Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Bess topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Snoqualmie council reads moratorium ordinance on battery storage and refers review to committee
Summary
After sustained public concern about a developer-proposed battery storage project, the Snoqualmie City Council read a temporary moratorium ordinance for first reading, suspended notice rules to allow the reading, and referred further review and format planning to the Finance & Administration committee; a King County briefing was scheduled for July 13.
Snoqualmie — The City Council on May 11 read the title of a temporary moratorium ordinance to pause acceptance of new land‑use and building applications for battery energy storage system (BESS) facilities within city limits and sent review of related procedures and public engagement to its Finance & Administration committee.
Council member Johnson introduced the ordinance as a procedural step to consider whether the city should regulate BESS facilities within Snoqualmie’s jurisdiction. "I believe it is appropriate for the city to now move forward with that legislative process," the council member said when presenting the draft ordinance for first reading. The council voted to suspend its 72‑hour notice rule so staff could read the ordinance’s title (ordinance 1322) during the meeting.
Why it matters: residents and several council members said they remain concerned about safety, transparency and the city’s ability to influence a project sited in unincorporated King County. Public commenters argued the council must clarify the city’s legal position on a 2010 pre‑annexation development agreement with Puget Sound Energy before the county SEPA review advances.
During public comment, resident Nivi Tanwar urged the council to provide a public legal position, saying, "Residents deserve clarity on how the city interprets these documents before SEPA review process advances any further." Jimmy Shaw similarly asked the council to direct the city attorney to identify “in writing the specific actions this council can take without triggering the risk of being sued.”
Council members noted limits of city authority when projects sit in the county’s unincorporated urban growth area. Mayor James Mayhew and others told the room a municipal moratorium would not alter approvals for a facility located outside city limits; the city’s focus, they said, is representing local concerns within the King County process.
Council member Washington won approval to add to the July 13 council meeting a presentation and Q&A with Leon Richardson, director of the King County Department of Local Services, on permitting for the proposed project in King County. Council also approved a motion to have the FNA committee plan a public engagement format (including the possibility of a town‑hall) and to continue committee review of the ordinance and work program.
Next steps: the ordinance was read in for first reading and the matter was referred to FNA for more detailed review and public‑engagement planning. The City will host (or consider hosting) the King County briefing on July 13, when residents can submit questions through administration for the Q&A format the council adopts.
