Wenatchee council authorizes mayor to pursue litigation against Chelan County over inmate-housing agreement

The Wenatchee City Council voted to authorize the mayor to instruct the city attorney to initiate litigation against Chelan County over the interlocal agreement for housing inmates at the Chelan County Regional Justice Center and to retain specialized outside co‑counsel, a motion moved by Council Member Atkinson and seconded by Council Member Hornby that the council approved by voice vote.

The vote authorizes the mayor to “instruct the city attorney to initiate and pursue litigation against Chelan County pertaining to the interlocal agreement for the housing of inmates at the Chelan County Regional Justice Center,” to retain specialty legal co‑counsel related to that litigation, and to sign documents needed to carry out that authorization. The motion passed by voice vote; council recorded multiple “aye” responses and the mayor said the motion carries.

Why it matters: the action begins a formal legal dispute between the City of Wenatchee and Chelan County over terms of the interlocal agreement for inmate housing at the regional justice center. The mayor said that because litigation has begun, the city council, city staff and the mayor will be limited in what information they can share about the matter publicly; the mayor also said the city will release an open letter to explain its reasons for taking the step.

Council Member Atkinson moved the motion and Council Member Hornby seconded it; the motion passed by voice vote. After the vote the mayor said the city attorney would move forward with initiating litigation and that the city will provide an open letter to the public while being constrained in further comment: “Moving forward, the city council, city staff and I will be limited in the information we can share on this topic,” the mayor said.

The council did not place additional details about the legal claims into the meeting record. The motion authorizes the mayor to retain co‑counsel and sign documents necessary to pursue the litigation; no timeline for filing or estimated legal costs were provided during the meeting.

The council’s action closes the public portion of discussion; the mayor encouraged residents to read the forthcoming open letter and to share feedback with the city even if staff cannot respond while litigation is pending.

Votes at the meeting were recorded by voice: the motion carried with multiple ayes and no recorded nays.