City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening, residents of Everett, Washington, and interested parties. I'd like to call to order the Everett City Council meeting of September 2nd, 2026. For information on council meetings and how to participate, please visit everettwa.gov slash city council. Please note that we do not allow comments that make up any kind of campaigning, whether for or against ballot measures or candidates running for office. We also do not accept comments focused on personal matters that are unrelated to city business. We ask that our audience refrain from clapping, cheering, or booing, and no signage of any kind is allowed in the chambers. We also will ask everyone to take a seat and not gather in our entryway area. Clerk, please take the roll.

Mayor Franklin. Here. Councilmember Bader.

Here.

Vice President Ryan. Here. Councilmember Burbano.

Excused.

Councilmember Tuohy. Here. Councilmember Weir. Here. Councilmember Zerlingo.

Here.

President Schwab.

Excused. I'd like now to ask Council Member Bader to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

To the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Council Member Weir, will you recite our land acknowledgment?

The City Council wishes to acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Stoogeship people, and their successors, the Tulalip tribes. Since time immemorial, they have hunted, fished, gathered on, and taken care of these lands and waters. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water. We will strive to be honest about our past mistakes and bring about a future that includes their people, stories, and voices to form a more just and equitable society.

Thank you. Mayor Franklin.

Good evening. Good evening, council and community. First, happy first day of school to all our Everett and Muckleteel students, including my daughter. I want to give a shout out to Superintendents Dr. Saltzman and Dr. Bernalson, as well as our teachers, administrators, and other school staff members. And a reminder to our community that there are a lot more kids out there on the road, so please be cautious as you're driving about and as they're heading to school. So please be extra cautious. And then Labor Day is coming up, so I want to take a moment to acknowledge the many hardworking people that keep our community moving forward every day. Everett has a proud history built by workers, and that continues today in our businesses, industries, public service, and throughout our community. The rights and protections many of us rely on today were hard-earned through generations of advocacy by working people and organized labor. I'm grateful for our city employees, our labor partners, and workers across Everett for everything they contribute to our community. And I hope everyone has a safe and restful Labor Day. And to everyone who will be working on Monday, thank you. Thank you for keeping our city running and keeping our community safe. We appreciate you. And with that, no further comment. Thank you.

Thank you. And now on to old business. Do I hear a motion for approval of the minutes for our August 26th, 2026 meeting? That's our beta symbols.

Second, the motion.

Please take the role.

Council member Bader.

Yes.

Vice president Ryan. Yes. Council member Tui. Yes. Council member Weir. Abstain. Council members Arlingo.

Yes. And now on to public comments, which includes written comment acknowledgement. Under our rules, written comments are considered in the same manner as oral comments. The person submitting the comments must provide their name and city of residence. Written comments require this to be made part of our official council record. Angie, do we have any written comments or did anyone sign up to speak this evening?

We received no written comments and we have one person online and quite a handful of people in the chamber. So we'll start with Rob online. And if you could unmute and turn your camera on. And when you see the timer start, please state your full name and city of residence and you'll have three minutes to speak.

Hello, my name is Rob Workman. I live in unincorporated Snohomish County, but literally across the street from the city of Everett. Good evening, Mayor Franklin and members of the Everett City Council. My name is Rob, and I'm speaking in regard to the proposal consolidation of the Everett Transit and Community Transit. I'm not speaking as someone who has simply studied transportation. I've spent decades using it, advocating it, advocating for it, and helping plan it. I love public transportation, and I will continue to use it for the rest of my life. I live in Everett. I lived in Everett off and on from 1998 to 2016. For the last 10 years, I've lived just across the street from Everett City Boundary. For my home, I'm eligible to use both Everett Transit and Community Transit. I regularly use both Everett Paratransit and Community Transit Dart. I've been using and riding Dart since 1998. For those 28 years, my personal experience with these two paratransit systems have been dramatically different. I estimate the late pickups, arrivals, and scheduling problems have affected approximately 80% of my DART rides. With Everett Paratransit, I've experienced those problems less than 10% of the time. For people with disabilities, that difference is enormous. Transportation isn't simply a ride. It's independence, dignity, and access to healthcare, education, employment, and our community. If your paratransit consistently makes you late or your disability begins determining which opportunities you can participate in. I also bring experience from planning side. From 2002 to 2005, I served on Everett's Transit Advisory Committee representing Everett Community College, students and riders with disabilities, while also serving two terms as ASB president. I later served five years on Intercity Transit Citizens Advisory Committee working on accessibility, universal design, facility planning, and student transportation needs. So I understand the potential benefits of consolidation, more service, better frequency, fewer transfers, and improved regional connections. But bigger does not automatically mean better. Everett Transit has served this community for 133 years. Once an independent transit agency is dissolved, that decision will be extremely difficult to reverse. I'm also deeply concerned that this decision permanently can move forward without Everett voters making the final decision. My greatest concern is Everett Paratransit. Everett has built a service that in my experience is remarkably reliable and responsive to riders with disabilities. You can see That attention and the details. Everett Transit routinely updates their riders' guides approximately every 12 to 18 months, while Community Transit is currently working to update their guide that hasn't been updated since 2021. And simply look at the differences in paratransit vehicles themselves. As a longtime wheelchair user, I noticed the practical differences in how these vehicles work for riders and drivers every day.

Rob, I'm sorry, you'll have to wrap up. Your three minutes have gone over.

Okay. If consolidation moves forward, please require specific enforceable long-term recommendations. Please protect it, improve it, and make Everett's accessibility standards something community transit riders to not something Everett riders are asked to surrender. It is the one...

I think that's it. To be fair to our other commenters, we have to end it here.

Thank you.

Thank you. to the the desk there it's your turn to speak yes oh that's key okay please state your full name and city residence and press the button on the mic yes keith jacobson uh city of everett um

You've seen me before. I've been here before. I've spoken personally to many of you. And you all kind of know, you all know where I stand on this. I'm opposed to the merger of Ever Transit for a multitude of reasons. First and foremost, of course, is the whole sales tax thing. This is going to be the largest single sales tax increase in the history of the state of Washington if this goes through. And it's going to be that without a vote of the people. Prior to this, the largest single sales tax increase was ST3 in 2016. That was a 0.5% increase. And that was done with the vote of the people. So what we're talking about here is foisting a sales tax increase on people. without letting them vote on it. Something that they rightfully should expect to have happen. And this 0.6% that we're talking about here, that's a lot of money we're talking about that's gonna come out of people's budget. That's approximately 30 million a year. That's enough to buy a baseball stadium every four years. So we're talking a lot of money here that we are going to be handing over to community transit. And this sales tax increase that we're talking about, if this goes through, it means the citizens of Everett will lose control of their sales taxes forever. Yes, we will have a voice on – at least a voice on the Community Transit Council governing board. But right now, we got all the voices. We will be giving up control. The citizens of Everett will be at the mercy of the Community Transit Governing Board for its sales taxes for as long as there is an Everett. This tool is wrong. We should not be forcing this sales tax increase on people without their say so. If you really think this is such a wonderful thing for the citizens of Everett, Make your case and let us vote. There's not an emergency with EverTrans that has to be done right now. You've got time. Unless there's some external force that is making us do it right now, we've got time to think about this and put it to a vote of the people, and yet we're choosing not to do that? I think the citizens of Everett deserve the right to vote on this, especially for a sales tax increase of this size, the largest in the history of the state of Washington. Thank you.

Thank you, Renee. If you could please come to the podium. And please state your full name and city residence. You have three minutes to speak.

Hello, good evening. Mayor, council members, voters and citizens of Everett and taxpayers. My name is Rene Paidoa. I'm going to read, so I don't follow. I am a resident, a voter, and a taxpayer in Everett. I would like this opportunity to address the merger between Everett Transit and Community Transit, but only from a perspective of a taxpayer. There will be some other opportunities, I hope so, for different perspectives like service sustainability, subsidies to corporations, etc. I would like to call this opportunity in front of you the Franklin Sales Tax Fund. I am here because I see a gigantic red flag associated with the mergers and the sales tax in Everett. The merger implies an automatic and permanent increase in the sales tax in Everett. With this merger, the sales tax portion for transit service in Everett will double from 0.6% to 1.2% of the total sales tax. This means that the residents, voters, and taxpayers of Everett will have to pay an additional permanent Approximately $30 million a year to finance transit service in Everett and equivalent to $450 extra a year for every household in Everett. Important is to mention that only about 6 percent of the residents in Everett use transit for daily work commute. But this can really go up to 10 percent if we consider the service that Everett Transit provide going to neighborhoods and local routes. At this moment, and for the next three to four years, every transit is and will be able to provide this service, like it has done in the last 133 years, of which 56 years has been owned by the city by popular vote. It was put to the vote of the people. As the decision makers, you, the council members, are bounded with an undeniable fiduciary responsibility with every single resident, voter, and taxpayer of Everett. This legal bond requires from you on this subject of the merger only to consider and to act in the best interest of the residents, voters, and taxpayers of Everett, all of them. saying that the subject at hand should not only be about the tax increase, but on how to maximize the use of this sales tax increase for the benefit of everyone. I believe that the city of Everett has not a money problem. It has an idea problem. It has effective and efficient communication problems, and most of all, personal agendas. But if you want the sales to increase and need the money to finance projects for the city, in the city, then let's keep the tax increase and make the people choose on how they want to use this money. One of the options is to give them the option of approve the merger and give the money to CTE. The other option should be approve the merger and increase the sale tax and the money stakes here. Remember, you are custodians, not liquidators. Fulfill your fiduciary duties with every resident and taxpayers of Everett and advocate and approve the vote for the Franklin Sales Tax Refund. That's it. Thank you.

thank you jack if you could come you're jack right okay if you could please go to the end of the desk and please state your full name and city of residence and you'll have three minutes to speak yes my name is jack williams

I was an Everett Transit driver years ago. I was here when the very first disabled accessible bus, we got it on a grant. As you can see, I am now severely disabled myself. The injury that you see now on the cervical collar is caused because a community transit driver and as a group, they refuse to secure our chairs, not just mine, but I see this with other people. Everett Transit is every bit as high quality a bus company as it was when I drove for them years ago. Please do not dilute by merging. Community transit can learn a lot from Everett Transit. I never have to ask one of the Everett Transit drivers to secure my chair. I have been told by attorney that if I get on another community transit bus and they don't secure my chairs, I request that I either have to get off the bus and find another bus or I am on a known hazard. This is not right. I need to be able to transport. I'm spending a lot of time in Everett now. And the difference between community transit and Everett Transit is worlds of difference. Please do not dilute a fine bus company. If any of you want to talk to me outside of the meeting, I will make myself available. I'm the driver. You can ask for older people in the towns. I'm the one that From the neck down, I had costumes for all the holidays. I had passengers asking for years after I left, are you going to come back and drive again? I loved my passengers. My passengers respected and appreciated me. I was not late for my stops. When I deployed the lift, and those take a lot more time than the ramps that we now have to flip out. I beg you please do not dilute a very fine. Us company. They're not going to get better. Being merged. And I. I'm speaking knowledge myself. A number of other people in chairs. They could not make it in tonight. Thank you. God bless and keep you all, and please take to heart what I'm saying, because any moment, any one of you could be in this situation, and to have to wait two and a half hours to get a bus driver that will finally grudgingly secure your chair, this is humiliating. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

By the way, both my service dog and I were injured when we were thrown. The driver took An S curve, too fast, and I was launched, and Scooby was launched. So I am an example of what happens when we don't get what is fair. Thank you.

Thank you. William, if you could please come to the podium. State your full name and city of residence. You have three minutes to speak.

William parents, Silver Lake. This is for Everett's summer festivals and support tourism and local businesses and generate positive media coverage throughout the sector. This is a, I need this. We need this in the city of Everett need this. And this is a, this is good. This is real good. Bring the good year blimp to Everett. That's all right. You don't like the Goodyear blimp? Oh, wow. The Goodyear blimp. Dear Mayor and the City Council members, Everett has a unique opportunity to attract one of the most recognizable aviation symbols in the world, the Goodyear blimp. An influx of tourism, weekend restaurant spending, and national television exposure for a massive event like a major golf tournament or festival. With California implementing new tire regulations that Goodyear has argued... could affect roughly 70 percent replacement tires and increase costs the company may eventually evaluate whether other locations better support its operation and if that happens everett should be at the top of the list our city is already known worldwide for aviation lnc the combination of playing field boeing presidents and A supportive community makes Everett a natural fit for the Goodyear blimp. A permanent blimp presence would draw tourists, support local businesses, and create jobs and provide excellent opportunities for community events and educational programs. The Goodyear blimp belongs in the city that celebrates flight, and few cities do that better than Everett. Addition of the Goodyear blimp could... make these efforts by drawing additional visitors to festivals, community celebrations, and waterfront events while providing another highly visible symbol of innovation and imagination. Everett's growing calendar of summer festivals and cultural events Present outstanding opportunities for the Blint to become a centerpiece attraction as the Goodwill ambassador. Bringing the Goodyear Blint to Everett would be an investment in tourism, local businesses, civic pride, and our city's world-reowned aviation legacy. I hope that Everett leaders will proactively communicate with Goodyear and highlight the many advantages our city can offer. Thank you.

Thank you. Jordan, if you could please come to the podium. Please state your full name and city of residence. You have three minutes to speak. And if you could press the button on the base of the mic. There you go.

I am Jordan Beardsley. I'm from Everett. What did you ask? I can't hear you.

I'm sorry?

I can't hear you.

Oh. Just state your full name and city of residence.

OK. Jordan Beardsley, Everett, Washington. Thank you for your time and listening to me tonight. I am seeking your support for a new small business called Take a Moment Mobile Care Bus, LLC. Our stationary mobile child care bus provides safe, short-term care for children while parents shop, run errands, attend appointments, or just need a moment in their car. The bus is fully contained with a restroom and hand washing. We do not serve food. The challenge is that current child care regulations were designed for traditional building, not mobile buses like ours. Because of this, there is currently no clear pathway for our business to operate. I respectfully ask the City of Everett to explore a permitting option that would allow retail properties to safely and legally host our bus. We believe this service could support local families, strengthen local businesses, and bring an innovation solution to our community. Thank you for your time. I've also emailed Everett, Mill Creek, and Linwood. I've gone to a legislators meeting, talked to Peterson and Dunn. They are interested, but I need to get on the ground floor first. Thank you for your time.

Will you make sure that Jennifer Gregerson has your contact information so we can follow up? She's right here.

Thank you. Thank you. Said, if you could please come to the podium. Please press the button on the mic and state your full name, city of residence. You have three minutes to speak.

My name is Said Hagigi and I live in Mount Vernon. Let me begin by saying that I would be really surprised to find out that any of you or the people at the state level who have started this process would have a relatively intimate knowledge of the challenges in the day-to-day life of a disabled person. I have been listening to their stories for over seven years, and believe me, even I don't have a clue what they go through. I know for a fact that many of them limit their use of our paratransit service because of the $2 fare. $2. And they would like to use the service more, but they can't afford it. Now, many people here think we are trying to fix something that isn't broken and, in fact, has been functioning well for a very long time. A decision of this magnitude, which affects the lives of many thousands, should be decided by the voters who would be directly affected by it. You have to be forthright about the actual reasons of your decision, about the benefits and drawbacks of this decision for the citizens and voters of Everett and inform them accordingly. If you avoid this, you will have failed in your duty to serve the people of Everett and will have essentially overstepped your electoral mandate. In other words, you will have acted just like our federal politicians who once in office will pursue their own personal objectives and pay little attention to the needs of the country and the welfare of the people. to close, why don't you survey 50 paratransit customers who regularly use us and the CTDART system and find out for real what they think. These are the people who use the system and it's worthwhile to know what they think of this proposal. Thank you.

Thank you. Daryl, if you could please come to the podium. And please state your full name and city residents. You have three minutes to speak.

Good afternoon, everyone, citizens. My name is Daryl Sullivan, and I'm a resident of Everett. I'm here to speak about the proposed transit consolidation. And it's I'm a real basic person, pizza and beer. I'm one plus one equals two, higher taxes, less good bus service, local bus service in Everett. I'm speaking local. It's negative two, lose-lose. And we're here to represent Everett. Just Everett, the county take care of their business. County Council does their thing. City Council does theirs. We're local. Just Everett. I can't see paying higher sales tax, especially in times like this. You all know it's crazy inflation. Six tenths of a percent is significant. Local businesses lose. The average citizens lose. I don't see a winner in Everett. That's it. Pizza and beer. Go on. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Evan, if you could please come to the podium. And state your full name and city residence. You have three minutes to speak.

Hi, folks. How are you? Nice to see you again. My name is Evan Reed. I run a nonprofit here in downtown Everett. I live here in downtown Everett. called Bunker Arts Collective. I'm kind of going off the cuff today. I could totally regret this or it could be a legendary moment for me, but here it goes. I'm speaking mostly about my experience as a resident living in downtown Everett. I've gotten a lot of time to walk around. I have very busy legs. I have walked around every single nook and cranny of our downtown corridor. There are so many historic buildings. We have so many wonderful businesses. Right after this, I'm going to Lucky Dime to go say hi to Alex. And after that, I'm going to bop over to Apollo or Horseshoe or El Paraiso is going to be still open. But I think the reason why the gears are turning my head of what is even still open is that There are some pretty serious systemic issues here in the downtown core that I want. And I want to emphasize our downtown Everett Association Chef's Kiss. They do amazing work. This has nothing to do with them. There are systemic issues policy wise and administratively wise and resource wise that I'd really love for us to prioritize in the coming years and in the future here to make sure that our downtown is going to set our businesses that are trying to do their best up for success. A large part of that, we have so many historic buildings, so many. I think right now they're currently unlit, most of them. We have so much mid-century modern and neo-Gothic and art deco, and it's just kind of sitting there. It's not part of the landscape, despite most of these buildings being there for over 100 years. blade signs, neon signs, things that used to catch people's attention when you're looking up and down the street. Most of that is gone. It's a lot of flat signage right now. I think when most folks are, say, going to Lucky Dime, for instance, they'll see that Apollo is open across the street. But if you start walking onto Colby, you're kind of... I don't know, you look both directions and the synergy kind of fizzles out a little bit. So really some of those systemic issues are long-term abandoned vacant properties, whether or not the code situation of getting these facilities up to code is the problem, or these property owners are holding onto it, waiting for market conditions to work in their favor. It's very nuanced. I'm not going to be accusatory, but that is, a lack of historical preservation, whether it be historical signage, historical markers, exhibitions, things actually highlighting the uniqueness and weirdness of what makes Everett so fun and so cool and such a great place to call home. And I think right now we're not doing enough. So through my nonprofit, we're starting a program called Refresh Everett. We're adopting a corridor every six months that the residents get to vote on. That poll is open right now. Downtown is an option of an opportunity for us to do trash cleanups, overgrowth, paint some murals, work with small businesses, really do everything. what we want to do full time with the ultimate aspiration to build a brick and mortar community arts center right here in downtown Everett. So thank you for your time. I'd love to chat and you have my information. Thank you.

Thank you. Dwayne, if you could please come to the podium. You state your full name and city of residence. You have three minutes to speak.

Hi, Dwayne Dow. I was born in old Everett General Hospital in 1962. I've been an Everett Paratransit driver now in year number 33. Rob that spoke earlier, he's been on my bus many times, taking him lots of places. When he was council president at the ASB at Everett Community College, he used to ride, you know, we'd take him down and he even complained about some of the roads because, you know, riding in his wheelchair, clunk, clunk, clunk, clunk over some of the seams on the roads, like going up 13th Street towards, uh, The hospital would then take that ride on to Wetmore and go down. And there was a lot of the riders that would like us drivers to speak for them. And we tell them that we can say something, but we can't speak for you. You need to speak for yourselves. That's why it's great to have Rob speak. It's great to have this gentleman here. Thank you for your... I didn't know him as an Everett driver. I said I've been here 33 years. The bus fare is another thing. With the taxes going up, we're still at $2. They say that with a merger, we'd still be $2 for a while. Rick Ilgenfritz was at an employee meeting, and he had told us that the ORCA people are actually trying to nudge him for a $3 fare. the people that we say that we care about that, you know, can least support a lot of these things are going to have that sales tax increase. They're going to maybe have a bus fare go from $2 to $2.50 and then possibly $3, you know, fairly quickly. And it doesn't seem like we're looking out for those guys. And, you know, we love our passengers. They, consider us some of their best friends. And we'd hate to lose that. I mean, not that DART doesn't provide the valuable service too, but unfortunately, they've got their issues. I worked for them a couple of years before I came to the city, and they were run by different people. It was run by senior services. It was different people running it. I mean, and it's still a great service, but Ever Transit, I've heard from so many people over the years that they've come from other places, and they tell us that we're the best. Like I say, somebody's got to be the best, and it'd be a shame to give that up. So thanks. Please vote no.

Thank you. Steve, if you could please come to the podium. You state your full name and city residence. You have three minutes to speak.

Good evening. My name is Steve Ose. I live here in Everett. Mayor Franklin, council members. I'm here to speak about the potential merger also. The sales tax, it's a terrible idea. I've gone out and talked to a lot of people about it. They aren't aware of it. They should be made aware of it if you are going to do that without letting them vote on it. If you want to let them vote on it and they say yes, they pass it, great. I'll support it 100%. But they have the opportunity to come in here, but they don't know. I go out and talk to them all the time. They don't know this is going on. I don't want to say any more about the sales tax or some other things I want to talk about. I've heard that we're going to have twice the bus service in Everett. If you believe that, I got some lakefront property out in Montana, not near any lakes, but it'll be lakefront. I guarantee you that. We won't have double the service in Everett. It won't happen. They can tell you that, but once this deal is done, it's done. Everett has a transit agency itself. We will never get it back if you get rid of it. Don't let that happen. One of the things I've heard from the administration is we want to make sure our team is taken care of, our drivers are taken care of. I had a meeting with 1576. That's the union, same union as us. They would be a sister one. We're 883. They're 1576. And what they said in the meeting is we want you to die on the vine. They want us. We can have our union. They'll have their union. And as we lose people through attrition, all the new hires would be hired into their union, and they'd be coming over and driving our routes. So we won't get rid of them. We'll keep them around for another 30 or 40 years. But once they die out, they're gone. We don't get to hire new people. That's not acceptable. Our local has a long history. Everett has a long history with having our union. We've been here since 1919. They have been here since 1976. We've been here a lot longer than them. That doesn't make us better. But we have survived very well. We've provided good service from many of our passengers. You've heard the type of service that they want and that they get from our local. They don't get from community transit. Anyway, thank you for the time. I hope you think about this. I'd like to be contacting some of you and having some meetings, but have a good night. Thank you.

Thank you. Deborah, if you could please come to the podium. And please state your full name and city of residence. You have three minutes to speak.

Do I need to push buttons? Oh, okay. Hi, my name is Deborah Papenthien. I live in Marysville, but I am an employee of Everett Transit for the last couple years. I'm also a retiree of Community Transit. So if I understand correctly, you guys have a priority list. And Everett Transit was at the bottom half of that list. And all of a sudden, we're at the top of the list the last couple months. It's like, what's going on? Why does it have to happen now? why can't we go back to the bottom of the list and give us time to prioritize and get the employees our financial affairs in order? I think about the employees who just purchased a home the last year or so. I think about the employees who are sending their kids to college. Are they gonna have to have them come home Like I said, I'm a retiree of community transit. Not everybody's going to end up there. So I'm just going to leave it at that. And I honestly hope that you will put Ever Transit back at the bottom of the list and give us time to get our personal affairs, financial personal affairs in order. Thank you.

Thank you. And that concludes our public comments.

Thank you. Now we'll go on to administration. Jennifer.

Council President, usually it's council comments next, please.

Oh, sorry. You're right. Skip that. Surprise. Jennifer. Now to council comments.

Council Member Bader. Thanks. I didn't want Jennifer speaking before me. No report, no comments. Thanks.

Also, let's see. Council Member Ryan.

Great. Thanks. Good evening, everybody. On Friday, I was honored to attend the New Start Center ribbon cutting. It's the old days in there right next to the Everett Mall. And it's been it was purchased by the county. And then with help from the city, it's now transformed into a transitional housing facility operated by. Salvation Army. I know that they gave a presentation at the committee meeting earlier tonight, so I don't want to steal too much thunder on it. But I did want to share just a couple comments about what a positive transformation this whole space is going to be for the city of Everett and for the people that are going to be staying there. you know, for a really long time, the Days Inn was a place where there wasn't a lot of positive opportunities for the people who stepped on site there. And so now with the vision from through the county and then with the support of the city and Salvation Army, there's a lot of positive outcomes that are going to happen as a result of this facility. So I'm really excited for the people who are going to be able to stay there and who can get their feet under them and move towards stability. I'm also really grateful for Salvation Army's commitment to being a good neighbor. They have a really outstanding and robust good neighbor policy. I'm glad that they put a lot of thought into that to make sure that they are great partners here in the city. Also, in conjunction with that, I'm excited to share an announcement that I was recently appointed to the Snohomish County Partnership to End Homelessness. i think we start our i'll start meetings uh later this month and look forward to reporting back on that so other than that no more comments thanks thank you councilmember toohey

Yeah, I will talk a little bit more about the New Start Center. We had them at our committee meeting for the community safety and community healthy community meeting committee meeting. Sorry about that. The Snohomish County group was so it's an emergency bridge housing. So it's not for permanent housing. but it's about a 90-day transition is the goal. This whole new project is really innovative. I don't know that there's anything quite like it. This one facility has 71 rooms. And they are hoping that 75% of those rooms will be with Everett people that are experiencing homelessness and that they will be there 90 days. And when they leave, they'll be going into permanent housing. So it's really quite an exciting project. And I know that Council Member Weir probably has a few things to say too, but it was very impressive what all they're doing.

Council Member Weir.

Yeah, I agree. It's exciting to see after the many years that they've been working on that location and project that it's finally ready to open to residents for that temporary stay over and get them on their feet. And they really do have a well laid out plan for what they're doing. And have put a lot of thought into the, you know, all the little details of how that's going to function for the residents and then the community members around it. So, but other than that, no comments from me.

All right. Thank you. Actually, I was at that ribbon-cutting as well, listening to the comments, took a tour, and I was also impressed with especially the thought that has already gone into this from the Salvation Army, the layout of the facility, the controlled access, the incremental kinds of help they expect to walk people through to get them back for self-sufficiency. Let's see, in the past week or so, I've been part of three meetings and events where I represented Everett. All those turned out to be regional this time. Just a couple of quick highlights. One of them was Snohomish County Tomorrow, kind of a countywide planning effort. We got a briefing from the PU Public Utility District, Snohomish County PUD CEO John Harlow. And one of the things that I thought was particularly remarkable there is in light of the current questions about power and power use and data centers and that sort of thing. They use the phrase, growth pays for growth, meaning that new users pay for the costs of new users. That's kind of an amorphous term, and he added a lot of specifics to that. And one thing I would say is that those specifics were reassuring to those of us who worry about power availability, about power rates. So, for example, if you're worried about a large new power user, such as a data center, causing rates to go up because more power is being used, more expensive power has to be purchased, more power lines need to be run, and that sort of thing. And they are pretty careful in this, and they work with the large power users in the early stages to make sure that all of those power needs are met by the new users. And they are not causing increases in rates for the rest of us. So it was a well thought out process that's in advance of our typical kinds of permitting. And that's especially important because the advanced thinking on that process means that projects don't go forward when power is not a workable process for them. Then I also attended earlier this week, Fusion Week. I represented the mayor and council administration. I was there with Dan Ernest, our economic development director. A lot of people are familiar with nuclear power in the form of fission, the power plants we've seen where heavy elements like uranium are split apart. That's what we're familiar with, but those unfortunately have risks associated with things like loss of cooling and production of long-life nuclear wastes. Fission is the opposite, where you take light things and merge them together, fusion, and the important part about that is that it's inherently safer. and also does not produce those long-life waste products. And that means something to Everett because there are a couple of fusion companies here. So I'm an engineer and have an interest in fusion going back decades. I was a logical person to attend that fusion week representing Everett, along with Dan Ernest. And I have to say I was really encouraged this time. Fusion that we've heard about for decades always seemed to be something on the far horizon, but with the effort of companies like Zapp Energy and Helion here, there's a real center, a kind of a convergence of things here in Everett, a cluster for fusion, various aspects of it. I think it's really promising. We are finally getting to the point where we can see the potential for actual commercial power plants, something that goes beyond these large science experiments that we've heard about. I think that's good news for Everett, it's good news for the planet, and it's good news for technology for us here. And then lastly, earlier today, I represented Everett at the PSRC's Economic Development District Board. That sounds like kind of an esoteric sort of thing, but it's the designated regional development authority, which gives us access to federal resources, particularly the Department of Commerce and federal and other funding. That means we get funding that way to develop a regional economic strategy and And that allows us to get funding to do local economic development. So just multiple parts operating that well together. And that's part of the duties of the council members here is to represent Everett in those efforts to make sure that we do the best we can for Everett. I think that is it for me. And now on to administration. Jennifer?

Yes, I just wanted to point out in item, or last item, item 14, there is a typo in the street address. So 2302 Pacific Avenue should be 2303. We will make sure it's corrected. And I don't think you'll have to, you know, change your action, but we wanted to make sure that was clear. It's accurate in the eminent domain ordinance that's linked there, but... I just thought that I would point that out before we got there, because sometimes when we get to the end of the agenda, we move expeditiously.

On to our city attorney, Ramsey Rembrandt.

No comments, no executive session tonight. Thank you.

Thank you. All right. Now we go on to our six consent items. Do I have a motion to pass the consent items? Council Member Bader-Somos.

Second.

Clerk, please take the roll.

Council Member Bader.

Yes.

Vice President Ryan. Yes. Council Member Tuohy. Yes. Council Member Weir. Yes. Council Member Zerlingo.

Yes, and now on to proposed action items. Items seven and eight have been read already into the record. Does the council have any question or comments on those two items? All right, and then on to item number nine on our agenda, Council Bill 2608-46. This will be both the first and second readings for this item. Adopt an ordinance assuming jurisdiction over a portion of the Mukilteo Water and Wastewater District's responsibilities, property, facilities, and equipment in areas previously annexed to the City of Everett. We expect a third and final reading on September 9th, 2026.

Do we have any questions or comments from Council?

All right, moving on to item number 10, Council Bill 2608-47. This is the first reading. Adopt an ordinance creating a special improvement project entitled 41st Street to Rucker Avenue Corridor Phase 2, Fund 303, Program 123, and repealing ordinance number 4118-25. We expect the third and final reading on September 16th.

And on this, do we have any council questions or comments?

Council Member Bader.

I'd request that we get more information on what this next phase involves, and maybe also a reminder of what phase one was and what we hope phase three might be. I don't know. I'm not asking for a briefing, but would just appreciate additional info. And I apologize if I missed it, but didn't notice much specifics in that.

I think we can expand on it. I don't have it, but I think we should get that to you.

Okay.

Or maybe Ryan. Ryan may have it now.

Oh, okay. And I didn't mean to necessarily ask for a briefing now, but anyway, whatever.

Good evening. Ryan Soss with Public Works. Phase one of this project was the multiple intersection improvements at 41st and Rucker, Rucker and Pacific, and Pacific and West Marine View Drive that were completed a number of years ago. And this project, phase two, are additional improvements between Pacific and Rucker and the Port of Everett.

And again, I apologize for being the road geek here, so should have called you ahead of time, Ryan. But when we're saying improvements, can you just give me some hint as to what those improvements are?

Yeah, there's widening to better move larger freight, elevation of signals for greater clearance, improvements of radiuses, that sort of thing, so that the movements are smoother. And then we'll also have some pedestrian and non-motorized improvements associated with it. This particular action is just an update to the funding ordinance because we got an additional 1.3 million in connecting Washington funds, and so we're updating the ordinance to accommodate the additional funding.

Thank you. Thanks for indulging my questions. Absolutely.

Any other questions or comments on that item? All right, then we're moving on to a briefing and proposed action item. First, I'll read this into the record. Our agenda item number 11, Council Bill 2608-48, the first reading, adopt the attached ordinance adopting amendments to land division procedures and development standards, amending chapters 13.16, 13.68, 19.01, 19.04, 19.06, 19.33, 19.34, 19.38, 19.35, and 15.02 of the Everett Municipal Code. repealing chapters 19.24, 19.25, 19.26, and 19.27 of the municipal code, and adding a new chapter, 19.23. The public hearing will be on September 9th of this year. The third and final reading is expected on September 16th. And I think we have a presentation by Yorick Stevens-Wasda, our planning director.

Thank you, Council Members Arlingo, members of the Council, Mayor Franklin, I'm York Stevens Wajda, Planning Director. I've got a few slides for you here to go along with that long list of sections and chapters proposed for update along with this ordinance. The proposed ordinance would update procedures and development standards for land divisions, which is the process by which a piece of property can be divided into multiple other, one or more other properties and lots that may be then sold or transferred. Our goals of this project are rooted in some comprehensive plan policies that came along with the ever 2044 periodic update a few years ago around. Increasing opportunities for home ownership in the city, there is a state bill that was adopted in last year's legislative session that we're addressing with this. And we are modernizing land divisions for middle housing kind of a compliment to the development regulations that were. amended in the periodic update to allow for development of that middle housing to as much as possible be available for homeownership and fee simple homeownership specifically, which is the most flexible and often most desirable form of ownership compared to condominium or unit lots or some other forms of ownership. As with everything, we try to work on streamlining and simplifying. And one example of that is currently we had a few development regulations that only applied if you were doing a land division, but not if you were doing the same type of development under a condominium, for example. So part of the streamlining means making all of those the same, regardless of the ownership type of the development that our standards apply to the physical development and not to the ownership type. Those policies in the comprehensive plan talk about boosting home ownership opportunities, providing for land division into small fee simple lots, and allowing lot splits. We knew that the bill was coming and wrote that into the policies to anticipate this step. House Bill 1096 from 2025 requires cities, including Everett, to allow residential lot splits, which is a process by which one lot is divided in two, with an administrative process, and each of the new lots must meet the minimum lot size. There are a couple pieces of this build we wanted to. We're taking kind of a we're one of the first City Council Chambers, adopters of local amendments to implement the lot split, if not the first so we're breaking some new ground here and wanted to make sure that we're complying with each of the pieces of the bill. City Council Chambers, So got them all listed out here, the lot split must maybe combined with the building permit, it must be administrative so not using hearing examiner planning Commissioner Council decisions which are the case for some larger land divisions. planning director decision, clear and objective standards, public hearing prior to the land division would not be allowed and administrative appeal would be exempt for these lot splits. We propose implementing the lot splits as a form of a short subdivision or a unit lot short subdivision. So we've got on this table those two routes and we went down the line to make sure each one of these rows is one of those requirements from the lot split bill. And for the most part, I would say we're actually already mostly consistent with the bill. We've done a lot of work in recent years and in the last decade to streamline and simplify our development regulations and procedures. We already have a administrative short plat process and we already check a lot of the boxes here. And so a lot of the amendments that are part of this ordinance here are improving and streamlining, but there was only a few little tweaks that we needed to do to actually meet the lot split bill. One of the changes is for a unit lot short subdivision, and we see a lot split as, again, being just a small version of one of those. There had been a review two process for a unit lot land division, which did include public notice, and if requested, a public hearing prior to making a decision. One of the changes in this bill is to bring those unit lot short subdivisions into a review one process, which is the administrative process. decision and planning director decision, which is consistent with the lot split bill. It would extend some of the streamlined aspects that are anticipated by that lot split bill out of the legislature upwards through all of our short plat allowance, which is up to nine lots. We're also looking at minimum lot size in the lot split bill, you must meet the minimum lot size for the two lots created through that right now in the two zones that are most likely candidates for residential land division or our neighborhood residential zone and our you are for zone. Currently the minimum lot size there is 5,000 square feet with some minimum dimensions, 50 feet wide and 80 feet deep, I think. Proposed to reduce the minimum lot size to 2,000 square feet with corresponding reductions to those other dimensions for the width, which is an important one, bringing it down from 50 feet to 25 feet, which matches the lot pattern in North Everett, commonly 25 foot lots, some of which have been merged into 50 foot lots. But we do have quite a few that still remain at that 25 foot width. The primary result of this is there could be a few lots in the City that are not buildable because they don't meet those minimum dimensions. If they can prove that they were created legally prior to our subdivision ordinance of 1956 is where we started to put some of these minimum dimensions into city code. You may build on it, but if you don't have that record of legal establishment, the lot is somewhat stranded and nothing can happen with it until it is merged with a neighbor or something like that. So for some of those lots that meet the proposed new smaller dimensions, but not our existing dimensions, it could make them buildable. And for others, it provides a route for that small lot land division that was anticipated in the comprehensive plan and for them to be fee simple lots with the most flexibility and independence compared to We have a unit lot subdivision process right now where you can get a lot down to any size. The regulations operate on the parent lot setbacks and setbacks is the main one. Maximum lot coverage by building as a percentage is another one. If you meet those setbacks, five feet on the sides, 10 feet in the front, 10 feet in the back, you can create as many and as small of lots within that. And this is current code as you want. By reducing the standard minimum lot size, you could do a standard short plat or long subdivision process to achieve fully independent lots down to that 2000 square foot size. We sized it both the dimensions and the total to accommodate reasonable dwelling size that would be legal under the building code and leave room for those setbacks on all sides. There have been some questions about whether a short plat could be redivided again in the lot split build. You may not use a lot split again once it was split in two. For our short plats, as long as you do not wind up creating more than nine lots, you can redivide again. That nine lot limit would exist for five years at any given time. And if you were to take a lot split it in two and then split it again into something that would in total exceed the nine lots and you would have to go through the formal full subdivision process. But as long as you are keeping that lot in under nine total. We could have a kind of a rapid fire two-step subdivision process. We anticipate some folks, for example, wanting to sell their backyard. Maybe they don't use it as much or they need some funds or something like that, but they don't know what they want to do with it. And a big piece of this, a use case would be selling that backyard and then a developer buys it and then they decide what they want to do with it, which could involve a second land division. And so that would all be within that nine lots permissible. Here's a couple examples of what this could look like. This is an alley lot with a house in the front and an existing curb cut coming off the street. Alley access was a big topic of discussion in the Planning Commission and in our work at a staff level. We have a requirement that if you have alley access, that you use that alley access and not create a new curb cut and driveway on the street side. And a couple examples here show how that would work in this case. We didn't want to create a pathway for, like I said, dividing that backyard, and then all of a sudden you're no longer an alley lot. So written into this ordinance is that at the point that you sever your property from the alley. That is the point to maintain access to the alley. And if you don't, and it's after the effective date of this ordinance, you would not be able to have a new curb cut to the front part. So in this example, you see three new lots created in the backyard, and this would be a unit lot land division. And you can tell because there are no setbacks for the new units in the back. They're all zero lot line, and this would be something like a townhouse. And I will pause council member Ryan has a question.

I do. Thanks for spotting that for this example. What if it's a corner lot? So it wouldn't so, like. On the graphic where it says new unit, what if that's. And is a street, so then wouldn't it make sense to have access from the street side on there, but not necessarily in front of the principal dwelling if that makes sense.

Yeah, if the lot has alley access, then it needs to take access from the alley, and that does include corner lots. There are a few exceptions. If it is infeasible, if there's significant topography or something else blocking that access. But for the most part, even if it's a corner lot, if the parcel has alley access, that's where the vehicles need to come off of or onto the property through. And so what we're doing here is with the land division, making sure that we don't have a 2 step process that results in a whole bunch of new. Curb cuts and driveways some of the reasons for that we get questions about that. Um, in my mind, the main ones are that the curb cut on the street. takes two, perhaps three parking spaces off the street, removes the landscape strip, removes multiple street trees or the opportunity for multiple street trees, and then interrupts the sidewalk. And anybody who goes walking with toddlers know that you can let them run as far as they can until they hit the next driveway. So for parental strolling freedom purposes and the other ones that I mentioned there. Great, thank you. Okay, thank you. Okay, so this is one scenario here's the scenario where the House does not have any curb cut on the street, maybe they have a garage or surface parking on the alley side. And on the right side, you would see an example of how that that front unit could preserve their ability to park in a garage or on the surface in their lot you would need to maintain an easement or build the driveway or something as part of that land division. This preserves vehicle access to the front lot. On this one, you can see an example. These, the children lots, the three in the back, have setbacks. They're smaller, and this is an example of not a unit lot land division, but a short subdivision. Now, each of the lots are fully independent, but they do need to have their own setbacks, where in the prior example, each lot was potentially exactly the size of the dwelling unit and no more. In this case, you can see that no access was was provided to the front principal dwelling and, in this case, that front principal dwelling would no longer be able to. In the future, create a curb cut in a new driveway on the street side, so the decision needs to be made, and we will communicate that to applicants that this is the time. To preserve your ability for future driveway to your property after you've severed from the alley that would no longer be possible. Here's an example on a non-alley lot, and you could have either an easement parking area with walkways to the individual units, or you could have, I think, a more common driveway to a parking port or to individual garages in the back. This is an example of a short land division with the setbacks there. Easement access drive. Okay, so those were a couple examples of what this can look like, but there are 1000 different ways that land divisions and development and lots patterns and everything exists in the city. The updates a lot of these are in the memo we're proposing to combine what is now four separate chapters into one that all deal with land divisions. We're updating the purpose statement that guides the land divisions and in cases of need for interpretation, that's what we look to. I understand a rare city to require that before recording a subdivision, you clear any gaps or encroachments. Gaps or encroachments is, and this is a fairly common thing in North Everett where the fence line does not perfectly follow the property line. In most places, that's a civil matter between neighbors and the city stays out of it. In Everett, we've been in it and that can be a drag on a land division because they either have to move the fence or they need to go to court or to make an agreement to address that. This would step us back out of that and it would remain a civil matter. PB, Harmon Zuckerman, These necessary provisions in 130 230 and 330 of the new chapter are things like every land division, no matter what is going to have to demonstrate that it has adequate provisions for access utilities. PB, Harmon Zuckerman, landscaping and everything that you need to have a successful dwelling unit and and independent property in the future. So we've reorganized those to make them clear for applicants. And as I started out by saying, these residential lot splits on the new state law are to be processed as a short subdivision or as a unit lot short subdivision. So we're not proposing to have a separate article or section or chapter for residential lot splits. We do have a section in there that clarifies that this is our intent so that there's no confusion there. I'll get to this at the end with a schedule thing, but the Department of Commerce, who provides technical assistance and reviews, along with other state agencies, all changes to development regulations and procedures, is taking a look at this. Like I said, we're an early adopter, and we will work closely with them to make sure that we're on the right track. They have asked for the full 60 days of the state agency review, which is going to push us past that September 16th by a couple of weeks, so we may be looking into October before The council may take action on it, but the benefit of that is that we will get some good discussions with the state, and it could be that we are creating a model that other jurisdictions may be able to follow, or we will need to make some changes, and I'll be sure to keep you up to speed on that. Timing of improvements is another important aspect of this ordinance. Right now, before you can record a land division and sell any of the properties, you have to actually physically install access, so driveways, walkways, and that sort of thing. Recreation facilities, some larger subdivisions require a playground or something like that. Utility stubs, you need to run the water lines and sewer lines to the future site of the the development and landscaping. All of that needs to be installed and inspected before you can sell any lot, and that takes some time. So we are proposing to instead apply conditions on the face of the plat that would provide for the construction of all of those before any building permit could be issued. So it ties the physical development of the infrastructure and supporting stuff to the building permit and not to the... I mentioned the minimum lot dimensions. This is for only the NR and UR4 zones. We had a question in committee a couple weeks ago. Thank you, Council Member Ryan, I believe it was, for spotting this one. It does not apply to the neighborhood residential constrained zone. No changes to what you can build or how you can divide to that zone. Those are the dimensions that are changing here. We did have a comment, which I thought was a good spot. The 60 foot minimum lot depth is exactly half of the common 120 foot lot depth in North Everett. And the question was, what happens if a survey shows that to be 119 feet and eight inches? And then now you could not do that front and back separation. So one thing we'll think about and look at the implications of other than it looking strange could be to make that minimum lot depth 59 feet or 58 feet instead of 60. So we don't get into an issue of inches. Uh, access right now there's a table in, uh, chapter 1926, one of the land division chapters that shows which types of number of dwelling units in a proposed development and the type of access drive or easement access drive or driveway. or private street or public street that it connects to. There are some confusing aspects and some unclear aspects to it. We are proposing to delete that table and instead handle that table administratively in the DCSS. The city's design construction standards and specifications that public works maintains, and they are working and have a complete draft of that, or will very soon. That will allow us to change it more easily and have all of the standard drawings and everything connected to it. Like I said, we're trying to make it the same process, whether and the same physical development, whether it's a land division or not. So we wanted to make sure that we have the ability to require dedication of public right-of-way or expansion of it, whether there is a land division or not. Right now, those sections are in the land divisions chapter. So if you were to build a development all on one parcel as a condominium or something like that, apartments, we wanted to make sure that we have the ability to build out the public road network, if justifiable. Same thing with block length standards. And on the bottom there, the curb cuts I talked about when we were looking at the graphics. There's one of these sections that only applies for land divisions, requires five feet of type three, which is shrubbery landscaping for the sides of private access drives and recreation and stormwater facilities. But if you were to build the exact same development without a land division, you don't have to have that. So we propose to delete that and through discussions with the Planning Commission, they thought that the most important of all of those five foot strips of landscaping could be the portion between a driveway and the neighboring property. So the outside of the driveway. So we do have that written in and preserved in 1935-130. Otherwise, all landscaping would be just per the landscaping chapter, like it would be for a non-land division development. issued a determination of non-significance under SEPA a couple of weeks ago. The Planning Commission recommended approval via Resolution 2604. and we are in that state agency 60-day review period through october 13th so we are asked or told not to take final action until that period is complete so looking at potentially october 14th but i will work with jennifer to confirm that that's an okay time and then a couple weeks after that would be the effective date of the amendments thank you for tolerating all of that i'm happy to take any questions

One clarification, then that does mean we would still be doing our public hearing on the night that we come today.

I think so. Yeah, we've already scheduled it and noticed it. So makes sense to continue and you'll get the benefit of hearing.

Okay, questions and comments. Councilmember Weir.

This may be a silly question, but do these same restrictions apply or guidelines apply whether somebody is trying to sell off the property for development or whether they're doing it just like as a mother-in-law, like family live-in type thing that they would continue ownership? Is it all the same requirements?

It would work for either pathway, yeah.

Councilmember Bader. Thanks, President. Maybe three questions. One, I guess at some point I'd be interested to know what in here we're proposing isn't required by the new state law, just so we know where we have some discretion. Second question would be I think it was slide 14 where timing of improvements. What if it goes forward, lot division goes forward, and then something prevents these improvements from happening and they can't develop? Is there some provision for retraining? Integrating those lots or I mean, I don't know what it might entail or if there'd be desirable to do that.

Yeah, I think you would need to revise the subdivision or do a new subdivision or a boundary line adjustment to change course after that. um we will make sure that any land division results in buildable lots so we will ask for a site plan that shows uh what you intend to build with the land division although that is not binding you're allowed to change but you have to you cannot create a bunch of one foot lots or something like that even through unit lot land division or strange sizes or something like that. So it will have to be buildable. You may change from an L-shaped to a square or something like that in the future when you come for building permits. So we want to make sure that we're not stranding any land. But if the development of the actual buildings falls through, you would still have a buildable lot that could be sold and someone else could pick that up, or there are a couple of ways to change the parcel lines and usements.

It's more thinking that if, you know, once you start digging and then you find out there's something like, you know, we can't go forward with this project and no one probably ever could, or, you know, utility access is just can't, can't happen. Just thinking all of a sudden we've created a lot, lots we don't need. And some, whereas now we would know before this was approved, if we had created lots, we would have.

Yeah, you would need to take some action of revising the plat or doing a different boundary line adjustment or doing a new subdivision. there is some risk of uh false starts like that um I think we think that it is worth it uh and and that's the feedback that we've heard is that in the rare cases I think this came up the planning Commission too it's going to be a rare case where we have uh that sort of an issue but it is a common case where folks are running into frustrations and timelines with land divisions yeah just wondering if there shouldn't be some provision

We'll take a look. Even at planning director's discretion. And then finally, and maybe you can talk to me offline, but several of your graphic examples showed both structures apparently immediately next to each other and others with setbacks. And so at some point wondering if you can remind me and not necessarily here, but what, you know, when, when they have to be set back and when they can be immediately you're right next to each other. So.

A unit lot land divisions allows for zero lot line development within the parent lot, and the standard short subdivision requires that each lot have its setbacks. That's the main difference. Okay, thank you. And to your first question, I would say. almost everything in this ordinance is city initiated and city discretion. We had already been almost entirely compliant with the lot split bill just with work that had been previously done through, I think, mainly rethink zoning. So this is all improvements that we put together.

Interesting. Okay, thank you.

Are there other council questions? I guess I had one or two myself, but one of them, maybe the compliment to Council Member Bader's question, where I can imagine situations currently where to make a subdivision sellable, the owner would need to put in a bunch of infrastructure improvements, but those might not then align with what the buyer would like in terms of their configuration. So in that sense, there is one problem that is maybe averted there, even though another might be created. And then just one other question, there was a removal of some requirements for public notice. Are there mechanisms for neighbor notices, not general public notices, but one of the things we sometimes hear from people is that something was happening and I didn't know about it. Are there provisions that way that would, where adjacent neighbors or abutting neighbors would notice?

Yeah, with a review 1 decision, there would not be public notice, not the poster, not mailed notice. Um, so. Like, to think of what we do with the public comments that we receive, and for a lot of these decisions that have been put to a review 1, it's, uh, there's not a lot of discretion necessarily for the city. Um, and it can serve to. create consternation among neighbors when there's not necessarily much we can do with the input. I would rather you did not split that lot, but it is legal to do so. So with a review one, there would not be public notice. I believe it would be up on our active projects webpage if someone were to map, if someone were to just go clicking and looking regularly, but we wouldn't expect that to happen.

All right.

We are our next ordinance is local project review procedures which is title 15 and we'll be looking more comprehensively at those review procedures, including the public notice, so I expect to have more conversations about what's in and what's out as part of that ordinance to.

Councilmember Bader. Just to follow up on that, but that public notice requirement or non-requirement is actually one of the things the state actually did take away from us, correct?

Yes, for lot splits. For the two-lot lot splits, yes. What we are proposing is, and right now a short plat already does not have public notice. It is only the unit lot land divisions. So those are the ones where you do not need the internal setbacks, but you still have an external setback. So under current procedures, if you are doing a short subdivision, no public notice. If you're doing a short unit lot subdivision, there is public notice. Both of them require the same setback from a neighbor, so it didn't seem to make make sense that difference. But we could under the law require public notice for two to nine lots. We do require a whole hearing examiner process, public hearings and hearing examiner decision for 50 lot plus land divisions. So we're going through that process right now for the Walmart site, for example. So large neighborhood building level subdivisions do have a lot of public process. This is for the small ones.

All right. Thank you, Eric. Okay, we're moving on now to our action item section, item number 12, Council Bill 2608-42, the third and final reading, adopt an ordinance creating a special improvement project entitled Evergreen Way at Center Road Pedestrian Safety Fund 303, Program 141, to accumulate all costs for the improvement. Any questions? Well, first, do I have a motion to approve?

So move the motion.

Second. All right. Do we have questions or comments on this item? All right. Clerk, please take the roll.

Council Member Bader.

Yes.

Vice President Ryan. Yes. Council Member Toohey. Yes. Council Member Weir. Yes. Council Member Zerlingo.

Yes. And on to agenda item 13, council bill 2608-43, the third and final reading. Adopt this ordinance amending ordinance number 4098-25 as previously amended to continue the special improvement project entitled Everett Outdoor Event Center Fund 342 Program 052 for the accumulation of expenditures associated with property acquisition costs necessary for the project.

And do I have a motion to approve?

Council Member Bader-Samos.

Second.

All right, questions or comments from council on this item? Council member Tui.

Yeah, I'm not in support of the Interfund loans without knowing the financial picture, the total cost financing and the financial performer of the stadium and impact that it will have on the city. Now, it's my understanding that we are expecting a full financial report of the project, hopefully by the end of the month. And I know staff is working hard on it, but they still have a lot of things that need to fall into place. So for me, I would need that financial information before providing an additional $3.5 million in this Interfund loan. Thank you.

All right. Any comments or questions? All right, clerk, please take the role.

One question.

Scott, both 13 and 14 were moving forward on that piece of parcel property where the owner insists on closing, or am I thinking, is this another parcel property that we're moving forward on? So I know recently we have had to deal with an owner who wanted to close on their parcel before mid-September. Does this either this item or item 14 cover either of those situations?

Yes. This is the same property for both 13 and 14, which is property number 28. And this is the property where we negotiated a very... Fair deal. And part of that was a quick closing. And I think for 1031 exchange reasons, so they could do a reinvestment of their finances.

Thank you. Council Member Weir.

So on that same subject, so what is the timeline for that closing requirement? So to Councilmember Toohey's concern about that we're expecting more financial information by the end of the month, and is there the timing of that lineup to wait on this, or is it not something that can hold off?

No, the closing on this is in about two weeks.

Okay. Okay.

All right. No further comments. Clerk, please take the role.

Council Member Bader.

Yes.

Vice President Ryan. Yes. Council Member Tuohy. No. Council Member Weir. Yes. Council Members Arlingo.

Yes. And our last item, number 14, adopt a resolution improving purchase of property. That is lot 28 for the Everett Outdoor Events Center. And I guess I will note, Jennifer, this was the one where you had a correction request.

Yes, it's that the street address is 2303 Pacific Avenue. So that's in the resolution and it's on the cover there right in the middle. And so we'll just make sure that's adjusted before the final document.

Thank you. Do we have a motion to adopt the resolution? Yeah, I guess verbatim.

Second, the motion.

All right, with a motion and a second, do we have any discussion on this item? All right, clerk, please take the roll.

Council Member Bader.

Yes.