Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annexation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Enumclaw staff outlines two annexation requests; council asks for attorney review and potential consultant-cost condition
Summary
City staff presented two annexation petitions (received March 19 and March 24). Staff recommended modified boundaries that would expand the combined area to about 38 acres with an assessed value near $8.5 million; council asked staff to check with the city attorney about requiring applicants to cover consultant costs and signaled preference to bring two separate resolutions back for formal action.
City staff briefed the council on two recent annexation petitions and council members asked staff to return with options and legal guidance rather than taking immediate action.
Chris Massenet, introduced in the agenda as the community development director, told council the city received two petitions in March and explained the 60% petition method commonly used in annexations: petitioners must gather signatures from property owners representing at least 60% of the total assessed valuation of the proposed area before the county verifies them. Massenet said staff recommended modifying the petition boundaries to add contiguous parcels and create more regular city limits; with the additional parcels the combined area would measure roughly 38 acres and have an assessed valuation of about $8.5 million.
Massenet said water and sewer are available near both areas (stubbed utilities exist) and noted that annexation usually requires the newly annexed area to adopt the city’s future land-use and zoning designations and assume existing bonded indebtedness.
Members of the Community & Economic Development committee and other council members raised procedural and equity concerns. One council member asked whether the Tarragon parcels alone represent 60% of the staff-recommended area’s valuation; staff said they do not and that the appellants would need at least one additional property signature if processed separately. The CED committee asked the city attorney whether the council could require applicants to cover the expense of a city consultant to run the annexation process and recommended processing the two petitions as separate resolutions so each property owner has an equitable opportunity to participate.
Applicant representatives introduced themselves during public comment: Alex Campbell said he represents Tarragon and resides outside Enumclaw, and Chad Perdue said he represents Tarragon LLC and is available to answer questions and provide documents.
What happens next: Staff will consult the city attorney and return with options; council indicated (by head nods) it is open to modified, separate resolutions but took no final vote at the April 27 meeting.
