Bellevue sustainability staff presented a progress update on the city’s five-year Sustainable Bellevue plan revision and asked the Environmental Services Commission for feedback on draft strategies and actions affecting waste diversion, stormwater and community resilience.

“This presentation is from information only. We are interested in your input, your feedback,” Justice Stewart, the city’s sustainability program manager, told the commission, stressing that the presentation was intended to gather community-facing input and not to request official action.

The update focuses on three near-term deadlines the plan uses to set goals: 2030 and 2050 for major targets, with the update itself scheduled for council review this fall and expected adoption in November. Stewart said materials-and-waste work aims to advance Bellevue’s long‑term “zero waste” target for 2050 while supporting compliance with recent state requirements for organics and extended producer responsibility laws.

Stewart outlined draft actions city staff are evaluating for the materials-and-waste focus area, including support for residents and businesses to comply with the new state organics management law and incorporating sustainability and extended-producer-responsibility (EPR) requirements into Bellevue’s next solid-waste contract. “Incorporating sustainability requirements, extended producer responsibility requirements … into the future solid waste contract,” Stewart said, noting the city is beginning work now because that contract will be rebid in 2028.

On the organics law, Stewart summarized elements of the statute she was familiar with: among other components, it “requires space be provided for 3‑way streams” in buildings and requires organics collection for applicable properties, which creates space and operational challenges for older multifamily and commercial buildings that currently lack room for a third collection stream.

Commissioners pressed staff for clarifications. One commissioner asked for a lay explanation of extended producer responsibility. Stewart replied: “a take back program is an example of extended producer responsibility,” explaining that the policy shifts some responsibility for end‑of‑life materials from the consumer back to producers, which can change packaging and product design.

Commissioners also asked about whether e‑waste and electronic recycling would be emphasized under EPR or the solid‑waste contract; Stewart said e‑waste is commonly discussed under EPR and she would follow up on whether the draft actions should explicitly call it out.

Natural‑systems and climate‑resilience draft strategies were also discussed. Stewart described actions to expand green stormwater infrastructure in new development and redevelopment—bioswales and bioretention—to improve stream health, and measures to reduce community water use aligned with Cascade Water Alliance regional targets. On resilience, staff proposed evaluating “resilience hubs” (existing community centers, libraries or schools equipped to support residents during extreme events) and assessing low‑ or no‑emissions backup power and energy storage as the community electrifies.

Commissioners asked whether resilience work focused too heavily on wildfire risk and whether other climate hazards, such as windstorms that down trees (as occurred during the recent “bomb cyclone” event), were receiving sufficient attention. Stewart said the plan must draw connecting threads among hazards: “building out redundancies of the electrical power system is an important part of electrifying everything,” she said, and noted discussions of microgrids and local storage are intended to reduce vulnerability to outages caused by storms as well as by wildfires.

The presentation emphasized that the draft strategies are still under development and are being evaluated for near‑term emissions reductions, longer‑term investments necessary to meet 2050 targets, and actions that meaningfully enhance resilience. Stewart said staff will present high‑impact strategies to council in July, share a draft plan with council in early October, and expect council adoption in November.

No formal action was requested or taken by the commission during the presentation; staff explicitly termed the briefing “information only” and asked for feedback and questions for incorporation as they finalize strategies.

The commission will be able to comment again during the public comment period on the draft plan and is invited to attend open houses and the city’s engagement webpage for additional opportunities to review materials and submit comments.