Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annexation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council splits on annexations: Tarragon approved, Kazer Mezic fails
Summary
The council approved Resolution 18-77 to accept a modified Tarragon annexation (about 18 acres) while rejecting Resolution 18-76 (Kazer Mezic). Staff emphasized available utilities and an offer to reimburse review costs; council said limited staff capacity shaped the split vote.
The Enumclaw City Council on May 11 approved an annexation petition from Tarragon but rejected a separate request from Kazer Mezic.
The council voted to pass Resolution 18-77 after staff recommended modifying Tarragons petition to include six parcels totaling about 18 acres and noted that water and sewer stub-outs are available nearby. City staff said the annexation aligns with the comprehensive plan and that the applicant offered to help cover review costs. The mayor announced the motion passed with "five yeses, one no." Alex Campbell, a resident outside the city, told the council the annexation would allow extension of utilities and reduce the burden on dead-end roadways and said, "the key to us is that we don't wanna burden city staff." The applicant's representative added that Tarragon sees Enumclaw as "a charming town full of character."
By contrast, Resolution 18-76 (Kazer Mezic annexation) failed after committee discussion about staff capacity and the limited geographic benefit of the proposal. Staff reported the initial petition covered fewer parcels and that the office lacks resources to process multiple annexations without consultant support. Council members said they would prefer a measured approach to avoid surges in workload and to keep growth steady; after the vote the mayor announced the annexation did not pass.
Why it matters: Annexations change city boundaries, bring properties into city land-use and service regimes, and affect future development and tax base. Council members repeatedly cited limited staff capacity and the practical costs of processing boundary-review materials as central to their decisions.
What happened next: Council directed staff to continue reviewing materials and consult with petitioners as required by state law; for Tarragon, the council set the administrative track in motion by approving the resolution. For Kazer Mezic, no action to accept was taken and the petition remains declined by the council.
Provenance: The discussion and motions for both annexations were introduced by staff and recorded in the transcript beginning with Resolution 18-76 (SEG 533) and concluding with the Tarragon vote (SEG 780).
