At the Kenmore City Council meeting in September 2025, multiple residents urged the council to take new steps on air and soil testing tied to the Cadman asphalt operation and the nearby Lake Point site, and Council member Culver moved that staff bring the matter back as a future agenda item for discussion and potential action.

Why it matters: Residents said air emissions from the asphalt plant and long‑standing contamination concerns at Lake Point have harmed neighbors and merit further testing and monitoring. Council members requested a staff report that summarizes past work, available funding and options for stationary monitoring and site testing so the council can decide next steps.

During the public‑comment period, Janet Hayes, a Kenmore resident, said Patrick O’Brien had spent years raising concerns about the Kenmore Industrial Park and the asphalt plant and added that “The Kenmore And Park Lake Point has not had comprehensive core testing since 1981.” Stacy Valenzuela, another resident, said testing by the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA) showed the plant’s emissions were “not just steam,” and asked the city to pursue a “cleanup plan, and enforcement” and to “install a few stationary air monitors in close proximity … that measure VOC and particulate matter with the resident warning system.”

Other residents spoke in memory of O’Brien and reiterated requests for air monitoring and core testing at Lake Point. Jim Myers and Elizabeth Mooney urged continued public and open processes for Lake Point decisions; John Hendrickson told the council he supported the request for stationary air monitors and provided historical tax‑assessment context for Lake Point.

Council response and next steps: Council member Culver moved to return the subject to the council as an agenda item for further consideration. The motion was seconded and drew broad support; council discussion focused on asking staff to prepare a concise report showing what testing and investigations have already been done, what remains to be done, funding available, and what monitoring the city could legally implement.

Council members asked for specificity. Council member Lutzis asked that the staff report specify “the type of testing” and confirm what earmarked grant funding is available for Lake Point due diligence; Council member Marshall asked for a summary of prior actions and outstanding questions. Council member Shrevnick suggested including Lake Point plans and options in the report, and Council member Sassen said the city should identify costs and feasible monitoring approaches. Deputy Mayor O’Kane and others emphasized transparency and making clear what the city can and cannot do now.

Limits and clarifications noted on the record: Mayor Nigel Herbig told the public that the city cannot conduct on‑site core testing at Lake Point without the property owner’s agreement, saying, in summary, that “we won't be able to do any actual testing on Lake Point until or if we have an agreement from the property owner.” Multiple council members acknowledged that some testing and monitoring work has already been undertaken or planned with outside agencies and that available grant funding is intended to support due diligence; the specific amounts of grant funding were not stated during the meeting.

What was not decided: No ordinance, contract, or testing program was adopted at the meeting. The council reached consensus to add the topic to a future agenda and asked staff to return with a report detailing prior work, current options (including stationary monitors for VOCs and particulates), estimated costs, legal constraints and funding sources. The record does not show a formal roll‑call vote—council members expressed support and asked for staff follow‑up.

Ending: Council and community members framed the request as an overdue next step following years of public comment; staff were asked to compile a factual, itemized report for a future meeting so the council can consider formal direction or action.