Kent council hears residents urging extension of six‑month moratorium on new detention facilities

Kent City Council held a state‑mandated public hearing on April 7 about a six‑month moratorium the council adopted in March restricting siting, establishment or change of use for jails, corrections and other detention facilities. Staff said the moratorium (Resolution 21109) is already in effect, is intended to protect the city’s comprehensive‑plan goals for housing and jobs, and will expire on September 3 unless extended.

Kristen Holdworth, a city staff member who presented the moratorium, told the council the pause was adopted under a specific state process and was chosen because the city recently completed its comprehensive plan and other planning work. Holdworth summarized the city’s rationale: Kent has an ‘‘overabundance’’ of regionally serving, non‑tax‑producing facilities downtown and adding more exempt uses could undermine implementation of downtown and industrial‑area plans and future funding eligibility. She said the council may renew the moratorium in rolling six‑month increments or, alternatively, adopt a one‑year moratorium that requires a funded study and additional findings.

Residents gave nearly an hour of testimony urging a longer pause. Barbara Clemens, a Scenic Hill resident, thanked the council and warned that federal immigration enforcement (ICE) ‘‘is going to keep on trying’’ to find sites and that the city must be vigilant about office space or other uses that could be repurposed. Cara Haney of Kent Indivisible said six months is ‘‘not enough time’’ and urged at least a one‑year or multi‑year moratorium so Kent is not viewed as the easiest site for detention expansion. Several speakers tied their concern to Kent’s diversity and history: Wendy Graves noted the city’s proclamations honoring diverse communities and called for protections so neighbors are not ‘‘ripped from their houses and from their families by ICE.’’

Youths and students also spoke. Asmin Boka, a Kent high‑school senior, said students are frightened by ICE activity at schools and urged the council to listen to youth voices when weighing an extension.

Councilmembers asked staff about options. Councilmember Micho asked whether the city could keep renewing a six‑month pause; Holdworth said that is legally permissible but warned that continually renewing a short moratorium is not a long‑term solution and that a one‑year moratorium carries a statutory requirement for related studies and funding.

The hearing was closed by motion and no immediate policy vote was taken at the meeting. Mayor Dana Ralph and staff reminded the public that the moratorium is in effect and that the council will determine next steps during the coming months, including code changes, studies or possible renewal. The moratorium resolution and the staff presentation were the primary written authorities discussed at the hearing; the staff presentation referenced Resolution 21109 and the state citation noted during agenda setting (RCW423144A).