Leavenworth council drops immediate opposition after county commissioner says land swap talks underway

The Leavenworth City Council on March 11 withdrew a proposed resolution that would have formally opposed a prominent private development on Tumwater Mountain after Chelan County Commissioner Sean Smith told the meeting he had begun negotiating a land swap intended to remove the parcel from private ownership.

Council members and dozens of public speakers had crowded the council chamber to urge the city to communicate concerns to the county about the project’s visibility and compliance with county zoning and scenic-highway rules. After public comment and an exchange with Commissioner Smith, who said he had initiated a land swap discussion between the property owner and the U.S. Forest Service, the council’s sponsor withdrew the motion to adopt Resolution 06-2025 so members could first verify the status of those negotiations.

Why it matters: The dispute drew broad local attention because the proposed feature would be visible from town and because neighbors said the county’s permitting review must strictly apply zoning, view-shed and wildland-fire protections. The council’s action avoided issuing a formal municipal protest while the county-level process and the owner’s reported conversations with federal land managers proceed.

At the meeting: Several residents urged the city to oppose the permit on legal and aesthetic grounds. Allison Miller, who reviewed county code during her public comment, told the council she believed the county’s zoning would not allow “a prominent structure” at the site and warned that issuing an exception would “have a significant impact on the city.” Glenn Peterson raised concerns that any visible structure could reduce adjacent property values. York Bauer, who said he has deep local roots, urged restraint and emphasized private property rights.

Commissioner Sean Smith said he had opened the land-swap conversation with the property owner and a U.S. Forest Service district ranger and that, with the owner’s “blessings,” a swap could remove the parcel from private ownership and halt the project. Smith urged neighbors to let the county and property owner pursue that option rather than litigate immediately at the city level.

Council response and next steps: Councilmembers expressed differing views: some said they preferred immediate communication to the county to register community concerns; others favored pausing to allow the commissioner’s reported talks to complete. Mayor Will Paul and several councilmembers asked county residents and others who had submitted comments to copy the county in their letters and to attend county meetings where the permit will be decided.

Outcome: The motion to adopt Resolution 06-2025 was withdrawn. Council members said they would track the county process, request updates from Commissioner Smith, and could reintroduce a resolution if the swap does not proceed or if county approvals move forward without addressing community concerns.

What’s next: The county retains permitting authority for the site. The council encouraged residents to engage the county process and said it would reconvene the issue should new information show the permit moves forward. The council did not take further formal action at the March 11 meeting.