The Washington City Council voted on Jan. 5 to approve a set of ordinances authorizing easements, infrastructure contracts and a settlement agreement as part of its regular meeting.

Council conducted second readings and approved: an easement agreement with Missouri Meerschaum Company; an easement involving Schwegman House LLC and Riverplace Townhomes Property Association; a contract with Baumann Earthworks LLC for the High Street stormwater basin retrofit; acceptance of minimum improvements and a two‑year maintenance agreement for Cribbon Subdivision; a release and settlement agreement with Perry Deco; an owner/contractor agreement with KJU Inc. (doing business as KJ Understall Construction Co.) for Washington Riverfront Park Phase 2 site work and Flag Plaza; acceptance of a bid from Crystal Heating & Cooling to replace Makeup Air Unit No. 1 at the wastewater treatment plant; and a correction to an ordinance establishing the offense of disorderly conduct.

City staff described routine technical reviews and funding arrangements for several items. For the Cribbon Subdivision acceptance, staff said the developer installed sewer, which was inspected and tested, and that the acceptance includes a two‑year maintenance agreement covering 20% of the work, “just over $10,000.” On the settlement ordinance with Perry Deco, staff noted execution timing: once the mayor signs, the document will be forwarded for counter‑signature and paperwork is expected to move into February. A staff member stated, “It’s in the agreement,” when asked about timing and conditions of signature and execution.

Councilmembers recorded affirmative votes during roll call for each ordinance. The presiding official declared each ordinance passed on second reading by recorded voice votes.

The Riverfront Park Phase 2 contract was discussed in the context of funding sources previously reviewed in a workshop; staff said multiple revenue sources are earmarked to move the second phase forward and that final approvals and contract scheduling would follow. The council did not request further substantive changes to the contract language during the meeting.

The meeting record shows routine procedural questions (for example, about sewer clean‑outs and construction timing) and no amendments that altered the final outcomes. The ordinances were approved as presented, and the meeting proceeded to other reports and adjournment.