Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Improvement Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kittitas County planners review late-season capital improvement plan update, set June recommendation
Summary
Planning staff presented a nearly finished annual Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) update required by the Growth Management Act, flagged three contingency building-replacement projects and an aviation grant, and told the commission they will return in June for a formal recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners.
Kittitas County planning staff introduced an annual update to the county’s Capital Improvement Plan on May 13, telling the Planning Commission the document is almost complete and that staff will return in June seeking a formal recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners.
The CIP update, staff said, is required under the Growth Management Act and is intended to “help jurisdictions plan for necessary infrastructure improvements and identify funding sources” including roads, water and sewer systems, flood control and public buildings. “This requirement under the Growth Management Act, to be done annually,” a staff member said during the presentation.
Staff said the version provided to commissioners is “99.5% complete,” that a 60-day notice has been issued to the Washington State Department of Commerce and that a public-comment period has been opened. Staff also told the commission they expect the county commissioners to adopt the CIP in July, and that the planning commission would be asked next month for a formal recommendation.
The packet currently lists three county buildings as potential replacement projects; staff said those three contingency items will be added to the plan before it returns to the commission. Staff also noted a recent aviation grant approval for about $10,000,000 related to airport expansion at the flight line and said that factored into capital planning conversation.
Commissioners asked how projects that did not receive biennial funding would be handled; staff replied the current update will not remove unfunded projects but will add the three contingency building items and other late submittals. Commissioners and staff discussed the CIP’s role as an informational and planning document rather than a directive—staff compiles projects and funding sources submitted by county departments and external agencies and packages them for public and elected-official review.
No formal action on the CIP occurred at the meeting; staff directed the commission to review the packet and prepare for a recommendation vote at the June meeting. The only formal action during the session was approval of the April meeting minutes by voice vote; the meeting record does not show a roll-call tally.
