Edgewood economic development board recommends 2025–26 work plan to City Council

The Economic Development Advisory Board voted unanimously on Feb. 3 to recommend a rewritten 2025–26 work plan to the Edgewood City Council, endorsing a format that pairs priority goals with measurable action items and a proposed implementation matrix.

Board Chair Andrew Wiesenfeld called for the vote after a lengthy discussion in which board member Kelsey Morgan presented a rewritten draft and solicited detailed feedback from colleagues and staff. "I would love you guys to rip this apart, this work plan," Morgan said as she described revisions aiming to convert priority bullets into trackable, time‑bound actions.

The board discussed several substantive changes in Morgan’s draft. Members agreed the document should emphasize the Meridian Corridor and Town Center commercial focus, include clearer language about zoning and infrastructure, and present impact fees as a topic requiring staff analysis and board study. Several members urged keeping implementation items flexible to reflect staff capacity; a city staff member noted some deliverables may need city resources or board assistance.

Board members debated whether the board should present a one‑ or two‑year plan. Morgan proposed a two‑year action orientation to reduce yearly rework; other members recommended labeling it an "action plan" or "multi‑year action plan" to reflect ongoing deliverables and allow updates. Steven (board member) and others pushed for a matrix that ties priorities to target dates, responsible parties and budgets; Morgan said she aimed to produce a matrix by early next year.

Impact fees featured prominently. Members recalled Council discussion of transportation and other impact fees and agreed the board should study examples (the packet included an "impact fee primer," a transportation impact fee schedule and a University Place TIF information sheet). A staff speaker said the city would present material on traffic impact fees at a future meeting and that board members could submit supporting research for the packet.

On land use and zoning, members asked for an educational presentation on how recent comprehensive plan zoning updates and the Planning Commission’s upcoming code changes will affect Meridian Corridor commercial opportunities. Staff described the formal review process: city code allows annual consideration of comp‑plan map and code amendments through a preliminary docket and Planning Commission review, with final docket approval by council (decisions on map amendments must be submitted on the annual schedule).

Board members also discussed outreach and recruitment tasks (inviting developers, business‑spotlight social media, and a business ambassador effort), regular coordination with the Planning Commission, and lower‑cost initiatives such as the Edgewood marketplace or pop‑ups. Morgan said she would include the revised draft and the underlying prioritization worksheet in the packet to Council for the Feb. 18 meeting.

The board then voted to recommend the draft to Council with the agreed edits and the option to do wordsmithing before submission. The motion to recommend the work plan was made by Sean Oleson and seconded by Steven; the board approved the recommendation unanimously (all members present voting "aye").

Staff and board members noted next steps: staff will assemble materials on impact fees and provide an implementation timetable, the board will consider forming small subgroups to gather data, and the chair will coordinate who will present to council on Feb. 18. The board also discussed other items in staff comments — including an upcoming West Valley overlay study, middle‑housing outreach and climate planning grants — which staff said will come through regular packets and specific presentations.

Votes at a glance

Recommend 2025–26 work plan to City Council — Motion to forward the draft work plan (as amended in the meeting) for inclusion in the Feb. 18 council packet. Motion: recommend draft 2025–26 work plan to council. Mover: Sean Oleson. Seconder: Steven (board member). Outcome: approved (unanimous among members present).