

45:53and they have no clue what people are

45:55going through

45:57trying to find affordable housing.

46:00I've seen the names on the various Arch

46:02boards and the people involved in ARCH

46:05and I'm pretty sure none of them has

46:08ever depended on affordable housing to

46:11survive.

46:13I kind I equate that to a bunch of

46:15cisgendered people determining what's

46:18best for trans people. It it's not going

46:23to work out because you don't live that

46:25experience. you're not struggling.

46:31So, yeah,

46:33it's too late for me, but because it's

46:37already too late, but people are still

46:39waiting and you're not building enough.

46:43And I'm tired of people celebrating

46:45these achievements that Arch is making

46:48when we're just getting table scraps

46:51versus I've seen building after building

46:53after building being built downtown.

46:56I've seen 20 10 buildings in the span of

46:599 years from my apartment window getting

47:02built. And that is not relieving the

47:04pressure of affordable housing.

47:06It's not that complicated.

47:09build buildings, not give 5% of an

47:14apartment building to affordable

47:15housing. That's not how you fix the

47:16problem. Thank you.

47:19>> Next is Sandra Ruffner, then David

47:21Morton.

47:28>> Um, good evening. Um my name is Sandra

47:30Ruffner and I'm with the Puget Sound

47:32Micological Society and the co-chair of

47:34the Bridal Trails Survey Project which

47:37is been um surveying um the Bridal Trail

47:41State Park for the last 10 years. Um and

47:44we've been doing DNA sequencing. um we

47:46have wanted to move our project to a new

47:50area and that this spring I um entered

47:54into a series of um email exchanges with

47:57the um with the park operations um

48:00manager of the um Redmond Watershed

48:02Preserve and um there were um our our

48:05our

48:06research is very low impact um you know

48:11collecting um um fungi for you know

48:14small samples for DNA sequence ing um is

48:17like um is collecting the fruing body

48:19just like collecting an apple from a

48:21tree. Um and the the underlying mycelia

48:24is not disturbed. So, we agreed to some

48:26of the conditions. some of the um and

48:29but [clears throat] when I went to the

48:31pro one of the the conditions I agreed

48:33to was that we had to do it um we had to

48:35make our applications six weeks in

48:37advance which is somewhat tricky when

48:39you're when you're collecting funray

48:41because you um the appearance of funray

48:42is dependent on the weather and that um

48:44um but I made that agreement and then I

48:46was um attempting to to go through the

48:50pro process of making the applications

48:53um for the autumn season in the summer

48:55and discovered that there was an

48:57important certain um requirement that

48:58had not been discussed in the halfh hour

49:00um Zoom meeting and the um emails that I

49:03had which was that we were going to be

49:05charged $25 an hour per session and our

49:08sessions were talking about multiple

49:10sessions over a course of a season. Um

49:13okay so um in any event our our

49:15committee is not budgeted for um for

49:17this kind of expenditure. um um research

49:23is underfunded at the university level

49:24and citizen scientists are um coming to

49:28to bridge the gap and it's um it's it's

49:31not for you know ab abstract science.

49:33It's that the management of our

49:35parklands and our and our um wildlands

49:39depends on a knowledge of the um ecology

49:43of of of of the of this of these lands.

49:46and that um um the park shouldn't be

49:50putting barriers to um to research. Um

49:54and so I'm asking the city of Redmond to

49:57reconsider its um policy of charging $25

50:01an hour for a um citizen science group

50:05to um do research in the park.

50:09Okay.

50:13>> Next is David Morton.

50:26>> [clears throat]

50:26>> Good evening, council members and mayor.

50:28I'm David Morton. I'm speaking on

50:30consent item five, the 2027 state

50:33legislative agenda. I ask council to

50:36pull it from the consent agenda, add

50:39three short items, and then adopt it as

50:41amended. The memo says the agenda was

50:44revised after study session, including

50:47new support for the RIA 8 Salmon

50:49Recovery Council's agenda, showing that

50:52this document can take environmental

50:54additions. It can take three more

50:57tonight. First, drinking water source

50:59protection. The support issues page

51:02says, quote, Redmond monitors and

51:04protects our shallow drinking water

51:06aquifer. That describes current

51:08practice, not a request to the

51:10legislature. The acronym PAS appears

51:13once under regional priorities as a

51:16regulatory cost to be funded. Cost

51:19recovery matters, but it addresses

51:21treatment of drinking water after

51:23contamination. The the agenda should

51:26support state PAS source control,

51:28cleanup of contaminated sites, and

51:31monitoring near wells in critical

51:33aquifer recharge areas. PFOS has already

51:36been detected in wells one and two, so

51:38this is not hypothetical. Second, the

51:41livable uh affordable neighborhoods

51:44section attributes builders permitting

51:46challenges to quote state and federal

51:49environmental, utility, and

51:51infrastructure requirements that invites

51:53the legislature to loosen environmental

51:56safeguards. Please add a sentence

51:58stating clearly that Redmond is not

52:00asking to weaken protections for

52:03aquifers, streams, or critical areas.

52:06Third, trees. The agenda lists climate

52:09resilience, wildfire response, and

52:11salmon habitat. But the words tree and

52:14urban forest never appear. Tree canopy

52:17shades salmon streams, slows storm water

52:20runoff, and cools neighborhoods. Please

52:23add support for state urban forestry

52:25resources and for standards that let

52:28cities independently verify tree

52:30assessments prepared by applicant hired

52:32professionals. These are policy

52:34statements, not city spending. My

52:37additions are statements supporting

52:39policies. Finally, the maintenance and

52:42operations center request describes a

52:44sustainable facility serving clean water

52:46and disaster response and asks the state

52:50for $3 million toward the MOC project.

52:53The agenda names no s sustainability

52:56standard. If the state is asked to

52:58partner, council should say what

53:01sustainable means in this context. The

53:04agenda's vision calls for a city that

53:06quote sustains the environment. Please

53:08make Redmond's request to the state

53:11match that vision and send Redmond to

53:13Olympia ready to protect drinking water

53:15and the trees that protect the streams.

53:18Thank you.

53:20>> There are two people who have signed up

53:22to speak remotely. U first we'll call

53:24Joe Kunler and then Jennifer Bar.

53:43Hello.

53:44>> Hello. You have three minutes to address

53:46the council.

53:48>> Hi. Thank you, board member Bernie. Uh,

53:50it's Joe Cutsler, that huge Redmond TV

53:53fan, stepping away from the Seattle

53:54Seahawks game just to call in to the

53:57world's best city council. you know the

53:59one with the hate free zone. Oh, that's

54:01Redmond in Bernie Championship Hall. So,

54:05I really want to also um thank you.

54:07Thank you and for you staff for getting

54:09the web form to work today. Um I know

54:12that was a bit of a problem. Uh that's

54:14why we're having exercise Vanessa flag.

54:16You know what this like red flag where

54:18the military goes out and they practice

54:19stuff. We're kind of having that right

54:21now in the open government community.

54:23But I also need to speak to about your

54:24legislative agenda while I check the

54:26clock. Um, and uh, I I got time and you

54:30you for your legislative agenda, you

54:31need to have the public disclosure

54:33commission have new tools to strike down

54:35and repeat respondents who don't pay

54:37their fines and file their paperwork.

54:39It's time to send the PDC deserves

54:41better, please. Also, and all thoughts

54:44are mine, uh, the attorney general's

54:46office needs an open government manual

54:48that's updated to 2026. Right now, it's

54:50dated 2016. If you took your open

54:52government training, you know that's

54:54outdated. So, please make that a

54:55priority. Also, I recommend you have

54:58annual training exercises for planning

55:00officers and clerks. Yes. I want every

55:04city to have a hatefree zone just like

55:06Redmond. Yeah.

55:10And um you know, we also need to train

55:12people how to comply with public

55:14meetings laws so we can have an exercise

55:16finess. Um, I also want to say very

55:19briefly and very carefully that I want

55:20to congratulate you on your hate free

55:22zone holding up uh against the the

55:24issues in the last meeting and I was

55:27wrong when I sent an email. You were

55:29right. You prevailed. Congratulations.

55:31In conclusion, I want to share very very

55:32carefully. I hope everyone has already

55:34voted by using a dropbox. Second, I hope

55:37Redmond and especially your real awesome

55:39city council believes in your awesome

55:41self. And I want to say with an

55:44additional minute left, what a privilege

55:46and honor it has been to stick up for

55:48you. What a responsibility and what an

55:52honor to learn from you. You Redmond

55:55have showed the way how to deal with

55:57hate. And now Zimmerman is excluded not

56:00just from from Redmond but from Kirkland

56:03as well and other places like Sound

56:06Transit thanks to the courageous actions

56:08of this Sound Transit board member

56:10Bernie. And yes, I'm a Sound Transit 12.

56:14>> [laughter]

56:15>> Um with uh 30 seconds left um I u really

56:21hope that you realize the guys like I

56:22who've worked on the public meetings act

56:24who've worked on you know cover public

56:26records issues that it's important that

56:28we have places we can point to and say

56:30look at those studs they're getting it

56:32done they're certainly getting it done

56:33better than the Seattle Seahawks against

56:34the Chicago Bears right now and maybe

56:36the Seattle Seahawks should sign Vanessa

56:38Critzer to a contract. Um, however, my

56:41time is running out, so I just want to

56:42say thanks for calling me board member

56:43Bernie. You rock and so is the Redmond

56:45City Council. Thank you. Go Redmond.

56:50>> Next is Jennifer Bar.

57:28Your call has been forwarded to

57:30voicemail. the person you're trying.

57:35>> Try one more time.

58:26Your call has been forwarded to

58:27voicemail.

58:29>> Um, we will not be able to have um,

58:32Jennifer Bar make public comment tonight

58:33because we cannot get a hold of her.

58:35Items from the audience is now closed.

58:37Our next item of business is the consent

58:39agenda. Is there a motion to approve the

58:40consent agenda?

58:41>> So moved. Is there a second?

58:44It's been moved and seconded. And just a

58:45reminder, we already passed item number

58:47four. Are there any items to be pulled?

58:51>> Seeing

58:54Did you Did you want to pull it? Oh,

58:56>> I am so sorry, Mayor. No. [laughter]

58:58>> Thank you. I didn't think so, but I just

59:00want to make sure. Um, this is a voice

59:02vote. All those in favor say I.

59:04>> I.

59:05>> I.

59:05>> Any oppose say nay.

59:08>> Motion carries unanimously. And with

59:10that, we have approved a new HR director

59:13named Truck Dver. We are really excited

59:15to have her on board and she will be

59:17here uh soon. I think on the 17th to get

59:20sworn in. So, thank you all. Um, next

59:24item.

59:24>> There she is. She's online.

59:25>> Oh, she is online. Yay.

59:28Welcome to Team Redmond. We're so

59:30excited to have you. Um, our next Let's

59:33Make sure I'm doing this right. Our next

59:35item, Make sure I did anything. Yeah.

59:38Our next item of business is a public

59:39hearing on the preliminary 2027 2028

59:42bienial budget. The public hearing is

59:44now open. I have the sign-in sheet for

59:46members of the public to speak in person

59:48tonight. When I call your name, you'll

59:49come up to the podium and have three

59:50minutes to address the council on the

59:52subject of the public hearing. There are

59:54two people to speak tonight and one

59:57person has signed up to speak remotely.

59:59Um um I will call you up, Aaron Hamilton

1:00:01and then David Martin.

1:00:17Well, I didn't finish writing this, so

1:00:19here we go. Uh, I wanted to speak about

1:00:23the funding for community-based

1:00:25organization engagement line item in the

1:00:28budget. Uh, I'm not entirely sure what

1:00:31types of programs or activities would

1:00:33qualify for this funding, but it would

1:00:36be nice if it could be used to help pay

1:00:38community members that offer services to

1:00:40the city, like uh, for example, the

1:00:44training and engagement initiatives that

1:00:46I have helped get off the ground here in

1:00:48Redmond. Um, it would be nice to get

1:00:51paid for that, even though, you know,

1:00:53the information is more important than

1:00:56money, but

1:00:58with my particular predicament right

1:01:00now, getting paid would be nice. Um, I

1:01:03think it's important to have funding

1:01:05funding set aside for little projects

1:01:08like this. Um, and I have kind of like a

1:01:12story that kind of like provides a good

1:01:14reasoning for that. Um, when I was

1:01:17talking to someone about the training

1:01:19that I do with law enforcement and the

1:01:21advisor advis advising work that I do

1:01:24with law enforcement, uh, and how I do

1:01:26it voluntarily, uh, they got very mad

1:01:29and upset. Obviously, I asked why it

1:01:32made it so mad, and they told me it was

1:01:35because if it was training for anything

1:01:38else, they would have gotten paid, but

1:01:41when it comes to anything involving

1:01:43marginalized communities, it's expected

1:01:45to be free. And I thought that was very

1:01:48ini insightful. I know it's probably

1:01:52Sorry, this is a train wreck, but it's

1:01:54okay. [snorts]

1:01:56If this is a funding pool that can help

1:01:59fund community initiatives like mine, it

1:02:02would show that the city sees the value

1:02:04of community-led engagement and

1:02:07initiatives as the community members do.

1:02:11Hopefully that made sense. I wish I

1:02:14wrote it. I wish I finished it earlier.

1:02:16Thank you.

1:02:20Next is David Martin.

1:02:38Good evening, council members and mayor.

1:02:40I'm David Morton. Thank you for posting

1:02:42the public comment matrices before each

1:02:45budget deliberation. Three requests I've

1:02:48made since August still do not appear in

1:02:50the issues matrix or the deliberation

1:02:53matrix. First, PAS. On October 22nd,

1:02:56Director Stinganger said staff are

1:02:58costing soil testing within the Evans

1:03:01Creek project where testing is

1:03:03authorized and warranted using existing

1:03:06funds within the 2025 to 2026 budget.

1:03:10Please confirm that sufficient funding

1:03:12exists in the 2025 to 2026 budget for

1:03:16testing before ground is disturbed,

1:03:19including testing the groundwater and

1:03:21extending to the 2013 allwood recycling

1:03:24fire site. That site is about a mile and

1:03:27a half from wells one and two where PFOS

1:03:30is already present at roughly five parts

1:03:32per trillion. And please publish the

1:03:35results. Second, trees. I'm grateful for

1:03:38the urban forestry program

1:03:40administrator, but director Hamilton

1:03:43described a strategy role, not a

1:03:45certified arborist, and the five parks

1:03:48arborists review applicant reports only

1:03:51when planning raises a question that's

1:03:54exceptionbased. Will the tree code

1:03:56define when city arborist review is

1:03:59required, such as for contested or

1:04:01high-V value tree removals? How much

1:04:04parks arborist time is funded for permit

1:04:06review? Please set a date for deciding

1:04:09on additional arborist capacity. Third,

1:04:13keep the $2.44 million environmental

1:04:16sustainability package whole. There's no

1:04:18proposal to cut it. Please keep it that

1:04:21way. Now, other matters. The

1:04:23deliberation matrix lists House Bill

1:04:252015 as not approved yet. The October

1:04:2927th presentation counted about $5.5

1:04:32million in new funding capacity from it,

1:04:35including an e-mobility coordinator,

1:04:37fire apparatus, and facility reserves.

1:04:40Before adoption, please say which of

1:04:42those remain funded and from what. Staff

1:04:46report that the MOC already holds $20.7

1:04:49million in contingency, while the matrix

1:04:52proposes raising its budget by $18.5

1:04:55million. Holding at 250 million until

1:04:59January's adjustment seems prudent.

1:05:01Staff estimate that adopting both new

1:05:04sales taxes would add about $184 per

1:05:08household annually.

1:05:10Please tie every change to a named

1:05:12outcome and its household cost on trees

1:05:15and drinking water. Trees cannot be

1:05:18regrown overnight and contaminated

1:05:20groundwater is hard to clean up. So,

1:05:23please have qualified independent

1:05:25experts check the facts before the city

1:05:27makes decisions that can't be undone.

1:05:30Thank you.

1:05:33>> One person has signed up to speak

1:05:35remotely, Joe Kunsler.

1:06:02Hello.

1:06:03>> You have three minutes to address the

1:06:05council for our budget hearing. Thank

1:06:07you.

1:06:08>> Well, no. Thank you, Mayor Bernie. It's

1:06:11your old counselor. Um, I I appreciate

1:06:14you pulling me away from the Bears

1:06:16decimation of the Seahawks. Um, about

1:06:19your budget this year, um, you need to

1:06:21put in your Pentagon budget, um, a few

1:06:23things. And one of the things you need

1:06:25to put in your budget in the strongest

1:06:27possible terms, um, is, um, you know,

1:06:31providing training to other local

1:06:33governments to be as excellent as

1:06:34Redmond. Uh, that's really important.

1:06:37you know, we saw um you know, when

1:06:40communities struggle to deal with issues

1:06:41around open meetings and public records

1:06:43that can lead to harassment and

1:06:46litigation, both things I would like to

1:06:48see prevented as an open government

1:06:49watchdog. You know, I'd like to see more

1:06:51people participate um in the community

1:06:55and in our public comment processes um

1:06:58who don't look like me or sound like me.

1:07:00And I'm a white uh heterosexual male,

1:07:02just so that's out there. Um but that

1:07:04isn't the point. The boys is that we

1:07:06have inclusion.

1:07:08And um with and good I got more time.

1:07:12Just checking the clock on my phone. Um

1:07:14you know I also want to add as if we

1:07:16talk about uh the Redmond budget that

1:07:18you badly need more bus shelters and you

1:07:22also need to make a monument to your

1:07:24hatefree zone. And um because the

1:07:27election's tomorrow, I can't say on here

1:07:29who I think the monument should be named

1:07:32after. I don't think that's appropriate.

1:07:33I'm going to choke on that one.

1:07:35Um, I'm going to instead say very very

1:07:38carefully that um I think we should have

1:07:42a monument to the the the angel who

1:07:45built the hatefree zone and um really

1:07:48show young people the the courage,

1:07:50conviction, uh character and cunning

1:07:54necessary to uh stand up to Alex

1:07:57Zimmerman's attacks and utter purveyors

1:07:59of hate. Um it's not easy. It's not easy

1:08:03to have a gentleman on your right wing

1:08:05say that certain politicians that are

1:08:07your friends aren't getting the job done

1:08:10and stand up to him and be proven right.

1:08:14And I think it's important that that be

1:08:15said before it's too late. And too late

1:08:18is November 18th.

1:08:21Um, I uh really hope that we could also

1:08:25encourage people to plant roast bushes

1:08:28uh and uh other plants to um really help

1:08:32absorb carbon emissions and be able to

1:08:34give gifts to one another and help help

1:08:37replace hate with love and mutual

1:08:39respect and and candandor. U I think

1:08:43that's important. I I think it's

1:08:45important that we build back better from

1:08:48the political division and divides we

1:08:51have right now as Americans, we should

1:08:53be able to come together as one. And I

1:08:54believe Redmond is the model city and

1:08:56the city upon the hill. Um, and I just

1:09:00hope in and my time's about to run out,

1:09:03so I just ask you please believe in

1:09:04yourselves because Redmond, you're the

1:09:06standard and that we can continue to

1:09:08achieve great things. That's been my

1:09:10message all along. Thank you for your

1:09:11public service. I think my time's up.

1:09:13>> Your time is up. Thank you.

1:09:15>> God bless. Thanks.

1:09:20>> The public hearing is now closed. Our

1:09:22next item of business is a staff report

1:09:24is uh a status update on downtown

1:09:26adaptive signal control project. Paul

1:09:29Cho, engineering manager, will introduce

1:09:31this item.

1:09:52Okay, while Hidemi is queuing up the

1:09:55presentation here, um,

1:09:59see. Good evening, Mayor, members of

1:10:02council, and the Redmond community. My

1:10:05name is Paul Cho, and I'm the city

1:10:07traffic engineer overseeing traffic

1:10:09safety engineering. With me tonight is

1:10:12Hidemi Suru, senior engineer

1:10:14specializing in traffic signal

1:10:16operations. I will provide a summary of

1:10:19the downtown adapted signal project and

1:10:21then we'll hand off to Hidemi to go over

1:10:23the before and after study of the system

1:10:26and look at the upcoming Overlake

1:10:28project. Next slide.

1:10:34The project was more than a simple

1:10:36signal upgrade. It involved deploying

1:10:38two distinct new technologies, adaptive

1:10:41signal control and multimodal detection,

1:10:44each with its own hardware, software

1:10:47configuration, testing, optimization,

1:10:50and staff learning requirements.

1:10:54Similar to switching from an iPhone to

1:10:56an Android phone with specialized

1:10:58features, the basic functions are

1:11:00similar, but getting the most out of the

1:11:02new technology requires time, training,

1:11:05hands-on experience.

1:11:07The project improved corridor

1:11:09performance and delivered measurable

1:11:11transit and environmental benefits. And

1:11:13the system greatly reduce the need for

1:11:15laborintensive manual signal timing.

1:11:29Okay.

1:11:30In July of 2024, this project was

1:11:33presented to city council ahead of the

1:11:35project kickoff. The system Qfree shown

1:11:38here in red was deployed along Redmond

1:11:41Way from 160th Avenue at the west end to

1:11:44East Lake Seamish Parkway at the east

1:11:46end. Multimodal detection system

1:11:50denoted in gray provides enhanced

1:11:53detection for cyclists, pedestrians, and

1:11:56continuous traffic counts.

1:11:58Okay, next slide.

1:12:02Traditionally, traffic signal timing was

1:12:04based on historical traffic data and

1:12:06required periodical periodic manual

1:12:09updates to individual intersections. The

1:12:11adaptive signal system shifts from that

1:12:14static approach to one that continuously

1:12:16evaluates realtime traffic conditions

1:12:19and adjusts operations throughout the

1:12:21day to better respond to actual demand.

1:12:24and Hidemi is going to uh provide

1:12:27information from the before and after

1:12:29study.

1:12:36Right. After the adaptive system was

1:12:38deployed, a before and after study was

1:12:39conducted to compare data with the

1:12:41system turned on and off. The results

1:12:43show that the adaptive system is

1:12:45actively adjusting cycle lengths and

1:12:46reallocating green time to optimize

1:12:48corridor progression. The most

1:12:50significant adjustments occur when

1:12:52conditions are changing, especially

1:12:53during midday and transitional periods

1:12:55leading up to the afternoon rush hour.

1:12:57This chart shows cycle lengths at a

1:12:59sample intersection. As you can see, the

1:13:01cycle lengths are actually changing

1:13:02throughout the day depending on demand.

1:13:05Quarter travel times were maintained or

1:13:07improved, showing that the system is

1:13:08supporting progression across Redmond

1:13:10Way. In order to optimize uh quarter

1:13:13progression, there may be some

1:13:14trade-offs at the intersection level,

1:13:15but the metrics show that the overall

1:13:17progression has improved. The study also

1:13:19showed that transit transit performance

1:13:21improved. The largest improvements

1:13:23occurred during the weekday PM period

1:13:25when average delay decreased by

1:13:27approximately 7 seconds per eastbound

1:13:29trip and nearly 3 seconds per westbound

1:13:31trip. CO2 emission savings were also

1:13:34calculated based on travel time

1:13:35reductions. Planning level estimates

1:13:37showed a total reduction of

1:13:39approximately 2.5 metric tons of CO2

1:13:41emissions per average weekday. This is

1:13:44the environmental equivalent of taking

1:13:45an average vehicle off the road for half

1:13:48a year. The last benefit we would like

1:13:50to highlight is a savings in time staff

1:13:52by reducing the need for manual signal

1:13:54retiming. Sign signal retiming is

1:13:57complex and labor intensive for

1:13:59corridors such as Redinway with a lot of

1:14:01conflicting cross traffic could take

1:14:03about 3 to six months to manually

1:14:04optimize the signal timing and even then

1:14:07it would be based on historical traffic

1:14:08counts.

1:14:10Moving forward, staff can now focus on

1:14:12fine-tuning the signal timing by

1:14:14adjusting how the system prioritizes

1:14:16movements and directions, how fast the

1:14:18system responds to changing conditions,

1:14:20and what kind of trigger or events

1:14:22trigger the changes.

1:14:29So, moving on, with any project, there

1:14:31are lessons learned that we can apply to

1:14:32future projects. When working with new

1:14:35technology, the project should verify

1:14:37that different hardware components are

1:14:38compatible with each other and with

1:14:40their environment. In the lab, hardware

1:14:42can be tested in a controlled and an

1:14:44ideal environment. But in reality, once

1:14:46it's installed in a signal cabinet, in

1:14:48the field, um, in the elements,

1:14:50connected to City Redmond communication

1:14:52network, PSC power, the programming may

1:14:54behave differently and unintended issues

1:14:56may come up. In addition for future

1:14:59projects, we will ensure the project

1:15:01requirements includes a thorough issue

1:15:03identification and resolution process to

1:15:05ensure issues are resolved in a timely

1:15:07and consistent manner. Finally,

1:15:10deployment of two new different

1:15:11technologies require significant staff

1:15:13time for installing, configuring,

1:15:15testing, and training. For future

1:15:17projects, staff will uh develop the

1:15:20schedule to better align with other

1:15:21priorities as well as a signals

1:15:22maintenance work plan. Staff will also

1:15:25consider contracting portions of the

1:15:26project to ensure the project can be

1:15:28completed on schedule.

1:15:31As we wrap up the project, several

1:15:32recommendations have been identified

1:15:34that could be applied for the next phase

1:15:36of adaptive deployment.

1:15:39The adaptive system is not a

1:15:40plug-and-play system. Ongoing

1:15:42fine-tuning of the settings at both the

1:15:44quarter level and at individual

1:15:45intersections is highly recommended to

1:15:47identify potential areas of improvement.

1:15:49As described in the previous slide,

1:15:51routine monitoring of signal performance

1:15:53data is also recommended to help stay

1:15:55staff stay in tune with the health of

1:15:56the trap signals and track and monitor

1:15:59any emerging issues. The system does not

1:16:01automatic automatically track metrics

1:16:03and make changes. So staff will need to

1:16:05schedule routine checks on the

1:16:06performance data and determine if any

1:16:08changes need to be made. Another

1:16:11recommendation is to expand the use of

1:16:12the multimmoal detection system. For

1:16:15example, the system could provide a

1:16:16longer crossing time for a pedestrian

1:16:18who just needs a few more seconds to

1:16:20cross, someone who starts to cross late,

1:16:22or a group of pedestrians who may be

1:16:23walking slower than the average walking

1:16:25speed.

1:16:30So, the overlay adaptive signals project

1:16:32will also install the two uh same techn

1:16:35or similar technologies as the downtown

1:16:37project. Um, however, there will be a

1:16:39more in-depth evaluation of the

1:16:41multimodal detection system and their

1:16:43capabilities. The project will pilot the

1:16:46new feature that would detect crossing

1:16:47pedestrians in real time and tell the

1:16:49signal to hold the red light for a few

1:16:51extra seconds to allow pedestrians to

1:16:52finish crossing if needed.

1:16:55This map shows proposed locations for

1:16:57these technologies along Northeast 40th

1:16:59Street, 148th Avenue Northeast, and

1:17:02156th Avenue Northeast. Uh these

1:17:05locations are preliminary and may be

1:17:06adjusted depending on the overall scope

1:17:08and budget.

1:17:13As the downtown project is wrapping up,

1:17:15we are now starting to scope out the

1:17:16overlake project. Um we have kind of a

1:17:19high highle project timeline here. So

1:17:21deployment of the new technologies is

1:17:22planned for 2027 and 2028 with the

1:17:26project wrapping up in 2029.

1:17:33>> Okay. So to wrap things up, the project

1:17:35was success uh was a successful

1:17:36demonstration of uh adaptive technology

1:17:40and its value to Redmond. Uh the team

1:17:43learned a lot during this initial uh

1:17:45deployment. Uh we have to remember that

1:17:48the same resources of engineers and

1:17:50maintenance staff were the same ones

1:17:52that uh built the ped scramble phase

1:17:55ahead of light rail and FIFA activities

1:17:58and then also uh deploy um such

1:18:02technologies as uh leading pedestrian

1:18:04intervals for uh pedestrian safety. So

1:18:08hopefully um we'll have a little better

1:18:11learning curve for the Overlink project

1:18:14uh using the lessons learned from this

1:18:16project. Uh but we definitely support

1:18:18it. Um and uh we know that uh

1:18:22fine-tuning uh the system uh will help

1:18:26ensure that we maximize the long-term

1:18:28benefits.

1:18:31And with that um thank you for your

1:18:33attention.

1:18:34>> Well, thank you both so much. Um, really

1:18:36exciting. I love hearing the data, not

1:18:38just around time savings for families,

1:18:40but also um, greenhouse gas savings,

1:18:43too. I just love that you tied those two

1:18:44together. Questions from the council.

1:18:46Council President,

1:18:48>> thank you so much. Uh, Paul and

1:18:49[clears throat] Hidemi, really

1:18:50appreciate your uh, your team's work on

1:18:53this. This has been a long time coming

1:18:54in the city of Redmond and to have these

1:18:56initial results to help inform uh,

1:18:59future projects around the city is

1:19:00really exciting. I'll also note for the

1:19:03uh listening public and the rest of the

1:19:04council that earlier tonight the members

1:19:07of of the council who are also serving

1:19:09on the board of supervisors for the

1:19:11community facilities district with

1:19:12Microsoft um had a brief touch on this

1:19:15topic as well as part of a touch on our

1:19:17overall projects. I do have a question

1:19:19for Paul and Hidemi um and it's on the

1:19:22project map for Overlake uh the Overlake

1:19:24adaptive signals project map. I don't

1:19:27know if we're able to go back to that

1:19:28one. Thank you so much. Um, I was

1:19:30wondering if we could take a little bit

1:19:31of time to understand um the uh how the

1:19:36community facilities district, the

1:19:38partnership with Microsoft is helping to

1:19:40deliver some of these adapted signals.

1:19:43And then I was also curious to learn

1:19:44more about um the light blue circles um

1:19:48on the south end of the city. It looks

1:19:51like these are adaptive signals that

1:19:52exist through a partnership already with

1:19:55the city of Belleview. Um but they're on

1:19:5724th Street. So, I was a little bit um

1:20:01confused because that still is within

1:20:02our city limits and um just interested

1:20:04in hearing more about Belleview as a

1:20:06partner in making this overall um

1:20:09ecosystem of adaptive signals work as

1:20:11well.

1:20:15general.

1:20:23>> So, um uh with the uh partnership with

1:20:27Belleview, so the city of Belleview has

1:20:29invested pretty heavily into an adaptive

1:20:32system of their own. Uh it's it's

1:20:34actually very complex and so we would

1:20:37have very difficult time working with

1:20:39them. Now we can uh in the future look

1:20:42at a means where uh our system or their

1:20:46system can provide some triggers uh so

1:20:49that uh we're not conflicting with each

1:20:51other's timings. Another jurisdiction

1:20:53that uh we would be working with and uh

1:20:56try to negotiate with is uh state

1:20:58department of transportation. So they

1:21:00have um signals at the offramps at uh

1:21:03northeast 51st street and northeast 40th

1:21:06street. And so, um, we're going to be

1:21:09looking into, uh, Belleview's

1:21:11relationship with WASHDOT and how

1:21:13they've taken over some operations and

1:21:16maintenance of the signals at the ramp.

1:21:19And I believe that uh, we're ready to

1:21:22start looking uh, exploring that to see

1:21:24if that's right for Redmond.

1:21:26>> Thank you. I do appreciate that. And,

1:21:28um, along 148th, that makes a lot of

1:21:31sense to me. I'm still not clear on the

1:21:33on the map. um the the

1:21:36um signals on 24th are within the

1:21:39Redmond city limits. So I'm curious um

1:21:43if that is existing Belleview

1:21:44infrastructure within our city limits or

1:21:46that's uh something that we're

1:21:48interested in pursuing a partnership

1:21:49with in the future. So those signals

1:21:51that are denoted on the map are um owned

1:21:54and maintained by city of Belleview. Um

1:21:57and and so they're linked into their

1:22:00adaptive system and so um folks that are

1:22:04traveling that area will still realize

1:22:06that adaptive um uh benefit. Um we have

1:22:11uh 151st and 152nd is uh city of Redmond

1:22:15owned and maintained signals. uh in

1:22:18between Belleview signals. And so for a

1:22:21time we tried uh doing um a cooperative

1:22:24agreement where we um put Belleview's

1:22:28technology into our uh traffic signal

1:22:31cabinet and uh we were a user off of

1:22:34Belleview's system and what it turned

1:22:37out is that um uh the technology was so

1:22:40different that uh we had difficulty in

1:22:43responding to emergencies because um

1:22:46Belleview's staff uh were not um

1:22:51familiar with Redmond's hardware and uh

1:22:54Redmond staff um didn't understand how

1:22:57to interface or or make changes with the

1:22:59Belleview system. And so um uh we

1:23:03reverted back to each agency uh

1:23:05maintaining their own signals again, but

1:23:08uh we're going to take another look at

1:23:09um how we want to operate this

1:23:12especially in light of the um uh uh

1:23:15growth in that area.

1:23:17>> Thank you Paul. I really appreciate uh

1:23:18the chance to better understand all of

1:23:20the partners uh that it takes to pull

1:23:22off this project in Over Lake. Thank

1:23:23you.

1:23:24>> Any other questions for the team

1:23:26tonight?

1:23:28>> Well, Edelcini, thank you so much. This

1:23:30is really very interesting. Looking

1:23:31forward to seeing the progression in

1:23:33Over Lake and and as um the council

1:23:35president mentioned, it's complicated

1:23:37when we're we have other jurisdictions

1:23:38with different systems. So, um look

1:23:40forward to continuing to work that out

1:23:42to make sure we're getting good travel

1:23:43times. So, thank you.

1:23:45>> Thank you.

1:23:45>> Thank you. Our

1:23:48next item of business is is uh ombbuzz

1:23:51reports. Uh we have for the month of

1:23:54October, we'll have council vice

1:23:55president Nova Kamina finish up and then

1:23:57for the month of November is council

1:24:00member Percy.

1:24:02>> Thank you. Well, the last week of

1:24:03November has definitely been a busy one

1:24:05as we were celebrating Halloween de Muto

1:24:08Sin and Dvali. Um over the last couple

1:24:11of weeks, the council has been um we've

1:24:15heard from community members on

1:24:17invitations and information regarding

1:24:19the residency event with Columbia

1:24:20Choirs. Um a community member inquiring

1:24:23about a DOT pilot program that allows

1:24:26for transportation of wheelchairs uh and

1:24:29wheelchairbound patients being

1:24:31transported

1:24:32um and whether or not Redmond has this

1:24:35capability.

1:24:36um as the wheelchairs are not able to go

1:24:39on the back of uh of an EMS. Had another

1:24:43community member reach out um to help

1:24:47the community understand how

1:24:49verification will work in practice while

1:24:51the tree canopy plan is rew rewritten,

1:24:55pardon me. Another community member

1:24:58reached out uh with concerns with public

1:25:01safety um in downtown Redmond. had

1:25:04another complaint from a community

1:25:05member from gas leaf blowers and the

1:25:08impact that it has on our environment.

1:25:10Uh community member reached out for

1:25:13around perceived conflict of interest in

1:25:15public safety technology.

1:25:18Council also heard from a a resident on

1:25:21accessibility concerns. Um there's a

1:25:25development sign that they were asking

1:25:27about up at Village Square on 85th and

1:25:31uh suggested that we take a look at

1:25:34completing the north south midblock

1:25:36trail similar to what we have with the

1:25:38east west midblock trail. Another

1:25:41community member reached out asking

1:25:43about a Axon Fusen core pricing

1:25:45discrepancy uh and sent an example of uh

1:25:49an increase for two additional Fus core

1:25:52devices. Another community member asked

1:25:55about Redmond's real-time surveillance

1:25:57and police budget.

1:26:00Um council heard from Lake Washington

1:26:03Tech in with an invitation for the

1:26:05Bright Futures coffee kickoff. let them

1:26:08know that each individual council member

1:26:09will be getting back with their

1:26:11availability.

1:26:12Um, for me as an individual, I attended

1:26:16a community dinner at Redmond

1:26:17Presbyterian, attended trunk or treat

1:26:20with here on municipal campus with

1:26:22several of my colleagues, um, and also

1:26:25Devali for with Round Glass. And that's

1:26:28the end of my onboards on report, pardon

1:26:31me. Right. Thank you so much, Council

1:26:33Member Parsy.

1:26:35Yeah, I received um updates in the short

1:26:38time um for this week. Um we received

1:26:42information about noise and light

1:26:43pollution, leaf blower noise um concern

1:26:46a resident who was concerned about

1:26:48public safety and a specific resident in

1:26:51Redmond who um potentially concerned

1:26:55them. Um also received information about

1:26:59uh questions with construction plans for

1:27:0140th for bike lanes.

1:27:04Right. Thank you. Any other ombbuds

1:27:06reports this evening?

1:27:11All right. Are there any committee

1:27:13reports?

1:27:14Council member Foresight.

1:27:17>> Thank you. Um I chaired my final East

1:27:21Trail meeting as co-chair. Um, it's been

1:27:24an honor to serve in that role for the

1:27:26last two years, and I'm very excited to

1:27:28share that, uh, Council Member Evans

1:27:31from Woodenville will be serving as the

1:27:33co-chair along with Council Member

1:27:34Beluchcci in the next, uh, 2-year cycle,

1:27:37which it's a little off cycle. We do it

1:27:39at the end of October and it lasts for

1:27:42two years after that. Um, but we talked

1:27:45about visioning for East Trail,

1:27:47realigning our vision statements. Uh,

1:27:50talked about how we fund the project

1:27:52into the future and potentially looking

1:27:54at um those investments and how those

1:27:59will be pushed into the future,

1:28:01especially with the Snowomish section um

1:28:03being in early stages of development.

1:28:06And uh it was just a really great

1:28:08meeting and honor to serve um as the

1:28:11co-chair.

1:28:11>> Great. Well, thank you so much and thank

1:28:13you for representing Redmond so well as

1:28:15co-chair and look forward to your

1:28:16continued work on the east trail, but

1:28:18it's a it's been an amazing project. So,

1:28:20thank you. Any other committee reports?

1:28:23Council member Sony,

1:28:26we hit parks and environment

1:28:27sustainability last meeting of this year

1:28:30and uh we discussed about parks and

1:28:32recreations impact fee update. uh there

1:28:35was a final contract uh like you to

1:28:37approve the final contract and accept

1:28:39construction for the teen center

1:28:40demolition project which just got

1:28:42approved today and there was discussion

1:28:44on the teen center uh with the full

1:28:47project update that was provided by

1:28:49director Hamilton. Uh we discussed about

1:28:52derby days 2026 and the events recap and

1:28:55Redmond lights 2026 preview. There was

1:28:58also an update to uh the pay plan

1:29:00updates which will be further discussed

1:29:02in the budget. Apart from this um did

1:29:05attended one Redmond annual meetings and

1:29:07the spotlight award event for our

1:29:09Redmond based businesses and the

1:29:11nonprofits and congratulations to all

1:29:13the winners those who received their

1:29:14awards and uh this is this is what is

1:29:17making our community so good and our

1:29:19economic development possible. They're

1:29:21really important. Was joined by Mayor

1:29:23Bernie Council President Stewart Vice

1:29:25President Kamina and Council Member

1:29:26Foresight. also attended the ribbon

1:29:28cutting for J Crew Factory outlet along

1:29:31with council member Critzer and

1:29:32Foresight. And then there was uh you

1:29:35know it was so good to see everyone out

1:29:37there for trunk or treat at the city

1:29:38hall like all the excited community

1:29:40members and young kids dressed up in

1:29:42their best uh costumes that they can

1:29:44bring. Uh this is really exciting and

1:29:46this is what brings our community

1:29:47together and uh celebrate some of these

1:29:50festivals. Uh this week is uh Diwali uh

1:29:54festival. So I just want to wish

1:29:55everybody those who are going to

1:29:57celebrate Diwali a very very happy

1:29:59Diwali.

1:30:00>> Thank you so much. Other committee

1:30:02reports uh I'll go with council member

1:30:04Kitzer and then council member Pria.

1:30:08>> Thank you. Uh my my colleagues have

1:30:10mentioned many events uh and gatherings

1:30:13that we've been at together. It's been

1:30:14wonderful to be out in community and and

1:30:16do want to wish all of our uh community

1:30:18members who are celebrating a happy

1:30:20Dvali. um really great to be able to to

1:30:22go to a community event um this past uh

1:30:25weekend um to be able to celebrate with

1:30:27folks and and be able to especially hear

1:30:29some of our youth in the community um

1:30:31talk about what what their culture and

1:30:32heritage really means to them. So um

1:30:35I'll also uh just note been a very busy

1:30:38time uh in our budget process. Hopefully

1:30:41everyone's been following that, but have

1:30:43been meeting multiple times a week to

1:30:45keep the process going well with council

1:30:47leadership with um with our finance

1:30:50staff and just want to give them some

1:30:51extra gratitude for for all that work

1:30:53and to the council through this process.

1:30:55Um and we will be having another uh

1:30:57special deliberations meeting on

1:30:59Thursday. Uh but uh have been preparing

1:31:02um to make sure that hopefully we'll be

1:31:04able to get through all the remaining

1:31:05items this Thursday and really looking

1:31:07forward to that with council. And I

1:31:09don't want to step on council member

1:31:10Praa's toes, but I will note that we've

1:31:12also been very busy the last couple

1:31:14weeks on our tenant protection

1:31:15subcommittee um being able to to both

1:31:18bring forward uh additional

1:31:20recommendations, options to council and

1:31:22then since then uh working to be able to

1:31:25um update on the proviso um and to make

1:31:28sure that we're getting feedback from

1:31:30advocates and community members on that.

1:31:32Um, and I will pause here in case uh,

1:31:34Council Member Proria, our chair of our

1:31:36committee, also wants to share, but I

1:31:37will say it's been a good bulk of of

1:31:39work over the last uh, couple weeks.

1:31:42>> Thank you, Council Member Pria.

1:31:46>> Yeah, I think uh, Council Member Critzer

1:31:48mostly covered it, but um, just wanted

1:31:50to give council a heads up that based

1:31:52off of council direction last Thursday,

1:31:55uh, we've been at work drafting the

1:31:56budget proviso and meeting with

1:31:58stakeholders to get feedback on that. Uh

1:32:00we expect to share that out in the next

1:32:02um day maybe two with the full council.

1:32:07>> Thank Thank you. Any other committee

1:32:09reports? Council president.

1:32:12>> Thank you. Uh well immediately following

1:32:14the wonderful one Redmond celebration,

1:32:16Mayor Bernie and I attended the Puget

1:32:18Sound Regional Council Executive Board

1:32:20meeting and I have already shared

1:32:22materials uh from that gathering with

1:32:24the council. We had a really helpful

1:32:27report uh from staff. The title of the

1:32:29report was housing production are we on

1:32:32track and the report detailed up until

1:32:35this moment since the beginning of the

1:32:37planning period in 2019 how have we as a

1:32:40region been performing? The short answer

1:32:42is that the region is on track and

1:32:45slightly ahead of ontrack in part

1:32:47because of some really wonderful work uh

1:32:50to produce housing in a couple of core

1:32:52cities including Redmond. In fact, um it

1:32:57was a very humbling day to see the

1:32:58success of Redmond um to date uh being

1:33:01presented at that meeting along with

1:33:03some other cities. So much more work to

1:33:05do to continue to deliver and to

1:33:08continue to have a steady uh rate of

1:33:10progress, but was a very uh humbling

1:33:13morning and I really appreciated uh the

1:33:15chance to share those materials with the

1:33:17council as well. Earlier today, I

1:33:19attended the Association of Washington

1:33:21Cities Legislative Priorities Committee.

1:33:23We are continuing to meet ahead of the

1:33:25um the session. At this point, we are

1:33:27beginning to um

1:33:31inform possible strategies based on what

1:33:34may be introduced in the legislative

1:33:36session. Um, the one update that is

1:33:39concrete enough that um, I'm able to to

1:33:42share back with the council today, we

1:33:44talked a little bit in our discussion

1:33:45with Lindsay Masters earlier today in

1:33:47committee um, regarding some of the

1:33:50planning for housing uh, challenges and

1:33:52the lively conversation that's happening

1:33:53regionally uh, here at the city of

1:33:55Redmond um, and as well as in the AWC's

1:33:59legislative agenda. We are seeking a

1:34:01clarification of House Bill 1220 to

1:34:04ensure um that that is a planning

1:34:06mechanism and not a requirement because

1:34:08that of course would have to come with

1:34:10funding um in order to produce that

1:34:12housing and there's been really good

1:34:14stakeholdering going on um including

1:34:16with uh all sectors involved in that and

1:34:20um some draft bill language is

1:34:22progressing. So um more to come on that

1:34:24one but excited to see that that one is

1:34:26gaining some early traction.

1:34:29Um, also final reminder that the uh

1:34:31applications for the Sound Cities

1:34:33Association boards and committees are

1:34:36due this Friday. Earlier today, I

1:34:38submitted uh my reapplication to the

1:34:41growth management policy council and my

1:34:45application to the regional planning

1:34:47council. I know a couple of you have

1:34:49been emailing me about things that you

1:34:50might also apply for. Um, from this

1:34:53point forward, if you do decide to

1:34:54submit an application, we just request

1:34:56that you send a note to the whole

1:34:58council. That way, we don't

1:34:59inadvertently have multiple applications

1:35:01and um, the nominating committee will be

1:35:03meeting uh, two weeks from now to uh,

1:35:06make our recommendations to the board.

1:35:08Thank you. Thank you so much. And uh,

1:35:10actually, can you also include me in

1:35:12that email since um, we also keep track

1:35:14from a staffing perspective as well. Um,

1:35:16and I applied for the PSRC

1:35:20um, transportation policy board. So

1:35:22hopefully no one else will apply to that

1:35:24because I already have. Um, we talked

1:35:26about it. So um, are there any other

1:35:28committee reports from council?

1:35:31I just have a couple of things I want to

1:35:32just get through really quick. Um,

1:35:34council vice president and I attended

1:35:36the Cascade Water Alliance meeting where

1:35:38we approved the bo the board oversight

1:35:40strategy for the Cascade Supply Program

1:35:43and we also approved a letter to King

1:35:46County regarding reclaimed water water

1:35:47policy options. Um, both very important

1:35:50topics. Um, I also was able to attend

1:35:53the next day um or last week a meeting

1:35:56with the four cities around Lake Taps.

1:35:58Cascade Water Lines owns Lakes Taps and

1:36:00we try we try annually to meet with the

1:36:03mayors um and their staff from those

1:36:04four cities and um it hasn't happened

1:36:07for a few years but we had a great

1:36:09meeting with them and um talked about

1:36:11shared shared needs around Lake Taps um

1:36:14and other a few other things but it was

1:36:16really great to meet all of those mayors

1:36:17down there. Um they're really doing

1:36:18great work, you know, even though even

1:36:20though they're in Pierce County um but

1:36:22it's it's wonderful to have such good

1:36:24partners. Um, uh, council president and

1:36:26I were able to attend, uh, the election

1:36:29center, uh, tour and we got to go behind

1:36:32the scenes. And I just want to say, um,

1:36:34we are so I am so grateful that we live

1:36:36in a county that does such an immen

1:36:39tremendously good job keeping track of

1:36:41our ballots. Um, they have quite a

1:36:42system there. If you ever get the chance

1:36:44to do that, um, to the public at large,

1:36:46um, I highly recommend doing it. It is

1:36:48really quite a phenomenal experience and

1:36:50I want to thank them for their tireless

1:36:52work. Um I know one of our our drop box

1:36:55out front is one of the busiest in the

1:36:56county and they are here very regularly

1:36:59during this time um to ensure that the

1:37:01ballot box never gets oversted um and

1:37:03they empty it out very carefully uh make

1:37:06sure ballots are counted. So I want to

1:37:07thank them for their hard work and I

1:37:09know they'll be working around the clock

1:37:12uh to ensure that all our all of our

1:37:13votes are counted. Um I also uh Saturday

1:37:16morning was able to read a proclamation

1:37:18for Green Redmond um out at Smith Woods.

1:37:21was really great to they had fantastic

1:37:23weather though cold. Um a lot of

1:37:25community members were out there to

1:37:26plant tree and trees and understory in

1:37:29order to um keep Smith Woods vibrant and

1:37:32um hopefully blackberry free but I think

1:37:34there's a a group from our teens that

1:37:36might be able to help them out with that

1:37:38too. I think um I also attended this

1:37:41last week um the joint meeting of

1:37:43Association Washington Cities District 7

1:37:45and 13 which I am u I am the seventh

1:37:49representative and um we and uh Mayor

1:37:54Dana Ralph is the 13th district

1:37:55representative as well as um Ed Prince

1:37:58is the ATL large member and uh Nancy

1:38:00Bakus is the secretary of AWC um along

1:38:03with the Sound Cities Association and um

1:38:06it was really great to see other cities

1:38:08there and um everyone had an opportunity

1:38:09to share what they're focused on and so

1:38:11it was good to see everybody. Um and

1:38:14then lastly um I was able to attend an

1:38:16event a few different events but one

1:38:18that hasn't been mentioned yet is um

1:38:20Kimchi for peace um and it was held in

1:38:23Belleview and a Korean organization um

1:38:26brought together community members from

1:38:28all over the area and we uh made kimchi

1:38:31which was really exciting and really

1:38:33fun. So, um I'm so happy that we have so

1:38:36many different exciting events happening

1:38:38in our community from so many different

1:38:40organizations and that we're able to

1:38:42experience the best of our community and

1:38:44coming together. All right. Um any other

1:38:47anyone remember any committee reports?

1:38:50All right. Um

1:38:52next on the agenda is uh there's no

1:38:55unfinished business. There is new

1:38:57business. Um the last item is a quasi

1:39:01judicial closed record proceeding. This

1:39:03is an appeal of a SEIPA threshold

1:39:05determination for noise code amendments,

1:39:08a non-p project action. This is before

1:39:11the council with a written

1:39:12recommendation from the hearing examiner

1:39:15dated October 19th, 2026. The hearing

1:39:18examiner is not an employee of the city

1:39:21and works on contract for the city of

1:39:23Redmond and several other local

1:39:25jurisdictions. The hearing examiner

1:39:27doesn't own property near the

1:39:28appellant's property or in the city of

1:39:30Redmond and would not be affected by the

1:39:32outcome of this appeal personally or

1:39:35professionally. The hearing examiner is

1:39:37subject to the state's appearance of

1:39:38fairness doctrine and issues an

1:39:41impartial recommendation to the council.

1:39:43The council shall make the final

1:39:45decision by accepting or rejecting the

1:39:48recommendation under RS Redmond zoning

1:39:51code 217190F2B.

1:39:55Each side shall have a maximum of 10

1:39:58minutes to testify followed by council

1:40:00deliberations. Testimony will be

1:40:02contained to the record. No new

1:40:05information outside of the hearing

1:40:07examiner record will be accepted. We

1:40:10will first hear from the appellent

1:40:12appellant and then from the city. This

1:40:15hearing is quasi judicial in nature and

1:40:17therefore the appearance of fairness and

1:40:19conflict of interest rules apply. City

1:40:22attorney Rebecca Mueller will address

1:40:24this with the council.

1:40:28>> Thank you may Thank you, Mayor Bernie.

1:40:30Good evening council. As Mayor Birdie

1:40:33shared, this is a quasi judicial matter

1:40:35and is subject to the appearance of

1:40:37fairness doctrine. In just a moment, I

1:40:40will ask each council member to answer a

1:40:42few questions to ensure this hearing and

1:40:44your participation complies with the

1:40:46appearance of fairness doctrine. The

1:40:48purpose of which is to ensure this

1:40:50matter is heard and appears to be heard

1:40:52in a fair and unbiased way, ensuring

1:40:55that no member of the council has a

1:40:57conflict of interest or prejudge the

1:40:59decision before them outside of the

1:41:01information on the record. I will now

1:41:03ask a handful of questions. If each of

1:41:06you could go down the row and answer yes

1:41:08or no. As a reminder, as you answer

1:41:11these questions, I will share that this

1:41:13item became quasi judicial on June 24th,

1:41:162026, the day that it the appeal was

1:41:19filed. First question, do you or your

1:41:23family have any interest in the subject

1:41:25property or application?

1:41:27>> No, no, no.

1:41:28>> No, no,

1:41:29>> no.

1:41:32>> Are we going down the line?

1:41:33>> We're going in order.

1:41:34>> Okay, thanks.

1:41:36Do you stand to gain or lose any

1:41:39financial benefit as a result of the

1:41:41outcome of the hearing?

1:41:43>> No.

1:41:43>> No.

1:41:44>> No.

1:41:45>> No.

1:41:45>> No.

1:41:46>> No.

1:41:47>> No.

1:41:48>> Can you hear and consider the

1:41:50application in a fair and objective

1:41:52manner?

1:41:53>> Yes.

1:41:54>> Yes.

1:41:54>> Yes.

1:41:55>> Yes.

1:41:56>> Yes.

1:41:56>> Yes.

1:41:57>> Yes.

1:41:59For this next question, if you could

1:42:00answer yes or no, if there are any

1:42:02yeses, and I recommend we just take

1:42:04those after the roll call vote. Has

1:42:06anyone engaged in any exparte

1:42:08communication with proponents or

1:42:10opponents of the application while the

1:42:12matter was quasi judicial as of June 24,

1:42:152026?

1:42:17>> Yes.

1:42:17>> No.

1:42:18>> No.

1:42:19>> No.

1:42:20>> Yes.

1:42:21>> No.

1:42:22>> No.

1:42:24>> What I'd like to do now is turn first to

1:42:26Council President Stewart. if you could

1:42:28place uh on the record the substance of

1:42:30any communication and any information

1:42:32you have to share.

1:42:34>> Thank you, Rebecca. As required for this

1:42:36proceeding, I'm placing on the record

1:42:38the substance of an exparte written

1:42:40communication received from the Inner

1:42:42Lake Sporting Association board of

1:42:44directors to the full Redmond City

1:42:46Council on June 30th, 2026. The email is

1:42:50titled Interlake Sporting Association

1:42:53position on the draft noise ordinance.

1:42:56The substance of the communications is

1:42:58as follows. A consolidated statement of

1:43:00concerns regarding proposed changes to

1:43:03operating hours and support for a

1:43:05development agreement to implement noise

1:43:07reduction measures. I will now provide

1:43:09that at each hearing where action is

1:43:11considered or taken on this item, a

1:43:13public announcement of the content of

1:43:14this communication and the party's

1:43:16rights to rebut the substance of this

1:43:18communication should occur.

1:43:21And I will ask you starting with you,

1:43:23Council President Stewart, and go down

1:43:24the line since you indicated all council

1:43:26received this uh correspondence. Has

1:43:29anything about this communication left

1:43:31you unable to base the decision solely

1:43:34on the information that's part of

1:43:35tonight's public hearing?

1:43:36>> No.

1:43:42>> No.

1:43:43>> Thank you.

1:43:43>> No.

1:43:44>> No.

1:43:44>> No.

1:43:46>> No.

1:43:47>> No. A point of information.

1:43:50Yes, council member Kitzer.

1:43:53>> My understanding was if the if the

1:43:55entire council received it and it was um

1:43:58noted for the record that that would not

1:44:01we would have not answered yes to the

1:44:02previous question. Can you clarify that

1:44:04as well?

1:44:04>> Sure. So my understanding is that this

1:44:07item of communication has not been

1:44:09placed on the record that it was sent

1:44:11individually via email to the entire

1:44:12council. It has not been previously made

1:44:15part of uh any record before council

1:44:17related to this item.

1:44:19>> Okay. Thank you for the clarification.

1:44:22>> Um I will share that for this type of

1:44:24procedural hearing quas judicial each

1:44:27side gets 10 minutes. So um they will

1:44:30have the opportunity in those 10 minutes

1:44:31to address the um exparte communication

1:44:34that was flagged should they choose to.

1:44:37And turning to you, council member

1:44:38Percy, if you could share uh and place

1:44:41on the record the substance of any

1:44:43communication that you've noted.

1:44:45>> As required for this proceeding, I am

1:44:48placing on the record the substance of

1:44:50exparte verbal communications obtained

1:44:52from homeowner homeowners in the

1:44:55neighborhood near ISA on June 27th, 2026

1:45:00regarding the noise um experienced by

1:45:03the neighbors. Um the summary of that is

1:45:06a few residents mentioned that the noise

1:45:08does not bother them. One residents

1:45:10mentioned concerns about cars zooming

1:45:12by. Two residents mentioned they were

1:45:14bothered by noise during the summer and

1:45:16at night when kids go to bed. And one

1:45:19resident who mentioned that the

1:45:20developer told them that ISA was moving

1:45:23away and that noise barrier would be

1:45:25helpful. Um

1:45:29um each hearing where action is

1:45:31considered or taken on this item, a

1:45:33public announcement of the content of

1:45:35this communication and the party's

1:45:37rights to rebut the substance of this

1:45:39communication will be made.

1:45:42>> Thank you, Council Member Parcy. And

1:45:43also flagging that the parties may have

1:45:46the opportunity during their 10 minutes

1:45:47to comment on the information you just

1:45:50shared. Is there anything about your

1:45:52communication that has left you unable

1:45:54to base the decision tonight solely on

1:45:56the information that's part of the

1:45:57public record?

1:45:58>> No.

1:46:03>> I'll now ask members of the audience if

1:46:05anyone has a challenge on the appearance

1:46:07of fairness grounds to any council

1:46:08members participation here.

1:46:13For the record, I see no hands in the

1:46:15audience.

1:46:17And I think that concludes my questions.

1:46:19Mayor Bernie,

1:46:20>> thank you so much. Thank you, councel.

1:46:21Um, next, the appellent um

1:46:25representative will now have 10 minutes

1:46:27to provide a statement. Please come on

1:46:28up to the microphone.

1:46:33>> I did. Yeah.

1:46:36>> Let me take a second to adjust,

1:46:38>> please. Yes.

1:46:39>> Thank you so much, Mayor Bernie.

1:46:40Honorable,

1:46:41>> let me start the timer. Are are you

1:46:42ready to go?

1:46:43>> Oh, I'm ready to go.

1:46:44>> Okay, great. Sorry. Thank you so much.

1:46:47Actually,

1:46:49hang on a second. This timer is uh not

1:46:51making not my friend.

1:46:57>> Okay, now we're ready to go. Thank you.

1:47:03>> Oh, it'll start when I start speaking.

1:47:05Okay. Sorry. Thanks. Uh thank you so

1:47:07much, Mayor Bernie. Sorry for the false

1:47:09start there. And good evening, honorable

1:47:11council members. Andrew Lewis for the

1:47:12Inner Lake Sporting Association.

1:47:15Uh, the Interlake Sporting Association

1:47:17asked that the council accept the

1:47:18recommendation of the hearing examiner

1:47:21and remand the determination of

1:47:23non-significance or DNS in this matter

1:47:25back to the technical committee for

1:47:27further consideration.

1:47:29The Interlakes Sporting Association

1:47:31concurs with the conclusions of the

1:47:33examiner that the record formed at

1:47:34hearing shows in summary

1:47:37first that the DNS in this matter is not

1:47:39based on an appropriate environmental

1:47:41baseline

1:47:42and second that the DNS improperly

1:47:44balances the benefits of the underlying

1:47:47ordinance with its impacts. The

1:47:49Interlake Sporting Association agrees

1:47:51with the examiner that the DNS should be

1:47:54remanded to the technical committee to

1:47:57establish a conditions-based

1:47:59environmental baseline

1:48:01and to consider whether the ordinance

1:48:03would result in probable significant

1:48:06adverse environmental impacts when

1:48:09balanced against that baseline.

1:48:13First, a conditionsbased environmental

1:48:15baseline must be established to support

1:48:17the conclusions of a threshold

1:48:18determination, which as the examiner

1:48:20identified is absent from the DNS before

1:48:23the council. Seer requires that policies

1:48:26with the potential to impact the

1:48:27environment be measured against current

1:48:29environmental conditions rather than

1:48:32against designated land uses.

1:48:35Accordingly, for an ordinance that's

1:48:37regulating noise at sports shooting

1:48:39facilities, the appropriate

1:48:41environmental baseline to measure

1:48:43potential environmental impacts is the

1:48:45actual noise generated by that facility

1:48:47rather than the facility's general

1:48:48designated use. The DNS prepared in this

1:48:52matter is unsupported by any study of

1:48:55the noise conditions associated with the

1:48:57Interlake Sporting Association's sports

1:48:59shooting facility and instead relies on

1:49:01assumptions that are related to the

1:49:03general use of that property.

1:49:05Accordingly, the examiner was persuaded

1:49:07with a firm conviction that the baseline

1:49:09of the DNS is not appropriate and does

1:49:11not meet SEPA's procedural standards.

1:49:14To comply with SEIPA, the city must

1:49:16establish a baseline based on actual

1:49:17environmental conditions and on that

1:49:19basis alone, the council should adopt

1:49:22the recommendation of the examiner.

1:49:25Uh second, the DNS must be revised to

1:49:27remove impermissible reliance on the

1:49:29balancing of the ordinance's perceived

1:49:32benefits to justify the impacts of the

1:49:35ordinance. As the examiner concluded,

1:49:37the DNS explicitly considers the

1:49:39benefits of fewer daytime hours of

1:49:41operation for sport shooting facilities

1:49:44while also conceding the possibility

1:49:47that noise conditions during those more

1:49:49limited hours will be more intense. This

1:49:52kind of balancing is in opposite to the

1:49:54purpose of SEPHA which is to require the

1:49:57full examination and disclosure of

1:50:00potential impacts to fully advise

1:50:02council members in advance of decisions

1:50:04on policy pending before the body. As

1:50:07the state supreme court has written in

1:50:09its sea jurist prudence, benefits are

1:50:11irrelevant to that process.

1:50:14Accordingly, the DNS should be remanded

1:50:17to the technical committee for the

1:50:19reasons that are identified by the

1:50:20examiner and supported by the record

1:50:23formed by the open record hearing in

1:50:25front of the examiner in early

1:50:27September. Additionally, the examiner's

1:50:29recommendation in regards to the actions

1:50:32that must be taken by the technical

1:50:34committee on remand are sound,

1:50:37namely establishing that environmental

1:50:39baseline and determining the impacts of

1:50:41the ordinance as measured against that

1:50:42baseline.

1:50:46The Interle Sporting Association

1:50:48looks forward to working together with

1:50:50the city to resolve concerns around

1:50:52mutual mutual concerns around noise

1:50:55impacts in the city of Redmond. And we

1:50:57thank the city and the city council for

1:51:00your consideration of our arguments here

1:51:02tonight uh and for our the collaboration

1:51:05of the city on these and other matters.

1:51:08And with that, um, I [clears throat] can

1:51:10actually yield the rest of my time back

1:51:12to the council given the late hour. So,

1:51:14thank you for your consideration.

1:51:23The city's representative will now have

1:51:2510 minutes to provide a statement.

1:51:44Just want to make sure we're all set up.

1:51:46We're

1:51:46>> all set.

1:51:47>> Thank you.

1:51:51>> Good evening, Council. Anthony Sado,

1:51:53deputy city attorney. Uh appearing on

1:51:55behalf of the planning department. Uh

1:51:58here today with Mr. Jeff Churchill and

1:52:01Mr. Alex Hunt.

1:52:05The city is in a unique position here.

1:52:07Essentially, we're arguing something

1:52:09that is rare uh and something that we

1:52:11would not typically ask for. We're

1:52:13seeking for you to reject the hearing

1:52:15examiner's recommendation uh based on

1:52:18several reasons that I'll outline. But

1:52:20again, what we're asking for is that you

1:52:22reject this decision.

1:52:25Uh first, I just want to go through the

1:52:27general uh SEPA process with you. Then

1:52:29I'll quickly review the sea process that

1:52:32occurred for this uh specific appeal.

1:52:35And then I'll talk to you about some of

1:52:36the technical, legal, and factual

1:52:38arguments arising from the city's

1:52:39perspective.

1:52:42Final uh finally, I want to offer some

1:52:44questions and considerations that you uh

1:52:47may use to determine the ultimate uh

1:52:49recommendation or excuse me, final

1:52:51decision that will be provided today.

1:52:54Again, while we respect the hearing

1:52:56examiner's process and recommen

1:52:58recommendation to this council, we

1:53:00disagree with the ultimate conclusion.

1:53:03We believe that city staff appropriately

1:53:05and reasonably uh reviewed the SEIPA

1:53:08checklist, reissued a SEIPA checklist

1:53:11after considering the comments that the

1:53:13ISA provided. The ISA has sought since

1:53:17day one, actually before this SEPA

1:53:19appeal, to delay enactment of the noise

1:53:22code amendments that are b the basis of

1:53:25this appeal. And we believe city staff

1:53:27appropriately reviewed this con reviewed

1:53:30the conclusions that are provided in the

1:53:31SEIPA checklist and accordingly again

1:53:34that this uh recommendation should be

1:53:36rejected.

1:53:39Just to quickly review the SEPHA

1:53:41process. Uh after uh after an initial

1:53:45action is made by the city, uh it is up

1:53:48to the city staff to evaluate and

1:53:51mitigate or excuse me, identify,

1:53:53evaluate, and potentially mitigate any

1:53:56probable environmental impacts that

1:53:58could happen from a city's action. Now,

1:54:00the city action in this case is actually

1:54:02what's called the non-project action.

1:54:04And that's a key component of this

1:54:06action because it's not a specific land

1:54:08use policy. It's not a specific review

1:54:11of a development project. Instead, what

1:54:13the city was looking at here was

1:54:15adoption of the noise code amendments.

1:54:17And specifically later, we'll talk about

1:54:20some of the uh noise conditions that

1:54:22were just a part of the uh ISA's

1:54:24original comments.

1:54:27But what I also want to remind you about

1:54:28SEPHA generally before we talk about the

1:54:30specific policies and procedures that

1:54:33happen related to this appeal is that

1:54:36SEPA requires a consideration of

1:54:39environmental impacts with attention to

1:54:41impacts that are likely and not merely

1:54:43speculative.

1:54:45In essence, what this requires is is

1:54:47that the presently unquantified

1:54:49environmental amenities and values be

1:54:51given appropriate consideration in

1:54:53decisionmaking along with economic and

1:54:56technical considerations. And that's

1:54:58codified in 432130,

1:55:02which is the actual statutory

1:55:04requirements of the threshold

1:55:06determination that we'll talk about

1:55:07next.

1:55:09The threshold determination language

1:55:11that's found in 4321 does not require a

1:55:14study. Again, that comes from case law

1:55:16and that comes from case law identifying

1:55:20uh regulations, development regulations

1:55:22and land use, which again is not a part

1:55:24of uh this non-project action.

1:55:29So, just to quickly review the uh the

1:55:32actual process that occurred for this uh

1:55:35before this appeal, the city issued uh

1:55:38its initial checklist in April of 2026.

1:55:41The staff reviewed that application

1:55:43material in May of 2026 and then the ISA

1:55:47actually provided comments which is

1:55:48permitted uh under a 14-day comment

1:55:51period which ended on May 27th, 2026.

1:55:55Uh, this is important because the ISA's

1:55:58comments were actually responded to in a

1:56:01supplemental checklist that was attached

1:56:03to the reissued determination of

1:56:05non-significance in June of 2026, which

1:56:08was ultimately the one that is on appeal

1:56:11now. And again, this this is important

1:56:14because the city specifically responded

1:56:17in this supplemental sheet that we'll

1:56:19show you here in a little bit um to the

1:56:21comments that the ISA provided about

1:56:24potential noise impacts that they were

1:56:26claiming would occur if if hours were

1:56:28limited.

1:56:33So, I'd like I'd like to talk to you

1:56:35specifically about uh not only the

1:56:38reissued DNS, but one of these specific

1:56:40checklist review questions that the city

1:56:43has to respond to as a non-p project

1:56:45action proponent. Uh, and this says that

1:56:47you must answer each question accurately

1:56:50and carefully to the best of your

1:56:51knowledge. In most cases, you should be

1:56:54able to answer the questions from your

1:56:55own observations or project plans

1:56:58without the need to hire experts. And

1:57:00why is that important here? The ISA's

1:57:03contention is that baseline conditions

1:57:04were not appropriately studied in this

1:57:07instance. I would urge you that that was

1:57:10not necessary. The city had looked at

1:57:12the ISA's comments. They knew how the

1:57:14gun range operated and the evidence

1:57:16showed that they appropriately responded

1:57:18in the reissued uh DNS in the

1:57:21supplemental sheet to those questions.

1:57:24And [snorts] again you have up here uh

1:57:26the sea reissued determination of

1:57:29non-significance which is cities exhibit

1:57:313.

1:57:36I also want to talk about uh the

1:57:38discussion of mitigation and the context

1:57:40of of balancing the pros and cons of uh

1:57:44of the noise ordinance in general versus

1:57:46the impacts that uh ISA has provided or

1:57:50contended could occur in this case. Uh

1:57:52and again that's in the reissued DNS.

1:57:55There's a a portion on the bottom that

1:57:56says proposed me measures to avoid or

1:57:59reduce such increases are the noise

1:58:02code. And again the reason those things

1:58:04were provided were were based upon

1:58:07specific comments that the ISA provided.

1:58:10There was no balancing here.

1:58:14Uh with respect to the balancing, I'd

1:58:16also like to talk about one of the uh

1:58:18ultimate legal issues before I forget to

1:58:20do that. One of the things that the

1:58:22hearing examiner uh found was that the

1:58:26SEPA expert, Mr. Weinman, whose uh

1:58:28testimony is in the record, actually

1:58:31talked about this balancing of the uh

1:58:34pros versus the cons that the city the

1:58:37city actually uh did in this instance.

1:58:40uh in the in the hearing examiner's

1:58:42recommendation, we actually have a

1:58:44finding that uh the city pointed out

1:58:47that legal opinions and conclusions that

1:58:50the SEIPA expert made were actually

1:58:52inadmissible.

1:58:54But in the in the process of uh

1:58:57rendering those inadmissible, she did

1:58:59not the hearing examiner did not

1:59:00actually exclude that admissible expert

1:59:03testimony. instead relying upon it to

1:59:06make that ultimate conclusion uh that

1:59:09there was balancing. And again, without

1:59:11any other evidence of balancing, without

1:59:14any other conclusion, uh she relied upon

1:59:17that expert testimony, which he stated

1:59:20here uh was was inadmissible.

1:59:25One of the final uh factual arguments

1:59:27I'd like to talk to you about is this

1:59:29this concept of moving days. uh the

1:59:32city's argument uh from the beginning

1:59:34and I think this was uh offered in the

1:59:37uh conclusions that are in the reissued

1:59:40DNS is that this moving of days was not

1:59:43substantiated by any of the witnesses

1:59:45and in fact was only based on

1:59:47assumptions by uh their only uh fact

1:59:50witness Dr. Jarvis throughout the

1:59:52testimony and was actually refuted in

1:59:54public comments that the city provided

1:59:57uh as part of this hearing examiner

1:59:59process. Uh I've provided a few of those

2:00:02references here. We have page six of

2:00:04city exhibit 7, page 14 of city exhibit

2:00:087, as well as page 21 of city uh exhibit

2:00:107. And again, those highlighted

2:00:13references show that there were actually

2:00:16comments that some of these users could

2:00:19not use the facility on Saturday.

2:00:21Instead of looking at those

2:00:23illustrations and the actual evidence

2:00:24that was provided in the record, for

2:00:27whatever reason, the hearing examiner

2:00:29skipped uh those those basis and again

2:00:32just made assumptions about uh Dr.

2:00:35Jarvis's testimony and relied actually

2:00:38within the recommendation on some of the

2:00:40public comments and his assumptions

2:00:42about uh users moving from one day to

2:00:44another.

2:00:52Finally, there was uh no discussion in

2:00:55the recommendation about this concept of

2:00:57delay. Again, as I stated earlier, uh

2:01:01one of the things that Dr. Jarvis we

2:01:03played for uh or we submitted into the

2:01:06record was his testimony to this council

2:01:08in January of 2026 that if these noise

2:01:11code amendments were enacted, ISA would

2:01:13have to sue. Well, here we are 10 months

2:01:17later. The ISA has sued. We have the

2:01:19appeal and the ISA has actually gained

2:01:23the benefit of delay. No enactment of

2:01:25this noise code ordinance and there was

2:01:27no discussion of that uh concept in the

2:01:29hearing examiner's recommendation.

2:01:34So, some of the concluding uh questions

2:01:37that I think are worthwhile. Why did the

2:01:39ISA choose not to share its data? Why

2:01:41didn't it share survey results of its uh

2:01:44members about use? Why didn't it share

2:01:46the actual sound studies that it had and

2:01:48the results on a daily basis instead

2:01:51just providing uh a conclusory sound

2:01:54study that was submitted as exhibit one?

2:01:57>> And I'll I'll leave it at that. Thank

2:01:59you.

2:01:59>> Thank you.

2:02:03>> Having not done this before, what are

2:02:06the next steps?

2:02:10At this point, we would turn it over to

2:02:11council for deliberation. Um, there

2:02:14would be uh the opportunity for

2:02:16questions to the parties. The questions

2:02:18would need to be contained to items in

2:02:20the record. Um, not just what you heard

2:02:22before you between both sides tonight,

2:02:24but questions you might have um that the

2:02:26parties can answer related to the

2:02:28hearing examiner uh exhibits and

2:02:31briefing. If there are questions to

2:02:32that, um the council could deliberate.

2:02:36Um the recommendation would be to put

2:02:39forward a motion uh eventually at the

2:02:42end of the hearing to either reject or

2:02:45um accept the hearing examiner's

2:02:47findings, recommendations, and

2:02:49conclusions from October 19th.

2:02:51>> Great. Thank you so much, Council.

2:02:54Council President,

2:02:56>> thank you so much. Um I'm wondering

2:03:01um if Thank you everyone uh for

2:03:04participating in our hearing tonight. Uh

2:03:06the recommendation from the hearing

2:03:08examiner is uh arriving at an

2:03:11interesting time in the city because it

2:03:13would uh to deliver on the hearing

2:03:15examiner's recommendation would remand

2:03:17um this body of work to the technical

2:03:20committee which council has given

2:03:22direction through reorganization of our

2:03:24departments uh to disband. And so I want

2:03:29to make sure um if council is able to

2:03:33receive some guidance on how that would

2:03:35be handled, that could be helpful. But I

2:03:37understand that we may not be able to

2:03:39answer that question as it's um not part

2:03:41of the existing record, but it is

2:03:43certainly um on our minds on my mind.

2:03:48I'm not sure if Mr. Churchill would be

2:03:50able to answer that. I know um that

2:03:53might be a question for the staff. Um,

2:04:01>> is that question able to be answered?

2:04:03>> I I just don't know that it Am I on

2:04:05here? I just don't know that it's within

2:04:08the uh current public record of this

2:04:12hearing examiner process. So again, I

2:04:14think we'd be speculating about a future

2:04:18department, a future coordination that

2:04:20is needed to take that next step which

2:04:23has not occurred yet obviously without

2:04:25the final decision of the council.

2:04:28>> Understood. Thank you,

2:04:31>> Council Member Parsec.

2:04:34I also have a question about the

2:04:36procedure of the meeting and um a

2:04:40question that I would like to ask staff

2:04:41is if and I would love to know if that's

2:04:45okay to ask is if um the council um

2:04:49accepts the recommendation, what would

2:04:52the cost look like for the city or in

2:04:55that case? I think I would love to um

2:04:57know if that's a question we can ask.

2:05:04Yeah, I I'm happy to take that as well.

2:05:05I I think again I would def um submit to

2:05:09the council and I'm I'm happy to let

2:05:11opposing council speak as well, but I

2:05:13don't believe that that was a part of

2:05:14the underlying hearing examiner's

2:05:16record. So, again, not a factor that we

2:05:20could put on the record now or part of

2:05:22public testimony or response.

2:05:27Other questions for um our two parties.

2:05:34>> Council member Pria.

2:05:36>> Um I was wondering if I could get

2:05:38further clarification on uh it was

2:05:41mentioned um during the testimony from

2:05:44the city of Redmond's deputy city

2:05:46attorney uh that I believe Mr. Jarvis of

2:05:49the ISA said the ISA would have no

2:05:51choice but to sue. Um, I was wondering

2:05:54if that could be expanded upon.

2:06:02>> Sure. H, thank you for the question.

2:06:04Happy to answer that. Um, that was from

2:06:07January 2026 testimony that I believe

2:06:10was in the record at the hearing

2:06:11examiner process. So, I'm happy to

2:06:14provide that specific reference. Off the

2:06:15top of my head, I don't know what it

2:06:17was, but um, that was that was the

2:06:19testimony.

2:06:22Thank you, Council Member Critzer.

2:06:27>> Oh, yeah.

2:06:29>> Yeah, please. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Mr.

2:06:31Lewis. Come on up.

2:06:32>> No worries. I'll try to close.

2:06:34>> Yeah, that would be great.

2:06:38>> Please, Mr. Lewis, go ahead.

2:06:40>> Yeah, thank you so much, Mayor Bernie.

2:06:42Um, and Council Member, thank you for

2:06:43your question. Um that there is indeed

2:06:48uh a substantial amount of testimony

2:06:50that is in the record regarding um past

2:06:53statements that members of the Inner

2:06:54Lakes Boarding Association have made um

2:06:57in these chambers for various proposals

2:06:59and comments they've made during those

2:07:01presentations around um asserting their

2:07:04legal rights at certain points in this

2:07:06process, including potentially bringing

2:07:08a SEPA appeal. Um those considerations

2:07:12are irrelevant to the matter that's in

2:07:14front of the council this evening, which

2:07:16is the legal sufficiency of the

2:07:19threshold determination in front of you.

2:07:21whether the ISA in the past had

2:07:23discussed potentially asserting their

2:07:26right to challenge a future threshold

2:07:27determination um that wasn't legally

2:07:30sufficient uh isn't something that

2:07:33should bear um or really appropriately

2:07:35can bear [snorts] um on whether the

2:07:38record in front of you supports that

2:07:39this threshold determination was done in

2:07:42compliance with the procedural

2:07:43requirements of SEPA. I would also draw

2:07:45the council's attention to the uh

2:07:48conclusion of the examiner conclusion

2:07:51number two where to the extent that

2:07:53those concerns are relevant, the

2:07:56examiner concludes that the ISA's

2:07:58repeated efforts to bring these impacts

2:08:00to the city's attention uh in the time

2:08:02leading up to the threshold

2:08:04determination was one of the things that

2:08:07she considered in her conclusions as to

2:08:11um the deficiencies of threshold

2:08:13determination.

2:08:14uh since the city was

2:08:16alerted to these impacts potentially

2:08:20being present and the analysis that the

2:08:22city conducted um did not form an

2:08:25adequate baseline to respond to them. Um

2:08:27so that's how the ISA would respond to

2:08:29your question.

2:08:31>> Thank you. Council member Parker, do you

2:08:33have a follow-up? I

2:08:33>> I do have a followup. Uh my question was

2:08:36uh more so in regards to whether that

2:08:38statement in particular um was regarding

2:08:40this SEIPA appeal or potential future

2:08:43litigation.

2:08:44Uh and that is asking for me to

2:08:47speculate. I uh don't know what Mr.

2:08:49Jarvis's intentions at that moment in

2:08:51time were.

2:08:57>> Council member Critzer.

2:09:00>> Yes. It it seems to me that um some of

2:09:02the crux of this issue also um revolves

2:09:06around uh what counts as an appropriate

2:09:08environmental baseline. And so, um, I'm

2:09:12curious to hear from, uh, the city's

2:09:15perspective,

2:09:17um, uh, or or both perspectives, uh,

2:09:21just a a little more of your, uh,

2:09:25perspective on on why, um,

2:09:29uh, from the city perspective, why the

2:09:32environmental threshold uh, could be

2:09:35determined based on the baseline that

2:09:37um, that was considered by the city

2:09:40staff.

2:09:46>> Uh, absolutely. Thank you for the

2:09:47question. I think it's a it's a good

2:09:49one. Um, first from the perspective of

2:09:53the case law talking about baseline

2:09:56conditions. Um, I I may have mentioned

2:09:59that a lot of that baseline condition

2:10:01analysis comes from specific land use

2:10:04and not and project actions that

2:10:08uh relate to environmental impacts that

2:10:11may be changing in reference to a

2:10:13specific site. Here in this instance,

2:10:16we're talking about a non-project action

2:10:18adoption of code, adoption of

2:10:20regulations, comp plans, including a

2:10:23citywide analysis of the noise code. Now

2:10:27the interesting or somewhat different

2:10:30issue of this has been that obviously

2:10:33the only comment that was provided to

2:10:34the city was one specific site that's a

2:10:37non-conforming use. It can't change. It

2:10:40can't uh be in other words the IC cannot

2:10:44develop on its site beyond what the

2:10:46current

2:10:48uh

2:10:51state of that property is. With respect

2:10:55to the baseline condition analysis

2:10:57though, uh what the ISA has never

2:11:00provided and I would argue is uh

2:11:03inapplicable in terms of this baseline

2:11:05conditions is what are we actually

2:11:07looking at and what are we actually

2:11:09studying and what should the city

2:11:11actually study? Is it January? Is it

2:11:14February? Is it March? We know that

2:11:17those are different times of year,

2:11:19different types of use or conditions may

2:11:22occur based upon the shooting

2:11:23activities. So I think that the hearing

2:11:27examiner really skipped a step in terms

2:11:29of applying this baseline condition

2:11:32analysis without identifying I think as

2:11:34you uh point out what that could

2:11:37possibly be and how you would establish

2:11:39that for one day and then make that take

2:11:43that a step further and figure out what

2:11:45the future uh impact could be such to

2:11:48find is there not a significant adverse

2:11:51impact.

2:11:54Do you have a followup, council member?

2:11:57>> Oh, I appreciate it and and I'm happy to

2:11:59hear the response as well.

2:12:01>> Okay. For Mr. Lewis

2:12:06>> and uh Council Member Critzer, thank you

2:12:09for um digging into

2:12:11um this issue of the baseline which is

2:12:13was obviously very important in the um

2:12:16decision that the examiner or the

2:12:18recommendation rather the examiner put

2:12:19forward. I mean the first thing that I

2:12:21would say at the top um uh council for

2:12:24the city just now um misrepresented the

2:12:27case law on um environmental baselines

2:12:31and the jurist prudence. It it there is

2:12:34no distinction under SEPA

2:12:38between project and non-project actions

2:12:40in terms of the procedural requirements

2:12:42that apply. Second, it is not the case

2:12:45that this baseline analysis is typically

2:12:48only applied to sight specific projects.

2:12:51As council just stated, the seminal case

2:12:53on this matter is friends of Seamish

2:12:55Valley versus King County, which

2:12:57regarded the uh a recent Supreme Court

2:13:00case from 2024 uh state supreme court,

2:13:03which regarded the baseline for um uh

2:13:08land use overlays for all of the rural

2:13:11zone areas in King County. So

2:13:15in that case, uh, King County had,

2:13:18similar to the threshold determination

2:13:21that's at at issue in this matter, made

2:13:24certain assumptions about the impact of

2:13:26those zoning changes based on the

2:13:29current use of that land rather than the

2:13:31condition of of the condition that land

2:13:35is currently in. for example, right? For

2:13:37example, you might have a land use where

2:13:41um

2:13:43uh you're currently authorized to put in

2:13:45a strip mall, but it's all agricultural

2:13:47land. The current state of that land is

2:13:50agricultural, even if the use would

2:13:51allow you to bulldoze it and put in a

2:13:54strip mall. But the baseline is what is

2:13:57the current condition of that land? you

2:13:59know, is it vacant space or is it built

2:14:02environment? In a matter like this,

2:14:05which is a non-p project action that's

2:14:08before the city that is going to

2:14:09regulate noise environment,

2:14:12uh it's appropriate under SEPHA to

2:14:16establish a baseline that actually looks

2:14:18at what the noise conditions are and

2:14:20then assess what the policy change is

2:14:22going to do to change those noise

2:14:23conditions. This ordinance is going to

2:14:25make material changes to the hours of

2:14:28operation for this sport shooting

2:14:31facility. That's going to change the

2:14:33pattern and concentration of when people

2:14:35use that facility to discharge their

2:14:37firearms. That's going to have an impact

2:14:39on noise conditions that'll be different

2:14:41from whatever the current baseline is.

2:14:43We don't know what that baseline is.

2:14:45That analysis is absent from the

2:14:47threshold determination. That is in

2:14:49contravention of the procedural

2:14:50requirements of SEPA. That is what the

2:14:52examiner's recommendation is. Uh these

2:14:54issues were thoroughly briefed in front

2:14:57of an extremely sophisticated examiner

2:14:59who wrote an extremely thorough findings

2:15:02and recommendation on this matter and

2:15:05concluded like you know it take great

2:15:08pain took great pains to conclude you

2:15:10know as a creature of the legislature

2:15:12very sensitive to the city's argument

2:15:14that substantial weight is due to the

2:15:16responsible officials determination.

2:15:18It's very rare for a hearing examiner to

2:15:20recommend against a city policy. So I

2:15:24would urge the council again um on a lot

2:15:26of these issues to um really rely on the

2:15:30thoughtful recommendation and the record

2:15:31formed by the examiner in this matter

2:15:34and

2:15:35uh especially on this baseline issue.

2:15:42>> Council member Pria.

2:15:45>> Thank you. And I am looking at um number

2:15:49three on page 22 of the hearing examiner

2:15:51recommendation to council under

2:15:53conclusions based on findings. I'm just

2:15:56going to read the first sentence which

2:15:57is that credible evidence in the record

2:16:00shows that under the existing daytime

2:16:02exemption hours. ISA members can and

2:16:04naturally do spread themselves out over

2:16:06the hours of a given week and such that

2:16:09the sounds of shooting are not typically

2:16:11concentrated resulting in maximum sound

2:16:13levels between 52 to 67 dB.

2:16:17Um what were the key pieces of credible

2:16:20evidence in the record here? I I see um

2:16:24findings 13 almost through 30 uh cited

2:16:27in the at the bottom of that paragraph,

2:16:29but I'm wondering if I could get um from

2:16:31both sides

2:16:33the key pieces of evidence that that

2:16:36were cited to uh that the hearing

2:16:38examiner that the hearing examiner

2:16:40determined sufficient to um uh

2:16:43sufficiently credible to show that ISA

2:16:46members do spread themselves out.

2:16:48>> If I can have Mr. Lewis go first so I

2:16:49can I'm going to have you guys switch

2:16:50off. Mr. Lewis.

2:16:55>> Um thank you so much, Mayor Bernie. Um I

2:16:58would direct the council member to

2:17:02uh earlier in

2:17:05the record established by the examiner

2:17:07where appellent evidence is discussed.

2:17:08That evidence is discussed on page 10

2:17:12through

2:17:14to

2:17:17page 16.

2:17:19And the particular evidence related to

2:17:22the decibel collections is from a sounds

2:17:25a sound study that was prepared by the

2:17:29Interlake Sporting Association's

2:17:32uh sound expert who is Mr. Tommy Pool.

2:17:36And that evidence is discussed

2:17:40specifically on paragraph

2:17:4318 on page 12-

2:17:46which is the Municon West Coast sound

2:17:49study that was conducted by Mr. Tommy

2:17:51Pool.

2:17:57And I believe paragraph 18 is the only

2:18:01one uh that discusses the sound study.

2:18:05Uh oh no sorry paragraph 21 as well the

2:18:10testimony of William Tommy Pool. Um but

2:18:13Mr. P uh provided testimony as to the

2:18:16methods and manner in which he collected

2:18:18the sound results. Uh he discussed the

2:18:22um events that he measured and and the

2:18:26conditions under which he measured uh uh

2:18:29noise activity that was generated by the

2:18:30Interlake Sporting Association. And that

2:18:33evidence was admitted into the record

2:18:35and relied upon by the examiner to form

2:18:38uh part of her her ultimate

2:18:40recommendations.

2:18:52Sorry. Uh thank you for the question,

2:18:55council member. I think that uh I want

2:18:57to just talk about one procedural issue

2:19:00that being that if we go down on that uh

2:19:05one of the findings on page uh 22

2:19:08uh it references a multitude of

2:19:11findings. I don't think that council

2:19:13knows or can identify which directly

2:19:15points back to or can assume what the

2:19:19hearing examiner referenced as to that

2:19:22specific 52 to 67 decel level. I don't

2:19:27necessarily dispute that Mr. P provided

2:19:30some of the testimony regarding that,

2:19:32but what I do want to highlight is

2:19:34there's no specific reference to that 52

2:19:38to 67 decel level. While we're on that,

2:19:42referencing the ISA's exhibit one, which

2:19:45is Mr. Pool's um

2:19:48specific report that council mentioned,

2:19:52the underlying data going back to the

2:19:54baseline conditions was never provided.

2:19:56These are all averages, daily averages,

2:20:00not based on daily findings, not based

2:20:03on again the baseline conditions that we

2:20:06talked about on a daily basis for any

2:20:08period before um this appeal. If you

2:20:12look at July of 2026, those are all

2:20:15averages after the appeal. So on the

2:20:18procedural issue, I don't know that we

2:20:20can assume and put ourselves into the

2:20:21hearing examiner's shoes and say that

2:20:25specific finding is based on Mr. Pool.

2:20:28You'd have to go through and look at all

2:20:30those findings and connect those back in

2:20:32uh as you deem fit.

2:20:38>> Council member Foresight,

2:20:40>> thank you. Um on the same line of

2:20:44questions, um the the noise um study

2:20:51that we're referencing here was hired by

2:20:55whom and um who was aware that this was

2:20:59happening at the time?

2:21:01>> Mr. Lewis, do you have an answer to

2:21:03that? Thank you.

2:21:06>> Um thank you for that question, Council

2:21:08Member Foresight. the um noise study

2:21:11that that I would also add in response

2:21:12to uh um council member Pria's comment

2:21:16earlier or question earlier um is

2:21:18available in full as part of the record

2:21:21um on the hearing examiner's website. Uh

2:21:24so council members can maybe if you have

2:21:26screens in front of you up there I don't

2:21:27know you can also you can review it as

2:21:29part of this it is part of the hearing

2:21:31[snorts] uh it was commissioned by the

2:21:32Interlake Sporting Association. It was

2:21:35commissioned after the after the filing

2:21:39of the appeal um to support the

2:21:42Interlakes Sporting Association's case

2:21:44at appeal. Um you know I think I can

2:21:47safely speak for my client that uh they

2:21:51didn't want to be in the position of um

2:21:54uh having to conduct an appeal and

2:21:57create evidence to support their case.

2:21:59But uh you know that is a a common

2:22:03practice and that is something that the

2:22:05Interlake Sporting Association felt

2:22:06compelled to do to prove the impact that

2:22:10they were alleging um given that this um

2:22:13dispute had come to the point where uh

2:22:17where it had to be litigated in the

2:22:18SEIPA appeal. Um but it was commissioned

2:22:21by the Interlake Sporting Association

2:22:23and we're not aware of any um study

2:22:27conducted by the city that has different

2:22:30or dissimilar results.

2:22:32>> And was the membership aware that the

2:22:34study was happening during that specific

2:22:36week?

2:22:38>> I would

2:22:41I would imagine that they would have

2:22:43been aware uh at least the board would

2:22:45have been aware it was a board

2:22:46commission study. I can't speak to

2:22:48whether the broader membership was

2:22:49aware.

2:22:54>> Any more questions of

2:22:58um Yes, Council President.

2:23:02>> Thank you. I'd like to be really certain

2:23:04that I understand one of the critical

2:23:06elements of the city's position. Um,

2:23:09exhibit three from the city is the

2:23:13environmental checklist from the most

2:23:15recent the the appeal that we are um

2:23:17here to discuss tonight. And I want to

2:23:20be certain um the hearing examiner in in

2:23:26her report identified that the checklist

2:23:29does not adequately discuss likely noise

2:23:32impacts. And exhibit 3 as presented

2:23:38has nearly a page of material on on um

2:23:43likely noise impacts that would be

2:23:45evaluated.

2:23:47So,

2:23:48am I un am I tying those two pieces of

2:23:51data together correctly and

2:23:53understanding that the city

2:23:55fundamentally doesn't agree um with the

2:23:59underlying

2:24:01um guidance or determination from the

2:24:04examiner on this particular issue. It

2:24:07seems like exhibit 3 is is the weight of

2:24:10this. Um but I'd like to understand the

2:24:12fuller record if possible.

2:24:15Uh

2:24:16Yes, overall I think that's correct. Um,

2:24:19not knowing what you're referencing in

2:24:21the recommendation, if you wouldn't mind

2:24:22giving me that reference point.

2:24:25>> My apologies. It is on

2:24:28uh page two of the PDF, page one of the

2:24:32of the cover sheet, essentially issues

2:24:34on appeal. In the appeal statement, the

2:24:36appellant alleged the following errors.

2:24:38Uh, the environmental checklist does not

2:24:40adequately uh discuss likely noise

2:24:43impacts. So in our discussion of exhibit

2:24:473, we are discussing that um the impacts

2:24:51have had been evaluated in the appeal.

2:24:55>> Sure. Let me let me just clarify so I

2:24:57make sure I respond to the correct

2:24:58question. You're referring to the

2:25:01recommendation page one that talks about

2:25:03the issues on appeal.

2:25:04>> Correct.

2:25:05>> Okay. Um that is just a summary just to

2:25:08go to process. That's just a summary. Uh

2:25:11to quickly refresh, our position from

2:25:15the city's perspective is that the

2:25:17supplemental sheet attached to the

2:25:19reissued DNS does adequately address the

2:25:22impacts by that discussion on the

2:25:24supplemental sheet.

2:25:25>> Thank you.

2:25:26>> Thank you.

2:25:30>> Any um question more questions for

2:25:35our presenters? Council member Critzer,

2:25:39>> I may ask a similar question to the one

2:25:41that was just asked but in a different

2:25:43way if if possible. Uh Mr. Salado, um

2:25:48it

2:25:50it seems seems to me that uh part of

2:25:52this is the city's argument that this

2:25:55would not um be likely to inc or that

2:25:58that that we cannot determine that it

2:26:01would be likely to increase the

2:26:02production of noise. Um, can can you

2:26:05speak to that?

2:26:09>> Um,

2:26:12yes. I think that that was I I can speak

2:26:14to that generally. I don't want to make

2:26:15sure that I stick to what uh was before

2:26:18the hearing examiner, but yes, just to

2:26:21um again review the city from the city's

2:26:24perspective that yes, the city reviewed

2:26:28the conditions, the use of that uh of

2:26:32that property at the time as addressed

2:26:35and addressed the ISA's comments that it

2:26:37provided uh in response to the initial

2:26:40sea checklist and adequately considered

2:26:43and decided that there was no

2:26:45significant adverse impact based upon

2:26:48their review of the entirety of those

2:26:50comments and all the underlying um

2:26:54I guess evidence at that point while the

2:26:56determination or when the determination

2:26:58was made. Does that

2:27:02what you were asking?

2:27:04>> Yes. Thank you.

2:27:04>> Okay.

2:27:09>> Any more questions, council members?

2:27:16Seeing none,

2:27:19um we are at the point where um council

2:27:21can I think they can discuss it amongst

2:27:25themselves if they would like to. Is

2:27:26that correct? They don't just have to

2:27:27ask questions of the

2:27:30of the uh two parties.

2:27:33>> That's correct, Mayor Birdie. They can

2:27:35deliberate. Yeah, if you would like to

2:27:37um deliberate um and then at at some

2:27:41point we need to have a a motion

2:27:44to approve or reject. Council member

2:27:47Pria.

2:27:52Um given the information presented

2:27:54tonight, um I want to bring our

2:27:56attention to uh page 22 of the PDF. Um

2:28:01page or page 23 of the PDF. Page 20.

2:28:04Page 22. Sorry, it's a long night. Page

2:28:0622 in the footer. Um, paragraph 4, the

2:28:10last section. Absent other analysis, uh,

2:28:14this appears to be clear error under um,

2:28:17Washington code.

2:28:21Given this finding, I am inclined to

2:28:24vote to approve the hearing examiner's

2:28:26um, recommendation.

2:28:28Um, I appreciate my colleague, Council

2:28:30Member Parsey's questions about costs to

2:28:33the city, even if they couldn't be

2:28:34answered. Um, and I think given the

2:28:37recommendation that we received tonight,

2:28:39uh, we are potentially exposing um, the

2:28:42city of Redmond

2:28:44um, to significant litigation if we were

2:28:47to proceed forward and try to enact um,

2:28:51try to enact this ordinance with this

2:28:53recommendation on the table now. So, I I

2:28:56would be in favor of going back uh to

2:28:58the drawing board and uh approving the

2:29:01hearing examiner's recommendation.

2:29:08>> Any other comments this evening?

2:29:13Discussion from council. Council

2:29:15President,

2:29:20thank you. I think there's a lot to

2:29:22consider in the record

2:29:24and the city is in a unique position.

2:29:34I think the question before us um

2:29:37shouldn't be made uh I I appreciate um

2:29:44risk management and

2:29:47um an instinct to risk management from

2:29:50my colleague but I think

2:29:53the feedback I I I think one way to

2:29:56observe the the report that we received

2:29:58from the hearing examiner is feedback on

2:30:01attempted policym

2:30:03And perhaps the feedback is um is just

2:30:08that and

2:30:11I don't know how I will um necessarily

2:30:14vote should a motion come to the floor

2:30:15tonight, but one way to interpret

2:30:18support for the recommendation from the

2:30:20hearing examiner would be to support

2:30:23continued policym

2:30:26um on the issue and um continued

2:30:30solution seeking.

2:30:33Um,

2:30:37so I just want to offer that as a a

2:30:39potentially different frame than the one

2:30:41previously offered among our discussion

2:30:44tonight. Thank you,

2:30:46>> Council Member Kitser.

2:30:49>> Thank you. Um, just to follow up on my

2:30:51colleagueu's comment, um, I do think

2:30:53that we should make this decision. Uh,

2:30:57not as as judging based on the evidence

2:31:02that's been brought to us, not

2:31:04necessarily the potential impacts to the

2:31:06city, which is why I think when the the

2:31:07question about the cost or the question

2:31:09about liability to the city was brought

2:31:11up, I think we we should take that out

2:31:13of of our um, look at this decision at

2:31:16the moment. um uh while being in this

2:31:20quasi judicial role. Um so I'll just

2:31:22underscore that point from my

2:31:23perspective and how I'll be thinking

2:31:25about this decision.

2:31:35Council member Sony. Um

2:31:37>> can I request um irrespective of

2:31:40whatever is the the decision

2:31:43uh maybe um if we can understand like

2:31:47you know what what will be

2:31:50you know what will happen basically if I

2:31:52have to have to ask you in a simple

2:31:54words

2:31:58>> I'll try and answer this just

2:32:00procedurally with how our ordinance is

2:32:02written. So, and maybe this will be a

2:32:05little helpful to to guide some of the

2:32:06discussion.

2:32:09This this appeal matter is specifically

2:32:12called out in the zoning code very

2:32:15specific for the SEIPA determination for

2:32:17non-p project action in that this is one

2:32:21of the only quasi judicial hearings that

2:32:23are in our code where you have delegated

2:32:27the power to the hearing examiner to be

2:32:30the factfinder to make a recommendation

2:32:34in the lens of what we call like the

2:32:37burden of proof. Is there is there a

2:32:40finding that there was clear error on

2:32:42the part of um the

2:32:46um SEIPA um representative in in making

2:32:50their determination

2:32:52that there is no significant

2:32:54environmental impact.

2:32:57So while there is

2:32:59nothing no independent standard of

2:33:02review which maybe is what might be part

2:33:06of the struggle of how to apply what

2:33:07what's before you. you are um your role

2:33:12is to be the ultimate decision maker

2:33:15taking the facts that the hearing

2:33:17examiner has uh summarized and

2:33:22determining whether those facts

2:33:24appropriately support her findings and

2:33:28recommendation to you.

2:33:32If there is a motion to accept her

2:33:36recommendation,

2:33:37then the um as she's laid out in the

2:33:46in the in the conclusion is that the

2:33:50environmental threshold determination

2:33:52would be remanded to the technical

2:33:54committee for further review.

2:33:57While I cannot predict how they will

2:34:00handle that if it's sent back to the

2:34:02technical committee, what the city would

2:34:04need to evaluate are the um the

2:34:08conclusions that were made. For example,

2:34:11there was a conclusion made around the

2:34:13need to expand upon the baseline. So

2:34:16would the city need to

2:34:18um what steps would the city need to

2:34:21take to create that baseline?

2:34:24Um, we have one noise study, but the

2:34:27city doesn't have its own. So, there

2:34:28would probably be a myriad of

2:34:30discussions that um and decisions that

2:34:33would need to be made as to how that

2:34:35would be addressed. Um,

2:34:38the

2:34:40I share that for procedural. I don't

2:34:43share that to to assert your decision-

2:34:46making. Um, and that that should be a

2:34:48consideration and that that would take

2:34:50time and and money. But I just say that

2:34:53to provide context of of where this

2:34:55would go. Um the alternative would be

2:34:59that you reject the hearing examiner's

2:35:02decision and you uphold that would

2:35:07default that you are upholding the

2:35:10recommend that the

2:35:12SEIPA uh representatives

2:35:16determination of non significance of

2:35:19non-environmental impact.

2:35:21Um

2:35:25does that answer your question at all?

2:35:31>> Yes to a certain extent that I I I can

2:35:34understand like you know it's a process

2:35:36a little complicated.

2:35:37>> Okay. If you want to rephrase it maybe I

2:35:41can provide some more clarity

2:35:44if that would be helpful.

2:35:45>> Yeah. Basically I wanted to understand

2:35:47in terms of the process say if we we

2:35:51accept the the hearings uh remark what

2:35:55will happen next as in terms of like the

2:35:58process steps and if we we reject then

2:36:03what will happen in terms of the process

2:36:05steps and maybe you know I can

2:36:07understand like you know your any of

2:36:09these things should not influence our

2:36:11decisions as council member criter said

2:36:14it should be purely based on the facts

2:36:16or the findings that we have received

2:36:18it. Uh but it I was just curious to know

2:36:22the process

2:36:23>> and and part of that does come from the

2:36:24hearing examiner's recommendation which

2:36:27is um identified in the last few pages

2:36:30on 21 and 22

2:36:33particularly her final although it's not

2:36:35it's a few sentences of her

2:36:36recommendation of what would happen if

2:36:39you were to accept her recommendation.

2:36:50Oh, sorry. Yes. Go ahead. I was I was

2:36:52reading what she was saying. I'll go

2:36:53council member for

2:36:55>> um

2:36:57sorry I lost my question a little bit in

2:36:59that. Um

2:37:01interested to

2:37:03again with that process.

2:37:06Uh remanding back to a technical

2:37:08committee that is no longer

2:37:12here

2:37:14um would would not necessarily be from

2:37:17my understanding would not necessarily

2:37:19be acceptance of the sea. It would just

2:37:24have the staff reook at everything and

2:37:27re-examine to make sure that we are

2:37:30within

2:37:32our bounds within the code state code um

2:37:37and re-evaluate the process moving

2:37:39forward. Is that is that an accurate

2:37:41assessment

2:37:42>> to some degree? I will add that her

2:37:45recommendation if if her recommendation

2:37:48as accepted

2:37:49um and maybe I'll just just read it is

2:37:52that the environmental threshold

2:37:53determination should be remanded to the

2:37:55technical committee for further review

2:37:58consistent with the conclusions herein.

2:38:00So the technical committee or whoever is

2:38:03in replacement of the technical

2:38:05committee would need to um re re view

2:38:09review a new threshold determination

2:38:11taking into account all five of her

2:38:13findings

2:38:16>> and we do whether or not the the

2:38:18technical committee still exists but

2:38:20there will still be that some sort of

2:38:22governing body. So I don't I'd like you

2:38:25there are people there to do the thing.

2:38:28[snorts] Um next I'll go to um Pria then

2:38:30Sony or and sorry then um Percy

2:38:33>> actually council member Parcy do you

2:38:35want to go first? I'd already given one

2:38:37initial comment.

2:38:38>> Sure. Um I also feel inclined to move

2:38:42forward accepting the hearing examiner's

2:38:45recommendation.

2:38:47I um believe that this um to to make

2:38:52sure that we have done our due diligence

2:38:55to not inadvertently

2:38:57um increase the impact for what we our

2:39:00purpose is to actually reduce the impact

2:39:02on the neighbors. I think it is

2:39:05justified due diligence that the city um

2:39:09should do to make sure that we don't um

2:39:12put forward policies that have negative

2:39:15consequence when we intend otherwise. Um

2:39:18so that is my uh position reading the

2:39:22hearing examiner's report. Um even

2:39:24though it could mean additional cost to

2:39:26the city um we're not taking that into

2:39:28account at this point. So um I'm

2:39:30inclined to move forward with that.

2:39:34Council member Repria.

2:39:36>> Yes, similar comment. Um, future

2:39:39litigation notwithstanding. Um, we are

2:39:42tasked today with identifying whether or

2:39:44not the city aired in their judgment of

2:39:48non-significance.

2:39:49And I think my interpretation of this

2:39:53document is that the city did heir

2:39:55because the city did not consider um the

2:39:58negative consequences. Um, I want to

2:40:01turn our attention to page 17 in the

2:40:03footer, um, of the hearing examiner

2:40:07recommendation, uh, paragraph 28. Um,

2:40:11I'm going to read the first sentence,

2:40:12which is that on cross- examination, Mr.

2:40:15Churchill testified that he did not

2:40:16review the informal noise study pro

2:40:18provided by the ISA based on the October

2:40:212025 sound data. uh when preparing the

2:40:24SEIPA checklist, he stated that he did

2:40:27not know whether anyone ever requested

2:40:29follow-up sound information after

2:40:30receipt of the ISA sound report and he

2:40:33did not personally request additional

2:40:35information. I I think that

2:40:40um my my interpretation is that we as a

2:40:44city we have to go through our due

2:40:45diligence and if we did not consider the

2:40:48negative effects um then I do think that

2:40:52the city aired and I would be supportive

2:40:54of um

2:40:57uh approving the the recommendation from

2:40:59the hearing examiner as I stated before.

2:41:02>> Council member Kitzer.

2:41:05Thank you. Um I would have a different

2:41:08perspective. I I don't I in looking at

2:41:11this I think it is a complicated case

2:41:14and or I believe actually the record

2:41:17shows that our city staff took great

2:41:19pains to do a lot of due diligence um on

2:41:22this um and that certain types of uh

2:41:27information that that was provided. They

2:41:30were able to use their technical

2:41:31judgment to decide which to which were

2:41:35applicable or not applicable. And so I

2:41:38would not characterize it as our staff

2:41:40did not do the due diligence um

2:41:42appropriate to this situation.

2:41:45Um I I am I'm in terms of thinking about

2:41:51actually what we decide to move forward

2:41:53with. I think if we did decide to move

2:41:56forward with accepting the the hearing

2:41:59examiner's recommendation,

2:42:01um I would I would uh be inclined to do

2:42:06that if

2:42:08more on the basis that um as as

2:42:11mentioned before

2:42:14we in this case we use the hearing

2:42:16examiner to do this deep dive and to

2:42:18look at a very complex issue in a case

2:42:21in which we are not um typically in the

2:42:24role of judge and uh examiner and expert

2:42:28and um an expert has examined this and

2:42:31weighed these different factors in which

2:42:34um there's there's a lot of of very

2:42:36credible arguments um and came to a very

2:42:39nuanced conclusion

2:42:41um and uh and I think to council member

2:42:44Parsy's point um if if we want to make

2:42:48sure that that we are doing an

2:42:50additional due diligence and that we are

2:42:53are listening to an expert that that did

2:42:55spend the time on this. Um that brings

2:42:58some additional expertise. Uh that might

2:43:01be the reason to to move forward with

2:43:03approving the hearing examiner. Um, but

2:43:06I do want to state for the record that

2:43:08that I do really appreciate the um

2:43:11perspectives and efforts from the city

2:43:13staff um to be able to do due diligence

2:43:16on this. And I'm not completely

2:43:18convinced myself that the case has been

2:43:22made that this would result in increased

2:43:27noise uh um to the point of of violating

2:43:32um the SEIPA um standards. So, but I I

2:43:37I'm if we're not sure if it's beyond a

2:43:39reasonable doubt, um, and we have an

2:43:42expert that looked at this, um, I might

2:43:44be inclined to to go with that, um, just

2:43:46to be, um, on the safe side.

2:43:51Any other comments from council members

2:43:52that haven't commented

2:43:56lately?

2:43:58Council President,

2:44:00thank you. I'll I'll say that Council

2:44:03Member Critzer articulated um many of my

2:44:06thoughts exactly. Um, I

2:44:10I am inclined to, as I said before,

2:44:14consider the hearing examiner's review

2:44:18of the of the record, which is very

2:44:20detailed and um,

2:44:23uh, painstakingly reviewed that re that

2:44:26record

2:44:28in order to provide feedback to the city

2:44:32on uh, potential next steps on a policy

2:44:36journey. I don't believe that um in any

2:44:39way accepting the hearing examiner's

2:44:42recommendation is the end of any policy

2:44:45road that anyone has won or lost that we

2:44:48just have a next step

2:44:50in in where we're going with all of

2:44:52this.

2:44:53Um,

2:44:55I also believe that city staff uh not

2:45:00only rep well represented the city um

2:45:03but also through as what is demonstrated

2:45:06in the record was delivering on council

2:45:09uh direction in so many uh steps of of

2:45:14uh how we got here today.

2:45:17Um,

2:45:22thank you,

2:45:25Council Member Parsy.

2:45:27>> I move to accept the hearing examiner's

2:45:30recommendation.

2:45:31>> Second. It's been moved and seconded. Is

2:45:33there any more discussion?

2:45:36Council member Newe Committee, Council

2:45:38Vice President.

2:45:39>> Thank you. Um,

2:45:43this this council already knows that my

2:45:46my my true northstar is always on

2:45:48integrity and

2:45:51um I would be in support of accepting

2:45:56the hearing examiner's recommendation

2:46:01because it's it's going to reinforce the

2:46:03integrity of the city's environmental re

2:46:06review process.

2:46:08And even if there there's regardless of

2:46:12anything else, um, for me, that's that's

2:46:15where I'm landing on on listening to a

2:46:18lot of the of the details. It's coming

2:46:21down for me in how can we reinforce the

2:46:24integrity of that process. Thank you.

2:46:27>> Any other comments on this?

2:46:30Seeing council council member Foresight.

2:46:35Um, I want to just thank uh, Council

2:46:38Member Kitser, Stuart, and Noea Kamina

2:46:40for their comments. um because I very

2:46:44much am in alignment with the uh process

2:46:48of just wanting to make sure we're doing

2:46:49our due diligence and to council member

2:46:51Percy's point um but I do also want to

2:46:54emphasize that I uh believe that the

2:46:57staff had done a lot of due diligence in

2:47:00this work and um that we are now

2:47:04entering a a period where we are just

2:47:06going to be re-examining some of that

2:47:10work against this finding and against uh

2:47:13the the code and um just taking this

2:47:17opportunity to really solidify how we

2:47:21can move forward, what that looks like

2:47:23across this um what was meant to be a

2:47:27citywide sweeping um ordinance

2:47:31um and making sure that we are

2:47:33protecting ourselves and doing our due

2:47:35diligence to the best of our efforts.

2:47:39Any other comment on this item? Council

2:47:41member Sony,

2:47:46>> perhaps today is one of the days which

2:47:48is where we have to take this decision

2:47:50and it has really made us think a lot.

2:47:55Um to to what council member Critzer

2:47:58said, there is lot of technical details

2:48:02is a lot of study that has happened in

2:48:04the past by our staff. um they've been

2:48:07like you know working tirelessly on this

2:48:10and then when there is an hearing

2:48:12examiner they have looked into multiple

2:48:15aspects maybe trying to you know prove

2:48:18the entire study to ensure that we are

2:48:20not missing anything. The decisions that

2:48:23we take here, they have to be based on

2:48:26doing the right things in the right way.

2:48:30And as council president Yakamina said,

2:48:33it's like, you know, living up to that

2:48:34integrity.

2:48:36I want to acknowledge I am not that

2:48:39technical expert if I have to take that

2:48:42decision. That's where uh we rely on lot

2:48:46of these these findings these

2:48:48recommendations that are presented to us

2:48:51and we have to take our decisions based

2:48:54on what is presented to us what we have

2:48:57it on the table. So if I'm looking at

2:48:59these recommendations that's coming from

2:49:01the hearing examiner where they had

2:49:03spent their time and efforts to look

2:49:05into the multiple details and they are

2:49:08recommending that it requires

2:49:12another study or you know more details

2:49:14into this thing we have to go with that

2:49:17because I believe like today when we

2:49:19have to take this decision that's the

2:49:21right way to do so you know I will be in

2:49:25support of uh moving this ahead.

2:49:31Seeing no more comment, this is a roll

2:49:34call vote starting with council.

2:49:35President Stewart

2:49:36>> I

2:49:37>> I

2:49:38>> I

2:49:39>> I

2:49:40>> I

2:49:40>> I

2:49:41>> I

2:49:42>> and that passes 70. Um they have

2:49:44accepted the report and we will uh share

2:49:47count next steps with council uh soon.

2:49:51With that concludes our business items

2:49:52of this meeting. If there is no

2:49:54objection, we are adjourned.

```*