Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Works Complaint Chip Seal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
University Place resident faults city chip-seal work, says public works didnt respond
Summary
Resident Jim Stevens told the council that a 2024 chip-seal on his street left tar-covered rock debris that continues to track into his home and that his emails to public works went unanswered; staff accepted his documentation for follow-up.
At the Sept. 2 University Place council meeting, resident Jim Stevens told the council he was dissatisfied with the July 24, 2024 chip-seal work on his street and the city's follow-up.
Stevens identified himself as a resident at 9723 Sixtieth Street Court West and said the project was "the worst chip seal procedure I have ever encountered." He said "tar covered rocks get dragged into my driveway, stick to my shoes, are not removed easily, and often have often been undetected then get dragged into my home." Stevens said he first emailed Public Works staff in November 2024 and received no response; later he said City Manager Steve Sugg forwarded his message to Public Works Director Jack Eklund, who responded and said a cleanup would occur "in the next few weeks." Stevens said the problem persisted and, after sending another email July 24, 2025, he again received no reply.
Stevens asked the council to pass his complaint to staff and to review the chip-seal process to prevent repeat problems. The mayor and staff accepted Stevens's documents and photograph for follow-up. The transcript records the mayor saying, "You can pass it on to staff. It'll be fine. We'll get it from the..." and staff confirming they would collect his materials.
The transcript records Stevens's complaint and the mayors instruction to staff to take the materials; it does not record a subsequent staff action or a formal directive from the council to open a formal investigation at the meeting.
Stevens called his tax contribution into the matter, saying he pays about $7,000 per year in taxes and expected a courtesy reply from staff. City staff later acknowledged receipt of his materials for follow-up.
Because this arose during public comment, the transcript distinguishes the resident's complaint from any formal council action; the statement prompted staff to accept documentation for investigation rather than an immediate policy change or vote.
