Council signals support for narrow sewer exemption to help Evergreen State Fair Park

Monroe City Council members on July 21 expressed general support for allowing the Evergreen State Fair Park to connect an additional sewer service in a limited, narrowly drafted way rather than a broad code change or annexation.

Mike Olsen, manager of the Evergreen State Fair Park, said the fair has long been a regional partner and asked the city to permit an additional sewer connection for a planned wash-bay maintenance facility on county property that lies within Monroe’s urban growth area but outside city limits. "Our entire campus has already served by Monroe Sewer System," Olsen said, asking the council to maintain the decades-long operating partnership.

City staff attorney Jacob Roberts explained that current Monroe Municipal Code (MMC 13.08.240) generally prohibits providing sewer service outside city limits to encourage annexation. Roberts said the Growth Management Act framework and the city's sewer system planning informed the rule and noted that the city’s 2024 Sewer System Utility Plan accounted for existing Fair Park service, though project-level impacts would require further study. Roberts listed possible approaches: maintain the current prohibition, create a narrowly drafted exemption for qualifying regional public facilities, or allow case-by-case approvals with specific criteria; he emphasized any change should be narrowly written by the city attorney.

Councilmembers largely favored a targeted approach. Several members said annexation of the Fair Park appeared unlikely, but a limited exemption allowing a public facility to request service — subject to staff technical review, system development charges and possible SEPA mitigation — would preserve the city’s partnership with the Fair while protecting city resources. One councilmember urged delegating technical capacity and system checks to public works and treatment plant staff so the council would not have to review each routine connection. Another favored a case-by-case council review path for larger expansions.

Roberts said staff would draft two ordinance options for council consideration — one narrowly tailored exemption and one case-by-case route — and return with more detail. No ordinance or vote occurred; council provided direction to staff to prepare draft code language and supporting analysis, including potential annexation implications, mitigation requirements and financial impacts such as system development charges.

The matter will return to council for further review; if the council selects an ordinance that is more restrictive than state law it would not become effective until the statutory waiting period specified by state rules.