City Council - Regular Meeting

We okay? Alright. It's now 06:31 and the meeting will come to order good evening and welcome to the 02/03/2026 City Council Kennewick City Council meeting with the city clerk, please state who is present and a quorum is established?

Good evening, Mayor McKay. All council members are present with the exception of council member Andrew McKay. Sorry. McShane.

Thank you.

Sorry about that.

That's good. It's gonna be

a night tonight, I think. Council members are present with the exception of council member Anderson. A quorum is established.

Will council member Milbauer please lead us in the pledge? Thank to

created all things, and by your will, they existed and were created. Lord, I come before you tonight to ask for your grace and blessing over Kennewick. Thank you for these men and women who have offered their time and talent to guide and direct our city. Because you are merciful, God, grant them wisdom from your throne room. In any area where there is lack of clarity, shine your light that they may see and know plainly every aspect of each issue before them this evening.

Give them courage to act, make them perceptive that they would understand the times and know what to do, and unite them together humbling themselves before you and one another storm. Storm. Going the midst of Jesus Christ.

Thank you. Council member Anderson provided advanced notice of his absence. Is there a motion to excuse the absence of council member Anderson?

Mayor Masheng.

Mayor Pro

of of the

Mayor Pro Tem Torelli and seconded by Councilmember Clipper to excuse the absence of Councilmember Anderson. Floor is open for discussion. There being no further discussion it's been properly moved and seconded to excuse the absence of Councilmember Anderson. Will the clerk please start the vote? We'll try it on this one.

All right, that motion has passed six to zero. Next on the agenda is visitors. Visitors are welcome to state their opinion on any topic except for election matters, quasi judicial matters, and items that are pending or previous public hearing. Comments will not be heard tonight for item number five a because it is a quasi judicial matter. The Planning Commission held a public hearing for this item on 01/05/2026, and the record is closed to further testimony. The city clerk has informed me that there are no online visitors. Written comments from members of the public were distributed to council prior to

the meeting for review and

have been included in the online meeting portal materials. As we begin, if someone in of of the Directors to you at this time. The city clerk's business card is on the table of by the door. We'll be by the end of the meeting. Thank you. And if you need follow-up after the meeting, please reach out to her and she will connect with someone who will help you

with

that. Certainly, council members are going to be here through the duration of the meeting and happy to speak with folks afterwards. When it's your turn, come to the podium and state your name and city of residence before beginning your remarks. Each person is permitted to speak for a maximum of three minutes. Three minute timer will be displayed on the screen. We think at least on one of these two. All right. And we'll start when you come to the podium. A total of thirty minutes is allocated for visitor comments this evening. And the city clerk will start the timer now and please raise your hand if you'd like to speak. Warren, please start.

That doesn't make noise anymore. Warren Hughes, Kennewick. Tonight, I wanted to come and address the council as a small business owner in Kennewick. I've been coming to a lot of meetings and kinda paying attention to what's going on. And there's a couple of issues that have kind of been dragging on here that I wanted to address.

One is the city of Kennewick is supported by sales tax. That is the majority of the funding for this body, this municipality. And more often than not, it seems like as a small business, my best hope for collaboration with the city is to be ignored so that Anowick gets shut down. I know there are other businesses in downtown that haven't been as fortunate as mine. And that just seems kind of antithetical to the funding structure of the city.

There are things that have happened recently, like the economic development department being cut in half, funding for HDKP always being coming in at the last minute. That just seems like there isn't a lot of attention for the small businesses that populate the downtown. And further, I brought this to the council's attention before, but the remodeling job for the city hall that we've been talking about went out to RFQ to different architects. Eight firms submitted, and the winning firms are both out of state. Now that doesn't seem like a big thing except that's money that's going from our community to in this case Idaho state income tax and not local sales tax and those are design professionals in other states that are receiving our municipal dollars.

And it would be fine if there were unqualified individuals in our town, but one of the firms that submitted was MMEC who did the 300,000 square foot renovation at the Kennewick High School and did it for $336 a square foot, which is shockingly cheap. And it looks great. It seems that there is a trend to move these projects out of our area and away from our local design professionals, and that's very concerning to me as a small business owner. And I would ask that the council consider that it would be in the city's interest to reach out and be more active as an economic development force in Kennewick. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay next please.

Hi, my name is Laura Staley and I'm here to address the change of zone on 3805 South Vancouver Street. Is that closed?

Yeah, that's I'm sorry, that's closed.

Alright.

Hi. My name is Wendy Keane. I live in Kennewick. First of all, I wanna thank you all for your time today, I would just like to bring to your attention RCW seven one zero nine zero nine seven section two. It states considerations for evaluating a proposed vendor's application for less restrictive alternative shall include applicable state and local zoning and building codes.

Current Kennewick currently has no zoning requirements for community based LRA housing without clear zoning protections any area in the city could potentially host an LRA housing facility. The lack of proper legal safeguards has opened the door for SPPs to be housed in residential zones. To remedy the situation, I propose that Kennewick City Council provide public notice and open hearings before an SPP is placed in the community. I encourage that the Benton County Sheriff's Office and any state entity to commit a broader and timely notification of any level three sex offenders. Kennewick City Council and Ben Benton City can insist that county of origin and county of placement notifications of all SVPs be given.

We could work with the legislator to close loop loopholes in RCW seven one zero nine and ensure the guidelines are for SVP placements. I would urge the city of Kennewick to create and enforce specific zoning codes similar to Polsboro municipal code one eight nine zero zero eight five that I just handed over, for LRA housing limiting placement to industrial or nonresidential areas. I have handed out copies of this for code for context. Polsboro wrote into their municipal code the following, a neighborhood meeting is required in pursuant to chapter nineteen six zero prior to placement. A high risk structured facility secured facility shall not be located adjacent to immediately across the street or parking lot from or within the line of sight of a particular of a risk potential activity or facility in existence at the time of the facility is established.

Based on what I brought to you guys last meeting within the line of sight means that you're it is possible to reasonably visually distinguish and recognize individuals. High risk potential activities and facilities, again, I discussed last meeting, but to remind you, it includes public and private schools, school bus stops, licensed daycares, licensed preschool facilities, domestic violence shelters, public parks, publicly dedicated trails, sports fields, playgrounds, recreational areas, centers, and churches.

Mayor, the time has expired. Oh, I'm sorry.

That's okay. You can't see it on the it's easy time.

Yeah. I would I let her go fifteen seconds past

Lisa Jolson from Kennewick. A high risk secured facility should not be located in community protection zone as defined in RCW 9.94A. Three zero six. Distance shall be measured from all property lines of a high risk secured facility from all property lines to the facility and grounds of a public and private school. Now to what I was going

to say.

One of the things that I brought up in the past was the mental health community here is extremely stressed. The Washington State Department of Health website, they list only four certified sex offender treatment providers for Benton County. Only one is in the Tri Cities. His name is Matthew Cummings. I spoke with him earlier today and in speaking with him I found out that he spoke with Joe Field over a year ago talking about providing services to his LRA here in Benton County.

He's not heard a thing from Joe since. He was very surprised that he hasn't heard anything considering everything that's been in the press. So who's going to be taking care of these folks? The other three sex offenders excuse me sex offender treatment providers are listed ones in Yakima, Wenatchee, and Spokane. Real local right?

This limited access means that these men here for treatment aren't going to get treatment locally. And if they do get it from the one provider we have, that's going be taking away appointments from people that need them here. According to Mr. Cummings, if these men are not seen in person, they're going to get online virtual treatment, oftentimes in a group Zoom setting. What kind of treatment is that?

The other thing I wanted to bring up was code enforcement. City code 18.27.060 talks about view obstruction, the arborvitaes fence and the light pole there at the corner of 8th And Edison on the property that we're talking about 5304 West 8th Avenue. They are in violation of this code as they obstruct the view of oncoming traffic on Edison when you go to turn on. Kennewick citizens within our neighborhood we have done extensive research regarding this topic. We've brought awareness to the community by creating an informative monitored Facebook page and group.

We've handed out multiple flyers, protested, we've had multiple meetings with immediate and surrounding neighbors as well as Kennewick School District, the city, county officials, as well as state legislatures. We started our Save Our Children Tri Cities, a five zero one(three) nonprofit and formed it to protect our community by raising legal funds to fight against SVP placements. To date we've raised $11,680 for legal fees, yet at $700 an hour that's not nearly enough. We're doing our part of the work. It's now your turn to do your work to ensure our community's safety by doing all of the lovely stuff, the zoning stuff that Wendy just talked about.

Thank you.

I just want to start by thanking you for setting up the town hall meeting last week. While the intention was pure and for the benefit of our community, sadly, most people left with more questions than answers. The feedback we've gotten overall was a feeling of disappointment and fear from the community there were a lot of deflected questions and lack of true information given. This LRA housing facility is a huge safety risk for Kennewick and the surrounding areas. Families needs need transparency about the LRA and how they can keep their families safe.

Because of these, we urge the city to host an awareness meeting where you will be discussing exactly what the LRA is and how this home will be operated. The background of those operating it and if there is anything we can do to stop the LRA at this location. To better address these questions, we suggest community members can pre submit questions that can then be addressed at the meeting. This way we can avoid statements from people and get relevant questions answered. It would be appreciated if SOCT can also be included in this meeting so we can show the community there are people supporting them alongside the city and school board.

Thank you.

Thank

you for this opportunity. I'm not a speaker like when you just spoke. I'm a mom, a grandma, and I'm a single woman that lives four houses down from this proposed house that's going up. I would ask if people could just go to the house, walk down the street less than 500 yards, and see how our houses are with three foot chain link fence between houses. And we have seven children in less than 500 feet.

And when you're standing on that deck at that house, you can see every part of their backyard, the playgrounds we're in, the pool that's two houses down, the deck that those people walk out of their bedroom. They can see everything. There's everything that they're viewing in that house. There's no privacy at all in that house. The fence is for their house, 34 feet is the next house from that fence with two small children that they can just see and grab at any second, to be honest.

116 feet is the next house. Again, chain link fence. You can view everything they're doing in their backyard. And they all have little girls under 15. Like, I live on the other side five or six houses down, and I live alone. I'm 65. I have my grandkids over all the time, and I'm scared already. I can't even pull in my driveway. I'm so sorry. And get in my garage without sitting in my car and shutting it even though they're not here yet. I'm so scared. Like, it's just I feel like we're going to be in a a fishbowl, and they're gonna be watching us. And then when I get out in three to five years, where do you think they're gonna come? They've been watching us. They know our license plates.

They're watching all the people. They're watching our little girls and little boys grow. These guys are sick. They are the violent, violent offenders, and they're putting them within feet of our children that walk right past their house normally to go to to to school, to get to the grade school and and and Kamaikan and everything. I mean, I just don't get it. It's scary. I I mean, I just I we need some help. I I really would like to hear more from our police department. I've watched what happened with the sheriff out at Teneno or Tenino. He's he was on the news just last week on Apple News how he said, I was at every meeting.

We have to stop this. Even though the police have no decision, they can still make a difference by understanding and helping these people know that this isn't right for our community. It's not safe. It's scary. It's awful. Sorry. I think I'm done.

Thank you. Before you walk away, I didn't catch your name.

Kelly. Kelly. Kelly Murphy.

Kelly Murphy. Thank you. Any other public comments this evening, please?

My name is Mitch Roulette. I'm from Kennewick. I have three kids, two special needs kids. As a gentleman back there stated, that meeting was a joke we had at the middle school. Joe Fields, I guess, got these nice terms, was laughing at us. And when we asked the chief himself, what's the response time? I don't know. How in the heck are you gonna tell me that they're gonna work in our community one of the worst offenders offenders, and he's sitting and telling us he don't know? Really? That's the way you say for our kids?

Come on. You guys can do better. And I hate to say it when we find out January 12, this is gonna happen, and we need and I'm not I should've sworn he heard, but he he announced or not. From his own mouth, we heard, January 24, there's a conversation. October 3, October 18, conversation. Can't let us know? Really? Your job is to protect and serve our community. Do your job. You let us down.

We didn't need to wait two weeks to know this. So who's the blame? It's clearly DSHS, our our chief, and everybody around it. But you guys coulda did your damn job, And he's fighting for us. The legislature's fighting for us. But the people who coulda did the job, you didn't do your job. You waited till January 12 to let us know. I have two special needs kids. It takes a little candy to lead my kid in that room for them to get one second. That's all they need. One second to harm any of our kids. Do better. If we'll post a count on you, then show us the count. Because right now, I don't think we can count a damn on you guys.

Other public comments this evening? Yes, please.

And I've been there for twenty three years. My husband and I we saved a lot of money. Took a lot of time finding this spot, enjoyed it, raised our kids. Now we have our grandkids there. And it's disappointing but it's also a little scary that we should have to risk losing money on our investment that the SVPs are located just a few houses away safety is number one of course but when we think about as retirement I have to think about my monies and what's going to get me through all this time for the rest of my life and my husband's life.

I don't feel that the real rehabilitation efforts for these individuals should come at the expense of our community safety. I think that has to be number one. I know that there are all the legal pieces in and out but I just wish that we can figure out what the common sense part of this is and having these gentlemen that close to children to the schools as a school teacher for forty years I'm always going to look after the kids and the safety is the biggest thing wish we could rezone it somehow or find a spot in a different zone that we could let these gentlemen be there and live out their lives. So safety first we need your help please help Thank you. Thank you.

Other public comments this comment period is closed. Next item on our agenda is approval of the agenda. If a council member would like an item removed from the consent agenda, please be recognized by the mayor and state the item that you would like to remove for further discretion and this item will be considered separately. I will entertain a motion. Mayor McShane. Mayor Pro Tem Torelli.

I move to approve the agenda as presented. Is there a second?

Mayor. Council Member Millbauer. I'll second the motion.

It's been moved by Mayor Pro Tem Torelli and seconded by Councilmember Millbauer to approve the agenda as presented. The floor is open for discussion. There being no further discussion, will the clerk please start the

have

a a zero. Good The consent team. Agenda is next on our agenda tonight. All matters listed on the consent agenda have been distributed to each member of the Kennewick City Council for Reading and Study are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion of the council with no separate discussion. Of of the Directors board.

Board position a continue progress the make to we'll have discussion and debate waiting until after a motion has been made. Made. And will the city clerk please start by reading the ordinance by title.

This is an ordinance amending the zoning classification of certain real property within the city of Kennewick located at at 33805 South Vancouver Street from residential suburban RS to residential low density RL COZ 20250005 AHBL Engineering Care of Jessica Bruce.

Thank you. As this is considered a quasi judicial act by counsel rather than legislative, quasi judicial matters require that the council meet the appearance of I'm you ask ask about you have to any to interest in the property or the courtroom. Application or do you own property within 300 feet of the subject property? Will you stand to gain or lose any financial benefit as a result of the outcome of this proceeding? Are you able to consider the application in a fair and objective manner?

Have you engaged in any ex parte communications with either the proponents or opponents of this action? Council Member Trumbo.

Because nonetheless, a good friend has had has approached me about concerns that they have on this matter. And I feel that it is enough that I should present it to the council for consideration without going into further detail. I'd rather not vote on this matter.

Other comments from council related to council member Trumbo's

discussion? Mayor McCain.

Mayor Pro Temp

Tempterrella. The decision to recuse himself is of course the council members but I believe that the council member can maintain a fair and impartial approach toward doesn't have any vested interest in it, then I would have no problem with you voting in it.

Any other comments?

So, the appearance of fairness doctrine requires requires that if there are ex parte communications that we give an opportunity for rebuttal statements from anybody who would want to speak in rebuttal to those statements that you received and we would open that public hearing for that portion for somebody to speak in favor of the project basically.

Favor or against?

To rebut.

Rebut council member No Trumbo's statement, other comments from council regarding to that. I will open a brief public hearing or as long

as

necessary for any person present or online who wishes to rebut that communication that council member Trumbo just 'll call again, is there any member present or online that would be wishing to rebut that statement? Seeing I believe it's been established that the city council can consider this matter fairly. I think council member Trumbull will need to determine whether he is going to abstain or not.

Mayor McShane I wish to abstain on this matter.

Thank you council member Trumbull. Mr. Laris will you please provide us with the staff report. Thank

you mayor and council members. So what I have in front of you today is a change of zone 20250005. Okay. If you can look at the screens over there, the applicant is Jessica Bruce of AHL Engineering and the property owner is Ilario Zaragoza. And the proposal is to rezone 4.61 acres from residential suburban to residential low density.

The comprehensive plan has the land designation as low density residential, and the location is at 3805 South Vancouver Street. And so if you look on the screen, this is the vicinity map. The property outlined in red is the property that is to be rezoned in this proposal. And on the zoning map, you can see right here that also that property is outlined in red, which is currently zoned residential suburban. And as you can see, the surrounding properties are zoned residential low density, which is what the applicant is proposing.

And just a brief history on the property. The city annexed the site in 1979 through ordinance 2,296 and zoned the property A agricultural. The property was rezoned to residential suburban in 2006 through ordinance 5,124. When it comes to permitted uses in these zonings, the RS and RL zones do allow for single family homes, but RL does allow for smaller lots. RS Zone has a minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet, while our residential low density has a minimum lot size of 5,500 square feet, although both zones do allow for townhome lots of 1,800 square foot minimum lot size.

When it comes to a change of zone, are certain findings that had to be met. One of them is that the proposed amendment conforms with a comprehensive plan, promotes the public necessity, convenience, and general welfare. And the proposed amendment does not impose a burden upon public facilities beyond their capacity to serve or reduce services to lands which are deemed unacceptable by the city. And the proposed amendment is consistent with all applicable provisions of the Kennewick Municipal Code, including those adopted by ordinance from the comprehensive plan, and that the property is adjacent and contiguous with two property of the same proposed zoning classification or higher zoning classification. And just a brief summary of the hearing.

The Planning Commission held a public hearing for this change of zone on 01/05/2026. Members of the public living adjacent probably did show up and express their opposition to this proposal as the applicant also applied for at the same time a preliminary plat for a new subdivision on this property which would not be able to proceed forward unless this change of zone was approved and that no testimony was given by the applicant. And after the public hearing of the recommendation was that the Planning Commission recommended approval of change of Zone 2020 Five-five. And I'll be happy to take

public were present in opposition?

I don't remember exactly. There were quite a few. Do you remember by any chance Anthony how many showed up?

There are 10 plus.

I was just asking. I think I see a 15. Yeah. There are quite a few. They didn't all speak. There were only a few who who spoke.

That.

I a previously and I wanted to make sure I understood what those concerns were again I if you don't mind.

So the concerns were mainly aimed at the preliminary plat application that was applied for at the same time. The main concerns generally with that was just like the size of lots and the proposed and also infrastructure since there are portions of Vancouver that don't have sidewalks for example. So like the concerns around that new development and how those needs will be met and how it would fit into the neighborhood essentially.

Infrastructure concerns being traffic concerns mostly?

Yeah pedestrian and Any

other questions on staff?

Directors

to the Board of Directors the the of of Board Board

Directors

the board. Of the Directors Board Board of wait until after a motion has been made. Of Mr. Wharton, will you please have a staff report? I was going to say that you're not him.

So I'm not as good looking, but I'll kick it off. Sounds good. Thank you, Mayor and City Council. My name is Brandon Lang, recreation manager. Here with me is Chase Wharton, our events supervisor. We're here to present a new way to manage some of the fee waivers that we permit and process for special events that will allow us to move toward more of a grant process and provide some much needed structure as well as allow for new events to come into our park system, get off the ground if they need a little bit of financial assistance for those first couple of years. So with that, I will turn it over to Chase.

Mike Slobetall. Thank you Brandon, thank you council members. So my name is Chase Warren, event supervisor. We currently fee waive about $28,000 of park recreation and facility rental fees for 12 different event groups that take place in different facilities in our in our community. We're able to do so through administrative code nine twenty.

The reason we do this is it allows broader community access opportunity and supports local nonprofits. Many of the events that are fee waived for these events are because those events better our community and also support those within our community. A few good examples, the Salmon Summit, which is hosted by the Benton Conservation District in Columbia Park. We see over 2,000 local students come in, release salmon into the river, and they learn about the ecology and the effects of the river that salmon have. We fee waive about $4,000 for that event.

Another good example is the veteran veteran stand down, which is a resource expo hosted at the New America Pavilion. The goal of that is at need local veterans get access to a suite of essential resources that allow them to integrate back in the community, assist with housing, etc. We waive about $7,000 in fee for that group as well. The current process has significant positive outcomes. However, there are two main pain points that exist.

We lack proper structure and framework for equitable monitored selection. Determination of who receives the fee waiver is really qualitative and discretionary in nature. And I think to reach the next level of operational maturity and how we approach these we need to build out some structured rubric in how we assess those and assess those fee waivers. Also the fee waivers as part of that rubric should be reviewed and approved by the Parks Recreation Director and then also brought before the Parks Recreation Commission to get their opinion on the matter. The second pain point is current recipients are not encouraged to become self sufficient.

There is not an end date on these fee waivers for them. We would like this means obtaining the fee waivers. We need to encourage them and also through this design of the grant process require them to eventually taper off their with the receipts and the amount of fees that are being waived for them. So now that you understand the historical approach, the new framework. We'd like clear guidelines on who is being selected and why.

Clear guidance on who makes that selection, again parks recreation director with commission inputs. A cap total and how much we can waive for each event. A capped amount per year we have available to waive as a bucket of money if you will. Again, we're pushing for self sufficiently self sufficiency, excuse me, and declining support, which will allow other those dollars to become available for new events that may need support to get themselves off the ground. So we're talking about eligibility.

The event what we're proposing is the event must be open to the public, community focused, in good financial standing with the city via five zero one c nonprofit government agency, or the proceeds must support a nonprofit. And they may not be receiving funds from any other City Of Kennewick source. So this is a standalone funding source. And just because someone applies and or has received funding before does not guarantee they will receive funding again. As mentioned in slide two, Kennewick Administrative Code allows the seat to choose events that can receive direct fee waivers.

KAC nine twenty will still exist. This will allow us to select events year over year who need continuous support outside of this grant process. Events like the salmon summit for kids. Events like I can bike that allow or teach individuals with disabilities how to ride a bike. Those kind of events, we can still, through KAC nine twenty, still still fee waived.

I'll note fee setting and or waivers for major community events, drive significant significant economic impacts such as water follies are not included in this grant process based on their scope and scale of their events. In the case of water follies any fees waived is negotiated based on their community impact, tourism generated, and their investments in cities parks. So what does the grant bucket look like? Each year we propose having 25,000 in fee waivers available. You may remember I said we grant about 25,000 currently so it's right on par with where we're at.

We'll set a maximum amount of 3,000 per year available to any single group other than those that fall under the KAC nine twenty. And then over the three years the support will decline following a predetermined percentage matrix which I'll show you that on slide nine. So the fees that we can waive, parks and facility rental fees, setup and tear down fees for those spaces, and then any city owned equipment, AV, flooring, those kind of things. Non waivable fees would staff staffing, excuse me, contractual services outside of the city. So if we owe service to waste management, etcetera, those we would not waive.

Alcohol related permits and requirements, reimbursements for past events, or events that promote political agendas. From an applicant standpoint, the process is pretty simple. After the event has been conditionally approved by our events team, the Parks Rec Department will have a group of three review committee members that will review the application and make a recommendation to the director of parks and recreation. The director of parks and recreation will then brief the parks and recreation commission to get their input. Upon that input the Parks and Recreation Director will have the final say in making a selection having taken that input from the commission.

Scoring criteria for the application is fairly straightforward. It's four items, merit, equity, community impact, and then marketing promotion. Merit is focused on the ability to promote a unique event to the community and become self sustaining. Equity is focused on their ability to serve underserved and underrepresented communities and audiences. Community impact is focused on how it meets a specific community need or demand, while also encouraging collaboration with local organizations.

And the marketing promotion is how the event positively impacts the Kennewick Parks and Rec system, as well as how they plan to market themselves, increase their attendees, and then of course become more self sustaining. Each one of those sections is built on a ranking system. So each of the four is worth 15 points for a 60 total, which will make more sense here in just a second. The review committee uses this matrix to determine the amount awarded, the scale in which financial support support diminishes. At the end of the three years, they will have to be self sustaining, which also allows new events to receive this funding support to get off the ground.

An example of this declining support, an event holder who gets 50 to 60 points can receive up to 100% of that 3,000 maximum in year one. In year two they would receive 70% of that maximum. Year 330%. The idea again being self sustaining. Those who score lower have less community impact or not a great fit may receive less to begin with and be tapered off quicker.

The amount awarded will be directly determined by the answers scoring and the years of support they will receive starting with year 2027. Staff Parks and Rec staff asks for and recommends approval to launch this new grant process starting with 2027 events. Thank you for your time and I'll gladly take any questions from the council.

Mister mayor? Yes, Mayor Pro Tempterra.

Two quick questions. So, what happened when we send our slide four determining eligibility, essential criteria for qualification. It says, not what get a we're to Kennewick Public Facility District, We're is that considered Kennewick funding?

I would say.

To clarify, CDBG funds wouldn't be coming through for special events, those are more project related. So I don't know if that would really apply to

Yeah, just can't think of a program that's The similar in

one that would be would be the hotel tax funding because we have representatives from you guys on there. That can be up for discussion. We don't have a lot of events that would meet this criteria be under that. For instance, baseball tournaments that come in may apply for those funds Because of the way they're structured, they would not available to be part of this grant process.

And my second question is, is there an event currently that just based on the receiving funding from other City Of Kenilworth source would no longer be eligible?

Not that I'm aware of. Not that I'm aware of.

I'd just make something up then. I can't. It's a joke. Don't read it.

Other questions? Mayor. Yeah. Council member Mubar. I too have a couple of questions. So time frame for applying. You know, there's an event August 1. When would they have to apply? When when they know receive not receive?

Yeah so we currently take applications for special events a year's time ahead year in advance. As soon as they receive that conditional approval which can take a few weeks to a month from the time of application they would then be able to Within two months time, it would be taken to go through the review process and get to the Parks and Recreation Commission via the director of Parks and Rec for then an approval. So the longest time would be three months but I would I would be very surprised if it makes that long.

Okay. How about our neighboring communities? Do they do fee waivers or is there similar to what you're proposing?

There are many many communities across the The U. S. That do fee waivers similar to this. We've actually built our structure off of

Cincinnati I believe. So there's

a we started this process about two and a half years ago. We want to make sure we got it right. But there are several cities within Washington State. I believe there's at least five that do it. They all do it a little differently. The similar, I guess the outcome is trying to make it the same where you're helping events get off the ground and then making themselves sufficient. So there are communities throughout our area. I don't believe that Richland and Pasco are doing this formal. They're more fee waving how our current process nine twenty works. But we do offer the most special events in entire Tri Cities. So it is important for us to move to a more formalized structure.

More formalized and probably more fair, would you say?

Yeah, because right now there's a lot of ambiguity on who we approve, which again is outside of the nine-twenty. So anything KAC nine-twenty, which will be moving to a KMC or the policy because it is dissolving. But anything like that. So for instance, water follies, I Can Buy, Veterans Stand Down, those are conversations we have with the city administration and say, we support it. Are you guys on board?

And a lot of times they're like, yes, it's a no brainer for us to move this forward. We want to keep continuing to support I Can Buy, continue to support Veterans Stand Down. These are for the other events that may not have that community impact. They may be a quality event that we want to help get in our system and get up and get going. They may go from 500 people to 10,000 people, but they don't fit the needs of say the veteran stand down.

Thank you. Mayor McShane? Yes, Councilmember Trummel.

Just a couple of questions that are I'd like to get some examples out here. Point.

That's

I

to such things as picnics that are done routinely, like the Mustang Club or the old car club, automobile events, or comes to mind is Labor Day picnics. We have a labor unions that put on a pretty big picnic at that time. Those have been ongoing. Are those eligible?

Certainly, yeah. They're more than eligible to apply and they will be scored based on that metric, the ranking that we have by the review committee. Okay.

So with these new criteria, so to speak, if you've been doing it for fifteen years, you get a shot. You get first year shot.

Certainly. Yes,

sir. Okay. The one other question I have to ask is, you know, in our complicated world these days, things can be difficult to determine if it's a cause or a political effort. I don't have to give too many examples, but we'll just say global warming or maybe something about some event that's supposed to favor some gender or something like that. I don't want to go too far down the road. People do these things to get support, to get public awareness of them, and to sometimes raise money or get membership. Are those things considered If

we had a situation like that, we would go through our parks and rec leadership as well as city administration to have that conversation to make a determination. We have no intention of making decisions in a vacuum for events that receive or do not receive fee waivers. So in instances where something comes up that may or may not fit or else on that borderline, we wear on the side of caution to have a conversation, make a determination that way.

But it's a no brainer. If the Benton County Republican Party wants to do something in Columbia Park, it's gonna cost. Yes, sir. Thank you.

Council member of each other.

Chase, it looks like in 2025 there were 12 events for that total. How many applications did we get over and above the 12?

Any idea?

We had 107 events last year.

How many did all 107 apply for grant help?

No we did not have a full we did not have a proper application process. So if they approached us and essentially said hey we need some support can you help? We would again very qualitatively look to see if they were an organization that was benefiting the community and we would make a determination.

And maybe I misunderstood. We gave 12 events help. Yes. So out of the 107 how many of them requested help I guess is what I'm asking.

Not many more than the 12.

Okay. That was what I

was wondering. I would say majority they requested do we work with good people. Majority of those requested do in fact need the support. And so we look at it make a determination. And I don't know that there were any others off the top of my head that were above and beyond the 12.

And just one more follow-up. It looks like on there with the $3,000 limit though you referenced the ones that are getting more than that and they could stay getting that, correct?

Correct.

Guess one of the thoughts I have is it's a $25,000 grant and there's a process in place now that looks to me to be very it's good because we're getting we're breaking down some of the things that have been bad in it. But if I hear something takes three months for Park and Rec to get approval, we're almost taking way too much time to talk about a $25,000 grant in my opinion. I want to make sure the bureaucracy isn't growing substantially on something that's a pretty small item that looks like it's been servicing pretty well. The people that are needing it are getting it. And so I hate to say we're to throw a bunch more in there. I like where we're headed with it. But I just would say, let's be cautious so we don't build a big bureaucracy on getting these people their money. If it's getting it there now, let's not make it a lot harder for them to do it.

Yes, that's a great question. As a rec manager, I look to set my team up for success. Right now, when they get asked, really don't have an answer. So they come to me and, hey, what would you like to do in this event? And then we ask questions and we do some investigating. And most of the time as Chase said, we permit that. The goal is to not make red tape. Trust me, we work in Parks and Rec. We would like all the red tape to go away because we're creative and we're doing cool stuff in our parks, right? So at the end of the I don't think this will take that long.

There are ways that we can move quickly through the system. As Jay said, Jay did a good job. He didn't share this, but he did a good job. We used to take all events in at the December and permit all of them at the same time. He created a process where they could go year round.

So now they're going three sixty five days ahead and it's a much better process for events. We probably couldn't do this without the change that he made, which gives us some more flexibility on how long we have. If you've worked in events, we'll get some events that come to us and say, I want to do an event sixty days from now. Well, I don't know how successful that event would be because we're already planning a river of fire right now, for instance. And so it also helps formalize the structure and make sure events have an idea on how long things take and are not coming to the table trying to rush I guess.

I would just preface that, when you guys come to your annual report, blew us all the way last time how busy you were. So it wasn't a comment on that. I was more saying give yourselves a chance of as you work through this, if you find out hey we're spending a lot of extra time doing this then just come back and get whatever approval we needed to change it to make it quicker for you. If the scoring gets hard, if things are taking too long, then don't be scared to come out and say we're going to shorten that a long way. Good job guys, thanks.

I have a few questions for you. Just help me walk through some of this. It's a little unclear to me as we talk about a $3,000 maximum. And then we look at the list of in kind sponsorships that we've done. Are these apples to apples comparisons? So the in kind sponsorships we're doing now are equal to the $3,000 grant that we would allow per event?

They're very close.

Can you give us an example of those in kind contributions for the veterans stand down for example?

Yeah, the veterans stand down. Veterans stand down again would be one we consider as part of the KAC920 continuation. But there we fee waived about 7,000 for them. So 6,987 right there. So that event we fee waived essentially everything other than I believe.

I'm sorry I understand that part I guess what are those things that we're waiving because we're obviously doing something. So what are those types

of So that is use of the facility. So they're in the facility for two days in New America Pavilion which is about 2,500 per day for the full rental. So it's about 5,000 there. Some support and setup fees for the equipment they use. We don't charge them for the tables, the chairs, some of those things. That would be those amounts.

And so as we now talk about going to a $3,000 amount for the veterans stand down, that would not be included in this grant because it has a different function in the community?

Yeah. Effectively, they are providing above and beyond service to community and community members. So we can consider them as part of the KAC nine twenty to receive funding and support outside of this proposed grant. Others that do not provide that level of community

that's a remaining. We're talking about a grant program that would be 25 question. Thousand dollars I'm guessing as I go through this, there's probably a couple more that would still be in that 9,000

Yes, I would say two more for sure.

And so we are increasing then our in kind available scholarships as part of this program. Is that right? Yes sir. And so just picking on a couple others to make sure I understand what we're doing. For example, the Salmon Summit, great activity again in our community. 4,000 in kind sponsorship, would that one be under the $9.20 or would that be under this grant program?

Because of the impact on youth, I would argue nine twenty. But with all events, we will review them annually to make sure they fit.

Yeah, fair enough. I guess that's what I'm trying to make sure I ascertain is that some of these to that. That. Moneymaking events, And right? They don't have vendors that are paying fees and those types of things.

And those are some of the ones I have concerns about as we go into this program. Not knowing all the details of all of these programs, it certainly seems like there are some that would fall under that kind of category and there are some that would not. Is there this nine twenty, is that well enough defined to ensure that we are not creating a lack of in kind contribution or in kind support for those events that we may lose some of those in our community.

Yes, I believe so. So it says the fee reduction policy upon written request from the sponsor park charges may be considered for reduced rates if the activity meets one or more of the following criteria. The event is deemed to be of overriding public service. The event is put on by an outside agency as a benefit to the park and the proceeds are donated to the park development fund.

And that's like that you're reading from the KAC there?

From the yes. Yes, Thank you.

I think that's all my questions. Alright, if there are no other questions, I will entertain a motion. Mayor? Council Member Millbauer.

And make a motion to approve the special events grant program as presented. Is there a second?

Mayor, I second it.

It has been moved by council member and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Torelli to approve the special events grant program as presented. The floor is open for discussion.

Mr. Mayor.

Council Member Clifford.

I really appreciate it. By Council Member O'Shea. Your presentation was very professional and to the point. But I just see mounds and mounds of bureaucracy there. I heard someone say on the radio one day about their practicing physician, said medicine is relational not transactional.

And I'm a cop and I immediately wrote that down. I want to work at my job building relationships with people rather than just writing tickets and making arrests and adding up numbers. And when you went through the presentation, it seemed so bureaucratic to me that we're losing that relational part of our Parks and Recreation program, so it just I'd love for me. It's a I will be voting no and ask that we just slow down and let's let's can we I'd love to go through it with you and and I think it's gonna pass. No big deal.

But that's why I'm voting no just bureaucracy just seems really, really thick from me and that concerns me. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. Thank you. Other comments?

I will make a couple of comments myself then. I share some of the same concerns about adding bureaucracy to any of our activities. I think we have enough to do. I think we talk about that all the time, right? So we've enough to do. I think the concern I have that has been expressed this evening is that we also need to have a formal process by which we're making these decisions. And I think the staff have tried to put that together in this. I don't know that it's perfect. I don't know that you'll know that. I don't know that you'll ever find that.

But I do know that you'll get started on it and have a path that you can go down. I am excited for more community events to be able to be started and kick started because a of times that's what it takes to get these events off the ground. I don't think we do enough events in Kennewick although you guys are doing amazing work. I think there can be more and I think that as you talk through our community that's one of the things keep hearing from members of our community and that is we just don't there's not enough offer and you guys are doing a great job of trying to get that off the ground. I appreciate that comment and would encourage you if you find this to be clunky, do not be afraid to bring it back and say we need to have a change made to make this streamlined. Mayor McClain.

Yes. Council member Trumbo.

I am motivated by the comments of councilman Clippert and your comments to say that I I am mostly concerned about groups, nonprofits in our community who genuinely are trying to do things to help the people in this community and are operating on a shoestring. And one of them is an organization that tries to provide housing has and successfully provided housing for developmentally disabled adults. Passive remark, I have one of those kids. And Benton County has made it increasingly difficult for these organizations to do things in fairgrounds facilities. The cost is getting to be a real problem.

So the the potential for too much bureaucracy may be there. But I'll be voting for this because I'm aware of several organizations that are really striving to do well for the people in this community. And I think they deserve a break. That's all

I wanted to say. Thank you. Any additional comments? Mayor McChing? Yes, Mayor Pro Tempterreli. One thing I do like about this process is it will bring to public perception or visibility organizations that just slide by us, right? This is going to go before the parks department. They will get that visibility that every organization organization needs to survive. And I think that's just as important as the grant itself is the publicity that results from it. Thank you. Thank you. I don't know that I

heard it tonight, but I wanted to just double check. This is going to be sorry, this is a question for staff. This is going be implemented starting in 2027. Correct. Events this year are already ongoing, already figured this would be for things starting in 2027. Probably February 27 because it's gotta be

a year out. We already have events. Yeah. Starting to start to turn.

Yeah. Just check. Alright. Alright. If there are no additional comments, I will entertain a motion or excuse me, it's already been properly moved and seconded to approve the special events grant program as presented.

You both. Next on the agenda, the city manager has an update for us on efforts to finalize the shoreline reconveyance related to Columbia River Waterfront.

Thank you Mayor McShane. Good evening council. Thank you for the last minute addition sorry to get this added yesterday but as you guys are aware we are under gun to get this into legislation. So I just had a couple of quick updates. I wanted to thank you all for approving the lobbyists. They got on board. We got the contract signed right after the meeting last week. They attended the first lobbying meeting for the project on Thursday and have hit the ground running. So we had another meeting with them today to also get set up with what we're gonna be looking at for earmarks and so forth moving forward. But as part of that lobbyist call, we kind of identified that the shoreline reconvanced project would be going into the word of bill.

We have talked about different avenues for that to be approved. So with that, the legislation for that is due this Friday. We've already been in big conversations with senator or congressman Newhouse's office. We've got placeholders in there. They've seen some draft language. We filled out the application. So the biggest thing for us to have by Friday is the finalization of what properties are gonna be requested. We did hear back from the tribes. The Yakima Nation will be requesting Babin Island, and the Umatillas will be requesting property just south of Columbia Point South in Richland. So they are diligently working on getting that language pulled together to get in the legislation, and then we're finalizing our language.

So the one thing I wanted to verify with council this evening, when we started looking at all of our parcels, we had everything basically from the city limits line down to the Blue Bridge. And then under the Blue Bridge is the levee system that follows down through and on the other side, basically by the island and the north side of Duffy's Pond. So what we have in our language is that we will take those levies completely. Some of the other jurisdictions have indicated that they will leave the levy, so they it kinda reads that the with the exception of designated levy structure or flood control infrastructure shall remain with the core. So I just wanted to verify that we are still under the impression that we would like to take the property, but we would like to suggest some language that indicate that the flood control apparatus and practice shall remain with the responsibility of the core.

So for example, there is one pump in the levee between the island and Duffy's Pond that helps manage flood control within Duffy's Pond and it helps with our water system as well. So we're just wanting to indicate that they would keep responsibility of that pump house essentially, but we would take ownership of the actual property. So I just want to verify that that is okay with council as written before Friday.

Go ahead. Questions, please.

Guess I will defer to staff because it's moving so fast. However, does that leave the door open for the core to have a say in what you do with that pump, how the pump works, when you do it, how much it costs? Part of this is to get them to never ever talk to them again, to be honest with you, because they're horrible. So is that leaving the door open where they can come back and have a say in what we do in certain areas?

Think there's always the potential. Our biggest concern is that pump is very old and not utilized very well, and so do we wanna take ownership of that at this point? The other piece is this is all subject to getting put into the bill at this time. So that's what we're gonna propose out of the gate. That does not mean that during this process of writing this into the bill and negotiations back and forth that this won't change. This will be our starting point.

Like I say, I'll I'll Yep. Trust whatever staff comes up with on that, but that would be my only concern is that we don't get them completely gone when we have the chance to get them. What would be the process down the road if they have a section of a pump? It's not a reconveyance of that. Or is there a part of the levy system that would reconveyed? How does that work?

I think what we're requesting again, still subject to negotiation, is that we would keep the property, it would all come to the city, we would own the levy, we would just ask them to continue operation of that pump.

They'd like a sub to us.

We'll see how this works.

We'll write some new policy we work on that pump. I'm We'll see how that fine with that.

Just a quick follow-up, just to make sure I understand. So we've talked about a lot of different things over the years, right? And so we have a levy system for those who aren't familiar with that. We have a levy system along the riverfront in Downtown Kennewick. We would be taking over ownership of the entire levy, the property, and the only thing we would remain is the pump itself. The pump chamber and the pertinences related to that, is that that's what we're thinking?

That's what our thought process is. I still need to work with our attorney to write that language but that's kind of what we're thinking.

That's the concept, right?

Okay. Thank you. Obviously subject to how it goes in DC. If we own the levees throughout that process, do we have the right to take the levees down?

Will be By something that owning them, it would give us more of a right to do that function. It is our understanding that they are higher than they need to be at this point, so that would give us flexibility to lower

modify them. Yes, because if you think about it, the levies that are in place still to this day, Columbia Park

doesn't have levies. Columbia Park is also a park that would flood not houses.

I get it, but it doesn't flood anymore. Our flood protection is called how many dams I

good Council member Clifford.

I Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And we're think thinking that's to the core would agree to that.

We don't know that at this point. Like I said, that's our starting point.

One more question. Please. And the properties that you mentioned reference to Yakima's and the Umatilla's, they would have sole ownership of that or just access to? The properties that they're requesting would go to them for sole ownership. So Bateman Island Island would no longer be usable by the citizens in the Tri Cities if they did not have permission of that tribe to use them?

Depending on how the tribe decides to to function and how they get transferred, yes.

And that is part of the current language?

They are working on that language right now. We haven't seen it yet. We're supposed to see it before the end of the week.

Thank you. Yeah, and

just to clarify, so we talked about the Yakima Nation having Bateman Island, but also Columbia Point South. And again, where is exactly Columbia Point South? That would be East of Interstate 182 along the Yakima River as it borders the Yakima River on the North until you get to Highway 240 plus or minus. Does that sound about right?

I think so.

There's a big rock beach area that I think is what they're talking about that we've talked about for a long time, right?

Yeah, and again, I I don't know that I've seen the exact map but I do know that that would be generally speaking the area would be East of Interstate 182 to the Yakima River down to

it. Yeah.

There is a question also, city manager. The access to the island that's been postulated, that doesn't necessarily mean that there's restricted access to the island. That's all part of these negotiations. And so as we've talked about these MOAs and discussions related to our activities with the tribes as it comes to Columbia Park, it would be kind of shoe on the other foot as we talk about public access to continue in those areas. And I don't know that that's a foregone conclusion. Think that's part of what is being discussed right now in the legislation.

Yes,

please. And so if the Bateman Island and the other property was I apologize for forget what it was. It'll be a point south. Columbia Point South. So then, if they took sole ownership of it, then they're going to take the responsibility when it catches on fire to put that fire out and keep it from spreading around across the Tri Cities?

It would be their property and their responsibility depending on how it gets transferred. If it gets transferred as fee simple property, then there's other negotiations because it still resides within whichever jurisdiction which would be Richland on both accounts. But if it goes into trust, then it would be an island that would they would be responsible for. Thank you. Thank you,

mister mayor. Thank you. Any additional questions to staff?

I do have one more.

Yes, please.

So the other piece that was identified through the lobby call when we were talking about getting support and trying to render support from multiple other senators, congressmen to get this passed, it was identified that a joint jurisdictional and tribal letter as we submit this would come with a lot of weight. So in your packet, and I sent around last week, is a joint letter of support for the Tri City Shoreline Reconveyance legislation. This just came out yesterday, so I will caveat that there may be a few tweaks, grammar changes here or there. But given the timeline, I wanted to get this in front of you and see if we had consensus to approve this and sign on to the joint letter and give me authority essentially to allow any grammatical changes. But if there's any substantive changes, I will bring this back to council.

We have until the seventeenth to to get this finalized. So I wanted to get it approved before because our meeting is actually on the seventeenth. Would

you like a motion

for I would like that motion for the letter. That's what we're looking for a motion for.

I would entertain a motion. Mister mayor? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Torelli.

I move to approve the letter as presented with the caveat that it may need some grammar changes. Mayor? Yes. I will second that motion.

It's been moved by Mayor Pro Tem Torelli and seconded by council member Milbauer to approve the letter as presented allowing for grammatical changes to be made by the city manager. I would just add it's no other discussion. Think that it's an incredibly important moment for our community to go forward with this. I do know that there are are trade offs when we have to make these types of decisions. I would encourage staff to work with the Army Corps to get the pump replaced as part of this legislation and have it included.

Whether it is included as our ownership or theirs, it sounds like it ought to be replaced. And so this is a great opportunity to do that and encourage staff to continue on that regard. So those are things that certainly the levy system as we've talked about has been an important part of keeping Kennewick safe. Think that we can continue to do that. We have a professional staff, our public works folks do a very good job and I have no concerns related to that.

I think whatever we can do to move on from the Army Corps is a good thing. For those that are unfamiliar, I had a nice tour of the park near Duffy's Pond that is not able to be irrigated currently because we have a broken sprinkler line in the dike, in the levee that we haven't been able to replace in part because the Army Corps estimates that it's a $15,000 permit to go replace a small sprinkler line. And so for those that may not be familiar with some of the challenges related to federal actions, that's one of the examples related to that. One of the this is a small reason why we would want to do a transfer of Columbia Park. There's lots more than that.

That's just a very easy example of why. And so I'm very strongly supportive of sending a letter. In my experience in my day job, anytime we can work together with other units of government and the local tribes, it's significantly more effective in Washington DC and have been on the receiving end of a ranking member on one of the House subcommittees where he was surprised to see a letter of support from a tribe for a title transfer of this nature and said, and I quote, this is the way all of these should be done. And so I think that we find I think if we can continue down that path, think we'll find great support in Washington DC for this. And so I would encourage us to approve this.

Any other comments? Alright. It's been properly moved and seconded to approve the joint support Tri City Shoreline Reconvance legislation letter grammatical changes as necessary by the city manager. Will the clerk please start the vote?

Councilmember Millbauer? Thank you.

That's passed unanimously. Thank you very much. Alright, we're to the council comments and discussion portion of our meeting. We're going to go ahead and start down the line. Council member Beecham, will you please start?

Yeah, thank you, Mayor. I want to address the public meeting we had at Highlands and appreciate what our mayor had to say at the very end of that meeting. Funny enough, throughout the meeting, I was texting him many, many times saying I wouldn't say anything. I don't think it's the right time. I think the crowd we've lost it. There's too many comments going on back and forth and he kept texting me. I'm going to say something. I'm going to say something Up until he said something I didn't think it would be perceived or come across the right way. Don't know. I guess I didn't trust him as good as it was, but I was very proud of him and what he stood up and said because I think that was exactly how the council felt.

And so I hope everybody understands that that's the mayor speaking for a council that's pretty unified on on the subject. I think he did a tremendous job showing where we stood and I'm glad I didn't have to say because I think I I don't know about it. It wasn't wussing out but it was a tough conversation to have and I think he did a great job. So, I appreciate his leadership on that. Also just following up with that, I know staff's doing everything possible. Keep showing up and keep talking about it because it's a tough subject. You can see it's kind of the talk of everything we're doing right now from the legislature. And so don't get frustrated. We'll do whatever we can and we're trying. So I think that's all I have tonight. Thank you. Councilmember Malar.

Thank you. Thank you for those words. Councilmember I also would respond and thank the staff from the city and also the school district for putting that meeting together hastily. I know there's a lot of emotionally charged. It's an important subject, but I thought it came together well. There were more questions, but we've got a lot accomplished there in my opinion. I do want to thank everyone for coming, the visitors, for speaking, and thanks staff. I also want to talk to a few points. I did attend the K-twelve luncheon through the chamber with staff. It was very good to hear what the three different school districts are doing in our community. I attended the ribbon cutting for the memorial pullover in Pasco, the cover. I got inside there from the outside. Doesn't look very big. You get inside. It's huge.

It's very nice. I was surprised to learn they're gonna take it up and down every year. So that was nice. And I met with some of their council members and some of their assistants over there because they opened it up to everyone that day. Attended the Visit Tri Cities meeting. Officer Peterson retirement over KPD and did the ribbon cutting for Indigo Urgent Care along with staff and council member Trumbo. Attended the pretrial diversion. Diversion. Were with council member Trumbo and Mayor Pro Tem Torelli. 12 individuals graduated.

So, to them. Over the past two years, there's been 57 participants completed that program which really serves them, but also saves us as citizens and the program and the courts. It saves in dollars as well. I did attend the City Action Days two weeks ago in Lacey Olympia area, day and a half of discussions and sessions. Friday, city action calls are every Friday for JWC.

If there's something you're interested in hearing, you can hear what's going on in the week. We heard from the AWC lobby lobbyists. Governor Ferguson spoke and gave us some insight into his budget ideas, housing programs, discussion on housing bills. There are city hot topics, what's going on in cities. There are some talks on LRAs throughout Washington. They got an update on the bills that are in session. Let's see here. We also heard from office of financial management. I think her name was Katie Chapman C. She gave the state forecast and budget overview, predicted 2026 to be modest growth.

And employment growth is going to slow in 2026. Unfortunately, unemployment in The US is slightly uptick. We did hear from the National League of Cities. They're from Washington DC. They came out and spoke. One of their points that I always find interesting is they spoke to PFAs. It's just not something that's happening in

our

area. Had a question as well as city manager from Airway Heights asked a question. He got with me afterwards because it was on funding and lawsuits. To to some money. We're We're are in between Fairchild Air Force Base and Spokane Airport. Their water is polluted pretty heavily. So they have water piped in from the city of Spokane who agreed to pipe. You know, they work together. They have water piped in there. So they're going through a lot and hired environmental attorneys to be successful in gaining some money back.

I was appointed to the large city board for AWC to represent Kennewick actually in the Tri City areas on this side of the state. So, looking forward to those meetings and serving the community a little bit more. With that, I'll end my report and thank everyone. Thank you. Council Member Trumbo.

To to the the Community Action Connections Board meeting. For those of you who may not know, that's a nonprofit. It's been in existence a long time in our area. They exist for purpose of helping people who need help in their circumstances of life, sometimes weatherization. There are issues that basically are are financial financially in in need and it's generally for the purpose of helping them survive in their existing position.

They don't provide twenty four hour good question. I I It's largely invisible, but it's been around for a very long time. And it reaches out as far as Cornell. So it's working in the background all around us. One of things the I would like to point out is that meeting, we had a we meet basically monthly.

Was a normal meeting, We went down a list of all things on the agenda, but the real meat and potatoes of that meeting was an executive session. And I may remind you that we had about succession with that organization. Our executive director had been there twenty five years. And there didn't appear to be any plan in place. So with the board's insistence, we chose to get a number two person hired.

And that individual showed up early January, if I remember correctly. And for some reason, it didn't work out well. And we had to have discussions in the executive session. And after that, we met in open session. And at that time, the board took action to reverse decisions of the executive director.

The executive director provided a new of Board of Directors of Previously, we're answering to the number two person. But the executive director decided that that wasn't going to be the case and kind of divided it up. You And

good

point.

Decision. And

I

it was important to do that. And we did. What it means is we have some unrest inside CAC. And we're going to have to deal with it. So the boat isn't completely righted yet.

We thought we had it, but apparently we don't. And everything I've told you is was shared in the open session following the executive session. So we still have stuff to do there. And it's one of that perhaps the mayor will recall this why I, not having this information, in my gut, I felt I need to stay on CAC. So we still have stuff to do there.

I intended the graduation event for the pretrial diversion program. It was well attended. Councilman made reference to it. There were graduates, family members, and court related county employees. And they pretty much filled the 3rd Floor, Room 303, upstairs in the County Admin.

Was it standing room, Jim? I think it might have been. I was up front. I was pleased to know that graduates, not all, but graduates or 12 individuals, some of the graduates spoke of how the program benefited them and that the how part is important, how it benefited them, along with appreciation for the individuals associated with the program and others who helped them along. Understanding here is this is not a small deal.

It is like you get to do this for a year. So you have to show up and do all the stuff. Each received a graduate graduation certificate and it was reassuring to hear applause from throughout the room. Our attorney, Lorencio, Lorencio, was there and made some remarks of encouragement. That was good that the city's attorney was there. I appreciate that. I think he spoke glowingly of this program previously. So it's not news for us. Noted that he mentioned that this is a program that's a model for the state of Washington. There's not a little bit of pride there, but there might be some.

I had the opportunity to share personal words of encouragement to the graduates, and I did so. I hope it was useful. It was an emotional and deeply meaningful ceremony for the graduates who quite honestly, because of where they've been and what they've done, weren't entirely comfortable being there. It was good that they were there. Here. Also, I attended the

is that thing?

Can't hardly get it up here. The Indigo urgent care program in Kennewick. It was I was interested to know, I spoke to one of the folks there, just what kind of demand there is for these facilities. And I was immediately set straight that Indigo has 49 of these urgent care clinics in the state of Washington. Most of them on the West Side, more than a few in Spokane, and several here mentioning Prosser and Kennewick.

And why? Because for any of you who might be a little beyond the age of 40, it's kind of hard to get a doctor's appointment these days with your personal care physician. And the waiting line in an emergency room is reminiscent of Baskin Robbins. Pull a ticket, have a seat. So that's why this kind of medical treatment is now occurring.

And we did a little walk through, if I counted correctly, five exam rooms, an x-ray diagnostic room, several exam rooms specifically designed to be comfortable and fun for children. I thought that was interesting. Chamber of Commerce was there in force, as always.

And

had police officers there. And George Ray also attended. He was doing his duty there. And if I took my notes correctly, Torelli and Mr. Milbauer were present.

I think that should complete my remarks, except to say that on the May or on the at the town hall meeting, I don't remember who I said this, but I gave it a C minus ranking for effectiveness. There was a lot of venting, but very little discussion about how to go forward. I think that's what was missing in large part. And because of that, I've stood on it for the whole week. And council, I believe, has received the result of that, which is I wanted to draft something that looked like a path forward, so I did my own version of a resolution.

It's not necessarily in the form of most resolutions, I think. It's not necessarily feel good. It's not, I hope, easily dismissed because it's a call for action. In the checkpoints, the boxes are definitely in that document. Because if we're going see change, meaningful change with, limited risk alternative housing that's gonna affect our community, we're going to have to call for some serious legislative changes.

And that's what I hope happens. I've drafted that. City managers got it. The council's got it. I don't know if it's gonna go anywhere, but that town hall meeting certainly prompted me to wanna do that. Thank you, mister mayor.

Thank you, council member Trumbull. Council member Clifford.

Thank you, mister Mayor. I too attend every one of the graduations in the therapy. There's specific therapeutic court graduations, but all of them are therapeutic and helping people dig their way out of some very, very difficult situations. If you've never gone to one before, everybody in hearing of my voice at this time, I strongly encourage you. I don't know of any reason why you couldn't sit in the audience, but bring box of Kleenex because you will hear people who have lost their families, they've lost their lives, their jobs, I'm sorry.

And I've heard many, many times that if it wasn't for this court, I would be dead now. And I remember I heard one man, one of the last ones I went to, he said, I've lived on the streets for seven years. And this court finally gave me a way to get off the streets and get my life together and get my family back and my job back. You're just amazing. I strongly encourage you to go. Also went to the state of the schools luncheon. It was fantastic. The people I got to sit with from this audience are here tonight. Thank you for letting me sit at the table with you. And it's always so wonderful to hear our superintendents or anybody involved in education here.

How kids lives can be just transformed through our education system, especially very, very proud of Tri Tech and what it's doing in our community. And lastly, the town hall. City of Kennewick, I couldn't be any more proud of you. You showed up. You showed up. And having been worked in Olympia for fourteen years, that's when you get things changed. When people show up and you showed up. There It wasn't standing room only. There wasn't any room left to stand. You guys were awesome.

I am so very, very proud of you. Keep up the good work. Don't give up. I won't give up. And let's work together and let's win this fight.

Mayor Pro Temterrelli. I'll keep it really short. The only place I went to that somebody else wasn't at was the Tridec that. To to

be

is called the HAPAC, the Hanford Area Economic Investment Fund Advisory Council. That process is transferring over to Tridec. They're better positioned to do a lot of the work that needs to be done there. So that's still underway. Also, you know, the the meeting Monday night I think was healthy and that allowed people to articulate the fears, the concerns, the worries, and now it is time to come up with action plans and some of that is underway now in conjunction with Kenilocks School District as well as Kenilocks City Council.

So, we are working toward that and and you know, I think the mayor said it well at the meeting. Engagement is everything. We need to keep the pressure up hit the right places and I will say say, not trying to controversial. Attacking the KPD is not the answer. You can be upset and Chief Guerrero accepts that.

City staff is on the side of the folks here and we're working to do everything we can. So, keep in mind that, you know, we are on your side as frustrating as it is. We are part of your family. Like all family members, sometimes you just want to yell at somebody and it's a family member. I understand that. But these are the folks who are going to help make that change that we need. So thank you.

Thank you. Manager Erman.

Thank you, Mayor McShane. In regards to the joint resolution, so just so everyone is aware and I won't steal. I'm sure Mayor McShane wants to talk about this but we did have a good meeting with the school district. So, a couple of school district board members and mayor McShane and mayor Pro Tem Torelli met with them last week after the town hall. We had a great discussion about possible ways to move forward.

One was doing a joint resolution with the school district and the city council. So I just wanna make sure that council you're aware that that was sent to you along with the resolution that or the, yeah, the resolution that council member Chumbo had put together. I do I did receive a working copy from the school district today, so they're continuing to make tweaks as well. I will share that out with you, first thing tomorrow morning. What I would ask is if that you have any comments or any major concerns with the way anything is written in either one of those now that you send those forward.

My hope is to combine that work with the school district and have something for you to review on February 10 so that we have a document that's ready to come forward at the February 17 meeting. So I just wanted to throw that out there. And then I want to remind everybody that the February 10 workshop will be at 03:30 in the afternoon at the Convention Center. Our plan is to do a tour of the construction site. We are moving that up to 03:30 so that we can do that tour through the construction site in the daylight, not in the dark.

And then we do have a room set aside so that we can have a small meeting afterwards where we can talk about the joint resolution. And then we will also, hopefully, depending on conversations this week, have an interlocal agreement for Parking Lot E with the Port Of Kennewick to review as well. And then last but not least, just a reminder to mark your calendars that we have the city retreat scheduled for March 7 at the Convention Center. That's a Saturday. That's all I have.

All right. Thank you. And thank you to my council members that were attendance. Want to just note all of our council members were in attendance on Monday night at the town hall and I appreciated everyone's sacrifice of their time. Do want to talk about less restrictive alternative housing, but just a couple of quick things before I wanted to express appreciation to Mayor Pro Tem Torelli for attending the Medtronic meeting on my behalf last week.

I also wanted to talk just a little bit about our historic Downtown Kennewick partnership. For those that are unfamiliar, we have a non profit that runs a significant portion of our downtown activities and they assist us with that for the city. It's an awesome program that we have down there. It does our B tax and contributions that they get a credit for. Businesses can donate to that and those that haven't been able to enjoy that need to try that out.

Feel free to reach out to me or to Stephanie Buttner, Director of is open. You to Board is and you things downtown. It certainly is high on my priority list as we go through. I want to encourage that continued on. I will say that this past couple of weeks, my time has been spent a significant amount of my time has been spent working on what we call less restrictive alternative housing.

Council member Trumbo mentioned that limited risk I think that's another word that some people may use less restrictive alternative housing is what it is called for sexually violent predators. Those are things that you know words that are acronymed out at our state level too often. And I think we need to focus on what they truly are. I think as we speak of these things I think we need to speak to what they really are. I do and I am encouraged by the continued support from the Kennewick School District and want to express appreciation for that.

I think that we're finding that our community does have a stance in this regard and it was coming together as to what needs to happen, not only in our community, but across the state. Don't know. I'm going to lean on Premier Pro Tem Torelli to make sure to kick me under the table if I'm speaking too far on legislative items from the dais. Is there anything I'm concerned about? No. Okay. All right. Perfect. All right. So a couple of things.

For those that have not had a chance to do some of the research on this, there's a significant amount of information related to this action, both done by state agencies as well as by those that are supporting those state agencies to the legislature. Some of those documents are long, 45 plus pages long, and as you read through those, they're a little hard to understand. What I can tell you is assuredly to me that there's a flaw in the current legislation. It's frustrating at times when we have these situations in Olympia, and we don't have enough folks that are willing to communicate and talk about and have dialogue related to this. From what we understand from our state legislators, there's house bills that are being proposed that are not being given a chance to be heard.

They aren't considering it. They're not talking about it. However, tomorrow morning there is a Senate Bill 6,339 that's going to be considered at a public hearing and would encourage those that feel like they would like to have a voice in that to both either sign in to testify towards that. Just as a detailed information that Senate bill is not going far enough in my opinion. However, it's a good first start.

It is related specifically to ownership of the property and the fact that the people that own the property need to be running the facility for the less restrictive housing alternative. Anyway, that's supported by our state legislators here in the 8th District as well as a couple of others here locally. But I do want to encourage folks to that. I am planning on getting online to support that. I unfortunately can't be in Olympia.

We have had people from our community in Olympia today that made the trek over to help testify and to speak with legislators on that side of the mountains. It's going to take a continued community effort this. I would encourage our council members to become educated as you have the time to do so. In the meantime, feel free to ask questions related to that. There is a significant amount of information on this subject.

It is a little bit challenging. I think we generally speaking understand the process although today I learned more about light industrial restrictions related to less restrictive alternative housing which was new to me and I've done a lot research in this in the last three weeks. And so this is like I say, so this is ongoing effort. I think we will be continuing. I'm looking forward to the resolution coming before council so we can speak in a united front from our community.

We have lots of support for this from other councils as well as from the Benton County Commission Commissioners and Franklin County Commissioners who reached out to me to express continued support. For Kennewick as we try to lead out on this particular issue. It's challenging to me to hear of the struggles that we saw. And I know that there were a lot of people frustrated by the town hall and the lack answers to some of the questions. I know that there were questions I wanted to have answered that I didn't get answered.

We're submitting those questions to DSHS and DOC to try to get those answers for our community. But there were a lot of things expressed and shared in that meeting that needed to be. And I think that as we grade that meeting, and I recognize council member Trumbo C minus, I think we also need to recognize that you have community that's frustrated, upset, that's scared, that is trying to figure out what the next path is. On Saturday, I had an opportunity to meet a young man who was so frustrated, he made some statements that I encouraged him to recant related to how he feels about this particular issue. He feels disenfranchised.

He feels like his voice doesn't count. And I think that we need to encourage continued dialogue on this issue both in our community and across the state so that we prohibit those types of things from happening that he may have suggested that he was considering. As we work through those things together, I think we're going find we're much stronger. I don't think this is a partisan issue. I think this is an issue that affects all of us. I think that's about all I want to say tonight. And so I appreciate everyone's help as we continue on this. It looks like something to say Jim, please.

Thank you. Thank you for your word. Just for everyone's edification, if you go, if you're interested, leg.wa.gov. If you don't know, plug in that bill number. It is being heard tomorrow morning at 8AM on Senate Human Services. So, you have an opportunity to sign in to do that. Thank you.

Thanks, Council Member Bill Barr. All right, there's no further business on tonight's agenda. It is now 08:19 and the meeting is concluded.