Sumner council debates Ryan House’s future as deed, safety and funding constrain options

Deputy Mayor Bowman and several city council members spent much of the April 21 meeting discussing the future of the century-old Ryan House and the possibility of developing Lucy Ryan Park, but they did not take a formal vote.

The debate centered on three constraints the council repeatedly cited: the property deed, a structural assessment that found significant damage, and the cost to rehabilitate the house. “It’s not really a lack of words…when we talk about Ryan House and the ability to bring it back up to code, it’s about money,” Deputy Mayor Bowman said during council reports, noting ongoing meetings between city staff and preservation groups.

Why it matters: the Ryan House has been a focal point of local preservation efforts and public comment for more than two years. Council members said they must weigh historic preservation against public safety and the city’s fiscal responsibilities.

Public comment and applicants

Two people spoke during public comment about how the city has handled records and appointments related to the matter. Randall Adams, a resident of Third Street Court East, criticized the city’s public records disclosures and said a local applicant had been treated unfairly. “The city would rather not fill committees than to include someone who may ask questions,” Adams said. Adams raised concerns about documents he received via public-records requests and suggested some records were not accessible as provided.

Nick Bierman, 5802 Parker Road East and a recent applicant for commission openings, said he was not granted an interview for a planning commission seat and called the treatment of him and others “pettiness.” “If there are questions about what Randy and I are talking about, people know where to find me,” Bierman said.

Council comments and technical findings

Council members described numerous meetings with preservation groups and state agencies and reiterated that the city has tried to engage stakeholders. Council member Carla Beteto said the deed placing constraints on the property is a major legal barrier and noted the building has been “red tagged.” She also cited a structural evaluation by WJE that identified split studs and other instability. “I was shocked to see how unstable the structure is due to missing beams,” Beteto told colleagues.

Council member Andy Cole, who said he had toured the house multiple times, said staff presented several options to the finance and personnel committee, including demolition, because of the safety risk. “We were tasked with looking to see what was best for the citizens of Sumner, making sure that whatever we do, we were fiscally responsible,” Cole said.

Council member Elfers described extensive outreach: the city has met with the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation, the Sumner Historical Society and other groups, she said, and at least one offer was made previously to return the house to heirs of the Ryan family. “I do know that when I was asking questions back in the lawsuit in the fall of 2023, the house was offered back to the Ryan family heirs,” Elfers said, adding that she did not know why the offer was not accepted.

Costs and fundraising expectations

Council members said they had set a target fundraising amount and timeline for a community-led partnership but had not received an adequate, organized plan to match city expectations. Council member Elfers said the council had requested about $2,200,000 and a timeline for raising it; she said those conditions had not been met. “We wanted $2,200,000. We wanted it by December,” Elfers said.

What the council directed (and did not)

No formal decision or vote to demolish or to transfer the property took place at the April 21 meeting. Council members repeatedly emphasized the distinction between discussion, public input and formal action. Several members said they remain open to a viable partnership that presents a concrete business plan, schedule and committed funding, but said none has been provided that meets the city’s risk and fiscal limits.

Next steps and legal context

The council indicated the issue remains active; officials said litigation and deed restrictions complicate transfer or disposition options. Mayor Hayden adjourned the meeting into an executive session on pending or threatened litigation under RCW 42.30.110(1)(i); the mayor announced there would be no action immediately following the session.

Ending note: Council members who spoke emphasized they continue to listen to residents but must consider safety, legal constraints and the city’s broader obligations to all residents when deciding the property’s future.