## Meeting Overview The Bellingham Parks and Recreation Advisory Board convened on September 10, 2025, in what proved to be a substantive session addressing the city's expanding park system and its financial challenges. Vice Chair Steve Walker presided over the meeting in the absence of a permanent chair, with approximately eight board members present both in-person and virtually. The meeting centered on the city's 2026 capital budget presentation, revealing a stark reality: the Parks Department faces significant funding constraints as second quarter Real Estate Excise Tax (REIT) revenues have dramatically declined. This financial pressure comes at a time when the city is actively acquiring new parklands and planning ambitious trail projects, creating tension between expansion and maintenance needs. Staff presented an extensive capital budget totaling millions in proposed projects, from the $1.2 million Middle Fork Spring Trail with its complex wetland boardwalks to the long-awaited Salish Landing park development. The meeting also featured updates on the comprehensive Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) plan and master planning for the 29-acre Bakerview Neighborhood Park, one of the largest park acquisitions in recent city history. ## The Capital Budget Reality Check Lane Wilson, representing Parks staff, delivered what amounted to both promising news and sobering realities about the department's financial outlook. The 2026 capital budget request reflects a department grappling with reduced state funding while managing an expanding portfolio of parks and trails. "We've gone through multiple 4-hour budget work sessions with department heads and the mayor to contemplate a $10 million general fund shortfall," Wilson explained, setting the context for difficult choices ahead. The city proposes addressing part of this gap through a new one-tenth of one percent sales tax for public safety, potentially raising $3.5 million, but Parks will need to compete for general fund resources more intensely than in recent years. The most striking revelation concerned REIT funding, which had become a crucial revenue source for Parks infrastructure projects. "Our proportionate share of REIT that we have enjoyed for the last few years has declined substantially this year," Wilson noted. The legislature's loosening of REIT restrictions has made these funds available for broader municipal needs, reducing Parks' access to what had been reliable funding. This funding squeeze directly impacts major projects like Bakerview Park, originally envisioned as requiring substantial REIT support for infrastructure development. "We were depending on REIT in order to build that park without having that funding because of other priorities that are more important, mainly municipal court," Wilson explained. The department now faces difficult choices about phasing development or seeking alternative funding sources. Board member Jed Holmes raised concerns about this trend: "Anytime that something like that gets stripped away, it just sets us back a little bit... we always want as all the funding we can get from the state." His comment reflected broader anxiety about maintaining service levels as the city acquires more parkland requiring development and ongoing maintenance. ## Middle Fork Spring Trail: Engineering Challenges Meet Environmental Complexity The Middle Fork Spring Trail exemplifies both the ambition and complexity of the city's trail development efforts. With a total projected cost exceeding $1.2 million, this project demonstrates how environmental protection requirements can dramatically impact construction costs. "The whole property is almost within buffer, and at some points, our boardwalk is going to be about 9 feet off the ground because of the topography and mitigation sequencing that we have to do," Wilson explained when board member Steve Walker questioned the high cost. The trail requires extensive boardwalk construction, structural engineering for elevated sections, and careful navigation of critical areas that make every aspect more expensive than traditional trail development. The project represents a broader challenge facing Bellingham's trail system: balancing public access with environmental protection in a landscape rich with wetlands, streams, and sensitive habitat. As Wilson noted, costs include "design, construction access and mitigation, all of that. The structures, the steel for the boardwalks. The structural engineering that has to go into the boardwalks." Paul, the city's trail specialist, was scheduled to provide a detailed presentation about the Middle Fork Spring Trail and other projects in October, suggesting the complexity requires dedicated time for proper explanation. This scheduling reflects the technical sophistication now required for trail development in Bellingham's environmentally sensitive areas. ## Salish Landing: From Contaminated Site to Community Asset The Salish Landing project represents one of the city's most ambitious park developments, transforming a contaminated industrial site into a 17-acre waterfront park. The capital budget shows funding spread across multiple years, with $4 million in Greenways funds proposed for 2027 and additional park impact fees supporting the project. Walker inquired about the timeline, noting that funding appeared delayed until 2027-2028. Wilson clarified that cleanup work will continue until approximately 2029, but park construction would integrate with the environmental remediation process. "The cleanup is a much bigger part of that construction than the park, which is going to happen on top and integrated into the cleanup," she explained. The project demonstrates the city's commitment to converting industrial waterfront into public space, despite the complexity and cost of environmental remediation. A contract award was scheduled for City Council consideration the following Monday, indicating the project was moving from planning to implementation phases. The integration of park development with environmental cleanup represents a sophisticated approach to urban redevelopment, where public amenity creation becomes part of environmental restoration efforts. This model could inform future waterfront development as the city continues implementing its shoreline master plan. ## Bakerview Park: Master Planning a Neighborhood Anchor Peter Dow's presentation on the Bakerview Neighborhood Park master planning revealed the complexity of developing the city's largest recent park acquisition. The 29-acre property, purchased in 2020, will become a 25-acre park serving the underserved Meridian and King Mountain neighborhoods. "This park provides a... would fill in a large gap in our level of service analysis," Dow explained, showing maps indicating significant park access deficits in the area. The park's location between two neighborhoods makes it particularly valuable for addressing equity concerns in park distribution. The master planning process has revealed both opportunities and constraints. The property includes approximately 20 acres of forest and 5 acres of open fields, but extensive wetlands will limit development options and require careful design. "Even in those open fields, there are a lot of wetlands to build around, and mitigate for if necessary," Dow noted. Community engagement has been robust, with 65 people attending the July open house and over 600 survey responses—remarkable participation for a neighborhood park. This level of engagement reflects both community need and excitement about finally having significant park space in the area. The planning timeline is ambitious, with design options planned for October, preferred concepts in November, and final master plan adoption by December. City Council had specifically requested that part of the property be reserved for affordable housing, adding complexity to the planning process but reflecting broader city priorities around housing and recreation balance. ## Trail Planning and Connectivity Vision The Greenways Committee's trail planning work represents a comprehensive effort to create a connected network of recreational and transportation corridors throughout Bellingham. Holly Miller praised the committee's work, calling it "really impressive" as Peter Dow presented updated trail facility maps. The planning process addresses multiple objectives: connecting parks and open spaces, providing safe access throughout the city, and creating usable maps for both public planning and private development requirements. When developers build on parcels containing planned trail facilities, they become obligated to construct those public improvements. The updated maps incorporate recent bike and pedestrian master plan adoptions, neighborhood trail plans from areas like Samish Crest, and heat map data showing existing usage patterns. This data-driven approach helps prioritize trail development based on demonstrated community need and usage. Board member Jed Holmes highlighted the ongoing barrier created by Interstate 5 between downtown and residential neighborhoods. While acknowledging the complexity of interstate improvements, the discussion revealed how comprehensive trail planning must identify desired connections even when implementation requires state or federal involvement. The trail typology consideration—from heavily built trails to single-track hiking paths—reflects growing recognition that "not one size fits all" and that the city "can't afford to build $2 million trailers everywhere." This pragmatic approach could help stretch limited resources while still expanding trail access. ## PROS Plan Policy Refinements The Parks and Recreation chapter of the comprehensive plan update revealed the careful balance between policy aspiration and implementation reality. Holly Miller's persistent advocacy for safe shared trail use led to specific policy language improvements that reflect growing multi-use trail conflicts. Miller proposed changing policy language to emphasize education "so a range of recreation and transportation trail users can respectfully share trails." Her advocacy stems from observed conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists, dog walkers, and other trail users as the system becomes more heavily used. "We're seeing a lot of comments at the Baker View Open House about speeding cyclists... and people don't know how to share," Miller explained. Her focus on education rather than enforcement reflects practical constraints: "we can't enforce the rules, we can't enforce a 25 miles per speed limit, or 10 mile per hour speed limit. We don't have the people, we don't have the money." The policy refinements also added community garden priorities for underserved areas and improved language around safety and lighting in parks. These changes reflect community input and evolving understanding of how parks and trails function in practice. ## Community Engagement and Volunteer Program Advocacy Brian Armstrong's remote public comment highlighted ongoing tensions between volunteer program enthusiasm and city capacity constraints. As a regular advocate for habitat restoration and volunteer programs, Armstrong expressed frustration with program limitations while demand continues growing. "We haven't even started the college season, and yet we're almost already full on some of our work parties, which just goes to show how important the community sees these work parties," Armstrong noted. He attributed program constraints partly to federal budget cuts affecting AmeriCorps positions, reducing staffing while community interest increases. Armstrong's advocacy for dedicated habitat restoration teams within Parks Department reflects broader questions about how the city balances volunteer enthusiasm with professional capacity. His specific mention of Cornwall Park's damaged bridge and erosion problems illustrated how volunteer energy could address visible maintenance needs if properly organized and supported. Steve Walker acknowledged Armstrong's commitment as "really inspiring" while noting that budget considerations would factor into future program decisions. This exchange highlighted ongoing tensions between community engagement aspirations and fiscal realities. ## Leonard Street Neighborhood Signs Approval The board's consideration of neighborhood welcome signs for the Lettered Streets area demonstrated the intersection of community identity and park management responsibilities. Natalie Baloy, representing the neighborhood association, sought approval for placing pedestrian-scale signs with QR codes on park properties. The proposal evolved during discussion, with staff recommending locations that followed established precedents about neighborhood signs at park boundaries rather than within park interiors. The final approved locations included Gossage Garden, the Tot Lot, Old Village Trail entrance, and Maritime Heritage Park bridge crossing. Board member Holly Miller expressed concerns about Parks Department installation costs given budget pressures, but staff clarified that neighborhood association grants typically include city installation as part of the agreement. The QR codes represent an innovative approach to connecting park visitors with neighborhood information and activities. The signs feature design elements incorporating children's alphabet blocks, reflecting the Lettered Streets neighborhood theme. The designer's local connection—a neighborhood resident in her twenties—illustrates how community identity projects can engage younger residents in civic participation. ## Ongoing Construction Updates Lane Wilson's brief updates on Sunset Pond and Storybrook projects provided glimpses of significant trail construction nearing completion. The Storybrook project, connecting Alderwood along Maplewood to McLeod, was approaching substantial completion by year-end, representing a major addition to the city's trail network. Sunset Pond construction faced typical challenges with in-water work windows and agency permit extensions. The contractor hoped to complete the ambitious project in a single construction season rather than the originally planned two seasons, pending agency approvals and weather cooperation. Both projects represent significant investments in trail infrastructure, with Sunset Pond benefiting from a $1 million grant that helped make the complex wetland boardwalk construction financially feasible. These projects demonstrate how grant funding can leverage local investments to create facilities that might otherwise be unaffordable. Walker's question about public access timing reflected community eagerness to use new facilities, while Wilson's cautious responses showed the reality of complex construction in sensitive environments where weather, permits, and environmental windows constrain scheduling. ## Future Leadership and Strategic Challenges The meeting concluded with acknowledgment of upcoming officer elections in October, as the board operates under interim leadership following recent changes. This transition period coincides with significant strategic challenges facing the Parks Department. The convergence of reduced state funding, expanding park portfolio, and growing community expectations creates a complex environment requiring strong leadership. The board's role in advising on budget priorities becomes more critical as resources become more constrained relative to opportunities and needs. The ambitious timeline for multiple major projects—Bakerview master plan completion, PROS plan adoption, trail network expansion, and ongoing construction—will test both staff and board capacity to provide meaningful oversight and community input. As Walker noted in closing, the board looks forward to selecting "new leadership for our illustrious organization," reflecting both the significance of the role and the challenges ahead. The October meeting will need to address both governance transitions and substantive policy decisions that will shape Bellingham's park system for years to come. The meeting demonstrated how successful park system management requires balancing community aspirations with fiscal realities, environmental protection with public access, and immediate needs with long-term vision. As Bellingham continues growing and evolving, these balancing acts become more complex but also more essential to maintaining livability and community character. --- *Real Briefings Full Meeting Narrative | Real Housing Reform Initiative | realhousingreform.org*

### Meeting Overview The Bellingham Parks and Recreation Advisory Board met on September 10, 2025, with Vice Chair Steve Walker presiding in the absence of the chair. The board reviewed the 2026 capital budget proposal, discussed the BakerView Neighborhood Park master planning process, approved locations for Leonard Street neighborhood welcome signs, and received updates on the Parks and Recreation chapter of the Bellingham Plan and ongoing construction projects. ### Key Terms and Concepts **Real Estate Excise Tax (REIT):** A tax on property sales that provides funding for municipal infrastructure projects. The board learned that REIT funding for parks has significantly decreased due to legislative changes loosening restrictions, reducing the department's traditional funding source. **Greenways Funding:** Money from voter-approved levies specifically designated for acquiring and developing parks, trails, and open space. This represents a more reliable funding source for parks compared to competitive general fund allocations. **Park Impact Fees:** Fees paid by developers to help fund park improvements needed to serve new development. These fees must be used for specific projects outlined in the capital facilities plan. **Level of Service Analysis:** A planning tool that identifies geographic areas lacking adequate park access within a 10-minute walk of neighborhoods. BakerView Park would fill a significant gap in the Meridian and King Mountain neighborhoods. **Master Planning Process:** A comprehensive planning effort involving community input, site analysis, and design development to create a long-term vision for park improvements and amenities. **PROS Plan:** Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Plan - the city's comprehensive planning document that guides park development priorities and policies citywide. **Change Requests (PA Numbers):** Budget modifications marked with "PA" numbers that represent proposed changes to existing capital project funding or new project proposals. ### Key People at This Meeting | Name | Role / Affiliation | |---|---| | Steve Walker | Vice Chair, Parks and Recreation Advisory Board | | Holly Miller | Board Member | | Jed Holmes | Board Member | | Ray Dellecker | Board Member | | Asa Deane | Board Member | | Nicole (Lane) | Parks Department Staff | | Peter | Parks Planning Staff | | Brian Armstrong | Parks Volunteer Program Advocate | | Natalie Baloy | Leonard Street Neighborhood Association | ### Background Context The Parks Department faces significant budget challenges with a $10 million general fund shortfall forcing difficult prioritization decisions. The loss of substantial REIT funding particularly impacts major infrastructure projects like BakerView Park, which requires expensive utility work including creek daylighting and wetland mitigation. Despite these constraints, the department continues advancing multiple major projects including Salish Landing Park cleanup and development, Middle Fork Spring Trail construction, and the comprehensive PROS Plan update. The Leonard Street neighborhood's request for welcome signs on park property represents a growing trend of neighborhood identity initiatives, while the ongoing volunteer program advocacy highlights community desire for expanded habitat restoration opportunities despite staffing reductions in AmeriCorps positions. ### What Happened — The Short Version Staff presented the 2026 capital budget showing reduced REIT funding but continued progress on major projects including $4 million for Salish Landing Park development and $300,000 additional funding for Middle Fork Spring Trail construction. The board approved locations for Leonard Street neighborhood welcome signs on park property, including Gossage Garden, Tot Lot, Old Village Trail entrance, and Maritime Heritage Park. Peter updated the board on BakerView Park master planning, announcing a September 19th site visit and October 23rd community meeting. The 25-acre park would serve neighborhoods currently lacking developed parks, though expensive infrastructure requirements may force phased development. The board reviewed updates to the Parks and Recreation chapter of the comprehensive plan, with Planning Commission review scheduled for September 16th. ### What to Watch Next - September 16: Planning Commission reviews Parks and Recreation chapter of Bellingham Plan - September 19: Parks board site visit to BakerView Park at 2:30 PM - September 29: Mayor presents final budget to City Council - October 23: Second BakerView Park community open house with conceptual designs - October meeting: Parks board will select new chair and vice chair - November: Final PROS Plan public meeting before Council adoption ---

**Q:** What significant funding challenge does the Parks Department face in the 2026 budget? **A:** REIT (Real Estate Excise Tax) funding has dramatically decreased due to legislative changes, eliminating a major funding source the department had relied on for infrastructure projects. **Q:** How large is BakerView Park and what neighborhoods will it serve? **A:** The proposed park will be 25 acres (out of 29 acres purchased) and will serve the Meridian and King Mountain neighborhoods, which currently have no developed parks. **Q:** What is the total proposed funding for Salish Landing Park development? **A:** $4 million in Greenways funding for 2027, plus additional park impact fee funding for 2026, though exact cash flow will be refined based on contractor estimates. **Q:** Who advocated for expanded habitat restoration programs during public comment? **A:** Brian Armstrong spoke on behalf of the Parks Volunteer Program, noting work parties are nearly full and requesting expanded habitat restoration teams. **Q:** What special infrastructure challenges make BakerView Park expensive to develop? **A:** The site requires creek daylighting, wetland mitigation, and substantial utility infrastructure, with Kamek Creek running through the property in a culvert. **Q:** When will the board select new leadership? **A:** New chair and vice chair will be selected at the October meeting, as announced by current Vice Chair Steve Walker. **Q:** What is the estimated cost of the Middle Fork Spring Trail project? **A:** The project shows significant cost due to extensive boardwalk construction up to 9 feet off the ground, required because the entire property is within critical area buffers. **Q:** How many community responses did the BakerView Park planning survey receive? **A:** Over 600 responses, which staff noted was an exceptional response rate for a neighborhood park planning process. **Q:** What was the top priority identified in the PROS Plan community feedback? **A:** Swimming opportunities and beach access ranked highest, followed by community building events and accessible/adaptive use facilities. **Q:** What neighborhood welcome sign locations did the board approve? **A:** Gossage Garden, Tot Lot, Old Village Trail entrance from Broadway, and Maritime Heritage Park bridge crossing area. **Q:** What major construction projects are currently underway? **A:** Storybrook Park (completion by end of year) and Sunset Pond (requesting extension of in-water work window beyond September 30). **Q:** When is the next BakerView Park community meeting? **A:** October 23rd, where staff will present conceptual design options for community feedback. **Q:** What change did Holly Miller request for the comprehensive plan trail policies? **A:** Addition of the word "safe" and revised language emphasizing that "a range of recreation and transportation trail users can respectfully share trails." **Q:** How many people attended the July BakerView Park open house? **A:** About 65 people, which staff considered excellent turnout for a neighborhood park planning meeting. **Q:** What is the proposed timeline for BakerView Park master plan completion? **A:** Design options in October, preferred option in November, and final master plan in December 2025. **Q:** What funding sources support the Leonard Street welcome signs? **A:** The neighborhood association received a grant to pay for sign fabrication, with city departments handling installation as part of the agreement. **Q:** What major policy area ranked highest for operations and maintenance in community feedback? **A:** Environmental protection, specifically invasive species control, habitat restoration, and reducing trail impacts. **Q:** When does the current fish work window end for Sunset Pond construction? **A:** September 30th, though the contractor is requesting a small extension to complete in-water work. **Q:** What is the expected annual visitation for BakerView Park once developed? **A:** Approximately 30,000 visits per year, similar to Juliana Park (35,000) and Roseville Park. **Q:** What major transportation barrier was identified for trail connectivity? **A:** Interstate 5 between Meador and Samish Way, requiring state and federal involvement for any crossing improvements. ---