Sumner holds public hearing on mid‑biennial budget amendment as residents question $35,000 in legal fees

Sumner — The Sumner City Council opened a public hearing on Nov. 24 on a mid‑biennial amendment to the 2025–26 budget, during which the city’s chief financial officer outlined changes across general, special revenue, capital and utility funds and several programmatic adjustments.

Cassandra Raymond, the city’s chief financial officer, told the council the mid‑biennial review is required under state law (RCW 35A.34.130) and is intended to keep the biennial budget current. She outlined revenue and expenditure recognitions for municipal services including metro animal services, cemetery operations, community court, municipal court and the senior center; new transportation benefit district revenues; planned capital work such as skate‑park demolition and utility billing equipment; and operational changes including software purchases and a public‑operations reorganization. Raymond said the council is scheduled to take action on the ordinance on Dec. 1.

During the public‑comment portion of the hearing, a member of the group Save Rhine House raised concerns about a line in the amendment that would add roughly $35,000 in legal fees to the city’s expenditures. "The majority of these funds, the additional $35,000, seem to have been spent after the land‑use action was already resolved in Pierce County Superior Court," the commenter stated, saying the petition was voluntarily dismissed Aug. 29 and that the city’s law firm filed an additional motion on Sept. 8 seeking another $735. He said the judge awarded only about $200 in statutory fees and argued the city could have pursued alternatives such as an environmental impact study or use of the historic preservation process rather than litigation.

Tina Burnett, a Sumner resident, echoed the criticism: "Spending $35,000 fiscally irresponsible to get $200 out of us," she said, and also praised field operations staff for a quick emergency response to a private utility issue.

The commenters framed their statements as objections to the allocation of legal expenditures in the budget amendment; council members did not debate the claims during the hearing. The city clerk read public‑hearing rules that limit council engagement during public comment. The mayor closed the hearing at 6:13 p.m.

The council will consider final action on the mid‑biennial budget amendment on Dec. 1. The public commenters asked that the record reflect their concerns about the timing and necessity of the legal work and suggested the funds might instead have been used for preservation or other city needs.