City Council Workshops

0:00 (upbeat music) Good afternoon, welcome to Vancouver City Council. This is Monday, April 6th, 2026. We have two workshops this afternoon. We'll talk about the electric vehicle infrastructure strategy, and then move on into the development activity. So we have Stacy ready to rock and roll. Hi.

0:56 Hello, here we go. - Hello. - Great, thank you for having us. Thank you, mayor and council. My name is Stacy Dalgaard, and... - You can turn on your mic. There you go, thank you. - There we go. - Okay, okay. - Great, thank you. I'm with the city's climate program in the city manager's office, and I am joined by my colleague, Laurel Priest, from the city's transportation planning team to present an update on our efforts to develop a strategy for expanding electric vehicle charging infrastructure in Vancouver. We have a brief update for you today. We're gonna stick to a few highlights from the planning process and where we're headed next, but we welcome your questions on the strategy and materials provided overall. There's a lot more in the materials than we'll have on our slides today. The full strategy is expected to be finalized later this month.

1:53 - All right, thanks, Stacy. So yeah, once again, I'm Laurel Priest. I'm a transportation planner within the community development department, so it's nice to see you all. Thanks for having us again. The electric vehicle infrastructure planning was identified within the climate action framework as a key early action to reach our community-wide carbon neutrality goals by 2040. On-road vehicles are Vancouver's single largest source of greenhouse gas emissions, and shifting the vehicles that are on the road today to low and no carbon fuels is a critical short-term strategy to meet our emissions goals. The Washington State Transportation Electrification Strategy also identifies EV charging as a priority action to propel that shift to EVs statewide. And we are working

2:51 on the electric vehicle infrastructure planning work is happening alongside all the work that the transportation planning and land use planning and other city efforts are ongoing to promote more transportation options. And that work is ongoing and directed by our transportation system plan and comprehensive plan updates. And to explain the visual on this slide is a pie chart that shows community greenhouse gas emissions. This is from 2023, and shows 50% of emissions come from transportation and travel, 37% of which is from on-road vehicles. Other major areas of greenhouse gas emissions in the city are from buildings and energy, which include residential, commercial, and industrial energy, as well as other emissions. Go to the next slide.

3:48 Great, so the strategy work has been underway throughout 2025 on the city-wide infrastructure work that Stacey and I have been doing. We first presented to council on this topic last June, and when we were in the middle of our community engagement phase. And since then, we've progressed on all three of the project objectives, which are listed here kind of from left to right, which included determining the appropriate role for the city in moving forward electric vehicle adoption, defining community priorities, and understanding target areas for intervention, and then also defining the actions that the city can take to advance these goals. So now, finally, at the end of the strategy development, we are kind of weaving all of these pieces together, and we'll have a final document for you soon. The timeline on this slide describes the phases and objectives of the project,

4:48 and we're at the end of the implementation planning phase. I'll hand it off to Stacey. - Thank you. So just to highlight some of what we heard from our community engagement activities last summer, we conducted community engagement really with this focus to identify the priorities around EV infrastructure, as well as how to ensure an equitable transition toward electric transportation options more broadly. We partnered with three community non-profits, Community in Motion, Vietnamese Community of Clark County, and Odyssey World International Educational Services, or AOES, to conduct that outreach together, and we engaged more than 400 people in various tabling activities and online surveys. In partnering with these groups, we were able to reach a much more representative sample of the community than our online survey alone. We really saw that difference between those two tools that we used to connect with folks, and we identified some key takeaways that go beyond EV charging stations themselves.

5:47 When it comes to siting charging infrastructure, our non-profit partners recommended balancing investments, both to fill equity gaps, as well as to continue to propel EV adoption by drivers that are on the cusp of a new vehicle purchase, to weight those things in balance. We heard strong desires for charging infrastructure near where people live and in apartment buildings from folks who identified as renters, and then a preference for charging where people shop, visit, and work by folks who are homeowners, which tracks with how we understand people's access to charging at home. This balance is reflected, that balance between those sort of different user types and interests within the community is reflected in the EV charging opportunity areas map that was provided in your materials, which highlights in pink those areas that are most likely to help achieve both goals, as we've defined it, and we're happy to get into that more in the discussion with you if you'd like. We also heard loud and clear that installing charging stations is not enough on its own.

6:47 Community education and incentives and rebates to help with vehicle purchases stood out as top priorities from those community events. That's what people ranked as their highest choice across a variety of different options to advance equitable transportation electrification, followed by micromobility options and some events, particularly with youth. More youth saw micromobility higher, like e-bikes and scooters. As people talked about gaps in the transportation network, bus stops that are far away or infrequent pickups, micromobility and car share, these models where you can reserve a car that's available and for running your errands, but without the responsibility or commitment to owning it full-time, were often seen as opportunities to address service gaps and affordability challenges. Community members that we spoke with expressed a strong desire

7:43 for more and more types of mobility options, particularly options that support elders, low-income households, and disabled community members. Really, when we kind of said, "What would you like more? "E-bikes or car share or more charging?" People said, "Everything." So there was a real desire for more options that we felt and heard in these conversations specifically. And based on people's open-ended responses, we noted that a lot of these priorities were frequently rooted in values around environmental health and social impact. We heard people talking about clean air, reducing fossil fuel use, protecting future generations, creating a sense of shared benefit and making transportation easier for families, elders, and neighbors. So those are some of the things that we heard come through. And we also wanna acknowledge that this work that we did with our nonprofit partners was in a cohort that was also supported by our friends at Clark Public Utilities and the Clean Cities Coalition. So that was a collaborative effort

8:43 across multiple organizations to kind of bring that cohort together to have this conversation in the community last year. Okay, checking our time. Building on these community priorities and recommendations from our consulting team on the strategy overall, we put together a draft set of strategies and actions to help promote an equitable transition to electric mobility. This list was provided as attachment C in your materials. At its highest level, we have the three main sort of buckets and categories for those on the screen here. And as we go through this at an overview level, we wanna recognize that since we started this planning process really over a year ago now, the political and economic context influencing what tools we have at our disposal to put these, to invest in infrastructure or for people

9:41 to purchase new vehicles has shifted significantly. And it's even more important in this climate for us to be clear about what the city has, the ability to influence, and be clear with our community members as well what actions we can implement within our current staffing structure and funding resources. So you'll see in the list of actions that were provided that we noted which ones fit in our current programs and which ones would require further prioritization. So the primary focus of this planning effort was really centered around how to expand public charging infrastructure. So that's our number one up here and highlighting the role of the city both in making public investments as well as enabling and activating the private sector as well. And so within this area, couple pages here, excuse me while I find myself.

10:39 We wanna highlight that there is a mix of activities here ranging from things that the city can lead directly as well as areas, what can we do as our next steps to enable and activate private sector development of EV charging and as well as promoting policies and programs to improve affordability and access to charging. So that's what we're finding in this section and we can dig into that more with you based on your specific questions today. But the early actions where we're taking our first step in the next, in 2026 and 2027 are focused around a city-led public EV charging pilot program for on the public side. We'll be looking at, we'll be auditing our existing policies

11:37 to better understand kind of what is the collection of permitting processes and policies that surround EV infrastructure so we can give a better picture of that for private development and better understand where those opportunities and barriers are. Looking at developing some kind of a toolkit later this year to make that clearer for private development as well as promoting and advocating for actions that are too big for the city to take on directly. We're trying to relay that up to state agencies and where we can kind of relay that on around incentives, opportunities and things like that that we may not be able to lead directly but we could co-promote and advocate for for our community based on what we heard. In the second bucket, based on what we heard from community that infrastructure alone is insufficient to meet our goals, we've also proposed a series of actions to build a supportive environment

12:35 and make EVs and electric mobility more accessible. Some of the early actions in this area that we're moving forward on as the EV pilot, the charging pilot comes online, we'll be able to take advantage of those new chargers for outreach and demonstrations with the public and community organizations to get more people familiar with the technology and what's there. We're advocating for, again, looking for opportunities to promote state incentives and continuing to try to have conversations where possible around car share partnership opportunities with folks who are interested in moving that forward. And the sort of third main bucket here, based on national best practices, we've also outlined steps to build capacity organizationally and collaborate beyond the city limits with our regional partners. And we are looking to coordinate with other Southwest Washington jurisdictions

13:31 through the Regional Transportation Coalition Commission and as well as at the county, and we've been having those conversations and reviewing this list of strategies with them as well. And we'll also be looking to leverage the climate action framework update this year to further prioritize these actions and try to define targets around EV charging. Just to give you an overview of what the pilot itself looks like, this is one of the first areas that we have been moving forward. We'll have three locations of publicly available EV charging that you can see on these two maps that are on the slide. From right to left, we'll have two level two charging units along Main Street. We'll have two level two charging units and two DC fast charging units at Marshall-Lupke Center.

14:28 I'll just make the distinction between these level two and DC fast charging. Level two is where people typically spend about two to four hours charging in a public setting, whereas DC fast charging is a higher power level and it can typically fully charge a vehicle in 30 minutes to an hour. So that's sort of the difference in terms of dwell time or how much time people will be spending at the chargers. And then also at Furstenberg Community Center, we will have two level two charging units and one DC fast charging unit for a total of six of the level two, the slower, slightly slower version, and three of the faster DC fast charging within our pilot. So start up costs for the pilot, including the equipment and construction, will be funded by state and utility grants. And really our primary goal of starting small and exploring these different locations

15:26 is to assess the potential to operate these chargers in a cost neutral way, where the revenue from the chargers can really continue to fund the operation and maintenance of those chargers. And so we are really focused as a team and with a cross department work group around setting metrics and sort of defining an implementation plan for these that will allow us to assess how this looks from a longterm operational standpoint for public charging. And at the end of the grant period, for chargers that are grant funded, they are required to be operational for a minimum of five years. And along that way, we'll be asking ourselves questions around what that cost neutral aspect looks like, but also asking questions about what the larger private market is doing and trying to understand our role in operating these alongside the way that things will continue to shift. So at the end of that grant period,

16:24 the city will, we will have a choice and we will make a determination of whether to retain the charging stations, sell them or lease them in some kind of public private partnership, potentially remove them if they are not a viable asset, but hopefully see them at, we've developed an implementation approach and a program plan that makes these something that really can be operated at a cost neutral way and in a successful way that way. - Thanks, Stacey. And a lot of that work where we were looking at metrics and evaluation of the feasibility of these in the longterm, the pilot program was this work that we did is sort of at the left hand side where we did the pilot program development, which was an internal working group that helped us figure out what the path forward would look like for the pilot and identifying funding streams as well as write how we might implement it and if it's not working out,

17:24 then what the exit strategy might look like. But so this slide shows a timeline of our actions this year and into and through 2027. We're polishing up the strategy document and getting started on the public charging pilot program as well. And then later this year, we'll be exploring what strategies could be effective in enabling the private development of EV charging infrastructure in the city. As we know with this pilot program, we can only take on a very small slice of the market. And to meet climate goals, we really do need to leverage both the public and the private sector to accelerate EV adoption, especially in the just current economic situation. And we'll be looking at how we can remove barriers to EV charging installation at existing multifamily homes and workplaces within the private sector and figure out how we can encourage that adoption

18:23 as well as figure out what are the headwinds and what are the obstacles that people that are interested in EV charging development. But I'm not sure where to start and where they're running into those issues. - Good. - All right. And with that, we welcome your questions and comments on the strategies we provided in the materials or other thoughts about the strategy development writ large. Councillors, questions? Councillor Stauber. - Thank you, Mayor. And thank you for the presentation. I'm glad to see this moving forward. So two things. Appendix B, I would really appreciate if it could be re-released with more clear explanation of what everything means on there.

19:22 It talks about existing charging stations and it has a plus symbol next to them, but there are no plus symbols on the map. Green is not explained. So if that could be reissued, I'd really appreciate that. I'm gonna go back to a theme that I've been saying for a very long time and wanna just continue to repeat this. So what you're talking about is convenience charging. And in developing, let me start there. This is convenience charging. And in developing this, I'm assuming you worked with Clark Public Utilities to ensure that there is need for more capacity in the Central Park neighborhood versus someplace else in the city.

20:22 - I guess, could you be more specific with your question? We have been working with Clark Public Utilities, but I-- - 'Cause their headquarters has a lot of public charging stations that aren't necessarily that far from the Marshall Center. So I'm wanting to make sure that we are deploying where we need to deploy and not creating XX capacity where we already have capacity. So confirmation from the PUD that their chargers are being utilized to an extent that we need to increase capacity in the Central Park neighborhood. - They do see a lot of usage on their chargers. I have confirmed that. We have had multiple conversations about that. So the chargers there are very well used. With that area being so close to I-5,

21:21 I do think that there is more demand that can be tapped into in that area, especially with the park and the visitation that Marshall gets. So even when you visit, Marshall observed multiple EV vehicles parked in the parking lot. So there is opportunity there just in the user base. And it is also, to some degree, reflective of where we have the opportunity to introduce charging as well at our facilities that have eyes on the ground and folks there regularly to observe those and that are visiting. And where funding was also awarded through those grants too. - I'd love to have that more clearly outlined. Where is the assumptions about where the demand is coming from there? Okay.

22:21 Second, I wanna talk about the necessity charging, which also bleeds into convenience charging but really around necessity charging. And this is the point that I keep hitting is from my own experience, 90 plus percent of the charging that I do can be accomplished with 110 volt outlet. And I don't want us to get so focused on expensive charging infrastructure and to lose sight of the fact that most people need really, really inexpensive charging infrastructure. Granted, that assumes their vehicle has a working level one charger

23:17 but I really don't want us to lose fact, try lose track of that great potential for meeting that necessity charging. - Thank you. Any other councilor? Councilor Paulson, go ahead. - Thank you, Mayor. One of the ways I'd love to see the city lead when it comes to EV charging infrastructure is around what I'll call friction of transaction. So the majority of the EV charging infrastructure that exists in the world today requires you to have an app in order to use it. But if I have an internal combustion engine, I can just pay with the type of a credit card or Apple Pay. And you should be able to charge EV in just as frictionless a way. So you shouldn't have to download an app in order to use the charging station. So if there's a way that we can facilitate this pilot in the more frictionless way, that would be a fantastic,

24:16 I think, way to lead within the community. And let's charge app free. Thank you. - Councilor. - Thank you, Mayor. And when you get these grants, as far as where they go on, you have to do the indexes in order for the state to say this is the prime place for you to put these. And that's kind of where you're getting a lot of your equity out of that. - Yeah, there are a number of ranking factors, depending on the grant program of how they're waiting and then awarding the grants. Does that answer your question? - It totally does, and that's awesome. Secondly, the chargers that were at the Chkalov building, do they work anymore? - There might be somebody in the room who would speak specifically. I think, let me see, do I have anything? - I know they were cut at one point in time. - I'm just checking, I think that they were removed. I won't, but they are in conversation. So I don't think they're physically there right now because of the history with them

25:14 and when they were brought into the city. I should defer more to the specifics, but there is conversation about what is the next iteration and plan for those. - Awesome, no wrong answer here. - Yeah. - And lastly, you know, if you're gonna do a single-family home, if you're gonna do something in the middle and it has a garage, a 50 amp plug-in at construction in code would probably go a long way to getting level two chargers proliferated in the city of Vancouver. Just a thought. And it's way cheaper if you do it at construction versus doing a retrofit. - Councilor Perez. - Thank you. I was glad to hear about the opportunities or the efforts to look at the public-private partnership. I think we should really explore and expand on that.

26:13 The other area I heard that I fully support is looking into at multi-family developments and wasn't sure if you looked into any upcoming, check for any EV building codes at the state level that may be coming down the pipeline or what they're thinking at that level. Three things that I wanted to bring up is knowing exactly the metrics that would determine whether the pilot is successful or not. And with that, some questions about utilization rates. So at what utilization rate does a charger become cost-neutral or profitable? And some financial modeling with this. So that has to do with what is a full life cycle of cost per charging station when we start thinking about that. And then lastly is how will success for equity be measured

27:11 since we're, these are one of the, it sounds like this effort's really trying to do three things. And that's build a charging infrastructure and address some of the equity gaps and accelerate the EV adoption. So just kind of narrowing in on the accountability and how that could be a little diluted with trying to do all those three. So thinking about those, especially for equity, is that like percent coverage in priority zones and taking into account the utilization rate and so forth. So those are some of the things that I had on the top of my mind here. Thanks. - Thank you. Councilor Harless, did you have any questions? - Mayor, she's not on. - Oh, I thought she was remote. Quick point, you have a new visitor's center at Clark County Historic Museum,

28:10 which is a couple blocks north of your main street location. You might consider putting in something there. So if people are coming in, they can plug in and then go to the visitor's center. - Yes. - So we need to get installed. This is a pass through. So really you have a third party vendor that's charging for the electricity that's going in the car. Correct? You have the City of Vancouver that's going to be operating all of these. - So the plan for the pilot for this first set is to help us understand what that combination of factors looks like. There are, we actually just, our work group had a workshop this afternoon with the technical advisor who is kind of educating us on all of the layers and components of those systems. So we are, the city will own the chargers. They'll be on city property. We will contract out maintenance and operations of them to some level. And that's what we're working on sort of defining right now. So that when we go out for procurement,

29:10 we have a clear ask for the different components we need to run this. So that it's not us on a every day monitoring it, that we're trying to sort of leverage multiple types of vendors to do that. But there's a payment system we would be tracking and we will be setting the rates for that. So that is something to highlight is we will be coming back in the fall in order to be able to charge fees for the charging stations, for those charging sessions. We will not need to pass an ordinance to charge those fees. So that's the next time you'll see us really back here talking about the EV charging pilot will be around that next step. - And you have two grants that are paying for these, correct? - Yeah, we have a couple of different grants. Some of them are still in their final contracting phase. So we'll leave it open-ended at the moment until we can make those formal announcements that should be coming soon.

30:07 But yes, we have a few different grants that are paying for them. - That goes directly to my point, I wouldn't be too bent over how much you're gonna cost recover back because this program is essentially paid for and you have a third party pass through. This is not something where the city of Vancouver is really gonna have any money coming out unless something happens to the units themselves. - Exactly. - So I'm just saying, personally, me, I wouldn't be too bent over that. - Well, in terms of the comments around a cost model, that is actually something we've already worked on developing to get us to the point of considering doing the pilot. So we put together a cost model. It has a lot of assumptions embedded in it and that's one of our hopes for the pilot to clear up some of those assumptions and give us some real numbers on usage and revenue so that we could project further out beyond the time period that the grants actually cover because there will be a period where those will need replacements, they'll need maintenance, contracts, and things like that that go beyond the grant funding.

31:04 - Okay, yes. - A couple follow-up points. First, Council Member Perez's points about the model. That's also what I was getting at in some of my comments is I really wanna understand what is that, those determinations of success. Second thing to comments that Council Member Paulson made, I appreciate his talk about being able to go and tap and go. Also, making sure that we're picking the right vendors. So I visited a Columbia Gorge town and they were very proud of their EV infrastructure. They didn't realize that the company that they chose required you to open account with a initial deposit.

32:00 So I think it was like a $20 deposit that I had to pay ahead I was not going to use that much and I don't know where else that company exists. And so also making sure that we're being very aware of what that cost recovery is for whoever we get as a partner. Thank you. - Okay, thank you very much. Let's go ahead and transition over. Patrick, let's go ahead and talk about development activity. - Thank you. (coughing)

32:39 All right, good afternoon Mayor, City Council. I am Patrick Quinton. I am the Director of Economic Prosperity and Housing and I'm joined by- - Chad Eiken, Director of Community Development. Nice to be with you. - And we are here today to cover a lot of ground but basically, I think this is now the second year in a row we want to do a recap of development activity over the past year in 2025 and talk about it from a variety of perspectives. So our agenda today is Chad's gonna start off

33:37 and walk through the permit activity and you actually see a lot of those reports every month but he'll walk through that, both commercial industrial but also on the residential side. Within that, he'll talk a little bit about MFTE activity as well. And then actually the agenda is one, the bullet to reverse. I'll then talk about what we see as the kind of market conditions that are causing the ongoing residential slowdown and then we'll talk about our progress on affordable housing production and then we'll finish it off with a kind of, both a recap of the housing actions that we have been taking now for a number of years and what we have planned but also what the implications are of the ongoing market conditions in terms of what we're likely to see in future development but also what it might mean for potential policy changes and then obviously we'll have plenty of time for discussion.

34:37 So with that, I'll turn it over to Chad. - All right, thanks. This-- - Oh, please. - Sorry. - You want me to-- - No, you run it. - Okay. - I just pushed. - This slide shows the total valuation of commercial and industrial new construction going back to 2019. The blue is commercial, the orange is industrial and just wanted to point out a couple of things on this slide. You'll notice a couple of peaks and valleys. The big dip in 2021 probably doesn't need much explanation. On the commercial side, the peaks in 2019, 2020, 22 and 23 are explained by Evergreen and Vancouver School Bond construction activity and then some waterfront projects. So we had some spikes then. Most of those have wound down by now. New office construction has been fairly light as employers wrestle with the right balance

35:36 between in-person work and allowing employees to work from home. The two spikes you see in industrial valuations were from large warehouse and distribution centers which have also now wound down as the regional market has absorbed new projects. While the number of new permits issued per year has been relatively constant for the past few years, there has been a gradual decrease in the total valuation of projects. This can be seen as an indicator that the size and complexity of projects is also decreasing. So we're seeing, the projects we're seeing generally tend to be smaller than we've seen in previous years. This is a slide that shows the residential-issued building permits going back to 2019. Blue indicates the multi-family units and the orange represents the new single-family homes.

36:36 The green line represents the production goal, it's about 2,500 units per year which includes the demand going forward to meet our population, expected population under the comp plan, as well as to make up for what we see as a current deficit in housing. The purple line shows the historic average number of units which is about 1,550 per year. From the peak in 2021, residential permit numbers have declined steadily to a new low last year. In fact, new units permitted in 2025 was 51% below the historic six-year average which was predicted because the number of permits received in the previous year was also very low. 2024 was our low point with just about 214 units

37:32 submitted for approval. We believe there will be a slight increase this year because the number of units submitted for approval last year was about 760, that's still not getting us to where we need to be. Approximately 2,000 housing units need to be built each year in order to meet the expected population growth. One way to visualize that is to picture basically a waterfront development being built every year throughout the city. That's about the number of units that we need to see being built out there. This next slide shows the multifamily tax exemption activity, the requests, and also the number of projects for the past 11 years. The subheading here really says it all. The MFTE pipeline which has enabled

38:30 every large multifamily development in downtown and the waterfront since it started has essentially dried up. The main takeaway from this slide is that the MFTE program which used to provide just enough financial benefit to make large projects pencil is no longer sufficient to overcome other conditions such as cost of construction and other factors that Patrick will touch on. The only one multifamily tax MFTE project was received last year, and although there was a surge in requests in 2023, you can see up there, that happened when developers were trying to lock in to new requirements that were coming online. Those new requirements have mostly been rolled back, but still there are only three multifamily

39:29 exemption projects currently in construction. Some of those MFTE requests or approvals are expiring, which means that those projects likely won't be moving forward. To underscore this point, for the first time in recent memory, there isn't a single large apartment or mixed use project that's in the permitting process for the downtown or the waterfront. This slide shows residential units under construction. So this is sort of a rolling tally by quarter of projects that are under construction. Because it takes 18, 24 months or more to build large projects, projects are showing up sort of in multiple quarters on this slide. The top gray line is the housing production goal. The orange line shows the six-year historic average

40:28 of units under construction, which is about 1,700. Because developments can take anywhere, oh, I already said that, sorry. As you can see, there's already been a fairly steady decrease in projects under construction since the pandemic when interest rates and cost of labor and construction materials increased dramatically. A final note on this slide is that the white space under the gray horizontal line represents the shortage of housing units going forward, which will make it harder to meet our housing goal by 2020, excuse me, 2045. Patrick.

41:12 - Okay, so, oops, sorry, I wanna spend a little time. There's a lot of different data points that we could bring on the macroeconomic conditions that are impacting development. We've chosen three different slides that are coming up. So the first one tracks multifamily vacancy rates in Vancouver since 2019. Vacancy rates are, it's an aggregate number of the number of residential units you have and how many are vacant versus occupied. So they generally reflect supply. So what you see in terms of the orange line moving up and down, as new supply comes online, you have a surge in vacancy, and then it goes down as units get occupied. So when you look at the graph here, you see the surge in vacancy rates in '23, '24. That's a result of the production that you saw in Chad's graphs in '20, '21, and '22. Those units came online. It took a while for the market to absorb those,

42:12 and then they brought down vacancy to where you see it as today. What's important about that is that we like to see vacancy in the green zone. Developers like to see vacancy in the pink or red zone. And so while vacancy rates still sit above that red zone and in the green zone, that's working against new development, meaning developers have less confidence that when they bring new units online that they're gonna be able to lease up the project in a timely manner. All projects require lease up, but the longer it takes, that's more kind of financial burden that a project has. So we'd like to see the vacancy rates come down so that we can encourage more development. We know that the demand is there over long periods of time, but right now we're not seeing it, and that's holding back developers. I will say just for the point of clarifying

43:08 what's to the right of the blue line is projected vacancy. This data source is CoStar, which is a commercial real estate data source. They are projecting slower population growth in the short run than we are projecting in our comp plan. Our comp plan is more of a long-term look. So CoStar doesn't believe that we're gonna have as much near-term demand for units, so that's why they're showing vacancy rates staying up there. If CoStar is wrong, then vacancy rates obviously will decline, and so some of this is gonna play out in the next few years and see how population growth matches with what either we're projecting or CoStar is projecting. The second data point, which is the hardest slide to present here, and I just wanna acknowledge that it's going into it, is what we're seeing in terms of growth in rent. So this slide is the title's negative inflation-adjusted rent growth, and it's showing not real rent, it's showing inflation-adjusted rent,

44:08 meaning if you adjust the rent increase, if rent's going up slower than inflation, then you have negative rent growth. So basically what we've been showing here between 2019 and 2027 is that we had real rent growth up until about 2021, and then over time, rents have not been able to keep pace with inflation. Some of that is, once again, inflation going up, and so cost going up, and when we talk about cost for real estate, it's cost of construction, the cost to operate and maintain buildings, and so those cost insurance been going up for developers, they have not been able to increase rents at the same pace that those costs have been going up. Once again, as long as this trend continues, and CoStar, as this CoStar data again, suggests it'll continue for at least another year, where once again, that's gonna put pressure on development economics

45:05 and will likely kind of slow the pace of new development. I just want to say for the record, it doesn't mean that rents aren't going up, it just means that inflation might be going up faster than that. And then the last one is a slide that we've showed you before and we've updated it. So this attracts both income growth in our region, according to both Portland, Seattle, and then nationally, and also the growth in construction costs. So we are still sitting in a dynamic of construction costs continue to grow at a faster rate than income. So the two forces working against rent increases are one, we have this vacancy number, right? They're not able to fill units quickly enough, and so that suppresses rents. And then we just don't have income growth that is allowing for rent increases as well, particularly given the cost structure

46:04 that our developers have. This was true, we showed this slide last year, this was true last year, and you can see the lines actually are slowly starting to merge. And we actually today just saw data that Geraldine Moyle has been aggregating from her own construction bids, and we're seeing construction bids come in at actually really reasonable rates now, in many cases below our budget. So it could be that construction costs are finally easing, and we may see these lines begin to converge, which would be good, certainly a good, a positive change for us. The only other thing to point out on this slide is just we have a different set of construction cost dynamics than much of the country. So the graph there shows the blue and orange lines, which are Portland and Seattle, making a noticeable increase over national construction costs.

47:00 That's the result of regional factors that make it more expensive to build here than in other parts of the country. So now I'm gonna shift into the affordable housing side of the development picture. Once again, this is a graph that you have seen many times. This shows our affordable housing production from 2019 through 2025. It compares actual production compared to our goal, which is 750 units a year. That's 750 when Chad talks about 2,500 units per year is our overall goal. 750 of that is for affordable units. We fall short every year of this. The issue, as you all know, is not a lack of capacity. It's not a lack of demand. It's a lack of resources. We do not have enough public subsidy to bump that number up higher. And my next slide is gonna accentuate that.

47:59 But our blue bar here, our production of about 500, excuse me, about 350 to 300 units a year is largely driven by our own resources. That's the max that we can actually help produce in a given year. So the next slide, I believe our city manager has seen this slide before. We asked him to share it with the governor when he was meeting with him. This is a map that shows the distribution of state housing awards in the years 2024 and 2025. This is really, we have data behind this, so I can tell you the data behind it, but it really is meant to show the significant concentration of housing awards within the Puget Sound area, but also the concentration in other communities across the state that are much smaller than our region. And so the data behind this is that we are one

48:58 of two counties where we receive about half of what we should receive relative to population. So we've received, we basically had one project receive funding over the past two cycles. We got the tax credits in one year and the funding in the second year. So, and I should have done a better job explaining, the blue is housing trust fund awards. Those are direct grants in the projects. The red is national housing trust fund awards, which also go into that pot. There aren't that many of those. And then the green spots are tax credit awards. And so we have basically received one project funding over the past two cycles. I know the mayor and others were heavily involved in our last, the last funding around, and we had six projects that requested funding and one received funding. So if this picture doesn't change, we will not increase our affordable housing production locally.

49:55 So the implications of all this, before we get into the work that we are doing, 'cause I think there's a lot for us to highlight, is that once again, housing deficit will continue to grow. The market economics are not gonna change overnight. I think there's positive news in the permit activity that Chad has been sharing. So we would expect it to, and already through March, I think we're trending higher on multifamily units than we did last year. So, but the deficit will still be growing. Development, the market forces that are impacting development will continue to be there. Plus we continue to have unpredictable shocks to the system, unpredictable cost variables. We had timber prices a few years ago, we now have gas prices. So as long as these unpredictable shocks happen,

50:54 we will continue to have developers say, maybe not this year. What we are seeing because of the relative costs of different projects is that the market dynamics currently favor lower density multifamily projects. What that means in actual projects, that means projects that are three story walkup projects, projects that don't require a podium, many cases don't require elevators. All of those projects add extra cost per unit. So if projects can come in at a lower cost per unit, developers are figuring out ways to make those work. The five story podium projects are the hardest projects to pull off right now. And so we're not likely to see many of those for the time being. For us to achieve our affordability goals and our density goals, either, and or density goals will require us to make greater city investment for the reasons I just mentioned.

51:53 So to the extent that we have places where we wanna see dense development, five over one development, that's gonna require, those don't pencil right now, MFTE, as Chad mentioned, is not enough. And so those are required greater investment. And then as I just showed you, to the extent that we wanna bump up our housing production on affordable units, we will need to put more money into those deals. And then the last piece, which is a whole nother topic for budget conversations is that this continues to put pressure on revenues to the city since the development generates property tax revenue, generates sales tax revenue, other revenues, utility taxes, all these other revenue sources are all driven by new development. So that's gonna continue to put downward pressure on those revenue sources. Now, the good news. And I first wanna start by, we included in your packet

52:53 the housing report. So this is the annual report that's put out by our affordable housing team. It's not just for our department, it's meant to encompass everything that's going on in the city on the housing front. But Samantha Whitley, who's our housing programs manager and her team puts together, but it includes a lot of accomplishments from our colleagues. So we included that. So you have a pretty detailed report on that. And then we also included, and Chad recently, I think was shared in one of the Friday reports, his own report on permit activity as well. - The community development report. So you have that as well. And then we also included the status report on our housing action plan. So the housing action plan is really this living document that we maintain. We meet like twice a month, there's a cross department team. And every year we pick items on here and we work those items.

53:52 And this is a status report on that. There's 65 items on here. This is a serious list. It's not, we're not just filling paper. We're trying to check off as many of these things as we can. And we obviously add new things to it. So this is the detail behind this single slide, but some of the highlights, the top ones you were part of. So we changed the MFT as Chad mentioned, so that we can delayed the payment of fee and lieu payments. And we also waived application fees. We also implemented deferral of SDCs as well as impact fees so that they're paid at the time right around certificate of occupancy. So that saves costs to developers. We reduced development review times within a particular part of our development review cycle. We implemented a single stairwell code. I'll let Chad talk about that. As well as we increased the exemption

54:52 from the state environmental protection act requirements for larger multifamily projects. So that saves time and expense on projects. And then truly the biggest housing action that the city can take is coming to you in a few months, which is the comprehensive plan, which will obviously overhaul land use in the city and open up significant amounts of the city to new housing production. Given the housing economics that we're seeing, it is likely that smaller scale housing production in up zone areas of the city will drive housing growth for the next few years, while the market for bigger multifamily projects catches up. So what the comp plan is doing is actually really significant, particularly given the current market conditions that we're in. But I know Chad has some talking points around some of these comp plan and other things. So I'll turn it to Chad for a second. - Just fill in some color commentary here

55:50 on the single stairwell code. That has been a feature of most building codes in this nation since the 1970s, where you have a requirement for two stairwells in apartment buildings. Recently, some jurisdictions have been trying to come up with a way that adds a lot of costs, at least 200,000 per project. We've been working with our fire marshal and their department to come up with an alternative, which is a single stairwell in the middle of an apartment building instead of two on the ends, to serve up to 49 units and four stories. So that has been approved by our building official and the fire marshal. So it is available. That can significantly reduce costs for small-scale apartment projects.

56:48 A companion piece to that that we've been working through, also with the same folks in fire and building is the, sorry, six-story wooden construction. Right now, that's capped at four stories. Above that, you have to go to steel and concrete. Seattle and Tacoma have allowed six-story wood frame structures for a period of time. There are some conditions that have to exist in order to permit this, either pressurized stairwells or fire-rated construction in different zones in the building.

57:45 Our fire marshal has explored the studies, found that there really is no evidence to show that it would not be safe, and so this is now allowed as an alternative to the steel and concrete construction for six stories or less. Wanted to touch on the SEPA exemption for 200 units. That's already on the books. One of the proposals in our development code update as a companion to the comprehensive plan will be to allow apartment projects that are 200 units or fewer to be processed under a Type 1 land use approval. That's our fastest land use process. Can be 28 days after it's found to be complete.

58:41 There's no public notice, there's no appeal period. So that's, all of those things add time to a project. It would be a big change for Vancouver, but it's something that we think Vancouver is ready for, and we'll be proposing that as part of the comprehensive plan development code. Those were the two things I wanted to touch on. - And the removal of parking minimums, obviously, as part of the comp plan is really, we know the actual cost of parking per, the ads per unit, so that alone, and there's many parts of the city where there is relief from parking minimums, so projects are already benefiting from that, but spreading that further in the city will save a lot of cost. So lastly, just wanna leave you with, these are more, they should have been framed more as questions, but discussion topics, and we can obviously discuss

59:39 other topics as well, but just, this is kind of how we think about what's out there for us that we can do, particularly on the affordable side, to keep production moving forward. And so the top bullet encompasses, you know, kind of everything we just talked about, which is we really need to keep the focus on housing action. Internally, on staff side, that means we, like we really do coordinate with each other. Right now, we're in a very extensive conversation about impact fees and STCs. Each of the different divisions within public works are looking at what should our STCs and impact fees be, and they rightfully should be doing that, but then now we're bringing it in. What is that gonna do to housing costs, right? That's what we mean when we talk about the housing action plan is, let's make sure that we're all working together towards a common goal, so that's fees and costs, that's process, you know, that's timelines, right?

1:00:36 Let's not make it more difficult to build housing, particularly in the middle of this crisis that we're in. The next four really are kind of how do we move projects forward? So, you know, should we think about how we value land differently? Should we think about making land available for not just affordable projects, but for workforce projects? I think there's categories of affordability that we could serve if we made use of our land and kind of relieve more of the burden on the project of paying for that land. Do we want to maintain the density expectations that we have for our strategic sites? That's a big question, but as long as sites that we put out for development require a certain number of units, those projects won't likely move forward. And I know that there's questions about, you know, these are sites we can hold forever and whatever, but those are, there certainly are calls

1:01:36 from folks in the development community. Hey, I could, we can move forward on projects if we didn't have to meet certain density requirements. And then I mentioned this earlier, it is likely that if we want some of our affordable housing projects that are in the pipeline to move forward in the absence of the state and other public funding, we probably will have to increase the amount that we put in per unit from the affordable housing fund in particular. So we are drafting right now for your consideration changes to the affordable housing fund administrative plan that would bring that to you as well as some other changes. Absent that we, you know, there's gaps that won't be filled for years on some of these projects. And then we've been asked for a long time to help solve a particular problem within the affordable housing community that is how do they fund pre-development costs? And a lot of communities have pre-development loan funds that get paid back when projects move forward. We've always tried to maintain our dollars

1:02:35 for actual construction, but if projects are stalled moving forward because of this, then maybe it's a role that we can play and we can maybe use the dollar amounts and these loans are smaller than some of the other loan funds that are out there. And we could maybe fund that with funds that we have available. So that's another idea that we would consider. And obviously it would come to you as a proposal. So those are some of the options that we're looking at right now. We're certainly open to other ideas and we're always looking to the development community to help us think through how to solve the situation we're in. So with that, we have some time for questions and feedback and anything else? - Let's go back one slide. Thank you. Okay, Councillors.

1:03:32 Okay, Councillor Perez. - Thank you. Lots of information. The fact is that we're doing a lot, but the market still isn't penciling. And so when we look at the actions here, perhaps now it's time to think that not all actions are equal in their impact. And so what are those top actions that are really driving the needle right now? And so I would like to see what those are as opposed to just treating every action the same, which they're not. So which actions or which things are enough to change the supply affordability and preservation outcomes

1:04:31 under the existing bad market conditions. So shifting from an activity tracking to an outcome tracking I think is gonna be important. Thank you for sharing that Clark County doesn't receive that proportional amount of state funding. I wasn't aware of that. I think it's also important to distinguish those high impact interventions that you have from exploratory ones 'cause it gets mixed up. So those are some of my thoughts. And as I process my thoughts a little bit more, I'll go ahead and defer to my other colleagues. - Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Stover, go ahead. - Thank you. Thank you both for presenting here tonight. Obviously this is critical importance

1:05:27 and needs to receive a lot of attention. And if we've got nothing else happening in housing, this is a good place for us to be spending a lot more time thinking about. You presented a lot of charts and graphs today. They are for the most part being presented as local snapshots. What's happening in Vancouver, maybe what's happening in Clark County. I think it would be very helpful for us to see this in context of what's happening in the metro area, what's happening statewide and what's happening nationally and being able to overlay those different data sets to see where things are off. If things are off or over the past 10 years,

1:06:26 really we've done nothing more than just follow national trends. Which I'm not saying that that's true, I'm just saying we need to understand, we really need to understand to what extent have all these different market interactions, interventions that we've done, have they really made a difference or all we do is riding a wave? I'm also interested in us trying to identify jurisdictions that aren't stuck right now and for us to be able to benchmark against. What are interventions, what are things that potentially are holding us back that we may be able to take advantage of? The last area is,

1:07:24 so I come from an area adjacent to where Council Member Hanson came from and that is in energy, specifically in energy efficiency. And interestingly enough, rate payer dollars, the dollars that we give a utility for our services, in many ways are treated with more respect than taxpayer dollars. So in that environment, I had to run a program where I had to produce a logic model. I had to say this is what I believe will happen if I do this and it seems like this is an area, housing is an area where being explicit about our logic model,

1:08:24 being explicit about our theory of change really would be helpful for us to be tracking. And I think a lot of this exists. It just doesn't, it hasn't been brought into a focus format. And also one of the things that was required of the work I was doing is every year, I had to go submit my work to an evaluator and somebody on the outside came in and said, yes, you're doing what your logic model says or no, you're not and you need to make changes. And that kept me honest in the work. And I would suggest that we need to be thinking in similar ways of what's our logic model, what are these assumptions we're making,

1:09:22 what are the market interventions we're gonna do in order to reach that end goal of increased housing production and then submit our work and have somebody on the outside on a regular basis. I don't know that's annually, but on a regular basis coming in and putting out where there are weaknesses in the model that we're pursuing. And then I look forward to the next discussion on this, being able to see some of this national data, statewide data, metro data laid on. I think there are, I have my own theory that there are deep seated assumptions that we have that aren't necessarily producing what we think they are. So thank you.

1:10:20 - Thank you. Councilor Paulson. - Thank you, Mayor. I agree with Councilor Stober's comment about context and I think that context matters. And I think that when we see aberrations between national trends, regional trends and local trends, those are areas where we can understand the efficacy of our efforts or find opportunities for additional efforts to take. And speaking to that, but also honoring your bullet points there, although they weren't framed as question, I'll treat them as such. Looking at bullet point one, absolutely yes. I read that as efficiency and making it easier. I have a specific question and then a suggestion. So one of the things that would fit into that category would be something we've talked about for a while and I'd like to know where we stand on it, which is the idea of pre-approved ADU plans that could be constructed without having to go through the permitting process.

1:11:19 Other jurisdictions have had those in place for some time. We've talked about doing that. I know that that's not necessarily going to generate huge numbers of housing units, but we're in an environment where every little bit counts right now. I'd like to know where we are with that. - That's on our housing plan. Yeah, yes, we think that is a great idea. Portland's done it. Other jurisdictions have done it. It's on our housing action plan. And so it'll be one of those items that we'll be following up on. - And I think more broadly, and I know Rebecca is online here too, but one of the priority areas of our housing action team for this year is to, once the comp plan's in place, to think through, okay, what's the middle housing toolkit that we need to make available so that we can actually, we can lower the barriers for whether it's individual

1:12:17 homeowners or small scale developers to take advantage of the new opportunity to develop there. So I think pre-approved plans is one of those things and there's other things that we're trying to identify that we can make available so that we can unlock development as quickly as possible. - So one of the things that I take away from your earlier presentations is a sense of urgency. 'Cause we are underproducing and we are seeing troubling market dynamics. But I'm not seeing a sense of urgency in terms of taking actions on, that's one illustrative example, but there could be other things that are in our housing action plan. And I agree with Council Member Perez's comment about doing things that are actually going to result in outcomes rather than just doing things because it feels good to do things. And so at the very least, speaking very specifically about that, but in a broader context of what's in the housing action plan knowing how we're prioritizing things and establishing timelines on them

1:13:15 so that each time we have this conversation, myself or others aren't having to ask the question like this and hear the same answer over again, which is it's in our housing action plan, but there's really no meaningful update. And it's been something we've been talking about for a while. And so something a little bit more concrete than that would be helpful. In addition to that, there was talk about unlocking potential within the city with the zoning changes that are gonna come with the comp plan. And that those are probably going to be some of our high opportunity housing production areas for the foreseeable future, assuming that the development environment remains the same. And so to the extent that that's true, understanding very specifically in this bullet point, what are some areas of opportunity that could help stimulate that in terms of creating efficiencies, lowering costs, improving timelines and removing regulations. Not a huge fan of sports metaphors, but this is an apt one. This would be the Gretzky comment about skate

1:14:13 where the puck is going, not where the puck is, right? So we know where we are. We know what we've done in the current environment. We have an idea what the environment is likely to change given what we're doing with our code. Are we changing our policies to stimulate? That should be a question that we're asking and if there's opportunities that are acting on them. I think on bullet point number two, absolutely. If there's things that we can do from a valuation standpoint that helps projects pencils, we should be doing that. I'm not eager to lower density expectations at the moment. We are in the forever business. And so a little bit of time now for a greater bang for the buck in the not too distant future I think is worth waiting a little bit, but open to conversation if there is an alternative view or a sense of urgency that I'm not picking up on specifically on that one. I really wouldn't want to give up hundreds of units to build now where we could wait a few years and get those units because we need those units.

1:15:11 Patrick, what I heard you say as far as investments from affordable housing is each project it's going to require bigger investments which translates for me as fewer units for the money that we're investing, which is troublesome because we have a significant gap in affordable production and that's not going to help. And so I think we also need to look at not just local investment, but what are ways that we can multiply those local dollars in an environment where there are increasingly scarce matching funds and other things, but how can we be creative? How can we can make our market more compelling to decision makers in Olympia and in Washington DC when it comes to grants and other things? If we're punching below our weight to your chart earlier in the state of Washington, why? And what can we do to get on par with the rest of the state? And then I think it's worth talking more about that loan fund, especially if it's something other jurisdictions that are doing and if that is a significant impediment

1:16:09 to keeping projects from moving forward at the present time. Thank you. - Thank you. Yes, Councilor, go ahead. - Thank you, Mayor. We had somebody came and presented before us maybe a year or two ago. I can't remember his name, but-- - Mike Wilkerson. - Thank you, that's the name. You know, he gave a great presentation. I saw it about six months ago and he basically went through how the three counties to the south of us are still decreasing in population while we're still increasing. And for the Portland Metro region, we're really carrying it. So I thought that was rather interesting. Maybe it'd be good to have him come back, talk a little bit about what's going on on the other side of development and what's gonna make their pro forma's pencil. Also, when I take a look at 536 units shy, and if the Vancouver Housing Authority is going at about $500,000 a door and multiply that by 536, it's about $268 million.

1:17:09 Our affordable housing levy brings in about $10 million a year for a total of $110 million going over 10 years. That's a significant investment that needs to happen in our affordable housing. So that's why I think, to my colleagues, what they brought up before, getting the data as far as what's gonna help bring that private equity in and want to invest in Vancouver is a priori. Also, I really like what you've done so far. I think you guys are doing everything you have in your toolkit. And really what I'm seeing out there is the middle. The middle is taking off. And where can you get that at a half an acre, one acre? How many units can you get in there? That's where I'm seeing things take off. And you can see it on Broadway. You can see it in those pocket parcels. Thank you, Mayor. - Thank you. Yes, Councilor, go ahead. - Just to finish my thoughts here. Patrick, you said that when the comprehensive management plan is done and ready,

1:18:08 that we'll really see things pick up. And my question to you is, if we have the same market conditions and it doesn't pick up like we hoped for, what is our plan B? And then the second thing has to do a little bit with, given our current economics, what is working? Which housing types are still penciling out and which ones don't? And going back to that strategy of plan B, so if high interest rates, we still have high interest rates, flat rents and high construction costs versus, you know, what is our backup plan and are we prepared to scale public or non-profit led development? Are we still relying on private market recovery? So just a couple of things to consider. And I do agree with the middle housing, ensuring that we can focus on that, especially for our workforce housing needs.

1:19:08 - Yeah, I think we're just on that what development is penciling, I mean, that's what we were talking about is the smaller scale development where you, you know, some projects are under $500,000 a door, but you're right, that's where a lot of the bigger projects come in. If we can get more projects around 300 to 350,000, in this market, the projects that are achieving that are smaller scale. They're stripping out a lot of the cost that comes with having a podium or elevators or those things. So that's why I'm making kind of a hopeful statement about the comp plan because it'll unlock more of that type of development than the larger scale development. So, but yes, we will come back with more about kind of how else we're gonna try and unlock that. - Patrick, I was looking at the second bullet on the valuation of city land. Have we considered the city land trust

1:20:06 for those affordable projects? We have it going on in the Heights with the owner home ownership piece, but have we considered it with Vancouver Housing Authority on affordable projects they're working on? - Yeah, I think there's a whole variety of ways we can look at valuation, but it's so, so like the project next door is 100% affordable, kind of deeply affordable that we basically contributed the land to that project. So if we're willing to do that, we could contribute it into a land trust and then that project would be owned by a community land trust or it could be like this model. So it's really just, are we willing to contribute land into affordable housing projects and right now that one, I think past this kind of internal filter as it's deeply affordable, 100% affordable,

1:21:06 so that meets the test, but if a project is 80% AMI, so not as deeply affordable, what are we willing to do there? There's plenty of documentation about both the need and the lack of how the development economics and those projects don't work either. So it's really kind of, are we willing to use our land to solve for the gaps in funding on projects besides the ones that have the deepest affordability? And there aren't other subsidy sources for workforce housing projects right now, so they don't have the benefit of housing trust fund money or even our affordable housing fund money, right? So that's where that question leads is what's the type of projects that we're willing to do that on, but yeah, it could easily go into a land trust if that's how we want it to be, but that would mean us contributing the land into the land trust. - I would be interested

1:22:05 in talking to Vancouver Housing Authority. They have an 85, 86 year old reputation of building some great stuff, leveraging funds together. I'd be interested in working with them and sitting down and talking about what land we have and how could we use it to build those affordable projects. They're with us every month asking for little parcels here and there. So that might be an opportunity. Okay. All right, Councilor, last minute. - Yeah, so I wanna hit this list as well. So I think point number one is where I was speaking to that logic model. Let's put it all out on paper. Very much open to revisiting and 80% AMI for Portland metro area

1:23:04 is 100% AMI for Vancouver, meaning people in Vancouver make less money than people in the metro area as a whole. And so I am open to talking about 80% projects. Like my colleague said, I'm not interested in lowering density expectations right now. I wanna know where we find these extra funds to invest in affordable housing. Obviously we need to, but I don't know where we find them. And looking at pre-development, I think that's also a great thing. And then what was the last point you made, Mayor? - About Vancouver Housing Authority? - Yeah, oh. - Leveraging community trust.

1:24:01 - And this is also where I get radical is if they're, I'm willing to also talk about things in the UGA personally. For instance, Habitat is trying to buy the mobile home park in Hazel Dell with a lot of development potential on that land and I'm willing to talk about how can we be a partner with that because I think that helps us if that can occur. So I'm willing to be creative from that standpoint as well. Thank you. - Great, thank you. So when will we see you next? In three months, four months? What's up? - I will come back whenever, if you want us to come back in three months, we're happy to do that. - Yes, let's go ahead and plan it.

1:24:59 You heard lots of different comments and see if we can follow up on any of that. We'll see you this summer. - Summer. - Okay. - Maybe we'll wait 'til the comp plan's adopted. - After June 4th, right? Okay, thank you so very much. Councilors, we're into executive session concerning potential litigation. According to RCW 42.30.110 I triple I will be in there at six o'clock and come out at 6.30 in time for our regular council meeting. Please take care of anything you need to and we'll see you in four and a half minutes.

1:25:39 (upbeat music)