>>> THE JULY 25, 2022 MEETING
OF THE SEATTLE PARK DISTRICT
WILL COME TO ORDER.
IT'S 9:31 A.M.
I'M ANDREW LEWIS, PRESIDENT OF
THE BOARD.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES AND
MOSQUEDA ARE EXCUSED.
>>> PEDERSEN?
>> PRESENT.
>> SAWANT?
>> PRESENT.
>> LEWIS?
>> PRESENT.
>> FIVE PRESENT.
>>> APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA.
IF NO OBJECTION, IT WILL BE
ADOPTED.
IT'S ADOPTED.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, THE
MINUTES OF THE JULY 14 -- THE
MINUTES OF THE 14th AND 18th
2022 MEETINGS HAVE BEEN
REVIEWED.
IF NO OBJECTION, THEY WILL BE
ADOPTED.
HEARING NO OBJECTION, MINUTES
ARE ADOPTED.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE AFFIX MY
SIGNATURE TO THE MINUTES?
>>> PUBLIC COMMENT.
AT THISPOINT WE WILL OPEN THE
HYBRID PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
THE CLERK WILL MODERATE
STARTING WITH IN-PERSON PUBLIC
COMMENTERS AND THEN PROCEEDING
TO VIRTUAL COMMENTERS, AND
MADAM CLERK, I WILL SET PUBLIC
COMMENT TIME AT TWO MINUTES,
AND WE CAN COMMENCE STARTING
WITH THE ROSTER OF
IN-PERSON SPEAKERS.
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> YEAH.
>> MY NAME IS TIM MOTZER LONG
TIME RESIDENT OF LAKE CITY.
BELOW ARE WAY YOU SHOULD
CONSIDERED THE QUESTIONS AND
ISSUES RAISED BY BOARD MEMBERS
ON THE JULY 18th MEETING.
ONE, SEVERAL MEMBERS EXPRESSED
CONCERN AND OBJECTION TO
INCLUDING THE 10 MILLION
ALLOCATION FOR SUPPLEMENTATION
IN THE NEXT CYCLE.
IT DOES NOT INCLUDE THIS
EXPENSE.
TWO, CONTINUED CONCERN BEING
RAISED BY MEMBERS REGARDING
POSSIBLE DOUBLING OF THE
PROPERTY TAX RATE FOR THE NEXT
CYCLE.
THE 33-CENT SOLUTION HAS A
LOWER TAX RATE THAN THE
COMMISSIONER'S RECOMMENDATION
AND DOES NOT REQUIRE DEBT
SERVICE FINANCING, WHICH WILL
ADD AN ADDITIONAL TAX BURDEN
FOR EVERYONE, 14 YEARS AFTER
THE COMPLETION OF THE
FORTHCOMING CYCLE.
THREE, CONCERNS WERE RAISED BY
MEMBERS REGARDING THE FUNDING
FOR LIFEGUARDS AND AQUATIC
SAFETY.
THERE'S A DEDICATED LINE
ATESTIMONY FOR THE NEED.
FOUR, CONCERNS WERE RAISED BY
MEMBERS REGARDING THE NEED FOR
CLIMATE CONSCIOUS BUILDINGS.
THE COMMISSIONER'S
RECOMMENDATION IS CONTINUED TO
REDUCE FOR MAINTENANCE FUNDING
THE NEED AT $11.34 MILLION,
WHERE AS THE 33-CENT SOLUTION
HAS RESTORED FUNDING FOR MAJOR
MAINTENANCE TO $21 MILLION IN
2023.
THE TAX PARK DISTRICT FUNDING
PLAN FROM 2015 TO 2022
DOCUMENTS THE UNADJUSTED SHIFT
FROM CAPITAL TO PROGRAMS DUE TO
COVID-19.
FIVE, ANOTHER REASON RAISED BY
MOST MEMBERS WAS ABOUT THE $2
MILLION FUNDING FOR THE
RESTROOMS, WHETHER OR NOT IT
WAS ENOUGH TO OPEN UP ALL OF
THE CLOSED RESTROOMS AND
PROVIDE NEEDED MAINTENANCE TO
KEEP THEM OPEN AND SAFE.
AGAIN, THE CAPITAL AND
OPERATING FUNDS TO ADDRESS
THESE NEEDS ARE INCLUDED IN THE
33-CENT SOLUTION.
SIX, PRESIDENT LEWIS RAISED
CONCERN OVER FUNDING LEVELS.
-- ADEQUATE INVESTMENTS AND THE
SITUATION WAS MADE WORSE BY THE
FACT THAT THE 22 PROGRAM THAT
WERE NOT EVALUATED TO DETERMINE
IF FUNDING LEVELS NEEDED WOULD
BE MAINTAINED OR CHANGED INTO
2023.
THANK YOU TO THE COMMISSIONERS
FOR CONSIDERING MY COMMENTS.
>> ALEX TSIMERMAN.
>> THANK YOU.
THE DIRTY FASCIST TO SPEAK TO
US FROM THE HEAVEN.
MY NAME IS ALEX TSIMERMAN.
FOR MANY HERE, I TALK ABOUT THE
PARK, AND WE SPEND FOR PARK, 1
MILLION, AND $1 MILLION, AND
YOU HAVE TOO MANY PROBLEMS,
POOR PEOPLE, MINORITY,
HOMELESS, COLOR.
A TON OF PROBLEMS.
PARK CAN EXIST.
YOU KNOW WHAT IS STAYING AS IS?
LOCATION, LIKE A PARK, OR HOW
MANY TOWERS ON THE YEAR?
20?
YOU FREAKING A BUNCH OF -- IS
EXACTLY WHAT -- IS EXACTLY WHAT
IS TOLD MANY TIMES.
YOU PRIMITIVE, AGGRESSIVE, AND
STUPID.
IT'S TYPICAL FOR FEMALE
MENTALITY.
WE NEED TO CUT THIS MONEY.
FOR ONE, TWO YEAR PARK CAN STAY
IN WHAT IS CALLED NOW, WITHOUT
ANY MORE MONEY.
YOU CUT EVERY SINGLE ONE
POSSIBLE, AND IT'S IMPORTANT
RIGHT NOW.
LOOK WHAT HAS HAPPENED WITH
SOUND TRANSIT.
WE MAKE MANY MISTAKES, AND NOW
RIGHT NOW, DOZEN BILLION
DOLLARS GOOD FOR NOTHING.
AND WE HAVE -- YOU KNOW -- VERY
NICE, AND SO WE LOSE OUR DOZEN
AND DOZEN, MAYBE $100 MILLION.
GUYS, WE NEED TO STOP ACTING
LIKE -- YOU KNOW WHAT IT MEANS?
LIKE AN IDIOT THAT IS INVESTED.
I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU GO AND
SIT HERE, AND THIS YOU NEVER
SHOW US YOUR FACES BECAUSE YOU
WANT TO DIGITALIZE EVERYBODY,
AND EVERYBODY WILL JUST SPEAK
FROM THE SKY, YOU KNOW WHAT
THIS MEANS?
EVERYBODY SPEAK FROM THE SKY,
AND YOU CAN SIT WITH $150,000,
WELFARE PROBLEM.
BY DEFINITION, IT'S NOT LEGAL,
AND THIS IS A BUREAUCRAT.
GIVE MONEY BACK TO PEOPLE.
THANKS.
>> THAT CONCLUDES THE PUBLIC
COMMENTERS IN PERSON AND IN
REMOTE.
>> THANK YOU, MADAME CLERK, CAN
I SEE IF SOMEONE FROM I.T.
CAN COME AND HELP ME WITH MY
SCREEN?
THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
I JUST WANTED TO DO THAT
CALLOUT FOR ASSISTANCE.
WILL THE CLERK READ ITEM ONE
INTO THE RECORD?
>> DISCUSSION OF OPPOSED
OPTIONS AND PRIORITIES FOR
CYCLE 2 FUNDING PLAN FOR
BRIEFING AND DISCUSSION.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, MADAM
CLERK.
WE ARE JOINED BY TRACI AND ERIC
FROM OUR COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF
TO GO OVER PROPOSALS FROM BOARD
MEMBERS OR ISSUE IDEA FROM
BOARD MEMBERS FOR ITEMS FOR
INCLUSION IN THE CYCLE 2 PARK
DISTRICT.
I WILL HAND IT OVER TO TRACI
AND ERIC.
THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT.
TRACI HERE WITH MY COLLEAGUE.
>> HI, GOOD MORNING.
ERIC CONAGHY, CENTRAL STAFF.
>> TODAY WE WILL GO THROUGH
WHAT I HAVE GOTTEN FROM ALL OF
THE COMMISSIONERS, EXCEPT FOR
ONE, OVER THE LAST WEEK, AS THE
OPTIONS AND PRIORITIES THEY
WANTED TO LIFT UP TODAY FOR
DISCUSSION AMONG THE
COLLEAGUES, AND I AM HAPPY TO
WALK THROUGH EACH ONE OF THE
SLIDES AND THEN HAVE THE
COUNCILMEMBERS SPEAK TO THEIR
PROPOSALS.
SOME OF THEM HAVE ONE OR TWO
SLIDES, AND SOME OF THEM JUST
HAVE ONE SLIDE.
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA,
MORALES, AND JUAREZ ARE NOT
PRESENT.
I CAN WALK THROUGH THEM, BUT I
CANNOT SPEAK TO THEM, JUST
DESCRIBING THE PROPOSAL.
HAPPY TO DO IT THAT WAY, AS
OPPOSED TO HAVING THE
COUNCILMEMBERS WORK THROUGH
THEIR ISSUES THEMSELVES.
AT THE PLEASURE OF THE
PRESIDENT AND COMMISSIONERS,
HAPPY TO PROCEED WITH ME
WALKING THROUGH THOSE AND THEN
HAVING THE COMMISSIONERS SPEAK
TO EACH ONE OF THEIR PROPOSALS.
>> YEAH, TRACI, I WOULD PROPOSE
WE GO THROUGH SLIDE BY SLIDE,
AND AFTER YOU CUE IT UP, WE
GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO THE
BOARD MEMBERS TO SPEAK TO THEIR
PARTICULAR ITEMS.
>> I THINK THAT WORKS FINE.
SO MOVING TO THE FIRST SLIDE.
LET ME JUST ORIENT YOU TO HOW
WE HAVE STRUCTURED THE SLIDES.
YOU WILL SEE ON THE FIRST
COLUMN, YOU WILL HAVE A BRIEF
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED
OPTION OR PRIORITY.
MIDDLE COLUMN REFERENCES IF
THERE ARE ANY EXISTING
PROPOSALS WE HAVE HEARD ABOUT
THAT MIGHT MEET THE PRIORITY OR
OPTION, AND WHAT THE FUNDING
AMOUNT IS FOR THE PARTICULAR
PROPOSAL, AND THEN IF IT'S
SOMETHING NEW OR REQUIRING AN
INCREASE OF AN EXISTING
PROPOSAL, WHAT WE KNOW IN TERMS
OF THE COST ESTIMATE IF THERE
IS ANY.
MOVING TO THE FIRST SLIDE FOR
COMMISSIONER HERBOLD.
PROVIDE FUNDING FOR NEW
OFFLEASH AREAS.
THERE'S NO EXISTING PROPOSAL
EITHER NEW INVESTMENTS OR FROM
THE BASELINE FUNDING THAT
ACTUALLY PROVIDES FUNDING FOR
NEW OLAs.
THERE'S BASELINE FUNDING OF
$130,000 TO FUND THE
IMPROVEMENTS TO THE EXISTING
OLAs.
THIS IS ONE THAT WOULD BE A NEW
ADDITION TO THE SPENDING
PROPOSALS AND COST ESTIMATES
WOULD BE TBD.
MOVING TO THE NEXT ONE,
INCREASE FUNDING FOR TREES IN
DEVELOPED PARKS WITH A STRONG
EQUITY FOCUS.
THERE IS FUNDING FROM THE PBRC
OF $400,000 FOR RESTORING AND
INCREASING URBAN CANOPY.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT
FUNDING WITH THE BASE LOIN
FUNDING OF $3.3 MILLION FROM
THE SAVE OUR TREES INITIATIVE
CAN BE USED TO PLANT TREES IN
DEVELOPED PARKS, BUT CERTAINLY
NOT EXCLUSIVELY.
I THINK IT MAY BE ONE IN WHICH
THERE WOULD BE AN INCREASED
FUNDING SPECIFICALLY FOCUSED ON
PLANTING TREES IN DEVELOPED
PARKS, AND MOVING TO THE NEXT
ITEM, PROVIDE FUNDING FOR THE
PLAY AREA PROJECT.
THERE IS FUNDING INCLUDED IN
THE EQUITY FUND INITIATIVE BY
THE BPRC THAT NAMED IT AS A
CANDIDATE PROJECT FOR FUNDING,
BUT THE QUESTION IS IF THERE'S
ADEQUATE FUNDING FOR ALL THE
THINGS THE COMMUNITY MAY WANT
TO SEE.
THE COST ESTIMATE IS TBD TO
DETERMINE IF THERE'S SUFFICIENT
FUNDS TO SUPPORT THE PROJECT.
COUNCILMEMBER WOULD PROPOSE TO
SUPPORT THE PROPOSED
ACCESSIBILITY OF BARRIER
REMOVAL INITIATIVE, PROPOSED BY
THE BPRC BUT ADDING IN HEARING
LOOPS AND COMMUNITY CENTER
MEETING ROOMS.
I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S CURRENTLY
WHAT THEY ARE ANTICIPATING
SPENDING MONEY ON, BUT IT COULD
BE DISCUSSED AS A FUNDABLE ITEM
SHOULD THE PARK DISTRICT BOARD
DESIRE TO MOVE FORWARD IN THAT
WAY, AND THEN FINALLY
COUNCILMEMBER SUPPORTS THE
PROPOSED UNREINFORCED MASONARY
INITIATIVE.
THERE'S A REQUEST FOR
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE
ITEM.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, TRACI.
BOARDMEMBER HERBOLD, DO YOU
HAVE COMMENTS?
>> YES, THANK YOU SO MUCH, TRAC
I, AND THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS IN THIS CAPACITY.
YOU ARE NOT JUST A BOARD
MEMBER.
YOU ARE THE BOARD CHAIR.
THANK YOU, BOARD CHAIR LEWIS.
IN MY DISTRICT, THE WEST
SEATTLE DOG CONNECTION
COALITION IS CALLING ATTENTION
TO THAT ONLY ONE OFFLEASH AREA
EXISTS IN ALL OF WEST SEATTLE
AT THE SOUTHERN END OF THE
DISTRICT WITH INCREASING
HOUSING DENSITY IN THE NORTH,
IT'S COMPLETELY INSUFFICIENT TO
ONLY HAVE ONE LOCATION, AND
TENSIONS ARE FLARING AROUND THE
OFFLEASH DOGS IN THE PARKS AS A
RESULT.
THE COALITION HAS MOBILIZED
VOLUNTEERS TO IDENTIFY A NUMBER
OF SIGNIFICANT PROPOSED
LOCATIONS FOR AN OFFLEASH AREA,
AND THEY HAVE BEEN SO
SUCCESSFUL THAT THE SEATTLE
PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT IS
ASSESSING THE SUBSET OF THE
LOCATIONS THEY HAVE IDENTIFIED
WITH THE ABILITY TO BUILD A NEW
OFFLEASH AREA.
I ALSO RECEIVED SIGNIFICANT
ADVOCACY AS MANY OF YOU HAVE IN
FAVOR OF EXPANDING THE NUMBER
OF OFFLEASH AREAS USING PARK
DISTRICT FUNDS, AND THE
COMMISSIONER'S REPORT SAY AS
FULL ONE-THIRD OF PUBLIC
COMMENTS ABOUT THE PARK
DISTRICT MENTION OFFLEASH AREAS
MORE THAN ANY OTHER AREA,
INCLUDING PICKLE BALL.
RESPONDING TO THE CALL WE HAVE
HEARD TO RAMP UP EFFORTS TO
INCREASE THE TREE CANOPY, AND
THE FOCUS ON REPLACING THE
DYING TREES IN OUR PARKS.
AN AVERAGE OF 700 DEGREES A
YEAR ARE RECORDED LOST IN
SEATTLE'S DEVELOPED PARKS, WITH
FURTHER LOG, IT INCREASES AS A
RESULT OF CLIMATE CHANGE.
THE AGING OF TREES AND RELATED
SHIFTS IN PEST VULNERABILITIES
TO TREES.
THERE'S SHOULD BE A STRONG
EQUITY FOCUS MOVING FORWARD TO
ENSURE NEIGHBORHOODS WITH FEWER
TREES AND PARKS BENEFIT EARLY,
AND THE TREE CANOPY IS NOW
INADEQUATE IN EQUITABLY
DISTRIBUTED.
PEOPLE WITH HIGHER HEALTH RISKS
BASED ON RACIAL, SOCIAL, AND
HEALTH DATA ALSO HAVE LESS
ACCESS TO PARKS WITH HEALTHY
TREES.
THE PROGRAM SEEKS TO ADDRESS
THIS BY PRIORITIZING TREE
PLANTING IN THE AREAS THAT NEED
IT THE MOST.
ADVOCATES WITH TREES FOR
SEATTLE PARKS CONFIRM THAT
FUNDING
REQUESTS FOR THIS ITEM IS
$637,000 ANNUALLY FROM THE
PARKS DISTRICT, WHICH WILL
COMBINE WITH THE FUNDING FROM
THE CITY AND BE MATCHED BY
PRIVATE DONORS FOR A TOTAL OF
$2 MILLION ANNUALLY.
MOVING ON TO THE EQUITY FUND.
REALLY EXCITED THAT THE PARKS
COMMISSIONERS HAVE INCLUDED AN
EQUITY FUND, AND THEY ARE
ENCOURAGING TO ME MORE
GENEROUSLY RESOURCED, AND WHERE
COMMUNITY MEMBERS CAN APPLY FOR
PRIVATE GRANTS IN LOCAL PARKS
LIKE ADDING A PLAY AREA, BUT
WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT FUND
RAISING FROM THE COMMUNITIES
CANNOT AFFORD IT.
I'M INTERESTED IN THE SIZE AND
THE COST OF PROJECTS THAT WILL
BE ELIGIBLE.
THERE'S TALKS ABOUT MAKING OR
CREATING SORT OF A CAP FOR
PROJECT SIZE, AND TRUST IN THE
PRIORITIZING OF THE
APPLICATION.
THE SLIDE, IT KIND OF PRODUCED
BLENDING THE EQUITY FUND WITH A
POSSIBLE ELIGIBLE PROJECT.
I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT THAT
I THINK THE MARA DESMOND PARK
RATE PHASE TWO IS AN IMPORTANT
PROJECT TO FUND, WHETHER OR NOT
IT'S AN ELIGIBLE PROJECT FOR
THE EQUITY FUND.
I LIKE THOSE TWO THINGS BROKEN
OUT.
INCREASING THE SIZE OF THE
EQUITY FUND.
POTENTIALLY A PROJECT LIKE
THIS, AND IT COULD BE AN
ELIGIBLE PROJECT, BUT EVEN IF
IT'S NOT AN ELIGIBLE PROJECT,
THIS IS A PARK THAT HAS A LONG-
RANGE PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT,
DATING BACK, MAYBE 2007.
PHASE ONE HAS BEEN COMPLETED.
IN PHASE TWO, IT INCLUDES A
PLAY AREA, A PAVILION, AND
HARVEST STATION RAISED BEDS AND
OTHER PROJECTS.
HEARING FROM COMMUNITY MEMBERS
EAGER TO SEE THE PLAY AREA
ADDED IN.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE FUNDING
SUFFICIENT FOR ALL PHASE TWO
PROJECTS INCLUDED IN THE PARK
DISTRICT GOAL TO FUNDING PLAN,
AND AGAIN, THE LONG-RANGE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATES BACK TO
2007, AND HAS NOT GONE BEYOND
PHASE ONE.
I APPRECIATE THERE'S
ACCESSIBILITY FUNDING IN THE
BUDGET FOR ADA-FOCUSED
IMPROVEMENTS, AND I WOULD LIKE
TO MAKE HEARING LOOPS AN
ELIGIBLE LOOPS.
AS TRACI SAID, I DON'T HAVE
MUCH TO ADD ON THE REINFORCED
METRO FIT FUNDING.
I'M JUST REALLY GRATEFUL
THERE'S IF THE FUNDING INCLUDED
IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS, AND I
WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S
REMAINED.
THE BUILDINGS WERE CONSTRUCTED
UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDING
1886 AND 1957 WITH BRICK OR
CLAY TILE BARING WALLS, AND THE
WALLS ARE NOT SECURED TO THE
FLOOR.
THEY ARE ESPECIALLY SUSCEPTIBLE
TO DAMAGE FROM EARTHQUAKES, AND
WHEN WE ARE TURNING TO PUBLIC
BUILDINGS AS A PLACE TO GO IN
EMERGENCIES, WE HAVE TO MAKE
SURE THAT THOSE BUILDINGS ARE
SAFE.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH
BOARDMEMBER HERBOLD.
I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS
FOR TRACI, AND REALLY
APPRECIATE ALL OF THESE ISSUE
IDEAS PARTICULARLY THE OFFLEASH
AREAS, WHICH I'M SURE ALL OF US
ARE GETTING A SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNT OF CONSTITUENT OUTREACH
AND INTEREST IN AS BOARDMEMBER
HERBOLD INDICATED.
THE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE
PARKS AND REC COMMISSIONERS
OVERWHELMINGLY WAS REQUESTING
AN INCREASED NUMBER OF OFFLEASH
AREAS, AND DO WE KNOW, ON
AVERAGE, TRACI, WHAT THE COST
OF DEVELOPING AND DESIGNATING
NEW OFFLEASH AREAS IS IN TERMS
OF BUILDING OUT OF THE SITES
AND THE DOUBLE GATED ENTRANCS
AND EVERYTHING THAT IS
INVOLVED?
LIKE WHAT KIND OF LINE ITEM ARE
WE TALKING ABOUT ON AVERAGE ON
A PROJECT BY PROJECT BASIS ON
WHAT IT COSTS PARKS TO DEVELOP
OFFLEASH AREAS?
>> THAT'S A QUESTION THAT WE
ANTICIPATE TO ASK THE EXECUTIVE
WHEN WE SUBMIT THE NEXT ROUND
OF QUESTIONS.
WE WILL TRY TO GET A BALLPARK
UNDERSTANDING OF THAT.
IT WILL PROBABLY VARY DEPENDING
ON THE SIZE OF THE OLA, BUT WE
WILL SEE IF THEY CAN PROVIDE
RANGES, EVEN THERE REGARDING
THE SIZE OF AN OLA.
>> GREAT.
ON THE UNREINFORCED MASONRY,
AND THIS IS A QUESTION THAT IS
GOING TO BE WITHIN THE FOUR
CORNERS OF SOME OTHER BOARD
MEMBER PRESENTATIONS LATER IN
THE MEETING, LIKE I HAVE
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE OVERLAP
BETWEEN A LOT OF THE CAPITAL
PROJECTS WE ARE ENVISIONING IN
CYCLE 2 AND THIS LINE ITEM.
IT WOULD BE GOOD TO KNOW HOW IT
INTERACTS WITH THE MAJOR
RETROFITS FOR THE GREEN LAKE
COMMUNITY CENTER OR THE LUOL
HEIGHTS COMMUNITY CENTER OR THE
PROJECTS WE ARE ENVISIONING.
IS THIS MONEY INTENDED TO DO
UNREINFORCED MASONRY UPGRADES
SEPARATE FROM THOSE
INITIATIVES?
OR IS THIS INTENDED TO BE A
SOURCE OF FUNDING THAT WOULD BE
ATTACHED TO SOME OF THE OTHER
CAPITAL PROJECTS ENVISIONED?
>> I UNDERSTAND IT'S A SEPARATE
POOL OF FUNDS TARGETED FOR A
SEPARATE GROUP OF BUILDINGS
THAT ARE IN THE PARKS FACILITY
PORTFOLIO.
IT'S NOT, AS I UNDERSTAND,
GOING TO BE USED TO DO THE URM
IMPROVEMENTS AND SOME OF THE
PRECOMMITMENT PROJECTS THAT ARE
LOOKING AT ADDITIONAL DOLLARS
AND SEPARATE DOLLARS.
>> THANK YOU, TRACI.
THAT BEING THE CASE, LIKE A LOT
OF QUESTIONS I HAVE FROM SOME
OF THE RECOMMENDED BOARD OF
PARK AND REC ADS, I WANT TO
KNOW WHAT THE PROGRAMS ARE
ATTACHED TO IN TERMS OF THE
METRICS OF WHAT WE CAN EXPECT
THIS TO DELIVER.
IS THIS GOING TO RETROFIT ONE
BUILDING, TWO BUILDINGS?
THREE BUILDINGS FOR SEISMIC
UPGRADES?
IS IT GOING TO BE A BIGGER
SYSTEMWIDE THING SUPPORTED BY
BONDABLE IMPROVEMENTS?
I THINK I FLAGGED IT ALREADY IN
AN E-MAIL TO YOU, BUT I WOULD
LIKE TO SEE THE METRICS
ATTACHED WHAT 1.5 MILLION GETS
US IN TERMS OF RETROFITTING
BUILDINGS.
I HAVE NOT SEEN THE CONTEXT YET
FROM THE DEPARTMENT.
I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE
IMPORTANT IN DETERMINING HOW WE
ENGAGE IN ON DOING THE
RETROFITS.
>> I THINK IT'S ALSO ONE,
COUNCILMEMBER, I WILL RAISE UP,
ONE THAT WILL REQUIRE
ASSESSMENTS OF THE BUILDINGS
THAT ARE LIKELY SUSPECTS FOR
URM IMPROVEMENTS, AND THOSE
ASSESSMENTS ACTUALLY CANNOT
HAPPEN UNTIL THE DEPARTMENT OF
CONSTRUCTION AND INSPECTIONS
ISSUES THE FINAL GUIDELINES.
WE HAVE ONE QUESTION INTO THE
EXECUTIVE TO SAY WHEN WILL THE
GUIDELINES BE ISSUED?
IT SEEMS TO ME YOU CANNOT DO
THE ASSESSING OF THE BUILDINGS
YOU NEED TO DO AND REPAIRS
UNTIL WE KNOW WHAT THE
GUIDELINES ARE, UNLESS THEY
HAVE A SENSE OF WHAT THE
GUIDELINES ARE AND HAVE ALREADY
HAD THE IDEA OF BEING ABLE TO
MOVE AHEAD WITH THE
ASSESSMENTS, BUT THERE MAY BE A
LAG BECAUSE THERE'S THE WAITING
OF THE GUIDELINES TO BE ISSUED
BY SDCI.
>> MAYBE BOARDMEMBER HERBOLD
WILL JUMP IN ON THIS.
I THINK IT'S ODD TO HAVE A LINE
ITEM REQUEST WHEN WE DON'T
REALLY KNOW WHAT 1.5 MILLION
GETS US, BUT I WILL TURN IT
OVER TO BOARD MEMBER HERBOLD,
AND I DON'T THAT TO BE
MISCONSTRUED I DON'T WANT THE
UPGRADES.
I DO.
I JUST WANT CONTEXT ON WHAT
THIS NUMBER IS GOING TO DO.
BOARD, MEMBER HERBOLD.
>> REALLY SIMPLY, I DON'T KNOW
THE WORD ASSESSMENT IS THE WORD
THAT AT LEAST I WOULD USE AS IT
RELATES TO WHAT WE ARE WAITING
FOR.
WHAT WE ARE WAITING FOR FROM
SPCI IS AN APPROACH FOR
RETROFITTING AND DIFFERENT
APPROACHES HAVE DIFFERENT COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH THEM, AND
THERE'S NEW APPROACHES THAT
THEY ARE EVALUATING, AND THEY
ARE LESS COSTLY, DELIVERING
MANY OF THE SAME, MANY OF THE
SAME SAFETY BENEFITS.
SO THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS
STCI IS LOOKING AT.
WHAT WILL THE CODE REQUIREMENTS
BE, AND WHAT IS THE TECHNOLOGY
AND THE ENGINEERING THAT WILL
BE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THOSE
CODE REQUIREMENTS?
OF COURSE WE HAVE EXISTING, YOU
KNOW, URM RETROFIT REQUIREMENTS
NOW, BUT FOR A LARGER CITYWIDE
PROGRAM, WE ARE LOOKING TO MAKE
CHANGES.
I THINK WE WILL GET THE FIRST
REPORT IN AUGUST.
I DON'T THINK WE WILL GET THIS
FAR, AS FAR AS THEY ARE MOSTLY
GOING TO BE REPORTING ON HIRING
OUT STAFF, BUT THE POINT BEING,
THERE IS A FRUSTRATING BUT GOOD
REASON FOR WHY THIS NUMBER IS A
PLACE HOLDER, AND IT IS REALLY
IMPORTANT, THOUGH, TO RECOGNIZE
THAT IT IS OUR PUBLIC BUILDINGS
THAT, IN THE CITY'S SORT OF
PHASED APPROACH FOR REQUIRING
THE BUILDINGS TO BE
RETROFITTED, YOU KNOW,
EVENTUALLY WE ARE GOING TO
REQUIRE THAT ALL URMs BE
RETROFITTED.
WE ARE GOING TO BE FOCUSING ON
THE BUILDINGS WHERE PEOPLE
GATHER FIRST, AND IT'S REALLY
-- ALTHOUGH IT'S FRUSTRATING TO
HAVE A NUMBER WE ARE NOT REALLY
SURE WHAT IT'S GOING TO BUY,
IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE SOME
PLACE HOLDER DOLLARS TO EXPRESS
OUR COMMITMENT TO RETROFIT OUR
BUILDINGS BECAUSE WE ARE GOING
TO MAKE IT A CODE REQUIREMENT
FOR FOLKS, OWNERS OF PRIVATE
PROPERTY TO DO IT AS WELL AS
OTHER PUBLIC INSTITUTION.
>> JUST TO CLARIFY, THE
ASSESSMENT IS THE ASSESSMENT OF
SPR, THEY THINK THEY HAVE ABOUT
25 BUILDINGS THAT ARE URM
CANDIDATES?
IT'S ONCE THE GUIDELINES ARE
ISSUED, SPR HAS STATED IN THE
WRITEUPS THEY HAVE TO DO AN
ASSESSMENT OF THE INDIVIDUAL
BUILDINGS TO IF AGO YOUR OUT
WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE TO COME
INTO COMPLIANCE ONCE THEY ARE
ISSUED, BUT HELPFUL
INFORMATION.
>> MY APOLOGIES, I THOUGHT THAT
WAS A KNOWN NUMBER OF
PROPERTIES AND PARKS.
THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING FROM
THE LAST THING I READ.
I APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION.
>> I CAN ONLY PROVIDE WHAT I
HAVE BEEN PROVIDED FOR
WRITEUPS, AND RIGHT NOW THEY
ARE SAYING THEY THINK THERE'S
25 MOST IMMEDIATE CANDIDATES
NEEDING TO BE ASSESSED AND
POTENTIALLY REPAIRED.
>> THANK YOU, TRACI.
TO THAT POINT, I WOULD LIKE TO
SEE THE OVERLAP OF THE 25
BUILDINGS AND ANTICIPATED MAJOR
CAPITAL PROJECTS AND
IMPROVEMENTS SO WE HAVE A GOOD
IDEA OF THE 25 WHAT IS ALREADY
BEING PROVIDED FOR THROUGH SOME
OF THE OTHER CAPITAL PROJECTS
IN THE PIPELINE, AND THEN WHAT
DO WE NEED TO PLAN FOR, WITH
WHAT IS NOT THERE.
AGREE WITH COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD'S VIEWPOINTS.
I SPENT TIME WITH A GROUP OF
PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT THE QUEEN
ANNE COMMUNITY CENTER BEING THE
LOCATION IN THE POINT OF AN
EARTHQUAKE, AND IT'S ALSO
UNREINFORCED MASONRY STRUCTURE.
THAT POSES SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC
SAFETY PROBLEMS.
GOING FORWARD, I WANT TO MAKE
SURE WE GET OUR HEAD AROUND,
YOU KNOW, LIKE THE PROJECT LIST
AND A GOOD IDEA OF WHAT THE
LINE ITEM WILL BUY, AND IT
SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A PROCESS
FOR THAT WITH TRACI.
A LOT OF INTEREST FROM MY
OFFICE.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE
BUILDING A PLAN FOR THIS.
OKAY, ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
FOR BOARD MEMBER HERBOLD'S
PRESENTATIONS HERE?
BOARD MEMBER HERBOLD, IF YOU
HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL CLARIFYING
REMARKS ON THESE BEFORE WE MOVE
ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE?
DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT.
OKAY, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
TRACI, WHY DON'T WE MOVE ON TO
THE NEXT SLIDE.
>> MOVING ON TO BOARD
COMMISSIONER JUAREZ WHO IS NOT
GOING TO BE PRESENT TODAY.
ONE PRIORITY SHE WANTED TO LIFT
UP, THE PROPOSED FUNDING FOR
THE LAKE CITY COMMUNITY CENTER
REDEVELOPING PROJECTS.
THE PROJECT IS INCLUDED IN THE
PRECOMMITMENT PROJECTS, AND
WITH A POTENTIAL FUNDING AMOUNT
OF 20 TO $25 MILLION, AND SHE
IS SUPPORTIVE OF THAT AS
PROPOSED IN TERMS OF THE
FUNDING LEVEL.
>> GREAT, AND THIS WOULD BE
PART OF THE BONDING COMMITMENTS
--
>> RIGHT.
>> I IMAGINE PER OUR PREVIOUS
CONVERSATIONS IT WOULD INVOLVE
SEISMIC UPGRADES?
>> TOTALLY NEW BUILDING.
I THINK THEY PLAN TO TEAR DOWN
THE EXISTING BUILDING.
>> YES, YES, EXACTLY.
BUT BUILDING IS ONE LESS ON THE
LIST OF 25 OF THE MASONRY,
RIGHT?
>> THAT'S RIGHT.
>> I JUST WANT TO FLAG.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WHEN WE
LOOK AT THE LINE ITEMS HOW SOME
INTERACT WITH EACH OTHER TO
MAKE SURE AS WE PUT TOGETHER
THE CAPITAL COMPONENT OF THE
LEVY, HOW THE INVESTMENTS SPEAK
TO EACH OTHER.
>> ABSOLUTELY.
ABSOLUTELY.
>> APPRECIATE IT
>> YEP.
>> GREAT.
>> NEXT SLIDE?
>> BOARD COMMISSIONER LEWIS.
THE FIRST WOULD BE TO INCREASE
FUNDING FOR THE SMITHCO PARK
DEVELOPMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF
PHASE 2. THERE IS A MR. POSED
FUNDING FOR PHASE 1 INCLUDED IN
THE PRECOMMITMENT PROJECTS, BUT
THIS IS ADDING APPROXIMATELY $7
MILLION TO ASSURE THE
COMPLETION OF PHASE TWO OF THE
PARK.
THE SECOND IS TO INCREASE
FUNDING FOR THE COMMUNITY
CENTER REHABILITATION CENTER
PROGRAM INCLUDING THE SUPPORT
FOR THE QUEEN ANNE COMMUNITY
CENTER.
THERE'S BASELINE FUNDING FROM
THE FIRST CYCLE OF $400,000 OF
MPD FUNDS, PRIMARILY THAT
MONEY, I UNDERSTAND, IS TO BE
DOING THE PLANNING AND
ASSESSMENT WORK THAT IS NEEDED,
AND FUNDING WOULD BE NEEDED TO
BE ADDED TO THE ACTUAL
CONSTRUCTION OF WORK, AND JUST
AS A HISTORICAL NOTE, THE
COMMUNITY CENTER REHAB PROJECT,
IT WAS ONE THAT HAD GOTTEN
ABOUT $10 MILLION TO $12
MILLION, AND MAYBE MORE MPD
ORIGINALLY, BUT IN 2019, THE
EXECUTIVE PROPOSED A FUNDING
SWAB TO BRING IN A FUNDING
SOURCE FOR THE PROJECT, AND IT
WAS USED TO FREE UP MPD TO FUND
OTHER ACTIVITIES THAT THEN
FREED UP GENERAL FUND.
THE AMOUNT OF THE MPD FOR THIS
PARTICULAR PROPOSAL, FROM THE
BEGINNING OF THE CYCLE ONE, IT
DID DECREASE, BUT IT WAS
BECAUSE OF THE FUND SWAP.
WE ANTICIPATE SEEING THAT, BUT
THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE WILL SEE
WHEN THE MAYOR PROPOSES HIS
SPENDING PLAN AND THE ADJACENT
BUDGET RELATED ITEMS RELATED TO
THE PARTICULAR INITIATIVE.
THE NEXT ITEM, PROVIDE FUNDING
FOR OFFLEASH AREAS.
AS I SAID BEFORE, NO BASELINE
FUNDING FOR NEW OLAs, BUT
THERE'S EXISTING BASELINE
FUNDING TO IMPROVE EXISTING
ONES OF $130,000.
THIS IS ADDITIONAL FUNDING THAT
WOULD BE NEEDED TO DO NEW OLAs,
AND THE NEXT WOULD BE TO
INCREASE FUNDING FOR THE NEW
PARK DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE,
INCLUDING McLEAN PARK IN EAST
QUEEN ANNE.
THE INITIATIVE INCLUDING $1.8
MILLION A YEAR, AND I DO NOT
BELIEVE THE PARK IS LISTED AS
ONE OF THE CANDIDATE PROJECTS,
AND LIKELY LOOKING AT NEEDING
TO BUMP UP THE FUNDINGAMOUNT
TO INCORPORATE THAT PARK INTO
THE INITIATIVE.
THE NEXT ONE IS THE PROPOSAL TO
INCREASE FUNDING FOR THE PLAY
AREA FUNDING INITIATIVE TO
SUPPORT ADDITIONAL PROJECTS
CITYWIDE INCLUDING THE
INSTALLATION OF TURF FIELDS.
SO THE PROPOSAL FROM THE BPRC
IS TO INCREASE RENOVATIONS $1
MILLION A YEAR, THAT WAS NOT
ANTICIPATING TURFING OF FIELDS.
THAT'S A COSTLY ENDEAVOR
ITSELF.
THE LATEST WAS $1 MILLION TO
INSTALL TURF.
THIS IS ONE IF THE
COUNCILMEMBERS WANT TO INCREASE
AND ALLOW TURF FIELDS TO BE
PART OF THAT INITIATIVE, THIS
WOULD ALSO REQUIRE AN INCREASE
IN FUNDING.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, TRACI.
TO GO THROUGH THESE BRIEFLY.
SMITH COVE PARK, WE HAVE TALKED
EXTENSIVELY ABOUT IT AS A BOARD
NOT ONLY IN THIS CYCLE, BUT
PREVIOUS CYCLE.
I BELIEVE COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS
IN PARTICULAR IS VERY, VERY
FAMILIAR WITH HIS WORK IN
ADVANCING THIS AND APPRECIATE
HIS LEADERSHIP, AND
COUNCILMEMBER BAGSHAW'S
LEADERSHIP IN BRINGING PEOPLE
TOGETHER TO KEEP MOVING THE
PROJECT FORWARD, AND THERE IS
AN ADDITIONAL SECOND PHASE TO
THE PROJECT, WHICH AS I
UNDERSTAND, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN
ENVISIONED AS SOMETHING WE WERE
TALKING ABOUT FUNDING IN CYCLE
2 IF PARKS HAD BEEN ABLE TO
FOLLOW THROUGH ON THE CYCLE ONE
PROMISE TO FINISH THE PHASE ONE
DEVELOPMENT OF SMITH COVE PARK.
IT'S UNFORTUNATE WE ARE NOT IN
THE POSITION TO BE ABLE TO DO
THAT GIVEN SMITH COVE PARK IS
STILL AN UNREALIZED PROJECT.
I DO WANT TO LOOK AT THE
POSSIBILITY OF INCLUDING THE
SECOND PHASE OF THE PROJECT IN
THE CYCLE 2 INVESTMENTS, AND
FLAGGING THIS EARLY FOR ISSUE
I.D.
PURPOSES AND TO WORK WITH THE
COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDERS WHO
HAVE BEEN GIVEN EXTENSIVE
PROMISES, AND IN DEED, YOU KNOW
IF YOU GO TALK TO THE FOLKS IN
QUEEN ANNE AND MAGNOLIA, ONE OF
THE BIG PROMISES DURING THE
CAMPAIGN FOR THE PARK DISTRICT
THAT WE ARE NOW SITTING ON THE
BOARD OF, SMITH COVE WAS GOING
TO BE ONE OF THE MARQUEE
PROJECTS, AND IT'S A PROMISE
THAT HAS NOT BEEN DELIVERED ON,
AND WE NEED TO WORK HARD AS A
BOARD TO HONOR, ALONG WITH THE
OTHER PHASE ONE PREEXISTING
COMMITMENTS, SO LOOKING AT WAYS
WE CAN ENHANCE THAT AND MOVE ON
TO PHASE TWO IS GOING TO BE A
PRIORITY.
COMMUNITY CENTER
REHABILITATION, I WANT TO LIFT
THIS CATEGORY UP, TRACI, TO SAY
THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO AN ENTIRE
MEETING, GIVEN THE
EXTENSIVE INTEREST AROUND
COMMUNITY CENTERS FROM -- WHAT
WE HEARD AT PUBLIC COMMENT AT
350 SEATTLE AND ALSO FROM THE
COMMUNITY COUNCILS AND STAKE
HOLDERS IN THE WORK.
THERE'S A LOT OF INTEREST IN
REALLY LEANING INTO COMMUNITY
CENTERS.
WE HAVE TOUCHED ON THIS A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE DISCUSSION
WITH UNREINFORCED MASONRY, AND
WE HAVE TOUCHED ON THIS THROUGH
A COUPLE OF ADDS THAT ARE
ALREADY WITHIN THE FOUR CORNERS
OF THIS CYCLE 2 LIST OF
INVESTMENTS INCLUDING GREEN
LAKE AND LUOL HEIGHTS, WHICH WE
WILL GET TO.
LAKE CENTER COMMUNITY CENTER,
WHICH WE JUST DISCUSSED.
I THINK THERE'S A BIG ENOUGH
SCOPE WE HAVE A BIGGER
CONVERSATION, AND A MEETING
DEDICATED TO JUST WHAT A
COMMUNITY CENTER CAPITAL PLAN,
WITHIN CYCLE TWO MAY LOOK LIKE,
AND, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE ALL
MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS THAT I
UNDERSTAND FOR THE MOST PART
ARE BONDABLE PROJECTS, GIVING
MORE FLEXIBILITY TO THE
METROPOLITAN PARK DISTRICT TO
SEE HOW WE CAN REALLY LEAN INTO
HAVING THIS CYCLE BE A ROBUST
CYCLE FOR THE COMMUNITY
CENTERS, AND BOTH TO
MAKE THEM, YOU KNOW SEISMICALLY
SOUND AND CLIMATE-RESILIENT
SPACES.
I THINK IT WOULD WARRANT
POTENTIALLY A SEPARATE MEETING
WHERE WE JUST TALK ABOUT A
LARGE CAPITAL COMPONENT TO THE
METROPOLITAN PARK DISTRICT,
DEDICATED TO COMMUNITY CENTERS
AND WHAT IT MAY LOOK LIKE AND
WHAT THE IMPACT MAY BE SO THE
BOARD CAN DECIDE IF THAT'S
SOMETHING THEY WOULD WANT TO
PURSUE OR NOT.
GIVEN THAT AS WE GO THROUGH THE
SLIDES THIS IS GOING TO BE A
FAIRLY COMMON AREA OF I.D.
FROM BOARD MEMBERS.
AND ALSO SHARING AS WE HAVE THE
DISCUSSION WITH BOARDMEMBER
HERBOLD, I THINK IT'S A FAIRLY
COMMON AREA OF INTEREST WITH
BOARD MEMBERS AND CERTAINLY THE
GENERAL PUBLIC.
I LOOK FORWARD TO LEARNING A
BIT MORE ABOUT ON AVERAGE HOW
MUCH THE PROJECTS COST.
ON McLEAN PARK, THIS HAS BEEN
FLAGGED BY THE QUEEN ANNE
COMMUNITY COUNCIL AS A
POTENTIAL SITE AS AN ADDITIONAL
DOG RUN.
IT'S CURRENTLY AN
UNDERDEVELOPED PARK ASSET, AND
I SEE THIS LINE ITEM AS SORT OF
LINKED TO THE OFFLEASH AREA
CONVERSATION, AND JUST WANT TO
FLAG THAT'S HOW I'M ENVISIONING
IT AND A LOT OF MY CONSTITUENTS
IN QUEEN ANNE ARE LOOKING AT
THIS.
SO A LITTLE MORE CONVERSATION
WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT ON
WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE AND
IF THAT COULD BE A SHARED
PRIORITY
GOING FORWARD WOULD BE REQUIRE
TO FLUSH THIS OUT IF THAT WERE
SOMETHING TO BE PURSUED.
AND TURF FIELDS, TRACI, CAN YOU
REMIND THE BOARD -- WE WENT
THROUGH IT WITH THE SEATTLE
PREP CONVERSATION, BUT CAN YOU
REMIND THE BOARD WHAT THE
AVERAGE LIFE EXPECTANCY IS FOR
A TURF FIELD?
>> I THINK ABOUT 20 YEARS.
>> ABOUT WHAT, SORRY?
>> TEN YEARS, DEPENDING HOW
HEAVY IT'S UTILIZED.
>> YES.
>> SO I THINK IT WOULD BE, YOU
KNOW, I KNOW THERE'S ALSO
DEMONSTRATED INTEREST FROM SOME
OTHER BOARD MEMBERS ON TURF
FIELDS, AND THAT MIGHT BE A
SEPARATE LINE ITEM ALL IN ITS
OWN FOR HOW MANY ADDITIONAL
FIELDS WE WANT TO -- WE WOULD
LIKE TO UPGRADE TO HAVE TURF.
AND WHAT THE SUSTAINABLE ASSETS
OF THE CYCLE ARE, NOT QUITE
ENOUGH LONG ENOUGH LIFESPAN FOR
BONDING TO BE AN OPTION FOR THE
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT.
I THINK IT'S NOT ONLY A
CONVERSATION ABOUT INSTALLING A
TURF FIELD, BUT ALSO THE
EXPECTATION OF HAVING A
SUSTAINABLE CADENCE TO THE
WORK, WHERE THE FIELD CAN BE
REPLACED IN TEN YEARS, SO THAT
IS SOMETHING THAT I'M
INTERESTED IN HAVING A
DISCUSSION ON.
WE DEFINITELY HAVE A VERY
ORGANIZED CONTINGENT OF
COMMUNITY MEMBERS ADVOCATING
FOR AN INCREASED AMOUNT OF
ATHLETIC TURF FIELDS, AND I
KNOW I SEE BOARDMEMBER NELSON'S
HAND UP, AND I KNOW IT WILL BE
AN ITEM SHE HAS IDENTIFIED,
TOO.
I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING ON
THIS WITH HER.
I WILL RECOGNIZE BOARDMEMBER
NELSON FOR A COMMENT.
>> I WILL WAIT.
I HAVE A BRIEF QUESTION, BUT I
CAN INCLUDE IT TALKING ABOUT
THE TURF ISSUE.
>> NO, THIS WAS PERFECT.
THAT WAS MY LAST LINE ITEM WAS
GOING TO DISCUSS.
IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR
CENTRAL STAFF, IT'S A GOOD
TIME.
>> SURE, SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT
LIFE CYCLE OF TURF, ET CETERA,
I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO
KEEP IN MIND, THE TRADEOFF
BETWEEN THE COST OF MAINTAINING
TURF FIELDS AND THE ONGOING
MAINTENANCE COSTS OF ENSURING
OUR FIELDS ARE IN A STATE WHERE
PEOPLE CAN USE THEM IF THEY ARE
NOT TURFED.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANALYSIS
HAS EVER BEEN DONE.
>> TRACI?
>> NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, BUT I
WILL ASK, JUST TO MAKE SURE.
IT IS POSSIBLE THEY HAVE DONE
SOME COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF
TURF VERSE NATURAL GRASS.
>> THANKS.
>> AND THEN THE DELTA BETWEEN
THE TWO THINGS WOULD BE REALLY
HELPFUL FOR ESTABLISHING WHAT A
TEN-YEAR REPLACEMENT CYCLE
WOULD LOOK LIKE.
I APPRECIATE BOARD MEMBER
NELSON IDENTIFYING THAT.
I'M SURE THE ATHLETIC FIELD
FOLKS ARE WATCHING, AND JUST TO
SAY A NUMBER OF US ARE
INCLUDING TURF FIELDS AS
POTENTIAL ADDS.
WE ARE LISTENING, AND WE WANT
TO WORK WITH YOU ON HOW WE MAY
BE ABLE TO PUT THAT IN THE
RENEWAL CYCLE.
THANK YOU.
>> AND COUNCILMEMBER, JUST TO
COMMENT ON YOUR REQUEST ABOUT
THE COMMUNITY CENTER PROPOSAL
AND ADDITIONAL FUNDINGTHERE, I
THINK WE SHOULD SPECIFICALLY
ASK THE EXECUTIVE WHEN THEY
COME IN WITH THE MAYOR'S
PROPOSED SPENDING PLAN, WE
SHOULD ALSO ADDRESS THESE
BUDGET ADJACENT SPENDING ISSUES
AND WHAT THE PLAN IS MOVING
FORWARD WITH FURTHER
IMPROVEMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY
CENTERS.
I THINK WE HAVE TO ASK AT THAT
TIME BECAUSE WE WILL NOT HAVE
TIME OR THE INFORMATION,
FRANKLY BETWEEN WHEN THEY
SUBMIT THEIR PROPOSAL AND WHEN
YOU HAVE TO ADOPT THE SIX-YEAR
SPENDING PLAN.
I THINK WE WILL, IF YOU'RE IN
AGREEMENT WILL ASK THEM TO
SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THAT WHEN
THEY SUBMIT THEIR PROPOSED
SPENDING PLAN?
>> APPRECIATE THAT, TRACI.
>> YEP.
>> I DO STILL THINK IT WOULD BE
GOOD FOR US AS A BOARD TO BE
ABLE TO HAVE A SESSION WHERE WE
GO THROUGH AND TALK ABOUT, YOU
KNOW, HOW THE BOARD COULD
STRUCTURE A MAJOR INITIATIVE
AROUND COMMUNITY CENTERS, AND,
YOU KNOW, THAT'S PART OF THE
PROCESS IN WORKING WITH THE
EXECUTIVE ON HOW THEY MIGHT
PURSUE THAT WORK.
>> YES.
>> AND WE CAN TALK MORE ABOUT
THAT.
>> YES, AGREED.
MY POINT IS THAT WE NEED THEM
AT THE TABLE TO TELL US THE
INFORMATION WE NEED TO KNOW
ABOUT THE ANTICIPATED PROJECTS
THEY SEE IN THE PIPELINE AND
WHAT THEY THINK THE BALLPARK
COSTS ARE THAT WE CAN GET
OURSELVES TO WITH AN
UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE LINE
ITEM WILL LOOK LIKE.
WE ARE GETTING A SENSE ON THAT
ON THE CLIMATE CONSCIOUS
BUILDING SIDE, BUT THIS IS IN
ADDITION TO THE CLIMATE
CONSCIOUS AND URM SIDE, SO
ABSOLUTELY GET YOUR POINT IN
WANTING TO UNDERSTAND THE
OVERLAP AMONG THE INITIATIVES
AS WELL.
>> THANK YOU.
NEXT?
>> MOVING ON TO BOARD
COMMISSIONER MORALES.
SHE WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE
FUNDING FOR THE LAKE WASHINGTON
BOULEVARD AND OTHER WALK, BIKE,
AND RURAL OPTIONS TO CONNECT
CITY PARKS, TRAILS, AND
NEIGHBORHOODS AMONG THE
BOULEVARDS.
I PUT THERE WAS NO FUNDING IN
THE EXISTING PROPOSALS, BUT
THERE ACTUALLY IS IN THE
BASELINE BUDGET FOR GREENWAYS
OF ABOUT $240,000 A YEAR, BUT
I'M NOT SURE THAT THIS ITEM IS
EXACTLY WHAT THAT FUNDING IS
ABOUT.
I THINK IT MIGHT BE, BUT I NEED
TO CLARIFY ABOUT THAT AND MAKE
SURE THERE'S NOT SOME FUNDING
AT LEAST ABOUT $240,000 A YEAR
IN THE BASELINE BUDGET
PRESUMING WE ARE TO MOVE
FORWARD TO ADDRESS HER DESIRE
THERE.
MOVING NEXT TO PROVIDING
FUNDING TO COMPLETE THE
IMPROVEMENTS AT BE'ER SHEVA
PARK.
IMPROVING PARKS FOR TODDLER
SAFETY.
THIS COULD BE UNDER THE
$150,000 TO REMIND FOLKS THAT
PART OF THE FUNDING THERE WOULD
BE USED FOR ADDITIONAL PARK
SAFETY AND PRESENCE OF
POTENTIAL UNIFORMED PARK STAFF
AT VARIOUS PARKS, AND THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT IS THE SUBJECT
OF AN RFP AND CONSULTANT WORK
TO IDENTIFY WHAT WOULD THAT
KIND OF INITIATIVE LOOK LIKE?
IT'S POSSIBLE SOME OF THE
FUNDING FROM THIS INITIATIVE
COULD BE USED TO ADDRESS PART
OF THE REQUEST, AND MOVING ON
TO SUPPORTING AND INCREASING
FUNDING FOR THE EQUITY FUNDING
INITIATIVE, THE RAINIER BEACH
CONSTRUCTION, AND OTHER
REQUESTED PROJECTS.
TWO THINGS.
ONE I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE
RAINIER BEACH SKATE PARK IS
COMPLETED.
IT'S A NAMED CANDIDATE PROJECT
IN THE EQUITY FUND INITIATIVE,
BUT THE COUNCILMEMBER ALSO
BELIEVES THERE IS A GREATER
NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL PROJECTS
THAT WOULD WARRANT BUMPING UP
THE AMOUNT FOR THE EQUITY FUND,
INCLUDING THE $1 MILLION
PROPOSED INCREASED BY THE BPRC.
I FAILED TO MENTION THERE'S
ALSO BASELINE FUNDING OF ABOUT
$1.5 MILLION OF THE EQUITY FUND
FOR TOTAL OF POTENTIAL 2.5 A
YEAR.
THAT MAY NOT BE SUFFICIENT FOR
THE COUNCILMEMBERS WHO WANT TO
DO MORE OF THAT.
AND FINALLY, SUPPORT FUNDING
FOR THE PLAY AREA FUNDING
INITIATIVE, INCLUDING FUNDING
FOR HUTCHINSON PLAYGROUND.
$1MILLION SLATED FOR THE PLAY
AREA RENOVATIVE INITIATIVE.
IT'S A CANDIDATE PROJECT, AND
IT IS SEEN BY THE PARKS
DEPARTMENT AS A POTENTIAL
PROJECT FUNDED WITH THE ANNUAL
FUNDING.
NEXT SLIDE.
THE NEXT ONES ARE JUST SUPPORT
FOR THE PROPOSED INITIATIVES AS
THEY WERE SUBMITTED TO US BY
THE BPRC.
MORAL SUPPORTS THE AQUATICS
SAFETY INITIATIVE AT $625,000 A
YEAR, SUPPORTING THE URM
INITIATIVE AT $1.5 MILLION A
YEAR, THE CLIMATE CONSCIOUS
BUILDINGS INITIATIVE AT $2
MILLION A YEAR, AND THE TEEN
AND YOUTH INITIATIVES.
AND THEN FINALLY SHE SUPPORTS
THE URBAN FOOD ASSISTANCE
INITIATIVE AT $700,000 A YEAR.
>> GREAT.
>> HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS
ABOUT THOSE IF I CAN ANSWER
THEM.
>> DO BOARDMEMBERS HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS ABOUT BOARDMEMBER
MORALES' REQUEST.
I DON'T SEE ANY.
AND I THINK WE CAN MOVE ON
TRACI.
>> COMMISSIONER MOSQUEDA ALSO
NOT PRESENT, SHE WOULD LIKE TO
INCREASE FUNDING FOR THE EQUITY
FUND FOR PROPOSED PROJECTS, AND
THE FUND HAS $1 MILLION
PROPOSED BUMP UP BY THE BPRC
AND THE BASELINE FUNDING FROM
CYCLE ONE.
PROVIDE FUNDING FOR A NEW STAFF
TO EXPLORE PARTNERSHIPS WITH
CHILDCARE PROVIDERS DESIRING
ACCESS TO PARK PLAYGROUNDS.
MY UNDERSTANDING OF THIS, THERE
IS A DESIRE TO HELP CHILDCARE
PROVIDERS WHO NEED OUTDOOR PLAY
AREAS TO OPERATE THEIR
FACILITIES, HAVING SOMEONE AT
PARKS WHO COULD HELP THEM
ACCESS THE PARKS PROPERTY OR
PLAYGROUNDS TO MEET THE OUTDOOR
PLAY AREA NEED.
IT'S NOT A CURRENTLY PROPOSED
INITIATIVE, AND IT WOULD BE A
NEW INITIATIVE REQUIRING
ADDITIONAL FUNDING, AND FINALLY
COUNCILMEMBER SUPPORTS AND
POSSIBLY INTERESTED IN
INCREASING THE FUNDING FOR THE
CLIMATE RESILIENCE INVESTMENTS
INCLUDING THE $2 MILLION FOR
CLIMATE CONSCIOUS BUILDINGS,
$300,000, AND THEN A FEW OTHERS
FOR CLIMATE INVESTMENTS, AND
THE FUNDING THERE IS TO BE
DETERMINED.
>> THANK YOU, TRACI.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS FROM BOARD
MEMBERS ON BOARDMEMBER
MOSQUEDA'S REQUESTS?
I DON'T SEE ANY.
IS TRACI, I THINK YOU AND I
HAVE DISCUSSED THIS, BUT NOW
THAT WE HAVE SEEN THIS A COUPLE
OF TIMES, I AGREE THE CLIMATE
CONSCIOUS BUILDINGS SHOULD BE A
PRIORITY, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO
GET MORE VISIBILITY INTO WHAT
EXACTLY THE 2 MILLION A YEAR IS
ENVISIONED TO DO TO REALIZE THE
GOALS.
YOU KNOW, IS THAT $2 MILLION
ENVISIONED TO, YOU KNOW,
SUPPORT DEBT, TO MAKE A BUNCH
OF IMPROVEMENTS.
$2MILLION FOR A COUPLE OF
IMPROVEMENTS EVERY YEAR FOR THE
SIX-YEAR CYCLE?
IT WOULD BE GOOD TO GET A BIT
TO BE PROGRAMMED BY THE PARKS
DEPARTMENT AS WE CONTINUE TO
WORK THROUGH THE PROCESS.
>> I CAN --
>> SAME WITH THE COMMUNITY
CENTER ELECTRIFICATION DEAL.
>> PLEDGED OR PROPOSED R THE CL
BUILDINGS, AND THAT COULD
EASILY INCLUDE THE COMMUNITY
CENTERS.
THERE MAY BE FUNDING LEVERAGED
WITH WHAT MAY BE PROVIDED BY
THE MPD.
SOME PLANNING, AS I MENTIONED
BEFORE IS ALSO ANTICIPATED BY
THE GREEN NEW DOLE TO FIGURE
OUT WHICH CITY BUILDINGS AND OR
SCHOOL DISTRICT BUILDINGS MA I
BE THE RESILIENT HUBS, AND HOW
DO WE COORDINATE THAT WITH THE
VARIOUS FUNDING SOURCES FOR THE
PARTICULAR EFFORT?
>> THANK YOU.
>> UH-UH.
>> WE CAN GO ON TO THE NEXT
SLIDE.
>> SO THIS NEXT ONE IS OUR
BOARD COMMISSIONER NELSON'S.
THE FIRST IS TO PROVIDE FUNDING
TO INSTALL TURF AT JETKINS PLAY
FIELD.
AS MENTIONED BEFORE, THERE'S NO
INITIATIVE TO FUND TURF
INSTALLATION.
IT'S A NEW ITEM AND REQUIRE
SOME ADDITIONAL FUNDING, AND
PROVIDE OR INCREASE FUNDING TO
EXPAND THE PRESENCE OF PARKS
PERSONNEL, PROVIDE GENERAL
ASSISTANCE TO PARK USERS AND
ADDRESS SAFETY CONCERNS.
AGAIN, THE PROPOSAL TO FUND THE
PARK CONCIERGE INITIATIVE AT
$650,000 A YEAR PROPOSED AND
THE FUNDING FOR THE PARK SAFETY
INITIATIVE THAT COULD PROVIDE
FUNDING TO ADDRESS THE SPECIFIC
NEED OR ADDITIONAL FUNDS COULD
BE NEEDED DEPENDING ON HOW
EXPANSIVE ONE WANTED TO HAVE A
PRESENCE BE AT PARKS CONCIERGE
OR A UNIFORMED TYPE OF PRESENCE
IN PARKS.
MOVING ON TO SUPPORT OR
INCREASE FUNDING TO EXPAND
ACCESS TO THE COMMUNITY CENTER
FACILITIES, AND THERE'S IS A
PROPOSED INITIATIVE FROM THE
BPRC TO PROVIDE $3.7 MILLION TO
EXPAND THE COMMUNITY CENTER
HOURS ON WEEKENDS AND EVENINGS,
AND WILL BE USING A SPECIFIC
RACIAL EQUITY LENS TO
DISTRIBUTE THOSE HOURS IN
PLACES WHERE THERE IS THE
GREATEST HEALTH DISTEARTIES AND
THE GREATEST REQUEST FOR HOURS.
A PORTION WOULD BE USED TO
EXPAND THE HOURS AT SELECTED
COMMUNITY CENTERS, AGAIN, WITH
THE EQUITY FOCUS.
THE NEXT IS FUNDING PROPOSALS
THAT ENSURE THE COMMUNITY
PARKS, BATHROOMS, ET CETERA ARE
OPEN, CLEAN, AND SAFE YEAR
ROUND.
THERE'S A NUMBER OF INITIATIVES
ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE.
THE $4.7 MILLION IN BASELINE
FUNDING FOR PROVIDING CLEAN,
SAFE, AND WELCOMING PARKS WAS
PART OF THE CYCLE 1 FUNDING
INITIATIVES, AND $794,000, AND
THE SECOND SHIFT MAINTENANCE
HAS BEEN THE NEW PROPOSAL FROM
THE BPRC AND THEN THE OPERATING
INITIATIVE GETTING AT THE ISSUE
OF PROVIDING MORE ACCESS TO
COMMUNITY CENTERS, AND CLEANING
UP THE COMMUNITY CENTERS WITH
EXPANDED HOURS.
THE NEXT PROPOSAL WOULD BE TO
SUPPORT THE FUNDING PROPOSALS
THAT ENSURE PUBLIC USE OF ALL
SWIMMING POOLS AND BEACHES.
A COUPLE OF INITIATIVES
PROPOSED BY THE BPRC.
$1MILLION FOR THE MAJOR POOL
MAINTENANCE INITIATIVE, AND
THEN THE AQUATICS SAFETY
INITIATIVE.
LOOKING LIKE AN EXTRA ZERO
THERE.
SORRY ABOUT THAT, FOLKS, TO TRY
TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL STAFFING
AND TRAINING FOR LIFEGUARDS,
AND THEN FINALLY, REQUIRING SPR
TO PROVIDE MORE DETAILS ON THE
SCOPE, DESIGN, AND COST
PROPOSED PRECOMMITMENT PROJECTS
BEFORE FUNDING AND BOND
ISSUANCE.
THAT'S RELATED TO THE 11
PROJECTS THAT HAVE FUNDING THAT
HAVE BEEN PROPOSED AS
PRECOMMITMENTS AND JUST A
DESIRE THAT WE HAVE MORE
DETAILS ABOUT THE PROJECTS
BEFORE THE ACTUAL FUNDING IS
APPROPRIATED OR BOND ISSUANCE
IS AUTHORIZED.
>> THANK YOU, TRACI.
>>> COMMISSIONER NELSON, IF YOU
WANT TO ADD TO ANY REMARKS?
>> YES, SO THE VALUE AND
PRINCIPLE BEHIND ALL OF MY
PRIORITIES, IT'S OUR
RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN THE
ASSETS WE HAVE GOT, AND FOR
PARKS AND COMMUNITY CENTERS
THAT MEANS ENSURING THEY ARE
SAFE, CLEAN, AND IN GOOD
WORKING ORDER SO OUR PUBLIC CAN
USE THEM.
THAT'S JUST THE MINIMUM THAT
OUR PUBLIC EXPECTS FROM US, AND
CENTRAL STAFF HAS INDICATED
THAT THE PROPOSED FRAMES AND
FUNDING AMOUNTS THAT CAN GET US
THERE, IN MY MIND, THIS SHOULD
NOT REQUIRE A SIGNIFICANT
INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAXES TO
MEET.
AN EDITORIAL FROM THE SEATTLE
TIMES ON JUNE 24th REFERRING TO
A SURVEY FROM THE SEATTLE PARKS
AND RECREATION DISTRICT OR
DEPARTMENT THAT WAS COMPLETED
AND PRESENTED IN FEBRUARY.
IT SAYS THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS
AWARDING SEATTLE PARKS AN A.
DROPPED FROM 23% TO 12% AND F.
GRADES TRIPLED ACCORDING TO THE
SEATTLE PARKS AND RECREATIONAL
SURVEY.
IN LOOKING AT THE ACTUAL
SURVEY, 60% OF THE SURVEY
TAKERS
IDENTIFIED IMPROVING SAFETY AS
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, AND 50%
SAID IMPROVING MAINTENANCE AND
CLEANLINESS IS EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT.
BE IT BATHROOMS OR, YOU KNOW
THE ACTUAL REST OF THE
FACILITIES IN OUR PARKS AND
COMMUNITY CENTERS, I DO THINK
THAT MY PRIORITIES NUMBERED,
LET'S SEE, THE SECOND AND
THIRD, AND THEN FOURTH, GET AT
THAT.
I WILL BE LOOKING FOR THE
FUNDING PROPOSALS THAT GO A
LONG WAY TO GETTING US HERE AT
A MINIMUM.
THE ONE NEW FUNDING PROPOSAL
THEY HAVE, AND IT'S TURFING THE
PLAY FIELD HAS BEEN A PRIORITY
FOR CENTRAL DISTRICT FAMILIES
AND COMMUNITY LEADERS FOR YEARS
AND YEARS.
THE HOME OF THE CD PANTHERS,
AND THEY ALSO HAVE BASEBALL
FACILITIES THERE AS WELL.
I BELIEVE THAT FUNDING, AS I
WAS REMINDED BY MR. MOTZER
GIVING PUBLIC COMMENTING THIS
MORNING, MAY BE MORE
APPROPRIATE FUNDING FOR THIS,
BUT I FIRST IDENTIFIED THIS AND
RECOGNIZED I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT
WOULD BE THE BEST FUNDING
SOURCE FOR THE CAPITAL PROJECT.
I DO BELIEVE, THOUGH, THAT
SCOPING AND GENERATING A COST
ESTIMATE COULD BE APPROPRIATE
FOR THE FIRST YEAR OF THIS NEW
SIX-YEAR CYCLE.
SO THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS RIGHT
NOW, AND I DO WANT TO SAY WHEN
IT COMES TO OUR FACILITIES THAT
ARE USED IN THE SUMMER,
EVERYTHING FROM WADING POOLS,
SWIMMING POOLS TO WATER
FEATURES IN OUR PARKS, AND
SWIMMING AREAS THAT ARE NATURAL
BEACHES, THEY INCREASED
STAFFING FOR ENSURING PEOPLE
CAN USE THEM SAFELY IS IN
ORDER.
NOT ALL OF MY MAINTENANCE AND
OTHER PRIORITIES, NECESSARILY
REQUIRE SIMPLY CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT STAFFING
AS OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE
IDENTIFIED HERE.
FINALLY, ONE THING THAT DID NOT
MAKE MY LIST, BUT FALLS IN THE
MAINTENANCE CATEGORY IS IVY
ABATEMENT.
WE TALK ABOUT THE URBAN CANOPY,
AND WE OWN A LOT OF TREES AND
PARKS, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE
THE ITEM THAT ADDRESSES THE
URBAN CANOPY IN THIS CYCLE, IT
WILL GO A LONG WAY TOWARDS
ENSURING THAT IVY IS REDUCED IN
THE PARKS BECAUSE IT WILL KILL
OUR TREES.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, BOARDMEMBER
NELSON.
I APPRECIATE THE HIGHLIGHTING
OF A LOT OF THE ADDS, AND THEY
ARE DEFINITELY ONES I HAVE MORE
QUESTIONS ON.
TRACI HAS RECEIVED MY E-MAIL ON
THIS.
ONE OF MY FRUSTRATIONS, AND I
DO APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER
NELSON ECHOING MY CLEAN, SAFE,
AND OPEN PHRASING OF WHAT THE
GOAL SHOULD BE AS PART OF THE
CYCLE.
I TOTALLY AGREE WITH BOARD
MEMBER NELSON'S COMMENTS THAT
FUNDAMENTALLY, THIS PARK
DISTRICT CYCLE NEEDS TO BE AN
EXERCISE IN MAKING SURE THAT'S
TRUE.
IF IT'S NOT TRUE THEY ARE
CLEAN, SAFE AND OPEN, ALL OF
THE OTHER
PROGRAMMING WE ARE PROPOSING
BECOMES MOOT.
IF THEY HAVE A BAD EXPERIENCE,
THEY DON'T WANT TO GO BACK.
FOCUSING ON THE BASIC SERVICES
IS ESSENTIAL.
ON THE SPIRIT OF THE COMMUNITY
CENTER OPERATIONS FUNDING, AND
THE BATHROOM EVENING AND SECOND
SHIFT ADD, SUBMITTED QUESTIONS
TO THE CENTRAL STAFF BECAUSE
SOME OF THE METICS RECEIVED
FROM PARKS FRANKLY DON'T TELL
US MUCH IN THE CURRENT FORM OF
WHERE THEY ARE.
I BELIEVE, AND TRACI CAN
PROTECT ME, THE $794,000 IN
SECOND SHIFT CLEANING IS
EXPECTED TO GET 12,000
ADDITIONAL HOURS OF CLEANING
FOR BATHROOMS, AND I DON'T HAVE
ANY CONTEXT FOR WHAT THAT
NUMBER MEANS GIVEN THE CURRENT
SITUATION.
MY DIRECTION TO THE DEPARTMENT,
I WANT THE NUMBER IN TERMS OF
HOURS THAT YOU THINK IS
CONNECTED TO MAKING PARKS
CLEAN, SAFE AND OPEN.
I DON'T WANT TO FUND AN
ARBITRARY THAT SOUNDS BIG, AND
IT'S IMPLIED TO MEAN IT WILL BE
CLEAN, SAFE, AND OPEN, BUT IT
DOESN'T MEET THE PUBLIC'S
EXPECTATION FOR WHAT THEY
EXPECT FOR THE INVESTMENT.
I WANT IT TO BE MORE OF AN
OUTCOMES METRIC-DRIVEN
DISCUSSION THAN HERE IS A
NUMBER, AND HOW MANY HOURS DOES
IT TRANSLATE TO?
IT'S THE SAME -- I DON'T SEE IT
IN HERE, TRACI, BUT THERE'S A
LINE ITEM FOR SOMETHING AROUND
LIKE VANDALISM OR GRAFFITI
ABATEMENT, AND I THINK THAT IS
RESPONSIVE TO BOARD MEMBER
NELSON'S REMARKS, PROBABLY
FITTING UNDER THE LINE ITEM OF
SUPPORT FUNDING PROPOSALS IN
ENSURING THEY ARE CLEAN, SAFE,
AND OPEN.
I DON'T SEE HOW, AS PRESENTED,
THAT NUMBER IS CONNECTED TO
GIVING ME CONFIDENCE AS A BOARD
MEMBER THAT THERE WILL NOT BE
GRAFFITI IN PARKS, AND I GET
THAT IT'S A NUMBER THAT WILL
INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF REMOVAL
GRAFFITI, BUT WHAT I HAVE NOT
REALLY SEEN IS WHAT THE
BUSINESS PLAN IS GOING TO BE
CONNECTED TO THESE INVESTMENTS
THAT IS GOING TO LEAD TO WHAT
WE WANT TO SEE IN THE PARKS
BEING CLEAN, SAFE AND OPEN.
THAT IS MORE THE INTERACTION I
WOULD LIKE TO SEE FROM HOW
PARKS AND REC INTERACTS,
INSTEAD OF THE DOLLAR AMOUNT
AND THE HOURS CONNECTED, I WANT
TO SEE THE BUSINESS PLAN ON HOW
PARKS IS GOING TO ADAPT TO, YOU
KNOW, MAKING SURE WE HAVE
CLEAN, SAFE, AND OPEN PARKS
THAT VANDALISM IS REPAIRED
EXPEDIENTLY, BATHROOMS ARE
CLEAN, OPEN, AND SAFE, AND WHEN
WE LOOK AT THIS, IT'S SCATTERED
OVER LINE ITEMS.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S NOT
FEDERALIZED IN TERMS OF HOW
THEY DO THE WORK.
I DON'T GET THE 4.77 MILLION
BASELINE, AND THEN THERE'S LIKE
A SEPARATE COMMUNITY CENTER
OPERATIONS LINE ITEM, AND THEN
THE SEPARATE EVENING AND SECOND
SHIFT MAINTENANCE INITIATIVE.
I WANT TO SEE ALL OF THESE
THINGS FORM LATE INTO WHAT ON-
THE-GROUND BUSINESS PLAN FOR
REALIZING THE GOALS IS, AND I
HAVE SENT THAT DIRECTION TO
CENTRAL STAFF.
SIMILARLY TO THE PARK CONCIERGE
AND PARK SAFETY PROGRAM, AND
TRYING TO GET MORE VISIBILITY
INTO WHAT THAT UNIFORMED
SERVICE WOULD BE LIKE AND HOW
IT WOULD BE ACTIVATED.
WE HAVE AN EXISTING PARK RANGER
PROGRAM, AND, YOU KNOW, I WOULD
LIKE TO SEE HOW WHATEVER THESE
SERVICES ARE, THEY LEAN INTO
THAT.
I WOULD RATHER IMPROVE AND BULK
UP THE EXISTING SERVICES RATHER
THAN CREATE NEW AND POTENTIALLY
REDUNDANT ONES.
I'M TALKING TO DIRECTOR BURG IN
THE MAYOR'S OFFICE ABOUT HOW
SAFETY INITIATIVES FUNDED
THROUGH THIS PARK DISTRICT
CYCLE ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO
INTERACT WITH THE OTHER PUBLIC
SAFETY INITIATIVES BEING
PLANNED TO AVOID REDUNDANCY.
CERTAINLY A SHARED AREA OF
INTEREST WITH MY OFFICE.
I APPRECIATE THES ADDS, AND
BOARDMEMBER NELSON, BACK TO YOU
FOR YOUR COMMENTS, AND TRACI,
WE SHOULD CIRCLE BACK TO YOU AT
SOME POINT TO COMMENT ON MY
REMARKS OF CLEANING AND GETTING
MORE CONTEXT FOR WHAT IT IS
THAT IS A CONNECTED, INTEGRATED
PLAN TO REALIZE THE
OVERREACHING GOAL OF CLEAN,
SAFE, AND OPEN, BUT I WANT TO
TURN IT OVER TO BOARDMEMBER
NELSON FIRST TO RESPOND, AND
THEN I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR WHERE
WE ARE ON THE QUESTIONS I HAVE
THAT ARE OUT OF THE DEPARTMENT.
BOARD MEMBER, NELSON?
>> WELL, CORRECT ME IF I'M
WRONG, BUT I THINK WHAT WE ARE
BOTH SAYING, WHAT WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT SHOULD NOT BE AN
EXTRA, AND IT SHOULD BE EASIER
FOR US TO IDENTIFY HOW
MAINTENANCE IS BEING FUNDED
NOW.
THIS IS THE POINT I MADE LAST
TIME, AND HOWEVER WE GET THERE,
YES, BUT, I THINK IT IS
INFORMATION THAT WE NEED BEFORE
WE START TO MAKE DECISIONS, YOU
KNOW, ON ACTUAL AMOUNTS IN THE
DIFFERENT CATEGORIES.
I DID WANT TO SPEAK BRIEFLY TO
THE 3.7 MILLION COMMUNITY
CENTER OPERATING INITIATIVE.
WHAT I HEAR FROM PEOPLE,
PARTICULARLY IN THE SOUTH END,
THEY WOULD LIKE THEIR KIDS TO
BE ABLE TO USE THE COMMUNITY
CENTERS MORE FLEXIBLY AND
LONGER HOURS.
IT'S AN EQUITY ISSUE TO ME.
I DON'T KNOW IF 3.7 IS THE
NUMBER IT WILL TAKE TO ADD THE
FOUR STAFFING AS YOU'RE NOTING,
HOW MUCH WILL IT COST TO KEEP
THEM OPEN FOR A FEW HOURS EXTRA
DURING THE DAY?
AND ADD MORE STAFFING SO THAT
INDOOR BASKETBALL COURTS ARE
CLEAN AND ACCESSIBLE, ET
CETERA, BUT THAT'S THE
PRINCIPLE BEHIND MY PRIORITY OF
EXPANDED ACCESS.
AND THE ASSOCIATED COST IN THIS
TABLE, IT DOES NEED SOME
DIGGING INTO.
>> YES, THANK YOU FOR THAT
CLARIFICATION BOARDMEMBER
NELSON.
I DO THINK WE ARE SAYING THE
SAME THING.
IT'S THEY HAVE NOT GOTTEN
ENOUGH INSIGHT FROM THE
DEPARTMENT YET ON
PROGRAMMATICALLY WHAT THE
NUMBERS WILL MATERIALIZE INTO
ON THE GROUND.
>> THE WAY EXISTING FUNDING IS
GOING
>> YES.
OR HOW IT'S BEING PRIORITIZED.
SO THAT'S WHY I WAS MENTIONING
EARLIER, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE
BUSINESS PLAN TO REALIZE THE
GOAL OF CLEAN, SAFE, AND OPEN?
>> TOTALLY ACKNOWLEDGING IT MAY
REQUIRE ADDITIONAL INVESTMENT
IN THE DEPARTMENT.
I'M NOT SAYING IT DOESN'T.
WHAT I'M SAYING, BASED ON THE
NUMBERS WE HAVE BEEN PRESENTED
AND THE METRICS ATTACHED, IT'S
-- THE ANSWERS WE HAVE GOTTEN
BACK SO FAR ARE THE NUMBERS OF
HOURS THAT THESE NUMBERS
PRODUCE IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW,
ADDITIONAL CLEANING AND
WHATEVER ELSE.
WHAT I HAVE NOT GOTTEN A GOOD
SENSE FOR, IS THAT THE NUMBER
OF HOURS REQUIRED TO ACTUALLY
MAKE THINGS CLEAN?
THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO HAVE A
CONVERSATION WITH THE
DEPARTMENT ABOUT.
BECAUSE WE CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW,
NEED TO BE DOING A LOT MORE TO
ENSURE THE PARKS AND OPEN
SPACES ARE MAINTAINED, BUT IT'S
A MATTER OF WHETHER THESE
INVESTMENTS ARE ENVISIONED TO
DO THE TRICK, AND ALSO HOW THE
INVESTMENTS LIKE I MENTIONED
EARLIER TALK TO EACH OTHER.
WE HAVE SEVERAL LINE ITEMS THAT
SEEM TO BLEED INTO EACH OTHER.
I WOULD LIKE TO GET A BETTER
IDEA OF HOW MANY THE BUSINESS
PLAN IT'S ORGANIZED TO DELIVER
THE SERVICES, WHICH IS WHAT I
THINK IS CURRENTLY MISSING.
TRACI, IF YOU HAVE ANY
ADDITIONAL CONTEXT FOR THAT.
>> ONLY TO SAY THAT YOU ALL
HAVE RAISED VERY GOOD
QUESTIONS, AND WE HAVE
SUBMITTED A NUMBER OF THE
QUESTIONS TO THE EXECUTIVE TO
TRY TO GET THE ANSWERS.
SOME OF THESE, OBVIOUSLY, YOU
CAN SAY THEY CROSS OVER ON A
NUMBER OF INITIATIVES TO MEET
MESSAGE IS LOUD AND CLEAR, ONE
OF THE CLEAR GOALS YOU WANT TO
SEE AS A RESULT OF THE NEXT
SPENDING PLAN, WE HAVE PARKS
AND COMMUNITY CENTERS AND
BATHROOMS THAT ARE OPEN, CLEAN,
AND SAFE.
WE NEED TO HEAR FROM THE
EXECUTIVE FUNDAMENTALLY.
HOW DOES THE NEXT SPENDING PLAN
THEY WILL SUBMIT TO THE BOARD
FOR APPROVAL, HOW DOES IT GET
TO US, AND HOW DO WE GET TO THE
GOAL?
AND FOR EACH OF THE
INITIATIVES?
WHAT'S THE SPECIFIC OUTCOME
RELATED TO EACH ONE OF THE
INITIATIVES THAT GET US TO THE
OVERREACHING GOAL.
WE HAVE PUT FORTH THE QUESTIONS
TO THE EXECUTIVE AND LOOK
FORWARD TO THEIR RESPONSES WHEN
THEY SUBMIT THE PROPOSED
SPENDING PLAN TO THE COUNCIL.
>> THANK YOU, TRACI.
I THINK WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT
SLIDE.
>> BOARDCOMMISSIONER PEDERSEN,
HE WOULD SUPPORT FUNDING OF THE
CYCLE 1 INITIATIVES, IN $2,023,
TOTAL ABOUT $58.2 MILLION, AND
HE ALSO INDICATED SUPPORT FOR
DEBT FINANCING THE
PRECOMMITMENT PROJECTS, AND
THESE ARE THE PROJECTS WE HAVE
-- THE 11
PROJECTS INCLUDING THE SITES
THE RENOVATION IN GREEN LAKE,
AND LAKE CENTER COMMUNITY
CENTER, AND THEN THE EIGHTH AND
MERCIER AND IMPROVEMENTS FOR
NEW COMMUNITY CENTER, AND HE
INDICATED HE WOULD BE
SUPPORTIVE OF PARTIAL FUNDING
FOR THE CLIMATE CONSCIOUS
BUILDING INITIATIVE, AND AGAIN,
THERE'S ABOUT A $2 MILLION
ANNUAL
APPROPRIATION THAT IS PROPOSED.
>> BOARDMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> THANK YOU, BOARD PRESIDENT
LEWIS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEAK AND YOU MOVING THIS
FORWARD.
I THANK CENTRAL STAFF FOR
PULLING TOGETHER THE VARIOUS
ITEMS FOCUSING ON THE PARKS
DISTRICT FUNDING, APPROXIMATELY
20% OF THE TOTAL BUDGET FUNDING
FOR PARKS AND REC I BELIEVE.
I HAVE MENTIONED IN PREVIOUS
MEETINGS, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT
THE PROPOSAL TO DOUBLE THE
PARKS DISTRICT PROPORTION OF
TAX BILLS ACROSS THE CITY,
INCREASING IN PROPERTY TAX AS
WE KNOW CAN BE PASSED TO
RENTERS, AND WE HAVE SEVERAL
ADDITIONAL PROPERTY TAX LEVIES
COMING INCLUDING INCREASES FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND
TRANSPORTATION, SO FOR PARKS, I
WOULD SUPPORT A REASONABLE
BACKED PROPOSAL INCLUDING THE
THREE INVESTMENTS ON THE
SCREEN.
NEW PROJECTS WE HAVE COMMITTED
TO AND RETROFITTING THE
COMMUNITY CENTERS WITH
ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY
HEATING AND COOLING PUMPS TO
ADDRESS THE HEAT WAVES.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD AND I ARE
RECENTLY SECURED FUNDING FOR A
WEST SEATTLE LIBRARY AND A
LIBRARY IN MY DISTRICT, AND I
SUPPORT DOING THAT FOR MORE
COMMUNITY CENTERS AS SEVERAL OF
YOU HAVE SPOKEN TO TODAY.
SO, PERHAPS, AND I APPRECIATE
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, YOU ASKING
FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS ON THAT.
PERHAPS THESE COULD BE FINANCED
THROUGH BONDING, TO DO THOSE
RETROFITS, AND SO, MY MODEST
PROPOSAL WOULD INCREASE THE
PARK DISTRICT FUNDING FROM
TODAY'S 56 MILLION TO
APPROXIMATELY 70 MILLION, AND
IT WOULD BE A 25% INCREASE
INSTEAD OF THE 100% INCREASE
PROPOSED BY THE PARKS
DEPARTMENT.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN OR BOARDMEMBER
PEDERSEN, A QUESTION FOR TRACI.
ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE,
DISCUSSING BOARDMEMBER NELSON'S
ITEMS, REMARKED THERE WAS A
4.77 MILLION BASELINE ON THE
CLEANING.
>> UH-UH.
>> CAN YOU CLARIFY?
I WAS GOING TO ASK ON THE LAST
SLIDE, WHETHER YOU SAY
BASELINE, IS THAT A CYCLE 1
INVESTMENT?
>> YEAH.
>> OR GENERAL, FROM THE GENERAL
FUND BASELINE?
>> SORRY, I SHOULD HAVE, YES, I
SHOULD HAVE BEEN CLEAR.
THE CYCLE 1 INITIATIVE SPENDING
PLAN.
>> OKAY.
>> SORRY.
>> GOOD.
THERE IS A BASELINE WITH
ADDITIONAL FUNDING, OBVIOUSLY.
>> VERY GOOD.
>> CAN YOU GO FORWARD TO BACK
TO BOARD MEMBER PEDERSEN'S
LIST?
YOU KNOW I APPRECIATE
BOARDMEMBER PEDERSEN, YOU KNOW,
IDENTIFYING CYCLE 1 AND KIND OF
PUTTING A MAGNIFYING GLASS ON
IT.
WE -- THERE ARE A LOT OF REALLY
IMPORTANT THINGS IN CYCLE 1
THAT WE NEED TO CONTINUE, BUT
I'M NOT NECESSARILY OPPOSED TO
LIKE A HARD LOOK AT LOOKING AT
SOME OF THE ITEMS AND HOW THEY
INTERACT WITH THE ENVISIONED
CYCLE 2 INVESTMENTS FOR SOME OF
THE REASONS BOARDMEMBER
PEDERSEN IS RAISING.
AS WE JUST DISCUSSED WE HAVE A
$5 MILLION BASELINE FOR THE
CLEANING ADDS, AND THEY ARE
PROPOSING THE BOARD OF PARKS
AND REC COMMISSIONERS, AND I
GUESS BY EXTENSION THE PARKS
DEPARTMENT ARE PROPOSING
760,000 MORE TO ESSENTIALLY GO
INTO THE BASELINE, AND THAT IS
IMPORTANT CONTEXT WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT FOR ALL OF THESE
THINGS.
I WANT US TO -- AND BOARDMEMBER
PEDERSEN NOTED, IT'S OVERALL
20% OF THE BUDGET OF THE PARKS
DEPARTMENT, AND I WANT US TO
START GETTING MORE COMFORTABLE
AS WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS TO
LOOK COMPREHENSIVELY AT ALL OF
THE ASSETS AND RESOURCES AND
HAVING THE DISCUSSIONS AND HOW
THEY INTERACT WITH EACH OTHER.
MOSTLY TO HAVE A CONVERSATION
AROUND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR HOW
WELL PARKS IS EXECUTING ON THE
BASIC, CLEAN, SAFE MAINTENANCE
PART OF THEIR MISSION AND
RESPONSIBILITIES.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE
ARE CONSIDERING CYCLE TWO
INVESTMENTS THAT CAN GET THEM
TO THE POINT THE PUBLIC EXPECTS
THEM TO BE, IT'S BEING DONE IN
THE CONTEXT OF WHAT IS BEING
SPENT TOWARDS THOSE THINGS, AND
HOW WE CAN DERIVE MORE VALUE TO
THEM AND BE BETTER AS A BOARD
AND COUNCIL IN HOLDING PARKS
ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE GOALS.
I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT
TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY SINCE
BOARDMEMBER PEDERSEN HAS
IDENTIFIED THIS CYCLE 1 LINE
ITEM THAT WE BE THINKING ABOUT,
YOU KNOW, THAT CYCLE 1 -- AND
BE CAREFUL HOW WE DEFINE
BASELINE.
MY EXPECTATION, BASELINE IS
LIKE WHAT PARKS HAS COMPLETELY
INDEPENDENT OF MPD INVESTMENTS,
BUT IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO
NOTE THERE'S THIS ADDITIONAL
BASELINE OF CYCLE 1
INITIATIVES, AND IF WE ARE
ADDING ON, WHAT ARE THE
METRICS?
WHAT DO WE EXPECT FROM PARKS TO
ADD ON TO IT?
HOW CAN WE HAVE THE DISCUSSION
THAT IS REALLY OUTCOME BASED
INSTEAD OF JUST, YOU KNOW,
METRICS THAT DON'T REALLY
TRANSLATE INTO SOMETHING THAT
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ARE GOING
TO SEE AS ENHANCING THEIR
EXPERIENCE IN THE PARKS?
SO, I JUST WANTED TO GIVE THE
COMMENTS AND CLARIFY THAT
BASELINE QUESTION FROM THE
PREVIOUS SLIDE, BUT, I DID JUST
WANT TO FLAG FOR CENTRAL STAFF
THEY THINK WE ARE MOVING INTO
THE PHASE WHERE AS WE LOOK AT
THE DIFFERENT BUCKETS OF
FUNDING, WE NEED TO BE REALLY,
REALLY CLEAR WHAT THEY ARE,
WHERE THEY COME FROM, AND HOW
IT INTERACTS WITH POTENTIAL
CYCLE TWO INVEST.
S. TRACI, DO YOU HAVE A
RESPONSE FOR THAT BEFORE WE
OPEN UP TO MORE BOARD MEMBERS?
>> I DON'T, REALLY, JUST IN
TERMS OF THE FOCUS AND DESIRE
FOR OUTCOME MEASURES FOR WHAT
YOU ALL DECIDE TO APPROVE IN
TERMS OF THE NEW PROPOSALS AS
WELL AS THE CONTINUATION OF
CYCLE 1. THAT IS A BODY OF WORK
THAT WE CAN REQUEST AND WILL
REQUEST OF THE EXECUTIVE, AND
THROUGH THE ADOPTION OF THE
SPENDING PLAN, AND I ANTICIPATE
THEY HAVE BEGUN THE WORK ON THE
NEW SET OF PROPOSALS.
I HAVE NOT SEEN THEM PROPOSE
THE OUTCOMES FOR THE
CONTINUATION OF THOSE CYCLE 1
INVESTMENTS, AND WE WOULD
EXPECT TO SEE THEM AND REQUEST
THEM TO COME BACK WITH THE
SPECIFIC OUTCOMES IN DISCUSSION
WITH THE BOARD IN JANUARY.
ONCE A FINAL SPENDING PLAN HAS
BEEN ADOPTED, AND I SAY ONCE
THE FINAL SPENDING PLAN HAS
BEEN ADOPTED BECAUSE WHEN THEY
KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY THEY HAVE
FOR THE INITIATIVES, THAT'S
WHEN I EXPECT WE COULD HAVE
SOME SERIOUS CONVERSATIONS
ABOUT EXPECTED OUTCOMES, AND
THAT, I DON'T EXPECT WE ARE
GOING TO GET A WHOLE LOT MORE
PLAY FROM THEM ON THIS BEFORE
THAT HAPPENS, AND WE HAVE SOME,
IN PARTICULAR OF THE $30
MILLION OF INVESTMENTS OF SOME
OUTCOMES, BUT PROBABLY NOT ALL
THAT WE WOULD WANT TO SEE, BUT
JUST PUTTING FOR YOU, IN FRONT
OF YOU THAT THAT WILL BE THE
BODY OF WORK THEY WILL LIKELY
HAVE TO COME BACK TO US WITH,
HOPEFULLY IN JANUARY TO SEE
SPECIFICALLY FOR ALL OF THE
THINGS PROPOSED TO BE FUNDED
ARE INCLUDED FOR FUNDING WHAT
THE EXPECTED OUTCOMES ARE,
INCLUDING LOOKING AT THE AREAS,
AND THERE'S A FEW FROM THE
FIRST CYCLE OF THE SPENDING
PLAN TO THE SECOND, AND THERE'S
SOME MARRYING UP AND LAYERING
ON OF THE FUNDING THAT WE
EXPECT TO SEE THE OUTCOMES THAT
INCORPORATE THE FUNDING FOR
BOTH OF THOSE TWO SPENDING
PLANS I GUESS YOU WOULD SAY.
>> OKAY.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS
FROM BOARD MEMBERS ON
BOARDMEMBER PEDERSEN'S ITEMS?
SEEING NONE, THANK YOU
BOARDMEMBER PEDERSEN'S
>> MOVING TO STRAUSS, PROPOSING
FUNDING FOR THE GREEN LAKE
COMMUNITY CENTER AND EVANS POOL
PROJECT.
$50MILLION IN THE PRECOMMITMENT
PROJECTS.
HE'S LOOKING TO REQUEST $50
MILLION FUNDED THROUGH THE BOND
ISSUANCE.
THE SECOND IS PROVIDING BOND
FUNDING FOR THE COMPLEX
IMPROVEMENTS, NOT AN INITIATIVE
INCLUDED, PROPOSED ON THE
BASELINE, OR THE NEW PROPOSALS
FROM THE BPRC.
THE REQUESTED ABOUT IS
APPROXIMATELY $10 MILLION.
THERE'S A REQUEST FOR
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE
FOLLOWING PARK RESTORATION.
WOODLAND PARK, VALLEY PLAY
FIELD TURFING, AND THE BALLARD
COMMONS SKATE BALL FEATURES.
NONE OF THE PARK PROJECTS ARE
LISTED AS CANDIDATE PROJECTS TO
MY KNOWLEDGE IN THE PROPOSED
INITIATIVES FROM THE BPRC.
ALL ARE REQUIRING ADDITIONAL
FUNDING, AND THEN FINALLY,
WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE ADDING
FUNDING FOR RENOVATIONS AT
SALMON BAY PARK AND GILMAN
PARK.
THERE'S HEALTHER HOUSE
INITIATIVE PROPOSED BY THE
BPRC, BUT THOSE PARTICULAR
BATHROOMS ARE NOT LISTED ON THE
CANDIDATE PROJECTS, NOT MEANING
THEY COULDN'T BE PUT ON THE
LIST OR MIGHT NOT BE THERE IN
LONGER TERM FUTURE, BUT NOT
CURRENTLY CANDIDATE PROJECTS,
AND WOULD LIKE TO REQUIRE
ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO COMPLETE
THEM.
>> COMMISSIONER STRAUSS?
>> THANK YOU, PRESIDENT --
BOARD PRESIDENT WHATEVER THE
TITLE THAT WE ARE USING TODAY.
THANK YOU, TRACI.
IT WAS VERY HELPFUL.
AS MANY OF THE VIEWING PUBLIC
HAVE WATCHED, MY COMMENTS
REGARDING HOW THE GREEN LAKE
COMMUNITY CENTER RENOVATION OR
REPLACEMENT HAS BEEN
CHARACTERIZED UP UNTIL THIS
POINT, IT IS NOT ADEQUATE FOR
WHAT THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AND
THE COMMUNITY HAVE UNDERSTOOD
AS THE PROMISES MADE TO DATE.
WITH NEED TO BE ABLE TO KEEP
THE PROMISES WITH THE COMMUNITY
FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS.
FIRST AND FOREMOST THE
COMMUNITY AS AT OTHER POINTS IN
THEIR HISTORY RATHER THAN
PUTTING THEIR REQUEST FORWARD
TO THE TOP OF THE LINE HAS
STOOD BACK -- STOOD ASIDE AND
WAITED FOR OTHER PROJECTS
THROUGHOUT OTHER PARTS OF THE
COMMUNITY TO BE PUT FORWARD,
AND THIS -- WE HAVE DONE THE
RENOVATIONS TO THE COMMUNITY
CENTER TO DATE.
WE ARE NOW AT THE POINT WHERE
EVEN THOSE RENOVATIONS ARE NOT
MEETING ENOUGH.
THE BOILERS ARE NOT -- THEY
HAVE BEEN REPLACED, AND THEY
ARE STILL NOT WORKING TO
CAPACITY.
I WILL TELL YOU, COLLEAGUES,
THIS WEEK, I'M HOLDING MY IN-
PERSON TOWN HALL AT GREEN LAKE,
AND DUE TO THE INCREMENT
WEATHER WITH THE HEAT, WE ARE
LOOKING AT PLACES WE CAN GO
INSIDE FOR AC.
GREEN LAKE COMMUNITY CENTER
WOULD BE MY FIRST CHOICE, AND
IT'S NOT AN OPTION TODAY.
THE PARKS DEPARTMENT HAS PUT
FORWARD THE PROPOSAL BEFORE US
SAYING $50 MILLION IS ENOUGH
WITH RENOVATIONS IN THE SEATTLE
TIMES COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, I
HAVE READ, THEY WANTED TO DO
49% RENOVATIONS SO THEY DIDN'T
HAVE TO MEET THE BUILDING
STANDARDS WE PASSED EARLIER
THIS YEAR TO HELP COMBAT THE
CLIMATE CRISIS.
FRANKLY WHAT I KNOW, THE GREEN
LAKE COMMUNITY CENTER IS THE
HUB FOR ALL OF NORTH SEATTLE.
IT'S D5, D4, D6, AND THERE'S
PEOPLE FROM ALL OVER THE REGION
THAT COME THERE.
IT'S THE MOST HEAVILY USED PARK
IN OUR CITY, AND AT TIMES IT
FEELS LIKE THE COMMUNITY CENTER
HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE THE
HOMESTEAD BROTHERS BUILT IT.
WE KNOW THE POOL NEEDS TO BE
FIXED, AND THE INSTRUMENTS FOR
ATTENDING TO THE POOL ARE CASED
IN CONCRETE.
WHAT WE KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE
CHILDCARE THERE TODAY.
WHAT WE KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE
ADEQUATE SPACE FOR THE
COMMUNITY TO GATHER.
MUCH LESS TO BE ABLE TO COME
TOGETHER TO WEATHER OUT THE
STORM WHEN WE HAVE CLIMATE
CRISIS EVENTS LIKE THIS WEEK.
WE DON'T HAVE A SPACE FOR THE
FOLKS IN THE NORTH END TO COME
TOGETHER AT GREEN LAKE.
COLLEAGUES, THAT'S WHY I KNOW
IT'S A BIG NUMBER, 50, THAT'S
$50 MILLION ADDITION TO THE
LINE ITEM.
IT'S LESS THAN WHAT THE PARKS
DEPARTMENT HAS STATED IN THE
PAST IN THEIR RENDERINGS AND
CURRENTLY ON THE WEBSITE SAYING
IT'S CURRENTLY $120 MILLION.
CANDIDLY, I THINK THAT'S TOO
MUCH.
WHAT I KNOW, WE NEED TO USE THE
EXISTING BUILDING TO THE
GREATEST ABILITY POSSIBLE BY,
YOU KNOW, ANYTHING IS ON THE
TABLE.
YOU KNOW, COMPLETELY GUTTING IT
AND REBUILDING, BUT WHAT I ALSO
KNOW, THE CURRENT FOOTPRINT IS
NOT LARGE ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE
THE CHILD CARE THE COMMUNITY
EVENT NEEDS, AND THEN THE
PROGRAMMING NEEDS OF THE MOST
HEAVILY USED PARK IN THE CITY.
TRACI, THANK YOU FOR WRITING
THE WORDS BOND FUNDING, AND THE
CENTRAL STAFF -- AGAIN, I'M
AGNOSTIC AS TO WHERE WE FIND
THE FUNDING, AND LET'S TALK
ABOUT THE INNER BAY ATHLETIC
COMPLEX.
NOT EVEN IN MY DISTRICT.
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, MAYBE A
LITTLE HELP ON THIS ONE.
I KNOW HE'S TRYING TO DO HIS
BEST TO KEEP A NEUTRAL
NEGOTIATING POINT FOR THE
ENTIRE PROCESS, PART OF WHY I'M
BRINGING THIS FORWARD, AND WHAT
WE KNOW ABOUT THE INNER BAY
ATHLETIC COMPLEX IS THAT THE
SOFTBALL FIELDS ARE THE ONES
RAINED OUT THE MOST IN THE
ENTIRE CITY, AND THAT THERE ARE
SOME UPGRADES THAT ARE NEEDED
TO THE SOCCER PITCH.
THE SOCCER PITCH IS SEATTLE'S
BEST SOCCER STADIUM AT THIS
POINT.
AT THIS POINT ARE THE KEY WORDS
BECAUSE THE SPEAKERS ARE NOT
WORKING, AND THERE'S SAFETY
MEASURES WITHIN THE COMPLEX
THEY WON'T GO INTO THAT NEED TO
BE ADDRESSED, AND WE HAVE A
LARGER DESIRE TODAY FOR PEOPLE
TO PLAY SOCCER THAN EVER
BEFORE, AND ESPECIALLY COMING
WITH THE WORLD CUP COMING IN
2026, AND WE NEED TO BE
PREPARED TO HANDLE THE SOCCER
DESIRES OF OUR FUTURE
GENERATIONS.
I KNOW BALLARD IS AS BALLARD
IS, BUT THE BALLARD YOUTH
SOCCER CLUB HAS BEEN HAVING
FIVE GENERATIONS OF PEOPLE
PLAYING SOCCER, AND I THINK
THAT'S WHY THERE'S SO MUCH
INTEREST IN THE NORTH END.
WE HAVE HAD BOOMERS, AND WE
HAVE HAD GENERATION X,
MILLENNIALS, Y, AND Z ALL
PLAYING FOR BALLARD YOUTH
SOCCER.
THE LATEST IS BALLARD FC, THE
SEMIPRO SOCCER TEAM THAT JUST
WON OUR -- GOING TO CONFERENCE
QUARTER FINALS THIS WEEK.
WON IN OVERTIME.
THERE'S FOUR PITCHES.
ONE IS USED FOR FRISBEE.
IF WE ARE GOING
>>> TO REDO THE COMPLEX WITH
ADDITIONAL SEATING, REDO THE
FIELD, SO THOSE OUTSIDE THE
SOCCER COMMUNITY HAVE A BENEFIT
HERE.
THE REALITY IS THAT THESE WILL
GO TO PENN TO PAPER, BUT WE
HAVE GOING IS THE PARKS
DEPARTMENT RIGHT NOW, SOME
EARNEST MONEY TO DEDICATE INTO
THE PROJECT.
I WILL NOT COME TO YOU FOR $50
MILLION FOR THE PROJECT.
I WILL ASK THE COMMUNITY TO
COME TOGETHER.
THE UNITED STATES SOCCER
LEAGUE, LEAGUE 2, THEY ARE VERY
EXCITED.
I HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH
THE UNIVERSITY AND WE KNOW WE
HAVE MORE PARTNERS OUT THERE.
WE KNOW THAT PRIVATE
FUNDRAISING HAS TO BE PART OF
THE REDEVELOPMENT.
AND WHAT WE NEED RIGHT NOW FROM
US, COLLEAGUES, SOME EARNEST
MONEY TO GET THE PROJECT
UNDERWAY.
THAT IS WHAT IS GOING ON THERE.
LAST TWO ITEMS, PROVIDE FUNDING
FOR THE FOLLOWING PARK
RESTORATION PROJECTS.
THIS IS WHERE I ASK CENTRAL
STAFF, WHAT IS ALREADY
CONTAINED IN THE PACKAGE,
BECAUSE WE KNOW WHEN I WAS
DOING MY WORK AT WOODLAND PARK
THIS YEAR I SAW THAT SOME MIGHT
BE ORIGINALS.
IN THE LAND WAS ANNEXED IN 1891.
THE BALLARD PLAYFIELD WAS
COMMITTED TO BEING RE-TURFED
DURING THE PANDEMIC AND WE TOOK
THE FUNDS TO USE IN THE GENERAL
FUND AND SO THAT NEEDS TO BE
FINISHED OFF.
I KNOW THAT AT SANDEL PARK, THE
WADING POOL, IT STILL FEELS
LIKE 1981 OUT THERE.
IT SEEMS LIKE IT COULD USE SOME
GOOD IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE NORTH
END THERE.
AND BALLARD COMMONS, WHAT WE
KNOW ABOUT THE STATE POLL
FEATURES, WIND BALLARD COMMONS
WAS ORIGINALLY TRANSITIONED
FROM A SAFEWAY STORE INTO A
PARK, IT WAS AN EXTENSIVE SKATE
PARK WITH STREET SKATING,
ANYONE OF ANY AGE COULD GET ON
A SKATEBOARD WITH A HELMET AND
LEARNED THE SPORT.
THIS WAS WELL BEFORE THE
SKATEBOARDING MADE IT TO THE
OLYMPICS, WHICH THEY ARE THERE
NOW.
WIN THE PARK TRANSITIONED FROM
A PARKING LOT INTO A PARK, WHAT
WAS TAKEN AWAY WERE THE ELEMENTS
THAT SOMEBODY WHO WAS NEW TO
LEARNING HOW TO SKATE COULD
PARTICIPATE IN.
WHAT WAS CREATED WAS A DEEP
BOWL THAT REALLY ONLY
EXPERIENCED SKATERS COULD
PARTICIPATE IN.
WE HAVE AN ISSUE AT THE BALLARD
COMMONS RIGHT NOW WHERE WE HAVE
A SPRAY PARK THAT IS
APPROPRIATE FOR 5-7-YEAR-OLDS
WITH A SKATE FEATURE THAT IS
APPROPRIATE FOR 15 AND ABOVE.
SO THERE IS 8 10 YEARS OF THE
CHILD'S ADOLESCENCE WHERE THE
BALLARD COMMONS DOES NOT WORK
FOR THEM.
WE ARE WORKING TO GET A
CHILDREN'S PLAYGROUND PUT IN
BUT STILL THAT WOULD GET
SOMEBODY MAYBE AGE, UP TO AGE
11 TO PLAY IN.
WE NEED THE PARK TO BE FOR ALL
AGES AND ABILITIES.
AND REALLY WHAT WE NEED TO BE,
WE HAVE GOT THE SPACE, RIGHT
ADJACENT TO THE SKATE BOWL.
ADDITIONAL FEATURES FOR FOLKS
THAT ARE LEARNING TO SKATE CAN
BE, THIS IS IMPORTANT.
AND FINALLY, WHEN I LOOK AT
BATHROOMS AT THE PARKS IN D 6,
WHAT IS VERY APPARENT TO ME IS
THAT THE BATHROOM AT SALMON BAY,
IT WAS, HOW DO I SAY THIS,
COLLEAGUES?
IT WAS OLD.
WHEN I WAS 5. AND IT HAS NOT
GOTTEN ANY YOUNGER.
SO THERE WAS DEFINITELY A
DIFFERENT WAY OF BUILDING
BATHROOMS IN THE 70s.
WITH CINDERBLOCKS.
AND METAL FACILITIES THAT ARE
NOT WELCOMING, COMFORTABLE, AND
I WILL LEAVE IT AT THAT.
[ LAUGHTER ] SALMON BAY PARK IS
ABSOLUTELY ONE OF THOSE
FACILITIES THAT NEEDS
UPGRADING.
THINGS HAVE CHANGED IN 50
YEARS.
AND THE SAME AT GILMAN PARK.
WHAT I KNOW IS THAT THE GILMAN
PARK BATHROOMS HAVE NOT BEEN
UPDATED.
THEY MAY HAVE BEEN BUILT A
LITTLE SOONER THAN SALMON BAY
BUT JUST AS I TAKE A SURVEY OF
MY DISTRICT, WHAT I HOPE TO
FIND OUR SMALL ADS WE CAN MAKE,
CHAIR.
SO WE ARE NOT HOARDING MONEY IN
THE NORTH END, MAKING STRATEGIC
INVESTMENTS TO ENSURE THAT
PARKS, AS COUNCIL MEMBER NELSON
SAID, MEETING THEM NEEDS OF
CONSTITUENCIES AND DISTRIBUTING
THE MONEY EQUALLY.
I WOULD BE REMISS IF I DID NOT
ADD IT HERE, TRACY, MY
APOLOGIES FOR NOT PUTTING IT ON
THE LIST FORMALLY, CHILDCARE.
I THINK I TALKED ABOUT IT
DURING MY DISCUSSION OF GREEN
LAKE.
CHILDCARE THROUGHOUT THE CITY
FOR PROGRAMMING AND PHYSICAL
SPACE, THAT IS A HUGE PRIORITY
OF MINE.
CHAIR, I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER
TO SAY.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH
BOARDMEMBER STRAUSS.
I THINK STARTING WITH A COUPLE
QUESTIONS, AROUND BATHROOM
RENOVATIONS, THAT IS A LINE
ITEM WHERE WE GOT A COUPLE
METRICS FROM THE DEPARTMENT, IN
TERMS OF WHAT THEY ENVISION
THAT 1.2 MILLION TO BE ABLE TO
DO EVERY YEAR.
CORRECT?
CAN YOU REMIND US WHAT THAT IS
ANTICIPATED TO PRODUCE.
>> I AM LOOKING CAREFULLY
BECAUSE I DO NOT WANT TO BASE
IT ON MY MEMORY. I
WANT TO SAY ON AVERAGE THE COST
OF THE RENOVATIONS ARE ABOUT
$540,000.
THAT IS WHAT I THINK IT IS.
>> SO THAT WOULD ALLOW ABOUT 2
1/2 ADDITIONAL RENOVATIONS PER
EACH YEAR OF THE CYCLE.
>> CORRECT.
CORRECT.
AND THEN WITH THE BASELINE
FUNDING ADDITIONAL, SEVERAL
ADDITIONAL --
>> AGAIN WHEN WE SAY A SIGN DO
WE MEAN CYCLE ONE OR THE
GENERAL FUND?
>> IN THAT CASE I MEAN THE
GENERAL FUND.
>> OKAY, GOOD, THANK YOU FOR
CLARIFYING.
>> THANK YOU FOR KEEPING ME ON
POINT THERE.
[ LAUGHTER ]
>> THIS IS A PERFECT CATEGORY
FOR THE DISCUSSION WE HAD
EARLIER OF LOOKING AT THE 1.2
MILLION INVESTMENT IN CONTEXT.
I THINK BOARDMEMBER'S STRAUSS ,
THE REQUEST TO FOCUS IN ON
BATHROOMS, WHAT I WOULD REALLY
LIKE TO SEE, WHAT I WOULD
REALLY LIKE TO SEE IS AN
OVERVIEW OF THE COMFORT
STATIONS AND BATHROOMS WITHIN
THE SYSTEM.
AND HOW THEY ARE TRIAGED IN
TERMS OF A PROJECT LIST, FOR
PARKS MOVING THROUGH.
AND WHAT THE CAPACITY ON
INTANGIBLE -- ANNUAL BASIS,
WITHIN BASELINE FUNDING AND
CYCLE 1, AND HOW THIS
INVESTMENT WOULD HELP TO
ACCELERATE MOVING THROUGH THE
WORK PLAN ON BATHROOMS AND
COMFORT STATIONS.
THEN WE CAN SEE WITH SOME
TRANSPARENCY WHERE SALMON BAY
PARK AND GILMAN PARK, IN THE
CASE OF BOARD MEMBER STRAUSS'S
ISSUES HERE.
OR OTHER DISTRICTS IN THE OTHER
PARKS IN THE CITY ARE, WITH THE
OVERALL LIST BEING WORKED
THROUGH.
AND WHAT THE STATED GOAL AND
METRIC IS OF THE DEPARTMENT.
TO BE ABLE TO WORK THROUGH THE
LIST AND UNTIL EVERYTHING THAT
IS NEEDING RENOVATION IS
RENOVATED.
IT WILL ALSO INTRODUCE A
POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL THING WE
COULD DO HERE, WHICH IS MAYBE
WORK WITH THE CITY AUDITOR TO
DO AN AUDIT OF THE CITY'S
BATHROOMS AND COMFORT STATIONS
IN PARKS, TO MAKE THE
DETERMINATION AND A SENSE THE
RENOVATION MAINTENANCE NEEDS.
SIMILAR TO THE BRIDGE AUDIT
THAT WE WORKED WITH
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN ON TWO
YEARS AGO.
JUST FLAGGING THAT AS A
POTENTIAL THING THAT WOULD BE
HELPFUL AS WELL.
AND BOARDMEMBER NELSON HAS A
COMMENT.
>> CAN WE THROW IN BASIC
CLEANING TO THE BODY OF WORK
YOU ARE DESCRIBING?
THAT IS RENOVATIONS, THAT IS
ONE THING, BUT JUST MAKING
SURE, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW MORE
ABOUT HOW WE ARE ENSURING THAT
THEY ARE CLEANED, WITH TOILET
PAPER, ET CETERA, ET CETERA,
WORKING LOCKS ON THE DOORS, BUT
CLEANING IS THE MINIMUM.
>> ABSOLUTELY BOARDMEMBER
NELSON.
LIKE MY COMMENTS EARLIER AROUND
WHAT IS THE BUSINESS PLAN,
RIGHT, FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND
CLEANING OF BATHROOMS,
DEFINITELY GOES TO THAT.
I MEAN IT IS EVIDENT THAT --
THIS IS JUST ONE OF THE
FUNDAMENTAL WAYS THAT PEOPLE
INTERACT WITH PARKS, COMFORT
STATIONS.
AND SEVERELY LIMITING THE
ABILITY TO MAKE FULL USE OF
PARKS IF YOU HAVE TO LEAVE THE
PARK AT THE POINT YOU HAVE TO
USE THE BATHROOM.
OR IF YOU ARE EXPERIENCE, IF
YOUR EXPERIENCE USING A
BATHROOM IN A PARK IS
UNPLEASANT.
I THINK REALLY LEANING INTO
THIS AS PART OF THE CYCLE TWO
WORK IS WARRANTED.
I THINK WE NEED MORE FROM THE
DEPARTMENT TO REALIZE THE GOAL
OF CLEAN AND SAFE.
YES, BOARDMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> THANK YOU.
I APPRECIATE THE LINE THAT YOU
GO DOWN WITH THE CONVERSATION
BECAUSE AT SALMON BAY PARK IN
PARTICULAR, WE HAVE HAD THE
CHILDREN'S PLAYGROUND REPLACED
TWICE.
IN MY LIFETIME.
THE FIRST TIME FOR GOOD REASON.
THE SECOND TIME, WAS IT NICE TO
HAVE OR A NEED FOR A REAL
REPLACEMENT?
RIGHT?
THIS IS THE CONVERSATION THAT I
THINK WE NEED, I BELIEVE, I AM
HERE FOR HAVING BELL PLAYGROUND
MEET THE NEEDS OF OUR CHILDREN.
AND IF WE ARE GOING TO UNDO
WORK THAT WE HAVE JUST DONE
WHILE WE SKIP OVER REPLACING
THE BATHROOM, WE ARE NOT SEEING
THE FOREST THROUGH THE TREES
HERE.
AND THE LAST POINT, I WILL PASS
IT BACK TO YOU, PRESIDENT, FOR
THE REMAINDER OF TIME.
BUT IN MY CONVERSATION ABOUT
GREEN LAKE CECI THIS MORNING,
IT REALLY IS, LIKE I HEARD FROM
SO MANY PEOPLE CALLING IN FOR
PUBLIC TESTIMONY ABOUT THE
RESILIENCY PROGRAM, WITH
HEALTHY THROUGH SMOKE AND HEAT
CAMPAIGN, THIS IS THE MOMENT IT
BECOMES CRYSTAL CLEAR.
A MOMENT THAT I HAVE SCHEDULED
A PUBLIC MEETING DURING A
PANDEMIC TO BE AS SAFE AS
POSSIBLE DURING OUTDOORS AND
THEN ANOTHER CRISIS LAYER ON
TOP, THE HEAT THIS WEEK, WHERE
I HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION ON
HOW TO MAKE MY RESIDENCE THAT
WANT TO INTERACT WITH ME, KEEP
THEM AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE.
THERE IS NOWHERE AT GREEN LAKE
TO DO THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT
ADOPTED THE HEALTHY THROUGH
SMOKE AND HE CAMPAIGN.
IF WE WERE ABLE TO PAIR UP THE
PROJECTS, CREATE A CLIMATE
RESILIENCY CENTER FOR PEOPLE TO
BE ABLE TO SURVIVE, THESE
CRISES IS, I JUST HIGHLIGHT THE
FACT THAT GREEN LAKE COMMUNITY
CENTER IS A PLACE THAT WE
ABSOLUTELY NEED TO BE DOING
THIS.
AND BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT ADOPTED
THE METRICS OF THE CAMPAIGN, WE
DO NOT CURRENTLY HAVE A PLACE
IN THE NORTH.
THANK YOU CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS.
THE NEXT POINT I WILL MAKE
ABOUT THE PROPOSED ADS ON
BOARDMEMBER STRAUSS'S SLIDE,
AND MAYBE TRACY THIS IS THE
RIGHT TIME, I THINK WE ARE
THROUGH ALL OF THE
COMMISSIONERS SLIDES AT THIS
POINT.
>> WE ARE, A LITTLE BIT MORE
INFORMATION ON CONVERSATIONS
THAT MAY HELP THE CONTEXT HERE
BUT GO AHEAD WITH WHAT YOU ARE
GOING WITH.
>> MAYBE WE ARE THINKING OF THE
SAME THING.
I KNOW THAT WE ANTICIPATE
HAVING A PRETTY GOOD YEAR FOR
REAL ESTATE TAX.
AND I KNOW THAT WHEN WE START
TALKING ABOUT THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS THAT ARE
PRESENT ON THIS SLIDE AND
HONESTLY ON ALL OF OUR SLIDES,
I AM NOT SINGLING OUT
BOARDMEMBER STRAUSS'S
PRIORITY, BUT ALL OF US WANTING
TO RECOGNIZE MAJOR CAPITAL
PROJECTS, AS WELL AS
INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS WELL
PAST THE END OF ITS LIFE AND
STILL BEING USED, AND THIS
INTERFACES WITH THE EARLIER
CONVERSATION WITH BMB HERBOLD
ABOUT SEISMIC RETROFITS AND
EVERYTHING ELSE.
THE REASON THAT I WOULD LIKE TO
CONVENE POTENTIALLY A SEPARATE,
A WHOLE MPD DISCUSSION
DEDICATED TO THE COMPONENT OF
THIS WORK THAT IS COMMUNITY
CENTERS IN PARTICULAR, IS TO
TALK ABOUT HOW CYCLE TWO
INVESTMENTS COULD INTERFACE
WTH THINGS LIKE R.E.E.T.
AND THE GENERAL FUND AND SOME
OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDING THAT
GO INTO PARKS.
TO REALIZE SOME OF THOSE GOALS.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS PARKS IS
ANTICIPATED TO GET A DECENT
CHUNK OF R.E.E.T.
INVESTMENT THIS YEAR.
I WANT TO FLAG THAT HERE.
SO THAT WE CAN QUEUE UP A
DISCUSSION THAT IS NOT
COMPLETELY IN ISOLATION WITHIN
THE FOUR CORNERS OF THE
PROPERTY TAXING AUTHORITY, THE
MPD, BUT SOMETHING THAT IS
CONDITIONING AND THINKING ABOUT
THAT R.E.E.T.
MONEY TOO IS ANOTHER INPUT TO
THE DISCUSSION.
AND I WILL TURN IT BACK OVER TO
YOU TRACY.
>> THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I MEANT
WHEN I SAID EARLIER THAT --
>> PERFECT!
[ LAUGHTER ]
>> IMPORTANT FOR US TO SEE THAT.
NOT ONLY WHAT IS IN THE NEXT
SIX YEAR SPENDING PLAN BUT THE
ADJACENT FUNDING THAT WILL BE
INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET, THE
GENERAL BUDGET, INCLUDING THE
GENERAL FUND AND R.E.E.T..
AGAIN YOU ARE CORRECT IN THAT
PARKS HAS BEEN A RECIPIENT OF A
GOOD AMOUNT OF R.E.E.T.
FROM YEAR TO YEAR, DEPENDING ON
THE NEEDS OF THE DEPARTMENT AND
THE NEEDS OF OTHER
DEPARTMENTS, FOR SURE.
SO WE WILL HOPEFULLY, WHEN WE
HAVE THE SIX YEAR SPENDING PLAN
FROM THE MAYOR, WHEN WE RECEIVE
THAT, HOPEFULLY WE SEE THE
ADJACENT PROPOSED INVESTMENTS
THAT WE WILL SEE IN THE
PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE PARKS
DEPARTMENT TO BE ABLE TO FIT
TOGETHER THE ENTIRE PICTURE.
NOT ONLY FOR THE COMMUNITY
CENTER BUT FOR OTHER AREAS OF
INVESTMENT.
AS IT RELATES TO COMFORT
STATIONS, THE INVESTMENT IS
$1.6 MILLION A YEAR AND THEY
CAN DO ABOUT 3 RENOVATIONS A
YEAR.
SO THAT COUPLED WITH THE NEW
FUNDING GET YOU TO ABOUT 5
MILLION A YEAR.
-- 5 RENOVATIONS A YEAR.
YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE IS MORE
TO COME IN TERMS OF THAT LIST.
I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ACTUALLY
HAVE THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS
AND REC IN YOUR PUBLIC ACCESS
MEETING ON THE 17th OF AUGUST,
TALKING ABOUT BATHROOMS.
I THINK A REASONABLE QUESTION
THAT COULD BE ASKED TO PRESENT
ON IS WHAT IS THE PLAN FOR THE
BATHROOMS, IN TERMS OF
RENOVATIONS AND CANDIDATES IN
LINE?
AND HOW YOU ARE APPROACHING
THOSE PROPOSED RENOVATIONS
COMING UP IN FUTURE YEARS?
PRESUMING NOT ONLY ADDITIONAL
MONEY FROM THE MPD BUT ALSO
ASSUMING THE BASE PLAN FUNDING
CONTINUES.
>> IF PARKS IS WATCHING, IN
PREPARATION FOR THE MEETING,
WHAT I REALLY WOULD IDEALLY
LIKE TO SEE AS IT COMES TO THE
COMFORT STATION DISCUSSION,
AGAIN IS REALLY JUST GETTING
SOME CONTEXT FOR THE SCOPE AND
SCALE OF THE SYSTEM PAIR, AND
HE COMFORT STATIONS WE HAVE.
HOW MANY BATHROOMS WE HAVE.
OBVIOUSLY THERE IS A LOT OF
OVERLAP HERE WHERE IT IS VERY
COMMON FOR A LOT OF THE COMFORT
STATIONS TO BE IN A BATHROOM
PARK, IN A COMMUNITY CENTER, SO
AGAIN THERE IS OVERLAP IN SOME
OF THE DIFFERENT WORK.
BUT IT WOULD BE NICE TO SEE AN
OVERALL LIST WITHIN THE PARK
AND REC SYSTEM, AN OVERVIEW OF
THE TYPE AND NATURE OF BATHROOM
AND COMFORT STATION THAT FALL
UNDER THE ENTIRE SYSTEM.
AND HOW THE RENOVATIONS AND
IMPROVEMENTS ARE TRIAGED
WORKING DOWN THE LIST.
IT WOULD BE REALLY USEFUL
INFORMATION FOR US.
IF YOU ARE SAYING, TRACY, LIKE
THE NUMBER YOU SAID WAS 5 TO 6
A YEAR.
IF THE LINE ITEM, 1.2 MILLION
WENT INTO CYCLE TWO, IT WOULD
BE 5 TO 6 A YEAR.
SO IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO
KNOW WHAT THE METRIC IS BUYING
THE MPD.
IF IT IS 5 TO 6 A YEAR BUT WE
HAVE 300 FALLING APART COMFORT
STATIONS, YOU KNOW, THAT
CONTEXT I THINK IS IMPORTANT
WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WITH
THE METRICS IS ON WHAT WE ARE
GETTING FOR THE INVESTMENT AND
WHAT THE PUBLIC IS GETTING.
>> THERE ARE 94 COMFORT
STATIONS AND 30 SHELTER HOUSES.
I DO NOT BELIEVE THEY INCLUDE
BATHROOMS IN COMMUNITY CENTERS
AND ENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING
CENTERS.
WE WILL ASK THEM SPECIFICALLY
TO ADDRESS THAT AT THE MEETING
ON THE 17th AND ALSO GET THAT
INFORMATION FOR THE COUNCIL
MEMBERS THAT CANNOT BE THERE.
WE KNOW THAT RIGHT NOW THERE IS
A RENOVATION LIFE CYCLE OF
EVERY 42 YEARS.
EVERY 42 YEARS!
WE HAVE TWO COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS'S POINT, WITH THIS
MONEY WE HOPE THEY CAN BRING
THAT DOWN TO AN AVERAGE OF 34
YEARS PER RECYCLE. SO IT IS
INTERESTING TO KNOW HOW THEY DO
THE CALCULATIONS AND IF THERE
IS A POSSIBILITY OF SPEEDING UP
THE PROCESS.
I KNOW THEY HAVE A GENERAL
APPROACH TO MANAGEMENT AND THE
FACILITIES OVERALL AND ARE
IMPROVED UPON THAT HAS TO DO
WITH EQUITY ISSUES AND ALSO
LIFE, HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUES.
AGAIN IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE
THEM SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THAT
AT THE MEETING ON THE 17th.
>> I AM JUST GLAD THE CIVILIAN
CONSERVATION CORPS BUILT THEM
STRONG THE FIRST TIME.
YOU KNOW?
WE NEED ANOTHER WORKS PROGRESS
ADMINISTRATION, TRACY.
[ LAUGHTER ] BUT NO, THAT IS
GOOD TO HEAR.
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT
LIST OF THE COMFORT STATIONS,
LIKE TRIAGED, IN TERMS OF WHAT
THE CONDITION IS.
YOU ARE SORT OF ANSWERING THAT
WITH THE INFORMATION NOW ABOUT
WHAT THE ANTICIPATED AVERAGE
RENOVATION CYCLE IS.
BUT I IMAGINE IT IS NOT THE
BEST PRACTICE TO HAVE 42 YEARS
BE THE RENOVATION CYCLE FOR A
COMFORT STATION.
BUT ARE THERE ANY OTHER BOARD
MEMBER COMMENTS?
BOARDMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> THANK YOU.
I WANT TO FLAG THE CONVERSATION
AROUND COMMUNITY CENTERS, USED
AS COOLING CENTERS.
AND AS A PLACE TO ADDRESS THE
CITY'S NEED FOR A LOCATION TO
GO TO IN HEAT EMERGENCIES.
IN THIS TIME LAST YEAR THE
COUNCIL PASSED THE OFFICE OF
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ALL HAZARD
MITIGATION PLAN.
WE INCLUDED LANGUAGE IN THAT
PLAN REQUESTED OEM INCLUDE --
AN EFFORT TO IDENTIFY
APPROACHES AND PROJECTS THAT
CAN MITIGATE THE EXCESSIVE HEAT
ON POPULATIONS IN SEATTLE, THE
OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
ENGAGED IN MULTIPLE CITY
DEPARTMENT -- AND OTHER SUBJECT
MATTER EXPERTS INCLUDING PUBLIC
HEALTH, TO SCOPE REALISTIC AND
IMPLEMENTABLE STRATEGIES AND
APPROACHES AND IDENTIFY NEEDED
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FUNDING FOR
THE STRATEGIES.
SO SUGGESTING THAT IF WE ARE
GOING TO BE HAVING A FOCUSED
MEETING ON THE STRATEGIES
RELEVANT TO THE COMMUNITY
CENTERS, WE SHOULD CHECK TO SEE
WHETHER OR NOT OEM HAS DONE ANY
OF THE WORK AND HAS
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THIS
PARTICULAR GROUP OF MUNICIPAL
OWNED ASSETS WE ARE TALKING
ABOUT HERE TODAY.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU BOARDMEMBER
HERBOLD.
AND TRACY, WE CAN MOVE BEYOND
COMMISSIONER STRAUSS'S SLIDE
NOW.
>> I AM SORRY, CAN I JUST
CONFIRM --
>> I WAS ABOUT TO GO BACK TO
THAT BUT I JUST WANTED TO MOVE
TO THE QUESTIONS SLIDE HERE.
BUT TRACY, IF YOU COULD RESPOND
TO BOARDMEMBER HERBOLD'S
QUESTION.
>> WE WILL INCLUDE OEM IN THAT
DEAL AGAIN IN THE OVERSIGHT
COMMITTEE JUST INCLUDED FUNDING
AS I UNDERSTAND IT.
YOUR POINT IS WELL TAKEN TO SAY
HOW THEY WORK WITH OEM?
ALSO WORKING WITH A SIMILAR
PLAN WHERE WE MIGHT HAVE
CLIMATE RESISTANT CENTERS.
>> IT HAS BEEN A YEAR SINCE WE
APPROVED THE PLAN, THE
RESOLUTION ASKING THEM TO BEGIN
THE PLANNING EFFORTS.
MY SPECIFIC QUESTION IS, DO
THEY NOW, TODAY, AS RESULT OF
THIS YEAR'S LONG WORK HAVE
RECOMMENDATIONS?
>> THANK YOU.
>> WE WILL FOLLOW-UP.
>> THANK YOU BOARDMEMBER
HERBOLD.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM BOARD
MEMBERS, NOW THAT WE HAVE
REACHED THE END OF OVERVIEWING?
I WILL BRIEFLY SAY TO KICK US
OFF I THINK THIS WAS A VERY
USEFUL EXERCISE AND I
APPRECIATE CENTRAL STAFF IN
QUEUING THIS UP AND LAYING IT
OUT.
THERE'S A LOT OF STRONG AREAS
OF COMMONALITY THAT I THINK YOU
COULD QUEUE UP FOR THE STRETCH
BETWEEN TODAY AND WHEN WE REFER
AUGUST RECESS.
A COUPLE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS TO
DIG INTO A COUPLE OF AREAS OF
COMMON AREAS FOR BOARD MEMBERS.
REALLY DIG INTO SOME QUESTIONS
AROUND METRICS FROM THE
DEPARTMENT, THINGS THAT WE
WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN TERMS OF
REALIZING A VISION OF CLEAN,
SAFE, AND OPEN PARKS.
AND REALLY MAKING SURE THAT THE
PROCESS IS NOT SIDELOAD TO ONLY
BEING WITHIN THE FOUR CORNERS
BUT WITHIN ALL PARKS RESOURCES.
AND A DRIVING FORCE FOR WHAT
THE BUSINESS PLAN IS, TO
REALIZE THE GOALS.
I THINK A LOT OF QUESTIONS HAVE
ALSO BEEN RAISED ON HOW TO
STRUCTURE THE CAPITAL PROJECT
COMPONENT.
HOW DO WE BUILD A CAPITAL
PROJECT LIST FOR WHAT WE
IDENTIFY AS BOARDMEMBER
PRIORITIES ? HOW DOES THE
CAPITAL PROJECT LIST FUND ALL
THE DIFFERENT FUNDING
OPPORTUNITIES THAT ARE AT THE
DISPOSAL OF THE PARKS
DEPARTMENT?
WE HAD A BRIEF DISCUSSION TODAY
ABOUT R.E.E.T.
AND WE WILL RECEIVE FROM
MEMBERS OF THE VIEWING PUBLIC A
FORMAL REVENUE UPDATE WHICH WILL
INCLUDE THE R.E.E.T.
, IN AUGUST.
I THINK THAT WILL BE HELPFUL
FOR THIS DISCUSSION.
PARTICULARLY AROUND THE
DISCUSSION ON CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS.
I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE USEFUL
TRACY, EVEN IN ANTICIPATION OF
THAT, IF WE COULD DISTRIBUTE TO
BOARD MEMBERS, A BRIEF SUMMARY
OF THE SCOPE AND SCALE OF
THINGS WE DISCUSSED TODAY, THAT
COULD BE R.E.E.T.
ELIGIBLE ITEMS.
THAT WOULD BE PERHAPS A USEFUL
EXERCISE.
YOU KNOW, ALSO USEFUL FOR
QUEUING UP BUDGET THIS FALL.
BUT I THINK THAT CONTEXT IS
IMPORTANT FOR TALKING ABOUT
PARTICULAR THE CAPITAL SIDE OF
THE INVESTMENTS.
THAT I THINK THAT THIS WAS A
USEFUL DISCUSSION AND I
APPRECIATE THE BOARD MEMBERS
BEING PATIENT AND REALLY
WORKING THROUGH A LOT OF THIS.
IT WAS NICE TO SEE A LOT OF
AREAS OF COMMONALITY.
WHICH SHOULD MAKE RECONCILING A
LOT OF OUR REQUESTS IN EASIER
PROCESS.
SO WITH THAT, ARE THERE ANY
OTHER BOARDMEMBER COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS BEFORE WE ADJOURN
TODAY?
OKAY, SEEING NONE.
I AM GOING TO GO AHEAD AND
CONCLUDE THE MEETING OF THE
SEATTLE PARK DISTRICT BOARD.
THE NEXT MEETING OF THE SEATTLE
PARK DISTRICT BOARD WILL BE
HELD TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, AT
2:30.
POTENTIALLY SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
IF THERE ARE SOME THINGS WE
WANT TO LOOK INTO.
BUT AT THIS TIME CURRENTLY THE
SCHEDULED MEETING IS SEPTEMBER
6, 2022, IT IS 11:23 A.M.
WE ARE HEREBY ADJOURNED.
♪