Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annexation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews two annexation petitions; staff told to prepare modified resolutions and consult city attorney
Summary
City staff outlined two annexation petitions covering five parcels (about 18 acres) and recommended modifying areas to include additional parcels; council asked staff to prepare two resolutions, consult the city attorney on conditions (including possible applicant-paid consultant requirements), and return for formal action.
The Enumclaw City Council spent substantial time on April 27 reviewing two annexation petitions (Kossert/Mezick and Tarragon) filed in March for a combined set of properties totaling roughly 18 acres.
Community Development Director Chris Massenet described the submittals and staff recommendations, including modifying the proposed boundary areas to add adjacent parcels to create more regular city limits and to comply with the comprehensive plan. "With the additional parcels, it would be roughly 38 acres in total with evaluation of about 8 and a half million," Massenet said when describing the larger area staff suggested for inclusion if the council chose to proceed.
Massenet explained the 60% petition method for annexation and noted that the Tarragon parcels by themselves do not constitute the 60% of assessed value needed to complete an annexation without signatures from additional owners. Council members raised operational concerns about staff capacity to process two annexations simultaneously and suggested conditions that could include requiring the applicants to pay for consultant support or otherwise cover city consultant costs to reduce staff workload.
Several council members expressed differing views about annexation tradeoffs: benefits such as sewer and police service and added tax base versus concerns about growth control and the city assuming bonded indebtedness. Council asked the city attorney to advise on whether it is permissible to require applicant-paid consultant costs as a condition and on any quasi-judicial limitations.
By general agreement (head nods), council directed staff to prepare two separate resolutions that modify the annexation areas to include the added parcels, have staff consult the city attorney about potential conditions (including consultant payment), and return to council; council did not take a binding vote that night.
