Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Maple Valley council adopts MFTE program in 4-3 vote after public support and procedural questions
Loading...
Summary
The Maple Valley City Council approved Ordinance No. O-26-874 establishing a Multifamily Tax Exemption (MFTE) program after public comments from property managers and business owners. The ordinance passed on a 4-3 roll-call vote; council members later asked staff to verify public-hearing requirements.
The Maple Valley City Council voted 4-3 on March 23 to adopt Ordinance No. O-26-874, creating a Multifamily Tax Exemption (MFTE) program intended to encourage development of affordable rental housing in the city.
Economic and Community Development Director Doug McIntyre and Community Development Manager Matt Torpey presented the ordinance to council. The measure drew multiple public commenters in favor, including property managers and long-standing local business owners who said the program can support affordable units and local commerce. Jose Ybarra, an Ascend property manager from Maple Valley, told council that the program "brings affordable housing," citing his experience with MFTE in Federal Way.
Supporters pointed to the potential for projects such as the Switcher Landing site to include affordable units; Jonell Bitney, who identified herself as connected to the Switcher Landing property, welcomed added affordable housing. Several small business owners, including Sheena Sanders and Jim Flynn, emphasized that denser housing near commercial corridors can increase customer traffic and benefit local businesses.
Councilmembers voted along the following lines in a roll-call: Yes — Victoria Schroff, John Herbert, Les Burberry and Mayor Sean P. Kelly; No — Syd Dawson, Dana Parnello and Deputy Mayor Didem Pierson. Councilmember Victoria Schroff made the motion to approve, seconded by Councilmember John Herbert.
During council comments later in the meeting, Deputy Mayor Pierson asked City Manager Laura Philpot to double-check whether all public-hearing requirements for MFTE had been satisfied, flagging a procedural concern. During the public comment period, resident Jonathan Miller said the Planning Commission "did not have all the information" that council had and expressed worry about possible legal ramifications from not holding a separate public hearing.
The ordinance text and implementation details were presented by city staff; the minutes do not specify an effective date or an implementation timeline. City staff are the next point of contact for developers and stakeholders seeking information on program eligibility and application procedures.
The council adopted the ordinance despite the split vote and procedural inquiries; the city will proceed with implementing the MFTE program while staff confirm hearing and notice requirements and report back as needed.