[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6234145,"mediaKeyId","3412000-1b9d7027b822408ec8a90281024ed2ed","parentId",3412000,"title","Residents and businesses press Lakewood council over proposed multifamily tax-exemption expansion","audioSeconds",3128,"startMs",5868000,"endMs",8996000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3412000-1b9d7027b822408ec8a90281024ed2ed&start=5868&end=8996","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3412000-1b9d7027b822408ec8a90281024ed2ed/thumbnail_5868000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6234145/Lakewood/Pierce-County/Washington/Residents-and-businesses-press-Lakewood-council-over-proposed-multifamily-tax-exemption-expansion","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6234145-c0c0dc9c002fe413d418c4739fb1ce1a/orig.mp4?Expires=1774877417&Signature=FcpAD3TmsVsrisw6KCXQKHhR44b21G0qtZ1TUHJtO-1cnptNv1VUG2Nnjtl8mxrb4nj05n7H9jEMx8ULeBtyF2U~ETwL8mvFcxygLHMHU23WZr~uQW0V9m38Ksoa~2-MouxrXRx~UGyrcgoeA8eIVRSqNHsb6VekSmDycCLWRpNGA-4MB6EaDdKVgWxoHNtlzpSq607uCQs3vYn2IN23AbVNfhiJsFpyfNT1ud4FkpL4MFyZpAFIoFZFuVG0ATUXBJ~uXLFS7kzydF0KfFngOzOvI9TVoisxMJQQawc76VukeguOB692oLtEV3zjBEJb6UF22XUs5QOXubaYklRUCQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Lakewood City, WA","date","2025-05-20T16:39:43Z","article","Lakewood — Planning staff held a public hearing May 19 before the Lakewood City Council on a proposal to expand the city’s Multifamily Tax Exemption (MFTE) residential target area (RTA) so it aligns with the Central Business District, with formal consideration scheduled for the council’s June 2 meeting.

The issue drew a large turnout of residents and business owners who said the tax break — a 12‑year exemption available under state law — would encourage dense apartment development that threatens the character of Gravelly Lake Drive and nearby historic shops, reduce tax revenue and put mature Garry oak trees at risk.

The MFTE program is authorized under the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) and is intended to encourage housing production in close‑in areas. Planning staff member Jeff Remack summarized the staff proposal at the hearing as including an RTA expansion and code clarifications about application timing.

\"Three primary items when we look at that: one is the expansion of the proposed RTA, the proposed extension for 12 year allowed extension that can be done per the RCW,\" Remack told the council.

Opponents said the proposal would reward developers while harming small, long‑standing local businesses. Christina Manetti, who identified herself with the Gary Oak Coalition, urged the council not to approve incentives for the block between Gravelly Lake Drive and Silicon Boulevard.

\"The tax incentives would encourage types of development there that are inappropriate for that area,\" Manetti said. \"These trees, even 400 years old or maybe even more, need to be considered first when planning in Lakewood.\"

Several business owners and merchants who operate in the Clover Park Shops and along Gravelly Lake Drive said they would be displaced if property owners sell to developers. Karen Burns, who identified herself as a Clover Park Shops business owner, described the personal impact.

\"If my building were to be torn down, ...there's no way I could stay open,\" Burns said. \"The tax incentives…you have no way to cover that except for us.\"

A smaller group of speakers urged the council to approve the expansion. Architect James Guerrero described a statewide housing shortfall and said the Central Business District is a logical place to concentrate new units.

\"We have a housing problem,\" Guerrero said. \"If we don't take this development in, we're effectively saying it's not for us. You make that happen somewhere else.\"

Council members and staff repeatedly noted that the hearing is part of a multi‑step legislative process. The planning commission provided recommendations earlier in the review; planning staff said public comments received at the hearing and in writing will be considered before the council votes on an ordinance on June 2.

Actions and next steps

No ordinance was adopted at the May 19 hearing. The council will consider action on the MFTE/RTA proposal at its June 2 meeting; written testimony received before tonight’s meeting was entered into the record. Planning staff identified the RCW authority for the MFTE program and said the proposed 12‑year exemption would be applied according to code language staff will bring back with the ordinance.

Discussion vs. decision

Discussion: public testimony focused on environment and neighborhood character, fiscal effects and the code mechanics for applying MFTE. Direction/assignment: staff will compile and evaluate written and oral testimony and incorporate it into the June 2 ordinance packet. Formal decision: none this evening.

Why this matters

If adopted, the expansion would give developers a multi‑year property tax exemption on qualifying multifamily buildings in the targeted downtown area. Opponents said the exemption would shift revenue burdens, remove longtime businesses, and risk loss of mature street trees and local character. Supporters said incentives are needed to attract housing supply to areas with services and transit.

Public input and evidence

The council received dozens of in‑person and virtual public comments at the May 19 hearing and a set of earlier written comments submitted in advance. Staff said the body will consider all comments before a planned vote on June 2.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City Council Meeting of May 19, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","At a May 19 public hearing, planning staff presented a proposal to expand the Multifamily Tax Exemption residential target area to match the Central Business District; the Lakewood City Council will consider adoption on June 2.","taxTitle","Lakewood, Pierce County, Washington","taxId",3978,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6234130,"Residents denounce demolition of Mirjalili home at Lake Steilacoom; raise environmental and equity concerns",1144,2992000,4136000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3412000-1b9d7027b822408ec8a90281024ed2ed&start=2992&end=4136","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3412000-1b9d7027b822408ec8a90281024ed2ed/thumbnail_2992000.jpg","/articles/6234130/Lakewood/Pierce-County/Washington/Residents-denounce-demolition-of-Mirjalili-home-at-Lake-Steilacoom-raise-environmental-and-equity-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6234130-2b0b87431fd8dca97c8bb6de363d3ec4/orig.mp4?Expires=1774877417&Signature=IZ-k32IHdwzdrCPsjC59iaIy3K1~0VaWIoPrHp7fYuz5GH5s4IA~h-K07BAWPBGw9tEyGrWRBuCVdv8Ts4ZmlhIY8AewMOgnSs-NbAybIFHdFhGnUeUTvzriMJpfCjnSc14WD2di9Fo1uHIK1nxIyoL51zbraut485fvMb1NXiDnf9aS802FG3eY566pOFbHZEd4fTBD6qyqHDirhodbd9JowSxCByYmeZtkUIkBL4ftUljuysFDJwCtO9l1VQ53h32h6d2LAmlaPKQ5sJYfvOXeOS09W25k9UY5NOLvUZMHy~kHO4q2Vo9g7oED5LEB1xtcMaQfdj1NFb0wQAri0A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Lakewood — Multiple residents used the public‑comment period May 19 to criticize the city’s handling of the demolition of Ibrahim Mirjalili’s house near Lake Steilacoom and to question the plan to convert the parcel to a parking area tied to a proposed boat launch.

Several speakers said the action displaced a longtime community member and argued the demolition and land use change were unnecessary and environmentally harmful to a lake identified by the state as priority fish habitat.

\"Eminent domaining and demolishing a family's house — how can you do such a thing for a boat trailer parking lot?\" asked Christina Manetti of the Gary Oak Coalition. \"The city is blinded by grants.\"

Dr. Ibrahim Mirjalili, who said his house had been demolished, said his family purchased and renovated the property in 2008 and that they feel the action was unfair.

\"I am the person whose house has been taken and demolished,\" Mirjalili told the council. \"We purchased it in 02/2008 and rehabilitated. Took us a decade to do it, and they demolished it now.\"

Speakers raised multiple environmental concerns tied to a motor‑boat parking area adjacent to an identified fish habitat: increased runoff from impervious surfaces, tire residue containing pollutants, noise and air pollution from diesel‑powered boats and trucks, and disturbance to fish and waterfowl.

\"Does the proposed parking lot even comply with environmental regulations governing development along shorelines?\" a resident asked. \"A parking lot with an impermeable surface right next to a lake that is priority fish habitat is not appropriate.\"

Other commenters said the enforcement and acquisition process appeared inconsistent and called for the city to make amends and to avoid similar actions in the future. The council did not take action during the May 19 meeting; the comments were entered into the record.

Discussion vs. decision

Discussion: public comments described the demolition, environmental concerns about a proposed parking lot and inequitable enforcement, and urged the city to restore or remediate the site and reconsider motorized access. Direction: none formal; staff and council received the comments. Decision: none this evening.

Why this matters

The dispute combines neighborhood livability, shoreline protection and municipal process questions. If the tactic is tied to grant‑driven park improvements, residents said the project’s public‑access benefits do not justify demolition and potential harm to sensitive habitat.","Residents told Lakewood council May 19 they oppose the demolition of Dr. Mirjalili's home at Lake Steilacoom and the city's apparent plan to convert the site to a boat‑launch parking area; speakers cited environmental impacts on fish habitat, runoff pollution and procedural fairness, and some alleged racial motivation in enforcement actions.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6234135,"Lakewood updates Clover Creek flood study; setback levee preferred, funding gap remains",636,9287000,9923000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3412000-1b9d7027b822408ec8a90281024ed2ed&start=9287&end=9923","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3412000-1b9d7027b822408ec8a90281024ed2ed/thumbnail_9287000.jpg","/articles/6234135/Lakewood/Pierce-County/Washington/Lakewood-updates-Clover-Creek-flood-study-setback-levee-preferred-funding-gap-remains","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6234135-2d667cb5a9c52db4ee3df8531c37b147/orig.mp4?Expires=1774877417&Signature=mZ7lMycLi3ZdZvKjvxD0Y021ZPquJmTTd3QDy9jP9aebvZyWAQRAHuJxZDf38GmmaaHQjQaYot4tFt-MYefWEtSEIxMPQt8mTE47IitKV~pOEjy2-oYyZtXdJq~6IFt9fTVbHiWJ1MHhEbKqB8OAVW9UQOAcukZqqQ5XgEvFsEOfES~19tjVy7Ks6BGOMAb9UjfDG4exjq~ps~cY6fn94oljo6Ah-By4bR5nZUkknzfR-NG6dk49CJt3hi~IW~sT~HXNpVMhTZKtOmYxKFsxP1692Rp-wOdsRMuY~yDSn8caTdL95kp4DVzVz5K6AgCFzgElYWvp989sbcNsO3vrjQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Lakewood — City engineering staff and consultants updated the Lakewood City Council on May 19 about the Clover Creek flood study and said a setback levee is the preferred alternative to reduce the extent of the modeled hundred‑year flood.

Engineers told the council that an updated, two‑dimensional hydraulic model shows a broader‑than‑expected area subject to a hundred‑year flood; in that scenario portions of Springbrook and sections south of I‑5 would be affected. Staff said a setback levee — extending roughly between JBLM tracks and Bridgeport Way in its preliminary layout — would remove property from the floodplain but would require property acquisitions in locations currently within the modeled floodway.

\"The project is still in its early stages,\" City Engineer Westinott said. \"We have about a half‑million dollars budgeted ... what that can get us is a 10% plan set. To get to a 30% scope, we're looking at almost $900,000 in 2024 dollars, so that puts us at a shortfall of about $365,000.\"

Consultant Ryan Retzloff told council members the study evaluated four alternatives — do‑nothing, channel and floodplain enhancement, an I‑5 flood wall and a setback levee — and that the setback‑levee option best balanced community benefit, water‑quality improvements and feasibility. Retzloff said the team would need more detailed survey, geotechnical and permitting work to refine costs and to estimate relocation or buyout costs for property that would be removed from the floodplain.

Council members asked whether downstream impacts would increase and whether regional partners — including WSDOT and Joint Base Lewis‑McChord (JBLM) — would be funding partners. Staff said neither WSDOT nor JBLM has committed funding yet and that additional partner outreach is part of the next steps.

Actions and next steps

Staff said the city will advance design to the 10% level with existing funds and seek additional sources to reach 30% design, which is typically required to be competitive for major grants. The project team will refine the levee alignment, perform detailed survey and geotechnical work and begin outreach to potential funding partners and permitting agencies.

Discussion vs. decision

Discussion: the council received a status update and asked questions about property acquisition, downstream effects and funding. Direction: staff to proceed to the 10% design scope and to begin partner outreach. Decision: no construction authorization or formal policy decision tonight.

Why this matters

Updated modeling shows the hundred‑year floodplain covers a wider area than existing FEMA mapping in parts of Lakewood. The preferred set‑back levee could lower flood insurance requirements for properties removed from the floodplain and reduce the risk of I‑5 overtopping, but it carries acquisition, permitting and construction costs and requires multi‑agency coordination.","City engineers briefed council May 19 on a Clover Creek study that modeled a larger hundred‑year floodplain than FEMA maps show; staff recommended a setback levee as the preferred alternative but said reaching 30% design will require roughly $365,000 more than currently budgeted.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6234140,"‘Beloved Community’ workshops seek ongoing Lakewood support after pilot events",680,1778000,2458000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3412000-1b9d7027b822408ec8a90281024ed2ed&start=1778&end=2458","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3412000-1b9d7027b822408ec8a90281024ed2ed/thumbnail_1778000.jpg","/articles/6234140/Lakewood/Pierce-County/Washington/Beloved-Community-workshops-seek-ongoing-Lakewood-support-after-pilot-events","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6234140-b268b444ef52da1ae0864b32e8eb95ec/orig.mp4?Expires=1774877417&Signature=OKwK3xFMAohhArdL7RFslz6TV8NRWFPl0wcbpW85q2tjAE~any0JdkJ0hAYanlAHznQwS-kngKBrfnAuzmZACj4oEw-a~CVW6zCzvuD0eXH53g97b6qZ6a8Oi1tgP5tTa0lYG6k-f--nuTaxwnihsP1WmlfHPri~ZwdvXQrP5lE-Qpv9vfMfdkNK7VYcAyZ1nIfaQus~G4OZutHExJtVsVbY9XpjMR9EThz~A6eOel-bPAjEtuYggk5hkFEdh3~m-GPJwlKK9GeEHNwDMwvQ6OzumNSea5mnLiteuSd~v8O4McM6vergYYRpSm~Uund6HJn-2BPaBonBLlh6P5XiAA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Lakewood — Dr. John Scott told the Lakewood City Council on May 19 that a series of workshops and a keynote event exploring the notion of ‘‘Beloved Community’’ drew volunteers, teens and adults and produced requests for ongoing city support and space.

Scott, who described his background in community leadership and education, said the events used theater, creative writing, movement and dialogue to help participants reflect on identity, healing and cross‑generational connection. He asked the city to consider backing more multi‑generational, interactive workshops and spaces where the practices could continue.

\"We wanted to invite people to really think about their own relationship to beloved community and share some stories about that as well,\" Dr. Scott said. \"A lot of the feedback that we got after the sessions was that folks wanted more of this, more practice, more conversations, and more engagement.\"

A senior at Gig Harbor High School, Leila Genevieve, spoke about the teen workshop and told the council the program used movement and theater rather than a traditional classroom format.

\"It wasn't your typical classroom setting. I wasn't sitting at a desk listening to someone speak. I was up, moving, laughing, and learning alongside other students my age,\" Leila said. \"Programs like these build understanding, connection, and hope. And right now, students need that more than ever.\"

Scott said the workshops included an intergenerational exercise in which teenagers requested opportunities to meet and talk with older residents to exchange life experience. He suggested the city could help by designating public spaces and providing logistical support so the workshops could continue beyond a single event.

Actions and next steps

No formal council action was taken. Organizers left the council with a request for city concurrence and ongoing support for creating multicultural, multigenerational engagement spaces and recurring workshop programming. Staff and council members asked clarifying questions about metrics and evaluation; Scott said organizers plan both qualitative and quantitative evaluation tools and will provide results to the city.

Discussion vs. decision

Discussion: overview of workshops, participation levels, and requests for sustained programming. Direction: organizers asked the city to consider ongoing support; staff will be the point of contact for any follow up. Decision: none this evening.

Why this matters

Organizers framed the work as civic capacity‑building: the workshops are meant to strengthen community connection, provide safe spaces for youth and adults, and improve cross‑generational understanding. The presentation asked the city to consider long‑term support to sustain the program’s benefits.","Dr. John Scott briefed Lakewood City Council May 19 on a series of ‘Beloved Community’ workshops for teens and adults; organizers asked the city to help sustain programming, provide multicultural, multigenerational spaces and consider ongoing funding or logistical support.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Residents and businesses press Lakewood council over proposed multifamily tax-exemption expansion

Residents denounce demolition of Mirjalili home at Lake Steilacoom; raise environmental and equity concerns

Lakewood updates Clover Creek flood study; setback levee preferred, funding gap remains

‘Beloved Community’ workshops seek ongoing Lakewood support after pilot events