Thursday, November 12, 2026
A trio of advisory bodies are going to sunset, while another one is going be restructured, after a year-long evaluation of the groups in Olympia.
The Olympia City Council approved a resolution that sunsets the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC), Design Review Board, and Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee (PRAC).
The resolution also calls for the Social Justice and Equity Commission (SJEC) to be restructured into a more focused, project-based role. The city council made the decision at a meeting on Tuesday, Oct. 20.
Community Engagement Program Specialist Margo Morales said the evaluation began in 2025 to assess the effectiveness of council-appointed advisory bodies, identify barriers to participation and improve alignment with priorities.
Through research, stakeholder feedback, and discussions with the Community Livability and Public Safety Committee (CLPS), Morales said the city identified a nubmer of challenges.
Those challenges included difficulty maintaining meeting quorums, unclear expectations about purpose and impact, and work that did not always align with council priorities.
CLPS unanimously recommended discontinuing the three advisory bodies and restructuring the SJEC at a meeting on Sept. 23.
Under the approved plan, the BPAC will wrap up its current work plan in March 2027, with the Olympia Planning Commission taking on future bicycle and pedestrian issues.
The Design Review Board will also conclude its current work plan in March 2027, with design review shifting to an administrative process within community development.
Morales said streamlining the process would help the city meet land-use timelines.
PRAC will end its work following the Parks Master Plan update, expected in early 2028. Future parks projects could use targeted engagement methods, such as steering committees or community collaborators.
The SJEC would shift to a focused work plan of one or two projects annually, with meeting schedules determined by project needs rather than a fixed monthly schedule.
The city has 14 council-appointed advisory bodies. Morales said their primary purpose is to provide “judicious advice from a community member perspective to the city council.”
Council member Robert Vanderpool questioned how the changes would ensure community input reaches the council.
He expressed concern that BPAC recommendations had sometimes stalled at the staff level and questioned whether transferring its work to the planning commission would resolve the issue.
Vanderpool briefly chaired BPAC before joining the city council in January 2024.
Morales said the evaluation found some advisory body projects did not align with council priorities, raising questions about whether advisory bodies were always the most appropriate way to gather public input.
“Maybe actually the advisory body was not the appropriate tool because … advice went to staff that did not ultimately come to decisions that you were being asked to weigh in on.”
Morales outlined a proposed community engagement tool kit designed to help staff select methods suited to each project.
The options range from sharing information and gathering feedback through Engage Olympia to working with community ambassadors, community collaborators, community academics and advisory bodies.
According to Morales, the approaches offer different levels of public involvement, from informing residents to collaborating with them, and require varying amounts of staff time and resources.
She added the tool kit would help the city balance those demands and choose appropriate engagement methods for each project.
Morales used the anticipated 2028 Transportation Master Plan update as an example. She said staff would present a community engagement proposal to the council, which could provide guidance on how residents should be involved. Staff would then use the selected methods to inform the plan.
The next steps include bringing forward municipal code amendments related to the advisory bodies and implementing improvements to recruitment, onboarding and work planning.
6 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
KarenM
One of the city's current 'engagement' tools is posting an on-line 'survey' about a certain topic. These surveys are not scientific, they are simply a way to gather ideas. It is a narrow self-selected group. Fine to gather some ideas but not a sample of any kind. When the results are reported they are shown as statistics such as '49.8% said _____'
This implies something more formal about the survey and could lead one to assume that the results are representative of the residents. These should be renamed as 'opportunities to comment' rather than 'survey' engagement.
If this Council had assigned substantive policy issues to these committees I believe their members would have provided a great service by bringing forward well considered ideas. This has happened in the past.
Merging BPAC with Planning Commission likely means that specific projects and policies about active transportation (cycling and walking) will not get as much attention. The Planning Commission has so much else on their plate it is hard to see how they would fit more into their work plans.
Wednesday, October 21 Report this
BettyVerdammt
Does Council want to hear less from the community?
Yes.
Wednesday, October 21 Report this
2theroots
Oh great one more way to cut public in put out of local government. The County has also been doing this. And there is the move away from having hearing examiners to allow citizen push back on SEPA's and there has been the limiting more of public comment time. What a sad thing for democracy.
Wednesday, October 21 Report this
BobJacobs
With the exception of developing the overall parks plan every 6 years or so, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee has not usually been asked to do "community engagement". They could if they were asked to. Meantime they have provided valuable information about parks policies, thereby supplementing the information developed by staff.
Is there a hidden agenda here?
Bob Jacobs
Wednesday, October 21 Report this
BenAlexander
I was the primary county planner and staff assigned to several citizen committees for five years. If an advisory group is unclear on its mission, or working on issues with low priority, that is a problem with the staff, not the citizen advisory group. Plans and projects that have early input from the citizen stakeholders are much more likely to have strong public support than those that wait until later in the process. Heaven knows, there were plenty of times when staff wished we could just get on with our work without the time and hassle of the citizen committees, but nevertheless the end products always benefited from the input provided by the advisory groups. By the time a plan gets to the stage of public open-houses or public hearings, much of the work has been done, there is more systemic resistance to making changes, and it is usually too late to have much impact on the end product. It has gotten much harder in recent years to stay informed on local government activities, and cutting back on advisory boards is one more nail in the coffin for public participation. If a specific board or council is not providing useful input, it should be reformed, not eliminated. Cutting out opportunities for pubic participation, especially early in the process, should be a last resort.
Thursday, October 22 Report this
TheVirtualOne
BenAlexander:
“Heaven knows, there were plenty of times when staff wished we could just get on with our work without the time and hassle of the citizen committees”
City staff work for the people who are paying their salaries. Not exactly what I would call a great attitude by city employees. One of the big reasons government employees have a horrible reputation. The word entitled comes to mind.
“ It has gotten much harder in recent years to stay informed on local government activities”
That is a poor excuse for not doing your job as government officials. Today, there are more tools available for communicating than ever before. Excuses that it is “harder” is not acceptable. Do you jobs!
Wednesday, October 28 Report this