Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Council seeks cost options for Clark Park spigot and gazebo reassembly after resident asks about missing water service

July 17, 2025 | Everett, Snohomish County, Washington


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Council seeks cost options for Clark Park spigot and gazebo reassembly after resident asks about missing water service
Michelle Pendergrass, a District 2 resident, told the City Council on July 16 that dog owners at Clark Park are pleased with the new dog area but asked, "Where's the spigot?" Pendergrass said neighbors expected a water spigot as part of the park amenities but found none.

Council members acknowledged the concern and asked staff for a status update. One staff member told the council the park does not have nearby potable water and that adding a spigot is more expensive than residents might expect; staff said there was no specific cost estimate available at the time. Council members asked that staff return to a future meeting with options and cost estimates so the council and public can weigh tradeoffs and potential budget adjustments.

Councilman Ryan requested that the spigot update be paired with a status report on the gazebo: Ryan said the gazebo had been dismantled, some pieces preserved for possible reassembly, and that American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds have been set aside to look into restoring it. Council Member Voguely said she recalled that the spigot had not been promised but noted the park previously required watering via a water truck when it was not yet open.

City Attorney David Hall, who said he is a frequent user of the Clark Park tennis courts, commented that the addition of the dog park had made the overall park experience more pleasant.

These were council comments and a request for staff follow-up; no formal motion or budget appropriation was made at the July 16 meeting. Staff committed to return with options and cost estimates; no timelines or dollar amounts were provided in the meeting record.

Why it matters: park amenities such as potable water and a reconstructed gazebo affect daily use by residents and maintenance costs. Understanding the cost and technical constraints (lack of nearby potable water) will inform whether the council needs to reallocate funds or pursue alternatives.

What was not decided: staff did not present cost estimates or a schedule for installing potable water or reassembling the gazebo. The council did not vote to allocate funds at the July 16 meeting.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Washington articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI