Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pasco council enacts six‑month moratorium while staff drafts rules for essential public facilities
Summary
The Pasco City Council on March 2 adopted a six‑month moratorium on applications for certain essential public facilities, including secure community transition facilities, directing staff to draft permanent land‑use regulations and hold public input sessions.
The Pasco City Council adopted a six‑month moratorium on applications for certain essential public facilities — including secure community transition facilities — to give staff time to craft permanent land‑use rules and public engagement, the council decided at its March 2 meeting. The moratorium was approved by motion and voice vote.
City staff told council that state law requires these uses to be allowed in jurisdictions but does not prevent local governments from establishing processes — for example, requiring conditional‑use permits and public hearings — that govern where and how such facilities are sited. “Staff is asking for the council to consider a 6‑month moratorium on application of location of those types of uses within our community while we develop an ordinance that can be in place permanently,” the city manager said, explaining the measure would buy time for legal review and public outreach.
Council members who spoke supported the pause as a pragmatic step. Councilmember Figueroa said the moratorium would provide staff the necessary time to “put something in place that is responsible,” while others said they wanted the process to include clear opportunities for community input.
The adopted ordinance (No. 47‑18) establishes an immediate effective date, authorizes publication by summary and directs staff to return with recommended land‑use regulations within six months. Staff told the council they will hold community input sessions during the moratorium to gather public feedback and vet options that are legally defensible under state law.
Because state statute places limits on what local governments can prohibit outright, the council’s action does not ban these facilities; it suspends the acceptance of new applications while procedures and notice requirements are developed. The council did not set a formal timeline beyond the six‑month window, and staff said they would proceed sooner if the ordinance drafting is completed ahead of schedule.
Next steps include: staff drafting proposed code changes and public‑input sessions; legal review of options such as conditional‑use permit pathways and notification rules; and return to council with a recommended ordinance within the six‑month period.
