Everett staff brief council on legal-fee budget for proposed outdoor stadium; members press for itemized costs

Scott Pattison, a city staff member, told the Everett City Council on April 2 that $600,000 is allocated in a budget amendment for initial legal fees tied to the proposed outdoor municipal stadium and that several professional-service agreements already exist to support the project.

The briefing covered what Pattison described as existing contracts and the next steps the city plans to take, and prompted council members to press staff for a clearer, itemized breakdown of anticipated consultant and legal costs before approving additional spending.

Pattison said, “Tonight I have a brief update for you on the $600,000 that’s allocated in the budget amendment for the initial legal fees related to the outdoor municipal stadium.” He listed previously approved professional-service agreements: a $457,000 agreement approved Dec. 18, 2024, with a firm identified in the presentation as SOJ and a $200,000 agreement approved Feb. 12, 2025, with Bailey Construction. He also told the council the work will involve consultants including PFM (for bond and financial planning), Stafford Sports (strategic and revenue planning for professional-sports leases), and relocation assistance work from Kimberly Horn.

Why it matters: council members said the stadium proposal is a high-profile, high-cost project and said more transparency is needed now, both for council deliberations and for public visibility. Council member Ryan said having specific professional-service agreements and scopes attached to the budget amendment would make the spending clearer to the public and to council. Pattison and City Attorney David Hall said the $600,000 figure consolidates several kinds of expenses (legal, appraisal, consultant fees) that are currently grouped under a single budget line.

Discussion highlights

- Transparency and scope: Council member Ryan asked why the proposed legal spending was presented in a budget amendment rather than as separate professional-service-agreement approvals that identify vendors and scopes. He said: “Having those specifics... is helpful.”

- What the $600,000 covers: City Attorney David Hall and staff clarified that the figure includes not only law firms but also non‑legal consultants (appraisers, revenue consultants) that staff currently classify under the same budget line. Hall said the city uses a mix of outside firms, naming Pacifica (previously used on the project) and Ogden Murphy as likely outside counsel for parts of the work.

- Timing and next steps: Pattison and Jennifer Gregersen (city staff) said the work is early-stage: relocation contacts and preliminary studies are intended to inform a fuller budget and a go/no-go decision later this year. Pattison said staff will provide more detailed estimates and identify firms and expected scopes when the council returns to the topic, likely in May or June.

Points of clarification from staff included that some relocation outreach (Kimberly Horn) will be limited, initial negotiations and appraisal work will begin only if the budget amendment is approved, and final bonding capacity depends on revenue modeling Stafford Sports will provide.

What the council did not decide

Council members did not vote to authorize new contracts on April 2. Instead they requested a more detailed cost breakdown for the legal/consultant budget line and asked that the slides presented tonight be added to the online agenda packet.

Ending

Staff said they will provide a follow-up with estimated dollar amounts beside each identifiable consultant and will add the presentation to the agenda materials. Council members reiterated that the stadium project’s high visibility makes early transparency important as staff proceed toward a later, end‑of‑year decision point.