Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Participation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews public participation chapter for Olympia 2045; youth input and equity changes proposed
Summary
City planners presented revisions to the Olympia 2045 public participation and partners chapter after a 95-person survey and advisory-committee input; council members discussed broadening outreach, recognizing neighborhood groups, and youth representation.
Dave (David) Ginther, senior planner with Community Planning and Economic Development, presented the public participation and partners chapter of the Olympia 2045 update and summarized key themes drawn from public outreach and advisory-committee feedback.
Ginther said an online survey for the chapter drew about 95 participants and that respondents generally supported the chapter’s goals and policies but wanted clearer information on implementation and reporting back to the community. “They really wanted us to report back to them,” Ginther said, adding staff made revisions to emphasize reporting on engagement outcomes.
The draft chapter incorporates comments from the Social Justice and Equity Commission and from the newly formed Youth Council. Revisions include: emphasizing outreach to young people and tailoring outreach methods to reach different populations (mail, email, social media); adding photos to improve community representation; and describing an existing accord between the Squaxin Island tribal members and the city with a new photo of a Squaxin Island ceremony at Squaxin Park.
Ginther said some materials were moved to more appropriate chapters: policies on land use moratoria, transfer development rights, annexation and housing densities were moved to the land use and housing chapters. The chapter also adds a policy describing two-way communication with subarea representatives and a new policy on how the city responds to public input.
Council members offered detailed edits and questions. Council Member Madron recommended broadening language in one policy (PP 3.5) so the city “partner with recognized neighborhood associations and other community-based organizations,” not solely neighborhood associations. Madron also suggested wording to address disagreement among community members and barriers to participation, and recommended removing the chapter’s specific reference to “3-minute” public testimony (staff noted public comment had been reduced to two minutes except for public hearings).
Mayor Pro Tem Nguyen and others urged staff to explicitly include community-based organizations and service providers (for example, homeless response nonprofits and racial-equity groups) as partners when appropriate. Council Member Cooper cautioned staff to check Growth Management Act constraints around annexation before changing annexation-related language in the plan.
Council Member Gilman pressed staff to strengthen the chapter’s approach to ensuring outreach reaches currently impacted and marginalized people, rather than relying on single spokespeople from those communities. Ginther and several council members discussed adding a statement that the city will strive to match survey respondent demographics to community demographics and to use multiple outreach techniques.
Ginther said the youth council asked for more visible references to youth participation; staff offered to add an explicit note about the Youth Council as a route for youth engagement and to include additional recent photos of youth in the chapter. No formal action was taken; staff requested feedback and said they will incorporate Council edits before the Planning Commission and full Council review.
