City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to the 03/03/2026 Kennewick City Council meeting. Will the city clerk please state who is present and whether a quorum is established?

Good evening, Mayor McShane. All council members are present and a quorum has been established.

Thank you. John Cowling, our public works director, lead the pledge? Thank you. No one registered to provide tonight's invocation. Those persons interested in giving the invocation can find information on our website or through the city clerk's office.

Next on the agenda is visitors. Visitors are welcome to state their opinion on any topic except for election matters and item 6A. Comments will not be heard for item 6A until later this evening when the public hearing is open. The city clerk has informed me that there are no online visitors registered to speak. So the way that we'll do is I'm going to read through kind of what the what to expect and then we'll talk about how you can get up here.

Public comment period is not an opportunity for mutual conversation with council members or for posing questions with the expectation of immediate answer. Council members will listen closely to your comments but will not directly respond to you. The city clerk's business card is on the table near the door. If you need follow-up after the meeting, reach out to her and she will connect you with someone who can help. When it's your turn, please come to the podium and state your and city of residence before beginning your remarks.

A total of thirty minutes is allocated for visitor comments this evening. And so as we begin this, we'll ask audience members to please just raise your hand and then you'll be called upon and asked to come to the podium. And again, if you wouldn't mind stating your name and city of residence. And so the city clerk will please start our thirty minute now. We have a number of people that are going to be here this evening to speak on the less restrictive alternative housing for sexually violent predators. If we could start with the comments that are not related to that yet this evening.

Hello, my name is Tiffany Thornhill. I'm a resident of the city of Kennewick. I've been born and raised here in Tri Cities, Washington for now thirty five years, and I wanted to say that I am here to actually speak on two topics. The first topic being for utility utilities, an example, I am a low income family of two disabled children, a total of a single mother of three in my household. Have come to realize that there are no low income programs for water, sewer, and I know garbage is a separate, but water and sewer.

My water so far, I've only lived in my house since May, has been shut off twice just because of financial difficulty. And I would think that's good good question. Question.

System.

I Also, that's a disabled discount also would be appreciated as well. You guys the City of Kennewick is the only for utility that I know of that does not have anything tailored to low income and disabled people. That's the first topic. Second topic is going to be about addressing a little bit of our homeless distress situation and trying to relieve some of resources the that we do have. For example, I wanted to make some bullet point proofs here.

The City of Kennewick has no mission for its residents whatsoever. That includes Richland, West Richland, Burbank, includes Benton City, that includes Kennewick. We have over 4,000 residents per year that are costly homeless and have nowhere to go because the only shelter in the whole Tri Cities is full and it also belongs to Franklin County as well. For their residents, they're doing great. They have a mission.

Why doesn't the City Of Kennewick, why doesn't Benton County have, which has a responsibility to its residents regardless if they're housed or homeless, has a responsibility to be able to provide shelter in some kind of way. They should have a shelter in Kennewick or should in Findlay, but Benton County itself needs a shelter. If we got a shelter, it would also help relieve some of the stress that is on the nonprofits around here and some of the resources as well that actually do tailor to long term housing. I think that's very important. Like I said, I didn't prepare anything.

And city.

Tony Sabino Kennewick. I just wanted to say that I would be opposed to any mission or those types of things in the city of Kennewick. I like things the way that they are. I think that, everybody, unless they're disabled or, mentally unstable, should be able to take care of themselves. And if they want to go to a mental institution or something, they should be able to do that. But I don't think it should be our taxpayer dollars or our city dollars that are having to take care of these people. And I would be opposed to something like that being built in our city.

Name is Eric Weinheimer. I'm from Sunnyside, Washington. I am a realtor. What I wanna do is make sure that the city of Kennewick understands, on the ordinance tonight. There's amending of the permitted uses in the urban mixed area, and that is gonna have major impact on the Blue Bridge project down there that's been worked on for years.

We have a gentleman now that is a developer that's already met with city members and talked about possibly developing that. They're talking about investing hundreds of millions of dollars. By changing this, amending this is going to probably send the developer down the road. He's not going to have an interest in coming in here, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars getting permits, doing all of the due diligence, doing geo testing of the ground, making sure everything's in order to build on, and then find out after two years of doing all this exploratory work Guess what? Now the neighborhood has changed dramatically from what he thought it was when he started the process, and he's no longer gonna have an interest.

So I would strongly encourage you to go ahead and proceed just as the planning department originally recommended is denying this and remanding it back to the planning commission for further review so everybody can have a clear understanding of what the impact of this could mean to the city of Kennewick.

Katie?

Tina, please.

Thank you. It's a shame that we can't get people to pray before our meetings, and I'm asking you to actually think about changing that because I can only do it twice a year, and I'm doing it in two weeks. But I want to also thank you for all your hard work on the resolution, but I need to remind you that this is not an answer. It's just a little bit, hey, Olympia, please listen to us. And we know how well they listen to us.

Just like the homeless thing that's coming down from over there where we have to allow every one of these homeless to be in any public area and nothing we can do. It seems like our hands are always tied and we're in fear of fines. We're in fear of whatever. But the thing is is taxpaying citizens are tired of this and we need you to stand up against all of these crazy laws that they keep pushing on us, where we should have some kind of ability in our own area to manage what we want to do instead of what they want to push on us. I just wanted to bring that to your attention and tell you that Mr.

Joe Field is a very abusive, violent man. He went and taught at the college. A person I've been discipling for years, he persuaded her into thinking that this is the best thing in the world to have these level three violent sexual predators next door. We just need to be aware of what's happening in our community. Our kids are indoctrinated, and I'm hoping that somebody will help us go to the college and give another view on that.

Because this is a violent man that's telling them he lied to the police and harassed me violently. And here he's telling kids at college, I was a liar and I have anger issues, but yet he's going to run this facility. So we really need to think about who we're allowing to be in charge of this. But thank you for all the work that you're doing.

Down here. My name is Jeanie Gilmore, and I live in Kennewick on 8th Avenue. Yesterday morning, a neighbor noticed that this proposed facility had been vandalized overnight. Law enforcement was notified, and they came out to inspect the premises. Then an officer called Joe Field.

Please note that order. I did not say the security system or cameras alerted Joe, who then notified KPD, who then came out to investigate, therefore alerting the neighborhood. From what I understand, and I'm willing to be corrected if there's new information, Joe was the very last one to know. There are security cameras all over that house that he had installed. I did not personally see who installed the first few, but I spoke with the young man installing additional ones and working on others, and he told me that he was hired by Joe.

Two weeks ago, this house was egged. But as far as I've heard and I have asked around, no video was supplied for the investigation. Odd. Sometime late Sunday or early Monday morning, rocks were thrown through at least three windows cameras on this house, two on each corner of the actual living space and two on each corner of the garage. No security system or cameras alerted Joe that anything had happened.

Joe was doing whatever it is he does in Walla Walla while our neighborhood addressed the issue. If he cannot manage and be aware of an empty house covered in security cameras right now, how are we supposed to feel any safety whatsoever once violent felons are placed there, simply babysat by a high school graduate or equivalent thereof? Not only is he not aware or proactive, leaving the neighborhood to essentially do his job, but he can't even provide law enforcement with tools or leads. Somehow his cameras conveniently don't work when there's an issue, which raises significant suspicion, or he's flat out lying and they simply don't work. Either way, unless someone knows something I don't, these reasons alone show he is not responsible enough to be in charge of this operation even if we were to discount the long list of other reasons.

Those include, but are not limited to, his extensive criminal record spanning three states to prove he is a lifelong con artist and criminal, the lies he has been caught in, which are numerous, or losing his temper in low threat situations against people who haven't even spoken to him. Joe Field, at least in my mind, has already failed, and the facility isn't even open yet. Our community is not safe under his supposed watch, and these actions do not support the claim that he has been a good partner with our police department. Thank you.

My name is Katie Perry and I'm from Kennewick. So again today I wanted to touch base on the LRA and, follow-up with the council. I last, city council, we discussed the zoning of facilities and that was a potential gray area that we were looking into the definitions of the LRA in regards to that zoning. And while it might be gray, it shouldn't mean inactive. While we hesitate to, clarify this information, the community suffers like was just said this week, there was another incident of vandalism at the home for the, designated LRI placement.

This isn't just a property crime. It's a symptom of a failed placement strategy. When the state forces these facilities into residential neighborhoods without clear local guidelines, it creates a volatile environment that threatens the safety of neighbors and the stability of the program itself. So our as we discussed last time, West Richland and Pascoe are already moving forward and trying to do things, and I just encourage us to, I know we are already looking into it, but continue to move forward on that path. While we know that the ordinances that the other cities have passed may not be able to fully regulate in LRA.

We understand that's a different, situation. They they are trying. And I think that testing the limits, and they are doing what they can to test the limits of their authority to protect their citizens. They are signaling to the state that the their residential core, are not a path for least resistance. So as we work towards attempting to clarify the code, we, are also tells to By not even attempting to clarify our code, we are essentially telling the department of, department of social and health services that we have no local preference, which only invites more residential placements.

So while the gray area is still working on being clarified, Kennewick does have the right under the Growth Management Act to designate where essential public, facilities are located. And I know there's still understanding going on there, but I encourage that we look into that, look into the placements of that into light industrial zoning. These zones naturally provide a distance and security buffer, that keeps these facilities away from schools, parks, and playgrounds. Playgrounds. Moving them into an industrial area isn't about a ban, which we know we cannot do.

It's just a responsible citing decision. It's about ensuring that leading the way, as Kennewick, does, includes leading the way in the safety of our neighborhoods. So vandalism and neighborhood unrest will likely continue as the community is upset. That's nothing that any of us want to see, and I just hope that as we take into consideration the concerns of the community that we can work towards clarifying the gray areas and moving forward. So thank you.

Good evening. My name is Doug Fearing. My wife and I live just down the street around the corner from the proposed LRA location. Tonight, I'm gonna make an assumption, which we all know is a dangerous thing to do, but I'm gonna say hello to our proposed LRA home very made. We are progress we

foundation

with

for

the

strong We foundation the facility about to open within the 500 foot minimum set by the state. You could argue that these came after the two associates, your two associates purchased the house, but the nail in the coffin of this venture lies directly behind the house in the form of the city's public walkway, which was on the drawing board long before your associates purchased the house. I'm told construction is about to commence, and if it hasn't already, and we all know that's on the DOC's list of nonstarters. Our well organized neighborhood association is confident DOC is not going to approve this residence for LRA, but in the event you can pull some strings or have some friends at DOC and the rules are ignored and is approved, then let me give you a brief overview of what our plan B looks like. Every property within a half mile radius of this residence will be reappraised by realtors we've lined up in the county assessor's office, taking into consideration the amount of equity each property will lose due to the LRA being in the neighborhood.

That loss will be substantial to property owners. And with that many properties involved, it will run into the values were injured because of this LRI We the strong for tied up and liquidated. We have already have a an attorney retained and a GoFundMe account has been established for several weeks. I'll reiterate the offer Jeanette Romero made at the town hall meeting to purchase the house, but it must market value. And once DOC rejects the resident, the deal is off the table.

It's the easiest, least expensive way out of this for everyone involved, and you can find a residence somewhere else to open up your LRA. We'll continue to fight the three of you as long as it takes. And if you think we're annoying so far, you haven't seen anything yet. We're just getting warmed up.

Good evening. My name is Holly Belgard. I'm a current Kennewick resident and I grew up playing with friends, riding my bikes and riding my horses along 8th Street where this LRA house is proposed. I too would like to address Isabelle N. Leidy.

We are a united group of neighbors and friends who have dedicated their time and resources to stopping your proposed LRA from ruining our neighborhood. We're not concerned about how long it takes or what we have to do, but we are determined to stop this insane project from progressing. We've been told that you both lost your jobs recently and that's unfortunate when that happens. But know this, we are of the opinion that anybody that employs either one of you has the right to know what other types of business ventures you two are engaged in and what kind of people you are. Wherever you go, we'll know about it in a day or so, for you see you have far more enemies out there than you do friends.

That's because almost everyone sees what you're doing for the sake of money is immoral. It may be legal, but it's still immoral. And the mere fact that you're both willing to ruin a beautiful neighborhood and put children and vulnerable people at risk is very offensive to everyone other than the predators themselves. You are siding with them at the peril of peaceful, law abiding citizens who only want to live their lives in peace and safety as I did as a child. For the sake of money, you both turn your backs on one's safe and wonderful neighborhoods and the people who live in them that plead with you not to destroy those neighborhoods and the values of their investments is taking them a lifetime to acquire.

So here's the bottom line, Isabelle and Leidy. As long as we are miserable, you're going to be miserable. Wherever you go, we'll be there. So if you think you're going to move or get new jobs and get rid of us that way, think again because we'll know within twenty four hours where you are and we'll be there to let your neighbors know who they're living next to just like we did last week in Sammamish. You're exercising your right to put LRAs neighborhoods and we're exercising our rights to oppose them in any peaceful legal manner we can.

And believe me, we will. If you think we've been a hemorrhoid up until now, you just wait and see what we'll do next. Pay close attention to the signs we carry if you do see us again and I'd say there's a high likelihood you will. Thank you.

Janera Merrill, City of Kennewick resident. I'm a little disappointed and having a hard time understanding why I'm not seeing an ordinance here to zone these LREs into lighter industrial areas when you guys were literally giving a blueprint on February 18 on how to do that with everything you guys need to do that. So that's a little disappointing. And since we are addressing Liddy and Isabelle, Liddy, shame on you for the suffering that you endured on your own daughter, and all will come out in due time.

Name is Gary Harvey. I'm I live on 8th Avenue. A couple weeks ago, the police department proactively came through and requested input into issues or concerns that we had. And I had a nice long conversation with a couple of police officers. I would like to know is there an update on what has been done with those questions or concerns? Do we have a path forward? Are we going to have a report? Just kind of wondering what happened after we voiced our concerns and had them written down by the police representatives.

Other public comments tonight? Hold on, we got two the same time.

Hello, Rachel, and I am Rachel Sombrano, I live in Kennewick. I have been born and raised, and I have a four generational farm that is directly across the street from this supposed LRA. And as for vandalism and this craziness that's going on in our neighborhood now has never been seen before. So, obviously, it is it it's just not working out well, and I'm just really praying and hoping that everything can pretty much get moved forward. Like, let's sell the house, and hopefully, they can understand that when you when you make bad investments and you try to invade neighborhoods with things that are not safe for children or for even women or elderly or the vulnerable, you're going to lose money.

So the best thing would be to sell the house.

Lisa Jules in Kennewick. Again, hello again. Yes, I live down the street and around the corner from this proposed house. Last meeting, there was talk about a possible other town hall meeting, something folks can talk back and forth. We are hoping that that is something that happens and hoping that we will hear tonight that there is a plan moving forward for that.

Also, I am hoping to find out whether or not we have a plan on what is going on with that telephone pole and hopefully get something going with that as well, moving the telephone pole backwards so that it can be seen better, which will unfortunately affect the people who live there. Who cares? We're talking to Leidy and Joe, Laidy, I just wanted to remind you of the lovely prayer we said that we our hope we ask God not to lead us into temptation, and therefore, you should not lead others into temptation.

Way up here. Hi, this is Kelly Murphy. We all hear what everybody's concerned about. I really just wanna say thank you to what you guys are doing because I see it. I appreciate it, and it's giving me a lot of comfort. So that's really all I wanted to say was just thank you for doing what you are doing because I see it. So thank you.

Ira.

My name's Ira Johnson. I'm from Kennewick, and I'm with these people. And you've been to all of our meetings, and you know it may be legal, but we don't want it. End of discussion. We need your help. Change the law. Do whatever you gotta do. Yep. Let's correct this bad thing that's coming to our town. That's all I gotta say. Thank you.

Hello. I'm Mark Jolson, resident of Kennewick. My family's been around the Tri Cities since 1939. So let's see. When we were protesting at her house, the two individuals, the ladies, she was concerned about her son seeing the signs and seeing us and thinking that he would be unsafe in their neighborhood.

I find that very ironic that that's the way we feel, safe if that house goes in our neighborhood. You felt it for two hours, those two ladies. We're gonna feel it every day. Welcome to the hell that you're putting us through. Thank you.

Okay. Time for one more probably.

My name is Trevor Delorme Kennewick. One thing that the lawmakers in Olympia probably looked over was in recent times, we have a lot of high schoolers protesting ICE. Right? They're going off campus to walk around the streets, really just skipping class. And if you have all of these houses with pedophiles in them, that's just gonna create problems.

Right? You're putting children right next to the house. They could be walking past it and not even know. So I think that the school boards need to keep the children in the classroom and keep these houses out of our city realistically. A better place to put them would be somewhere far out in the county where they can't even see anyone. Thank you.

I think we've got about two minutes left if there's one more comment. I'll just say we'll be here again in two weeks. So you have time as well. Don't have to get them all in tonight. Thank you all. All right. The next item on the agenda is approval of the agenda. If the council member would like an item removed from the consent agenda, please be recognized and state the item number you'd like to have removed for further discussion. I'll entertain a motion. Mayor McCain. Mayor Pro Tem Torelli.

Move to approve the agenda as presented. Is there second?

Mayor? Yes, Councilmember Millbauer. I'll second the motion. It has been moved by Mayor Pro Tempterrelli and seconded by Councilmember Millbauer to approve the agenda as presented. The floor is open for discussion.

There being no further discussion has been properly moved and seconded to approve the agenda as presented. Will the clerk please start the vote? It has passed unanimously. The next item is the approval of the consent agenda. All matters listed within the consent agenda have been distributed to each member of the Kennewick City Council for reading and study. They're considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion of the council with no separate discussion. I'll entertain a motion. Mayor McShane. Mayor Pro Tem Torelli.

Move to approve the consent agenda as presented. Is there

a second? Mayor. Council Member Millbauer. I second the motion. It has been moved by Mayor Pro Tem Torelli and seconded by Councilmember Millbauer to approve the consent agenda as presented. Will the clerk please start the vote? That is passed unanimously. Next, we will consider the adoption of three ordinances. After each staff report, council will have an opportunity to ask questions or to request clarifying information. We're going to have general discussion and debate to wait until after a motion has been made.

Our first ordinance concerns an amendment to the KMC title of eighteen-twelve-ten permitted uses in the urban mixed use zone under DCA twenty twenty five-six. Will the city clerk please read the ordinance by title.

Thank you. This is an ordinance relating to table of non residential uses and amending section 18.12. Zero one zero b one of the Kennewick Municipal Code.

Mr. Moai, may we have a staff report, please?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of the council. Tonight, we have before your request to amend amend our municipal code to allow vehicle sales, incidental repair oops. Let me turn this on real quick. It's going to register pretty soon, I think.

Thank you. There we go. This is the wrong presentation. 2025006. There we go.

Yeah. Thank you. This is a proposal to allow vehicle sales, incidental repair, and service in our urban mixed use zone. And with that said, the the proposal, while it allows it in the urban mixed use zone, it it does not allow it in the Vista Field area, which so we have two urban mixed use areas where urban mixed use is currently within the city of Kennewick. One is Vista Field.

The other is on Columbia Drive. And so this will apply solely to the Columbia Drive area. The this is what the proposed amendment looks like. Basically, we'd be adding a permit that it would be permitted in the UMU with a footnote that it's not allowed in Vista Field. A brief history.

In 2010, the city adopted the bridge to bridge river to rail revitalization plan. In 2017, the city adopted the UMU zone and development regulations to implement that plan. The plan itself states that the area is to be zone mixed use, has the most opportunity for new urban neighborhoods, retail entertainment, personal services, and pedestrian related activities. Since '2 set 2017 when the pleased the past. Existing businesses that are within each zone.

So it's not a new topic that's come up where staff is familiar with the desire for some of the existing businesses there that are zoned wanting to expand. At the public hearing, the Planning Commission held on February 2, staff recommended denial of the proposed amendment. There were two applicants or the applicant case. I that. To And we'll And do limited to vehicle sales.

And then at the vote, planning commission voted five zero to recommend approval of the amendment. And we had one planning commissioner who recused himself from the hearing first quarter had of examining alternatives that would allow the expansion of certain businesses, successful businesses who are at a point where they want to expand, allowing them to to expand while still maintaining their legal nonconforming status so that at such time that they cease operation for a period of six months or the use changes, they would not be able to come you would not be able to put another non conforming that same non conforming use back onto the property. We believe that could be achieved similar to what you see on the screen, which would allow existing non conforming uses to expand, provided they're not more intense or more non conforming, as long as the non conformance hasn't continued. And that would allow, as I said earlier, allow successful non conforming businesses to expand while still allowing for businesses that are not successful that and those properties change

to And

that.

So

see that And we're that while those that maybe were not as successful as they transitioned out, it would allow those uses to transition out into more favorable uses that are permitted in the current zone. Planning Commission's recommendation, as stated earlier, was to recommend approval to the city council. As you see in your cover sheet, you have two motions that were listed. One is to adopt the ordinance as presented, which will allow vehicle sales throughout the entire UMU zone. Option two is to remand the matter back to the Planning Commission to consider amending KMC eighteen fifteen o one o and and come up with somewhat of a compromise that would allow expansion of certain nonconforming uses.

There's always a third council has related good I question.

Questions of staff? Mayor? I'm sorry. Go ahead.

Council Member Trumbull. Thank you, Mayor McShane. The first question I have is I think it would be helpful for everyone who is listening, witnessing here to know exactly or at least in a sense that we could appreciate today where this boundary area is. How far does it go? Along Columbia Drive. Does it go to? The highway and the traffic circles. On both sides. Does it go? South.

How far? I'm assuming it goes all the way to The Blue Bridge.

To

we're And be

to able sense

And that runs from the North Side of Columbia Drive And all the way to the levee. On the South Side of Columbia Drive, the UMU zone runs, say, roughly to Bruno Street, where it then meets some industrial zone lands. When you're looking West of Fruitland Street, between Fruitland Street and the Blue Bridge Roundabout, the properties that front Columbia number

the

properties projects that that are just the properties that we are fronting Columbia Drive. Once you get behind those properties to the north, everything from there to the north is zoned urban mixed use. And then all of the land that is along 395, kind of what's referred to as the Blue Bridge property, the land that once had the old motel and mobile home park that's since been cleared, all of that is zoned urban mixed use.

Are on the North Side Of Columbia Drive some I'll call side of the And

So, other side this proposal is the proposal that the applicant made will only affect vehicle sales within the urban mixed use. So any other non vehicle sales instance, storage land would remain unaffected. Repair shops that are located along their ban on construction, they would remain unaffected. So there would continue to be nonconforming uses that are allowed to persist and would not be affected by the proposed change that the applicant made. How is this

Proposed amendment. Significantly different. From what Has been approved and allows businesses existing that are grandfathered to expand up to a certain percentage of their space that they occupy.

How is this So the way that this is different is that currently if you're nonconforming use you're allowed to expand up to 25%. The applicant's proposal would allow car dealers to UMU. So whether they were there or not previously, whether they were grandfathered or not, they can go in, change a use, and start a car dealership.

So it's wide open. There's no 25% rule.

Correct. Thank you. Two questions, Anthony. First of all, when you say the proposed expansion is not more intense or non conforming, what is a more non conforming look? I mean, if Volgolturf wants to

So,

it's it's probably probably the thing. Correct. Doing something else. Yeah. Okay. And was this option available to the Planning Commission during

the February meeting? So, so there was a brief discussion about this at the where they where the planning commission asked a question related to nonconforming uses and whether or not something like this could be done. Staff responded to the inquiry that it could be that something could I I

think,

where No, was not in this detail. It was just a general discussion.

Council Member Anderson.

Anthony, looking at that area, the urban mixed use area, could you explain what is the vision that the city has for that area and the use? Because the area that we're kind of looking at, vacant area near the Blue Bridge, it's been empty for a decade. Nothing's been done there. So, what's the city's vision of what they would like to see and why they oppose this?

So, during the planning effort for the Bridge To Bridge area, we reached out and had several public outreach sessions with people who live within the area, people who own businesses within the area, people who own the land within the area, in addition to the general public. What we heard from the general public and from people that own businesses and live there was that we have an asset, the river. We need to maximize the use of that and try to capitalize on that. We heard a lot of feedback about more urban style development. I wouldn't say exactly what you see at Vista Field, but similar concepts where you've got multistory that.

To

livable environment. That's been

the that. Vision. And However, it's a difficult vision to try to put in place when you don't own any to And get that. Do to And And we're catalyst. And Now that's clear at the other end of this bridge to bridge area, right?

It's the Far East End. We're starting to see additional development that is similar to what the plan contemplated in regards to more dense residential redevelopment of underutilized lands. And the hope is that, that what we're seeing now is an offshoot of the investment that the port and the city made the Vista or not Vista, excuse me, Duffy's Pond, the wine garden, Artisan Garden, Artisan Village area. Keep changing the name so I don't it's hard to keep track of but in that that wine garden, wine village area that the port has developed, hoping to see additional development because of the investment made there. Now, we're seeing that across the street on Oak Street with some or excuse me, not Oak Street, Elm Street with the development of townhomes.

We saw some additional development of townhomes in the high density neighborhood and we've been in discussions with others about more potential development in that area. And the hope is that these projects will act as catalyst to increase more development in the future. That's really how you have to look unless you're going to come in condemn areas, and really put money into areas, which cities don't typically I mean, cities of our size typically don't have the money to do that, then you're really waiting on the market to change, someone to take a risk, invest, and then see that change happen. I believe we're starting to see that change happen. You heard from, you know, mister Weinheimer earlier that he's got someone they've been working

to to

do we'll And that.

Able to do

And

A we're follow-up to that, And what you're saying is the applicants who are requesting this are the property owners in that area or not property owners in that area?

Applicants requesting this change are one towing used to be. Yeah, near Hubby's Pizza. Okay. And they specifically, they purchased a car dealership. You know, moved their business there and then purchased adjacent land and expanded onto it, came in for a pre application meeting because they wanted to build some new buildings and were told they, you're non conforming, you shouldn't have expanded that much and so the route is either pull it back or they applied for this code amendment to try to get them into a a conforming status.

So, they're looking to change for the which would change for the entire zone, but it's really just for them and their location. But it would adversely affect whatever theoretical pie in the sky developments that's happening close to the Blue Bridge. Like I said, it's been ten years, nothing

has happened. That's the yes, that

was plan. Am I understanding that correctly?

Yes, that was the claim that was made. I haven't met with Mr. Weinheimer's clients recently. I know that they're the owners

of bridge. We've heard many years. We've got something I mean I've heard it before I was on council. Oh, it's something's coming and that's all I wanted just to make sure Okay, I thank you.

Anthony on that with. It is the property there at VIP motors. That's. That's the one that specifically have the non conforming use right now. They expand out of that?

Yes, they had a nonconforming use. They expanded without permits beyond 25%. Now they're requesting a change to the code so that they can maintain their expansion.

So question is everything else there that touches Columbia Columbia Drive at least down past Fruitland, that's our vehicle sales corridor, correct?

Correct.

Because this has been something that we've looked at on a few different occasions, wondering why we did that versus the UFO. So this one now is fronting Columbia Drive, happens to be UMU to where all the other fronting our vehicle cell corridor,

correct? Correct.

Why don't they instead of amending this, why don't they ask for a zone change and go to vehicle corridor? What's it talked about?

That was not talked about, but they need to expand the corridor further.

The vehicle corridor doesn't come, that would be a comp plan to change that or

how? Not

that.

To

city. It's been very slow moving, painfully slow. It's hard when someone looks at a map there of Columbia Drive and sees everything's vehicle sales. There's I think I wrote down 14 or 15 of them are vehicle sales or Matthews Auto Body. I mean, the whole corridor looks like to your eye, it looks like that's all UMU, where we have a weird zoning of that vehicle. So I would rather see a zone change do

And

that. To we're trying to grow would be how I would view it. And Is then that a possibility? I mean, it's a little more work for the applicant. I get it. I've been through it multiple times.

Yeah. And I think we recognize that as well, which is why then then going to to grow do to And business. To grow And they go, if they're not replaced by the same use, then that use changes over the next thing that goes in, there has to be something that's conforming in the UMU. And so it would allow those businesses that are successful to continue and to expand.

Is that a path forward for this applicant?

That would be a path forward for this applicant and it doesn't hurt them at all because like I said earlier, they currently have expanded without permits and at this point, it's just an outcome of whatever happens with council. If council denies the request, we start a code enforcement process where we require them to pull back. If it's approved, they're allowed to just stay there. If it gets remanded to the planning commission, we come back with an alternative that kind of meets the needs of everyone the best it can, and then they would like to get to remain.

Specifically where they're non conforming currently, I'm struggling with that. If they're non conforming, they expanded their expansion was into what to make them more non conforming? They purchased

to to And then we'll be do do that. To

by looks. I've And known Neil. I've never built that building. I've been around these

companies You've heard the story. We've got design standards, but you can follow the design standards I'm like something just saying,

I would like to find a way for the applicant to get where they're wanting go. I think they're in line with the vision of what goes on in Columbia Drive, but I'm not for changing the code right now. I would like to be able to move everybody out of there whether that's a twenty, fifty. Mean some of these people have been there longer than I've been in East Kenilke and I've been there awhile. And so I'm not looking for them to leave but like you said as those businesses fail that is the vision we have is to change that eventually but it doesn't happen quick. I also see I'd like to see these people to be able to expand. I hate to tell a business that you've been a good neighbor down there. You're selling a lot of cars but we don't have an avenue for you to to keep doing what everybody else is doing next door to you. I I struggle with that but I'd like to find a way to work with them. Help them in a way to find a rezone or to find a way to do it.

But I'm not for passing the orders the way it is to change everything down there. I'd like to keep the bridge to bridge even though I haven't been a fan of Bridge to Bridge for my whole life. At least keep working towards getting Bridge to Bridge be what it set out to become.

Any other questions? Mayor McShane,

you got any? Unless anyone has one.

Oh, still have a question. Was going offer another paper. Anthony, we just heard a couple of different alternatives I thought. I was trying to make sure I was keeping them all straight in my mind. The one that was proposed by the applicant and approved by the planning committee would be to change our UMU zoning to allow these things.

I'm going to summarize these. I'm sure I'm not going get it completely right. The other option would be to remain it back to the planning committee to take a look at KMC eighteen fifteen ten to see if there's kind of a middle ground and I think that's described in the staff recommendation as something that you know would be some type of middle ground. And then the third option that I heard Councilmember Beacham talk about was this idea of rezoning the property but that's a comp plan amendment first and then a rezone for that area. And so I just want to see if those are reasonable alternatives that I heard.

The comp plan amendment rezone

question.

So, I

that's we'll

that that done. That

And did see a map that Crystal we'll had put up on the screen that showed us the different types, if that would be all right. I have one similar to it on my screen, but I can't

put it up there to

describe it.

And again, not having been at all the discussions related to the zoning that we did go through here, this Commercial Auto Row, which is the red on this map, plus or minus. Is related to car sales. Yes, was going to say not quite Not at all. Yes, but close.

There's a couple of parts there's one parcel on that's not Commercial Auto Row. And

so the designation just to give some background here. So the idea that Commercial Auto Row would be limited to the areas West Of Fruitland and not be extended continuing on further down Columbia Drive. Can you describe what delineation was, if that was just a convenient map location

And to And be they felt that there was so much changeover elsewhere on Columbia Drive that the more I don't know about consistent, but the ones that have remained car dealers the longest were between Fruitland and the Blue Bridge. And the automobile dealers and we had separate meetings just with the automobile dealers because we knew that was a large stakeholder in the area. And so the development of the commercial auto row zone was an outcome of our meetings with them and for their desire to preserve an area within the bridge to bridge that allowed for those uses outright.

And so just making sure I understand the what I'm going call option two, looking at the remanding of that ordinance. There's a discussion in here about nonconforming businesses remain subject to 25% expansion limitation. Can you just describe that a little bit more so I understand? This would be maybe I'll say what I think it is and then you can correct me. If I have a business and I want to expand that business, I'm allowed to continue with the nonconforming use up to 25% size larger than that? Correct. Is that in the land mass or in sales or in ish?

We don't get into sales. So it's either building or land mass.

Building or land Yes.

Right. And And that's square

is that that's not currently what the requirement

right to And

right option two, as I understand, how would that allow them to expand to meet

Proposed option two allows us to find a compromise while leaving them nonconforming but allowing them more flexibility and expansion. That way, I said earlier, those businesses that are successful within the area can continue to operate. They can expand when needed. And those that are not, as they phase out more if they're not replaced with the same use, a use that is conforming in their mixed use zone would then replace it, and then we'd start to see those uses that we wanna see in those areas that were contemplated in the plan starting to pop up. I think I understand.

Thank you. Any other questions? Yes, mister Matt. Councilman Clipper.

I see option two, as worded, motion to remand the matter back to the Planning Commission to consider amending KMC eighteen fifteen ten. In our handout, there's, language that says remand the proposal back to the Planning Commission or direct staff to start a new amendment review. I'm wondering my question is, would it be proper? The language I like the most is remand the proposal back to the Planning Commission and direct staff to work with them to start a a new amendment review. Planning Commission and staff are working together on this. Is that workable language or? Absolutely. Thank

you, Mr. Mayor. You. Yes, please. Kind

of following up with that, I like where he's headed with that. If staff's looking at this, is this something where we have that 25% expansion clause kind of in there? Is that something you look at if you have a successful business if they could expand to 100% if this is a successful business right there and they're doing good then I don't want to chase them out would that help them to then expand to the area they're trying to go to red towing? Yes. So I would recommend the staff looks at that.

The successful business can expand. Don't know it's 100 or whatever they need to do. But if they're successful, let them do it. I would like that much better than how they currently have a proposal. I like that idea a lot.

I took a look at the same thing. Think that let me clarify something. Are we asking questions or are we making comments? I think we're

trying to ask questions and I'm getting I think some of the questions just recently have been trying to lead towards a motion to

be made. I'm going to wait for comment.

Okay, thank you. Okay, I heard a potential motion from Council Member Clippert. I was gonna say I think I think if Crystal can can please if city clerk could please get yeah try to try to work work towards that we'll we'll see if that's what council member Clipper had.

Crystal, I think I can go ahead and make a motion on this.

Excellent. Mayor McShane?

Yes, Mayor Pro Tempterra.

I move to remand the proposal back to the Planning Commission and direct staff to start a new amendment review.

I would second that.

You're the best city clerk.

We're in agreement?

If you hold on just again I can put that on the screen there if you don't have it.

I'm almost there but I

would if you're there faster.

There. All

right.

Motion has been made to remand the proposal back to the Planning Commission and direct staff to start a new amendment review. Is there a specific code amendment that we're wanting them to review? Or is that necessary?

I don't know that it's necessary. Perfect.

Okay. Alright. Is there the floor is open for discussion?

Oh, was

Yes, Member Bicham. So sorry, it has been properly moved by Mayor Pro Tempterrelli and seconded by Council Member Bicham to remand the proposal back to the Planning Commission direct staff to start a new amendment And the floor is now open for discussion council member Trumbull go ahead.

Thank you Mayor McShane. By way of just a quick comment in historical context. The Bridge to Bridge River to Rail revitalization plan was adopted by the city in 2010. We have this on our screen. And in 2017, the city adopted the UMU zone and development regulations, which implement the bridge to bridge river to rail revitalization plan.

Point. I think good point. Suggestion made by Councilman And Clippert to simplify instead of constrain land use along this area. And the way to do that is to allow for areas that are along Columbia Drive that are predominantly auto sales at this time, I think marked in red, if I'm correct, to not be limited by the 25% rule, which is part of what happened in 2017. But at the same time, I would like the part of this UMU zone that goes far beyond the red zone, the red areas on the map to have not be subjected to land use activities that would be contrary to the vision that I think the council and the planning commission would want to see and I'm including the landowners, particularly the 40 acres next to the Blue Bridge, so that they can have an opportunity, continued opportunity, to bring to fruition what the original proponents of Bridge the to Bridge and River a And question.

Think

sales tax. But that's they don't really look all that attractive. I think we need to try to get both of those objectives achieved. The car lots should not be constrained, and the landowners who have vision to do something different shouldn't be handicapped with the car lot outside their front door. And that's all I'm trying to say.

Other comments? Councilmember Anderson.

Yeah, I would support the motion for the simple fact that I'm very pro business and it would make sense to have all these other businesses that are already there and then constrain this business that wants to grow, that's doing well, that's providing a service to the community, that's generating tax revenue for the city simply because we have this long term view that may or may not be fully compatible with what they're doing. If we were talking about a different area, but right there, I think there's six dealerships within a couple 100 yards of that location. And if they're willing to expand, they've spent the money, they're doing well enough in sales that it warrants that. Think we don't want to handicap businesses in our community. On the other hand, on that corner, there is actual work being done and actual plans, we don't 're be do we're be

to

voice to that. I think if We're we have a successful business that's looking to do expand in our city and we can find a way to make that successful, I think we should try to help with that. I do think that sometimes we do need to take the long view and it may not be what people want right now. But I think these types of transformative things do take time. I will point out and take a moment of advantage here to talk about the fact that the bridge to bridge plan was done in 2010.

That was fifteen years ago. And I think that shared vision that we have today for downtown area, I would call it from bridge to bridge from the River South as far as 10th Avenue even perhaps may need to be relooked at and may need to be a priority of our council as we go forward. So I think we want to make sure not to limit our to do some of those things and make sure that those decisions are still available to future councils as well. And so I think this is a good compromise and appreciate everybody's work. I don't

see Steve here, but I just want to go on the record for Anthony and I that I agreed with Anthony's decision on the planning thing downtown Kenilworth. So I just want to be on the record saying that I agree. You got to be a first for everything. I'm just joking.

Okay. Alright. Without further comment or discussion, it has been properly moved and seconded to remand the proposal back to the commission direct staff to start a new amendment review. Will the clerk please start the vote? Thank you.

Next is an ordinance docket concerning two ordinances updating KMC title 17 under DCA twenty twenty five-seven. All matters listed within the ordinance docket have been distributed to each members members board members members ordinance, members may of strike that item for the docket for separate consideration and vote. As we get started with the city clerk, please read the ordinance titles for the docket items.

Thank you, mayor. So for item five b one, we have an ordinance relating to subdivisions and adding chapter 17 dot 14 to the Kennewick Municipal Code and for item five b two we have an ordinance relating to definitions and amending section seventeen point zero four point zero two zero of the Kennewick Municipal Code.

Alright mister White, will we have a staff report please?

Thank you again, Mr. Mayor and members of the council. We have, as stated earlier, a proposal to amend Title 17, which is our subdivision code. The city is the applicant and we are proposing this amendment in response to and grow Senate Bill five thousand five and fifty nine, which requires that the city adopt development regulations for what's termed as unit lot subdivisions. That's a new term that I think the legislature created.

I don't know where it came from. But it's a term that was not on my radar until this bill was passed. What it does is it allows for the subdivision of a parent lot into several children lots, I guess. You know what, we're just gonna it's confusing us all get out. Ir

do that.

And so to we're we're able do to

procedures located in

chapter that. 17 dot 13. And Okay. Here's where maybe it'll make sense. And I know I've presented on unit lot subdivisions before, but it has been a while. So, basically, what we have is a concept where, especially with middle housing that's been passed by the legislature that the council adopted going do to to And

able do

to

that. To And to so we're do do to to to we'll that. Requirements, which I'm not sure why it wouldn't because we'd be permitting. We wouldn't permit it if it wasn't. But provided they meet the zoning requirements, you can then segregate each unit off onto its own separate individual half

And 20

to

in relation to the parent lot. And so, anyway, that gives property owners an option if you've built an accessory dwelling unit on your property and, you know, you now wanna you don't need it or you wanna sell it for whatever reason, you're now able to go through this process that allows you to segregate that unit off and then sell it. Unit lots cannot be subdivided again. And on the face of the unit lot subdivision, it states that. And so once a unit lot is created, it cannot be divided

to

we're

February. We had one member of the public testify in favor of the proposed amendments, and the planning commission voted six to zero to recommend approval of these amendments to the city council. With that, I'd be happy to take any questions. Related to this proposal.

Board.

Board. And I us from the state legislature. We must do this. Correct.

Anthony, in the event that we talked about them not being able to subdivide further, what could they subdivide? What would even be possible as small these units are for the doghouse? I mean, what's left?

Well, there's not a limit to how big that unit lock could be. And if I could I don't know. I might have to have Crystal do it because that doesn't want to work for me. Back to slides, please. I think you just have to touch it and then suddenly it works for me.

If you look at, I guess, the example furthest to the right, what you see is three units there. You have a detached accessory dwelling unit. You have an attached duplex unit, or I guess a duplex, smaller unit, larger unit, and an accessory dwelling unit. And then you have area that's shaded in blue that's held in common, owned in common by the three owners. The the owner, the common ownership is not necessarily required.

You could have an easement in place that provides access to each of those lots or the Oh my gosh. Yeah. To the unit lots. And this accessory dwelling unit parcel could take up all of that blue area. Right? It's possible that you could end up with a sense get And

we talk about these lots these parcels or portions of properties a owned in common, is that being done through like a covenant or condominium type conditions? Is it similar to that?

Yes, it would be done in a way similar to that. So like in a condominium is a good example. With condominiums, you typically have common ownership of the area outside the buildings. And however many units, if there's 20 units, know, one twentieth is every unit's responsible for one twentieth of the outside. They come up with an agreement on how to maintain it. And then that's recorded and put in place. So it's so it's applicable applicable to anyone and everyone who purchases after the fact or when lots of units are transferred, etcetera. So the same type of agreements would be put in place with these when

own. Think have think just missed it as I was looking through. Question. At any rate that's the intent you understand it.

Think, able we're get a prohibiting homeowners associations to to basically ban whatever those bills were proposing. Middle housing is one of the most, I think, recognizable ones for me at least because we spend so much time on it. Any covenants that were in place prior to the effective date of that bill were grandfathered. Anything that came into effect after are prohibited from banning middle housing. The same thing was true I believe with the accessory dwelling unit bill that was passed as well requiring two us to allow two accessory dwelling units on every lot.

And I can't say for sure if this bill had the same language in it. I don't recall, but I would not be surprised because other housing bills that I'm seeing in this session have the same language.

That would be my expectation also. Thank you.

Any other questions for staff? Entertain a motion. Mayor McShane? Yes, Mayor Pro Tempterlli.

I move to adopt KMC Title 17 ordinance update docket as presented docket items 5B1 and 5B2. Is there a second? Mayor, Council

Member Millvara. I'll second that motion.

It's been moved by Mayor Pro Tempterrelli and second by Council Member Millvara to adopt KMC Title 17 Ordinance update docket is presented. Docket items 5B1 and 5B2. The floor is open for discussion. Council Member Clip.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I will be voting no tonight. When I look at this proposal. I appreciate. The city making this request based on demands made by the state legislature.

However, if I understand correctly, if we thought that this was good for the city of Kennewick, we could have done this without the state demanding that we do so if we thought it was good for the city of Kennewick. Hear between the lines that once again something's come from the state that we go, what? And I'm just sick and tired of the state of Washington making demands on the cities and the communities in Washington state saying we must do this whether you like it or not. Sometimes it's like our audience has showed us today. You need to stand up and say no. You're not going to make us do things that don't make sense for our community.

Other council comments?

Okay.

No additional comments. It has been properly moved and seconded to adopt the KMC Title 17 ordinance. The update docket is presented, docket items 5B1 and 5B2. Will the city clerk please start the vote?

Motion is passed five to two.

Public hearings. Next is a public hearing for resolution approving a final latecomers reimbursement agreement for South Colorado Street Sewer. After the staff report, council have an opportunity to ask questions or to request clarifying information. Following those questions, persons interested in testifying for or against the matter will be invited to speak. A general discussion and debate by council must wait until after a motion has been made. The city clerk is informing there are no online visitors signed up to testify for the public hearing. Mr. Cowling, may we have a staff report please?

Thank you, Mayor McShane. However, I'm going to introduce Mr. Caleb Shannon to give the staff report.

That sounds great. Caleb. Please.

Good evening, mayor, city council members. I'm here to talk about a different acronym for LRA. It is the, Lake Comers Reimbursement Agreement. This is for the Colorado Street sewer extension.

I just note that this is

a much more welcome version. It's a lighter it's a little lighter think

a good I

be reimbursed for the construction of the sewer if the adjacent properties were to connect or to use that sewer in the next twenty years or is required by a plaque condition to put in that sewer. This project is or the sewer is related to the light industrial area project, which was based on an eight inch developer size for sewer. We ended up putting a 12 inch sewer in that project. The total construction for the final late comers agreement based on construction is $306,000. The value for the reimbursement for the properties, is shown in some later exhibits. And, again, this is based on actual construction dollars.

So

KMC five sixty allows for they come agreements for the installation of sewer mains. This is this sewer was put in as part of the city's Light Industrial Area or LIA Utility Extension P 2011. The

the day,

property owner's owner's property 11/05/2024. At that time, owner's parcel a, on this exhibit here, it'd be the Northeast parcel, was undeveloped as shown in that map on the right. The sewer was constructed, and our project was constructed between January 2025, during which time Apple Valley continued to develop and Parcel A has since partially subdivided into individual home lots. This is shown on the image on the left. Those yellow lines there are the individual home lots that have been subdivided.

It is our intention that the remainder of parcel A will be assessed as originally planned for in the preliminary latecomers agreement when the remainder portion of the undeveloped property parcel a is developed. This is an exhibit that shows the affected parcels. There are three parcels owned by Matt Smith with Tri Cities Development Company and two parcels owned by Marcus Fuller Leo with JC Structures. This is a cost breakdown for the final latecomers agreement, and this was based on actual construction unit pricing. There was an overall reduction between the preliminary latecomers agreement and this final latecomers agreement for these property owners.

That was due to the removal of, a few of the bid items that we deemed not applicable and, being based on actual construction dollars rather than estimate. The total estimated cost is $306,000. So the city went through a final latecomers notification process in February and involved sending out letters, to the property owners by certified mail. In those letters, I just wanna note that there was a clerical error, a math error that had a discrepancy of 30 that has since been corrected. So the totals presented in this presentation are the correct numbers.

I've mentioned the total $306,005.62 84. And, again, that changed very, very slightly due to that $30, error that was on the notice that was sent out to the property owners. This is the assessment broken out by parcel. So the three parcels owned by Matt Smith and his company are listed there. This is based on the frontage along Colorado Street, a percentage of that. And then on the west side of Colorado Street are the parcels owned by Marcus Fuller Leo, and that is his assessment. They're the same. I'll open up to any questions.

Has this questions.

To

be the And Approves that assessment to each parcel that's identified and that this is the final latecomers that again comes to council based on actual construction costs.

My question, I shouldn't have tried to go back door. Should have answered directly or asked directly. Has anyone spoke? I'm super excited

about this.

I'm just wondering, has anyone spoken in opposition to this idea? No. Excellent. Thank you.

I'll just note that part of the reason we have a public hearing this evening. Right for four people to come and do that.

I'll add that the city's been in contact with both property owners from the beginning of the project to establish this and that's been. The last two to three years in the works so they're well

aware. Other questions of staff? Alright, if there are no additional questions of staff, we're going go ahead and the public hearing is now open. If someone in the audience wishes to speak, please raise your hand. If there are no speakers, the public hearing is now closed. I will entertain a motion.

Mayor McShane.

Mayor Pro Tempterlli.

I move to adopt the resolution as presented and authorize the city manager to sign the final late comers reimbursement agreement for South Colorado Street sewer.

Is there a second?

Mayor, I second.

Thank you. Councilmember Anderson. It's been moved by Mayor Pro Temporelli and seconded by Councilmember Anderson to adopt the resolutions presented and authorize the city manager to sign the the

Directors

of

of

resolution presented and authorize the city manager to sign the final latecomers reimbursement agreement for South Colorado Street Sewer. Will the clerk please start the vote? That has passed unanimously. Thank you.

All

right, let's move on to the council comments and discussion portion of our agenda this evening. We'll go

I

question. That's

think

I

important it's has, I think, been successfully resolved. We did that last Thursday. So no more fireworks at CAC. Thank

you.

You. Council member clipper. Thank you, Mr.

Mayor. Just very briefly in interest to everyone's time today, we had a disability board meeting and we had one applicant from the community come before us. I just wanted to thank that applicant one more time for doing that because having been involved in elected service many years now, sometimes it's very, very hard to get the public involved in their governance and when people step forward to do that, like the audience has done tonight and that gentleman did today when he applied for an open position. I just want to say thank you very much and I'm excited to be

a part of this council.

Mayor Pro Temps really. Two quick comments. It was brought up tonight that a proposed path forward on the LRA was had been made available to us. That doesn't work for the city of Kennewick where that was applied to counties on the West Side essentially it didn't change anything. Now we can go forward with a proposal and would be successful in a secure facility transition center regulating that to a light industrial for example.

But one of the ways you have to contextualize this is if somebody is released from prison. They've been accused of molestation or rape or whatever and they move in with their parents. Can you move to a different area of the city and as long as you're staying below a certain number of bodies my understanding is you can't do that so can't that that's how it gets contextual ized and then mister Johnson had submitted a form that I thought was pretty good. One of the communities was able to fight back using sewer requirements for that's I good I'll do so again but the real answer does lie in Olympia And I think the answer that Mayor McShane came up with the trail between KID and City of Kennewick, the opening of a childcare center, those are the things that are going to make the difference in your immediate area. But for the region as a whole, we need Olympia to get on board with us.

So the activities that you did this weekend or this past week have been really fundamentally impactful as far as the owners are concerned. But now we need to focus on who are the legislatures that we can talk to that would support us across the aisle where we don't get into this you're a D, I'm an R and therefore I will never listen to you eat thing, right? So again, appreciate the willingness to do this time and time again. I understand the frustration that feels like nothing is happening, but at the same time, know that we are all on the same page. We are all trying to work toward the same direction.

I know the mayor has been really close with the group and I I appreciate that. Thank you.

Council Member Anderson.

Just echo what's been said and support support the SOCT group and all the efforts that they've gone through and

just

voting has consequences. And we've unfortunately got some certain level of lunacy that goes on in Olympia. And we just need to be involved, and people need to be involved. And and this situation will be resolved, and I know there's some things going on behind the scenes that are looking hopeful. But when this is over, you can't stop being involved.

For example, this zoning, the middle housing bill and the zoning requirements about what you can and can't put in the neighborhood and how you can and can't subdivide the land that's been passed by the state, we had no say in it. And I appreciate the votes of note tonight in sort of making a statement. But the reality is we need to be more active in Olympia. We need to be more active with our legislators, with the governor's office, because really a small group of people here really represent the entire city of Kennewick. And yet, this small group of people can make a huge difference.

So I appreciate what's being done, and we just need to continue with that. I do want to give a quick update. We talk a lot about what the city can do as far as infrastructure and I was at the roads meeting and the presentation given by can find his exact quote, this is the Assistant Director of Washdot. Quote, our system is wrecked. And he talked about the road system in the state of are so failing and so aged.

We are $1,400,000,000 annually. It's accruing annually behind, dollars 1,400,000,000.0 behind on repairs just for repairs preservation of what's already there. One example was in December alone, they had a pretty significant weather event on the West Side with a lot of rain and mudslides. They spent $40 to $50,000,000 just in emergency repairs just to get the roads up and running, which is a massive amount from the budget. Just one other interesting note is that the typical lifespan of a bridge is about seventy five years.

So that's pretty close to the age of the Blue Bridge by the way. Three fifteen bridges in the state of Washington are 80 years or older. There's one bridge in Mount Rainier Park, and I can't recall the name of it. It's 103 years old. They just had to close it, and the road is no longer operable.

And the replacement for that one bridge would be 160,000,000 that's not going to happen. And this is simply a small snapshot of what's going on in the state and the infrastructure of the state and the roads. So think we're having an uphill battle in getting state funds for of our projects because of that. But we do what we can. I think we've got a pretty good system in place that wasn't in place before as far as our preservation budget for our roads and our infrastructure.

But it's a difficult thing when the costs are rising, taxes are rising. At some point, things need to be cut to be able to afford the standard of living that we enjoy. So just keep that in mind as we go forward and look at projects and look at things that need to happen in our city. Think so far we're above average compared to the state but something to consider. You. You. Councilmember Millbauer. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you

everyone, for showing up. Appreciate you continuing to fight the good fight. I appreciate Mayor Pro Tem and Councilmember Anderson's words in that area. Councilmember

I did want to report that I was invited to Hawthorne Elementary Amazing Shakes. I don't know if you've heard of that program before. Mayor Pro Tem Torelli and I were there. Chief Guerrero, a detective, and another police officer were there. It's really a program that's a competition to develop professional skills for the students.

And those students did an excellent job answering rapid fire questions. Shaking your hand, looking you in the eye, I was very impressed with fifth graders where you look at should be a recess plan. They did a wonderful job. I did also attend the Tri City Chamber Association of Washington Business meeting that was making 2,040. Chris Johnson, I think was, the CEO of Washington.

Association of Washington Business, got it, gave a report. Also attended the Continuum of Care meeting, visit Tri team. Able able to they're we're in negotiations for another term hopefully here in Tri Cities. So with that, thank you and have a good evening. Just

wanna make a couple of comments. Number one being on the unit lot subdivision. Well, I I fully understand the couple of council members decision to do what they do and I support that fully. I just want the the public to know that going into subdivision or middle housing bill, there have been hours upon hours of workshop that we had set through prior to when you sit here and see tonight, it looked like May took that a little flippantly and made a quick decision. You didn't attend the 12 meetings we had a middle housing all throughout do

to

board. That. I very point. Chief knows this. Anytime I do any preaching of anything, it's because I haven't learned it because people tell it directly to me. So this is just a word of caution. I think everybody out there knows where council sits with all of this. We're completely behind you. We're trying to do what can be done. I think everybody's voiced that in as many ways as they can.

Never a negative comment towards what you're doing and impress what you're doing. But just a word of caution. Says meekness is a word that we often hear and we take that as weakness. But think about who you have been told your whole life is meek and that person is definitely not weak. So meekness is not weakness, it is the ability to be strong while remaining gentle and humble.

Meek person may be capable and confident but chooses patience, kindness, and restraint instead of pride and aggression. And the only word of caution I give is I've sat up here a long time and I've also been on the other side where I haven't been that person. And we often lose sight of what the objective is when we kind of have that when it happens. Not that it hasn't happened to me. In fact, everyone in staff in this room knows that I've lost my cool at times when I shouldn't have.

But as soon think think good a a point. And on what the problem is and we don't get too loud or get out of control in ways that we that we lose people. When people stand up here and have done that to us in the past or do it to me, I can shut down pretty quickly not listen to a word they say. Because if they're gonna do that, I don't don't want to hear it. If they're making points of aggression towards me, whatever, I just don't listen.

So just a word of caution, I don't feel like it's happened, but I don't want it to happen in this group because you're working too hard to have something derail where we're headed. So I appreciate everybody being here, continue to be here, and hopefully we get some resolution at some point. Thanks.

City Manager Erdmann.

Thank you, Mayor McChinney. Just want to give the council a heads up that we had two good meetings last week. We met with, congressman Newhouse's office, the first virtual meeting with them. We also met with, senator Murray and representative Adam Smith's office as well. Great conversations. I think everyone's on board to help support this project. We have path moving forward. We're gonna place this within the word of bill. Congressman Newhouse's office is also preparing to write separate language for a stand alone bill should that not go through properly within the word of process. So, pretty good progress there.

We are scheduling trips out to Washington DC, for the week of March 16 through the twentieth. We're trying to do dual track on this. So now that we have brought on our federal lobbyists and are, submitting earmark requests for the City Of Kennewick as a stand alone, we'll be ing for those two projects. So we're looking at the PFAS facility at about $3,000,000 and then Columbia Center Boulevard widening between 5 to $7,000,000 request. So we'll be lobbying for those two, and then we'll also be tagging on with the Shoreline Reconveyance Group and lobbying for that process.

So, we'll be headed out there in a few weeks to take care of that. And then, I just wanna give an update that I had the privilege of touring the new AC, Marriott Hotel last week. Pretty eye opening, actually. That facility is a lot bigger than I initially anticipated. It's gonna be the biggest AC Marriott within the Pacific Northwest. And it they've only built up to the third story so far, and it currently has a beautiful view of the river. So that fifth story restaurant's gonna be very nice. So we're excited to see that they are on track. They're scheduled to open in the 2027. So they'll be just a few months behind Convention Center.

And then just a reminder that our council retreat is this Saturday, March 7 at the 3 Rivers Convention Center from eight to 03:30. So see you all on Saturday.

I'm glad my calendar said till 05:30.

Yeah. Figured we might lose everybody by then.

You.

Erin, would you on the agenda as well, you're going to lobby into DC, would you add daylight saving time, let's get rid of that and put just tag that on the shore

a I of the year. Question. Wanted to report back. I did have a chance to go to the VFCOG meeting a week or so ago. I had a good meeting there.

It was a really good opportunity, I think, to help the other cities in our area understand more about less restrictive alternative housing. It got heightened awareness and I met with the mayors of the four cities last week and helped them to see some of the challenges that we're facing, some of the things that quite frankly are a false sense of hope in other parts of this false sense of security in other parts of our community. Working with the United Voice and communicating that's really important and so we made sure to clearly state that. I then spoke at the Franklin County Commission meeting at request of Commissioner Baumann. We had an opportunity to describe and help folks understand what less restrictive alternative housing for sexually violent predators really is.

It's amazing to me now and I don't even know what week we're in since we started down this path. I can't even tell you. It's been six or seven weeks. It's amazing to me that we still have people in our community that do not know what we're talking about. Elected about. And so I think we appreciate the efforts of the local neighborhood group. And we say the neighborhood group, but I want to make sure that it's clear. This is the people I've had a chance to meet are not just residents that live on 8th And Edison. They're people from all over our community. People from Pasco, I I want to say Burbank.

I think I've met people from Richland. I've seen people from Pasco, Kennewick, all over our community that have come in. I've talked with people across the state that have fought this in their communities. It amazes me that this hasn't come to more information. Working with Franklin County, brought up something that I think is important for us.

Our resolution is not just a virtue signal. I hope everybody recognizes that. Our resolution directed our staff to spend effort and resources of the city to help fight against this less restrictive alternative house sexually violent predators in Kennewick, but also across the state. And so we're anxious to see that continue. I do think it's important elected officials are aware and understand what it is that we're going against.

My encouragement has been that our staff and especially our attorneys across the cities are coordinating so that we have a consistent message as we go forward. One of the things that came to light for me was that we have members of law enforcement, I won't say in our community, but in communities in the state that don't know what less restrictive alternative housing is. And that was surprising to me. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. We didn't know either.

And now we do. And so we are going to be interested I think in doing that coordinated effort. But I think the city staff need a little bit more time to make sure that we get that going. I do think we need to and I would encourage us to work on our zoning ordinances. Right now that doesn't affect a less restrictive house, what I'm going to call community housing for lack of a better term.

So DSHS calls it sometimes on their website. And so but we're going to be focused on making sure we've covered every base that we can. And I think we've been working on that right now. I think we've got a few more things to get done as it resides here in Kennewick, what we can do on the ground. But after that, I think that we're going to be focusing on getting legislative changes done and we'll be working with our Leg eight district legislators that has grown beyond our Leg eight and fourteenth and 15th And 16th District are all interested in being participatory in that.

We're working with the Association of Washington cities to make sure that it's known across the state. We have helped from a couple different county commissioners that will be working with the State Association of Washington to make sure this is on their legislative agenda as well. Think it's incredibly important. Think one of the frustrations I have in talking to Fred Brink, our mayor of West Richland, he is the current president of the association of Washington cities. For those that are unfamiliar, organization that represents Washington cities across the state. Previous to being president, he was vice president. Previous to being vice president, he was secretary. And I asked him point blank, said, you ever heard anything about this? Do you know anything about this at all? And although we see this fight in Tenaino and in Inanclaw and other places, he had never heard of it.

And I think that that's something that we're going to change right here. And so the work that we're doing, Mayor Pro Temcarelli is part of that legislative group and we expect to see that going forward. We have like say Benton County Commissioner Michael Alvarez and Yakima County Commissioner Amanda McKinney are on the county city excuse me. State Association of County's version of that same. They'll be bringing that up in their legislative tours as well.

We're going to be able to generate some of that. I I think we do need to develop what that legislative request is. And I think what you'll see is me encouraging us to have a legislative meeting across our region focusing on all of our city councils, school districts, and others county commissions coming together with a joint unified proposal for the ledge session in 2027. And so like I said we've a lot of things on our plate right now. We're trying to get everything done as we can.

And so if we're not quite as fast as what some people would like, we're going to try to make sure we get it. We've got like I said, we've to fight here at home and then fight across the state. We're excited to do that. I want to just end on this. Every time I go down this path, I think I've been of progress the very we've made email. Mayor Pro Temporelli sent me an article from the Seattle Times. And I read through this article, and I forget what's the date on that article. Was that

That was August 24, but she's written another one from what Kevin Coe was released last month. That

And Seattle I'm reading this article and I'm going, my gosh, how on earth are we still in this position? How do we we to help people understand what decisions are being made on their behalf in Olympia. And I think too many of us are head down just trying to make it day to day and I think we miss some of these decisions that are going on. So I think it's really important to be involved in the process. I do still believe that our state is worth fighting for.

I'm not prepared to move out of the state as much as some people may think that's a good choice maybe for me but others as well. I think that it's really important that we continue to fight and we're going to continue to take this to Olympias as we can and appreciate the efforts of our council members continue to fight on behalf of our community. And then there's lots more people too. And I'm just really appreciative of the community outreach and effort that's going on. And so with that, I appreciate everybody's efforts. I appreciate our police department. I know there's some questions asked about a report our police department is doing. Guys, we are not even talking about all of the things that we've tried to do and are trying to help with to make this happen. So if you have questions like that, please feel free to reach out. Our police department is more than happy to answer those questions.

There's a lot of efforts going on both behind the scenes and out in front. We appreciate everything everyone's doing in our community. And so with that, I will end the evening. And there's no further business on tonight's agenda. So it is now 08:30, and the meeting is concluded.