MEETING AGENDA
- 6:30 – 6:45 Neighborhood Reports (1 minute challenge)
- 6:45 – 7:00 Neighborhood Matching Grant update – Lydia Moorehead
- 7:00 – 7:50 MOU Kick-off Discussion:
“Sense of the CNA” on City-Neighborhood Relations (see topics below) - 7:50 – 8:20 Parks and Recreation Survey – Tentatively Scheduled: Laura Keehan (unconfirmed)
- 8:20 – 8:25 Candidates Forum Organizing
- 8:25 – 8:30 Minutes Approval and Agenda Ideas
- 8:30 Adjourn
Meeting Handouts / Attachments:
Council of Neighborhood Associations (CNA) Minutes
- Date: Monday, March8, 2021
- Time: 6:30 – 8:30 PM
- Location: Zoom virtual meeting
CNA Meeting Minutes – May 10, 2021, via Zoom, 6:30-8:30 p.m.
Present: Council of Neighborhood Associations Officers: Larry Dzieza (Nottingham) – Chair, Melissa Allen (BHNA) – Vice Chair, Mark Toy (SWONA) and Jim Rioux (ENA) – Co-Secretaries
Members: Judy Bardin (NWONA), Bruce Coulter (NWONA), Bob Jacobs (GSNA), Jenn Wulf (DNA), Darrah Johnson (Wildwood NA), Martha Worcester (Redwood Estates), Jenn Wulf (DNA), Bob Schoorl (South Capital), Richard de Rossett (Cooper Crest HOA), Dana McAvoy (Eastbay Drive), Helen Wheatley (CRANA), Charlotte (Bigelow), Lisa Riner (Elliot NA)
City & State Representatives & Presenters: Yen Huynh (City Council), Lydia Moorehead (Community Planning), new Asst. Planner Casey Schaufler.
AGENDA
Lydia introduces Casey. Works on homelessness response work, GIS mapping, some CNA work. Just checking things out tonight.
Larry – Parks and Rec presentation moved to next week. Substituted Yen feedback segment.
6:30 – 6:45 Neighborhood Reports (1 minute challenge)
Bob – Things are looking good.
Dana – People out, dogwalking, joggers, bicyclers. Annual newsletter with walking map (250 copies) distributed.
Melissa – Walking map distributed to neighborhoods, City staff, not online. Larry asked to send to put on CNA website.
Martha – Summer picnic planned. Concern about developments along 18th Street. Helen asked if that was where KOIN story was about. Martha had not heard about it.
Bruce C. – New board member. Dedication of Salmon and Heron statues on West Bay Drive got some press. Lots of neighbors fixing houses to sell.
Melissa – 4 new board members, need SOPs to transfer institutional memory.
Bruce C. – NMG to reorganize RNA, creating guide. Can get a lot of info on how to run NAs online.
Jenn – Same sentiment, reinventing the wheel.
Melissa – Maybe subcommittee in CNA needed
Mark – Waiting for NMG contract, organized a weekend to clean and whitewash the defaced portion of mural on Olympic Way NW. June meeting planned, deciding on whether to have a summer picnic and when to meeting again in person.
Bob Van Schoorl – Redevelopment of South Capital Campus may close off three access streets to neighborhood – RNA trying to negotiate better solution. Roads are City – want to close 15th, Columbia and Water St.
Richard de Rossett – Insurance for working in ROW for NMG questions. Lydia says 3-4 NMG with ROW requirements, maybe get group solution. Mark says use Nicholson Bros for several years on insurance for pocket park work, not SWONA president anymore.
Helen Wheatley – Increase in traffic speed in neighborhood. Board meeting scheduled for May 26. Redwood City, CA has handbook, lends ‘meeting owl’ to NAs for mixed in-person, virtual meetings. May 6 KIRO story on 18th – Tree protection issue with property border with developer. County stormwater basin manager course, nearby orphaned drainage basin. Asked for dumpster for cleaning out – Lacey, Tumwater do but Olympia does not.
Jenn – Last month switched to weekly meetings. Tenant protections, other downtown issues discussed.
Jim Rioux – Parks Dept. asked NA rep to be on selection committee for architect to renovate Armory. Jim asked Stephanie Johnson to reach out to Jenn (DNA) as well.
Darrah – Quarterly membership meeting later in month, deciding whether to continue biennial garage sale (conflicting opinions on NA liability).
Charlotte – RNA rented pressure washer for cleaning sidewalks, used two to clean 95 lots. NMG to create two free libraries and park bench.
Larry – A few RNA not officially recognized anymore (ex. Ward Lake Heights). Thinks they should still be welcome at CNA meetings. Traffic safety issues. Traffic signs available at schools 4-6 pm later in week, Mailbox security – some broken into for pandemic checks.
6:45 – 7:00 Neighborhood Matching Grant update – Lydia Moorehead
Lydia – Sent e-mail out on April 24 notifying RNAs approved for NMG. 10/12 applications approved by City Council (shows map) for total of $22,920, 1500 NA volunteer hours (details individual NMG for each RNA). Insurance issues: unsupervised minors on work parties, volunteers in ROW, minors in ROW prohibited. Projects need to be done by December 31 but projects in ROW get two years. City will specify insurance requirements.
Lisa (Elliot NA) wanted to examine grants.
Lydia will post online once NMG grants finalized. Lydia discussed non-renewing RNAs.
Melissa mentioned Upper Eastside NA, dropped off after Stephanie left.
7:00 – 7:50 MOU Kick-off Discussion:
Larry gave overview of MOU discussion (copied from e-mail below in italics). Also shared screen with MOU language (bold sections below highlighted):
“Sense of the CNA” on City-Neighborhood Relations:
MOU Kick-off Discussion Topics
As discussed last month, the time has come for the periodic review of the CNA Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). I have pulled out topics from the current MOU and City Neighborhood Ordinance (both attached) to help structure our discussion. Covering all the topics will likely extend across multiple CNA meetings. Tonight’s topical focus areas:
Topic A: How are we (City and CNA) doing in terms of the MOU’s goal of “… involving neighborhood associations in all areas of the city”? (Part II)
(poll result: 13/16 voted. 42% grade B or better. Martha thought good job done on getting homeless assistance input. Melissa asked for clarification on the question – thought they were two questions. Helen thinks question means are all areas of City represented on CNA. Brought up example of McGraff Woods development and lack of City outreach for input. Jenn says DNA members often surprised by developments even though on list as parties of interest. Bruce questions whether it’s RNA board’s responsibility to contact neighbors about developments once contacted by City. Lydia – RNA within 1000 feet of a development application contacted – 2 RNA contacts on update form. If interested, can also become party of record and be contacted directly. Neighbors within 300 feet get direct mailing. Charlotte talks about big development behind her. Lisa Riner agrees with Charlotte – once notice goes up, too late to impact decision. City shows lack of consideration for neighborhood sentiment on West Bay Parks Development. Judy chimes in – Developer has purchased lots, done planning – only three weeks to do appeal.
Subarea planning process discussion. Larry reads portion of MOU about it. Mark: SWONA had discussions on it, thought it was too much work if City was just going to ignore it on development decisions. Jim adds everything locked in by codes but does not achieve stated goal. Larry questions City’s commitment to have neighborhood input on planning decisions. Martha went over Comp Plan, ID’s sub-area but language does not talk about any specific issues within subareas.)
Topic B: In regard to “CNA Involvement in City Decision Making and Processes”, how successful have we been in the pursuit of an open dialogue concerning citywide issues and to fostering a spirit of openness and mutual trust? (Part III)
(poll result: 13/16 voted. 0 As, 5 Bs. Charlotte – City deals with each neighborhood separately, CNA does not have say. Jenn – interpreted as members of CNA having dialogue, not CNA dialog with City. Lisa says City just ignores people, repeating West Bay Yards example. Judy – two CNA members on Missing Middle work group, input ignored in end product. Larry – City works with developers, but when City is developer (Boulevard project) and did not contact NAs – used other representatives. Lydia – 2 members on developer selection board from neighborhood. How developer engages neighborhood is one criteria for selection. Martha – site already cleared, graded. Helen – NAs want to protect neighborhood assets, aim of subarea planning process. ‘Trees’ keeps coming up. Metric could be degree in involvement in NAs. Nobody likes feeling treated like a box to be checked. It has to be worth peoples’ time and effort. Larry – YIMBY aspects of NAs being ignored as well – positive things NAs want to see. Melissa relayed conversation with City planner describing NAs as ‘NIMBY homeowners’, rely on advisory committees to represent population. Judy – advisory committees are picked by city council.)
Topic C: What has been our experience and assessment of the MOU provision for Neighborhood Issues Forums? (Part III(a))
“CNA agrees to periodically provide, through CNA meetings, forums for the discussion of regional, citywide and neighborhood issues.
Forums will be conducted early in the process before any significant final decisions are made and allow for broad dissemination of proposals and consideration of alternatives to the proposed action. – 10 acres Blvd.
The forums may cover subjects such as:
• making City programs more neighborhood-centric,
• incorporating the interests of neighborhoods in land use decisions, and
• emergency preparedness.
The CNA and the City agree that a work plan detailing Neighborhood Issues and a schedule shall be developed jointly with the City Manager on an annual basis.”
(Melissa – Missing Middle panel discussion about 3 years ago with Subarea A. Notes ambiguity in MOU. Charlotte – Olympia Housing Plan hearing May 17. 3900 Boulevard (near 18th) – City led mixed use development. Poll result: not posted – will discuss at next meeting. Moving on to Yen.)
Topic D: How well have we achieved the goals called out in the MOU CNA for “Involvement in City Decisions Related to Land Use Planning and Resource Allocations” (Part IV).
The MOU reads, “Planning, land use and permitting decisions of the city have a major impact on residents and neighborhoods. The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan both reflect and seek to preserve the interests of Olympia’s neighborhoods. Land use decisions that focus on pedestrian-oriented streetscapes, sidewalk and trail system improvements that connect neighborhoods and enhance walkability also help create community. The parties agree to collaborate in pursuing these policies.”
Discussion
Larry used Zoom poll feature.
Charlotte: Absorbing failing NA’s? Melissa gave example of Upper Eastside – no interest from neighborhood in helping out. Neighborhood boundaries are flexible, can be changed if interest.
Jenn: Renters don’t know they can be part of NA. Outreach needed to increase numbers.
Lydia: RNAs that did not renew for 2021: Carlyon North, Castlewood, Goldcrest.
7:50 – 8:20 Councilmember Yen Huynh’s Perspectives on City Issues Affecting Neighborhoods
Yen – Do not have a good sense of individual RNA issues. Asked to CNA committee assignment in January. She is a renter. Has heard about NIMBY perspective of NAs. Has met with a couple of RNAs. Last meeting tough. West Bay Yards Development high interest topic, cannot discuss due to litigation (by Olympia Coalition for Ecosystem Development).
Helen – How does City see liaison role? Yen – Met with Clark to orient, phone call with Larry, met with Lydia – sees herself as communication bridge. Takes feedback from CNA meetings with one on one meetings with City Council, Jay (City Mgr.).
Lori Dorn (Bigelow) – Quality of life, not NIMBY issue, with respect to development. Yen responds that NIMBY perception of NAs widespread but she hopes not to spread it.
8:20 – 8:25 Candidates Forum Organizing
Larry will put out Survey Monkey to organize. He got notes from Roger Horn on the process, recites examples of questions asked. Volunteers to vet questions. Target before primary voting starts (July 14). 13 candidates so far for 5 positions. General sentiment not enough time or organize forum before primary – maybe get candidates to answer questions. Jim will meet with Roger to get input.
8:25 – 8:30 Minutes Approval and Agenda Ideas
Minutes approved. Next meeting agenda suggestions: MOU with City, Candidate Forum, Reviving moribund NAs, Perceptions of Neighborhoods (i.e. NIMBY) and how to change. Helen volunteered to help plan for MOU discussion. Comp plan to be revised by 2025. Buildable lands report – TRPC recommendations. Puget Sound Regional Council on GMA committee. Shift in discussion on King/Pierce Co. – Housing Supply (Market rate not the answer), Stability (keep neighborhoods vital, keep housing affordable), Subsidy (to supply housing market will not supply) three pillars of housing plan. 52% of population in Olympia are renters – wrapped in equity issues Move on from Missing Middle argument – does not get you to equity. Melissa – Trickle down development does not work. Charlotte – Market rate development razing affordable housing.
8:49 Meeting Adjourned