HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-11-28 NCBC Agenda Pkt_rescheduledYakima City Council Committee
Neighborhood & Community Building Committee (NCBC)
2nd Floor Conference Room – 129 N 2nd St, Yakima, WA
Tuesday November 28, 2017
2:00 p.m.
RESCHEDULED from November 16, 2017
City Council City Staff
Councilmember Dulce Gutiérrez (Chair) Cliff Moore, City Manager
Councilmember Avina Gutiérrez Joan Davenport, Community Development Director
Councilmember Carmen Méndez Sara Watkins, Senior Assistant City Attorney
Councilmember Holly Cousens (alternate)
Agenda
1) Board Appointed Reports – Standing Items
a) Transit Development Plan / Transit Related Issues (D. Gutiérrez)
b) Parks & Recreation Commission (D. Gutiérrez)
c) Henry Beauchamp Community Center (A. Gutiérrez)
d) Historic Preservation (A. Gutiérrez)
e) Yakima Planning Commission (A. Gutiérrez)
f) Bike/Pedestrian Committee (C. Méndez)
g) Homeless Network (C. Méndez)
h) TRANS-Action Committee (D. Gutiérrez)
2) Update on Equity Study Additional Information Requested
3) Other Business / Requests
a) Approve Minutes of 10/19/2017 NCBC Meeting
b) Community Integration Exploratory Committee Draft Minutes of 10/3/17 and 10/9/17
c) Future Items
d) Recap of Deliverables for Next NCBC Meeting
e) Interpreter for Next Meeting (48-hr advance notice)
4) Audience Participation
Next Meeting: December 21, 2017
The complete agenda packet is available online at: https://www.yakimawa.gov/council/city-council-committees/
WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research and Extension | 915 Broadway, Everett, WA 98201
425-405-1734 | metrocenter.wsu.edu | Metro.Center@wsu.edu
MEMORANDUM
TO: Joan Davenport, Community Development Director
FROM: Martha Aitken, Senior Associate, WSU Metropolitan Center
DATE: November 9, 2017
SUBJECT: Additional requests for data analysis
Following the Metropolitan Center’s October 19, 2017 presentation of the City of Yakima Equity Study
Analysis at the NCBC meeting, City Council members, and community members in attendance, posed
requests for additional data analysis. The list, as recorded by Ms. Rosalinda Ibarra, is attached.
We recognize that all of these requests represent important concerns, and so we assessed each
individual request based on whether or not the data are available, and whether the request falls within
the scope of work of this project, and the very specific variables we were contracted by the City Council
to analyze. After communicating with city staff we learned that, in most instances, the data for these
requests does not exist. Although the data requested may seem related to the data sets in the Equity
Study, it is data that has not been collected. For example, the Equity Study data includes the location of
streetlights, however, it does not include information about whether or not the streetlights are working.
We were able to comply with the requests for transit information for riders under the age of 18. It is
included in our revised report.
We also provided more complete interpretations of the analysis in our revised final report, to the degree
that that data allows.
With regard to Police Department calls for service, after speaking further with Tom Sellsted, we do have
some ability to respond to requests regarding response times and nature of calls once the following
items are resolved:
• The data will require additional work on the city’s part to prepare it for this further level of
analysis. Due to the vacation of Mr. Sellsted, this process will not begin until after his return. The
analysis will not be ready by the November 16 NCBC meeting, however, if the data can be
delivered we hope to have it concluded in time to present at the December 12 City Council
meeting.
• Currently there are 122 different categories identifying the nature of a Police Department call
for service and many of the categories overlap to some degree such as: animal problem, animal
noise and animal bite. This is also true of categories pertaining to domestic violence, violent
crime and property damage. We can perform an analysis on priority categories once these
categories are consolidated, and prioritized for analysis by city staff.
Finally, the complete results for each selected GIS data layer, including all graphs (currently available at
http://gist.gis.washington.edu/yakima_equity/) will be transferred to the city once all data analysis has
concluded.
NCBC 002
Items requested from the WSU Equity Study presentation at NCBC meeting of October 19, 2017:
• Dulce Gutierrez
o More conclusive narratives with explanations of what data was and what data wasn’t
considered and/or included in the analysis (describe the input and output variables)
o Streetlights – timing data (as energy-saving method some streetlights alternate on/off)
o YPD – the City’s response is in terms of calls responded to
o Transit – transit riders under the age of 18
• Avina Gutierrez
o Streetlights – conditions (working and non-working)
o YPD – duration of response time from when a call comes in to when a LEO arrives
o YPD – pattern in trends and locations on types of calls (such domestic violence, violent
crime, property damage)
o YPD & YFD – identify the meaning of “open” and “closed” time on calls for service
o Transit – comparison of transit stops and explanation of “why” (for instance, if there is
less bus stops on a certain side of town, is it because of increased car ownership or
higher income, resulting in less need for public transportation)
• Carmen Mendez
o
• Mary Lopez
o How many streetlights are working? What is the distance between streetlights? How
can the public request a streetlight?
o More information about the condition that parks are in – observed no bathrooms, water
fountains in east side parks
o Income – include information on single-family income (one-parent income)
o Education – percent of people who didn’t finish high school
o YPD – how many calls are from Spanish-speaking people; what was the service response
(some people who call 911 report that an officer didn’t respond)
o YPD – nature of the call (graffiti, domestic violence)
o Transit – more ridership information, specifically about minors
• Rogelio Montes
o Suggested that the City provide more data to WSU overall
o YPD – police response outcomes (3 hours for an officer to show up)
o Transit – information about other age demographics, not just senior citizens
• Dr. Phil Hurvitz
Complete results for each selected GIS data layer, including all graphs, are available at:
http://gist.gis.washington.edu/yakima_equity/
NCBC 003
City of Yakima
Equity Study Analysis
Conducted by the WSU Metropolitan Center for
Applied Research & Extension
Draft Final Report, Revised
November 9, 2017
The Metropolitan Center for
Applied Research & Extension
WSU Everett
915 N. Broadway
Everett, WA 98201
206-219-2426
http://metrocenter.wsu.edu
NCBC 004
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
November 2017
Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 3
Scope of Work ........................................................................................................................................... 7
16th Avenue – demographics over time .................................................................................................... 8
Task 1, Part A: Summary of the City of Yakima’s Data Collection Methods ........................................... 11
Terminology ........................................................................................................................................ 11
Methods .............................................................................................................................................. 11
Findings ............................................................................................................................................... 11
Public Safety Calls for Service ......................................................................................................... 11
Streetlights ...................................................................................................................................... 12
Code Compliance Requests ............................................................................................................. 12
Parks ................................................................................................................................................ 13
Transit ............................................................................................................................................. 13
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 14
Task 1 Part B: Process and Accuracy Audit Site Visit .............................................................................. 14
Methods .............................................................................................................................................. 14
Findings ............................................................................................................................................... 15
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 16
Task 2 Part A: Data Quality and Limitations............................................................................................ 16
Task 2 Part B: Confirm the input and output variables for the analysis ................................................. 17
Methods .............................................................................................................................................. 17
Task 2 Part C: Statistical Analysis ............................................................................................................ 18
Methods .............................................................................................................................................. 18
Results: Analysis of Historical Data - Parks ......................................................................................... 18
Results summary - parks ..................................................................................................................... 25
Results: Analysis of Current Data ........................................................................................................ 25
Police Department calls for service ................................................................................................ 25
Fire Department calls for service .................................................................................................... 28
Streetlights ...................................................................................................................................... 30
Code compliance requests .............................................................................................................. 32
Transit ridership .............................................................................................................................. 34
Bus stop benches ............................................................................................................................ 37
Bus stop shelters ............................................................................................................................. 40
Conclusion and Recommendations ........................................................................................................ 42
About the Metro Center ......................................................................................................................... 45
NCBC 005
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
2
November 2017
Appendices .............................................................................................................................................. 46
Appendix A – Complete City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis ........................................................... 47
Appendix B – City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Task 1 Report .................................................. 48
Appendix C – Project Proposal ............................................................................................................ 62
Appendix D – Demographic Variables Over Time ............................................................................... 53
Appendix E – Summary of Accuracy Audit Findings............................................................................ 65
NCBC 006
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
3
November 2017
Executive Summary
Washington State University’s Metropolitan Center for Applied Research and Extension (Metro Center)
was contracted by the City of Yakima to conduct of an analysis of a specified range of variables using
data compiled for the City of Yakima’s Equity Study. This report presents the principal findings from the
analysis (Appendix A – Complete City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis) and an overview of the city’s
methods for collecting, storing and sharing that information. This analysis of the Equity Study data is one
of a “series of actions the Yakima City Council has taken to address equitable distribution of resources
throughout the City of Yakima related to social, racial and economic benefits”
(https://www.yakimawa.gov/council/equity-study/ ).
On June 6, 2017, the Metro Center met with Yakima City Council members on the Neighborhood and
Community Building Committee: Chair Dulce Gutiérez, Carmen Méndez and Avina Gutiérez, to clarify
the scope of work, define the specific variables and geographic dividing line to be analyzed, and the
overall intent of the study. Data used in the analysis came from existing sources, including data collected
by the city and census data. The Metro Center was not contracted to collect additional data for this
analysis.
This report includes characterization and analysis of data sets specified in the scope of work which
follows, and provided to the Metro Center by city staff:
• Public safety calls for service
• Streetlights
• Code compliance requests
• Parks (excluding privately funded parks, or those that charge for use)
• Transit ridership, shelters, benches
These data were compared across demographic variables obtained from U.S. Census Bureau and the
geographical dividing line of 16th Avenue. In addition to examining the applicability of the data for the
purposes of the Equity Study, the Metro Center team also documented the methods of collection,
storage, and sharing of these data between departments.
On September 15, 2017 the Metro Center submitted an initial report (Appendix B – City of Yakima Equity
Study Analysis – Task 1 Report) which concluded that City of Yakima has a professional and appropriate
process for collecting, storing, and analyzing data, and a staff knowledgeable in the data infrastructure.
Additionally, the data is recorded and handled in a reasonable and professional manner for its original
intent: to support the city's geospatial data and land use planning.
However, our examination revealed that while most of data sets assessed in this contract were
developed using best practices, and are a professionally appropriate resource for the operations of their
associated departments, with the exception of the Parks and Recreation and Parcel data, the data did
not include date attributes. For example, the data indicated the presence of a streetlight, but did not
indicate the date it was installed. As a result, while the data are appropriate for their designated use in
city asset management, they could not be used to evaluate budgetary decisions and resource allocation
over time, making it difficult to use the data to address the equitable distribution of resources
throughout the city. The specific details of the utility of the data, and a summary of the analysis of the
data sets, appear in the body of this report.
NCBC 007
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
4
November 2017
Findings and Recommendations
Demographic Change over Time
The City of Yakima has undergone many changes since it was incorporated in 1883. Yakima’s population
has become more diverse, more educated, and median family incomes have risen (Appendix C –
Demographic Variables Over Time). However, although social conditions in Yakima improved overall,
they have not been shared by all residents as demonstrated by the ethnic segregation marked by 16th
Avenue:
• The proportion of residents who are of Hispanic origin has increased at a greater rate on the
east side.
• Median family incomes have increased at a greater rate on the west side.
• College graduation rates have increased on the west side and decreased on the east side.
• The proportion of youth has increased over time on the east side. Whereas the number of
seniors has steadily decreased on the east side and steadily increased on the west side over the
same period.
City of Yakima’s Data Collection Methods
Our analysis suggests the City of Yakima has a professional and appropriate process for collecting,
storing, and analyzing data, and a staff knowledgeable in the data infrastructure. We found no major
sources of explicit bias in the collection, handling or storing of data. However, we did find several
opportunities to improve data quality and quantity related to equity analysis
• Develop the Yak Back application in Spanish to meet the needs of more residents
• Develop an anonymous way to determine the status of Yak Back complaints to eliminate
duplicate complaints and illustrate the city’s responsiveness
• Create a system to allow residents to request additional street lights
• Create criteria for prioritizing code compliance requests, including those that do not threaten
public safety.
• Creating a formal system of reporting the conditions of bus benches and shelters
• Add the condition of park amenities to the data currently collected
Process and Accuracy Audit Site Visit
Our team was able to confirm the accuracy of the parks data provided for the Equity Study. Using the
parks data as an indicator of overall quality, and in combination with the assessment of data collection
methods, we can infer the general reliability of the city’s data. We also identified the opportunity to
provide park improvements with an increased emphasis on equitable distribution of parks and
amenities.
• Add qualitative data (condition of amenities) to supplement the quantitative data (existence of
an amenity)
• Develop a set of criteria for prioritizing park improvements that include indicators of equity, in
addition to the current practice of informing service organizations of planned capital
improvements
• Provide the prioritized list, and suggestions, to private entities seeking to fund park
improvements
• Develop a policy whereby the city keeps a percentage of private contributions for parks to
support park improvements and amenities across the city.
Statistical Analysis of Historical Data – Parks
Parks were the only data that included an attribute storing the year of establishment, allowing for an
analysis from 1980-2015. Much of the data needs to be considered in historical terms; the east side was
developed earlier, following typical pre-WWII patterns (smaller parcels on regular street-blocks),
NCBC 008
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
5
November 2017
whereas the west side was more recently developed, with more suburban forms (larger parcels, some
irregular street patterns). More recent developments often include parks as formal design elements,
whereas older developments frequently did not include similar land set aside for parks.
• When stratified by 16th Avenue, it appears that far more persons on the east side reside within
¼-mile of parks than on the west side
• While many demographic variables showed little change over the years, it appears that within
the ¼-mile area around parks, there were lowering proportions of persons of Hispanic origin,
younger and older persons, married persons, and home owners.
• Some notable trends are the decrease in the number of persons residing within 1/4 mile of a
park on the east side, and an increase on the west side; a drop in younger persons within buffers
on the east side; and changes in the proportion of Hispanics that seem to mirror general
demographic shifts over time.
Statistical Analysis of Current Data
Most of the GIS data sets were not encoded for longitudinal analysis (that is, the features in the GIS do
not contain attributes representing the time at which the real-world features were
created/installed/developed). Therefore, analyses for specific data sets were restricted to examination
of current features and data sets with respect to current demographic data. These data sets therefore
represent a benchmark more than allowing for analysis. No regression trend lines were added to the
graphs, and formal statistical tests were performed due to the small sample size; due to the small
sample size, trend lines are easily leveraged by outlier points, and correlation coefficients and p-values
are unstable. Findings include:
• Police department calls for service
○ The tracts with the greatest number of per-capita calls were on the east side, but there
appeared to be no association between demographic characteristics and counts of calls
per capita.
• Fire department calls for service
○ There is no consistent trend of more calls coming from tracts with differential income,
percent of residents of Hispanic origin, or renters
• Street lights
○ There appears to be no general association between streetlight density and
demographic variables that cannot be explained by basic principles of urban form and
historical development.
• Code compliance requests
○ Code compliance requests per capita appear to occur in greater numbers on the east
side
○ The data do not indicate whether the resident who submitted the code compliance
request is a neighbor, landlord, or someone who is just driving by. Therefore, the origin
of the request cannot be directly ascribed to any difference in services provided.
○ The data did not include any consistent record-level information on either status or date
of resolution, it is not possible in this analysis to make any conclusions on questions of
equity related to how the City responds to such requests.
• Transit ridership
○ Patterns in transit ridership are similar to those of streetlights, and are likely due to
similar underlying urban characteristics.
○ There is also slightly higher ridership in tracts containing lower proportions of persons
under 18 years of age, pointing to a potential mismatch between level of service and
need
NCBC 009
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
6
November 2017
○ The patterns of bus stop bench density are similar to those of transit ridership, likely
indicating that benches and shelters are placed in locations with greater ridership.
○ Bus stop bench density appears to be higher in tracts with lower proportions of persons
65 years or older on the east side.
Conclusion and Additional Recommendations
Over the course of this project the Metro Center found that the city is doing professional work in the
development and management of the various data sets under their purview, gathered for specific
purposes related to city and department management. The data sets are useful for their original
purpose but, as this analysis has shown, the data sets within the scope of this study cannot adequately
provide an assessment of whether city resources have been equitably distributed. While this
determination cannot be made, we believe that information in this analysis, and the act of engaging in
this analysis, can prove valuable to the city.
City Council approved this analysis of the Equity Study data with the intention of using it as a tool to
move forward, and to inform data driven decisions to benefit the city. Data driven decisions cannot be
made without reliable data and proper systems for handling them. Our study concluded that Yakima has
both the staff and the systems to support the use of data as a powerful tool for decision making, and
data that can be used as an initial conditions statement and a base upon which to build. This is a
tremendous asset for the city. The city can now determine what additional data it needs to collect - date
and time attributes, for example – based on the questions the city wants to address in the future.
We provide the additional recommendations to assist the city:
• In order to look forward, the city may benefit from also examining its history and the current
conditions that evolved from typical patterns of growth.
• As a reference for understanding the forces leading to modern inequities in the City of Yakima, it
may be useful to place Yakima in the larger context of other cities across America that are facing
similar situations.
• Many cities, large and small, have developed criteria for making decisions that include equity,
typically called an Equity Lens. An Equity Lens is a practical tool to help insure that planning,
decision making and resource allocation lead to policies and programs that help to achieve
equity across the community, racially, socially and economically
• To evaluate progress toward equity, each city determines what it should measure. Hence, the
value of a reliable system of collecting and managing data, which this study concluded the city
possesses, becomes critically important.
• A cornerstone of equitable decision making is authentic community and stakeholder
engagement. It, too, is a process that requires care and commitment to insure that engagement
sparks lively civil discourse without resulting in acrimony and deep divisions.
NCBC 010
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
7
November 2017
Scope of Work
The Metro Center’s Scope of Work consisted of the two tasks listed below, as specified by the City
Council. The findings of this report are organized by these tasks. The complete project proposal is found
in Appendix D – Project Proposal.
Task 1: Validate Equity Study data
Methods
Confirm with City Council up to 6 data sets identified in Task 2 B, excluding US Census Bureau data, to
assess the validity of those data. For each data set selected we will conduct, as appropriate:
A. A process audit by interviewing City staff and reviewing documents associated with how these
data were collected, compiled, summarized, and made accessible to the public.
B. An accuracy audit of the data by randomly selecting a representative sample of data points, and
independently determining the accuracy through direct observations.
Task 2: Analyze existing Equity Study data to assess the geographic distribution of public
resources and funds (e.g. city, State, or Federal)
Methods
A. Assess the quality of the data to understand any qualitative concerns and limitations that would
impact data analysis or interpretation (i.e. period of time collected, geographically resolution of
the data, etc.).
B. Confirm the input and output variables for the analysis, and the geographical dividing line. Initial
request included the following 6 data sets, upon which this estimate is based:
• Input variable:
o Demographics, to include income, race, education level, marital status, home
owner or renter, property value and age
• Output variables:
o Public safety calls for service (location, response time)
o Streetlights
o Code compliance requests
o Parks (exempt parks that are privately funded or charge for use)
o Transit ridership, shelters, benches
• Geographical dividing line
o 16th Avenue
C. Perform the appropriate statistical analyses to assess any relationships amongst the input and
output (i.e. response) variables.
NCBC 011
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
8
November 2017
16th Avenue – demographics over time
The City of Yakima has undergone many changes since it was incorporated in 1883. Economic and
demographic transitions, as well as geographic changes have been ongoing for the City as it adapts to
regional, and national influences. In the past thirty-five years, Yakima’s population has become more
diverse, more educated, and median family incomes have risen (Appendix C – Demographic Variables
Over Time). However, although social conditions in Yakima improved overall, they have not been shared
by all residents as demonstrated by the ethnic segregation marked by 16th Avenue. The following four
sets of graphs in particular show the different trends that residents in eastern versus western Yakima
have experienced between 1980 and 2015. These figures show the significance of the dividing line of
16th Avenue, which was identified by the City Council as a demarcation line for this project.
Figure 1 shows that the proportion of residents who are of Hispanic origin has increased at a greater
rate on the east side; Figure 2 shows that median family incomes have increased at a greater rate on the
west side, and Figure 3 shows increasing college graduation rates on the west side and decreasing rates
on the east side. Figure 4 shows dramatic changes in age profiles; the proportion of youth has increased
over time on the east side, particularly from 2000 onward. Whereas the number of seniors has steadily
decreased on the east side and steadily increased on the west side over the same period.
Figure 1: Percent Hispanic, east and west of 16th Avenue
NCBC 012
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
9
November 2017
Figure 2: Median family income, east and west of 16th Avenue
Figure 3: Percent of residents who are college graduates, east and west of 16th Avenue
NCBC 013
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
10
November 2017
Figure 4: Percent of residents by age (< 18, left; ≥, right), east and west of 16th Avenue
NCBC 014
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
11
November 2017
Task 1, Part A: Summary of the City of Yakima’s Data Collection Methods
This section provides an overview of the methods used by City of Yakima employees to collect, store and
share data for five city-provided data sets: public safety calls for service, streetlights, code compliance
requests, parks, and transit (ridership, benches, and shelters).
Terminology
Throughout this report the following terms: equity, equality and bias will be used. As it relates to the
scope of work of this project, the following definitions will be used.
• Equality – an equal service level regardless of need.
• Equity – a service level appropriate to need, regardless of the absolute amount of service.
• Bias – intentional or unintentional (systematic) treatment or distortion of either equity or
equality in favor of or against one group as compared with another
Methods
After receiving portions of the data and conducting an initial review, the Metro Center team met by
phone with City Manager Cliff Moore, Community Development Director Joan Davenport, and city staff
to clarify the intent of some portions of Task 1 of the Scope of Work, and to make sure there was an
understanding of the city’s interest in positive strategies for the future. Through this discussion we came
to understand that the language of the scope required clarification. Task 1 “Validate Equity Study data”
means something different in the academic realm and the applied real-world one. A technical data
validation process would be overly statistical, particularly with a “representative sample of data points”
across the various datasets, and would be both prohibitively expensive and, most important, would not
achieve the city’s objectives. Instead, we decided that we needed to know if the city’s data are being
collected and recorded in appropriate ways (Task 1, part A), and whether it is useful to the current
analysis (Task 1, part B). Then, as appropriate, we would check for accuracy of the acceptable data by
ground-truthing through site visits (Task 1, part B) to complete Task 1.
For our process audit we reached out to city staff in multiple departments to learn about the internal
processes used to gather, compile, and store data for the Yakima Equity Study. Staff were uniformly
open and helpful in sharing with us their processes for data collection and handling, as well as the data
itself.
The Metro Center team contacted the City of Yakima’s Supervising Senior Analyst, Tom Sellsted, to
obtain the five datasets of interest. After reviewing the data available, a Metro Center team member
spoke with Tom Sellsted and Jill Ballard to discuss the methods used to collect and display datasets in
the Equity Study’s ArcMap Online Story Maps
(https://yakima.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapJournal/index.html?appid=edb33521fed7400e839ae1b1e7a
d3fcc). Mr. Sellsted also provided the Metro Center team with contact information for the city data
steward(s) of each of the five datasets, and the team scheduled one-hour phone calls with each data
steward. During these calls we asked questions to identify and clarify our understanding of the methods
used to collect the data used in the Equity Study. We took detailed notes during the call and, in some
cases, followed up with additional emails or calls for clarification.
Findings
Public Safety Calls for Service
Public safety calls for Yakima Fire and Police services are recorded by the 9-1-1 dispatch center operated
by Yakima County’s Suncomm, which operates county-wide. When a call is received by Suncomm, the
call taker confirms the physical address and inputs it into a database shared with city staff. As call takers
NCBC 015
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
12
November 2017
continue gathering more information from callers, a dispatcher simultaneously contacts the appropriate
agency to provide services to the caller. The location, type of response, services provided, and
department providing the services are all recorded in real time. Because this information is being input
directly into a database shared with the City of Yakima, current data on public safety calls for service are
continuously being recorded. This is the method used to record all calls received by Suncomm, from all
City of Yakima locations, and for all types of service needs. Data for the Fire Department and Police
Department calls for service are both recorded in the same way.
The data displayed in the story maps of the City of Yakima’s Equity Study is populated by the data in the
database shared by Suncomm and the City of Yakima. A programming code (using Python, the same
coding language used by ArcMap, a geographic information system software) collects the real-time data
being input into the database by Suncomm call takers, and displays it on the Equity Study story map.
Although the story maps only display the most recent month of data, Suncomm has been recording data
for Public Safety Calls for Service in a way that can be displayed on GIS maps since 2012. Calls that are
made directly to the Yakima Police Department are manually added to the database shared by the City
of Yakima and Suncomm. This is also the case for service requests from walk-in visitors to the Police
Department offices.
Streetlights
Digital maps of streetlight locations were developed over 15 years ago, and display the current locations
of streetlights throughout the City of Yakima. At that time satellite photography was analyzed to identify
and geolocate streetlights within the city. Since then, the digital maps have been updated as needed to
show the addition of new streetlights, or the acquisition of streetlights formerly owned by Pacific Power.
The Public Works Department identifies damaged or non-functioning streetlights in two ways. The first
way from phone calls and submissions on Yak Back (the city’s web application to report potholes,
graffiti, etc.) from residents who observe a streetlight that needs repair. There is no documentation of
how many residents call rather than use the Yak Back application. The second way that staff identify
streetlights that need maintenance is by driving along portions of the City of Yakima street grid after
dark between November and March. Starting with main arterials, and streets around schools, and
working their way along the grid to residential streets, Public Works staff identify whether the
streetlights are functioning. In this way, all streetlights are assessed for maintenance by City staff
annually. In 2017 the Public Works Department is overseeing the installation of LED light bulbs in all of
the City’s streetlights. During this upgrade process the GIS locational data is being updated and revised.
Residents can request a new streetlight be added to their street by contacting the City. Those requests
are prioritized by the City’s transportation engineers, who review crime statistic data, the cost of
installation, and the length of time a request has been on the list. The target for the spacing of
streetlights is between 200 and 250 feet, but can be as far as 400 feet apart, depending on the
dispersion of the light by a given streetlight.
Code Compliance Requests
Data used in the Equity Study to show the locations and type of code compliance request are recorded
by the Yak Back web application. Only complaints made by the Yak Back web application are displayed
on the Equity Study story maps; those data do not reflect the code compliance requests made by phone,
or those initiated by Yakima Code Compliance Officers or other City staff.
NCBC 016
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
13
November 2017
When Code Compliance Officers receive code compliance requests, from either the Yak Back
application, phone calls, or from other city departments, that information is entered into the
SMARTGOV database used by the Code Administration Division. Because the code compliance cases
managed in SMARTGOV do not have a method for tagging whether a case was submitted by Yak Back or
other means, it is not clear how many cases are initiated by phone versus Yak Back. However, city staff
report that requests submitted via Yak Back make up the majority of requests. Yak Back provides an
anonymous means of contacting the City and can be used by anyone with internet access. However, Yak
Back is only available in English, and no other languages spoken by City residents. Both of these
characteristics are potential limitations to this type of request system.
After a code compliance request is made and a case is opened by Code Compliance Officers in
SMARTGOV, the officers update the information related to the case on a daily basis until the case has
been resolved. When resolved, cases are marked as “closed” in the SMARTGOV database, and no longer
receive updates unless re-opened. In this way, up-to-date information on the progress of code
compliance requests is available to city staff, and can be used to develop GIS maps as needed. The code
compliance data used for this analysis is a complete dataset from the year 2015.
Code Compliance Officers prioritize their responses to code compliance requests based on the degree to
which the case threatens public safety. There is no formal criteria to prioritization decisions made by the
officers, this is left to their judgment.
Parks
The Yakima parks inventory is updated in every Comprehensive Plan cycle. During Comprehensive Plan
updates, the Yakima Parks and Recreation department (YPR) surveys the parks and their amenities,
takes note of needed improvements, and assesses current conditions. The updated inventory of parks
and their amenities is then compiled by YPR into a report, which is shared with the data analysts who
created the online Equity Study maps. The data analysts translate the parks data into GIS format, and
develop ArcGIS maps with attribute tables that describe information about each park, such as Capital
Improvement Plan spending, types of amenities, and completed projects. However, details about the
condition of the amenities are not recorded.
Transit (Ridership, and shelters/benches)
Transit ridership in the City of Yakima is recorded by the bus drivers themselves by entering rider
information into an application on an iPad. Drivers enter rider information including the method of
payment and the number of passengers entering. The iPads on city buses run a JavaScript application
that submits data to a database shared by Yakima Transit and the city GIS analysts. These data were
used to populate Equity Study maps with ridership information as soon as it is recorded. There is no
alteration or editing of the data between when they are taken from the recordings of the bus drivers
and uploaded onto the Equity Study maps.
In the event of failure of an iPad or the network, manual devices for counting ridership are also available
to bus drivers. These manually recorded data are later entered into the database by Transit staff to
maintain accurate ridership data.
The transit benches and shelter location data are the product of annual inventory surveys that Yakima
Transit conduct. The GIS data are also updated to reflect the removal or addition of benches and
shelters between annual surveys. The condition of benches and shelters is informally observed both by
riders and bus drivers, who typically notify Yakima Transit maintenance crews if a bench or shelter is
NCBC 017
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
14
November 2017
damaged or needs maintenance. By creating a formal system of reporting, the possibility of bias would
be diminished.
Residents or Yakima Transit employees can suggest the placement of a bench or shelter. The criteria for
approving the addition of a bench or shelter focus primarily on the availability of space in the public
right of way and condition of the sidewalk, as well as the volume of riders who use that bus stop.
Conclusion
Our analysis suggests the City of Yakima has a professional and appropriate process for collecting,
storing, and analyzing data, and a staff knowledgeable in the data infrastructure. We found no major
sources of explicit bias in the collection, handling or storing of data. Additionally, most of the data is
recorded and handled in a reasonable and professional manner for its original intent: to support the
city's geospatial data and land use planning. We note that the city’s GIS architecture has been developed
over more than 30 years, a positive quality which means that the city has a mature system in place.
Task 1 Part B: Process and Accuracy Audit Site Visit
To complete the accuracy audit described in Task 1, part B, the Metro Center team reviewed the Yakima
Parks and Recreation (YPR) parks data. This data set was selected in part because of its general
applicability to the City’s Equity Study, specifically the ability to track parks over time. The accuracy audit
was conducted to verify by ground truthing the parks data provided by YPR, and to further assess
differences in parks on either side of 16th Avenue that may not be recorded, or obvious, in the data. It
should be noted that privately funded parks were included in this process and accuracy audit as a
possible point of comparison and provide a more comprehensive assessment however, per the scope of
work, privately funded parks are not included in the statistical analysis.
On September 12th, two members of the Metro Center team visited the City of Yakima. During this visit,
the team members were accompanied by Yakima Parks and Recreation staff, who provided information
and support. The objective of the visit was to review a sample of ten parks within the City to assess the
accuracy of the parks data provided to the Yakima City Council for use in the Equity Study. This section
details our methods and findings.
Methods
The WSU team developed a set of criteria for selecting which parks to visit and perform direct
observations. The purpose of these direct observations was the confirmation of the amenities that are
listed in the parks data, and to compare the accuracy of the data on either side of 16th Avenue. The
following criteria were used to select ten parks for onsite observation:
• Geographic Location: Select parks that are entirely located on either the west or east side of
16th Avenue, and do not span across that dividing line.
○ For eight parks: select only parks that have not received funding from private donations
○ For contrast, select two additional parks, one on each side of 16th, that were built using
private donations
• Data Enumeration or Completeness: select parks for which data was not richly recorded and
amenities enumerated, to possibly provide the Yakima Parks Department with a more complete
inventory. This would include for example:
○ Counts of amenities rather than binary observation of presence vs. absence of an
amenity
NCBC 018
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
15
November 2017
○ Presence of parking lots
○ ADA parking compliance
• Variability: Select parks with different types of amenities (fields, usage type, bathrooms, courts,
etc.) as well as variations in size and age of park.
• Amenities: Parks in our sample were selected in pairs, one on the east side of 16th and one on
the west side that have the same type of amenity, and could have their condition and quality
assessed and directly compared.
Ken Wilkinson, Yakima Parks and Recreation Manager, and Jenise Sanders, Parks and Recreation
Administrative Assistant, showed the Metro Center team each park and answered questions pertaining
to the current information for parks, and the history of park development. During the visits to each park
the Metro Center team members walked through the park, and recording notes on data collection
sheets. The team members paid specific attention to the amenity that was selected for comparison (e.g.,
horseshoe pits at both Milroy Park and West Valley Community Park). Additionally, the Metro Center
team members took photographs of the parks and the built environment of the surrounding
neighborhood. Table 1 shows the complete list of the parks visited. Appendix E – Summary of Accuracy
Audit Findings shows a summary of findings at each park.
Table 1: Summary of parks visited, and the amenities of interest
Side of
16th
Council
District
Park Name Amenity Comparison
E 1 McGuinness Picnic Shelters
W 3 Emil Kissel Picnic shelters
E 2 South 2nd St Open space
W 6 Gilbert Park Open Space
E 1 Milroy Park Horseshoe pits
W 7 West Valley Community park Horseshoe pits
E 2 Yakima Arboretum Arboretum (landscape,
maintenance)
W 3 Fisher golf course Golf course (landscape,
maintenance)
E 2 Kiwanis park (private funding) Recreation facilities - baseball fields
W 4 Franklin Park (private
funding) Recreation facilities - Pool
Findings
The direct observations of the selected parks confirmed the accuracy of the documentation of the
amenities, approximate size, and location of the parks. Appendix B provides a summary of the audit
findings. While these data might be used for the Equity Study, there are observable differences in the
age and size of amenities between parks that are not described by the data. For example, while both
McGuinness Park and Emil Kissel Park each have one picnic shelter, the available data does not describe
NCBC 019
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
16
November 2017
the size, age, or condition of each picnic shelter. By adding qualitative data to supplement the
quantitative, primarily binary data, the Equity Study can be better informed about the conditions that
residents in Yakima experience.
It is clear from the YPR parks data and conversations with staff that a portion of the improvements to
Yakima’s parks have been made possible by contributions from several non-profit and service
organizations. Those improvements also do not appear to have been made with any intentional
geographic bias, and the city benefits from the generosity of those organizations. However, those
contributions have been accepted by City of Yakima without prioritization for which projects are to be
completed.
This means that improvements to parks by donation throughout the City have been made based on the
interest of the group providing the donations, and has not been intentionally directed to provide
improvements based on some equity criteria. Importantly, this finding provides an excellent opportunity
to move forward with future allocation decisions that increase the equitable distribution of parks
amenities. One essential component to realizing this opportunity is the development of prioritization
criteria for determining the order in which parks receive funding for improvements (from both public,
and private sources). Including meaningful considerations of equity in these prioritization criteria
provides the YPR with a valuable tool for guiding the donations and volunteer efforts of Yakima’s highly
engaged service organizations.
Conclusion
Given that the parks data can be analyzed to show its relationship between demographic “input”
variables over time, it is likely the only directly applicable dataset of the five “output” variables provided
to the Metro Center team. This was an important factor in choosing parks as the dataset for which to
conduct an accuracy audit. By making direct observations at ten parks with the assistance of Yakima
Parks and Recreation staff, the Metro Center team has been able to confirm the accuracy of the parks
data provided for the Equity Study. Using the parks data as an indicator of overall quality, and in
combination with the assessment of data collection methods in the previous section, we can infer the
general reliability of the City of Yakima’s data.
Although intention bias was not observable, we identified the opportunity to provide park
improvements with an increased emphasis on equitable distribution of parks and amenities by providing
guidance or suggestions regarding donations and efforts of service groups. This would likely entail
developing a set of criteria for prioritizing parks investments that includes indicators of equity (such as
income, educational achievement, property value, race, and distance to parks). This could be in addition
to the YPR’s current method of sharing comprehensive planning documents with service organizations
to inform them of all planned capital improvements to parks.
Task 2 Part A: Data Quality and Limitations
The city is to be commended for its long commitment to a citywide Geographic Information
System. However, it is important that staff and council recognize the limitations of that data to answer
questions for which it was not originally designed. Because the datasets were collected and developed
for purposes other than to assess equity, they are insufficient to do so because they lack necessary
elements including but not limited to: an accurate recording of the date of resource development (e.g.
the date a streetlight was installed), qualitative characteristics of variables, or the method that data are
collected by the city (e.g. Yak Back).
NCBC 020
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
17
November 2017
In Appendix B, we provide a summary table of the data sets and the possible usage of each. We hope
this will help council understand possible approaches they might take, and what analyses are not
supported by the data as composed.
Task 2 Part B: Confirm the input and output variables for the analysis
Methods
Because the data provided were rather limited with regard to being able to answer questions of equity,
the Metro Center team developed additional datasets. We compiled Census data from the decennial
and American Community Survey (ACS) data sets for each of the demographic “input” variables: income,
race, education level, marital status, and homeowner or renter. These data sets were collected for years
1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2015. It should be noted that the 1970 Census data contained no values for
Yakima County, so analyses for 1970 were not possible. Census data came from three distinct sources:
• 1970, 1980, 1990-time series data: NHGIS (https://www.nhgis.org/)
• 2000 Decennial data, US Census: Summary File 3, 2000
(https://www.census.gov/mp/www/cat/decennial_census_2000/summary_file_3.html)
• 2010, 2015 American Community Survey data: censusreporter.org
(http://censusreporter.tumblr.com/post/73727555158/easier-access-to-acs-data)
The Census data collected included:
• Total population
• Persons by sex
• Persons by age, with specific classes <18 and ≥65
• Persons by race (white, nonwhite)
• Persons of Hispanic origin
• Total households
• Total families
• Persons by nativity
• Persons 25 years and over by educational attainment
• Household income in previous year
• Family income in previous year
• Occupied housing units by tenure
• Marital status
• Poverty (percent of population below poverty level)
These data sets were used as input variables to perform statistical analysis of output variables (Task 2,
part B), as well as to tell the demographic story of Yakima over time (Appendix D). Data for property
value and age was also obtained from city GIS staff. Since these data include time stamps (i.e. a specific
date and / or time associated with the variable), they allowed for a longitudinal analysis of age and value
through the years of census data available.
Data obtained from city GIS staff were converted to a PostgreSQL/PostGIS database, used to run
tabulations, and then used to determine any correlations. For each data set and each field of interest,
tabulations of values were generated. These tabulations should prove useful as guidance for City of
Yakima staff in forming particular questions about data sets.
NCBC 021
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
18
November 2017
Overlay analyses were performed (e.g., point-in-polygon) to generate summaries by administrative unit.
Administrative units were represented by sociodemographic variables, and bivariate scatter plots were
generated for each pair of variables of interest.
Task 2 Part C: Statistical Analysis
Results are presented in two sections, one for data that were encoded with temporal data (i.e., date of
infrastructure installation), and one for current data that did not have attributes representing date of
installation. In order to perform longitudinal analysis of infrastructure data stored in the GIS, it is
necessary to have GIS data sets that include variables that represent when a feature of infrastructure
was created or installed (e.g., installation date for a streetlight or patch of sidewalk).
Throughout this report, graphs were selected that best illustrate the findings. All of the graphs for parks
created for this study can be found in the online Appendix A at
http://gist.gis.washington.edu/yakima_equity. It should be noted that the data and analysis in Appendix
A will be transferred to the city in the near future, and this URL will no longer be active. The city will
determine how to make this information available.
Scatter plot graphs illustrate results of the statistical analysis. Scatter plot graphs present
demographic variables of interest on the X-axis (horizontal) and compared to quantities, such as per-
capita area of parks on the Y-axis (vertical), time-matched by year. The dots indicate individual census
tracts (or tracts that were bisected by 16th Avenue), with census tracts east of 16th represented by
orange dots, and west of 16th indicated by blue dots. In cases where a census tract crosses 16th Avenue,
some pairs of points represent the same tract ID, but the E and W portions, respectively.
Methods
In the first set of analyses, historical boundaries (i.e. annexations) of City of Yakima were overlain with
contemporaneous Census data to provide estimates of the demographic conditions of Yakima as a
whole, and also stratified by the 16th Avenue geographical dividing line. In the GIS overlay process,
census tracts that are straddled by the city limits are “clipped.” The ratio of clipped area to original area
gives a value that can be multiplied by the original census values to produce an estimate of the
enumeration within the clipped area (assuming a uniform distribution across the census tract). For
example, if a census tract had 4000 persons, and 75% of the tract was within the city limits, the estimate
of the number of persons in the portion of that tract within the city limits would be 3000
(4000∗0.75=3000). For enumerated variables (i.e., counts of persons), the sum of these area-weighted
estimates was generated.
Results: Analysis of Historical Data - Parks
Parks were the only data encoded for historical analysis, with an attribute storing the year of
establishment. For these analyses, the park data were selected to match the year of the census data,
such that the GIS data selection represented those infrastructure features that existed at the time of the
census. The park polygon data were then overlain on the census polygon data to generate tables that
were then graphed, allowing comparison of potential park accessibility and demographic patterns.
NCBC 022
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
19
November 2017
Parks
Historical analysis of parks was done using two separate methods. For both methods, per the scope of
work, parks which received private funding in the past were excluded from the analysis. The following
parks were not included in the analysis:
• Chesterly Park
• Franklin Park & Pool
• Harman Center at Galleon Park
• Kiwanis Park & Gateway Sports Complex
• Larson Park
• Miller Park
• North 44th Ave. Park
• Randall Park
• Rosalma Garden Club Park
• Southeast Community Park
The parks within Yakima City limits are shown in Figure 5. It should be noted that some of the parks did
not have a value for the “year created” field and were not included in this analysis; results would differ
with the use of a fully attributed data set. Note that there are generally larger and fewer parks in west
side tracts, and smaller, but more dispersed parks on the east side. This is consistent with parks
distribution in other cities where more space and larger parcels of land are available in the newer,
expanding, portions of the city, compared to smaller parcels in the older, original portions.
Figure 5: Parks in Yakima with 2015 city limits
NCBC 023
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
20
November 2017
For parks and census data sets, years were matched (e.g., for the 1980 census, only those parks that
existed in 1980 were selected). A GIS intersection was performed to tabulate the total area of parks
within each census tract. Demographic characteristics of the tract and the area of parks within the tract
graphed as XY scatter plots. Also, because many tracts had no parks overlapping their boundaries, the
number of available points is small, therefore no formal statistical tests were performed.
The area of park per capita across 1980-2015, stratified by the 16th Avenue divide, is shown in Figure 6.
Overall, there was more park area per capita on the west side versus the east side. The other trend
seems to be that the amount of park area per capita was greater for western Yakima in 1980, but as the
City grew over subsequent years, the area of park per capita became more uniform across the 16th
Avenue dividing line. It should be noted that the calculation of per-capita area of park is dependent on
both the total area of park as well as the number of residents. Additionally, the area of park does not
necessarily reflect actual accessibility, and cannot reflect quality or amenities.
Figure 6: Area of park per capita, 1980-2015
Figure 7 and Figure 8 show park data from 1980, plotting per-capita park area on the Y-axis (vertical)
against the percent of residents on the X-axis (horizontal) who were Hispanic and median family income,
respectively (including all data (left panel) and with a large “outlier” removed (right panel)). The obvious
stratification in the X-axis (percent Hispanic and median family income) reflect the general segregation
of ethnicity and income across the 16th Avenue divide.
Overall, the amount of park per capita is uniform across census tracts (meaning that the data values
(dots) are distributed vertically similar regardless of their location along the horizontal axis). Yet, there is
an overall greater variation on the west side, and with a single west side tract having a relatively large
area of park within the tract. This is tract 1100, at the southern end of the City, intersecting Fairbrook
Islands, Kissel Park, and Tahoma Cemetery, and with an estimated population of 2,244 persons. The
three tracts with the greatest per-capita area of park are on the west side which also have a relatively
NCBC 024
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
21
November 2017
low Hispanic population, although one tract on the west side with the lowest Hispanic population also
has the lowest per-capita park area. Figure 8 should be interpreted with caution since per-capita values
are highly dependent on the denominator (i.e., tract population); two tracts with the same park area but
different populations will have different per-capita area—which is not necessarily a good proxy for
accessibility.
Figure 7: Park area per capita by percent Hispanic, 1980. All data (left); outlier removed (right)
Figure 8 is more or less a mirror of Figure 7, since median family income and percent of residents with
Hispanic origin are strongly correlated.
Figure 8: Park area per capita by median family income, 1980. All data (left); outlier removed (right)
The same data are shown for 2015 in Figure 9, and Figure 10. There are more data values, reflecting
both the geographical growth of the city as well as some census tracts being subdivided, this is indicated
by the larger number of both orange and green dots.
Comparing 1980 data with those for 2015 show similar patterns, but now with a single east side tract
having a relatively large per-capita area in park land. This represents tract 1602 at the far eastern side of
the City, containing the large areas of Sarg Hubbard Park and the Yakima Area Arboretum, but with an
estimated population of only 791 persons. Therefore, while this city has grown geographically and in
the number of residents, the general uniform distribution of park area per capita relative to percent
Hispanic and median family income has not changed overtime.
NCBC 025
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
22
November 2017
Figure 9: Park area per capita by percent Hispanic, 2015. All data (left); outlier removed (right)
Figure 10: Park area per capita by median family income, 2015. All data (left); outlier removed
(right)
One method to assess accessibility and equitable distribution or access is look at how close individuals
live to a park. Therefore, Buffers of 1/4-mile, as a proxy for locations within reasonable walking
distance, were generated for the parks polygons; these buffers were then overlain on the census tracts
to obtain estimated demographic counts (converted to percentages using total tract population as the
denominator) within and outside the buffers. This is similar to the approach used to assign absolute
population numbers to census tracts that crossed the 16th Avenue dividing line in the above analyses.
The relative proportion of persons in each demographic category was tabulated using the same year-to-
year matching. Total area of parks per capita was tabulated for each year with stratification by 16th
Avenue.
NCBC 026
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
23
November 2017
Figure 11 presents demographic characteristics of the population residing within 1/4 mile of any park.
For example, about 45% of Yakima residents have their home within the ¼ mile buffer (upper left corner
graph), and between 40% and 45% of residents whose homes are within the buffer are of Hispanic origin
(upper right graph). While many demographic variables showed little change over the years, it appears
that within the ¼-mile area around parks, there were lowering proportions of persons of Hispanic origin,
younger and older persons, married persons, and home owners.
Figure 11: Demographic characteristics of the area within 1/4 mile of parks, 1980-2015
When stratified by 16th Avenue, it appears that far more persons on the east side reside within ¼-mile
of parks than on the west side (Figure 12). This appears to be due to larger parks on the west side that
are not uniformly distributed; whereas on the east side there are more parks that are both smaller and
more uniformly distributed over space (see Figure 5). Trends generally follow overall demographic
patterns with respect to the east and west sides. Some notable trends are the decrease in the number of
persons residing within 1/4 mile of a park on the east side, and an increase on the west side (top of
graphs); a drop in younger persons within buffers on the east side; and changes in the proportion of
Hispanics that seem to mirror general demographic shifts over time.
NCBC 027
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
24
November 2017
Figure 12: Demographic characteristics of the area within 1/4 mile of parks, stratified by 16th Avenue
1980-2015
NCBC 028
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
25
November 2017
Results summary - parks
The results presented above should be interpreted with some caution for several reasons, a few of
which are enumerated as follows. First, the use of census areas in a GIS overlay analysis assumes that
there is a uniform distribution of persons across the census unit, which is generally not true. Second, not
all parks are equal in terms of the amenities they provide as attractors of activity. For example, use of a
cemetery is likely to be very different from use of a sports complex. Third, simple overlay ignores actual
location; having a park overlapping a census unit at one side of the unit does not provide equal
accessibility to all persons residing in the unit. Fourth, residents of a census unit that has no overlap with
a park may actually reside close to a park that lies in an adjacent census unit; in fact, some of these
persons may reside closer to a park than some of the residents in the adjacent unit but whose homes
are relatively far from the park.
In addition, these data need to be considered in historical terms; the east side was developed earlier,
following typical pre-WWII patterns (smaller parcels on regular street-blocks), whereas the west side
was more recently developed, with more suburban forms (larger parcels, some irregular street
patterns). More recent developments often include parks as formal design elements, whereas older
developments frequently did not include similar land set aside for parks.
Results: Analysis of Current Data
Most of the GIS data sets were not encoded for longitudinal analysis (that is, the features in the GIS do
not contain attributes representing the time at which the real-world features were
created/installed/developed). Therefore, analyses for specific data sets were restricted to examination
of current features and data sets with respect to current demographic data. These included public safety
calls for service, streetlights, code compliance requests, and transit (ridership, benches, and shelters).
These data set therefore represent a benchmark more than allowing for analysis.
The scatter plots presented on the following pages are the result of performing the GIS and statistical
analyses per Task 2, Part C. These plots also include the stratification by the 16th Avenue geographical
dividing line. The scatter plots here are a representative sampling of the demographic variables. The
complete set of graphs for each selected GIS data layer and demographic variable are provided in
Appendix A. Maps showing changes in demographic variables over time are presented in Appendix D.
A general trend to be noted in these graphs is the obvious stratification between west and east sides of
Yakima in the X-axis (horizontal axis). This is a reflection of the city’s underlying sociodemographic
stratification. While segregation itself is of concern, these graphs would indicate inequity in city-
provided service only if there appears to be increasing or decreasing trends (i.e., a visible slope in the
point pattern); if the point pattern appears to be uniform (equally distributed across the horizontal axis)
or random, that would not indicate inequity in services. It should also be noted that no regression trend
lines were added to these graphs, and no formal statistical tests were performed; due to the small
sample size, trend lines are easily leveraged by outlier points, and correlation coefficients and p-values
are unstable.
Police Department calls for service
Police Department calls for service per capita are graphed in Figure 13, Figure 14, and Figure 15 (median
family income, percent Hispanic, and percent housing renter occupied respectively). The tracts with the
greatest number of per-capita calls were on the east side, but there appeared to be no association
between demographic characteristics and counts of calls per capita. There is no consistent trend of
more calls coming from tracts with lower or higher incomes, percent of Hispanic residents, or renters –
NCBC 029
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
26
November 2017
other than the four tracts with high values, the other tracts are uniformly distributed in terms of the
count of calls per capita (y-axis) and the demographic variable (x-axis).
Figure 13: Police Department calls for service by median family income
Figure 14: Police Department calls for service by percent of residents who are of Hispanic origin
NCBC 030
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
27
November 2017
Figure 15: Police Department calls for service by percent of residents who are renters
NCBC 031
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
28
November 2017
Fire Department calls for service
Similar to Police Department calls for service, there appeared to be no association between
demographic characteristics and count of Fire Department calls for service (Figure 16, Figure 17, and
Figure 18). It should be noted that there is one tract on the east side that had a relatively high number
of calls per capita. Other than this one “outlier,” there is no consistent trend of more calls coming from
tracts with differential income, percent of residents of Hispanic origin, or renters.
Figure 16 Count of Fire Department calls for service per capita by median family income
NCBC 032
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
29
November 2017
Figure 17 Count of Fire Department calls for service per capita by percent of residents who are of
Hispanic origin
Figure 18 Count of Fire Department calls for service per capita by percent of residents who are renters
NCBC 033
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
30
November 2017
Streetlights
There appears to be a greater number of streetlights per square mile in tracts on the east side (Figure
19, Figure 20, and Figure 21). Streetlight density was greater in tracts with lower college graduation
levels, which is also mirrored in ethnic composition and median family income. These differences are
likely due to the greater street density in the older part of Yakima that was developed previous to the
newer areas on the east side. There appears to be no general association between streetlight density
and demographic variables that cannot be explained by basic principles of urban form and historical
development. It should be noted that this analysis did not include any consideration of streetlight type
or condition (type and condition were not available consistently for all streetlight records).
Figure 19: Streetlight density by percent of residents who are college graduates
NCBC 034
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
31
November 2017
Figure 20: Streetlight density by percent of residents who of Hispanic origin
Figure 21: Streetlight density by median family income
NCBC 035
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
32
November 2017
Code compliance requests
Code compliance requests per capita appear to occur in greater numbers on the east side, which is also
mirrored by east side tracts having lower median family income, with higher proportion of residents of
Hispanic origin, and who are renters (Figure 22, Figure 23, Figure 24). Code compliance requests
originate from residents; however, the data do not indicate whether the resident who submitted the
code compliance request is a neighbor, landlord, or someone who is just driving b. Therefore, the origin
of the request cannot be directly ascribed to any difference in services provided. Additionally, as the
data were delivered without any consistent record-level information on either status or date of
resolution, it is not possible in this analysis to make any conclusions on questions of equity related to
how the City responds to such requests.
Figure 22: Code compliance requests by median family income
NCBC 036
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
33
November 2017
Figure 23: Code compliance requests by percent of residents who are of Hispanic origin
Figure 24: Code compliance requests by percent of residents who are renters
NCBC 037
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
34
November 2017
Transit ridership
Patterns in transit ridership (Figure 25, Figure 26, Figure 27, Figure 28, and Figure 29) are similar to
those of streetlights, and are likely due to similar underlying urban characteristics. Transit is
economically feasible only in areas of relatively high residential density, which usually includes older
developments. Newer, lower density, and more car-dependent communities are generally not served by
transit. These types of newer developments also tend to have demographic characteristics that are
different from areas that are well-served by transit. For this probable reason, there is generally higher
ridership in tracts with lower median family income, lower rates of college graduation, and greater
rental rates. There is also slightly higher ridership in tracts containing lower proportions of persons
under 18 years of age, pointing to a potential mismatch between level of service and need, since
younger persons tend not to have access to cars and rely more heavily on public transportation. It
should be noted that the transit data did not include school buses, which may confound interpretation
of bus service to youths.
Figure 25: Transit ridership by median family income
NCBC 038
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
35
November 2017
Figure 26: Transit ridership by percent of residents who are college graduates
Figure 27: Transit ridership by percent of residents who are renters
NCBC 039
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
36
November 2017
Figure 28: Transit ridership by age (< 18 y) under 18 years of age
Figure 29: Transit ridership by age (≥ 65 y) 65 and older
NCBC 040
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
37
November 2017
Bus stop benches
Not surprisingly, the patterns of bus stop bench density (Figure 30, Figure 31, Figure 33, and Figure 32)
are similar to those of transit ridership, likely indicating that benches and shelters are placed in locations
with greater ridership.
Figure 30: Bus stop bench density by percent of residents who are of Hispanic origin
NCBC 041
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
38
November 2017
Figure 31: Bus stop bench density by median family income
Bus stop bench density appears to be higher in tracts with lower proportions of persons 65 years or
older on the east side with one exception (Figure 32). If a large number of riders are older, this could
point to an opportunity for providing better service for these age groups. However, the proportion of
elderly is also greater on the west side, where transit usage is lower, and where higher socioeconomic
levels point to potentially less need for transit (if the elderly have access to cars). In order to come to
any conclusions on whether the elderly are underserved in terms of bus stop benches, more data would
be needed on the characteristics of individual transit riders. Likewise, the number of youths is greater on
the east side.
NCBC 042
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
39
November 2017
Figure 32: Bus stop bench density by percent of residents who are 65 years or older
Figure 33: Bus stop bench density by percent of residents who are less than 18 years old
NCBC 043
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
40
November 2017
Bus stop shelters
Bus stop shelters have patterns very similar to bus stop benches: they tended to have greater density in
tracts with lower median family income (Figure 34), and higher proportion of youths (Figure 35, with
one outlier having very high ridership but about 23% of younger residents). Shelter densities were
slightly greater in areas with lower proportions of seniors (Figure 36). There were also more shelters in
tracts with a higher proportion of persons of Hispanic origin (Figure 37).
Figure 34: Bus stop shelter density by median family income
NCBC 044
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
41
November 2017
Figure 35: Bus stop shelter density by age (< 18 years)
Figure 36: Bus stop shelter density by age (>= 65 years)
NCBC 045
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
42
November 2017
Figure 37: Bus stop shelter density by percent Hispanic
Conclusion and Recommendations
Over the course of this project the Metro Center found that the city is doing professional work in the
development and management of the various data sets under their purview, gathered for specific
purposes related to city and department management. The data sets are useful for their original
purpose but, as this analysis has shown, the data sets within the scope of this study cannot adequately
provide an assessment of whether or not city resources have been equitably distributed. While this
determination cannot be made, we believe that information in this analysis, and the act of engaging in
this analysis, can prove valuable to the city.
City Council approved this analysis of the Equity Study data with the intention of using it as a tool to
move forward, and to inform data driven decisions to benefit the city. Data driven decisions cannot be
made without reliable data and proper systems for handling them. Our study concluded that Yakima has
both the staff and the systems to support the use of data as a powerful tool for decision making, and
data that can be used as an initial conditions statement and a base upon which to build. This is a
tremendous asset for the city. The city can now determine what additional data it needs to collect - date
and time attributes, for example – based on the questions the city wants to address in the future. As an
example, we suggest the following improvements may provide the city with both additional data and
benefits.
• The Yak Back application is an excellent tool for getting information from residents. However, it
is only provided in English. Consider developing the app in at least Spanish to meet the needs of
both a significant number (and percentage) of the population and the east side of the city more
generally.
NCBC 046
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
43
November 2017
• Develop an anonymous way to find out the status of Yak Back complaints. Perhaps this is a case
number that someone could enter into the app to track it and see whether and how the case
had been resolved. This will provide closure and increase the perception of responsiveness by
the city. It may also reduce the number of duplicate or follow-up complaints.
In order to look forward, the city may benefit from also examining its history and the current conditions
that evolved from typical patterns of growth. The legacy of annexation and other development patterns
is both a benefit and a challenge to overcome. For example, parks are larger on the west side, likely
because of the later annexation of larger, county, parcels. It is unlikely though not impossible, that the
city would be able to agglomerate significant park acreage in the east side to match the west if residents
prefer fewer, larger parks relative to more numerous, smaller parks, and there may be better strategies
identified by council to address this disparity in more strategic ways. Understanding the existence and
some of the likely reasons for current conditions, without the major expenditure required for historical
analysis, can help productively move to a different state.
The challenges of growth and equity facing Yakima are shared by many cities and echo national trends
described in a report issued by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Planning for Social Equity (2017)
authored by Kathleen McCormick (http://www.lincolninst.edu/publications/articles/planning-social-
equity). In this report, it is noted that inequality is now at levels the U.S. has not seen since the 1920s. As
a reference for understanding the forces leading to modern inequities in the City of Yakima, it may be
useful to place Yakima in the larger context of other cities across America that are facing similar
situations.
Many cities, large and small, have developed criteria for making decisions that include equity, typically
called an Equity Lens. An Equity Lens is a practical tool to help insure that planning, decision making and
resource allocation lead to policies and programs that help to achieve equity across the community,
racially, socially and economically. The foundation of an Equity Lens is a set of values or principles. Each
new policy or program is evaluated to see whether it upholds those values or principles using a set of
questions or procedures that include equity. For example: “What is the impact of the policy or program
on diverse groups?” While the questions may seem simple, the process of preparing for, and developing
and Equity Lens takes time and commitment.
To evaluate progress toward equity, each city determines what it should measure. Hence, the value of a
reliable system of collecting and managing data, which this study concluded the city possesses, becomes
critically important.
Although each city must develop its own Equity Lens, the examples below provide some insight into the
process.
• City of Seattle Racial Equity Toolkit -“lays out a process and a set of questions to guide the
development, implementation and evaluation of policies, initiatives, programs and budget
issues to address the impacts on racial equity.”
http://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/RSJI/RacialEquityToolkit_FINAL_August2012.
pdf
• City of Portland – Racial Equity Toolkit https://www.portlandoregon.gov/oehr/71685
• All-In Cities Policy Toolkit - Building an Equitable Economy from the Ground Up, an initiative of
PolicyLink http://allincities.org/toolkit
To explore a practical example of how an Equity Lens could influence policy decisions in Yakima, we turn
to parks. The city has long benefitted from private funding for parks and other amenities. As part of an
NCBC 047
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
44
November 2017
Equity Lens, the city could develop a set of criteria for parks around equity and inclusion. This criteria
would rank possible investment opportunities for philanthropy, and provide this rank ordered list or
some part of it to community partners. The city could also develop a policy that dictates that for any
donation to a specific project the city takes a percentage for the general funding of that project amenity
across the city. For example, if the city took ten percent of such park donations for general use for parks
across the city, a $10,000 gift towards a particular project would lead to $9,000 for that project and
$1,000 for the parks general fund.
A cornerstone of equitable decision making is authentic community and stakeholder engagement. It,
too, is a process that requires care and commitment to ensure that engagement sparks lively civil
discourse without resulting in acrimony and deep divisions. The Metro Center provides tools that
promote understanding and assist communities in making choices about difficult decisions.
• The Poverty Immersion, facilitated by the Metro Center, is an interactive workshop that changes
attitudes and challenges stereotypes about the working poor. Through this experience,
participants develop a better understanding of community needs, ultimately improving policy
and program development and decision making.
• The Metro Center is part of a nationwide project with the Kettering Foundation to frame
complex issues for public discussion. Using structured deliberative dialogue, the Metro Center
facilitates productive community conversations aimed at understanding residents’ perspective
on their community and the issues that are of greatest importance to them.
Throughout the course of this project, the Metro Center team has engaged with Yakima City Council
members, city staff, and concerned residents. To a person they have shown a strong commitment to
their work, and a deep affection for the city. Addressing equity is difficult under the best of conditions,
and we commend the city for the progress you have made, and welcome the opportunity to support
your efforts in the future.
NCBC 048
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
45
November 2017
About the Metro Center
The WSU Metro Center connects decision-makers in Washington’s cities with the expertise of
Washington State University to produce practical solutions to the challenges of growth. Using a project-
based and client centered approach, the Metro Center responds to emerging needs, and helps
communities build capacity to create sustainable solutions for the future. The Metro Center works at the
direction of clients, and follows a defined scope of work which is negotiated with the client. The Metro
Center compiles a unique team for each project with the necessary expertise and attributes to
successfully complete all project goals. Team members include WSU faculty and staff; however, we also
utilize external partners as needed to implement the project.
This analysis was conducted, data compiled, and this report written by the following team assembled
because of their expertise in urban planning and geospatial analysis. In particular we wish to
acknowledge the work of Dr. Branden Born, with whom we have often worked on community based
projects, and Dr. Philip Hurvitz, who led the data analysis.
WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research and Extension
• Martha Aitken, Senior Associate and Project Manager
• Brad Gaolach Ph. D., Director
University of Washington, Department of Urban Design and Planning
• Branden Born Ph.D., Associate Professor
• Philip M. Hurvitz Ph. D., Research Assistant Professor
• Connie Combs MUP
• Kizz Prussia, MUP candidate
NCBC 049
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
46
November 2017
Appendices
• Appendix A – Complete City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis
• Appendix B – City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Task 1 Report
• Appendix C – Demographic Variables Over Time
• Appendix D – Project Proposal
• Appendix E – Summary of Accuracy Audit Findings
NCBC 050
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
47
November 2017
Appendix A – Complete City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis
http://gist.gis.washington.edu/yakima_equity/ (It should be noted that the data and analysis in
Appendix A will be transferred to the city in the near future, and this URL will no longer be active. The
city will determine how to make this information available.)
NCBC 051
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
48
November 2017
Appendix B – City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Task 1 Report
Introduction:
On June 28, 2017 the City of Yakima entered into an agreement with WSU’s Metropolitan Center for
Applied Research and Extension (Metro Center) to analyze data from the city’s Equity Study
(http://www.yakimawa.gov/council/equity-study/ ) for the purpose of helping inform the 2018 budget
and future budget decisions. The contract’s Scope of Work included two tasks listed below, with
variables to be used in the analysis, and the geographical dividing line specifically stated.
The Metro Center assembled a team comprised of experts in urban planning and geospatial analysis to
perform the activities required to meet the deliverables of the project. This report serves as the Task 1
deliverable and provides an overview of the Metro Center’s activities to analyze the data collection and
handling processes the City of Yakima employs with regard to the data used in the Equity Study, and a
preliminary summary of findings. This report also addresses aspects of Task 2, Parts A and B, much of
which could most efficiently and appropriately be implemented concurrently with Task 1.
Review of Scope of Work:
Task 1: Validate Equity Study data
Methods
Confirm with City Council up to 6 data sets identified in Task 2 B, excluding US Census Bureau data, to
assess the validity of those data. For each data set selected we will conduct, as appropriate:
A. A process audit by interviewing City staff and reviewing documents associated with how these
data were collected, compiled, summarized, and made accessible to the public.
B. An accuracy audit of the data by randomly selecting a representative sample of data points, and
independently determining the accuracy through direct observations.
Task 2: Analyze existing Equity Study data to assess the geographic distribution of public
resources and funds (e.g. city, State, or Federal)
Methods
A. Assess the quality of the data to understand any qualitative concerns and limitations that would
impact data analysis or interpretation (i.e. period of time collected, geographically resolution of
the data, etc.).
B. Confirm the input and output variables for the analysis, and the geographical dividing line. Initial
request included the following 6 data sets, upon which this estimate is based:
o Input variable:
o Demographics, to include income, race, education level, marital status, home
owner or renter, property value and age
o Output variables:
o Public safety calls for service (location, response time)
o Streetlights
o Code compliance requests
o Parks (exempt parks that are privately funded or charge for use)
o Transit ridership, shelters, benches
o Geographical dividing line
i. 16th Avenue
C. Perform the appropriate statistical analyses to assess any relationships amongst the input and
output (i.e. response) variables.
NCBC 052
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
49
November 2017
Methods:
Clarify Intent
WSU Metro team first met with Yakima City Council members on the Neighborhood and Community
Building Committee: Chair Dulce Gutiérez, Carmen Méndez and Avina Gutiérez, to further clarify the
scope of work, define the specific variables and geographic dividing line to be analyzed, and the overall
intent of the study. After receiving portions of the data and conducting an initial review, the Metro
Center team met by phone with City Manager Cliff Moore, Community Development Director Joan
Davenport, and city staff to clarify the intent of some portions of Task 1 of the Scope of Work, and to
make sure there was an understanding of the city’s interest in positive strategies for the future.
Through this discussion we came to understand that the language of the scope required clarification.
Task 1 “Validate Equity Study data” means something different in the academic realm and the applied
real-world one. A technical data validation process would be overly statistical, particularly with a
“representative sample of data points” across the various datasets, and would be both prohibitively
expensive and, most important, would not achieve the city’s objectives. Instead, we decided that we
needed to know if the city’s data are being collected and recorded in appropriate ways (Task 1, part A),
and whether it is useful to the current disparity analysis (Task 1, part B). Then, as appropriate, we would
check for accuracy of the acceptable data by ground-truthing through site visits (Task 1, part B) to
complete Task 1. We hope this clarification is helpful.
If the city would like to pursue the academic level of statistical validation of their collected data, the
Metro Center could assist in providing suggestions about how that could be done.
City of Yakima Data
For our process audit we reached out to city staff in multiple departments to learn about the internal
processes used to gather, compile, and store data for the Yakima Equity Study. Staff were uniformly
open and helpful in sharing with us their processes for data collection and handling, as well as the data
itself.
The Metro Center team contacted the City of Yakima’s Supervising Senior Analyst, Tom Sellsted to
obtain the five datasets of interest. After reviewing the data available, a Metro Center team member
spoke with Tom Sellsted and Jill Ballard to discuss the methods used to collect and display datasets in
the Equity Study’s ArcMap Online Story Maps. Mr. Sellsted also provided the Metro Center team with
contact information for the city data steward(s) of each of the five datasets, and the team scheduled
one-hour phone calls with each data steward. During these calls the Metro Center team asked questions
to identify and clarify our understanding of the methods used to collect the data used in the Equity
Study. We took detailed notes during the call and, in some cases, followed up with additional emails or
calls for clarification. The description of the methods used by the City of Yakima will be included in the
final report.
Additional Data
To supplement city data from the Yakima Equity Study, we compiled census data from the American
Community Survey (ACS) for each of the demographic “input” variables: income, race, education level,
marital status, and homeowner or renter. These data sets were collected for years 1980, 1990, 2000,
2010, and 2015. These data will be used as input variables to run statistical analysis of output variables
(Task 2, part B), as well as to tell the demographic story of Yakima over time as discussed in the Metro
Center/City staff telephone conversation mentioned above.
NCBC 053
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
50
November 2017
Data for property value and age has also been collected. Since these data include time stamps, they will
allow for a longitudinal analysis of age and value through the years that we have census data.
Results and Analysis
Process and Accuracy Audit
Our analysis suggests the City of Yakima has a professional and appropriate process for collecting,
storing, and analyzing data, and a staff knowledgeable in the data infrastructure. Additionally, most of
the data is recorded and handled in a reasonable and professional manner for its original intent: to
support the city's geospatial data and land use planning. We note that the city’s GIS architecture has
been developed over more than 30 years, a positive quality which means that the city has a mature
system in place.
An accuracy audit was conducted on a sample of city parks, on both the east and west sides of 16th
Avenue, to assess parks data - one of the most complete and historically available datasets provided.
This audit will also add richness to the binary nature of the parks data, and will help us understand
whether there are qualitative differences in park resources across that geographic dividing line. The
results of that audit will be presented in the final report.
We found no major sources of explicit bias in the collection, handling or storing of data, but we do
recognize some sources of potential unintended consequences that may insert bias into the city’s data
collection for some of the datasets provided. These will be detailed in the final report.
Data Quality and Limitations
While the city is to be commended for its long commitment to a citywide Geographic Information
System, staff and council should understand that, because the datasets were collected and developed
for purposes than an analysis, or to assess disparity, most are insufficient to demonstrate either
disparity/inequity or associated causation. The original intent of the data collection ultimately limits our
ability to use the data to answer some of the current equity questions regarding past city practices: it is
simply invalid for those purposes based on the time period, scale, or collection method used.
In the Table 2, we provide a summary table of this data and its possible usage. We hope this will help
council understand possible approaches they might take, and what analyses are not supported by the
data. Much of this work is part of Task 2, part A.
Recommendations
We note that while the data is too variable in quality, especially with regard to availability over time, to
do historical examination of whether city resources have been distributed equitably, we think that a
current “snapshot” or examination of existing conditions is appropriate and warranted.
Most of the contemporary data statistical analysis on the correlation of demographic variables (such as
poverty, race, etc.) with geographic location is appropriate. And, when compared or cross-checked with
a historical analysis of the growth of the city through annexation and demographic change over 30
years, we think a reasonable story can be developed to answer some of the equity questions. Moreover,
we will be able to point to areas where the city may be able to implement future strategies that will lead
to positive outcomes.
Our understanding of the Code Compliance data, though, suggests that this dataset remains problematic
for analyzing equity due to the anonymous nature in which the data is collected. However, further
NCBC 054
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
51
November 2017
conversations with city staff might clarify for us some possible lines of inquiry for which the Code
Compliance data could be used.
Next Steps
We will complete any remaining portions of Task 2 Parts A and B, and complete the analysis in Task 2
Part C including the accuracy audit on parks data, historic and contemporary demographic maps and
historic demographic summary tables, and contemporary disparity/equity statistical analyses as
appropriate. The demographic maps will show “input” variables across the period 1980-2015. We will
then draft a final report of our findings for the city.
Timeline to Completion
Due to some of the challenges presented by the data, we request an extension of the contract to
October 31, or a mutually agreeable date.
NCBC 055
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
52
November 2017
Attachments
Summary of Data Utility
Table 2: Summary of data utility
Output
Variable
Recommended use in
Equity Study
Limitations Recommendations
Public
Safety Calls
(for
Service)
● Analyze current
disparities in response
times for both Fire and
Police Services
● Analyze Fire and Police
services by council
district and by 16th
Avenue dividing line
● GIS Data are only available from
2012 to present day (not suitable
for historical analysis)
● Walk-in cases to YPD are not
consistently tracked. The database
is shared with SunComm
Streetlights ● Analyze current
disparities in streetlight
presence per council
district, by demographic
output variables
● Historical data not available in GIS
format
● Define levels of service (LOS)
standards for streetlights
throughout the City of Yakima
Code
Compliance
Requests
● Display the data
spatially to identify
possible disparities
● Data in GIS format are only
available from 2015 to present day
(not suitable for historical analysis)
● There are many confounding
factors that could lead to
disparities in types of code
complaints, and responses
● Create tag to identify which
code compliance cases were
received by Yak Back, phone
calls, emails, or other methods
● Develop documentation of
response prioritization criteria
Parks • Analyze the
development of parks in
each council district
over time, by population
• Analyze the
development of parks in
each council district
over time, by
demographic
characteristics
Transit
(Ridership)
● Historical data not available in GIS
format
● Obtain data for analysis of
disparities in level of service for
transit
Transit
(Benches)
● Review criteria for placement of
benches to prioritize need as
well as feasibility, and ridership
Transit
(Shelters)
● Review criteria for placement of
shelters to prioritize need as
well as feasibility, and ridership
NCBC 056
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
53
November 2017
1990 2000
2015 2010
1980
1980
Appendix C – Demographic Variables Over Time
All maps are available at http://gist.gis.washington.edu/yakima_equity/
Income - Median household income
1980 - 2010
Marital Status – Percent Married
1980 - 2010
NCBC 057
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
54
November 2017
1990 2000
2015 2010
NCBC 058
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
55
November 2017
Income – Percent living below the poverty line
1980 - 2010
1980
1990 2000
2010 2015
NCBC 059
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
56
November 2017
Percent Non-White
1980 - 2010
1980
1990 2000
2010 2015
NCBC 060
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
57
November 2017
Percent Hispanic
1980 - 2010
1980
1990 2000
2010 2015
NCBC 061
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
58
November 2017
2010
Education Level - Percent college graduate
1980 – 2010
1980
1990 2000
2015
NCBC 062
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
59
November 2017
1990 2000
2015 2010
1980
Percent Renter Occupied
1980 - 2010
NCBC 063
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
60
November 2017
1990 2000
2015 2010
1980
Mean year home built
1980 - 2010
NCBC 064
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
61
November 2017
1990 2000
2015 2010
1980
Median Property Value
1980 - 2010
NCBC 065
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
62
November 2017
Appendix D – Project Proposal
Objective:
To analyze data from the City of Yakima’s Equity Study to help inform the 2018 budget and future
budget decision.
Background
In May 2016, the Yakima City Council directed City staff to begin an Equity Study to research the
distribution of city funded services and improvements. This study was launched through the
encouragement of a private non-profit organization. The data collected to date have been made
available to the public on the City’s website at https://www.yakimawa.gov/council/equity-study/.
Representatives from the City of Yakima contacted WSU’s Metropolitan Center for Applied Research and
Extension (Metro Center) to assist the City with addressing equity concerns of Council Members around
resource allocation.
About the Metro Center
The Metro Center helps Washington’s cities and metropolitan communities create vibrant economies,
healthy communities, and sustainable environments. We do this by connecting decision-makers with the
expertise of Washington State University to produce practical solutions to the challenges of growth.
Using a project-based and client centered approach, the Metro Center remains flexible to respond to
emerging needs, and help communities build capacity to create sustainable solutions for the future.
About our process
The Metro Center compiles a unique team for each project with the necessary expertise and attributes
to successfully complete all project goals. Team members include WSU faculty and staff; however, we
also utilize external partners as needed for a project. Potential partners were contacted during the
creation of this draft to ensure that the Metro Center has the ability to undertake and fulfill the actions
proposed below. Their input and expertise is incorporated into this proposal.
Project Tasks:
Task 1: Validate Equity Study data
Methods
Confirm with City Council up to 6 data sets identified in Task 2 B, excluding US Census Bureau data, to
assess the validity of those data. For each data set selected we will conduct, as appropriate:
A. A process audit by interviewing City staff and reviewing documents associated with how these
data were collected, compiled, summarized, and made accessible to the public.
B. An accuracy audit of the data by randomly selecting a representative sample of data points, and
independently determining the accuracy through direct observations.
City of Yakima Responsibilities
City staff will make original data available for an audit and staff members will be available for questions.
Metro Center Deliverable
NCBC 066
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
63
November 2017
We will provide a written report of our findings to the City with an option for an in-person or remote
presentation.
Task 2: Analyze existing Equity Study data to assess the geographic distribution of public
resources and funds (e.g. city, State, or Federal)
Methods
A. Assess the quality of the data to understand any qualitative concerns and limitations that would
impact data analysis or interpretation (i.e. period of time collected, geographically resolution of
the data, etc.).
B. Confirm the input and output variables for the analysis, and the geographical dividing line. Initial
request included the following 6 data sets, upon which this estimate is based:
a. Input variable:
o Demographics, to include income, race, education level, marital status, home
owner or renter, property value and age
b. Output variables:
o Public safety calls for service (location, response time)
o Streetlights
o Code compliance requests
o Parks (exempt parks that are privately funded or charge for use)
o Transit ridership, shelters, benches
c. Geographical dividing line
o 16th Avenue
C. Perform the appropriate statistical analyses to assess any relationships amongst the input and
output (i.e. response) variables.
Metro Center Deliverable
We will provide a written report of the process we used for the analyses, results of the analyses, and an
interpretation of the data, with an option for an in-person or remote presentation.
City of Yakima Responsibilities
City staff will make all data sets, including any meta-data available to the WSU team in mutually agreed
upon format(S), documentation as to how data were collected, accessed, and / or manipulated as well
as being available to answer questions as needed.
Timeline
Completion by 90 days from initiation of the contract, or mutually agreeable date.
Budget: $25,100
The budget includes personnel, materials, travel, and WSU’s required 26% indirect costs.
Personnel
Includes all salaries, wages and benefits of project personnel required to implement project tasks as well
as administrative aspects of the project including, but not limited to, meetings, reporting, and
communication.
Materials
Materiel costs will be minimal and may include photocopying and binding of final reports.
Travel
NCBC 067
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
64
November 2017
Travel costs will be incurred only as necessary to complete project tasks and will include: travel to and
from Seattle and Yakima, hotel and meals while in travel status, and local ground travel, as set by the
U.S. General Services Administration.
Indirect Costs
A Facilities and Administration (F&A or Indirect Cost) rate of 26% is added to all direct project costs.
NOTE: These are preliminary estimates only, and have not been reviewed by WSU contracting or finance
offices. As such, they are subject to modification as part of the formal contracting process. These
estimates include a good faith assessment of the appropriate Facilities and Administration (F & A or
Indirect Cost) recovery rates (26% for most activities herein), which may also be changed after formal
review. These estimates are provided to facilitate discussion and negotiation, but do not constitute a
formal offer or the basis of a formal contract – which may only be executed by the WSU Office of
Research Support and Operations. All expenses regarding the venue, food, and rentals are to be paid for
by the funder.
NCBC 068
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
65
November 2017
Appendix E – Summary of Accuracy Audit Findings
Table 3: Park audit details
Park Name Data
Errors
(Y/N)
Reported Location and
Amenities
Observed Location and
Amenities
Notes
McGuinness
Park
N 14th Ave & Swan Ave
• Playground
• Picnic Shelter
• Basketball court
• Asphalt pathway
14th Ave & Swan Ave
• (1) Playground
• (1) Picnic shelter
• (1) basketball court
• Asphalt pathway
Shelter fits four
picnic tables
Emil Kissel
Park
N 3000 W Mead Ave
• Tennis Center (12
courts)
• (1) Restroom
• Playground
• Asphalt path
• Picnic Shelter
• Basketball court
3000 W Mead Ave
• (12) Tennis Courts
• (1) Restroom
• (1) Playground
• Asphalt path
• (1) Picnic Shelter with
grill
• (1) Basketball court
• Parking lot
(estimated* 83 stalls)
Picnic shelter with
grill, wall on two
sides providing
shelter from wind.
Gilbert Park N 500 W Lincoln Ave
• Open Space
• Parking lot
500 W Lincoln Ave
• Open Space
• Parking lot
(estimated* 87 stalls)
South 2nd St
Park
N 706 E Race St
• Open space
706 E Race St
• Open space
Milroy Park N SE Corner of 16th & Lincoln
Ave
• Playground
• Restroom
• Volleyball court
• Horseshoe pits
SE Corner of 16th & Lincoln
Ave
• Playground
• Restroom
• Volleyball court
• Horseshoe pits
• Parking lot
(estimated* 29 stalls)
horseshoe pits
missing the posts,
inoperable
West Valley
Community
Park
N 1323 80th Ave
• (3) Picnic Shelters
• (2) Playgrounds
• (1) Restroom
• Horseshoe Pits
(unspecified number)
1323 80th Ave
• (3) Picnic Shelters
• (2) Playgrounds
• (1) Restroom
• (4) Horseshoe Pits
• (2) Basketball Courts
Well maintained
structures.
Horseshoe pits
unmowed, have tall
weeds.
NCBC 069
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report revised 11.9.17
66
November 2017
Park Name Data
Errors
(Y/N)
Reported Location and
Amenities
Observed Location and
Amenities
Notes
• Basketball Courts
(unspecified number)
• (2) Parking lots
(estimated* 54, and
60+ stalls)
Yakima
Arboretum
N 1401 Arboretum Dr
• Open space
• Parking lot
• Jewitt center (owned
by Arboretum, not
YPR)
1401 Arboretum Dr
• Open space
• Parking lot
(estimated* 135
stalls)
• Jewitt center (owned
by Arboretum, not
YPR)
Fisher Golf
Course
N 823 S 40th Ave
• 9-hole 3 par course
• Starter house
• Maintenance building
823 S 40th Ave
• 9-hole 3 par course
• Starter house
• Maintenance building
• Small parking lot
(estimated* 23 stalls)
Franklin
Park
N 2101 Tieton Dr
• Outdoor pool
• (2) Small picnic tables
• (1) Pavilion
• (1) Playground
• Tennis courts
(unspecified number)
2101 Tieton Dr
• Outdoor pool
• (2) Small picnic tables
• (1) Pavilion
• (1) Playground
• (6) Tennis courts
Previous capital
improvements
received private
funding
Kiwanis Park N 1501 E Maple St
• Restrooms,
concessions
• Playground
• Picnic Shelters
(unspecified)
• (8) Baseball/softball
fields
• Basketball court
• Concrete skate park
1501 E Maple St
• Restrooms/concessi
ons
• (1) Playground
• (2) Picnic Shelters
• (8) Baseball/softball
fields
• (1) Basketball court
• Concrete skate park
• Large Parking lot
(estimated* 441
stalls)
Previous capital
improvements
received private
funding
NCBC 070
Yakima City Council Committee Minutes
Neighborhood & Community Building Committee (NCBC)
City Council Chambers, City Hall
October 19, 2017
Committee Members Staff
Dulce Gutiérrez, Chair Joan Davenport Ken Wilkinson
Carmen Méndez Cliff Moore Alvie Maxey
Avina Gutiérrez Rosalinda Ibarra Joseph Calhoun
Holly Cousens (Alternate, not present) Sara Watkins
Others: Martha Aitken, Dr. Phil Hurvitz, Dr. Brad Gaolach
Chair Dulce Gutiérrez called the meeting to order at approximately 2:05 p.m.
Board Appointed Reports – Standing Item
Transit Development Plan/Transit Related Issues – Maxey provided a draft agenda of the next Transit
Advisory Committee meeting which is November 8th.
Parks & Recreation Commission (P&R) – the topics discussed at the previous P&R meeting included:
Harman Center programs and activities, P&R Comprehensive Plan, progress of Randall Park improvements.
Other future park improvements were discussed by Wilkinson and A. Gutiérrez.
Henry Beauchamp Community Center (HBCC) – the next quarterly meeting is October 24, 2017.
Historic Preservation (HPC) – the next meeting is October 25th at 5:30pm. Calhoun reported that the HPC
had a successful outreach program at the Farmer’s Market and there is still one vacancy remaining.
Yakima Planning Commission – Calhoun reported that the YPC issued its recommendation on the final plat
process amendments; an ordinance will be presented to the City Council in November. He also noted that
there is also one vacancy on this commission.
Bike/Pedestrian Committee – the committee finalized their comments on the Bike & Pedestrian Plan. They
are working on prioritizing projects and seeking grant applications for potential projects.
Homeless Network – Davenport and Méndez explained the transition of the Homeless Network and the
Continuum of Care (CoC). The upcoming Homeless Network meeting is scheduled for November 14th at
9am. Further clarification continued regarding the roles of the staff representative and Council representative.
TRANS-Action Committee –D. Gutiérrez reported the next meeting is November 20th. Elections will be take
place for four positions. Staff will reach out to the Fairgrounds and SOZO to encourage participation in
TRANS-Action.
Ethics & Equal Rights Committee (EERC) – Watkins described her role in participating in the EERC
committee meetings. Maria Rodriguez, Committee Chair, clarified that she provided a recommendation to
City Council and it would be their responsibility to define the details of a permanent committee. After a brief
discussion, A. Gutiérrez moved, seconded by Méndez, to direct staff to conduct a legal review of the
recommendation presented by the EERC committee. Motion carried unanimously. City Council will consider
whether to establish a permanent EERC committee at their November 7th business meeting.
Community Integration Committee (CIEC) – D. Gutiérrez reported that the CIEC presented their final
recommendation to City Council on October 17th. The City Council postponed their vote to November 7th
pending additional information related to the cost estimated for a permanent committee.
WSU Equity Study Task 2 Deliverable – WSU Metro Center [consultant] representative Martha Aitken
(Senior Associate WSU) and Dr. Phil Hurvitz (UW Dept. of Urban Design and Planning) presented a
detailed overview of their findings of the Equity Study Analysis project. This was a two-step project which
consisted of data audit/validation and data analysis/assessment.
For the process audit they concluded that the City collects data in a non-biased manner and the data is
handled appropriately for its original intent, which is to support the city’s geospatial (GIS) data and land use
planning. They also performed a site visit to several City parks for direct observations to compare with the
data collected. The limitations identified in the data collection is that the information lacked necessary
elements to assess disparity. For the analysis strategy, the Metro Center team used additional information
gathered from the Census data and American Community Survey data. Dr. Hurvitz further described several
data graphs, using 16th Avenue as the geographical dividing line between eastside and westside of Yakima.
Page 1
NCBC 071
Some of the comparisons included; increased median family income, ethnic composition, and college
graduation rates, average year of built structures, and amount of park area per resident, streetlights, police
and fire department calls for service. The complete results for each selected GIS data layer, including all
graphs, are available at: http://gist.gis.washington.edu/yakima_equity/
Ms. Aitken shared recommendations and potential next steps that the City can implement; such as, adding
information to include the date of resource allocation to evaluate trends over a period of time, develop a set
of ranking criteria for future resource allocation and investment opportunities. She also suggested the City
explore the racial equity toolkit that the cities of Seattle, Portland and Dubuque have implemented. Another
resource is the Kettering Foundation which has a method for involving the public in addressing challenging
issues. After considerable discussion and audience participation, the following items were requested:
• Dulce Gutiérrez, Council member
o More conclusive narratives with explanations of what data was and what data wasn’t
considered and/or included in the analysis (describe the input and output variables)
o Streetlights – timing data (as energy-saving method some streetlights alternate on/off)
o YPD – the City’s response is in terms of calls responded to
o Transit – transit riders under the age of 18
• Avina Gutiérrez, Council member
o Streetlights – conditions (working and non-working)
o YPD – duration of response time from when a call comes in to when a LEO arrives
o YPD – pattern in trends and locations on types of calls (such domestic violence, violent
crime, property damage)
o YPD & YFD – identify the meaning of “open” and “closed” time on calls for service
o Transit – comparison of transit stops and explanation of “why” (for instance, if there is less
bus stops on a certain side of town, is it because of increased car ownership or higher
income, resulting in less need for public transportation)
• Mary Lopez, Audience member
o How many streetlights are working? What is the distance between streetlights? How can the
public request a streetlight?
o More information about the condition that parks are in – observed no bathrooms, water
fountains in east side parks
o Income – include information on single-family income (one-parent income)
o Education – percent of people who didn’t finish high school
o YPD – how many calls are from Spanish-speaking people; what was the service response
(some people who call 911 report that an officer didn’t respond)
o YPD – nature of the call (graffiti, domestic violence)
o Transit – more ridership information, specifically about minors
• Rogelio Montes, Audience member
o Suggested that the City provide more data to WSU overall
o YPD – police response outcomes (3 hours for an officer to show up)
o Transit – information about other age demographics, not just senior citizens
D. Gutiérrez requested additional discussion at the next NCBC meeting in November and asked that the
consultant present to the full City Council at their December 12th business meeting, the committee members
agreed with that timeline. The consultant will discuss and clarify the requests with staff to ensure that the
data is available.
Naches Parkway Evaluation and Discussion – Wilkinson presented a PowerPoint regarding designating
Naches Parkway into a park and what the feasibility would consist of. Some points that were highlighted
include:
• Naches Parkway is 15 blocks long and stretch from Race Street north to H Street.
Page 2
NCBC 072
• Cost of annual maintenance is estimated at $57,000 which involves grass mowing, trimming trees,
irrigation system maintenance and watering costs.
• One-time costs include: benches starting at $600 each, picnic tables starting at $1,500 each, signage
at $80 per sign including installation, fence costs range from $4,750 to $26,000 per block depending
on the type, and basic non-decorative trash receptacles are free.
• Annual projected maintenance costs of $8,500 include labor for trash removal and disposal fees.
• Public safety considerations: low curb height, need for fencing, and close proximity to traffic.
Watkins spoke about options and potential changes to the Yakima Municipal Code related to re-designation
of Naches Parkway, which include: amending YMC Section 13.20 to add Naches Parkway to the park
curfew ordinance; amending YMC Section 13.16 Park Rules and Regulations to address specific matters
pertaining to Naches Parkway; and adding a definitions sections in the Rules and Regulations ordinance for
“parks”, “parkways”, and “trails” and other park terms. Following an extensive discussion, A. Gutiérrez
motioned to direct staff to prepare amendments to YMC 13.20 Park Curfew ordinance and YMC 13.16 Parks
Rules and Regulations, and include a definitions section in YMC 13.16; motion carried unanimously.
Another motion was made by A. Gutiérrez, seconded by Méndez, to change Naches Parkway to a park with
minimal requirements necessary, such as signage, trash receptacles and disposal; motion carried. The NCBC
will make these recommendations to the full City Council at their November 7th business meeting.
Approval of Minutes – A motion was made by Méndez, seconded by A. Gutiérrez, to approve the minutes of
09/21/2017 as presented; motion carried unanimously.
Recap of Deliverables – Staff reviewed the following list of deliverables from this meeting:
• Equity study update at the next NCBC meeting
• Staff to encourage SOZO and Fairgrounds to participate in the TRANS-Action Committee
• Legal review and analysis on the recommendations presented by the EERC and CIEC
• Follow-up with YPD on response times pertaining to the equity study
D. Gutiérrez announced that Spanish interpretation services are available; however, require a 48 hour
advance notice.
Audience Participation – none noted.
Adjourn – D. Gutiérrez adjourned this meeting at approximately 3:49 p.m.; the next meeting is November
16, 2017.
Approved by:
Date Approved:
Prepared by: Rosalinda Ibarra, Community Development Administrative Assistant
Page 3
NCBC 073
Yakima City Council Advisory Committee Minutes
Community Integration Exploratory Committee
2nd Floor Conference Room, 129 N. 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901
October 3, 2017
Prepared by: Tiffany Pitra, Community Integration Exploratory Committee Recording Secretary
Staff Present Community Integration Community Members
Anita Quintana
N/A Arthur Alcazar N/A
Brandy Schwartz
Laura Armstrong (absent)
Marco Campos (LOA)
Rachel Lierman
Tiffany Pitra
Meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m.
This was a working meeting for the City of Yakima Community Integration Exploratory.The
committee worked on the rough draft portion of our final report to the city Council.
This meeting adjourned at 7:38 p.m.
Approved by: Date of Approval:
(Arthur Alcazar, Community Integration Exploratory Committee Chair)
NCBC 074
Yakima City Council Advisory Committee Minutes
Community Integration Exploratory Committee
2nd Floor Conference Room, 129 N. 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901
October 9, 2017
Prepared by: Tiffany Pitra, Community Integration Exploratory Committee Recording Secretary
Staff Present Community Integration Community Members
Anita Quintana
Sara Watkins Arthur Alcazar N/A
Brandy Schwartz
Laura Armstrong
Marco Campos (LOA)
Rachel Lierman
Tiffany Pitra
Meeting was called to order at 5:39 p.m.
1. Arthur motioned to adopt amended agenda by skipping “welcome and introductions.”
a. Tiffany seconded the motion.
b. Unanimous approval.
2. Arthur motioned to approve the meeting minutes from 9/25/2017.
a. Laura seconded the motion.
b. Unanimous approval.
3. Voting
a. Arthur motioned to recommend that the permanent committee membership be open
to City residents.
i. Tiffany seconded the motion.
ii. The Committee discussed how this might exclude community members who
use Yakima resources or work in Yakima, but don’t technically live within
City limits. They also discussed how it may be suitable to omit a
recommendation and let City staff and Council work out those details.
iii. Arthur withdrew his motion. Tiffany withdrew her second.
iv. No votes were taken
b. Tiffany motioned to make no formal recommendation regarding area of residency for
permanent committee membership.
i. Anita seconded the motion
ii. Unanimous approval.
c. Anita motioned to recommend the exploratory committee becomes a permanent
committee.
i. Laura seconded the motion.
ii. Unanimous approval
d. Tiffany motioned to recommend the permanent committee name remain as
Community Integration Committee.
i. Laura seconded the motion.
ii. Unanimous approval.
e. Laura motioned to include a portion in the report regarding integration being the
responsibility of the City of Yakima.
NCBC 075
Prepared by: Tiffany Pitra, Community Integration Exploratory Committee Recording Secretary
i. Arthur seconded the motion.
ii. The Committee discussed that the draft section regarding “purview of the
City” needs some editing and inserted after the section titled, “Relevance to
Yakima.” They also discussed that content did not need to be voted on at this
time.
iii. Laura withdrew her motion. Arthur withdrew his second.
iv. No votes were taken.
4. Working session. At this time the Committee split into small working groups to finalize the
report for City Council, Power Point presentation, appendices, etc.
5. Arthur motioned to approve the final report with minor formatting changes.
a. Rachel seconded the motion.
b. Unanimous approval.
This meeting adjourned at 8:06 p.m.
Approved by: Date of Approval:
(Arthur Alcazar, Community Integration Exploratory Committee Chair)
NCBC 076