Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Works topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council authorizes on‑call encampment cleanup contract and WSDOT maintenance agreement for SR‑516 interchange

Kent City Council · April 7, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council approved a cooperative purchasing agreement with Totem Logistics for on‑call encampment cleanup (contract ceiling $175,000) and authorized a maintenance agreement with WSDOT covering the I‑5 / SR‑516 Veterans Drive interchange that clarifies which agency maintains specific legs, drainage and traffic control.

On April 7 the Kent City Council authorized two public‑works agreements: a cooperative purchasing contract with Totem Logistics for on‑call encampment cleanup and a maintenance agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) for the recently completed I‑5/SR‑516 Veterans Drive interchange.

Public Works conservation coordinator Tony Dennady told council the city used an on‑call contractor repeatedly in 2025 to remove unmanageable encampments from city property; staff reported 26 unmanageable removals in 2025 that removed nearly 200,000 pounds of debris at a cost of about $173,000. Dennady asked the council to authorize a cooperative purchasing agreement that will allow continued on‑call cleanup through Jan. 16, 2027, with a contract ceiling of $175,000 and funding drawn from drainage utility, capital projects, solid waste and parks depending on location.

Transportation Engineering Manager Rob Brown described a maintenance agreement with WSDOT that defines responsibilities on the new interchange — the state will maintain the new sections while the city will maintain certain older legs and traffic control for pavement markings on specific approaches. Brown told council that traffic control costs can exceed pavement‑marking costs and said assigning certain marking responsibilities to the city reduced public inconvenience.

Council authorized both agreements by voice vote.