►
From YouTube: Bothell City Council Meeting - May 9, 2023
Description
0:00:05 - Call to Order, Pledge of Allegiance & Roll Call
0:01:50 - Meeting Agenda Approval
0:02:00 - Public Engagement Opportunities
0:02:41 - Proclamation: Safe Boating and Paddling Week
0:06:10 - City Manager Report
0:09:55 - Council Committee Reports
0:11:05 - Visitor Comment
0:17:15 - Projected Agenda Discussion
0:17:25 - Consent Agenda
0:18:10 - Ordinances & Resolutions: Consideration of Ordinance Approving Board & Commission Code Amendments
0:34:45 - Ordinances & Resolutions: Consideration of Resolution to Adopt the 2021 Update of the Snohomish County Comprehensive Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Plan
1:00:55 - Other: Regional Crisis Response (RCR) Principals Assembly Appointment
1:07:10 - Study Session: Consideration of Resolution to Submit the Renewal of Urban District Emergency Medical Service (EMS) Levy to Voters in Snohomish County
1:49:30 - Study Session: Review Planning Commission Findings and Recommendations on Proposed Outdoor Dining Regulations
2:05:15 - Study Session: Shoreline Management Code (BMC Title 13) Amendments
2:50:05 - Council Conversations
A
A
The
city
of
Bothell
is
now
providing
the
option
of
attending
Council
meetings
remotely
or
in
Person.
Public
comment
will
be
allowed,
both
in
writing
or
verbally
verbal
comments
may
be
taken
either
in
person
or
remotely
sign
up
sheets
were
provided
online
by
the
city
clerk's
office
via
link
from
the
agenda.
A
call-in
phone
number
was
provided
on
the
meeting
agenda
for
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
listen
live
to
the
meeting.
A
If
you
have
called
in,
we
ask
that
you
mute
your
device
if
a
participant
fails
to
mute
their
connection
and
causes
A
disruption
to
the
meeting.
The
connection
will
be
terminated
for
a
study
session
item
we're
trying
something
new.
This
evening
we
will
recess
and
set
up
conference
tables
here
in
Chambers
and
conduct
a
study
session
from
here.
If
attending
virtually.
There
is
no
need
to
break
your
connection
at
this
point,
we'll
take
a
moment
to
take
roll
call
of
the
council
members
by
position.
Number
please
say
here
when
the
city
clerk
calls
your
name.
A
A
A
Our
middle
housing
survey
is
open
through
May
18th.
You
can
share
your
thoughts
about
current
middle
housing
proposals.
By
taking
the
survey
we
have,
a
sidewalk
survey
is
open
through
May
15th.
You
can
share
your
thoughts
on
how
we
can
make
sidewalks
paths
and
crossings
safer
for
pedestrians.
We
also
have
a
dog
Watcher
dog
walker
watch
class
Thursday
May
18th
at
6,
PM
I'm,
calling
all
dog
walkers
learn
how
and
when
to
call
9-1-1
when
spotting
suspicious
activity
in
your
neighborhood.
A
Residents
of
all
ages
engage
in
recreational
boating
and
whereas
the
city
of
Bothell
encompasses
the
Sammamish
River,
Lake,
Pleasant
and
other
waterways,
and
whereas
the
mission
of
the
United
States
Coast,
Guard
auxiliary,
is
to
promote
and
improve
recreational
boating
safety
by
teaching
boating
safety
courses
and
conducting
vessel
safety
checks.
Now,
therefore,
I'm
Mason
Thompson,
mayor
of
Bothell
Washington,
do
hereby
Proclaim
May
20th
through
26th
is
safe,
boating
and
paddling
week
in
the
city
of
Bothell
and
encourage
all
residents
to
learn
about
and
practice
safe
boating
and
I
believe
we
have
read
here
to
accept
thanks.
E
Ladies
and
gentlemen,
mayor
Thompson
is
team
members
of
the
city
of
Bothell
and
fellow
residents.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
address
you
in
this
important
occasion
as
a
proud
resident
myself
and
a
dedicated
volunteer
of
the
U.S
Coast
Guard
auxiliary
I'm
honored,
to
stand
before
you
to
accept
the
proclamation
of
safe
boating
and
paddling
week.
E
This
Proclamation
serves
as
a
powerful
reminder
of
our
shared
responsibility
to
ensure
safety
on
the
waterways
and
to
foster
a
culture
of
responsible
boating
and
paddling
in
our
beautiful
city,
I'd
like
to
express
my
gratitude
for
mayor
Thompson
and
the
city
council
for
their
dedication
to
promoting
safe
boating
and
paddling
in
Bothell.
Your
Proclamation
not
only
reflects
your
commitment
to
the
safety
of
our
residents,
but
also
helps
create
a
safer,
more
enjoyable
experience
for
all
who
visit
our
waterways
to
the
public.
E
I
encourage
you
to
take
this
this
opportunity
to
familiarize
yourself
with
the
boating
safety
guidelines
and
to
make
a
conscious
effort
to
prioritize
safety
in
all
your
water-based
activities.
Remember
a
little
preparation
goes
a
long
way
in
ensuring
a
safe
and
enjoyable
experience
on
the
water.
In
closing,
I'd
like
to
remind
everyone
that,
while
we
enjoy
the
beauty
and
excitement
of
our
waterways,
safety
should
always
be
our
top
priority.
E
B
You
mayor
good
evening,
city
council,
it's
a
beautiful
night
for
a
council
meeting.
I
have
two
two
quick
updates
tonight.
First
I
want
to
follow
up
on
one
of
the
items
that
was
in
the
community
outreach
event,
and
that
is
to
again
encourage
everyone
to
respond
to
the
surveys
we
have.
We
have
both
the
sidewalk
and
middle
housing
in
regards
to
Middle
housing.
As
you
know,
we
had
an
event.
B
Last
last
Wednesday
we
had
roughly
between
50
and
60
individuals
who
came
to
participate
in
addition
to
our
Planning
Commission
city,
council
and
staff,
of
course,
to
support
the
event
and
received
quite
a
bit
of
notes
and
take
away
that
that
information
will
come
back
to
council,
as
well
as
the
results
of
a
a
survey
poll.
That's
on
the
streets
right
now,
I
checked
with
our
community
development
department
and
as
of
4
30.
This
afternoon
we
have
170
responses.
B
B
Next
up
is
just
recognizing
that
we
are
coming
into
a
busy
season
of
shifting
into
summer,
but
we
know
we
have
a
number
of
things
that
the
council
is
interested
in
completing
before
your
before
your
break
in
August.
Two
of
those
dates
then
come
are
coming
up
in
quick
succession
in
that
on
June
20th,
which
is
a
Tuesday,
is
the
starting
of
AWC
event
and
I
know
a
number
of
council
members
plan
to
attend
that.
B
One
thing
that
we
would
ask
to
consider
is
whether
or
not
you
want
to
shift
that
meeting
to
June
27th
again,
if,
if
folks
need
more
time
to
consider
that
we
can
certainly
finalize
that
next
week,
but
I
just
wanted
to
raise
it,
the
other
one
probably
was
already.
You
don't
need
me
to
tell
you,
but
the
Fourth
of
July
is
also
on
a
Tuesday
night.
B
Our
assumption
with
that
one
would
be
to
to
shift
the
the
meeting
from
that
evening
to
the
fourth
Tuesday
of
July,
which
would
be
July,
25th
I
will
just
also
say
in
full
packaging
everything
the
schedule
that
is
before
you
in
terms
of
middle
housing,
code
amendments
which
were
as
directed
to
staff
earlier
this
year
when
additional
time
was
added.
The
the
request
was
to
bring
that
before
wrap
that
up
before
the
August
break
as
well.
B
That's
currently
scheduled
to
come
for
possible
action
on
the
18th
of
July,
so
adding
a
meeting
on
the
25th
I
just
want
to
make
it
clear
of
that.
That's
not
a
in
order
to
to
get
that,
but
we
are
looking
at
having
an
additional
meeting
after
the
18th
as
well
in
case
there's
more
time
or
other
items
that
are
building
up
on
our
schedule.
B
A
H
H
I
took
a
lot
of
notes,
there's
some
really
excellent
data
from
the
King
County
prosecutor's
office,
about
rates
and
the
rates
of
domestic
violence
and
how
it
has
shifted
over
time
how
pandemic
conditions
affected
it
and
also
they
shared
a
legislative
update
and
we
got
to
receive.
We
received
a
presentation
from
an
organization
called
Bridges,
which
is
a
diversion
and
Intervention
Program
for
adolescent
domestic
violence,
and
so
just
a
really
good
meeting
and
good
people
there.
So
thank
you.
A
Thank
you
all
right,
seeing
no
more
I'm
moving
on
the
city
has
accepted
visitor
comment
and
writing
as
well
as
accepted
sign
up
sheets
for
those
who
wish
to
speak
at
tonight's
meeting.
Written
comments
submitted
to
the
city
clerk
no
later
than
3
pm.
Today
we're
forwarded
to
All
City
Council
Members
and
are
part
of
the
record
when
the
clerk
calls
your
name.
You
will
have
three
minutes
to
speak.
Please
note.
The
council
will
receive
your
input,
but
on
the
advice
of
our
City
attorney,
we
do
not
engage
in
discussion
of
these
topics.
C
Do
mayor
Thompson,
thank
you.
First
off
we
have
one
person
that
submitted
written
comment
that
was
Joanne
Harkness,
who
wrote
regarding
the
use
of
private
parking
space
for
outdoor
dining
and
that
will
be
was
sent
to
you
earlier.
We
have
one
person
signed
up
to
speak,
that
is
Jeremy
Tadros
without
us.
If
you
want
to
step
to
the
podium
turn
on
the
little
mic
thing,
you
have
three
minutes
to
speak.
You'll
see
the
the
clock,
the
timer
on
the
dice
there,
it'll
it'll,
be
green
and
at
30
seconds,
it'll
turn
to
Yellow.
I
I
I'd
like
to
kind
of
game
out
that
scenario
for
Bothell,
if
Council
opts
to
not
have
a
planner
decides
to
try
to
prevent
growth
entirely.
As
of
right
now,
I
checked
this
earlier
today.
The
median
home
price
in
Bothell
is
981
000,
that's
if
you
include
condos
town
homes
and
everything
if
it's
just
single-family
homes,
it's
1.2
million,
and
that's
our
current
situation
right
now,
pretty
much
the
only
people
who
can
afford
homes
right
now
are
people
who
bought
them.
I
The
people
who
make
Bothell
run
people
who
make
Bothell
great
firefighters,
city
workers,
minimum
wage
workers.
People
who
are
running
and
working
in
our
businesses
will
not
be
able
to
afford
to
live
in
the
city
that
they
are
providing
and
helping
support,
and
when
that
happens,
basically
you're
going
to
lose
a
lot
of
social
cohesion.
I
C
J
J
One
way
an
hour
at
least
I
did
that
for
12
years
and
I
did
that,
because
I
bought
in
Bothell
I
grew
up
in
Federal
Way,
and
let
me
tell
you
my
mom
and
dad's
house
in
Federal
Way,
which
I
could
have
bought
for
30
percent.
Less
it's
a
nice
place
still
is
hardwood
floors.
Four
bedrooms,
two
baths:
it's
a
better
house
than
I
own
now,
but
I've
decided
buying
Bothell
for
195
000
I
floated
that
note
making
38.5
but
I
loved,
coming
back
home
after
work,
even
through
an
hour
and
45
minutes,
commute.
J
A
A
D
A
B
C
C
So
Council
concurred
at
that
study
session
with
the
following
term
changes.
So
standardizing
the
terms
on
the
landmark
board
from
a
five-year
to
a
four-year
term,
the
Arts
commission,
from
a
three-year
to
a
four-year
term,
with
the
youth
terms
being
two
years
and
the
Parks
Board
from
a
three-year
to
a
four-year
term,
with
youth
being
two
years.
C
They
also
concurred
with,
since
you
also
concurred
with
confetti
in
the
library
board,
changing
the
salary
commission
from
a
standing
committee
to
an
ad
hoc
committee
and
the
term.
The
adjustment
of
the
terms
would
begin.
May,
1,
starting
in
2024
and
end
April.
30Th
council
did
defer
the
staff's
recommendation
to
make
the
shorelines
board
an
ad
hoc
committee.
C
So
what's
next
is
we
will
have
a
second
study
session
to
focus
on
some
other
things
that
we
would
asking
Council
to
implement
and
look
at
one
is
revisiting
the
shoreline's
board
recommendation
to
make
that
an
ad
hoc
company
we'll
have
more
information
on
that.
The
others
are
roles
and
responsibilities
for
both
Council
and
boards
and
commission
how
they're
going
to
coordinate
and
Community
engagement
and
inclusive,
inclusive
activity
and
representation.
G
Well,
I
was
watching
this
at
home
this
with
ice
packs,
and
you
know
my
little
pity
party
going
on
and
it
may
have
been
discussed,
but
I
guess
I
should
run
it
by
our
City
attorney.
First
to
whether
or
not
it's
even
something
that
we
could
do,
we
have
struggled
with,
we
have
a
huge
Community
interest
in
serving
on
boards
and
commissions.
Huge
and
expanding
the
the
head
count
on
boards
and
commissions
makes
a
lot
of
cooks
in
the
kitchen,
so
I
thought.
If
you
talked
about
this
and
I
missed
it.
G
G
L
L
Yep
so,
for
example,
in
the
section
one
under
BMC
2.34.030
for
membership
terms-
and
this
is
regarding
ltch
positions-
two
four
and
six
shall
expire
in
odd
number
of
years
positions,
three
five
and
seven
expire
in
even
numbered
years
and
that
repeats
itself
also
in
the
Civil,
Service,
Commission
and
other
commissions,
where
and
I
think
Planning
Commission
as
well,
where
they
talk
about
the
the
dates
but
I,
don't
recall.
Reading.
I
G
Can
we
do
term
limits
with
the
caveat
that
if
positions
are
unfilled,
then
someone
who
goes
past
the
term
limit,
you
know
say
we
set
the
terminal,
it's
at
two
term
limits
with
the
caveat
that
if
no
one
applies
for
it,
someone
can
continue
for
a
third
but
I
thought
if
we
had
turn
limits-
and
maybe
this
is
something
we
want
to
think
about
and
decide
about
later,
but
if
we
had
term
limits
that
would
allow
more,
in
theory,
more
members
of
the
community
to
participate
on
our
boards
and
commissions.
So.
L
G
We
might
not
be
able
to
do
it,
but
we
might
be
able
to
okay.
So
let's,
let's
talk
about
that
later
and
then
the
other
thing
is
what
that,
when
we
talk
about
Shoreline
board
staff
has
been
really
excellent
in
when
we've
had
a
topic.
That's
moved
an
agenda
item
that
is
moved
on
for
discussion,
including
comments
from
people.
Can
we
make
sure
that
when
we
bring
Shoreline
that
we
have
the
comments
that
Suzanne,
Burnell
and
Anna
guard
had
I
think
she
presented
last
in
April?
F
No
thank
you.
Mayor
yeah
I
just
had
a
couple
comments
around
the
terms
of
service,
so
when
I
look
at
a
three
to
four
year
term
and
the
opportunities
that,
with
with
all
those
in
our
community
that
want
to
serve
and
potentially
serve
the
longer,
the
term
I
feel
the
less
opportunity
we're
giving
to
members
of
our
community
to
serve
and
I'm.
Just
I
want
to
gauge
from
a
from
a
council's
perspective
is,
is
increasing
the
term
in
one
case,
for
the
Arts
commission
as
an
example
from
three
to
four
years.
F
So
to
me,
I,
look
at
that
as
I
would
rather
do
the
work
to
ensure
that
we're
allowing
as
many
community
members
the
opportunity
to
serve
and
not
having
such
long
terms
right
if
more
people
come,
give
more
people
opportunity.
So,
for
not
increasing
the
number
of
people
on
the
boards
and
commissions,
then
how
do
we
get
more
people
involved,
especially
when
we're
going
three
four
five
years
down
the
road?
F
So
that's
just
you
know
a
comment
that
I
wanted
to
make
that
I
feel
like
when
we
want
to
be
inclusionary
and
intentional
about
making
sure
that
we
hear
as
many
voices
from
our
community
as
possible.
I
feel
like
this
is
one
area
where
you
know,
because
of
the
workload
we're
trying
to
extend
the
time
of
the
committee
boards
and
commissions
versus
reducing
it,
having
more
people
come
in
front
of
us
and
giving
more
opportunity,
that's
just
my
my
take
on
it
after
looking
at
this.
D
Yeah
I
assumed-
and
you
know
when
somebody
assumes
what
that
means,
because
councilman
McNeil
brought
up
a
very
good
point
and
councilman
is
a
community
engagement,
inclusivity
and
representation.
I
thought
you're
going
to
be
making
a
I
assume
that
that
includes
different
ways
of
including
or
expanding
Community
engagement,
inclusion
in
the
not
only
in
the
process,
but
also
being
involved
for
longer
than
the
more
than
just
an
interview
right.
You
know.
C
Back
in
I
want
to
say
October
last
year,
maybe
prior
that
the
previous
summer
we
did
a
survey
of
the
boards
and
commissions
but
yeah
we're
gonna
focus
on
this
summer,
like
reaching
out
to
the
boards
and
commissions
reaching
out
to
the
community.
To
see
you
know.
So
we
can
bring
back
some
some
suggestions
and
how
we
can
do
more
to
include
the
public
and.
C
Four
years
in
its
standard,
because
we
have
some
boards
that
were
five-year
terms,
some
three,
some
four,
so
we
were
just
trying
to
standardize
it
across.
You
know,
but
the
term
you're
still
going
to
have
staggered
terms
and
you're
still
going
to
have
interviews
every
year
and
people
drop
off,
Etc,
et
cetera,.
M
D
So
I
was
so.
My
assumption
was
correct
that
that
part
of
that
conversation
is
going
to
be
all
of
the
above.
What
we
just
talked
about
is
that
correct,
like
having
more
people.
How
do
we
involve?
Have
more
people
involved?
How
if
we
can
add
more
committees
if
we
can
reduce
the
length
of
the
period
of
time,
if
we
can
do
term
limits,
and
all
these
kind
of
things
is
that
going
to
be
discussion.
C
Robin,
can
you
go
back
to
that
slide?
Are
you
trying?
Thank
you
sorry,
yep.
Oh
you
passed
it
there
you
go
yeah,
so
we
were
changing
the
landmark
board
from
a
five-year
to
a
four-year
term
and
then
Arts
commission
from
three
to
four
years
and
Parks
Board
from
three
to
four
years,
but
the
youth
positions,
we're
recommending
that
and
we
to
change
those
to
two-year
terms
because
they
turn
over
a
lot.
The
youth,
kids.
K
Thank
you
mayor.
Thank
you
for
the
presentation.
I
I,
like
the
idea
of
standardizing
the
terms
I,
think
it
makes
things
a
lot
clearer
to
everybody,
I
think
in
September,
looking
at
either
a
different
term
length,
there
are
more
people
on
boards
makes
total
sense,
but
for
this
tonight,
I
like
it
and
I
plan
to
vote.
Yes,
thank
you.
A
F
Yeah,
thank
you
mayor
and
I
appreciate.
The
motion
in
the
second
I
will
not
be
supporting
this
motion,
not
by
way
of
not
supporting
council's
decision,
but
just
by
way
of
making
sure
and
ensuring
that
we
we
here
from
as
many
members
of
our
community
as
possible,
and
that
we
figure
out
ways
to
shorten
terms
so
that
we
can
have
more
participation
for
members
of
our
community.
So
I
do
support
members
of
our
community
that
come
forward
and
want
to
participate
and
I
think
sometimes
terms
that
are
four
years
limit.
F
G
Yeah
I
can
appreciate
the
intent
from
council
member
McNeil
on
trying
to
make
the
boards
and
commissions
accessible
to
more
of
the
commit
community
and
he's
brought
up
some
good
points.
I
will
support
this,
but
I
will
also
be
looking
in
September,
for
how
do
we
go
about
encouraging
more
Community
involvement
in
term
limits?
A
B
Thank
you
mayor
and
we've
been
emphasizing
a
flow
of
information
through
study
session
right
recently,
as
you
may
have
observed,
I
want
to
call
out
this
item
tonight
and
just
note
that,
as
Emily
will
explain
in
further
detail
that
this
was
an
exception
of
this
will
be
the
first
touch
for
Council
and
we
do
have
a
resolution
before
you.
Just
something
to
reinforce
is
that
by
taking
action
tonight
no
service
will
change
within
the
community.
B
Any
any
changes
that
come
forward
as
again
Emily
will
highlight
would
be
it
would
impact
if
the
city
were
to
Antics
additional
areas
within
Snohomish
County
to
the
community.
So
again,
there's
there's
no
operational
impact
of
making
a
decision
tonight
and
at
the
same
time,
if
there's
more
information
needed.
That's
always
a
great
question
to
ask
too
so
to
walk
us
through
more
information
and
actually
to
introduce
our
colleague
from
Snohomish
County
I'm,
going
to
turn
things
over
to
Emily
Warnock.
Our
sustainability
and
engagement
coordinator
take.
O
Well
that,
while
that
presentation
is
coming
up,
thank
you
everyone.
My
name
is
John
grindinger
I'm,
an
operations
manager
with
the
solar
waste
division
up
in
Snohomish
County,
and
the
presentation
that
I'm
going
to
go
over
tonight
is
a
a
brief
I'm
going
to
go
through
fast.
It's
10,
slides
on
the
solid
and
hazardous
waste
comprehensive
plan
and.
O
What
I'm
going
to
ask
for
tonight
is
for
Council
to
approve
a
resolution
of
adoption
for
the
comprehensive
plan
that
the
mayor
can
sign
and
then
I
will
take
that
that
resolution
and
package
it
up
into
to
the
Department
of
ecology.
So
that's
that's
kind
of
the
the
ask,
and
so
the
resolution
of
adoption
and
the
interlocal
Agreements
are
kind
of
two
different
things
but
related
sorry,
yeah
right,
perfect.
N
O
We're
not
we're
not
oh,
so
you're
going
to
control
the
slides
perfect.
Thank
you.
So
what
I'm
going
to
kind
of
go
over
just
real
quick
is
the
the
timeline
of
the
update
process
and
kind
of
what
we
went
through
to
do
this
a
general
overview
of
the
plant
elements
and
there's
basically
three
parts
to
it.
There's
a
volume
one
volume
two
and
the
appendices
I
want
to
give
you
kind
of
the
next
steps
of
what
we're
doing
with
the
comp
plan
and
just
some
general
Solid
Waste
updates.
O
O
O
So
we've
been
through
three
Grant
administrators
at
the
department
of
ecology.
We've
been
through
three
Solid
Waste
directors
in
the
solid
waste
division
we've
been
through
our
swac,
our
Solid
Waste
advisory
committee
has
changed
more
than
half
of
the
members.
It's
been
a
grind
and
so
I'm
excited
to
continue
this
this
process,
so
the
top
part
that's
been
completed.
O
We
we
started
in
2020,
we
went
through
multiple
swac
meetings,
ecology,
review
public
comment,
took
those
comments
and
got
endorsement
from
slack
and
did
the
CPA
review,
and
so
for
the
last
little
bit,
I've
been
going
to
all
the
cities
for
their
resolution
of
adoptions
for
the
plan
last
month,
County
Council
just
finished.
They
did
their
resolution
of
adoption
of
the
plan,
and
so
once
I
can
get
the
city
of
bothell's
resolution.
I
will
get.
O
O
Don't
know
if
that's
going
to
be
you
or
not,
for
a
swac
member
from
the
city
of
Bothell,
because
currently
we
don't
have,
we
don't
have
one
and
then
I've
done
multiple
presentations
for
City
councils
throughout
the
county,
so
a
general
high-level
overview
of
the
of
the
plan-
and
this
is
the
first
section,
it's
kind
of
like
an
expanded
executive
summary
and
really
it's.
The
plan
provides
for
a
framework
for
solid
waste
activities
in
Snohomish
County,
and
it
really
has
a
focus
for
this.
O
O
Volume
two
now
this
is
the
meat
of
the
of
the
plan
and
on
the
slide,
so
we
call
these
all
technical
memorandums,
they're
they're,
individual
chapters
that
really
get
into
the
Weeds
on
some
of
these
specific
items
and
so
on
the
left.
It
follows
kind
of
the
kind
of
the
path
of
solid
waste,
I
guess
from
just
in
general,
climate
change
and
sustainability,
all
the
way
through
like
recycling
Organics
and
then
the
waste
like
creating
the
waste
and
then
the
transfer
and
Disposal.
O
So
it's
kind
of
the
path
within
each
technical
memorandum
of
of
the
plan
on
the
right.
That
reviews,
the
summary
background
and
the
existing
programs
planning
issues
and
each
chapter
has
recommendations
and
Alternatives
associated
with
it,
and
so
the
idea
there
is
those
chapters
on
those
specific
topics
will
kind
of
guide
activities
for
for
the
solid
waste
Division
and
the
community
next
slide.
O
The
third
part
of
the
plan
is
the
appendices.
The
department
of
ecology
requires
lots
of
background
information
in
there,
and
so
a
lot
of
these
are
kind
of
mandated
items.
We
roll
our
our
mrw.
The
moderate
risk
waste
plan
into
the
overall
comp
plan.
A
lot
of
jurisdiction,
keep
it
separate.
The
big
thing
here
is
the
the
contamination
reduction
Outreach
plan.
That
was
a
that
was
a
new,
a
new
law
that
ecology
brought
into
I,
think
that
was
a
that
was
a
20.
O
O
So
the
next
steps
would
be
that
I.
Ask
that
you
approve
a
resolution
of
adoption
for
the
mayor
to
sign
and
then
I
will
do
next
week
as
a
as
we
have
a
swac
meeting,
and
so
we'll
do
one
final
review
of
the
waste
and
recycling
elements
of
of
the
plan,
all
package
it
up,
submit
it
to
the
Department
of
ecology
and
then
the
idea
here
is
to
have
it
be
a
bit
more
Dynamic
and
usable
framework,
because
when
I,
when
I
started
this
in
in
2020,
we
were
moving.
O
O
B
I'm
gonna
step
in
John
I'm,
sorry,
but
we
can.
We
can
follow
up
with
more
information
on
that
I
think
with
okay,
not
having
that
be
a
decision.
That's
before
council
tonight,
I
think
we
should
probably
get
some
more
information
and
tee
that
up
for
a
deeper
discussion
before
we
dive
into
what
it
would
look
like
and
take
a
look
at
all
of
our
representation,
including
in
King
County
as
well.
H
O
I
would
I
would
say
about
half
you
know.
The
north
half
of
the
city
of
Bothell
is
in
Snohomish
County,
so
it's
split
evenly,
but
in
2011
there
was
a
series
of
agreements
where
it
was
decided,
I
think
procedurally,
because
it's
I
can
understand
how
it's
difficult
to
okay.
You
got
the
county
boundary
south
of
that
arbitrary
boundary
right.
It
has
to
go
to
the
King
County
system
and
North.
It
has
to
go
it.
Procedurally,
there's
there's
a
lot
of
logistics.
There
right
yeah.
So
in
2011
those
agreements
were
put
into
place.
O
It's
a
50-year
agreement.
It
goes
to
the
year
I.
Think
it's
a
I!
Think
it's
2057,
something
like
that
that
the
agreement
goes
to
but
yeah
that's
kind
of
the
design
and
and
earlier
there
was
the
discussion
about
the
annexations,
because
there's
there's
a
little
island
that
we're
kind
of
talking
about
I've
reached
out
to
King
County
on
that
and
I'm
waiting
for
them
to
return.
My
emails
on
what
that
kind
of
adjustment
might
look
like,
but
yeah
it's
it's
kind
of
odd,
but
That's
What,
It,
Is,
Well,.
O
B
G
F
O
Well,
not
the
resolution
of
adoption
and
the
in
the
comp
plan
are
all
the
interlocal
agreements
that
we
have
with
Bothell
and
all
the
other
cities
and
towns
in
Snohomish
County,
so
those
those
are
part
of
it
there.
Ultimately,
it's
to
provide
efficient
services
for
all
the
residents
of
Snohomish
County,
including
the
city
of
Bothell
residence,
and
so
by
that
interlocal
agreement
that
we
have
that's.
The
idea
is,
as
of
that
2011
boundary,
all
those
services
are
going
to
go
south
to
King
County.
It.
F
Allows
us
to
have
a
free
boundary.
Yeah,
basically,
is
what
we're
doing
we're.
Providing
we're
able
to
provide
a
level
of
service
to
Snohomish
County,
with
a
partnership
with
King
County
as
well
correct.
Is
that
what
I'm
understanding?
Okay
I
just
wanted
to
get
that
out
there,
because
that
is
that's
what
I
know
is
happening,
but
I
want
to
make
sure
that,
as
we
have
this
conversation,
the
community
understands
yeah
as
well,
because
if
you.
O
D
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
This
is
I
was
confused
as
well,
but
thank
you
for
clarifying
the
question
I
have
is,
has
I'm
assuming,
but
then
again
you
know
what
that
mean.
I
am
that
staff
City
staff
has
reviewed
the
this
this
plan
and
signed
off
on
it
and
it's
ready
to
go.
We
just
need
to
approve
it.
Then
it's
like.
D
O
That's
that
is,
there
are
two
distinct
parts
to
getting
a
plan
approved.
Is
you
have
to
have
the
Isles
which
at
this
point,
they're
not
changing
right
and
you
have
to
have
a
resolution
of
adoption
from
all
the
cities
and
towns
and
those
are
the
two
pieces
that,
in
conjunction
with
the
plan
that
I
have
to
submit
that
whole
package
to
ecology
yeah,
so
the
ilas
aren't
changing
there
may
be.
If
we
have
to
do
some
well
you'll
get
into
that
later.
D
Department
of
college,
because
we
haven't
seen
the
the
actual
details,
except
for
the
summary,
the
you
know
the
the
headlines
that
you
just
showed
us
there.
What
I'm,
assuming
that
staff,
has
reviewed
and
approved
all
the
details
in
there
and
they're
okay
with
it
for
the
plan
for
the
plan.
Yes
well
for
the
well
city
council
is
going
to
approve
something
that
we
haven't
seen
so
the
details
of
which
we
haven't
seen
all
we've
seen.
Is
this
contract
there's
this
presentations
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that.
N
K
I
just
want
to
clarify
for
my
understanding
and
for
everybody.
We
have
to
approve
this
because
we
are
a
Snohomish
County
city,
but
in
practice,
unless
we
Annex
another
part
within
Snohomish
County,
it
doesn't
mean
anything
to
residents
of
Bothell
because
it
does
not
apply
to
us
because
we
have
an
interlocal
agreement
and
our
waste
is
all
managed
the
same.
So
we
have
to
approve
it
for
you
to
file
your
plan,
but
it
doesn't
actually
do
anything.
K
O
Okay
in
in
in
the
ilas
there's
a
piece
in
there
that
talks
about
Bothell
participation
in
the
swac
right
and
participation
with
the
the
comp
plan
right
and
so
this.
This
is
the
participation
participation
in
the
comp
plan
piece,
but
it
is
just
it's
just
a
checklist,
a
procedural
item
that
that
that
we
need
to
continue.
But
it's
not
going
to
change
any
of
the
Solid
Waste
Services
and
going
forward.
K
And
I
like
that
I,
actually,
my
other
member
who
lives
in
the
Snohomish
County
part
of
the
city
is
not
here
tonight,
but
I
do
and
even
though
our
waste
goes
to
the
King
County
system,
we
still
use
like
them.
I
use
the
Mountlake
Terrace
transfer
station
when
I
go
through
my
cleaning
phases
and
all
that
stuff,
so
totally
get
it.
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
we
were
all
on
the
same
page
that
the
impact
is
not
immediate,
but
that
you
need
our
sign
off
to
file
your
overall
comprehensive
plan.
Correct.
D
For
the
record,
I,
don't
I,
usually
at
work
in
my
day,
job
I,
don't
sign
contracts
without
actually
look
at
them
so
and
I
realized
that
there's
it
was
linked
and
I
tried
to
browse
through
it,
but
I'm,
not
an
expert.
You
know
my
day
job
come
ask
me
any
questions.
I'll,
give
you
all
the
answers,
but
so
that's
why
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
all
on
the
same
page
that
staff
is
good
with
it
and
I
trust
our
city
staff
and
I'll
be
good
with
this.
H
For
pointing
us
to
the
link
in
our
packet,
a
quick
search
of
just
the
word
Bothell
reiterates.
What
we're
hearing
tonight
is
that
Bothell
has
an
agreement
with
King
County
or
with
Recology
for
all
of
our
ways
to
go
to
King,
County
and
that's
part
of
the
plan,
so
we're
basically
approving
the
plan
that
we're
going
to
keep
our
level
of
service
that
we
have
is
that
one
way
to
put
it
cool,
nothing's.
A
G
A
B
That's
right:
it's
a
complicated
system.
We
will
talk
about
appointment
of
positions.
Now,
as
Council
knows,
last
fall
you
were
presented
with
interlocal
agreement
to
form
their
Regional
Crisis
response
agency,
known
as
the
acronym
eraser,
and
so
the
the
organization
was
was
formed
and
initiated
on
January
1st,
the
executive
board
has
been
meeting.
One
of
the
primary
actions
was
to
hire
an
executive
director
which
took
place
in
in
April
and
or
in
March
and
Brooke.
A
B
Now
at
this
assemble
they're,
putting
together
one
of
the
pieces
that
is
yet
to
come,
is
that
you'll
see
in
your
agenda
Bill
there
is
a
organization
chart
of
how
this
multi-agency
Cooperative
is
organized
and
one
of
the
the
pieces
in
there
is
to
have
a
principles
assembly
and
for
those
who
may
not
be
as
familiar
who
are
watching
at
home
as
Bothell
being
one
of
the
Cities.
That's
a
member
of
this.
We
are
considered
a
principal
agency
per
the
Ila.
B
The
current
agencies
who
joined
at
the
beginning
will
be
the
Principal
cities
for
at
least
a
year
of
operations
and
at
that
time
any
other
locality
that
shares
a
border
with
an
existing
agency
is
able
to
join
with
that
said,
the
first
principles
assembly
is
scheduled
to
take
place
on
June
28th.
That's
still
a
tentative
schedule
because,
as
we
are
having
this
discussion,
several
other
cities
are
also
appointing
who
their
representative
would
be
per
the
Ila
each
principal
agency.
B
So
each
City
in
this
case
would
select
one
council
member
to
serve
as
the
primary
representative
per
our
Norm
in
Bothell.
It
would
also
be
open
to
the
idea
of
selecting
a
a
an
alternate
in
case.
Certain
dates
don't
work.
The
commitment
level
is
outlined
in
the
agenda
Bill
and
also
found
in
the
directly
quoted
from
the
interlocal
agreement
that
the
principles
assembly
after
the
first
biennial
will
most
likely
meet
once
a
year
unless
the
council,
from
one
of
the
principal
cities,
calls
for
a
meeting
to
take
place.
B
With
that
we're
planning
on
following,
what's
outlined
in
section
2.08,
section
g
of
the
city
council
protocol
Manual
of
how
you
appoint
representatives
to
external
committees
or
committee
assignments,
in
which
case
we'd
be
looking
for
concurrence
of
counsel
on
who
to
appoint
this.
Then,
for
the
for
this
position,
the
term
would
last
until
next
January,
which
is
our
next
regularly
scheduled
time
to
review
all
of
the
committee
assignments
for
the
council
and
we'd
pick
it
back
up
then.
So,
with
that
I'll
pause
and
be
happy
to
respond
to
any
questions.
K
H
H
Request
an
alternate
like
if
there's
another
name
that
could
come
forward,
and
this
has
not
been
discussed
beforehand.
So
I,
don't
I,
don't
know
who
I'm
well,
I'm
I'm,
just
volunteering
people
I'm
sorry,
but
if
councilmember
McNeil
or
Deputy
mayoral
Cobra
were
interested
to
be
my
alternate
I
would
appreciate
it.
L
A
A
A
A
B
B
Kuan
Wong
is
here
to
present
a
study
session,
with
a
consideration
of
a
resolution
to
submit
the
renewal
of
urban
District
Emergency
Medical
Service
EMS
Levy
to
voters
in
Snohomish,
County
Juan
will
touch
on
the
on
the
details
of
this
and
I
would
just
really
emphasize
too
that
this
would
be
a
renewal.
This
is
not
a
new
Levy
and
Quan
will
walk
you
through.
What
that
looks
like
take
it.
P
Away,
thank
you
city
manager,
good
evening,
mayor
council
members,
so
we
are
in
front
of
you
seeking
feedback
tonight
on
a
potential
resolution
before
you
schedule
next
month
to
renew
this
Snohomish
County
Emergency,
Medical,
Services,
Levy
and
again,
as
Kyle
said,
this
is
a
renewal.
This
is
not
a
new
Levy.
We
have
done
this
in
the
past
many
years,
so
we're
here
to
answer
questions
that
you
have
with
me
on
Zoom
is
that
our
deputies,
Finance
director
and
also
our
silly
Bank,
Council,
LS
I,
hope
she's
online
soon.
P
But
anyway,
let
me
kick
off
the
study
session
with
an
overview,
so
the
current
six-year
Snohomish
County
EMS
Levy,
passed
by
the
voters
back
in
2017,
will
expire
on
January
1st
2024.
So
this
is
a
timely
data
will
come
before
you
asking
for
feedback
and
again
on
June
13th
I
will
come
before
you
with
a
resolution
for
you
to
adopt.
P
So
a
vote
of
your
resolution
is
scheduled
again
before
the
console
on
June
13th.
We
do
have
some
deadline
later
on.
I
will
point
out
that
we
have
to
file
the
ballot
with
this
Snohomish
County
auditor
or
before
August
1st
this
year,
so
the
next
slide.
So
this
is
a
staff's
recommendation
for
your
consideration.
So
you
can
ask
us
your
questions
between
now
and
June,
so
the
proposed
six-year
EMS
Levy
that
the
staff
is
recommending
will
be
a
26.5
cents
per
1000.
P
Dollar
assess
value
and
again
this
is
a
lower
rate
than
the
one
we
passed
almost
six
years
ago.
So
this
is
a
lower
rate,
but
the
purpose
is
not
about
whether
we
adopt
a
different
rates
is
really
empowered
with
a
walking
county
is
paying
or
the
King
County
residents
paying.
So
what
we're
recommending
to
you
is
just
you
know,
be
empowered
with
King
County's
rate,
so
this
will
let
Snohomish
and
King
County
residents
of
the
city
pay
the
same
Levy
rate
for
sharing
the
cost
of
providing
EMS
within
the
city.
P
This
rate
will
yield
an
estimated
2.18
million
dollar
annually,
based
on
2023
assessed
value
for
the
snow,
homage
County
side
of
Bothell,
so
the
amount
is
approximately
535
000
more
than
in
the
adopted
2024
budget.
So
I
can
explain
that
later.
So
again,
it's
not
about
the
revenue,
but
the
policy
choices
to
have
the
rate
in
practice
with
what
we
have
done
in
the
past.
P
P
A
So
this
so
so
Snohomish
County
residents,
since
this
is
a
renewal
of
a
levy,
they
won't
see
their
property
taxes
go
up
because
of
this
correct
perfect.
That
and
the
fact
that
this
is
something
that
the
community
has
already
voted
for
and
already
told
us
they
want.
I
am
not
going
to
tell
them.
They
can't
have
it.
G
P
B
Yeah
and
that's
what
I
would
want
to
clarify
I
think
that's
what
you
meant
was
a
public
hearing.
Public
comment,
absolutely
emails
letters
any
way
of
communicating
with
the
council
before
your
vote.
Absolutely
Juan
is
pointing
out
that
there
isn't
a
public
hearing
required
but
to
make
sure
the
council
knows
whether
or
not
you
want
one
but
public
comment.
Absolutely.
Q
M
K
G
I
know
that
in
the
scheme
of
things,
when
people
look
at
their
property
tax,
they're
not
going
to
look
at
it
and
go
wow.
Look
how
much
my
property
tax
has
gone
down,
but
I
hope
they
can
feel
a
little
bit
of
relief
with
this.
If,
if
this
and
I'm
hoping
and
anticipating
that
it
will
pass
but
I
I
do
hope
that
people
will
see
a
little
bit
of
relief.
M
F
F
Gotcha,
so
there's
no
difference
in
the
level
of
service
the
EMS
service
in
Snohomish
versus
King
County,
that's
correct,
okay,
so
some
so
obviously
the
community
supports
this,
but
just
want
to
raise.
You
know
where
I
see
is
the
assessed
values
of
King
County
the
same
as
the
assessed
values
of
Snohomish,
County,
meaning
if
you
live
in
King,
County
and
you're
assessed
at
one
or
eight
right,
your
house,
your
house
value
is
one
thing
versus
Snohomish
County.
F
It
could
be
slightly
different
correct,
so
you
could
live
in
the
same
square
foot
home,
but
your
value
of
your
home
in
King
County
might
be
worth
more
than
the
value
of
your
home
in
Snohomish
County,
so
you're
paying
more
for
the
levy
because
of
the
assessed
value
of
your
home.
The
rate
is
the
same
across
the
board
you're
just
paying
more.
For
that.
Correct
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I'm,
I'm
understanding.
B
Correct
is
saying
it
yeah
the
assess
the
the
assessed
value
will
be
different
in
different
parts
of
the
community
and
different
houses.
Absolutely
the
rate
is
the
parity
that
we're
aiming
for,
which
has
been
the
council's
practice.
I
believe
when
we
researched
this
that's
been.
The
historic
practice
of
the
council
is
to
shoot
for
parity
of
the
rate
between
the
two
counties
right.
F
F
But
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
at
least
have
the
conversation
around
that
that
your
assessed
value
for
your
home
this
year
has
increased
in
some
cases
two
and
three
times,
and
therefore
it
may
seem
like
we're
reducing.
But
inevitably
it's
not
reducing
your
taxes,
because
your
assessed
value
has
gone
up
exponentially
right.
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
you
know
as
we're.
F
These
are
some
of
the
comments
that
I'm
hearing
from
the
community
and
and
obviously
the
community
is
going
to
be
the
ultimate
decider
on
this,
but
I
want
to
make
sure
when
we're
having
conversations
around
taxation
that
we're
having
the
conversation
around
how
the
assessed
values
are
affecting
people
today,
because
I'm
hearing
it
from
the
community
that
their
home
values
have
gone
up.
So
much
that
all
of
the
taxes
that
have
been
placed
on
them
is
hurting
them.
F
B
B
It's
absolutely
a
great
question,
because
we
would
you
know
you'd
hate
to
think
that
like
for
me
as
a
Snohomish,
County
Bothell
resident,
that
I
would
have
anything
different
if
I
had
an
incident
at
work
versus
at
home
right
that
that's
not
a
scenario
that
we
would
ask
the
public
to
make
a
choice
on
and
so
you're
absolutely
right.
That's
parody
is
really
what
we're
aiming
for
as
much
as
we
can
in
this
situation.
Thank
you.
P
B
H
So
my
understanding
of
the
the
changes
in
property
values
over
time
is
that
throughout
the
city
of
Bothell
house,
values
are
much
higher
in
2023
than
they
were
in
2017.
I.
Don't
know
what
the
number
I
don't
know.
What
the
median
home
value
in
2017
was
off
the
top
of
my
head
and
if
somebody
does
I'm
impressed,
but.
A
H
H
And
it's
not
like
we're
going
from
a
2017
cost
and
then
six
years
later,
it's
ballooned.
It
has
actually
slowly
increased
over
time
so
that
we
would
see.
Probably
you
know,
house
prices
continue
to
go
up.
Another
slight
increase
because
our
property
values
are
higher
and
and
I
realized
that
that's
a
very
rudimentary
understanding
of
how
property
taxes
work,
but
sometimes
it
can
be
helpful
to
just
have
it
be
reviewed.
H
How
you
know
that
these
Services
continue
to
provide
us
services
like
that
we
really
need
and
and
that
the
prices
do
change
and
fluctuate
over
time.
But
in
a
way
that
is,
is
fair
and
incremental
for
our
community
members.
We
don't
have
control
over
the
market
more
than
any
like
we
have
very
little
control
over
that.
But
but
when
it
comes
to
the
public
process,
we
do
have
control
over
what
our
rates
are
and
how
property
values
is
assessed,
and
this
is
an
opportunity
for
the
voters
to
vote
on.
R
I
would
just
add
that
When
the
Levy
is
set
let's
and
then
over
the
six
year.
Life
of
the
levy,
with
the
amount
that
we
actually
collect,
is
limited
to
a
one
percent
increase
every
year.
If
the
council
chooses
to
take
that
plus
and
allowance
for
the
value
of
any
new
construction
that
gets
added
to
the
tax
rolls.
So
part
of
this
is
also
a
resetting
in
terms
of
every
six
years
you
get
a
chance
to
reset,
because
you
only
get
that
one
percent
increase
every
year.
So
I'm
anticipating
a
question
about
why
it.
Q
And
if
I
may,
that
that
was
sort
of
there
seemed
to
be
a
bunch
of
questions
about
to
serve
property
tax
Basics
here
that
you
know
maybe
I
thought
I
could
help
chime
in
on
their
so
I.
Think
a
lot
of
what's
been
said
is
absolutely
correct
that
the
the
rate
that's
selected
here
would
be
the
maximum
rate
that
could
be
imposed
and
how
much
you
pay
depends
on
the
assessed
value
of
your
particular
house
and
how
fast
that
value
increases
or
decreases
over
time.
Q
But
the
re.
The
idea
here
in
selecting
the
rate
for
the
Snohomish
County
portion
of
the
city
is
to
again
keep
the
rate
the
same
as
what
those
the
King
County
residents
of
the
city
pay,
so
that
everybody
at
least
is
on
that
same
rate
basis,
and
then
the
amount
you
pay
will
be
different
than
your
neighbors,
based
on
the
assessed
value
of
your
house
compared
to
your
neighbors,
whether
they
live
in
the
same
county
or
you
as
or
not
shouldn't
make
that
much
of
a
difference.
Q
So
so
again
you
know
that's
what
everyone
has
been
saying.
The
idea
here
is
just
to
come
up
with
a
system
where
both
residents
of
both
counties
are
paying
the
same
rates
and
then
the
second
point,
I
think
which
Ted
just
made,
was
that
the
maximum
rate
for
the
six-year
period
will
be
set
by
this
ballot
measure
and
then
whatever
amount
actually
gets
collected
or
gets
imposed
will
form
a
cap
that
can
only
increase
by
that
one
percent
Levy
lid.
F
Yeah,
so
just
a
clarifying
question.
So
if,
if
the
valuation
of
all
the
properties
that
would
be
paying
on
this
Levy
increase
30
over
the
course
of
a
year,
then
the
amount
that
those
properties
would
pay
for.
This
Levy
would
decrease
by
that
same
30
percent,
so
that
they're
not
paying
30
percent
more.
Q
Not
the
I
mean
I,
don't
know
that
30
I,
don't
know
that
would
translate
exactly
the
same
as
30.
But
yes
as
assessed
values
go
up
rates
come
down
and
what
stays
constant
in
the
middle
is
essentially
to
produce
that
same
collection
amount.
So
if
the
city
wants
two
2.5
million
dollars
and
you
kind
of
that's
the
steady
Point
as
assessed
values,
go
up
rates
will
come
down.
F
F
F
F
It's
not
that
easy
for
them
to
do,
especially
when
they're
living
on
their
own,
so
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
consciously
thinking
about
all
these
things
again.
Ultimately,
this
decision
that
we're
talking
about
tonight
will
be
in
the
hands
of
the
community
where
it
should
be,
but
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
at
least
are
having
these
conversations,
because
taxes
are
affecting
a
lot
of
people
in
our
community
and
and
I.
Don't
know
about
all
of
you
but
I'm
hearing
from
the
community
about
it.
F
K
No
I
really
appreciate
that
point.
It's
very
important
I
did
want
to
ask
city
manager,
my
grandparents
lived
in
the
city
of
Seattle
and
when
they
qualified
for
tax
exemptions,
there
was
a
person
at
the
city
of
Seattle
who
helped
them
apply.
Do
we
have
that
program
either
through
the
city
or
through
a
human
services
provider?.
B
K
And
I
did
want
to
add
one
detail,
it's
minor,
but
it
is
important
when
we
talk
about
levies.
The
median
home
price
is
not
the
median
assessed
value
price.
So
my
my
assessed
home
price
has
gone
up
since
I
bought
in
2018,
but
it
still
doesn't
match
what
I
could
sell
the
house
for
and
I
think
it,
maybe
after
five
years
caught
up
to
what
I
paid
for
the
house
so
different
numbers.
Just
as
we
talk
about
things
and
visualize
in
our
heads.
D
P
So
if
we
collect
at
the
26.5
census
proposed,
so
we
have
an
estimated
increase
in
about
500
000
over
our
budget.
In
our
budget
estimate,
we
were
just
you're
assuming
a
certain
rate,
but
now
we
have
a
a
proposed
rate
before
you,
so
we
just
want
to
identify
the
500
000
so-called
in
in
so-called
extra
amount
in
our
budget,
but
but
the
amount
will
also
go
to
pay
for
anticipated
increases
in
in
costs.
B
Yeah
I
think
the
important
the
important
to
remember
too
it's
compared
to
what
was
adopted
last
last
fall,
and
so
we
can
again
that's
within
our
biennial
budget,
which
every
every
year
we
get
to
take
a
look
at
and
there
will
be
other
costs
that
go
up.
So
while
that's
against
the
budgeted
amount,
I'm
sure
three
years
from
now,
that'll
look
like
a
different
number,
but
in
the
interim
those
are
conversations
we
can
have
at
the
mid
back
I.
D
Why
did
we
not
if,
if,
according
to
Alice
and
I,
see
her
Henry's,
we
said
we
have
a
certain
budget
that
we
budgeted
for,
but
then
we
want
to
collect
two
million
dollars
a
year
rates
will
go
up
and
down
doesn't
matter,
houses
go
up
and
down
we're
just
going
to
get
approximately
202
million
dollars
a
year.
Why
would
we
get
extra.
Q
Q
and
I.
Think
you're
you.
So
if
you
were
to
take
the
26
and
a
half
cents,
that's
in
the
proposal
and
use
that
as
your
Levy
rate
and
multiply
it
I'm,
not
sure
Quan.
If
you
used
your
estimate
of
what
2024
assessed,
values
are
then
you're
estimating
that
that
Levy
would
produce
a
little
more
than
what
you
had
budgeted
for
this
year.
So
you
know
we're
kind
of
talking
future
projections.
M
Q
Understanding
that
your
2024
Levy,
you
don't
yet
know
what
the
real
assessed
value
is,
and
you
haven't
yet
you
know
budgeted
for
2024
and
you
know
so
you
don't
quite
know
at
this
point
what
those
what
your
budget
amounts
would
be,
but
if
you
kind
of
proceeded
on
the
same
path
as
you
had
been
in
the
last
couple
years,
that
dot,
that
Levy
rate
should
be
sufficient
to
cover
what
you
have
historically
budgeted
for
that
I
think
that's
a
way
to
summarize
it
right.
Ted's.
R
I
would
just
I
I
would
also
add
that
you're
setting
this
rate
every
six
years
and
so
and
then
and
again
you
can
only
increase
it
by
that
one
percent
a
year
and
costs
are
more
than
likely
going
up
by
more
than
that
one
percent
a
year.
So
it's
important
to
take
that
opportunity.
When
you
renew
the
levy
to
reset
okay.
R
R
They
are
four
years
ahead
of
us,
so
there
they
will
come
up
in
two
years
or
their
next
six-year
Levy
and
the
past
practice
has
been
to
Mir.
So
you
can
look
at
it
as
they're
four
years
ahead
of
us
or
we're
two
years
in
front
of
them
on
the
back
end,
and
when
we
looked
into
past
practice,
it
had
always
been
to
set
it
what
they
set.
R
I
guess
it
would
be
four
years
ago
in
this
case,
which
was
that
26
and
a
half
cents,
and
they
don't.
We
don't
have
an
answer
from
them
on
what
they
intend
to
do
firmly
in
two
years,
but
the
best
estimate
we
got
at
the
time.
What
I
believe
Chief
croon
talked
to
somebody
in
King
County
and
that
estimate
was
probably
staying
at
26
and
a
half
cents
and.
B
Chief
ryzen
has
been
reaching
out
to
and
I
know,
they're
in
the
King
County
Chiefs
Association
they'll
they'll
be
starting
to
have
these
conversations,
probably
around
the
time
that
this
goes
to
pallet.
But
that
is
any
early
indication
is.
Is
that
they're,
looking
at
recognizing
the
pressure?
That's
come
up
tonight
of
for
the
King
County
aside
to
keep
it
as
close
to
what
the
current
assessment
is
right
now.
D
Q
Yes,
so
if
I
could
just
clarify
that
point,
so
the
26
and
a
half
cents
is
the
maximum
Levy
rate
that
you
can
go
up
to
over
the
next
six
year
period,
but
in
November
or
December.
When
you
go
through
your
budget
process,
you'll
be
able
to
actually
Levy
the
amount
you
need,
which
will
translate
into
a
rate
and
as
long
as
it's
not
higher
than
26
and
a
half
cents,
then
it
will
be
fine,
and
it's
that
amount
then
that
over
the
next
six
year
period
you
know,
can
only
go
up
by
one
percent.
D
Q
I
I
think
in
again,
I
didn't
prepare
this
so
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
I
think
what
what
that's
saying
is
that
if
you
took
the
26.5
cents
and
multiplied
it
by
the
2023
assessed
value
for
the
Snohomish
County
side
of
Bothell,
then
you
would
yield
you
would
be
able
to
collect
500
000
more
than
you
actually
budgeted
for
this
year,
and
so
that's
just
giving
an
indication
that
you
know
you
would
at
that
Levy
rate.
You
would
be
have
sufficient
capacity
to
be
able
to.
D
Q
P
Q
P
K
Just
want
to
make
sure,
because
that
the
way
that
it
actually
because
people
think
if
my
assessed
value
goes
up,
you
know
50
so
do
my
taxes,
but
with
levies
it's
actually
we
just
collect
what
we
need
to
collect,
and
so
you
will
just
pay
no
more
than
101
percent
of
what
you
paid
last
year.
So
it
it's
hard
to
explain
conceptually
so
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
all
matches
with
with
what
the
Smart
Finance
people
were
saying.
F
F
I
think
this
is
this:
is
Snohomish
County,
correct,
2187
right,
so
it'd
be
nice
to
see
what
the
King
County
side
would
would
yield
as
well
and
then
to
council
member
Dot's
Point.
While
the
rate
stays
the
same,
assessed
values
go
up,
our
property
taxes
do
go
up
right,
so
we
need
to
I
guess
for
me
for
the
community.
P
F
So
when
we
so
the
thing
that
I'm
hearing
is,
we
have
a
bunch
of
levies
right
and
we
say
well.
This
is
only
going
to
amount
to
twenty
dollars
a
year
or
a
hundred
dollars
a
year,
but
we
look
at
those
in
totality
and
they
could
be
five
six,
seven,
a
thousand
dollars
a
year
right
and
so
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
collectively
I
think
I've
spoken
to
this.
Previously
that
really
like
to
see
what
it
looks
like
in
the
city
of
Bothell.
F
Maybe
the
council
can
can
see
what
those
taxes
look
like,
what
we
are
paying
for
right
so
that
we
have
a
way
to
talk
to
the
community
because
again,
a
lot
of
things.
A
lot
of
community
members
want
to
know
I
mean
when
you
jump
20
on
your
your
property
value
in
one
year,
and
yet
you
can't
afford
to
move.
F
B
Yeah
and
councilmember
McNeil
on
our
on
our
website.
We
do
have
using
2021
numbers
and
illustration
of
that
for
both
counties.
I
think
it's
probably
through
transition
of
staff,
and
everything
is
now
that
we're
past
the
budget
we're
past
closeout,
that's
something
we
can
work
on
updating
as
well
and
keep
that
out
front
and
center
for
the
community
sent.
P
H
13Th
June
13.,
okay
great
since
this
will
be
coming
back.
I
I
do
like
to
see
it
calculated
out
like
with
the
median
home
price
and
so
I
I
would
like
to
see.
You
know
the
2017
rate
from
the
LA
from
the
last
Levy
calculated
out
at
that
rate
with
the
median
home
price
and
then
also
at
the
new
rate,
and
so
we
can
actually
compare
like
what
the
you
know
that
what
that
line
item
on
our
property
taxes
says.
Is
it
the
difference
between
I?
H
Don't
well,
we
haven't
calculated
out
so
I,
don't
even
know,
but
yeah
I.
Would
we've
been
able
to
see
that
in
other
situations,
where
we're
looking
at
at
tax
rates
and
just
and
be
able
to
calculate
out
what
the
actual
kind
of
changes
using
a
hypothetical
home
or
a
median
home
and
I
think
that's
useful.
If
we
could
do
that,
if.
B
B
What
I
want
to
make
sure,
too,
is
that
primarily
the
the
question
in
front
of
council,
too,
is
around
the
big
picture.
Question
is:
should
we
go
back
to
the
voters
and
ask
them
to
renew
a
levy
that
is
expiring
at
the
end
of
this
year
right?
So
the
alternative
is
not
to
put
a
levy
on
the
ballot
and
then
there's
there's
zero
Revenue.
B
That's
that's
just
us
on
our
own
and
so
what
we
would
be
prepared
to
bring
back
and
with
all
these
examples
is
the
rate
that's
shown
before
you.
So
I
just
want
to
confirm
that
as
we
bring
this
back,
that's
the
scenario
like
we're
we're
on
track
with.
That
is
a
scenario
we
should
come
back
with
the
Assumption
of
teeing
things
up
of
what
would
be
the
schedule.
What
would
be
the
decision
before
Council
of
putting
this
on
the
ballot?
B
B
B
It
and
I
think
ultimately,
that
is
one
of
the
things
in
terms
of
this
consideration
completely
agree
that
the
the
strain
on
property
tax.
We
could
have
a
long
discussion
about
what
that
looks
like
and
there's
many
decisions
at
the
Council
clinic
and
yes
for
this
one.
This
is
a
there's,
a
pretty
pretty
core
services
that
we
provide
and
again
would
would
want
to
hear
from
the
voters
of.
Is
this
something
you
want
to
continue.
K
B
K
M
S
A
B
B
Council
will
recall
that
in
the
in
the
fall
you
were
presented
with
another
interim
outdoor
dining
regulation,
they've
been
coming
to
you
on
a
six-month
clip,
so
you're
probably
familiar
with
that,
and
at
that
time
the
council
did
give
direction
to
staff
to
bring
forward
proposed
outdoor
dining
regulations
to
to
break
the
cycle
of
interims,
so
staff's
been
been
working
on
that
they
have
been
moving
through
the
Planning
Commission
and
again.
While
this
is
something
that's
going
to
feel
familiar
to
you
and
we
keep
talking
about
how
many
touches
is
the
council
had
on
this?
B
One
you've
talked
about
the
issue
a
number
of
times
and
now
the
planning
commission's
looking
at
it,
but
again
just
to
really
frame
it.
We
are
in
a
study
session
so
now
you're
getting
to
hear
the
results
of
the
the
work
that
staff's
put
into
and
the
conversations
and
feedback
from
public
hearing
and
with
Planning
Commission
of
saying
what
would
this
then
look
like
to
be
ongoing?
B
T
All
right
so,
as
mentioned
we're
here,
to
talk
about
the
findings
and
recommendations
from
our
April
19th
public
hearing
with
Planning
Commission,
and
if
there
are
no
proposed
changes
or
further
discussion
warranted.
We
are
recommending
moving
to
a
public
hearing
on
June
6th,
so
just
an
overview
of
what
is
where
we've
been
and
where
we're
going
so
on.
June
9th
is
when
we
had
first
adopted
the
interim
ordinance
back
in
2020.
T
So,
in
terms
of
the
Amendments
included,
there's
a
number
of
Citywide
amendments,
as
well
as
some
specific
to
the
sub
areas
that
we
have
in
terms
of
city-wide
amendments.
They
fall
into
a
couple
different
categories.
One
was
we
wanted
to
establish
the
standard
size
for
the
allowance
of
the
tents.
This
is
based
on
what
we've
seen
happen,
so
we
know
that
they're
all
about
a
thousand
square
feet
and
that
seemed
to
be
fair
to
say,
hey.
This
is
what's
been
working
for
people.
This
is
what
seems
to
be
fitting
into
space
as
well.
T
T
So,
in
terms
of
our
two
unique
fun
sub
areas,
part
of
this
was
just
capturing
the
Citywide
regulations
and
the
sub-area
regulations,
because
they
have
their
own
applicability.
Sections
Canyon
Park
has
I
believe
three
levels
of
applicability
for
what
gets
triggered
for
compliance
and
downtown
is
kind
of
similar
there's
a
level
at
which
your
improvements
trigger
additional
requirements,
or
not
so
just
being
really
clear
about
what
doesn't
doesn't
get
triggered
so
yeah,
really
just
making
sure
that
those
city-wide
standards
are
mirrored
in
the
sub
areas.
That's
pretty
much
it
for
those
more
General
items.
T
Downtown,
as
we
know,
is
its
own
special
situation.
There's
a
lot
of
older
businesses,
a
lot
of
businesses
that
already
aren't
technically
compliant
with
their
minimum
parking
regulations,
just
because
it's
an
older
part
of
town
and
that
wasn't
created
at
the
time.
So
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
the
existing
businesses
that
are
doing
this
could
remain,
and
part
of
that
was
considering
how
to
handle
the
parking
standards.
T
So
what
we
decided
to
do
was
create
a
minimum
allowance
to
use
existing
parking
stalls
without
triggering
any
other
form
of
compliance.
That's
why
it
was
set
at
a
third
is
because
that's
what
works
for
the
Julios
and
the
cottage
site.
So
that's
really
the
minimum
amount
proposed
in
order
for
compliance
for
Julio's
in
the
cottage
there
was
a
little
bit
of
discussion
with
Planning
Commission
of
hey.
Would
we
want
to
consider
a
larger
number
or
not,
and
the
feedback
we
gave
was?
T
That
could
be
something
we
think
about,
but
right
now,
if
we
wanted
to
make
sure
we'd
just
get
this
going,
get
it
into
places
installing
that
minimum
doesn't
mean.
We
can't
change
it
at
some
point
in
the
future.
If
the
situation
arises,
where
someone
wants
more,
and
that
might
be
something
that
people
want
to
talk
about
and
consider.
T
So
again,
cat
wanted
to
keep
it
fairly
brief,
since
it's
I
wanted
to
keep
the
code
changes
fairly,
simple
I,
usually
less
code
is
better
code.
Simple
code
is
better
code,
so
we
really
wanted
to
keep
things
really
clear
and
concise
and
make
sure
that
it
was
easy
to
implement
for
staff
too
and
easy
to
understand.
G
M
G
Businesses
on
the
other
half
of
the
strip
on
the
south
end
is
my
compass
right
points
on
the
compass
right
really
struggle
with
having
parking
for
their
customers,
and
so
one
of
my
questions
is.
It
is
privately
owned
with
the
code,
because
I
did
go
through
and
look
at
the
code.
Does
this
still
allow
the
property
owners
who
own
the
property
to
say
yes
or
no?
You
may
not
put
outdoor
dining
on
this.
T
The
best
of
my
knowledge
that
would
be
a
private
matter.
Okay,
it's
I,
would
kind
of
almost
think
about
it.
Similarly,
as
other
private
property
matters,
we
get
asked
about
like
property
line
disputes
or
things
with
HOAs.
It's
not
a
city,
regulation
and
I,
don't
think,
there's
anything
in
there
that
would
preclude
them
from
saying
to
the
to
the
business
renters.
No,
we
don't
want
you
to
do
this,
because
I
think
they
do
need
approval
from
the
property
owner
to.
G
G
G
Okay,
all
right
I
just
wanted
to
ask
that
and
then
I'll
try
to
go
through
my
questions
quickly.
On
page
52,
there
was
an
exemption
of
no
parking
spots
for
outdoor
dining
and
vendor
trucks,
carts
spaces
or
stall
sets.
We're
just
talking.
Food
trucks
is
that
right
on
page
52,
there's
no
minimum
parking
spaces
required.
T
M
G
One
line:
okay,
all
right
on
to
the
next
page,
all
right!
Okay,
you
answered
that
question
we're
moving
through
I
guess.
My
only
comment
was
on
page
58.
Up
to
one
third
of
existing
parking
spaces
may
be
utilized.
I
kind
of
my
gut
reaction
was
depending
on
context,
that's
kind
of
a
big
reduction,
but
that's
just
an
opinion
and
then
page
16.
G
G
T
M
T
T
Now
our
code
doesn't
really
speak
to
that,
because
the
code
that
talks
about
vendors
trucks
and
stalls
is
under
the
land
use
table
for
eating
and
dining
okay.
But
it
is
something
that
we
could
consider
as
an
allowance
in
the
future.
I
know
it's
been
discussed.
Okay,
but
I
could
see
that
as
a
kind
of
maybe
a
separate
but
related
topic
that
we
could
address
at
some.
G
Point
and
there's
and
there's
I
think
in
the
past
we've
had
businesses
who've
wanted
to
have
special
events
that
would
spill
out
into
their
parking
spot.
So
I,
don't
know
where
you
want
to
put
that
in
the
docket
of
your
scope
of
work,
but
I'm
sure
that
there's
not
and
not
in
the
too
far
distant
future
interest
in
can
we
use
those
parking
spots
for
other
things,
and
how
would
this
city
allow
us.
T
To
do
that,
and
that
is
unrelated
to
this
a
discussion
that
staff
has
kind
of
already
been
having
in
the
background,
for
some
other
topics
is
the
utilization
of
outdoor
areas
for
different
types
of
sales
opportunities,
so
I
think
it
definitely
could
be
something
that
we
talk
about
down
the
line.
Okay,
all
right!
Thank
you.
K
I
would
add
too,
some
of
that
does
already
happen
so
I
personally
I've
seen
it
at
Fred,
Meyer
Home,
Depot
first
in
Maine,
has
done
markets
with
different
organizations
behind
it,
so
businesses
do
already
get
to
do
that.
Flex
I,
don't
know
in
our
code
at
what
point
they
have
to
talk
to
the
city
before
they
do
it,
but
luckily
we
do
see
that
and
it's
pretty
fun,
although
I
mean
bags
of
bark
at
Home.
Depot
is
not
fun
unless
you're
looking
for
bark
I
guess,
but
like
some
of
the
sales
reproving.
H
How
else
do
we
get?
Would
we
get
our
Christmas
trees?
Foreign
I,
do
appreciate
how
you
really
did
try
to
make
this
pretty
simple
and
and
I
think
that
number
three
on
page
59
really
summarizes
quite
well
what
your,
what
you're
proposing
to
us,
and
so
that's
amending
one,
two,
three
four
five,
six
sections
of
the
code
and-
and
you
outlined
it
really
well
tonight
too.
So,
thanks
for
making
it
accessible
and
understandable,
because
code
can
be
complicated
and
I
really
do
appreciate
your
efforts
thanks.
A
You
know
the
amount
of
public
comment
we
got
in
support
of
this
last
time
was
pretty
impressive
and
I
just
loved
to
hear
you
say
the
simpler.
The
better
when
it
comes
to
code,
makes
my
heart
sing.
So
thank
you
for
that.
I'm
I'm,
going
to
be
in
support
of
this
I
enjoy
the
spaces
that
are
there
right
now.
A
H
K
I
appreciate
that
call
out
councilmember,
aldricks
and
I
were
both
on
the
Planning
Commission
working
on
the
Canyon
Park
area,
sub-regulation,
sub-area
regulations,
and
it's
great
that
this
will
be
hopefully
in
place.
As
we
see
a
big
change
over
the
next,
you
know
30
40
years
in
Canyon
Park,
so
that
in
my
golden
years
I
can
enjoy
it.
T
A
A
B
As
you
said,
Shoreline
management
code
amendments
I
do
want
to
just
clarify
too
that
this
is
the
the
study
session,
with
the
anticipated
Next
Step
being
to
bring
a
public
hearing
forward
to
the
Council
on
June
13th,
but
we'll
see
how
how's
the
night
goes
and
go
from
there
I'm
going
to
introduce
Dave
Boyd,
who
is
joining
us
remotely
tonight
to
just
do
a
little
bit
of
Framing
and
then
introduce
our
our
Consultants
who's
here
to
guide
us
through
the
presentation.
So
looking
forward
to
learning
more
tonight,.
U
Thank
you
and
good
evening.
It's
my
my
pleasure
tonight
to
introduce
Amy
Sumi
from
Shannon
Wilson
she's
been
our
consultant.
Go
going
all
the
way
back
to
the
2012
Shoreline
master
program
update.
She
also
helped
out
with
the
2019
update
and
with
these
most
recent
updates.
So
what
tonight
I'm
gonna
share
my
screen
and
start
a
presentation
and
then
I'll
turn
it
over
to
Amy,
so
we're
bringing
you
tonight
for
study
session.
S
What's
that,
oh
yes,
it
is
okay,
thanks,
Dave,
apologies!
First
for
my
voice,
allergies
are
trying
to
take
it,
I'm,
not
sick,
but
it
might
come
and
go
so
just
a
quick
background
on
the
shoreline
master
program
and,
first,
maybe
a
nod
to
Kirsten
who
said
that
less
code
is
better
code
and
unfortunately,
the
shoreline
master
program
does
not
work
that
way.
S
S
Next
slide:
Dave,
okay,
so
kind
of
the
the
main
items
that
were
used
to
form
the
basis
for
our
code.
Amendments
was
first,
the
shoreline's
board
I
had
asked
for
a
long
time
to
take
another
look
at
the
buffer
reduction
mechanisms,
how
they
worked,
whether
they
were
necessary.
That
sort
of
thing,
and
so
we
spent
a
lot
of
time,
exploring
that
again.
S
The
recent
updates
to
Municipal
Code
chapter
1404,
we
looked
at
those
and
where
appropriate,
strove
for
consistency
between
what
are
otherwise
very
similar
critical
areas,
regulations,
language
in
both
codes,
we
removed
the
special
flood
Hazard
area
regulations
from
the
shoreline
master
program,
and
then
there
was
a
great
deal
of
activity
around
a
wash
dot,
405
sr527
project
that
went
to
the
Carrick
examiner.
There
was
a
lot
of
Department
of
ecology,
engagement,
trying
to
understand
the
code
and
how
it
applies.
Variances
were
sought
and
ultimately
obtained
and
out
of
that
process.
S
As
usual,
Department
of
ecology
has
continued
to
update
their
best
available
science
guidance
documents
and
provided
some
other
input.
So
we
took
a
look
at
that
and
then
finally,
there
was
just
a
variety
of
kind
of
non-substantive
housekeeping
changes
that
we
made
in
the
text
and
in
my
presentation
tonight,
I'm
just
focusing
on
what
I
think
are
some
of
the
the
highlights
and
are
things
that
you
didn't
already
review
is
part
of
the
critical
areas
regulations
update.
S
So
we
don't
need
to
kind
of
rehash
that
stuff
unless
you
want
to
which
I'm
happy
to
do
so.
The
first
one
I
wanted
to
touch
on
is
what
started
out
as
a
housekeeping
kind
of
a
change
and
then
grew
a
little
bit
more
when
Department
of
ecology
took
another
look
at
it
so
and
the
current
code.
There
is
a
note
on
the
sherlin
environment
designations
maps
that
says,
regardless
of
the
mapping.
S
If
it's
a
city
right-of-way
associated
with
a
road,
it's
automatically
high
intensity
and
we
said
that
just
because
it's
really
hard
to
catch
all
these
little
slivers
when
you're
doing
the
environment
designation
mapping.
But
that
was
the
intent
and
that
was
expressed
on
the
adopted
Maps.
But
it
wasn't
specifically
stated
in
the
code
text.
S
It
was
just
on
the
map
which
was
adopted,
and
so
we
thought
oh
it'd,
be
nice
and
clean
if
we
just
put
that
note
map
right
into
the
text,
but
that
sort
of
begged
the
question
of
what
the
date
is
like.
Are
we
continuing
to
designate
rights
of
way
and
suddenly
now
we
have
more
area?
That's
high
intensity
that
wasn't
really
considered
back
in
the
original
update,
and
so
with
ecology's
input.
S
The
code
was
amended
so
that
it
does
state
that
rights
of
way
are
high
intensity,
regardless
of
mapping,
but
its
rights
of
way
designated
as
of
a
certain
date.
So
if
new
rights
of
way
are
designated,
you
would
need
to
amend
the
the
map
formally
through
a
Sherling
code.
Amendment
process
with
public
input,
ecology,
review,
Etc
or
find
another
kind
of
a
regulatory
way
to
accomplish
what
you
need
to
within
that
high
intensity
or
within
that
right-of-way
area.
So
so
that
is
an
explanation
of
that
next
slide
and.
S
S
But
with
the
position
and
locations
of
the
roads,
the
natural
environment,
designation,
Etc,
it
became
evident
that
really
it
should
be
a
conditional
use
permit,
which
would
allow
folks
to
pursue
a
fill
for
those
special
cases
where
for
existing
public
transportation
and
there's
no
other
way
to
improve
an
existing
road.
We
don't
want
to
relocate
it
out
of
Shoreline
jurisdiction,
but
to
do
it
right
in
that
footprint
and
expand
it
as
needed.
S
So
there
is
a
process
now
where,
when
necessary,
and
four
only
existing
Bridges
Trails
roads
that
you
could,
with
the
conditional
use
permit,
have
a
fill
within
a
floodplain
outside
of
the
flood
way.
So
it's
a
less
sensitive
portion
of
the
floodway
and
you
would,
of
course,
still
have
to
go
through
the
usual
mitigation
sequencing
process
avoid
it.
If
you
can
minimize
it
those
types
of
things,
so
there's
a
lot
of
other
Environmental
Protections
that
would
still
come
into
play
in
this
scenario.
S
And
this
next
one
again
is
related
I
think
to
the
527
405
project.
The
code
currently
just
prohibits
just
outright
modifications
to
Wetlands
unless
it's
related
to
a
water
dependent
or
a
public
access
and
recreation
use,
based
on
a
presumption
that
any
other
kind
of
use
could
be
located
somewhere
else
again
with
roads,
which
are,
you
know
rather
unique.
You
can't
just
put
an
improved
roadway
somewhere
else,
and
so
the
way
around
that
was
to
change
the
shall
be
prohibited
to
shall
not
be
permitted.
S
Ecology
didn't
want
to
just
have
an
open
doorway
for
that
kind
of
thing.
So,
instead
of
an
outright
prohibition,
which
is
really
hard
to
get
around
shall
not
be
permitted,
gives
you
an
opportunity
to
pursue
a
variance,
and
then
you
can
kind
of
make
your
case
for
why
you
need
to
have
that
proposed
well
and
fill
for
this
particular
project
and
satisfy
those
criteria,
go
through
City
process
and
go
through
an
ecology
process.
S
And
then
Wetland
buffers,
we
spend
a
lot
of
time
talking
about
the
Wetland
buffers
and
the
different
ways
that
they
could
be
divided
up
into
different
buckets
based
on
habitat
points.
Originally,
our
thought
was
that
we
would
just
match
the
existing
critical
areas,
regulations
which
were
updated
just
a
couple
years
ago
to
match
Department
of
ecologies
three-tier
system,
where
it's
just
three
to
four
points
or
three
to
five,
then
six
to
seven
and
eight
to
nine.
S
But
it's
kind
of
those
in
between
steps
where
you
end
up
with
some
differences
on
the
ground
with
real
projects,
and
they
didn't
want
to
see
a
reduction
in
buffer
widths
within
Shoreline
jurisdiction
where
it's
believed
to
be.
You
know
that
much
more
important
in
supporting
salmon
habitat
and
all
the
other
benefits
of
Shoreline
areas.
S
So
what
we
did
do,
though-
and
this
was
more
to
at
least
match
the
structure
of
the
critical
areas.
Regulations
was
to
add
another
table
that
just
very
clearly
states
that
you
have
a
standard
set
of
buffers
and
these
are
what
they
are
and
that's
the
table
you
already
have.
If
you
implement
these
minimization
measures
and
there's
a
table
of
minimization
measures,
that's
was
in
there
before
we've
updated
it
and
it's
just
kind
of
standard
bmps,
best
practices
for
developing
prop
properties
near
Wetlands
or
buffers.
S
But
then
in
the
existing
code
there
was
a
little
bit
of
ambiguity
on
well.
What,
if
you
don't
do
the
minimization
measures
and
so
in
the
the
critical
areas
regulations
code
in
1404
there's
another
table
that
says,
if
you
don't
do
the
minimization
measures.
This
is
what
it
looks
like
and
it
provides
this
table
that
you
see
on
the
screen
here
that
has
increased
buffer
widths.
For
that
scenario,
and
the
code
already
kind
of
says
this,
it's
just
a
little
bit
lost
in
text.
S
It's
a
little
ambiguous
on
when
or
if
the
city
would
apply
it,
and
this
just
makes
it
Crystal
Clear
matching
the
critical
areas,
regulations,
format
and
then
also
consistent
with
Department
of
ecology's
preference
for
how
these
things
are
presented
and
I.
Think
it
just
is
easier
for
staff
and
easier
for
the
public
to
kind
of
understand
what
what
their
options
are.
S
And
then
the
shoreline
buffer
reduction
option,
there
was
again
a
lot
of
discussion
about
whether
or
not
the
buffer
reduction
option
should
be
retained.
And
what
I'm
referring
to
is
that
the
standard
buffer
in
most
of
the
city
is
a
hundred
feet
off
of
Shoreline
water
bodies,
but
for
certain
types
of
activities
in
particularly
the
shoreline
residential
and
high
intensity
environment
designations.
You
could
reduce
that
buffer
without
having
to
go
through
the
very
extensive
process
of
a
shoreline
variants
by
implementing
various
enhancements
or
implementing.
S
You
know
different
practices
into
the
project,
and
that
would
enable
you
to
get
down
to
I
think
it's
60
feet,
60
feet
or
40
feet.
I
can't
remember
now
the
top
of
my
head,
but
they
decided,
after
looking
at
again
kind
of
the
rationale
for
this
whole
approach
and
then
looking
at
how
many
properties
really
have
the
opportunity
to
pursue
such
a
a
reduction
to
eliminate
that
opportunity
for
new
development
and
those
two
environment
designations,
because
there
just
aren't
very
many
undeveloped,
like
a
neutral,
completely
undeveloped
properties.
S
That
would
be
able
to
do
this,
but
they
did
elect
to
maintain
that
option
for
substantial
Redevelopment,
which
I
think
is
the
the
greater
issue
because,
as
you
can
see
in
this
picture,
most
of
the
development
within
Shoreline
jurisdiction
is
well
within
the
100
foot.
Buffer
and
folks
would
have
a
very
difficult
time.
You
know
modifying
rebuilding
redeveloping
their
their
single
family
homes.
S
And
then
the
removal
of
the
30-foot
Bridge
limit
so
in
this
is
something
that
we
already
did
in
the
critical
areas.
Regulations
and
the
proposal
was
to
take
that
limit
out
of
the
shoreline
master
program
regulations
as
well,
where
it
only
allowed
within
buffers
new
or
improved
Bridges
that
were
up
to
30
feet
and
then
otherwise.
S
You
would
have
to
pursue
some
sort
of
again
a
variance
or
some
other
process,
and
that
30
feet
felt
a
little
bit
small
based
on
the
type
of
projects
that
are
going
to
happen,
and
also
with
all
of
the
other
protections
and
environmental
restrictions
that
are
in
the
code
for
that
kind
of
project
and
the
fact
that
you
might
have
to
get
a
conditional
use
permit.
For
other
reasons.
S
There
was
concerns
about
that,
of
course
again,
because
this
is
Sterling
jurisdiction,
we're
talking
about
the
Sammamish
River
and
North
Creek.
So
there
was
some
additional
mitigation
considerations
that
were
added
to
kind
of
balance.
The
removal
of
that
30-foot
limit,
so
an
applicant
would
have
to
more
thoughtfully
and
clearly
describe
what
the
potential
impacts
were
to
riparian
vegetation
or
to
increases
in
shade
over
water
cover
into
that
aquatic
environment
and
then
address
those
depending
on
what
the
the
analysis
found.
So
that
was
kind
of
how
that
was
packaged.
U
S
U
So
open
up
for
questions,
The,
Next
Step
here
We've
scheduled
a
public
hearing
on
June
13th
and
would
be
looking
to
take
care
of
sipa
and
other
noticing
requirements
ahead
of
that
date
and
then
so
the
again
the.
What
we're
looking
for
tonight
is
any
direction
the
council
has
on
the
short,
the
shoreline
board
recommendations
to
bring
back
to
Council
on
June
13th.
U
H
G
That's
helpful
yeah!
No,
no!
That's
totally
fine
that
one
right
yeah!
Thank
you!
Dave
Juan!
Thank
you
for
the
to
the
to
our
planning
department
and
our
Shoreline,
because
this
was
Monumental
work
and
I.
Think
you
have
to
kind
of
be
a
shoreline
nerd
to
really
get
into
this
and
then
so.
I
have
a
few
comments
for
Bridges
like
the
102nd
or
going
over
North
Creek.
That's
going
to
be
heavily
regulated,
have
engineering
regulations,
Department
of
ecology
and
so
I'm
comfortable
with
those
those
assessments.
G
U
We
can
we
can
look
into
that
we're
in
a
kind
of
an
unusual
situation.
We
don't
actually
have
a
shoreline
board
right
now.
Only
one
of
the
shoreline
board
members
applied
to
be
reappointed
all
of
their
their
terms
expired
in
March
of
this
year.
So
that's
one
of
those
issues
that
again
you're
is
coming
back
to
you,
I
believe
in
September,
from
the
discussion
earlier
on
in
the
meeting
so.
G
G
Though,
on
our
end,
we've
paused,
it
they're
they're,
still
part
of
that
Brain
Trust
in
how
we
got.
We
got
to
this
point
right
and
then
the
so
that
would
be
great
if
we
could
do
that
and
then
and
then
they
had
asked
that
staff
write
a
letter
regarding
middle
housing
and
as
I
was
looking
at
what
you
know
along
the
slew
with
brackett's
landing
area.
G
If
that
am
I,
calling
right,
I'm
sitting
here
thinking
middle
housing
is
if
they
must
have
opinions
about
building
within
the
footprint
versus
adding
an
Adu,
because
once
you
put
an
Adu
on
those
properties,
you've
now
taken
away.
Pervious
soil,
that's
going
to
be
filtering
along
those
critical
areas
of
the
river.
So
if
that
letter
covers
those
topics
about
what
they
like
and
what
their
concerns
about,
what
middle
housing
should
look
a
lot
look
like
along
Shoreline
areas.
G
S
A
flood
plain
and
then
there
is
a
a
higher
protected
area
of
called
the
flood
way,
and
so
we've
got
a
special
Provisions
for
that
are
very
restrictive
in
a
flood
way.
You
don't
see
those
on
the
screen,
but
within
the
floodway
there
is
a
lot
of
very
special
restrictions
and
then
outside
of
the
floodway,
but
still
within
the
100
year,
flood
plain:
that's
where
we
propose
to
still
allow
an
opportunity
for
development
to
take
place
related
to
existing
Bridges
and
trails.
K
I'll
jump
in
I
I'm
interested
in
what
they
What
gene.
We
brought
up
about
middle
housing,
but
I.
Don't
know
that
I
understand
why
middle
housing,
which
would
only
be
built
in
the
footprint
of
a
single
family
home,
would
have
different
regulations
on
surface
area
coverage,
so
I
think
I
would
just
want
to
not
apply
more
burden
on
that
than
any
other
development,
and
in
that
vein,
I,
don't
know
that
I'm
understanding
the
concept
of
having
different
buffer
rules
for
new
development
along
the
shoreline
versus
substantial
Redevelopment.
K
S
I
wonder
if
the
kind
of
unique
things
about
Shoreline
jurisdiction,
that's
a
little
different
from
standard
critical
areas.
Regulations
is
the
principle
of
no-net
loss
of
ecological
functions
and
a
expressed
intent
to
recognize
what
the
existing
condition
is
and
then
kind
of
take
that
forward
in
through
in
your
regulations
in
establishing
buffers
and
that
sort
of
thing.
So
this
is
a
little
bit
unique
I
think
because
the
city
opted
to
have
a
buffer
to
set
the
buffer
much
larger
than
what
existing
conditions
would
have
otherwise
kind
of
Led
You
toward
and
the
reason
they
did.
S
By
asking
for
it,
you
have
to
add
vegetation,
you
have
to
restore
or
convert
impervious
services
to
previous
Services.
Maybe
you
have
to
add
large
Woody
debris,
it's
a
kind
of
a
whole
menu
of
things
that
people
can
choose
from
in
order
to
get
that.
So
the
idea
is
that,
if
with
substantial
Redevelopment,
even
if
your
your
buffer
on
paper
is
getting
smaller,
you're,
actually
getting
increased
ecological
function
relative
to
that
existing
condition.
S
So
it
seemed
like
a
really
good
way
to
not
punish
the
people
who
are
already
there
and
have
their
homes
and
there's
this
very
a
prevalent
pattern
of
development,
but
also
achieve
some
improvement
in
lift.
So
it
was
a
little
bit
of
a
a
win-win,
but
if
you
took
that
away
from
the
substantial
Redevelopment,
then
again,
you'd
be
leaving
an
awful
lot
of
people
needing
to
pursue
a
variance
to
do
anything
and
a
lot
of
non-conforming
development
which
doesn't
really
serve
anybody.
S
I
think
there
was
another
part
to
your
question:
oh
new
Redevelopment,
new
development.
So
again
we
looked
very
closely
at
that
I
think
there
was
kind
of
two
things
that
came
out
of
that
one
is
that
the
shoreline
sport,
as
we
analyzed
it.
There
was
so
few
properties
where
there
was
new
development
potential
within
Shoreline
jurisdiction
and
I.
Think
one
of
them
was
actually
that
opportunity
is
gone
now.
It
was
at
the
Bothell
Townhomes
32
I'm,
going
to
butcher
the
name
of
it.
It's
next
to
Lazy,
Wheels,
I,
think
or
the
way.
S
A
A
S
S
And
most
of
the
carve
outs
it's
to
recognize
existing
Transportation,
not
like
New,
Roads
and
new
new
other
kinds
of
infrastructure.
So
I
think
that's
how
we
balanced
it
is
just
practically
speaking.
There
isn't
another
way
to
improve
102nd
where
it
wouldn't
need
to
get
a
little
bit
wider
to
meet
current
safety
standards
for
for
pedestrians
for
roads.
S
Maybe
there's
storm
water
infrastructure
Etc
in
there,
and
so
it
just
it
didn't
seem
like
it
added
any
value,
and
so
that's
and
I
think
particularly
with
adding
those
additional
mitigation
considerations,
there's
already
so
much
protection
of
wetlands
and
floodplains,
and
not
just
by
the
shoreline
master
program,
but
also
by
other
Regulators
that
forcing
folks
to
go
through
a
process
for
those
types
of
public
goods.
Sorts
of
improvements
didn't
seem
to
have
any
added
value
to
it.
U
S
Yeah
drove
a
little
little
bit
the
fact
that
we
were
thinking
about
transportation
but-
and
we
did
try
I-
would
say
not
to
make
things
harder
for
for
other
kinds
of
buildings.
I
think
the
exception
would
be
removing
that
buffer
reduction
potential
for
new
development
and
again
we
just
found
there
was
maybe
one
or
two
properties
that
even
had
potential
to
be
classified
in
that
way.
Okay,.
A
I,
don't
know
that
I
I,
don't
know
that
I'm
on
board
with
that
part
of
it
primarily
just
because
there's
only
a
couple
and
it's
not
going
to
make
a
I
mean
a
huge
difference
and
I
believe
you
said
part
of
the
exchange
there
and
that
reduction
is
for
improvements
along
the
shoreline.
Correct
and
I
would
like
to
see
those
improvements
happen,
and
if
somebody
building
a
house
there
gets
us
a
a
house
and
B
improvements
on
the
shoreline.
That
seems
like
a
win-win
to
me.
So
I,
don't
think.
A
S
G
H
Believe
you
that
and
if
I
were
to
guess,
one
of
those
properties
is
right
around
the
bend
at
the
Sammamish
River
between
522
and
Smith
River,
there's
a
like
an
empty
lot.
That
I've
heard
talk
of
being
developed,
and
maybe
that
is
too
specific
for
this
conversation.
But
but
if
I
were
to
guess
that
might
be
one
of
them
that
has
development
potential.
U
S
S
F
S
S
F
S
S
F
I
believe
so
one
of
the
things
that
that
we
talked
about
when
I
first
got
on
Council
seven
over
seven
and
a
half
years
ago,
was
the
shoreline
of
the
entire
Sammamish
River
and
its
tributaries
in
studies
and
have
has
the
shoreline
board
done.
Any
studies
related
to
the
entire
Ceramics.
So
as
an
example
we're
talking
about
the
City
of
Buffalo
and
the
effects
of
what
happens
here
in
the
city
of
Bothell.
F
U
Well,
what
they
have
done,
not
not
with
these
code
amendments,
but
with
the
previous
round
and
with
some
of
the
the
critical
areas
code
amendments
there
have
been
some
amendments
that
have
opened
the
door
somewhat
to
off-site
mitigation
within
What's,
called
the
service
area
and
there's
a
wetland
mitigation
Bank
outside
of
Redmond
that
qualifies
that's
in
our
service
area,
so
those
opportunities
have
have
been
made
possible
to
to
utilize
with
some
previous
amendments.
They're
not
part
of
this
package,
though.
F
Okay,
well,
the
reason
I'm
just
asking
the
question
more
or
less
to
ascertain
what
you
know
we're
doing
work
here
in
Bothell.
But
what
does
that
look
like
holistically
and
how
does
it
affect
the
the
entire
tributarian?
You
know,
I.
Think
the
mayor
and
council
member
Dodd
brought
up
the
the
point
about
roads
in
in
in
housing,
and
the
thing
that
came
to
my
mind
was
when
we
talk
about
filling
Wetlands,
what
what
does
filling
Wetlands
mean
and
we're
filling
it
for
roads?
U
It's
only
for
improvements
to
existing
roadways
and,
and
even
then
it's
quite
tightly
constrained
so
but
it
was
a.
It
was
something
that
the
current
code
created
some
significant
hurdles
for
the
405
project
when
I
went
through
the
hearing,
examiner
process
and-
and
it
was
the
hearing
examiner
that
suggested-
that
we
make
some
revisions
through
the
code
so
that
they
didn't
have
to
do
quite
as
many
legal
gymnastics
too
yeah
do
that
sort
of
thing,
yeah.
S
And-
and
we
we
did
also
talk
with
or
Dave
talked
with,
the
Rhodes
people
within
the
city
to
ask
them
about
future
projects
and,
if
just
to
confirm
like,
are
there
any
roads
that
the
city
needs
to
improve
for
for
safety
and
just
to
upgrade
to
meet
current
standards
and
are
they
proximal
to
Wetlands
and
or
flood
Plains,
where
there
would
be
a
conflict?
And
there
were
a
couple
projects
that
potentially
had
had
that
element
to
it
as
well.
S
So
it
seemed
like
there's
a
real
need
for
that
and
again
transportation
is
fairly
unique
and
that
you
can't
just
relocate
it
somewhere
else
and
the
improvements
need
to
happen
adjacent
and
on
top
of
the
existing
roadway.
So
and
as
we
mentioned
too,
there
is
an
incredible
amount
of
protective
regulation
of
wetlands
and
the
environment
in
general,
contained
within
the
shoreline
master
program
with
another
provision.
So
the
whole
package
really
I
think
holds
the
line
on
protecting
environmental
functions
while
still
allowing
important
projects
and.
F
Okay,
yep
and
so
the
last.
The
last
item
I
had
a
little
check
box.
Here
was
the
the
mitigation
for
those
buffers
and
the
kind
of
the
menu
that
you
picked
through
yeah,
and
what,
when
we
talk
about
menus
and
picking
through
things,
it's
like,
if
you,
if
you
change
something
to
where
you
can
build
a
house
on
a
lot,
but
you
have
a
tree
ordinance
that
doesn't
allow
you
to
build
a
lot.
It's
a
problem
right.
So
the
question
I
have
is
around
that
is
with
that
menu.
F
Is
the
menu
going
to
become
cost
prohibitive
for
those
folks
to
be
able
to
do
something
based
on
the
mitigation
they
have
to
do,
and
I'm
only
merely
asking
the
question,
because
you
know,
if
you
have
to.
If
you
take
one
tree
down,
you
got
to
plant
100
trees.
It
becomes
at
some
point
cost
prohibitive
to
do
that
right.
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I'm
kind
of
understanding
how
how
that
mitigation
piece
would
come
into
play
on
the
under
reduced
menu
buffer.
S
Then
you
would
be
looking
at
state
and
federal,
permitting
and
engineering,
and
you
know
a
variety
of
things,
but
we
tried
to
make
the
menu
have
options
that
could
kind
of
meet
different
folks
needs,
but
also
that
menu
was
driven
by
the
analysis
we
did
in
2012
looking
at
what
does
the
river
actually
need
and
what
sorts
of
improvements
would
really
increase
ecological
function
and
of
that
Shoreline
area.
So
so
it's
kind
of
driven
by
both
of
those
considerations,
great.
F
U
U
B
They
have
the
one
other
takeaway
that
I
got
and
will
commit
to
following
up
with
Council
on
is
that
there
was
some
analysis
that
Amy
referenced
at
the
shoreline
board
received
so
we'll
go
through
and
make
sure
we
find
that
packet,
and
you
won't
email
that
out
and
I
know
you
all
can
find
it
on
the
website
too,
but
we'll
make
sure
to
get
that
out
this
week,
so
that
you
have
plenty
of
time
before
the
next
touch
in
case.
There's
anything
in
the
analysis.
There
that's
helpful.
F
H
I
just
want
to
say
that
Hank,
the
fish
survived
the
sound
and
that's
been
fun
each
year
where
we
participate
in
the
in
the
survive.
The
sound
like
about
salmon
spawning
and
for
I
think
this
might
be
the
second
year
in
a
row
that
the
city
of
Bothell
agreed
to
rip
have
Hank
represent
us
a
very
cute
little
Coast
Salish
design,
fish
in
in
purple
and
teal
and
yeah
this
last
year.
Our
Hank
did
not
survive
the
sound
this
year
our
Hank
did,
and
that
was
exciting.
G
M
K
Shelton
View
Elementary
had
a
lockdown
yesterday
and
the
Bothell
police
were
there
in
60
seconds,
the
North
Shore
School
District,
not
just
the
security
team,
but
all
the
school
staff,
lots
of
other
staff.
I
saw
super
superintendent
tolly
there
and
all
the
kids
seem
to
do
pretty
great.
Everybody
was
glad
to
see
their
parents
and
all
the
parents
were
calm
in
the
reunification
line.
K
It
was
a
very
smooth
process
with
a
lot
of
obviously
frazzled
nerves
and
everybody
did
as
as
well
as
I
could
ask
personally
not
being
an
expert
in
any
of
these
things,
and
so
it
was
great
to
see
large
chunks
of
our
community
with
different
perspectives
coming
together
and
supporting
the
kids
and
ensuring
safety.
So
just
wanted
to
shout
out
kind
of
everybody.
There.
H
And
it's
not
the
like
the
first
right,
because
last
year
there
was
threats
at
Bothell,
High
and,
and
it
was
from
somebody
who
was
out
of
District
like
not
even
I,
don't
even
know
what
the
connection
was,
but
yeah
that
it
is
it's
strange
times
to
live
in
when
that
can
be
the
impact
on
our
communities
and
I'm.
I'm
glad
that
you
brought
it
up
that
that
there
was,
you
know
a
you
know,
very
kind
and
supportive
Community
response
in
that
in
those
moments,
and-
and
that
makes
a
big
difference
when
like.