Good evening. Welcome to
Vancouver City Council. Today
is Monday, April 13th, 2026.
This afternoon we had a
legislative end of session
update. And then we also had a
comp plan update. We went into
executive session. No decisions
were made concerning. Those
pieces were now in our regular
council meeting. And would you
please stand and join me in the
Pledge of Allegiance? I pledge
allegiance.
>> To the flag of the United
States of America and to the
Republic for which it stands.
One nation under God,
indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all.
>> Thank you. Miss Stella. Will
you please call the roll?
>> Yes. Thank you. Mayor.
Council member Harless present.
Perez.
>> Fox here.
>> Paulson here. Stoeber
present. Hansen. Present. Mayor
McInerney Ogle present.
>> Thank you very much. We're
now moving into the approval of
the minutes. Councilors, you
have in front of you the
minutes of April 6th. Are there
any changes or corrections?
Hanson has made a motion to
approve who will second it.
>> Stober.
>> Thank you. Councilor Stober
has a second. Those in favor of
approving the minutes of April
6th, I.
>> I abstain.
>> To abstentions. All those
opposed motion passes. Thank
you. Let's move into our
proclamations. We have a couple
different proclamations this
evening. The first one. Karen,
here you are. Okay. Whereas
autism is a naturally occurring
neurodevelopmental condition
that is present from birth and
affects the way individuals
communicate, process,
information, and experience the
world. And whereas autistic
individuals thrive when
provided with access to
inclusive education, equitable
support, meaningful
opportunities, and full
acceptance within society, and
through research, training,
advocacy, support groups, and
increased empowerment for
autistic youth, adults, and
families. Vancouver can
continue to be a welcoming and
supportive community for all.
Now therefore, I Anne McEnerny
Ogle, Mayor of Vancouver,
Washington, do hereby proclaim
the month of April as Autism
Acceptance Month in the City of
Vancouver and encourage all
community members to embrace
autism acceptance, promote
inclusion, and celebrate the
contributions of autistic
individuals and their families.
And I have a proclamation. I'll
bring it over and present it.
Thank you.
>> Thank you so much.
>> Yes. Go ahead and turn it on.
You'll see a green light pop in
there for you. There you go.
And introduce yourself to us,
please.
>> Hello, everyone. My name is
Qayoumi Diamond and I lead
Helpinghands, a volunteer group
for neurodivergent teens and
young adults. We're a community
that believes in support,
inclusion, and acceptance of
all voices. Helpinghands was
created to give neurodivergent
individuals more volunteer
opportunities in a place where
they feel accepted, whether
it's through community service,
peer mentorship, or just
showing up for one another.
We're proving that
neurodivergent voices aren't
just valuable, they're
essential. This Autism
Acceptance Month, we're not
just seeking awareness, but
true inclusion. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Please.
>> Thank you, Madam Mayor. And
all the friends here on the
City Council. First, I'd like
to thank each and every person
who came out tonight in support
of the proclamation. Whether
you're autistic, a parent,
community partner, or an ally,
each one of us, each one of our
voices matters. Typically, you
have Karen Crate to the
executive director here of
Autism Permit. She's not
feeling under the weather. She
is feeling under the weather
tonight. And she sends her
condolences for not being here.
My name is John Kadijah. I'm
the programs director and
co-founder of Autism
Empowerment. In June of 2026,
autism marked 15 years of
service that was founded right
here in Vancouver, Washington.
When we first started our work,
our work, the narrative in our
community focused on autism
awareness. Over the years,
we've been able to shift that
conversation from awareness to
acceptance. There has been a
lot of work done, but in the
current political climate,
there's a lot more to be to do.
It doesn't matter if you're
newly diagnosed or if you've
been advocating for years. We
want people to know you are
seen, you're valued, and you're
not alone. Since our founding,
we've been devoted to enriching
and empowering the lives of
youth, adults, and families
with autistic and
neurodivergent communities, we
provide a culture of autism
acceptance and believe that
each one of us has gifts and
talents that makes the world a
better place. Wherever you
identify in your life's journey.
Autism empowerment is here to
meet you along the way with
acceptance, enrichment, and
inspiration and empowerment for
the road ahead, which are our
four foundational pillars of
autism empowerment and autism
empowerment. We believe that
every autistic person,
regardless of age, ability, or
support needs, deserves dignity.
Their voice to be heard and
open with equal opportunities,
free of discrimination. We
stand for equity, compassion
without competition, unity
without conditions. There is a
space for all of us at the
table. We are here for the.
We're here for the whole
spectrum. Almost done. In
addition to autism serves with
Sue me here represents. We have
a lot of educational and media
programs, including Spectrum
Life magazine, which is in your
packets. This is the newest
issue that actually just came
out today, and we are
celebrating ten years of
producing this print magazine,
which can be found all over
Clark County and which all of
our Vancouver as well,
including right here at City
Hall. We also have our
NeuroDivergent Careers
Collective, which supports
teens and adults with in the
Entertainment and Fine Arts
arena and our Autism
Empowerment podcast, which is
going to be coming back soon.
All of these programs are not
only service people here in
Vancouver, but all over the
West Coast, the United States,
and even around the world.
Thank you to Uhl for places
like Vancouver that's committed
to making a more inclusive,
accepted and empowered
community for all of our
citizens. Thank you to each one
of you on the City Council who
have worked over the past 15
years. Again, for all that and
for all of those who are in
attendance here tonight. Thank
you so much. And those copies
in the the the foyer here. So
thank.
>> You, John. Thank you so very
much. You were holding up the
spectrum magazine. Is it a is
it on the web or somewhere so
people can have access to it?
>> All 15 or all 10:10 years
are actually available online
for free. People can there.
Every single article is in blog
format. We want to be able to
elevate autistic voices in this
particular issue. Every issue
we have an autistic a young
adult who actually uses a
letter Boerke to communicate.
In this particular issue, we
actually has two articles. So
we really believe in supporting
the entire spectrum. But so can
you either be in print or
online?
>> Great. And please give Karen
our best for speedy recovery.
>> Thank you.
>> So much. Thank you.
>> Bye.
>> Our second proclamation this
evening is National Donate Life
Month, and we have Laura with
us this evening as she's coming
up. Whereas National Donate
Life Month is observed in April
to raise awareness about the
importance of organ, eye and
tissue donation and to honor
those who have saved and healed
lives through the gift of
donation. And Whereas, the 2026
National Donate Life Month
theme Leave a Legacy uses the
symbol of a tree to represent
the life and connection between
donors, recipients, and their
families, standing as a legacy
of hope. And whereas a single
organ donor organ donor can
save up to eight lives, and a
single tissue donor can enhance
the lives of more than 125
others. And whereas the city of
Rekah city of Vancouver
recognizes the heroic
generosity of donors and their
families, as well as the
dedicated health care
professionals who make the gift
of life possible. Now,
therefore, I Anne McEnerny Ogle,
Mayor of Vancouver, Washington,
do hereby proclaim the month of
April as National Donate Life
Month in the City of Vancouver
and encourage all community
members to consider the impact
of organ, eye and tissue
donation. Register and tell
their loved one about their
decision. And Laura, before I
bring this proclamation to you,
as you are well aware, Mayor
Pro Tem Sarah Fox is one of
your donors. Sarah, thank you
so very much for that. Do you
have any words for folks?
>> Sure. Thank you so much for
the proclamation. I'm sure
everyone out there that has any
questions about organ donation.
I I'd say, one, don't be afraid
to ask a lot of questions. And
two, don't hesitate to go get
tested if if you could
potentially be a match for
someone with kidney disease. I
didn't hesitate because that
person was a very good friend
of mine, and I ended up being
the best match that she
probably ever could have had,
and has gone on to live a
healthy 15 years after the time
that we've donated. So anyways,
thank you for bringing that up
and giving me an opportunity to
make a pitch.
>> You bet. All right. Go ahead.
Yes, press that button. It
turned green. Great.
>> Thank you.
>> And Laura, go ahead and
introduce yourselves. Yes.
>> I'm Laura Ellsworth. I'm the
executive director for Donate
Life Northwest. And our mission
is to educate and inspire the
community to register as organ,
eye and tissue donors. We do a
lot of public education and
have a variety of programs that
do that in Oregon and Southwest
Washington. So good evening and
thank you. Mayor McEnerny Ogle,
Mayor Pro Tem Fox and members
of the Council. I'm here before
you today on behalf of the
donation community and the
thousands of Washingtonians
currently waiting for a second
chance at life, I'm here to
express my deepest gratitude
for the 2026 Donate Life Month
proclamation. Special thank you
to Mayor Pro Tem Councilor Fox
for your championing of this
cause in the most profound way
possible. As a living donor,
your leadership helps bring a
message of hope directly to the
heart of Vancouver. This year's
theme, as you mentioned, leave
a legacy. When we talk about a
legacy, we often think about
statues or buildings or bridges
or wealth. But the most
profound legacy that a human
being can leave behind is the
gift of time. The years,
birthdays, milestones given
back to our neighbors through
organ, eye and tissue donation
to leave a legacy as to plant a
garden that you'll never get to
see. By issuing this
proclamation, the City of
Vancouver is helping plant that
garden. You're normalizing a
conversation that can be
difficult, but one that is
ultimately rooted in love and
community. Currently, over
100,000 people nationwide are
waiting for a life saving
transplant in our own backyard.
Many of our fellow Vancouver
residents are waiting for that
call that will change their
lives forever. This hit home to
me just last week when I was
walking home from our local
coffee shop after a meeting,
and I just stopped to make
small talk with someone who had
recently remodeled and their
landscaping in their yard. And
it looked really good. And I
just said, hey, that looks so
good. You guys love it. And
then lo and behold, she found
out I actually, I was carrying
this and she saw the sticker
and I asked if she knew about
us. And she's like, well, I
need a kidney. And I attended
your workshop on how to find a
living donor like six months
ago. And I was like, wow, you
just never know what our
neighbors are going through
right now. So your recognition
of April as National Donate
Life Month serves as a powerful
reminder that we all have the
power to be a hero. Donate Life
Northwest invites everyone in
our community to reflect on the
legacy that they wish to leave.
It only takes a minute to
register as a donor, but that
one decision can save up to
eight lives and heal up to 125
others. So thank you, mayor.
All the councilors here tonight
for standing with us and for
honoring those who have given
the ultimate gift, and for
encouraging Vancouver to leave
a legacy of life. Thank you.
>> Thank you Laura. That
concludes our. That concludes
our proclamations and brings us
into community communication.
Are there any yellow cards,
Miss Taylor? Okay, then I'll go
ahead and bring up Ellson
Srahman Ellson. Go ahead and
join us. I turn on the
microphone and please state
your name and the city for the
record.
>> There we go.
>> Good evening, mayor and
council members. My name is
Ellson Tran. I moved to
Vancouver in 1984. Been here
for a few years. I'm here to
comment on the Comprehensive
Plan update presented this
afternoon, specifically in
regard to the extended timeline
for replacement of single
family homes in a medium scale
district to two years, rather
than the originally proposed
one year window to determine a
non-conforming use, which
impacts homeowners throughout
the city. While the time period
changed from 1 to 2 years is a
step in the right direction, as
correspondence she received
from legal counsel Steve
Hornstein outlines, it really
does not provide sufficient
protection for property owners
whose single family homes have
been impacted by a catastrophic
event, such as a fire insurance
payments, estate settlements,
permitting processes, ability
to sell and other factors or
combination of such factors
that are well beyond the
control of a property owner can
cause them to easily extend
beyond a two year period, and a
property owner should not be
prohibited from rebuilding or
selling their property for a
single family home replacement.
If it does not occur within the
two year period. While examples
can readily be cited were
homeowners find themselves in
limbo well beyond a two year
period, such as those impacted
by the Pacific Palisades Fire
in Los Angeles. There is an
example of such a circumstance.
In my own neighborhood. There
was a house fire in 2019 that
effectively destroyed the home
buyer, purchased the property
in 2022, managed to demolish
the remaining structure in
order to build a single family
residence. Unfortunately, his
spouse became very ill, forcing
them to sell the property. In
2021. A residential permit was
then issued to the new property
owner in 2022, and a new home
was finally built. A two year
cap would have prevented this
home replacement. I urge the
council not to adopt an
arbitrary two year timeline, as
recommended by staff, that
would remove the flexibility of
homeowners to protect their
property rights for what many,
many may well be their largest
and most important asset. Thank
you very much.
>> Thank you. Having no
additional in. Cards. Okay.
Having no additional
individuals. I'll go ahead and
close the communication, bring
it to consent agenda councilors
you have in front of you the
consent agenda. You have 12
items. Which items would you
like to withdraw?
>> Ten.
>> Yeah, we already have item
number ten. Thank you,
Councilor Fox on that and other
items. That's it. All right
then I'll accept a motion for
items one through nine, 11 and
12.
>> Move to approve. Paulson.
>> Thank you. Councilor Paulson
made the motion to approve
those items. And Mayor Pro Tem
Sarah Fox has seconded any
other discussion. All those in
favor, say aye.
>> Aye.
>> Opposed? Motion passes. Item
number ten. City manager, would
you like to bring up your staff?
There we go.
>> Yeah. We're being joined by
Shannon Olsen and Anthony Glenn
for the benefit of the public.
I'm the city manager. And this
is a resolution about an
Interfund loan from the general
fund to the fund to continue
the construction on Fire
Station eight. And if I could,
before we see if there are any
technical questions for the
staff, just take the council
back a little bit to 2024 on
the timeline on how this
developed. So when the current
biennium budget was being put
together, the city had a
question before the public for
proposition four, and we didn't
yet know what was going to
happen with proposition four.
And so any of the banked
capacity from the prior
approval proposition two
related to fire services was
not included in the budget in
the initial year. And so when
proposition four didn't pass,
the council asked me to work
with the staff to see if there
was any way that we could
actually put some of that
banked capacity back in. We
determined that the timeline
just did not allow for it. And
so we moved into the current
biennium budget without banked
capacity in the first year. We
then were set to implement
banked capacity in 2025,
specifically for capital
projects that were underway,
including Fire Station eight.
And that was when we engaged
with the police Advisory
Committee. They ultimately
recommended a severely scaled
back version of a public ask
that turned into proposition
five for police services. So
getting towards 2025, we now
had a a second question in
front of the public. That one
did pass. And when we were
looking at the budget, putting
that one voter approved in
there, plus the banked capacity
that we were looking at from
proposition two would have
resulted in a property tax
increase, more than 10%. And we
thought that that was untenable,
especially given that the
public had just given us a vote
of confidence in wanting to put
some more money towards police
services. So that left us with
an approved budget that was
advancing capital projects,
advancing construction on a
fire station without the
anticipated revenue source that
would be needed to make
payments on it while it was
under construction. So in
talking with the budget staff
and looking at the resources we
had available, we decided to
bring the to the council an
internal loan that we could use
from the general fund so that
we could make the payments. And
then in this calendar year,
actually implement that banked
capacity and pay the general
fund back as part of that
discussion. One of the things
that we had to figure out,
because we really hadn't done
it before, was whether or not
we would charge interest on an
internal loan, because we were
setting a policy for any future
internal loans, and we didn't
want to be in a situation where
we're trying to explain to our
auditors, why did you charge
interest on this one? Why did
you not charge interest on that
one? And so we elected to come
up with a way to determine what
our benchmark interest rate
would be. And so we're setting
that in this first one. And you
might ask the question, you
know, why would you do internal
loans? Well, for a short term
debt, you don't want to go out
to the bond market, the bond
market, you're going to pay
attorney's fees, you're going
to have issuance costs, you're
going to have origination fees.
So for something that's short
term, like three, five years,
it really doesn't make sense to
go seek outside financing.
Internal financing makes more
sense because you don't have
those costs. And while this one
is going against the
proposition, I guess, you know,
imagine a scenario where the
parking fund got an opportunity
to buy a private parking lot.
They didn't have the cash on
hand to do it, so we could loan
them the money from the general
fund and then repay ourselves.
Obviously, you would want to
pay interest out of those other
funds. Or if one of our other
organizations, the Downtown
Redevelopment Agency, needed a
short term loan to make some
emergency improvements, we'd
have the capacity to do that,
but we would charge interest
because we the general fund, is
losing the use of those dollars
now, in this case, because the
money is being funneled through
the general fund, my intent
would be to return that
interest back over to the fire
fund, because the assurance
that we made to the public is
that the proceeds from
proposition two will get used
for the projects and the hiring
of the staff that we put in
there. So while we're
establishing the policy of
charging ourselves interest, we
also have a lot of flexibility
in how we use interest that is
earned through the general fund.
So in this case, we could turn
right around and put it right
back into the fire fund and
ensure that the proceeds from
proposition two go where we
told the voters they were going
to go. Great.
>> Thank you. Councilors
questions? Yes, Councilor Fox,
go ahead.
>> Do you need any direction or
discussion with us about that?
Utilizing the interest funds to
go back into the fire fund? You
said that's a choice that
you're deciding, but do you
need council to weigh in on
that and provide direction?
>> I think from the perspective
of the council, if you want to
make sure that you're providing
direction to me and to the
staff, that that's how those
that that is your expectation,
then you could put it into the
language for the motion to
approve the resolution. That
puts it in the record for
posterity. And you know,
something happens to me, I get
into a car accident and I can't
act as the city manager. Then
there's a record that that's
your council expectation for
the use of those funds.
>> And Sarah Fox, I forgot to
say that the first time. One
more question. As you were
describing a policy moving
forward, that would be kind of
blind to the the loan and the
purpose, you know, the the
party that we're loaning to, I
guess, internally. Do you what
other examples do we have,
maybe from other equal, equally
sized local governments that do
this type of, I guess, interest
rate policy on Interfund loans?
And also. Well, I'll just stop
with that question. Okay.
>> I think maybe I'll ask
Shannon and Anthony to weigh in
on that one. I know there are
several methods that are
legally acceptable for the
determination in how we
benchmark our loans, and maybe
Anthony could provide some
guidance on how he arrived at
this recommendation. Good
evening.
>> Mayor and Council. Anthony
Glen, City treasurer. It really
just goes to Gfoa best practice.
There's only so many things you
can kind of look at to
establish a borrowing rate. The
two primary are your external
borrowing rate. So if you went
out to market what that cost
would be. And the other primary
one is what you're essentially
lose on your investments if you
do loan those funds. So in this
case, the internal pooled rate
most closely aligned with the
opportunity cost of the general
fund giving up those dollars.
>> Okay. So in our particular.
Anne. McEnerny Ogle item number
ten says a resolution relating
to the establishment of an
Interfund loan from the general
Fund to the fire fund in the
amount of 3.6 million to
support construction of fire
station eight and providing for
repayment with interest goes on
to say the approval of the
resolution establishing an
Interfund loan to the amount of
3.6 million from the General
Fund to the Fire Fund to
support construction of Fire
station eight, with repayment,
including interest as outlined
in attachment A. So I believe
it's already in our resolution
to move forward. Any other
comments?
>> Just accept the peace that
our City Manager just explained
is that we would need to amend
that resolution to say that
that interest would be returned
to the fire fund. Is that the
correct way to word that not
being my specialty, being a
finance.
>> Finance, repayment,
including interest, doesn't say
that. Anthony, is that are you
hearing the distinction?
>> There are two ways that you
could do it just to make sure
that it's memorialized. You
could actually amend the
resolution to add that into the
language of the resolution or
in the motion approving
resolution. You could say, I
vote, I move to approve the
resolution and to direct the
city manager to ensure that
interest is returned to the
fire fund.
>> Okay. So it's hold on, hold
on, hold on, hold on, hold on.
You need to be recognized. Hang
on here. Okay. Councilor
Harless.
>> Oh.
>> Sorry, I thought I had it
first, but. Sorry. Kim Harless
council member. Yeah, I was
going to bring up if we are
able to actually put it in
writing, that would be my
preference. So my question was
going to be to the attorney of
what that process, if it
changes any sort of timelines
to amend to actually put it in
writing.
>> I think that's our process
tonight. Councilor Stober, did
you have a point?
>> Okay.
>> I would like to make just
iced over City Council member.
I want to make sure that this
refunding happens on an annual
basis. So I would like that to
be part of this motion as well.
Versus versus happening at the
end of the loan period.
>> Anthony, is that is that a
problem in financing? No.
>> However you approve it is
how will administer it?
>> Okay. Councilor Hanson, you
had a point to make. Thank you,
Councilor Perez.
>> My question is why we're
even charging interest to
ourselves and to something we
and the voters had voted for to
support our fire first
responders. So I just find it
odd that we're charging
ourselves interest in the first
place. So that's my first
comment. Maybe you can
elaborate on on the rationale
for that. And then secondly, I
agree that whatever we are
promising or committing to that,
it has to be memorialized. But
I just want to go back and I, I
just find it odd that we're
charging interest on our own
internal funding, especially
for fire.
>> Yeah. Lannen Cleghon City
Manager it probably feels a
little more odd because both of
these accounts funnel through
or are kind of hosted by the
general fund. But if you think
on some of the other ways that
we gather money, and I'll use
an example of like a business
license surcharge. So we have a
business license surcharge,
that part of that is dedicated
towards economic development.
We've got an approved ordinance
to scale those collections up
through, I believe, 2030. If
economic prosperity and housing
came to us and said we have an
opportunity to buy a parcel of
land, we would like to borrow
some money in order to be able
to do that. We could
potentially loan money out of
the general fund and have it
repaid using proceeds from the
business license surcharge. But
in that intervening period, the
general fund is losing money,
it's losing dollars, and we
want to make sure that whatever
that property is ultimately
disposed of for, that we don't
run afoul of something like a
gift of public funds issue. So
we need to make sure that the
general fund is made whole
during that intervening period
count. Future council could say
at the end of that, you know,
we've decided to waive interest
or like we're talking about
here, we would like to return
it back to that account so that
we can use it for future
economic development purposes.
But we wanted to make sure that
we just had a policy for any of
these types of internal loans.
You know, we have utility funds,
we have the parking fund, some
of those other ones that are
more proprietary or more
restricted in usage. But I will
acknowledge that this one feels
a little bit weird, just
because so much of the support
for fire comes out of the
general fund.
>> Yeah. And then just a follow
up, what has been the response
or the input from our fire
department on this mechanism?
>> None of them have reached
out specifically to me about
this. The generalized concern
like that I heard from talking
with 4 or 5 two was wanting to
make sure that the projects
weren't delayed, because we
were not putting the banked
capacity into the budget in
this calendar year that we're
waiting for it to come ahead,
but that we needed to keep
those projects moving along.
>> Okay. Again. Anne. McEnerny.
Ogle. Nina, do you have you've
heard two amendments to this
resolution? Do you have the
language?
>> Yes, mayor. We could add
language in the resolution.
There's at least two. Whereas
clauses that it could go the
one on the top of page two or
the one right before. Now.
Therefore, we could add the
following language that I
believe picks up both of these
motions. We could say with the
interest returned to the fire
fund on a yearly basis.
>> Anthony, is that financial
language satisfactory?
>> Well, Anthony Lannen City
Treasurer Yes, that'll work.
>> Thank you very much. All
right. Now, Councilor Hanson.
So you have to say your name.
>> Council Member Hanson. So
moved. Thank you. Mayor.
>> Council member Paulson
seconds Council Member Hanson's
motion.
>> And for those of you in our
audience who are wondering
what's happening, we are
working to make sure that we
meet the accessibility
standards from the federal
government. And so part of that
is to help make sure all of our
language is clear and we are
identifying ourselves and our
actions. Mayor.
>> I just wanted to say, Sarah,
council assistant, I just
wanted to clarify one thing. Is
this a motion for the item with
the amendment or just the
amendment?
>> This is an amendment to the
resolution. So we have an
amendment that has been put
forward. We have a motion from
Councilor Hanson, a seconded by
Councilor Paulson. We will be
voting on the amendment. Then
we'll come back and vote on the
entire resolution. Okay. All
right. Now, Miss Dollar, do you
need a roll call vote on this,
or can I just call for the vote?
>> You can do a roll call or
sorry. And I'll.
>> Approve a general call for
vote. All those in favor, say
aye.
>> Aye.
>> Opposed? The amendment to
the resolution has passed. Now
we'll go back to the amendment.
>> Move to approve the
amendment. The resolution.
>> Mayor Pro Tem Sarah Fox has
made a motion to approve the
amended resolution, and it has
been seconded. By Councilor Ty
Stober. Are there any changes?
Discussion. All those in favor,
say aye.
>> Aye.
>> Opposed? Motion passes.
Thank you for the help. Got it.
Okay. We have completed the
business portion. Let's go into
communications from the
councilor. Councilor Harless.
Councilor Perez.
>> Yes. Just wanted to quickly
comment on a successful
community forum. I think we
didn't really get a chance to
talk about it at our last
council meeting. And then there
was then there was a forum and
we just had a little bit of a
break. So I just wanted to
thank staff for their great
help and work in doing that. I
think that was the most young
people I've seen at a community
forum. I know that there's
always room for improvements,
but I'm curious to see what the
feedback or exchange or report
out from staff on that, how
that community forum went.
>> Okay.
>> Sometime in the future, or
if you know Lorne at this point,
or if Lisa's in the audience or
anybody.
>> She's not. Okay. All right.
>> Any other item councilor.
>> That well, one more thing.
Tomorrow is our ending
community homelessness
organization echo meeting. We
actually have a panel of law
enforcement across jurisdiction
to talk about the interrelation
there of addressing
homelessness with our law
enforcement officers. And it'll
be a panel style. People can
zoom in and take a look at that
virtually or attend from 930 to
1130. We'll be on the sixth
floor at Clark County
Courthouse. No. Clark County
building.
>> Public service center.
>> Public service center, not
the courthouse. My apologies.
>> That's it. Okay.
>> Councilor Hansen.
>> Thank you. Mayor. 10 to 3
neighborhood association
meetings last week. Fircrest
Vancouver Neighborhood
Association and our Neda
Fircrest went into a very
elaborate presentation on
addressing development in your
neighborhood. I thought that
was very well done. The VNA
great meeting there as well.
And lastly, the our Neda
Neighborhood Association wanted
to talk about getting speeds in
neighborhoods down to 20 miles
an hour. And, you know, as I
drive through my neighborhood
with cars parked and coming
around the corner 20 miles an
hour even seems fast now. We
talked about this a while ago,
Lorne, and I'm wondering where
we left off on it. And, you
know, it is rather costly to go
around and change all the signs
in the city of Vancouver.
Totally appreciate that. But
where it's not posted, at least
I was thinking, you know, maybe
we could look at something to
start to move in that direction.
That's all I have, mayor.
>> Okay. Thank you, Councilor
Paulson. Councilor Stoeger.
>> Thank you, mayor. Mr. strand,
tonight brought up the two year
cap on. On rebuilding a
property, and I would be I
personally would be interested
in hearing from staff. Are
there other measurements that
could be tied to process that
goes into that, rather than a
hard date or ways that that
could be integrated to take
into account that, you know,
worst case scenario from a for
us is a Cascadia zone
earthquake. And in that kind of
a situation, it will be
probably years before many
people will be able to even
start rebuilding. So if there
can, if staff could look at and
it may be may be that it's
nothing that can be done right
now, but I think it is a valid
concern. If we could re-index
it. Thank you.
>> This is Council Member Diana
Perez. I agree.
>> As well.
>> Councilor. I will remind you
to wait to be called upon. So
Councilor Stober is still
talking. Thank you. Now,
councilors.
>> Council Member Diana Perez,
I agree with Council Member
Silva's comments to have staff
take a look at that issue that
was brought up by public
comment at the beginning of our
session here regarding the two
year cap. Maybe there's some
exceptions, something that we
could look at to really address
that key issue that was brought
forward.
>> Are there any other
councilors? Councilor Harless.
>> Kim Harless, council member,
also supportive of staff
looking into it for, you know,
particular exemptions for
things that are out of control
for a lot of folks. So that's
my particular interest in that.
>> Any other councilors? Okay.
Mayor pro tem. Councilor Hanson,
please identify yourself.
>> Council Member Hanson thank
you mayor. I would agree for
such issues you would find in
the insurance industry as
perils, you know, fire, flood,
earthquake, that kind of stuff.
That would be a definite
exemption in my opinion. Thank
you mayor.
>> Thank you. Mayor Pro tem fox.
>> I Sarah Fox, I just wanted
to bring up a few things to the
council. One of them is well,
first weighing in. Well I'll
give my update first. So
lodging Tax advisory committee
met last week and we had a
presentation that was brought
to us by a fellows program that
was working with Visit
Vancouver, and it was the Young
Southeast Asian Leaders
Initiative Professional Fellows
Program. There was two women
that have been basically
looking into our entire tax
advisory grant program,
reviewing all of the grants and
grant decisions that we made
last year, looking at the
criteria that we utilize to
make those decisions, and then
focused on bringing into as a
future proposal for us to
consider how to better align
our grant application and
scoring to better reflect the
city's sustainability, climate
resiliency, equity, and
inclusion goals. I think most
of the most of the committees
seem pretty receptive to what
they had proposed. I know for
myself, just speaking on behalf
of of what I was listening to,
I appreciated that they
basically provided a more
enhanced scoring rubric that
reflected what a score of like
1 to 5 could be. And I think
that really will help, even if
even if we don't accept
everything that they
recommended. I think that type
of more detailed scoring rubric
moving forward this year for
all of the criteria is going to
be a lot more helpful. And our
meeting in May will be to
further refine and make some
final decisions on the criteria
and the application process.
And then June, we'll finalize
it. And I can bring information
back to everyone in June. So
that's that update. And then
maybe weighing in a little bit
on. I just lost it.
>> Stover's two year.
>> Well, I could weigh in on
that too, but just from a being
an urban planner standpoint,
when it comes to having what we
consider conforming and
non-conforming uses, which is,
is what staff was bringing
forward. When you have a zoning
plan such as ours, where we're
trying to create change in our
community, where we're trying
to increase density or just
change uses, ultimately in a
particular area in the city, it
is very useful to have a time
limit on what we would consider
non-conforming uses, be it a
single family structure on a
single lot, perhaps in those
zones where we want to be more
dense. And so having a limit,
be it two years, three years is
important in order to encourage
the new uses to be built on
that site. So I'm, I guess I'm
not as concerned about the time
limitation at two years, but be
interested to see if there's
any particular magic to that
number. When it comes to the
ability for a property owner to,
to react and rebuild in case of
fire or other damages that are
outside of their control speed
limit. That was the one. Thank
you. Oh my gosh. I was like,
there was something you said,
Bart. So I just wanted to tie
back to that 20 mile an hour
speed limit. I was at a Lincoln
neighborhood meeting. I think
it was about a month or so ago.
And they also raised the
question of lowering speeds in
the neighborhood and the
Lincoln neighborhood. But that
20 miles an hour actually ties
to safety. They have extensive
studies that show that, you
know, if a pedestrian or, or
someone is hit by a car going
speeds less than 20 miles an
hour, then they have a very
high likelihood of surviving
the crash. But over that there
and every, I don't know, one
mile or two miles over that
speed limit their chance of of
survival just decreases rapidly.
And so that's the magic of that.
Number 20.
>> Thank you, thank you. Anne
McEnerny Ogle mayor well, first
of all, councilor, thank you
for the unanimous support for
reaffirming our support for the
Library Square terminus of the
LRT for IBR. We that was your
item number 11. Thursday. We
have Sakura over at Clark
College and then Saturday the
Red heart reconciliation is
down at the fort. And Councilor
Paulson, you gave us, you
attended something and they
sent you home with a gift.
>> Thank you. Mayor. Council
member Erik Paulsen. Yes,
several of us attended the
dedication of the Renaissance
Point Park on Thursday
afternoon, and several of the
individuals who played an
important part in the creation
of that park were given a gift.
That gift was given to me as a
proxy for the City of Vancouver
in recognition of the City of
Vancouver's role in making that
park a reality. And so I've
just brought it to you as the
messenger.
>> And this park is located at.
>> At the end of the Waterfront
Renaissance Trail. So it would
be a few hundred yards east of
the artist formerly known as
beaches.
>> E of Rosie the Riveter.
>> Yes.
>> And this was Jill Brown's
work after the death of her
husband, Clark County Sheriff
Jeremy Brown.
>> And that. In the years prior
to Jeremy's unfortunate passing
his murder, Jill and Jeremy
would take a daily walk that
that waterfront trail was not
far from the home that they had
at the time, and they would
walk to the end of the trail.
And when they arrived there,
for those who may not recall
what that site is or what it
was prior to it being what it
has become, it was an open
fence to an industrial laydown
area. It was just sort of a
desolate. It was a very
inauspicious way to end an
otherwise remarkable trail. And
so Jeremy's comment to Jill
during those walks was, there
should be a better way for this
trail to end. And so Jill's
action to honor Jeremy's legacy
was to see that vision through
to a reality. And it's become a
very special place.
>> It is on the back of this.
It says Renaissance Point.
Thank you for helping bring
this place to life. May it
always point you to what
matters most. April 9th, 2026.
And it is actually a working
compass and a little bit more
than a working compass. So and
it's actually pointing true
north. So it's it's a lovely
piece.
>> True north or magnetic north.
>> That you're absolutely right.
There is a difference there.
Thank you councilor, for the
reminder. Okay. All right. City
manager, do you have any items?
>> I'd like to invite Tyler
Chambers to come up and address
the council.
>> Good evening. Councilors.
Tyler Chambers, retired police
officer for the City of
Vancouver, currently serving as
our homeless response
coordinator. It's very
fortuitous that you were
talking about pedestrian safety
tonight. My purpose for being
here is just to bring some
context and some awareness to a
proposed Vancouver Municipal
Code change in the public
safety section that we hope
you'll see in the next few
sessions. Currently, the VMC is
silent on occupancy of areas
that are in divided roadways,
such as the raised medians and
places that are not crosswalks.
The city continues to routinely
receive concerns and complaints
about folks who are standing or
otherwise occupying those
spaces, creating a hazard for
road crews, cyclists,
pedestrians and motorists alike.
The revised Code of Washington
is also silent on those spaces,
in particular when it comes to
law enforcement's ability to
take any kind of early
intervention or prevention in
those spaces. So while law
enforcement might make a
friendly stop and suggest that
that's not a wise place for
someone to be, they actually
couldn't take any kind of legal
enforcement action against
somebody other than merely
suggesting that it's not safe.
In 2021, we lost a community
member to a medical emergency.
The driver lost control of the
vehicle through no fault of his
own, and actually struck and
killed someone that was in one
of those spaces. The Vancouver
Traffic unit at the time
commented that within just a
couple of hours after they
cleared the several hours of
investigation of that collision,
somebody was already occupying
that space once again. And at
the time, there was really
nothing they could do. After
combing through the current
city code as well as state law
for those particular road
spaces, they're just not well
defined in the law. I did not
realize until poking into this
over the last couple of years
that in the city limits alone,
in a few year period, 2021 to
23, we had 18 serious injury or
fatality collisions involving
cyclists or pedestrians in 2024.
For Clark County wide, the
county was the highest county
in the state of Washington,
with 17 fatalities that were
pedestrians or cyclists at the
time. So the state seeing an
increase in these types of
pedestrian safety issues. And
the goal would be to to propose
an ordinance that would close
that gap in the law, give law
enforcement a tool where they
could actually have something
more than just a mere
suggestion that somebody leave
that space where it's unsafe
for them to be. And again, we
hope to see that come before
you in the coming weeks.
>> Thank you. Tyler, City
Manager process on this
procedure.
>> As this one's an ordinance,
I'll ask the city attorney to
weigh in on that.
>> Thank you.
>> Thank you. This is Nina
Kolke, Vancouver city attorney.
We can work with Tyler to amend
the language in the Vancouver
Municipal Code. It would come
before council for a first
reading and a week or so
thereafter, we would have a
public hearing.
>> Okay. All right. Any
comments for Mr. Chambers? It's
hard not to call you Officer
Chambers. Yes, councilor.
>> Stober thank you mayor.
Thank you, Tyler, for bringing
this up. Can you give me a a
specific example of one of
these spaces in our city?
>> Fourth plane at Auto Mall or
Van Plaza, there's raised
medians where there's actually
no crosswalk space. So the
crosswalk may be on the north
or south or east or west side,
but not both sides. So there's
no intention for pedestrian
traffic to cross, say, north
south across fourth lane. And
there's a raised median or
island that's in between the
opposing lanes. There's center
island or center dividing
spaces between roadways. Mill
plain, fourth plain, Andriessen,
where the space is not intended
for vehicular travel either.
And so people will occupy those
spaces for various reasons.
Sometimes it's just a shortcut.
And jaywalking, for lack of
better words, but they end up
stopping or remaining in those
spaces. And currently, there's
nothing to prevent someone once
they've made it to that space,
from staying that space legally.
For enforcement. Again, other
than mere suggestion that it's
not a wise place to be, there's
nothing there to actually tell
someone that they need to leave
that space.
>> So I would encourage staff
to be thinking through through
all the details of this. I'm
thinking in particular of the
space on Mill Plain east of
downtown. That is a favorite
place for people to place signs,
which obstinately, obstinately,
anyways means that they were
occupying that space in order
to put the sign up. Is that
what am I correct here?
>> So under the pedestrian code,
it would require a warning
before enforcement. So it's
it's like trespass unless it's
signed, which these spaces are
not signed. Someone would have
to give them a verbal warning
that they need to leave that
space. Or it's like blocking a
sidewalk. People have an
opportunity to comply by
leaving the space. So I would
assume that if someone was
temporarily in that space for
some intended purpose and then
left, they're probably never
get contacted anyhow.
>> I but I think at the same
time it goes over into other
parts of code or policy
regarding signs. And that might
be we might want to consider
that and prohibit if we if we
feel it is a safety issue for
people to be in those spaces,
we may want to think about
explicitly, explicitly
prohibiting them from usage.
Thank you.
>> So Tyler and McEnerny Ogle
sorry, the space 164 162 the
big grassy area between north
and south bound is the area
where you're also talking about.
>> Correct. It would be any of
those defined spaces that are
in between opposing roadways.
Part of the reason that the
state law is silent on is
because of the way that roadway
is defined under the law,
there's definitions that
include. Just the surface
that's traveled by a vehicle,
and there's parts of the roads
that are defined as from curb
to curb. Okay. The pedestrian
rules include the roadway
portion. It's traveled by cars.
And so it leaves out it leaves
a very gray area. And law
enforcement is not excited
about operating in the gray
areas.
>> Gotcha. Okay, so we'll
expect to start seeing some
drafts come through then. And
I'm going to make an assumption
that there are other cities in
the state of Washington that
perhaps already have something.
So we're not starting from
scratch. Okay. Yes. Councilor
Perez.
>> Thank you, Tervo, for
bringing this up, because I
think it's really about saving
lives, right? Unnecessary
deaths, unfortunate situations.
The other thought that came to
mind as we work to define this
a little bit clearer in an
ordinance, is, does this also
mean that there are some areas
that could use a crosswalk? And
so I that's where I was
thinking too, that maybe this
is a sign that for us to
consider potential crosswalk
areas as well, if it's just an
issue of people trying to go
across or the issue is more
behavior where they stay in the
median and do whatever it is
that they do there. So those
are just some of the thoughts
that came to mind.
>> Correct. The intent is to
control spaces that are not
already allowed by a crosswalk
or the intended intended place
for pedestrian travel. So it's
those areas that are not
intended for pedestrian travel.
So it would include both the
traveling to and from. In other
words, by preventing the
occupancy, we would hope it
would deter the traveling
across the roadway as well,
where a lot of those negative
interactions between motorists
and vehicles are happening.
>> Okay. Thank you. Oh, Diana
Perez. Thank you. City Council
member. Yes.
>> Okay. Thank you Tyler. City
manager additional comments.
>> Nothing for me mayor thank.
>> You. City attorney.
>> Nothing from law. Thank you
mayor.
>> All right. That concludes
the city business. And we are
now going to go in to our the
portion of our meeting
designated as the Community
Forum. City Council policy
tells us that this is the
opportunity for us to hear from
our community members. We will
be audio recording, but not
video recording, so we can ask
CVTV to turn off their cameras.