The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2026.02.17 Council Meeting Packet AGENDA City Council Regular Meeting 7:00 PM - Tuesday, February 17, 2026 Pasco City Hall, Council Chambers & Microsoft Teams Webinar Page 1. MEETING INSTRUCTIONS for REMOTE ACCESS - Individuals, who would like to provide public comment remotely, may continue to do so by filling out the online form via the City’s website (www.pasco-wa.gov/publiccomment) to obtain access information to comment. Requests to comment in meetings must be received by 4:00 p.m. on the day of this meeting. To listen to the meeting via phone, call 1-332-249-0718 and use access code 157 217 35. City Council meetings are broadcast live on PSC-TV Channel 191 on Charter/Spectrum Cable in Pasco and Richland and streamed at www.pasco-wa.gov/psctvlive and on the City’s Facebook page at www.facebook.com/cityofPasco. Audio equipment available for the hearing impaired; contact the Clerk for assistance. Servicio de intéprete puede estar disponible con aviso. Por favor avisa la Secretaria Municipal dos dias antes para garantizar la disponiblidad. (Spanish language interpreter service may be provided upon request. Please provide two business day's notice to the City Clerk to ensure availability.) 2. CALL TO ORDER 3. ROLL CALL (a) Pledge of Allegiance 4. CONSENT AGENDA - All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by roll call vote as one motion (in the form listed below). There will be no separate discussion of these items. If further discussion is desired by Councilmembers, the item may be removed from the Consent Agenda to the Page 1 of 174 Regular Agenda and considered separately. 5 - 14 (a) Approval of Meeting Minutes for January 26th and February 2nd To approve the minutes of the Pasco City Council Regular Workshop held on January 26, 2026, and Regular Meeting held on February 2, 2026. 15 - 16 (b) Bills and Communications - Approving Claims in the Total Amount of $8,997,674.66 To approve claims in the total amount of $8,997,674.66 ($6,152,317.82 in Check Nos.276279 - 276550 ; $1,549,935.59 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 852056 - 852133, 852135 - 852196, 852218 - 852308, 852318 - 852319, 852321 - 852322, 852324 - 852342; $20,661.98 in Check Nos.55140 - 55146; $1,274,759.27 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 30237400 - 30238067). 17 - 20 (c) Letter Regarding Possible Re-Conveyance of Rivershore Property from USACE The City Council authorize the Mayor to sign the joint letter of support for proposed federal legislation directing the transfer of Columbia River shoreline lands in the Tri-Cities from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to local governments and Tribes. 21 - 31 (d) Resolution No. 4706 - Sole Source Purchase of Three (3) Valley Pivots for the Process Water Reuse Facility Irrigation System Farm Upgrades Project To approve Resolution No. 4706, waiving the competitive bidding requirements and approving the purchase of three (3) Valley pivots and ancillary equipment from LAD Irrigation of Pasco. 32 - 49 (e) Resolution No. 4707 - Professional Services Agreement with Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. for City Meter Reading Services To approve Resolution No. 4707, authorizing the City manager to execute a personal services agreement with Columbia Meter Reading Services. (RC) MOTION: I move to approve the Consent Agenda as read. 5. PROCLAMATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS - The public may address Council on any items unless it relates to a scheduled Public Hearing. This item is provided to allow the opportunity to bring items to the attention of the City Council or to express an opinion on an issue. Its purpose is not to provide a venue for debate or for the posing of questions with the expectation of an immediate response. Some questions require consideration by Council over time and Page 2 of 174 after a deliberative process with input from a number of different sources; some questions are best directed to staff members who have access to specific information. Citizen comments will normally be limited to three minutes each by the Mayor. Those with lengthy messages are invited to summarize their comments and/or submit written information for consideration by the Council outside of formal meetings. Lastly, when called upon, please state your name and city or county residency into the microphone before providing your comments. 7. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND/OR OFFICERS (a) Verbal Reports from Councilmembers 8. HEARINGS AND COUNCIL ACTION ON ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS RELATING THERETO 50 - 81 (a) Public Hearing & Ordinance No. 4814 - Tierra Vida Phase 1 Westerly 20 Feet (VAC2025-003) (5 minute staff presentation) CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4814, vacating the westerly 20 feet of Tiera Vida Phase One, as recorded under Auditor's File No. 1691585, providing for severability and establishing an effective date, and, further, authorize publication by summary only. 9. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS NOT RELATING TO HEARINGS 82 - 157 (a) Ordinance No. 4815 - Code Amendment Allowing Sandwich Board Signs within the Downtown Pasco Overlay District (CA2025-002) (5 minute staff presentation) MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4815, amending Title 17 (Sign Code) of the Pasco Municipal Code to establish regulations allowing sandwich board signs within the Downtown Pasco Overlay District and, further, authorize publication by summary only. 158 - 164 (b) Ordinance No. 4816 - Creation of Transportation Benefit District (5 minute staff presentation) MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4816, amending Pasco municipal code to enact a new chapter 3.270 Pasco Transportation Benefit District, establishing a transportation benefit district, specifying the boundaries for the transportation benefit district, pavement maintenance & reconstruction, street and traffic maintenance and operations, and other transportation related capital projects; providing for severability and establishing an effective date, and, further, authorize publication by summary only. Page 3 of 174 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 11. NEW BUSINESS 12. MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION 165 - 174 (a) City Manager Report 13. EXECUTIVE SESSION 14. ADJOURNMENT 15. ADDITIONAL NOTES (a) (RC) Roll Call Vote Required * Item not previously discussed Q Quasi-Judicial Matter MF# “Master File #....” Page 4 of 174 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 13, 2026 TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/17/26 FROM: Krystle Shanks, City Clerk City Manager SUBJECT: Approval of Meeting Minutes for January 26th and February 2nd I. ATTACHMENT(S): 1.26.2026 & 2.2.2026 Draft Council Minutes II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: To approve the minutes of the Pasco City Council Regular Workshop held on January 26, 2026, and Regular Meeting held on February 2, 2026. III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: V. DISCUSSION: Page 5 of 174 MINUTES City Council Workshop Meeting 7:00 PM - Monday, January 26, 2026 Pasco City Hall, Council Chambers & Microsoft Teams Webinar CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM by Charles Grimm, Mayor. ROLL CALL Councilmembers present: David Milne, Charles Grimm, Joe Cotta, Leo Perales, Calixto Hernandez, Abel Campos, and Mark Figueroa Councilmembers attending remotely: Councilmembers absent: None Staff present: Harold Stewart, City Manager; Richa Sigdel, Deputy City Manager; Angela Pashon, Assistant City Manager; Kevin Crowley, Fire Chief; Kevin Hebdon, Finance Director; Daniel Kenny, City Attorney; Haylie Matson, Community & Economic Development Director; Sara Matzen, Human Resources Director; Arman Rashid, IT Director; Ken Roske, Police Chief; Maria Serra, Public Works Director; and Krystle Shanks, Deputy City Clerk The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS Councilmember Cotta traveled to Olympia, Washington, for several days in support of the City of Pasco’s legislative issues and funding efforts. Councilmember Figueroa attended New Movement Church, where introductions were made and community collaboration efforts were discussed. Mayor Grimm traveled to Olympia, Washington, along with Councilmember Cotta and City staff to support the City of Pasco’s legislative issues and funding efforts. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION WITH OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT Page 1 of 4Page 6 of 174 Unlicensed Vendors - Presentation from Benton Franklin Health District Ms. Sigdel introduced Janae Parent, District Administrator for the Benton Franklin Health District, who discussed issues related to unlicensed and unpermitted vendors. Ms. Sigdel also introduced other Benton Franklin Health District representatives in attendance who were advocating for public health. Erin Hockaday, Surveillance and Investigation Director for the Benton Franklin Health District, presented on unlicensed food vendors in the region, highlighting related issues, research, collaboration, and enforcement efforts. Council questions and discussion followed with Ms. Parent and Ms. Hockaday. David Cortinas, representing the Latin Business Association (LBA), spoke regarding issues related to unlicensed food vendors, particularly food trucks. Amber Wade, a Pasco resident, discussed concerns involving the Police Department and the Benton Franklin Health District. Land Use Framework Overview Ms. Matson presented the land use framework overview which included the Comprehensive Plan, Master Plans (area-specific details), Zoning (parcel-level rules), and the Municipal Code (procedures & enforcement), explaining that the requirements must all align and be remain consistent. Council and staff questions and discussion ensued. Mayor Grimm called for public comments three (3) times and no one came forward to speak. Introduction to Ordinance - Amending Pasco Municipal Code Related to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Thresholds Ms. Matson presented an introduction to a proposed ordinance amending the Pasco Municipal Code related to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) thresholds. The amendment would raise the thresholds so that not all projects would be required to undergo the SEPA process, saving applicants time without degrading environmental protections. The City would continue to review projects for environmental impacts, and the SEPA process was noted to be often redundant. Council and staff questions and discussion ensued. Mayor Grimm called for public comments three (3) times and no one came forward to speak. Page 2 of 4Page 7 of 174 Resolution - 2026 Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Pasco Police Officers Association - Non-Uniform Bargaining Unit Ms. Matzen, along with Chief Roske, discussed the 2026 Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Pasco Police Officers Association – Non-Uniform Bargaining Unit, which consists of personnel who support sworn police officers. Ms. Ashley Lucas, Police Evidence Technician, spoke on this item and described the duties and responsibilities of the staff within the bargaining unit. Mayor Grimm called for public comments three (3) times and no one came forward to speak. Resolution - 2026 Collective Bargaining Agreement with the International Union of Operating Engineers Local No. 280 Ms. Matzen discussed the 2026 Collective Bargaining Agreement with the International Union of Operating Engineers Local No. 280, which covers staff in Public Works Operational Services, Environmental Services, Parks & Facilities and Animal Control Services, which are all essential to public safety. Mayor Grimm called for public comments three (3) times and no one came forward to speak. Resolution - Acceptance of Work for MLB Required Improvements at GESA Stadium - Female Locker Room Improvements (Phase 1-A) Ms. Serra provided a brief report the the proposed resolution that would accept the work for MLB required improvements at GESA Stadium - Female Locker Room Improvements. Mayor Grimm called for public comments three (3) times and no one came forward to speak. MISCELLANEOUS COUNCIL DISCUSSION Ms. Stewart noted the following upcoming events: Coffee with a Cop at Columbia Basin College, Development Outreach event including virtual participation to discuss lighting, a ribbon-cutting for the new Memorial Pool Dome. Councilmember Perales discussed an article from the Tri-Cities Editorial Board regarding the Mid-Columbia Library Annexation proposal on the upcoming ballot, and asked for legal guidance on how Councilmembers can address ballot items. Mr. Kenny provided legal guidance on supporting or proposing ballot items. Mayor Grimm noted that Council had discussed the Mid-Columbia Library ballot item in a public setting at a previous Council meeting. Page 3 of 4Page 8 of 174 Mayor Grimm then requested two Councilmembers to volunteer, along with himself, to be a part of the Boards & Commission Subcommittee for Boards and Commissions, as there was currently an open seat one of the Boards. Councilmember Perales and Councilmember Cotta volunteered to be Boards and Commissions Subcommittee members. EXECUTIVE SESSION Council adjourned into Executive Session at 8:35 PM for 35 minutes returning at 9:10 PM to discuss with legal counsel about current or potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) with the City Manager, Deputy City Manager, and City Attorney. At 9:10 PM Mayor Grimm announced that the Executive Session would continue for another 10 minutes to return at 9:20 PM. At 9:20 PM Mayor Grimm announced that the Executive Session would continue for another 10 minutes to return at 9:30 PM. Mayor Grimm called the meeting back to order at 9:30 PM. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 PM. PASSED and APPROVED on _______________________. APPROVED: ATTEST: Charles Grimm, Mayor Krystle Shanks, Deputy City Clerk Page 4 of 4Page 9 of 174 MINUTES City Council Regular Meeting 7:00 PM - Monday, February 2, 2026 Pasco City Hall, Council Chambers & Microsoft Teams Webinar CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM by David Milne, Mayor. ROLL CALL Councilmembers present: Charles Grimm, David Milne, Mark Figueroa, Leo Perales, Joe Cotta, Calixto Hernandez, and Abel Campos Councilmembers attending remotely: Councilmembers absent: None Staff present: Harold Stewart, City Manager; Richa Sigdel, Deputy City Manager; Angela Pashon, Assistant City Manager; Kevin Crowley, Fire Chief; Kevin Hebdon, Finance Director; Daniel Kenny, City Attorney; Haylie Matson, Community & Economic Development Director; Sara Matzen, Human Resources Director; Arman Rashid, IT Director; Ken Roske, Police Chief; Maria Serra, Public Works Director; and Krystle Shanks, City Clerk The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Meeting Minutes for January 12th and January 20th To approve the minutes of the Pasco City Council Regular Workshop held on January 12, 2026, and Regular Meeting held on January 20, 2026. Bills and Communications - Approving Claims in the Total Amount of $5,026,886.84 To approve claims in the total amount of $5,026,886.84 ($3,184,950.37 in Check Nos. 275971 - 276278; $558,730.10 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 852202 - 852208; $9,589.94 in Check Nos. 55134 - 55139; $1,273,616.43 in Electronic Transfer Page 1 of 5Page 10 of 174 Nos. 30236706 - 30237399). Resolution No. 4702 - Acceptance of Work for MLB Required Improvements at GESA Stadium - Female Locker Room Improvements (Phase 1-A) To approve Resolution No. 4702, accepting work performed by Banlin Construction of Kennewick WA, under contract for the MLB Required Improvements at GESA Stadium -Female Locker Room Improvements (Phase 1- A) Project. *Resolution No. 4703 - Interlocal Agreement with and Southeast Regional Internet Crimes Against Children To approve Resolution No. 4703, authorizing the City Manager to Execute an amended and restated Southeast Regional internet Crimes Against Children Task Force (SERICAC) Interlocal Cooperative Agreement. Resolution No. 4704 - 2026 Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Pasco Police Officers Association - Non-Uniform Bargaining Unit To approve Resolution No. 4704, approving the 2026-2026 Collective Bargaining Agreement between the City of Pasco and the Pasco Police Officers Association Non-Uniformed Employees. Resolution No. 4705 - 2026 Collective Bargaining Agreement with the International Union of Operating Engineers Local No. 280 To approve Resolution No. 4705, approving the 2026 Collective Bargaining Agreement with the International Union of Operating engineers, Local No. 280. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Milne moved, seconded by Councilmember Perales to approve the Consent Agenda as read. RESULT: Motion carried unanimously by Roll Call (RC) vote. 7- 0 AYES: Mayor Grimm, Mayor Pro Tem Milne, Councilmember Figueroa, Councilmember Perales, Councilmember Cotta, Councilmember Hernandez, and Councilmember Campos PUBLIC COMMENTS Mary Mahoney, Pasco resident, spoke regarding Tri-Cities Animal Control, the Pasco Public Facilities District, the City Manager’s Report, the Pasco floodplain, eagles, and a Local Improvement District (LID). REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND/OR OFFICERS Verbal Reports from Councilmembers Page 2 of 5Page 11 of 174 Councilmember Perales reported attending a TRIDEC board meeting; a Port of Pasco meeting; met with downtown businesses and the Latin Business Association regarding revitalization efforts; shared updates on potential new downtown tenants; and attended a community event at the Pasco Hub. Councilmember Campos reported attending the ribbon-cutting ceremony for the Memorial Pool Dome and commended staff and community turnout. Councilmember Figueroa echoed comments on the Memorial Pool Dome ribbon- cutting ceremony, thanked prior councilmembers for advancing the project, and reported attending the State of Education luncheon highlighting workforce readiness and STEM education. Mayor Grimm reported attending the Memorial Pool Dome ribbon-cutting ceremony, the State of Education luncheon, and testified on state legislation impacting local development, and meeting with community and legislative representatives regarding infrastructure and funding needs. HEARINGS AND COUNCIL ACTION ON ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS RELATING THERETO Public Hearing - Transportation Benefit District Ms. Sigdel presented an overview of a proposed Transportation Benefit District, including allowable uses, governance options, and revenue mechanisms. Staff outlined funding options of a vehicle license fee or a 0.1% sales tax and noted projected revenues, comparisons to nearby cities, and increasing street maintenance demands due to growth and stagnant revenues. Council and staff discussed impacts, equity considerations, and the need for long- term street maintenance funding. Mayor Grimm opened the public hearing and called for public comments three (3) times and no one came forward to speak. Council recommended returning with an ordinance for Council consideration. Public Hearing - Ordinance No. 4813 - Amending Pasco Municipal Code Related to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Thresholds Ms. Matson presented proposed amendments to the Pasco Municipal Code to increase State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) categorical exemption thresholds using a phased approach to streamline development review and reduce redundant processes while maintaining environmental protections. Councilmembers expressed support for the phased approach, commended staff for extensive work on development regulation reform, and noted the changes would improve efficiency and competitiveness with neighboring jurisdictions. Page 3 of 5Page 12 of 174 Mayor Grimm opened the public hearing and called for public comments three (3) times and no one came forward to speak. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Milne moved, seconded by Councilmember Perales To adopt Ordinance No. 4813, an ordinance of the City of Pasco, Washington, amending and repealing sections of Pasco Municipal Code, in Title 23 Environmental Impact, related to environmental impact, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) thresholds and procedures and, further, authorize publication by summary only. RESULT: Motion carried 7-0 AYES: Mayor Grimm, Mayor Pro Tem Milne, Councilmember Figueroa, Councilmember Perales, Councilmember Cotta, Councilmember Hernandez, and Councilmember Campos UNFINISHED BUSINESS Resolution No. 4686A - Pasco Public Facilities District (PPFD) Aquatics Facility - Management and Operations Interlocal Agreement Mr. Rice presented an updated interlocal agreement (ILA) between the City of Pasco and the Pasco Public Facilities District (PPFD) for the City to manage and operate the new aquatic facility for an initial three-year term. Director Rice explained that the agreement had been updated following PPFD legal review, with key changes including retention of PPFD ownership, final approval over policies, and co-administration by the City Manager and PPFD Executive Director. Staff noted the project is slightly behind schedule, therefore a decision was needed on the amended agreement, but work on policies and procedures continues. Councilmembers asked clarifying questions about the updated agreement and operational oversight, acknowledging the importance of timely opening and successful management. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Milne moved, seconded by Councilmember Hernandez To approve Resolution No. 4686A, authorizing the City Manager to execute a new Interlocal Agreement between the Pasco Public Facilities District and the City Of Pasco for administrative and financial services, and for management and operations of the new Aquatic Facility. RESULT: Motion carried 6-1 AYES: Mayor Grimm, Mayor Pro Tem Milne, Councilmember Figueroa, Councilmember Cotta, Councilmember Hernandez, and Councilmember Campos NAYS: Councilmember Perales Page 4 of 5Page 13 of 174 MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION Mr. Stewart reminded Council of a special meeting next Monday at 5:30 p.m. for Councilmembers to share backgrounds, discuss priorities, and build group cohesion ahead of the budget session. He clarified public concerns regarding the Tri-Cities Animal Control (TCAC), stating animals are not sent for research, except the shelter mascot, Dee, for veterinary care. Mr. Stewart also announced a citizen satisfaction survey to gather feedback on city services and budget priorities. Councilmember Perales proposed exploring a Community Workforce Agreement for major public works projects to promote local hiring and workforce development. Council discussion ensued with some Councilmembers expressing support, noting potential benefits for internships, apprenticeships, and bridging local labor with city projects, with other Councilmembers raising concerns about budget constraints, administrative workload, and potential impacts on competition. A majority agreed to staff researching this idea to be brought back to Council. Councilmember Figueroa discussed the recently approved Pasco Public Facilities District (PPFD) Aquatic Facility Interlocal Agreement (ILA). Council discussed risks versus efficiencies of city-managed operations and agreed to revisit long-term management after the initial three-year term. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:10 PM. PASSED and APPROVED on _______________________. APPROVED: ATTEST: Charles Grimm, Mayor Krystle Shanks, Deputy City Clerk Page 5 of 5Page 14 of 174 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 5, 2026 TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/17/26 FROM: Kevin Hebdon, Director Finance SUBJECT: Bills and Communications - Approving Claims in the Total Amount of $8,997,674.66 I. ATTACHMENT(S): Accounts Payable 01.22.26 to 02.04.26 II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: To approve claims in the total amount of $8,997,674.66 ($6,152,317.82 in Check Nos.276279 - 276550 ; $1,549,935.59 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 852056 - 852133, 852135 - 852196, 852218 - 852308, 852318 - 852319, 852321 - 852322, 852324 - 852342; $20,661.98 in Check Nos.55140 - 55146; $1,274,759.27 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 30237400 - 30238067). III. FISCAL IMPACT: IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: There are two categories of accounts receivable write-offs: 1. Direct write-offs are small in value or, in the case of Ambulance Fund, reflect a reduction of fees related to a discount required by DSHS and Medicare. These direct write-offs are not sent to collection. 2. Write-offs referred to collection and have been in arrears for a given number of days and exceed minimum values that move them out of the direct write-off category. Please see the summary page attached to this agenda item for details. V. DISCUSSION: Page 15 of 174 REPORTING PERIOD: February 17,2026 Claims Bank Payroll Bank Gen'l Bank Electronic Bank Combined Check Numbers 276279 - 276550 55140 - 55146 Total Check Amount $6,152,317.82 $20,661.98 Total Checks 6,172,979.80$ Electronic Transfer Numbers 852056 - 852133 30237400 - 30238067 852135 - 852196 852218 - 852308 852318 - 852319 852321 - 852322 852324 - 852342 Total EFT Amount $1,549,935.59 $1,274,759.27 $0.00 $0.00 Total EFTs 2,824,694.86$ Grand Total 8,997,674.66$ Councilmember B 100 3,764,799.45 110 81,787.09 140 4,458.50 145 4,690.76 150 367,404.79 155 1,580.63 160 12,472.31 165 19,775.85 168 120,509.58 170 6,644.27 180 1,286.53 185 44.22 191 14,583.34 193 824,203.40 194 19,812.91 195 4.35 196 HOTEL/ MOTEL EXCISE TAX 9,321.98 367 14,861.90 410 736,682.88 510 65,944.32 511 885.91 520 435,167.32 690 2,490,752.37 GRAND TOTAL ALL FUNDS:8,997,674.66$ PAYROLL CLEARING UTILITY, WATER/ SEWER EQUIPMENT RENTAL - OPERATING GOVERNMENTAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL - OPERATING BUSINESS MEDICAL/ DENTAL/ VISION INSURANCE TRAC DEVELOPMENT & OPERATING CAPITAL IMPROV REET ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STADIUM/ CONVENTION CENTER GENERAL CAP PROJECT CONSTRUCTION MULTI-MODAL FACILITY RIVERSHORE TRAIL & MARINA MAIN ARPA CEMETERY ATHLETIC PROGRAMS ANIMAL CONTROL SENIOR CENTER OPERATING C.D. BLOCK GRANT MARTIN LUTHER KING COMMUNITY CENTER AMBULANCE SERVICE Councilmember A SUMMARY OF CLAIMS BY FUND: GENERAL FUND STREET We, the undersigned City Councilmembers of the City Council of the City of Pasco, Franklin County, Washington, do hereby certify on this 17th day of February, 2026 that the merchandise or services hereinafter specified have been received and are approved for payment: January 22, 2026 to February 4, 2026 C I T Y O F P A S C O Council Meeting of: Accounts Payable Approved The City Council City of Pasco, Franklin County, Washington We, the undersigned, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury the materials have been furnished, the services rendered or the labor performed as described herein and the claim is a just, due and unpaid obligation against the city and we are authorized to authenticate and certify to such claim. Harold Stewart, City Manager Kevin Hebdon, Finance Manager Page 16 of 174 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 4, 2026 TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/17/26 FROM: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Manager SUBJECT: Letter Regarding Possible Re-Conveyance of Rivershore Property from USACE I. ATTACHMENT(S): Proposed Letter II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: MOTION: I move that the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign the joint letter of support for proposed federal legislation directing the transfer of Columbia River shoreline lands in the Tri-Cities from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to local governments and Tribes. III. FISCAL IMPACT: Fiscal: Direct Costs: None to the City for signing the letter of support. Long-Term Impact: Potential reduction in annual maintenance costs and administrative burden associated with federal ownership. Impact (Other than Fiscal): Operational Efficiency: Streamlines shoreline management decisions, reducing delays and complexity. Cultural and Environmental Protections: Maintains Tribal Treaty Rights and cultural resource protections through binding agreements and easements. Community Benefit: Enhances local control over public shoreline and parks, improving responsiveness to community needs. IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: Page 17 of 174 Background: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers acquired much of the Columbia River shoreline in the Tri-Cities during the mid-20th century for flood control purposes. Since then, local governments have leased and maintained these lands on annually $2 approximately million use, public for spending maintenance without ownership rights. City of Pasco estimates about $175,000 annually on mowing, irrigation, bathroom cleaning, and other maintenance. Federal ownership adds delays, costs, and complexity to routine maintenance and improvements. Congress authorized shoreline transfers in the FY1996 Water Resources Development Act, but the parcel-by-parcel process has proven impractical. For example, the City of Kennewick has spent $1 million over a decade attempting to transfer 72 acres, and the process remains incomplete. In response, the Tri-Cities Shoreline Reconveyance Working Group was a develop to Tribes, and including local 2021, in formed governments collaborative solution. The proposed legislation would direct a no-cost transfer of shoreline lands to local governments and Tribes, eliminating duplicative federal regulatory review while ensuring protections for Tribal Treaty Rights and cultural resources through Memoranda of Agreement, cultural easements, and protocols for ground-disturbing activities. V. DISCUSSION: Recommendation: City staff recommends that Council approve signing the joint letter of support for the proposed legislation to transfer Columbia River shoreline lands from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to local governments and Tribes. Next Steps: 1. Council approval to sign the letter of support. 2. Submit signed letter to Congressman Dan Newhouse and other relevant stakeholders. 3. Continue participation in the Tri-Cities Shoreline Reconveyance Working Group to monitor legislative progress. Alternatives: 1. Oppose Legislation: Not recommended, as it would conflict with regional consensus and long-term goals for local control and lowered maintenance costs. Page 18 of 174 Mayor | 525 N 3rd Avenue, Pasco, WA 99301 | 509-544-3060 | www.Pasco-WA.gov February 17, 2026 Joint Letter of Support – Tri-Cities Shoreline Reconveyance Legislation The Honorable Dan Newhouse United States House of Representatives 460 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 Dear Congressman Newhouse: We write in strong, unified support of legislation to direct the transfer of certain properties on the Columbia River shoreline in the Tri-Cities, Washington area from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to local governments and Tribes. This legislation would resolve longstanding inefficiencies associated with federal ownership of land that has been locally managed as public shoreline and parks for decades, while ensuring protection of Tribal Treaty Rights and cultural resources. Following major flooding events in the mid-20th century, the Corps acquired much of the Columbia River shoreline in the Tri-Cities area for flood control purposes. Since that time, cities and counties have entered into long-term leases with the Corps and have been responsible for operating and maintaining this land for public use. Today, local governments collectively spend approximately $2 million every year maintaining land they do not own. Congress previously recognized the appropriateness of local ownership by authorizing shoreline transfers in the FY 1996 Water Resources Development Act. However, the existing parcel-by- parcel federal regulatory process has proven impractical. Under current authority, the City of Kennewick has spent approximately $1 million over the past decade to pursue transfer of just 72 acres, and the process remains incomplete. With thousands of acres of shoreline involved, this approach is not viable at scale. In response, the undersigned governments and federally recognized Intain Tribes with Treaty ceded lands in the Tri-Cities area formed the Tri-Cities Shoreline Reconveyance Working Group in 2021 to develop a comprehensive, collaborative solution. Central to this effort is a framework that ensures Treaty Rights, cultural resources, and Tribal access are protected if the land is transferred out of federal ownership. This framework includes binding Memoranda of Agreement between each Tribe and participating local governments, clear protocols governing ground- disturbing activities, and Perpetual Cultural Practices Easements to ensure continued Tribal use and access. The legislation would also transfer certain Corps lands directly to trust ownership for the benefit of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation and Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, returning these culturally significant ceded lands to their original owners. The proposed legislation would build on this collaborative work by directing a no-cost transfer of the shoreline without requiring duplicative federal regulatory review, while relying on executed agreements and easements to provide durable protections. It would, however, require a cultural resource survey of all parcels before transfer, and the Washington State Environmental Policy Page 19 of 174 Mayor | 525 N 3rd Avenue, Pasco, WA 99301 | 509-544-3060 | www.Pasco-WA.gov Act (SEPA) would be in place for future environmental review if a change in use is contemplated for any portion of the shoreline. This approach reflects decades of successful local and Tribal stewardship, reduces unnecessary federal administrative burden, and allows shoreline management decisions to be made more efficiently and responsively at the local level. We respectfully urge Congress to advance this legislation and appreciate your consideration of this targeted, consensus-based solution. We stand ready to work with you and your staff to provide any additional information or technical assistance that may be helpful. Sincerely, Charles Grimm Mayor Page 20 of 174 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council January 28, 2026 TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/17/26 FROM: Maria Serra, Director Public Works SUBJECT: Resolution No. 4706 - Sole Source Purchase of Three (3) Valley Pivots for the Process Water Reuse Facility Irrigation System Farm Upgrades Project I. ATTACHMENT(S): Resolution with Sole Source Worksheet Sales Proposal II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. 4706, waiving the competitive bidding requirements and approving the purchase of three (3) Valley pivots and ancillary equipment from LAD Irrigation of Pasco. III. FISCAL IMPACT: Amount not to exceed $620,000.00. This cost is accounted for in the adopted 2025-2026 capital bugdet for the project IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: Background: The Process Water Reuse Facility (PWRF) Irrigation System Farm Upgrades Project encompasses the fourth phase of the current series of planned improvements and modifications to the PWRF. This project (informally referred to as PWRF Improvements Phase 4) will replace existing irrigation system components nearing their end-of-life, construct new irrigation assets to convey the pretreated process water to the City-owned land application farm circles, and extend the system to newly created land application areas from recently purchased parcels. The City secured the professional services of RH2 to provide holistic planning, Page 21 of 174 design and permitting support services for the proposed improvements to implement the land treatment system expansion consistent with the “Process Water Reuse Facility Engineering Report”approved by the State of Washington Department of Ecology on April 12, 2023. Farm pivots are a type of irrigation system that consists of a long arm that pivots around a central point, pivot irrigation is a type of sprinkler irrigation delivered to crops through a series of rotating sprinklers. The farm pivots are utilized in the final treatment and disposal of pretreated process water from Process Water Reuse Facility (PWRF). After biological treatment, effluent is land applied on farmland owned by the City and planted with engineered crop rotations to maximize uptake of nutrients. Farm operations are contracted by the City with local farmers. These proposed pivots are planned to be installed in the expanded land treatment system. Without these pivots the City would not be able to expand the land treatment system and therefore fail to comply with the limits established for the facility under the State Waste discharge permit for PWRF. A Requests for Proposal for farm circle pivots was issued in 2020. At that time, LAD Irrigation of Pasco was selected for the purchase and installation of pivots. In order to accomplish ease of operation and integration, it is advisable to remain with the same installer and ensure that all pivots are set up similarly. Several other brands were evaluated; however, it was determined that each alternative requires specialized tools that the City of Pasco Public Works Operations does not currently possess. The selected brand is consistent with existing the have staff that already system, the in equipment ensuring necessary tools and compatible spare parts to support efficient maintenance and continued functionality. LAD Irrigation of Pasco is the only local vendor for Valley Center Pivots. It is important to note that price is not the primary justification for this sole source a of set unified maintain objective is City’s The designation. to components, spare parts, and tools for efficient maintenance and continued functionality. This item was previously approved with Resolution No. 4677 during the November 17, 2025, Regular Council Meeting. The updated cost reflects a correction in LAD pricing, the updated 2026 cost increase, and a small percentage of contingency (~3%). Impact (other than fiscal): The proposed sole source pivots are consistent with existing equipment in the system, ensuring that staff already have the necessary tools and compatible spare parts to support efficient maintenance and continued functionality. This allows and for ease of operations, effective maintenance, continued Page 22 of 174 functionality so that processors that utilize PWRF have less likelihood of interruptions to service. V. DISCUSSION: Recommendation: This item was presented to Council at the February 9, 2026 Workshop as a discussion item. Staff and the project's consulting firm RH2 Engineering, Inc. have reviewed the sales proposal and recommends approval of waiving the competitive bidding requirements and approving the purchase of three (3) Valley pivots and ancillary equipment from LAD Irrigation of Pasco, in the amount not to exceed $620,000.00 as shown on the Sales Proposal. Constraints (Time or other considerations): The construction of this project needs to be completed during the non-irrigation season to minimize interruptions or impacts to normal PWRF Farm Operations. Next Steps: Provided the Council approves the Sole Source, staff will work with LAD Irrigation with align to pivots the schedule and purchase to Pasco of construction. Alternatives:  Council may choose to reject the sole source and request additional information. This is not recommended since the City has already done a request for proposal and this project is on a tight timeline.  Council may choose to reject the sole source, potentially allowing use of another type or brand of pivot. The contractor would then purchase the pivots through a change order, and if another type or brand of pivot is purchased, operations will need to purchase spare parts and equipment for any non-matching farm pivot. Page 23 of 174 Resolution Sole Source Process Water Reuse Facility irrigation Equipment - 1 RESOLUTION NO. 4706 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, WAIVING THE COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENTS AND APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF THREE (3) VALLEY PIVOTS AND ANCILLARY EQUIPMENT FROM LAD IRRIGATION OF PASCO. WHEREAS, it is critical for the City of Pasco (City) to have proper equipment to perform Process Water Reuse Facility (PWRF) irrigation functions; and WHEREAS, the City currently uses Valley pivots equipment and accessories provided by LAD Irrigation of Pasco equipment and accessories; and WHEREAS, the City has established work standards that are supported by the use of these exact pivots, so that Operations has a standard set of tools, replacement parts, and equipment; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Pasco hereby determines that the paramount considerations in the acquisition of matching pivots to ensure the seamless integration and upkeep of PWRF functions with the ongoing expansion of the land treatment system; WHEREAS, the use of Valley Pivots and ancillary equipment is clearly and legitimately limited to a single source of supply, as detailed in the Sole Source Worksheet (Exhibit A), to support current operation standards, this purchase becomes subject to waiving competitive bidding requirements per RCW 35.23.352(9) competitive bidding requirements and RCW 39.04.280(1)(a) sole source and RCW 39.04.280 (1)(b) special market conditions; and WHEREAS, RCW 39.04.280(2)(a) requires that prior to utilizing the sole source exemption the City Council must first adopt a resolution reciting the factual basis supporting the exemption; and WHEREAS, the City Council pursuant to 39.04.280(2)(a) finds that such factual basis as described herein and detailed in the Sole Source Worksheet does support application of the sole source exemption as pertaining to the purchase of Valley pivots and ancillary equipment from LAD Irrigation of Pasco. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON: The City Council of Pasco hereby find the above-described circumstance is justification for the waiver of bidding requirements under the authority of RCW 35.23.352(9) and pursuant to sole source provider (RCW 39.04.280(1)(a)) and special facilities or market conditions (RCW 39.04.280(1)(b)) and, therefore, the bidding requirement is hereby waived for the purchase of Valley pivots and ancillary equipment from LAD Irrigation of Pasco. Page 24 of 174 Resolution Sole Source Process Water Reuse Facility irrigation Equipment - 2 Be It Further Resolved, that the City of Pasco Public Works Department purchase Valley pivots and ancillary equipment from LAD Irrigation of Pasco for an amount not to exceed the sum of $620,000.00. Be It Further Resolved, that this Resolution shall take effect immediately. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ____ day of February, 2026. Charles Grimm Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ ___________________________ Krystle Shanks, CMC Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC Deputy City Clerk City Attorney Page 25 of 174 Resolution Sole Source Process Water Reuse Facility irrigation Equipment - 3 SOLE SOURCE WORKSHEET Requisition Item: Three valley pivots and ancillary equipment Requisition No. TBD Prior Purchase Order Number (if item had been approved previously): Resolution No. 4677. 1. Please describe the items and its function: Farm pivots are utilized in the final treatment and disposal of pretreated process water from Process Water Reuse Facility (PWRF). After biological treatment, effluent is land applied on farm land owned by the City, and planted with engineered crop rotations to maximize uptake of nutrients. Farm operations are contracted by the City with local farmers. These proposed pivots are planned to be installed in the expanded land treatment system Without these pivots the City would not be able to expand the land treatment system, and therefore fail to comply with the limits established for the facility under the State Waste discharge permit for PWRF. 2. This is a sole source because: ☐ sole provider of a licensed or patented good or service ☒ sole provider of items that are compatible with existing equipment, inventory, systems, programs or services ☐ sole provider of goods and services for which the City has established a standard ☐ sole provider of goods or services that will meet the specialized needs of the City or perform the intended function (please detail below or in an attachment) ☐ the vendor/distributor is a holder of a used item that would represent good value and is advantageous to the City (please attach information on market price survey, availability, etc.) 3. What necessary features does this vendor provide which are not available from other vendors? Please be specific. A Requests for Proposal for farm circle pivots was issued in 2020. At that time LAD Irrigation of Pasco was selected for the purchase and installation of pivots. In order to accomplish ease of operation and integration, it is advisable to remain with the same installer and ensure that all pivots are set up similarly. 4. What steps were taken to verify that these features are not available elsewhere? ☒ Other brands/manufacturers were examined (please list phone numbers and names and explain why these were not suitable). • NW Irrigation Systems - (509) 547-1761 o Zimmatic - (775) 625-1945 This was not suitable as the City’s objective is to maintain a unified set of components, spare parts, and tools for efficient maintenance and continued functionality. ☐ Other vendors were contacted (please list phone numbers and names and explain Sole source purchases are defined as clearly and legitimately limited to a single supplier. Sole source purchases are normally not allowed except when based upon strong technological grounds such as operational compatibility with existing equipment and related parts or upon a clearly unique and cost- effective feature requirement. Page 26 of 174 Resolution Sole Source Process Water Reuse Facility irrigation Equipment - 4 why these were not suitable). 5. Sole source vendor certifies that the City is getting the lowest price offered for the item. It is important to note that price is not the primary justification for this sole source designation. The City’s objective is to maintain a unified set of components, spare parts, and tools for efficient maintenance and continued functionality. Certification of Need This recommendation for sole source is based upon on objective review of the product/service required and appears to be in the best interest of the City. I know of no conflict of interest on my part of personal involvement in any way with this request. No gratuities, favors or comprising actions have been taken. Neither has my personal familiarity with particular brands, types or equipment, materials or firm been a deciding influence on my request to sole source this purchase. By: Maria L. Serra, Public Works Director Date: January 12, 2026 Page 27 of 174 Aprl 2026 Order May 2026 Delivery Deliver to field Customer City of Pasco Account#00515 29-Dec-2025 Location Pivot C-14 North Full PR00730 196,974.29$ Pivot C-16B East Half PR00731 167,391.08$ Pivot C-16A West Half PR00732 236,387.80$ Freight Total 600,753.17$ PAYMENT SCHEDULE CASH PAYMENT SCHEDULE Down Payment 4/1/2026 481,000.00$ Progress Payment, due on -$ Progress Payment, due on -$ Final Payment Upon Completion June 1 119,753.17$ TOTAL 600,753.17$ Thank you for doing business with us! Project Summary Sales Agreement Required on orders over $50,000.00 See Quote for Material List and Individual Pricing Page 28 of 174 Page 29 of 174 Page 30 of 174 Page 31 of 174 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 2, 2026 TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/17/26 FROM: Kevin Hebdon, Finance Director Finance SUBJECT: Resolution No. 4707 - Professional Services Agreement with Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. for City Meter Reading Services I. ATTACHMENT(S): Resolution Professional Services Agreement (PSA) Memo II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. 4707, authorizing the City manager to execute a personal services agreement with Columbia Meter Reading Services. III. FISCAL IMPACT: Proposed Professional Services Agreement (PSA) - The approved annual budget for this contract is $564,500 for both 2025 and 2026 for a total of $1,128,000. With the new fee schedule and effective date of the contract, staff anticipates exceeding the biennium budget by $59,000 with this contract. Staff estimates the 2026 annual value of the contract to be $610,000. Funding: Water Utility Fund IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: Background: reading meter water provided has Inc. Reading, Meter Columbia (CMR) services for the City of Pasco for 24 years and has developed extensive knowledge of the City’s water system and meter locations. CMR currently reads has approximately 24,000 water meters citywide and consistently delivered accurate and reliable service, supporting accurate utility billing and assisting staff in identifying potential infrastructure issues early. Because the Page 32 of 174 City relies on physical meter readings and alternative service providers are limited, CMR’s familiarity with the City’s system is a key operational benefit. There are no statutory requirements governing personal services for cities; instead, cities must follow their own adopted policies and procedures. Under the City’s Procurement Manual, the City Manager may approve a written exception when it is determined to be in the best interest of the City. After reviewing the information provided, the City Manager determined that renewing the agreement with Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. supports continuity or service, accuracy, and operational efficiency, while ensuring reliable utility billing for residents and businesses. This item was discussed at the February 9, 2026 Council Workshop. Impact (other than fiscal): None anticipated as this maintains the services that we have been providing to our community. V. DISCUSSION: Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the Professional Services Agreement with Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. for meter reading services. Although an exception to the procurement process was approved by the City Manager in accordance with the City’s Procurement Manual, City Council approval of the agreement is still required. Constraints (time or other consideration): The City does not currently have automated meter reading technology and must use cities nearby most Because meter physical on rely readings. automated systems, contractors that provide physical meter reading services are limited, often located outside the local area, and typically charge higher rates. Establishing a new contractor would require significant onboarding time to develop familiarity with Pasco’s system and could increase the risk of billing errors during the transition. Next Steps: will Professional the execute Manager approval, the Council Upon City Services Agreement on behalf of the City. Staff will continue to coordinate closely with Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. to ensure meter reading operations are conducted efficiently and accurately. Ongoing monitoring will be performed to and verify service quality, reliability, and compliance with the terms conditions of the agreement. Alternatives: Page 33 of 174  Do not approve the agreement and direct staff to immediately issue a Request for Proposals for meter reading services. Due to the limited availability of providers that perform physical meter reading, this option could result in service gaps or delays that may disrupt utility billing for residents and businesses.  Approve a reduced one-year term for the agreement and direct staff to issue a Request for Proposals for meter reading services during that term. While this option maintains short-term continuity, the same market constraints may apply, and the procurement process could still result in service gaps or delays that impact utility billing. Page 34 of 174 Resolution – Meter Reading Services - 1 RESOLUTION NO. 4707 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PERSONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH COLUMBIA METER READING, INC. FOR METER READING SERVICES WHEREAS, the City of Pasco (City) has effectively utilized Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. services for reading the City’s water meters for over 24 years; and WHEREAS, Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. has extensive knowledge of the City and the location of the City’s nearly 24,000 water meters; and WHEREAS, Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. has demonstrated a history of high performance (with an accuracy rate of 99.9%) and assistance in early detection of infrastructure issues; and WHEREAS, it is functionally necessary to continue services with Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. because they are the sole provider of the services within the area that meet the specialized needs of the City,; and WHEREAS, based on continued growth in the City, the expanding service area, and in consultation with the Finance Director and City Manager, and considering the experience and level of service currently provided by Columbia Meter Reading, Inc., staff recommends approval of a three-year Professional Services Agreement, with two optional one-year extensions, in order to maintain reliable meter-reading services while preserving the City’s ability to evaluate and potentially transition to newer meter-reading technologies, including radio-read systems, as part of its long-term operational and infrastructure planning. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON: That the City Council of the City of Pasco approves the terms and conditions of the Personal Services Agreement between the City of Pasco and Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. as attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. Be It Further Resolved, that the City Manager of the City of Pasco, Washington, is hereby authorized, empowered, and directed to execute said Professional Services Agreement on behalf of the City of Pasco. Be It Further Resolved, that this Resolution shall take effect immediately. Page 35 of 174 Resolution – Meter Reading Services - 2 PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ____ day of ________________, 2026. ______________________________ Charles Grimm Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Krystle Shanks, CMC Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC Deputy City Clerk City Attorney Page 36 of 174 Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. PSA Meter Reading Services Version 8.15.2025 Page 1 of 9 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT METER READING SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into between the City of Pasco, a Washington Municipal Corporation, hereinafter referred to as “City”, and Columbia Meter Reading Inc., hereinafter referred to as “Contractor,” on _____________________________________. [date of execution] RECITALS WHEREAS, the City desires to have certain services and/or tasks performed as set forth below requiring specialized skills, training, equipment, and other supportive capabilities; and WHEREAS, the Contractor represents that it is qualified and possesses sufficient skills, experience, equipment, and necessary capabilities, including: technical and professional expertise, when required, to perform the services and/or tasks as set forth in this Agreement upon which the City is relying. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, and performances contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Scope of Services. The Contractor shall perform such services and accomplish such tasks, including the furnishing of all labor, materials, facilities and equipment necessary for full performance thereof, as identified and designated as Contractor’s Responsibilities throughout this Agreement, and as more particularly described in Scope of Work detailed in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein (the “Project”). 2. Term. The Term of this contract will be three (3) years from execution date. Upon mutual written agreement of both parties, this contract can be extended for two (2) additional years, one year at a time. 3. Compensation and Payment. 3.1 Payment for services provided hereunder shall be made following the performance of such services. Such payment shall be full compensation for work performed or services rendered, and for all labor, materials, supplies, equipment, and incidentals necessary to complete the Project. 3.2 No payment shall be made for any services rendere d by the Contractor except for services identified and set forth in this Agreement except as may be authorized by a written supplemental agreement approved by the City. 3.3 The City shall pay the Contractor for work performed under this Agreement upon timely submitted invoices detailing work performed and expenses for which reimbursement is sought. The City shall approve all invoices before payment is Page 37 of 174 Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. PSA Meter Reading Services Version 8.15.2025 Page 2 of 9 issued. Payment shall occur within ten (10) days of receipt and approval of an invoice. 3.4 The City shall pay the Contractor for all work performed and expenses incurred under this Agreement in accordance with Exhibits A and B. 4. Reports and Inspections. 4.1 The Contractor at such times and in such forms as the City may require, shall furnish to the City such statements, records, studies, surveys, reports, data, and information as the City may request pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. 4.2 The Contractor shall, at any time during normal business hours and as often as the City or the Washington State Auditor may reasonably deem necessary, make available for examination all of its records and data with respect to all matters covered, directly or indirectly, by this Agreement and shall permit the City, or its designated authorized representative to audit and inspect other data relating to all matters covered by this Agreement. The City shall receive a copy of all audit reports made by the agency or firm as to the Contractor’s activities. The City may, at its discretion, conduct an audit at its expense, using its own or outside auditors, of the Contractor’s activities which relate, directly or indirectly, to this Agreement. Contractor shall be provided a copy of such reports. 4.3 The Contractor, during the term of this Agreement, shall obtain all permits and registration documents necessary for the performance of its work and for the execution of services at its own expense, and shall maintain its validity. Upon request, the Contractor shall deliver to the City copies of these licenses, registration documents, and permits or proof of their issuance or renewal. 4.4 Contractor shall maintain books, records and documents, which sufficiently and properly reflect all direct and indirect costs related to the performance of this Agreement and shall maintain such accounting procedures and practices as may be necessary to assure proper accounting of all funds paid pursuant to this Agreement. These records shall be subject, at all reasonable times, to inspection, review, or audit as provided above. 4.5 The Contractor shall retain all books, records, documents, or other material relevant to this Agreement for three (3) years after its expiration. Contractor agrees that the City, or its designee, shall have full access and right to examine any of said materials at all reasonable times during this period. 5. Ownership and Use of Documents. 5.1 All research, tests, surveys, preliminary data, information, drawings, and documents made, collected, or prepared by the Contractor for performing the services subject to this Agreement, as well as any final product, collectively referred to as “work product,” shall be deemed as the exclusive property of the City, including copyright as secured thereon. Contractor may not use them except in connection with the performance of the services under this Agreement or with the prior written consent of the City. Any prior copyrighted materials owned by the Page 38 of 174 Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. PSA Meter Reading Services Version 8.15.2025 Page 3 of 9 Contractor and utilized in the performance of the services under this Agreement, or embedded in with the materials, products and services provided thereunder, shall remain the property of the Contractor subject to a license granted to the City for their continued use of the products and services provided under this Agreement. Any work product used by the Contractor in the performance of these services which it deems as “confidential,” “proprietary,” or a “trade secret” shall be conspicuously designated as such. 5.2 In the event of Contractor’s default, or in the event that this Agreement is terminated prior to its completion, the work product of the Contractor, along with a summary of the services performed to date of default or termination, shall become the property of the City, and tender of the work product and summary shall be a prerequisite to final payment under this Agreement. The summary of services provided shall be prepared at no additional cost, if the Agreement is terminated through default by the Contractor. If the Agreement is terminated through convenience by the City, the City agrees to pay Contractor for the preparation of the summary of services provided. 6. Public Records. 6.1 Contractor acknowledges that the City is an agency subject to Chapter 42.56 RCW “Public Records Act.” All preliminary drafts or notes prepared or gathered by the Contractor, and recommendations of the Contractor are exempt prior to the acceptance by the City or public citation by the City in connection with City action. 6.2 If the Contractor becomes a custodian of public records of the City and request for such records is received by the City, the Contractor shall respond to the request by the City for such records within five (5) business days by either providing the records, or by identifying in writing the additional time necessary to provide the records with a description of the reasons why additional time is needed. Such additional time shall not exceed twenty (20) business days unless extraordinary good cause is shown. 6.3 In the event the City receives a public records request for protected work product of the Contractor within its possession, the City shall, prior to the release of any protected work product or as a result of a public records request or subpoena, provide Contractor at least ten (10) business days prior written notice of the pending release and to reasonably cooperate with any legal action which may be initiated by the Contractor to enjoin or otherwise prevent such release. 7. Independent Contractor Relationship. 7.1 The parties intend that an independent contractor relationship is created by this Agreement. The City is interested primarily in the results to be achieved; subject to the scope of services and the specific requirements of this Agreement, the implementation of services will lie solely with the discretion of the Contractor. No agent, employee, officer or representative of the Contractor shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, officer, or representative of the City for any purpose, and the employees of the Contractor are not entitled to any of the benefits or privileges the City provides for its employees. The Contractor will be solely and entirely Page 39 of 174 Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. PSA Meter Reading Services Version 8.15.2025 Page 4 of 9 responsible for its acts and for the acts of its agents, employees, officers, subcontractors or representatives during the performance of this Agreement. 7.2 In the performance of the services provided in this Agreement, Contractor is an independent contractor with full authority to control and direct the performance of the details of the work, however, the results of the work contemplated herein must meet the approval of the City and shall be subject to the City ’s general rights of inspection and review to secure the satisfactory completion thereof. 7.3 The Contractor shall comply with all State and Federal laws including, but not limited to: 7.3.1 The definition requirements of RCW 50.04.140 (Employment Security). 7.3.2 RCW 51.08.195 (Industrial Insurance). 7.3.3 Obtain a City of Pasco business license. 7.4 The City may, at its sole discretion, require the Contractor to remove any employee, agent or servant from employment on this Project who, in the City’s sole discretion, may be detrimental to the City’s interest. 8. Indemnification. 8.1 The Contractor shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits including attorney fees, arising out of or resulting from the acts, errors or omissions of the Contractor in performance of this Agreement, except for injuries and damages caused by the sole negligence of the City. 8.2 However, should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this Agreement is subject to RCW 4.24.115, then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the Contractor, and the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers, the Contractor’s liability, including the duty and cost to defend, hereunder shall be only to the extent of the Contractor’s negligence. It is further specifically and expressly understood that the indemnification provided herein constitutes the Contractor’s waiver of immunity under Industrial Insurance, Title 51 RCW, solely for purposes of this indemnification. This waiver has been mutually negotiated by the parties. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreeme nt. 8.3 No liability shall attach to the City by reason of entering into this Agreement except as expressly provided herein. 8.4 This indemnification shall include damages, penalties and attorney fees sustained as a result of Contractor’s delayed or failed performance of Section 6 above. Page 40 of 174 Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. PSA Meter Reading Services Version 8.15.2025 Page 5 of 9 9. Insurance. The Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees, or subcontractors. The Contractor’s maintenance of insurance as required by the Agreement shall not be construed to limit the liability of the Contractor to the coverage provided by such insurance or otherwise limit the City’s recourse to any remedy available at law or in equity. 9.1 Minimum Scope of Insurance. Contractor shall obtain insurance of the types and coverage described below: 9.1.1 Automobile Liability insurance covering all owned, non-owned, hired and leased vehicles. Coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CA 00 01. 9.1.2 Commercial General Liability insurance shall be at least as broad as ISO occurrence form CG 00 01 and shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, stop-gap independent contractors and personal injury and advertising injury. The City shall be named as an additional insured under the Contractor’s Commercial General Liability insurance policy with respect to the work performed for the City using an additional insured endorsement at least as broad as ISO endorsement form CG 20 26. 9.1.3 Workers’ Compensation coverage as required by the Industrial Insurance laws of the State of Washington. 9.1.4 Professional Liability insurance appropriate to the Contractor’s profession. 9.2 Minimum Amounts of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain the following insurance limits: 9.2.1 Automobile Liability insurance with a minimum combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage of $1,000,000 per accident. 9.2.2 Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written with limits no less than: ☒ $1,000,000 each occurrence; and ☒ $2,000,000 general aggregate; 9.3 Other Insurance Provision. The Contractor’s Automobile Liability, Professional Liability, and Commercial General Liability insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain that they shall be primary insurance as respect the City. Any insurance, self-insurance, or self-insured pool coverage maintained by the City shall be excess of the Contractor’s insurance and shall not contribute with it. 9.3.1 The Contractor’s insurance shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be cancelled by either party, except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. Page 41 of 174 Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. PSA Meter Reading Services Version 8.15.2025 Page 6 of 9 9.4 Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A: VII. 9.5 Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish the City with original certificates and a copy of the amendatory endorsements, including, but not necessarily limited to, the additional insured endorsement, evidencing the insurance requirements of the Agreement before commencement of the work. 9.6 Notice of Cancellation. The Contractor shall provide the City with written notice of any policy cancellation within two (2) business days of their receipt of such notice. 9.7 City Full Availability of Contractor Limits. If the Contractor maintains higher insurance limits than the minimums shown above, the City shall be insured for the full available limits of Commercial General and Excess or Umbrella liability maintained by the Contractor, irrespective of whether such limits maintained by the Contractor are greater than those required by this Agreement or whether any certificate of insurance furnished to the City evidences limits of liability lower than those maintained by the Contractor. 9.8 Failure to Maintain Insurance. Failure on the part of the Contractor to maintain the insurance as required shall constitute a material breach of contract, upon which the City may, after giving five (5) business days notice to the Contractor to correct the breach, immediately terminate the Agreement or, at its discretion, procure or renew such insurance and pay any and all premiums in connection therewith, with any sums so expended to be repaid to the City on demand, or at the sole discretion of the City, offset against funds due the Contractor from the City. 10. Nondiscrimination. In the performance of this Agreement, the Contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment on the grounds of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, marital status, age or the presence of any sensory, mental or physical handicap; provided that the prohibition against discrimination in employment because of handicap shall not apply if the particular disability prevents the proper performance of the particular worker involved. The Contractor shall ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment in the performance of this Agreement without discrimination because of their race, creed, color, national origin, sex, marital status, age or the presence of any sensory, mental or physical handicap. Contractor shall take such action with respect to this Agreement as may be required to ensure full compliance with local, State and Federal laws prohibiting discrimination in employment. 11. Covenant Against Contingent Fees. The Contractor warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company, firm, or person, other than a bona fide employee working exclusively for the Contractor, to solicit or secure this Agreement; and that it has not paid or agreed to pay any company, person or firm, other than a bona fide employee working exclusively for the Contractor, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, the City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement. Page 42 of 174 Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. PSA Meter Reading Services Version 8.15.2025 Page 7 of 9 12. Assignment and Subcontracting. 12.1 The City has awarded this Agreement to the Contractor due to its unique qualifications to perform these services. The Contractor shall not assign (or subcontract other than as specifically identified in Exhibit A) its performance under this Agreement or any portions of this Agreement without the prior written consent of the City, which consent must be sought at least thirty (30) days prior to the date of any proposed assignment. 12.2 Any work or services assigned or subcontracted hereunder shall be subject to each provision of this Agreement including Section 6, Public Records; Section 10, Nondiscrimination; proper bidding procedures where applicable; and all local, State and Federal statutes, ordinances and guidelines. 12.3 Any technical or professional service subcontract not listed in this Agreement, must have prior written approval by the City. 13. Termination. 13.1 Termination for Convenience. Either party may terminate this Agreement for any reason upon giving the other party no less than ninety (90) business days written notice in advance of the effective date of such termination. 13.2 Termination for Cause. If the Contractor fails to perform in the manner called for in this Agreement, or if the Contractor fails to comply with any other provisions of this Agreement and fails to correct such noncompliance within thirty (30) business days of written notice thereof, the City may terminate this Agreement for cause. Termination shall be effected by serving a notice of termination on the Contractor setting forth the manner in which the Contractor is in default. The Contractor will only be paid for services and expenses complying with the terms of this Agreement, incurred prior to termination. 14. General Provisions. 14.1 For the purpose of this Agreement, time is of the essence. 14.2 Notice. Notice provided for in this Agreement shall be sent by: 14.2.1 Personal service upon the Project Administrators; or 14.2.2 Certified mail to the physical address of the parties, or by electronic transmission to the e-mail addresses designated for the parties below. Page 43 of 174 Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. PSA Meter Reading Services Version 8.15.2025 Page 8 of 9 14.3 The Project Administrator for the purpose of this Agreement shall be: For the City: For the Contractor: Harold L Stewart, II City Manager 525 N 3rd Ave Pasco, WA, 99301 stewarth@pasco-wa.gov Peter LeMieux Vice President 3420 W Pearl Street Pasco, WA 99301 zinmercab@icloud.com 15. Dispute Resolution. 15.1 This Agreement has been and shall be construed as having been made and entered into and delivered within the State of Washington and it is agreed by each party hereto that this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington. 15.2 In the event of a dispute regarding the enforcement, breach, default, or interpretation of this Agreement, the Project Administrators, or their designees, shall first meet in a good faith effort to resolve such dispute. In the event the dispute cannot be resolved by agreement of the parties, said dispute shall be resolved by arbitration pursuant to RCW 7.04A, as amended, with both parties waiving the right of a jury trial upon trial de novo, with venue placed in Pasco, Franklin County, Washington. The substantially prevailing party shall be entitled to its reasonable attorney fees and costs as additional award and judgment against the other. 16. Nonwaiver. Waiver by the City of any provision of this Agreement or any time limitation provided for in this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other similar event or other provision of this Agreement. 17. Integration. This Agreement between the parties consists in its entirety of this document and any exhibits, schedules or attachments. Any modification of this Agreement or change order affecting this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both parties. Page 44 of 174 Columbia Meter Reading, Inc. PSA Meter Reading Services Version 8.15.2025 Page 9 of 9 18. Authorization. By signature below, each party warrants that they are authorized and empowered to execute this Agreement binding the City and the Contractor respectively. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date first written above. CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON Harold L. Stewart II, City Manager COLUMBIA METER READING, INC Peter LeMieux, Vice President ATTEST: Krystle Shanks, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC, City Attorney Page 45 of 174 Exhibit A – Scope of Services, Compensation, and Penalties 1.Scope of Services The Contractor shall provide professional meter reading and related ﬁeld services for the City, including, but not limited to, the following: A. Meter Reading Services •Per Meter Read Routine meter reading services for city utility accounts, billed on a per meter read basis. •Meter Rereads Meter rereads performed at the city’s request to verify the accuracy of a prior meter reading. Each reread shall be billed on a per reread basis, as applicable. B. Turn-On and Turn-OƯ Services •Per Turn-On or Turn-OƯ Water service turn-ons and turn-oƯs as directed by the city. •Simultaneous Turn-Ons and Turn-OƯs (move out / move in) Multiple turn-ons and/or turn-oƯs performed during a single visit at the same location. C. After-Hours Services •Non-Scheduled A ter-Hours Call Outs Unscheduled after-hours turn-on or turn-oƯ services requested by the City. •Deﬁnition o A ter-Hours “After Hours” shall mean any turn-on or turn-oƯ service assigned to or received by the Contractor after 4:30 pm and before 8:00 am, including weekends and City-recognized holidays. D. Meter Box Lid Replacement •Replacement by Work Order Meter box lid replacement performed pursuant to a City-issued work order. •Replacement While on Route Meter box lid replacement performed while the Contractor is already on route conducting meter reads. E. Safety and Conﬁned Space Services •Conﬁned Spaces In recognition of the additional labor costs for access meters in conﬁned spaces, these meter reads will be charged at a high rate per meter in accordance with the Fee Schedule. Page 46 of 174 2. Additional Compensation Provisions A. Hourly Pro essional Services (Non–Task Based Work) When requested by the City, the Contractor may be required to perform services that are not included in the per-task pricing structure, including but not limited to document review, meetings, data review, coordination with City staƯ, or other professional support services. All hourly services must be pre-authorized by the City and shall be billed based on actual time worked. • Hourly Rate: $150.00 per hour B. Standby / Waiting Time When speciﬁcally requested by the City, the Contractor may be required to remain onsite for a deﬁned period of time when work cannot proceed due to City-directed delays or operational needs. Standby time shall be billable only when expressly authorized by the City in advance and shall not be billed concurrently with active hourly services. • Standby Rate: $150.00 per hour • After-hours Standby Rate: $300.00 per hour 3. Penalties To ensure performance standards are met, the following penalties shall apply and may be deducted from amounts otherwise due to the Contractor: A. Incomplete Meter Reading Penalty There shall be a $100.00 per day penalty for failure to complete meter reading services in accordance with the City’s established schedule. B. Unread Meter Threshold Penalty There shall be a $100.00 penalty for each one percent (1%) by which the percentage of unread meters exceeds three percent (3%) per book. C. Unreachable Contractor Response Penalty There shall be a $150.00 penalty for each occurrence in which the City is required to dispatch a Public Works employee to respond to a location due to the Contractor’s failure to respond as required. Penalties assessed under this section do not relieve the Contractor of its obligation to complete the required services. Page 47 of 174 CURRENT 4/1/2025 4/1/2026 4/1/2027 4/1/2028 4/1/2029 1) Per meter read 1.32$ 1.52$ 1.57$ 1.62$ 1.68$ 1.74$ 2)Per turn-off or turn-on and simultaneous turn-ons and turn- offs (move out / move in)4.67$ 5.37$ 5.56$ 5.75$ 5.95$ 6.16$ 3) Per non-scheduled after hours call outs 46.77$ 53.79$ 55.65$ 57.58$ 59.57$ 61.63$ "After Hours" means a turn-on or turn-off assigned to/or received by the contractor after 4:30 p.m. and before 8:00 a.m.4) Per re-read when the original read turns out to be correct 7.80$ 8.97$ 9.28$ 9.60$ 9.93$ 10.27$ when the original read is NOT correct -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 5) Per meter box lid replacement If done by work order 6.56$ 7.54$ 7.80$ 8.07$ 8.35$ 8.64$ If done while on route being read -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 6) Per each meter read in confined spaces 15.60$ 17.94$ 18.56$ 19.20$ 19.86$ 20.55$ EXHIBIT B - FEE SCHEDULE The rates set forth below establish the compensation for services described in Exhibit B – Scope of Services, Compensation, and Penalties. Rates are effective on the dates shown and apply only to services authorized by the City. COMPENSATION: The City agrees to pay the contractor at the following rates: 1/16/2026 Pa g e 4 8 o f 1 7 4 a'?Pasco Memo City of Pasco 0 (509)545-34“ 525 N.3‘Ave.-Pasm W A 0930i mu .pasco-wagm To:Harold L.Stewart 11-City Manager From:Kevin Hebdon —Finance Director Date:January 14,2026 Tity ofPaSCO ("09)543—3488 525 N.3"Ave.Pasco,WA 9 J “WWWlJaSLOwagoz RE City of Pasco Service Agreement with Columbia Meter Reading Columbia Meter Reading,INC (CMR)has provided 24/7-meter reading services for the City of Pasco for past 24 years.Because of this,CMR has extensive knowledge of the City and of the location of all 24,000 water meters.With an accuracy rate of 99.87%,CMR has provided exceptional service to the City. Based on discussions with Public Works,it has been determined that training City staff to provide this service is not feasible or advisable at this stage.This is due to the state laws regarding water delivery and noti?cations,and current internal processes not being ideal for this type of transition.City also plans to move to AMI/AMR,which will make signi?cant changes in this area in the next 3 to 5 years.In addition,no local companies provide meter-reading services. Due to the needs of the City,we would require a company within close proximity of the City to provide around the clock coverage. According to Administrative Order No.470,Purchasing Policy and Procedures,service contracts over $50,000 require a competitive purchasing process;except,if the City Manager approves in writing an exception based on the best interests of the City,the competitive process can be waived. Based on the information provided,Staff has determined that proceeding with a Service Agreement with Columbia Meter Reading,INC.will be in the best interest of the City.With your written consent,we would like to move forward in executing a Service Agreement with Columbia Meter Reading,INC. I,Harold L.Stewart II,City Manager for the City of Pasco,have determined that it is in the best interest of the City to establish a Service Agreement with Columbia Meter Reading,INC. Harold L.wart 11,City Manager Page 49 of 174 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council January 20, 2026 TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/17/26 FROM: Haylie Matson, Director Community & Economic Development SUBJECT: Public Hearing & Ordinance No. 4814 - Tierra Vida Phase 1 Westerly 20 Feet (VAC2025-003) (5 minute staff presentation) I. ATTACHMENT(S): Ordinance, with Exhibit A Ordinance 4646 Tierra Vida Phase One Final Plat Right-of-Way Vacation Petition Vicinity Map Resolution Date and Time for Public Hearing for Meeting Setting 4692 VAC2025-003 Power Point Presentation II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4814, vacating the westerly 20 feet of 1691585, No. File Auditor's under Vida as One, Phase Tiera recorded providing for severability and establishing an effective date, and, further, authorize publication by summary only. III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: Background: On October 19, 2006, Tierra Vida – Phase One established the section of right- of-way now proposed for vacation. In April 2023, it was determined that this segment, along with additional right-of-way intended for a future street, was not feasible, and Ordinance 4646 was adopted. While map records indicate that Page 50 of 174 this portion had been vacated, the corresponding legal description was inadvertently omitted and never formally proposed until now. On September 3, 2025, Jose and Silvia Duarte, Rosa M. and Jorge Ortega, and Maria Muñoz submitted a petition to vacate the right-of-way. This petition represents 100% of the required two-thirds approval under Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 12.40.020(2), as the portion that would have needed to be granted to adjacent properties to the west under RCW 35.79.040 was already addressed by Ordinance 4646. This segment of right-of-way is currently landlocked and was omitted from the legal description of Ordinance 4646. In accordance with PMC 12.40.030(1)(c), the petitioners provided all required title reports on October 29, 2025. PMC with in provided was accordance public the of Notice hearing 12.40.050(3)(a)–(d). On January 20, 2026, notice was mailed to all property owners abutting the subject right-of-way, as well as to property owners within 300 feet of the site. Notices were also posted at three public locations within the City—two at City Hall and one at a conspicuous location adjacent to the right-of-way—on January 20, 2026, and at the Mid-Columbia Library in West Pasco on January 22, 2026. In addition, notice was published in the Tri-City Herald on January 18, 2026. On January 5, 2026, City Council approved Resolution No. 4692, setting a public hearing for 7:00 PM on Tuesday, February 17, 2026, to consider the proposed right-of-way vacation. Impact: The proposed right-of-way vacation will not result in landlocked parcels or substantially impair access, as all affected properties will retain legal and physical access. The portion of right-of-way proposed for vacation is currently unused and does not serve an access function. Approval of the vacation would provide a public benefit by increasing the lot sizes of Lots 4, 5, and 6 of Tierra Vida Phase One, supporting orderly development and ensuring clarity in the public record for future reference. V. DISCUSSION: Recommendation: Staff recommends adoption of the proposed right-of-way vacation and approval of compensation This requirements. and waiver the of a appraisal 4646 recommendation is based on staff’s finding that Ordinance No. inadvertently omitted the legal description of an existing right-of-way that should have been vacated at that time. Page 51 of 174 While the proposed vacation is not directly associated with the right-of-way dedication made through the Helena Street Addition No. 1 Plat, staff finds that the prior dedication provided a public benefit that supports and helps justify the waiver of the appraisal and compensation requirements. Constraints (Time or other considerations): As noted, Resolution No. 4692, setting 7:00 PM on February 17, 2026, as the date and time for the public hearing, was adopted on January 5, 2026. In accordance with code, the public hearing must be held no fewer than 20 days and no more than 60 days following adoption of the resolution. Although this timing requirement applies only to the public hearing and not the ordinance itself, it is recommended that both be considered concurrently. Definition & Purpose: It is the removal of public right-of-use for roads, alleys, or public service easements. It is often done to facilitate private development or to close unused public infrastructure. Staff Analysis: In evaluating the proposed right-of-way vacation, consideration has been given to the criteria outlined in PMC Section 12.40.070(1) through (4): 1. The proposed vacation will not adversely affect traffic accessibility within the City and will not impact circulation in the immediate area, as the right-of-way has not been used for access and is currently landlocked. It is undeveloped and does not accommodate vehicular or pedestrian traffic. 2. The portion of right-of-way proposed for vacation is not needed for future public use. As part of prior subdivision activity to the west, Eureka Avenue and Sprague Avenue were dedicated to the City, providing the necessary public access in lieu of the right-of-way vacated through Ordinance No. 4646. That action resulted in this segment becoming landlocked; the proposed vacation would address and correct that condition. 3. be access will landlocked, become nor property other No will substantially impaired. All affected properties will retain both legal and physical access via Paz Ct. 4. The public need will not be adversely affected. In fact, the vacation provides a public benefit by increasing the lot sizes of Lots 4, 5, and 6 of Tierra orderly and supporting development Phase Vida One, establishing a clear record for future reference. Pursuant Section PMC refers which to Section PMC to 12.40.030(1)(e), 12.40.120(2), the City may require petitioners to provide a signed agreement covering the cost of an appraisal and compensating the City for the right-of- way to be vacated. These requirements may be waived in whole or in part. Staff compensation recommends waiving the appraisal and requirements Page 52 of 174 based on two considerations: 1. The vacation is offset by the dedication of substitute public right-of-way of equal or greater value, as provided by the developers to the west. Additionally, this action corrects the omission in the legal description from Ordinance 4646. 2. The community benefits of the requested vacation are considered to outweigh the appraised value of the right-of-way. The area proposed for vacation is approximately 7,099 square feet and is landlocked, situated among multiple residential properties. Accordingly, staff recommends waiving the requirement for an appraisal and any form of compensation in this instance. Next Steps: The vacation ordinance will be recorded with Franklin County, completing the formal process and clarifying property boundaries. Petitioners will be notified of the City’s decision and will formally acquire the portion of land that was intended to be theirs under the previously adopted ordinance. Alternatives: Although PMC Section 12.40.070 does not specifically list denial as a criterion, the City Council retains the authority to deny the proposed right-of-way vacation if the findings support such a decision. Page 53 of 174 Ordinance – Vacation No. VAC2025-003 - 1 FILED FOR RECORD AT REQUEST OF: City of Pasco, Washington WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of Pasco, Washington Attn: City Clerk 525 North 3rd Avenue Pasco, WA 99301 ____________________________________________________________________________ ORDINANCE NO. 4814 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, VACATING THE WESTERLY 20 FEET OF TIERRA VIDA PHASE ONE, AS ESTABLISHED BY AUDITOR’S FILE NUMBER 1691585, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, from time to time in response to petitions or in cases where it serves the general interest of the City, the City Council may vacate rights-of-way (ROW); and WHEREAS, a petition for vacating the westerly 20 feet of the right-of-way dedicated through the Tierra Vida Phase One Final Plat, as established by Auditor’s File Number 1691585 has been submitted to the City by owners of more than two-thirds of the properties abutting the portion of the right-of-way to be vacated per Pasco Municipal Code (PMC); and WHEREAS, on January 5, 2026, pursuant to the PMC Section 12.40.040, the City passed Resolution No. 4692, initiating the vacation procedures and setting a public hearing for the proposed vacation; and WHEREAS, pursuant to PMC Section 12.40.050, appropriate notice was given of the City’s intent to vacate the public right-of-way; and WHEREAS, the City held a public hearing on the proposed vacation on February 17, 2026; and WHEREAS, the vacation process provided in PMC Chapter 12.40 requires a title report, and an appraisal of value and compensation unless waived by the City Council; and Page 54 of 174 Ordinance – Vacation No. VAC2025-003 - 2 WHEREAS, pursuant to PMC Section 12.40.120(2) the City may waive the requirement for a title report, an appraisal of value and compensation if one or more of the following are applicable: the vacation is initiated by Council Resolution; the vacation is at the requ est of the City; the Council had previously determined that the right-of-way is not essential to public traffic circulation and is available for vacation; the grant of a substitute right-of-way has value as a right- of-way at least equal to the right-of-way to be vacated; or the resulting benefit to the community of the project requiring the vacation outweighs the appraised value of the right-of-way to be vacated; and WHEREAS, the proposed vacation does meet the above listed criteria for waiver of the requirements for an appraisal of value and compensation pursuant to PMC Section 12.40.120(2), as the right-of-way was acquired at no cost to the City and is landlocked, and the resulting benefit to the community outweighs any value of the vacated right-of-way; and WHEREAS, the City Council may approve a right-of-way vacation upon making findings pursuant to PMC Section 12.40.070(1)-(4), that the vacation of the right-of-way will not adversely affect traffic accessibility and circulation within the immediate area or with the City as a whole; is not contemplated or needed for future use; no abutting property will become landlocked or have access substantially impaired; and the public needs shall not be adversely affected and the vacation will provide a public benefit or serve a public purpose; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the required criteria of the PMC Section 12.40.070(1)-(4) have been met; and WHEREAS, all steps and procedures required by law to vacate said right-of-way have been duly taken and performed. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That a portion of right-of-way, as described below and as depicted in Exhibit A be and the same is hereby vacated; THAT PORTION OF THAT 20.00' WIDE STRIP DEDICATED AS PUBLIC ROAD RIGHT OF WAY ON THE PLAT OF TIERRA VIDA, PHASE ONE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME D OF PLATS, PAGE 317, RECORDS OF FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASINGTON, SITUATE IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 9 NORTH, RANGE 30 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF PASCO, FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 27; THENCE NORTH 0°03'30" EAST 485.01 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 27 TO THE WESTERLY MOST SOUTHWEST CORNER OF Page 55 of 174 Ordinance – Vacation No. VAC2025-003 - 3 SAID PLAT OF TIERRA VIDA PHASE ONE AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 0°03'30" EAST 355.11 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID PLAT TO THE WESTERLY MOST NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 89°00'18" EAST 20.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PLAT TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 6 OF SAID PLAT; THENCE SOUTH 0°03'30" WEST 354.88 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINES OF LOTS 6, 5, AND 4 OF SAID PLAT TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 4; THENCE NORTH 89°38'17"WEST 20.00 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PLAT TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Section 2. That pursuant to PMC Chapter 12.40, the City Council hereby waives the requirements for an appraisal and compensation for the vacated right-of-way. Section 3. That a certified copy of this Ordinance be recorded by the City Clerk of the City of Pasco in and with the office of the Auditor of Franklin County, Washington. Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance. Section 5. Corrections. Upon approval by the city attorney, the city clerk or the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this Ordinance, including scrivener’s errors or clerical mistakes; reference to other local, state, or federal laws, rules, or regulation s; or numbering or referencing of ordinances or their sections and subsections. Section 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after approval, passage and publication as required by law. Page 56 of 174 Ordinance – Vacation No. VAC2025-003 - 4 PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington this ___ day of _____, 202_. Charles Grimm Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ ___________________________ Krystle Shanks, CMC Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC Deputy City Clerk City Attorney Published: _____________________________ Page 57 of 174 EXHIBIT‘A’ LEGAL DESCRIPTION PUBLIC ROAD RIGHT OF WAY VACATION THAT PORTION OF THAT 20.00'WIDESTRIP DEDICATED AS PUBLICROAD RIGHTOF WAY ON THE PLATOF TIERRAVIDA,PHASE ONE,ACCORDING TO THE PLATTHEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUMED OF PLATS,PAGE 317,RECORDS OF FRANKLINCOUNTY,WASINGTON,SITUATEIN THE SOUTHWESTQUARTEROF SECTION 27,TOWNSHIP 9 NORTH,RANGE30 EAST,WILLAMETI'E MERIDIAN,CITYOF PASCO,FRANKLINCOUNTY,WASHINGTON,DESCRIBEDAS FOLLOWS: COMMENCINGAT THE SOUTHWESTCORNER OF SAID SECTION 27;THENCE NORTH 0°03’30” EAST485.01 FEETALONG THE WEST LINEOF SAID SECTION 27 TO THE WESTERLY MOST SOUTHWESTCORNER OF SAID PLAT OF TIERRAVIDA PHASE ONE AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING;THENCE CONTINUINGNORTH 0°03’30”EAST355.11 FEETALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID PLATTO THE WESTERLYMOST NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF;THENCE SOUTH 89°00’18”EAST20.00 FEETALONG THE NORTH LINEOF SAID PLATTO THE NORTHWESTCORNER OF LOT6 OF SAID PLAT;THENCE SOUTH 0°03’30”WEST 354.88 FEETALONG THE WEST LINES OF LOTS 6,5,AND 4 OF SAID PLATTO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 4;THENCE NORTH 89°38’1 7”WEST 20.00 FEETALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PLATTO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. 18825 Page 58 of 174 i 9‘ ‘IIIII/IIl/l/I/ll/III/IIIA\\\\\\\\\\\\V\\\\V\\\\\III\ ESEEEE..6x;.,£22320 TIERRA VIDA PHASE! VOL D PG 317 EXH/B/T A—7 PUBUCR040 RIGHTOF WAYVA04770N PIN sw1/497 EN R30E WM ., " CITYOFPASCO 8890018E HBIWIGJNCOUMXWASHINGTON 20. .F_..mmm cr‘LOT 5 LOT 3 \9.BA :3 ‘94“0/‘0’7 8 ‘T ¢¢b O (I) Q2319~esrs°TZ€Reo§v’QVALLN‘DC"20, N89'38'17”W J1/'?x;9 N0'03'30"E 28 27 485.01’33%;?“ma.as M“mwg‘gum: 33 34%)”!1MI 18825 LOT 4 m..on.mo. LOT 7 LO Page 59 of 174 Page 60 of 174 Page 61 of 174 Page 62 of 174 Item: Washington Addition Streets and Alleys ROW Vacation N "Exhibit A" Applicant(s): Jubilee Foundation c/o Steve Bauman AFile#: VAC 2022-009,W W LU � °' 0 � '----------' � N I----+---+---+--------, M 1---.J....--1---1-----+-----+------I----I LU b ;---,--�..--� 1----------< Cl Cl :::> � � � � 1--------1 i OJ .______, .______, Vl V) fl5 '----____._-------'-____,., OC -....___._ � E HELENA ST E HELENA ST ._______. b 1--------1 >-----------< � 1--------1 □□ □□ PAZCT 3 EAST 360 540 72 Feet �----; � __ __.____._� ___ "--_ __.___.___7 � ESTRELLA DR��-"-.......... ' � EAST EAST Pa g e 6 3 o f 1 7 4 th a n . \I l l l l l l j l l l m . Wu : m[9 - 1 1 - 0 1 LQ R ‘ i E“ 53 Eg g : g. 3.5! <3 5“ E = a I ar i a : 3%; Q5 ; gg i 55 3 5 3 ; ; Eg ? g i g g g , 3' 2 . “ gig? ‘s i g i; gé g i g g i g g Hi m : 5‘ L Q 5Q 50 §§ = €3 5 . ”n u s : 5: 1 3 ? 2 *2 $3 5 3 1 " a .. . . . . . . a . . ,1 I I, ”S E E S’ E ' s 25 5 5 ? } ; 23 : 2 2 : 2 3 g gs g w g 53 II I E 40 b i t , i ?q , ‘ ' 5 a - =2 l VN ‘ E3 3 3 ; mm ” H” - II km a g ? g Eg g ; gi g ; 5 “i n “ ; g 5? g; 5 A Hg , 2 ° 'i ‘ E ‘ E N ‘5 :3 3 ? ! “ E =§ j/ / - g i .. §D F § § 8 § §a § § I §§ § § § E § § ,, gg %/ ’ /, “ «2 1 : ; I; N, to - ', i : , _ 2" ; 9’ 5 'e / r ’ _, ' . u 1 ’ = i g N §T § § § § SE E E 3 ga g g i a s é w i g s i a g g g ”5 , 2 : «’ . “" ° // \ 1' lI 3% E: kq ‘ * : § k “i:2 EE E gi g g g g g g g ag g g ‘ é 59 % . (v // \B ) II ! E :52 ; gé z é a é é g s ‘ i éz z g g g ? m s z é ? g é : g i ' é i z ' ,/ a: .HI I} . I" 5& 2 : $5 w a“ : =s ‘ Ei ' g i - s s % bi : I $3 ; Ei g i i i ii i é g é é z é é i é g i i ? g g é é é - E g i i I : . l 11 . ; 3% ! a Q fr i v ‘ a i ? é 52 - w - H 3 5' 3 ? I [l g : r 7' E g§ § = g £ § § h 5 f § § § g é ? g ? g § § £ 3 2 3 3 ; $2 9 3 II : 3 E; " gi g ” E i g i s i é é é E § § § § § § E E E E § § § § E § § ~ § g” I Hi ; E; E9; & ' b EQ “ I 1' V \§ “r w ‘4 ” . E i 3 EN .3 " 1“E g g E{go I If I I I I I I I IIIII II i IIIIH: F} ; I n I I ; II . I H: .. . | I I,5' IIII II 8; II 33 : H7 Es : II' 52% H 51% {I kg ! In 5; ! “ ‘3 li d :5 I: If 2 ‘g g ' I‘ E E} II : §E n § § IE 55 % ; {1 $ Eg g ; 3‘ 5° 4: 3 a; :I w; l . 4 :L1 §§ § E § I I' “ I IE I I‘ ! I II I It ] , _ I Ii i II I $3 ! ' | :5 } J '~ ' § § S § § _% _ _ 4* .1 rm : mu m Pa g e 6 4 o f 1 7 4 tau!25..5:225. £5 . 1 3 :5 3 . . . a. . . KHz-1:5.— .E g r i n 4 § Ca n c u n : N5 ca:2.gE 13 a n . kW 5. 5 % I?!:8.I.3 Lm ? :2 Bk : ER 3: : a. .9 ?scal—IE. .t a n a p a n — Q — Ka n - p l a n s ; cniniwn—B» 38 5 9 . En g “ ! 5- 8 £892.85; ii i - : 9 CR ! “ .3 8.;v.3 ,K W ! ! S § 53 . 5 . ” q u rennincng RE S - . 2 C “R E . can:FE E . lm l v n £4 : 53 Itl????-wu. TF 3 .3 . 1 5. Lt?lr._.5. ii i - . 8 a. Ir w i n ; : n 53:235.. §g . n . § (a n ; Id ; :3«?xanE.— .. A ? '3 . 3 v3 .E v a u 23 H g .t.‘5:I5.. ‘K R II 3 .9 ER Sn - R g {REuw‘g .E ' 13 . I .5 Ra m wa y : 3 5. . high—KLE- Ea l s . I? :8 3 . . - E5 4 ,H3.13 €3 1 . 4 3 3 on Bi . 1. 9 NE :2 a. . . a. EL F R724:A!.15!!!.....HhNo-?aH!NRaNFNSQM.la.4.£35...I 5h.1!Sign3:Hull.m....9:uzhhiahJNNWVNUV!’n53...EE-.-$§:.E§EsPufas?un?vza?vnuhsu?kf?a?a?irii?se??n55:55:33asazin?sag?uv?g.§.§§!=ztnugii!!§:§§¥§=§:l‘i—ddgbr<izl§§§1§dg_h5553ngE9:Vbt?k?uh.N93;.150,at ; 5!.9:33..rain-5:. il l u l i i s g ...i .5 3 5 .a. .. . . maths:.538IEens........:3:?ns . . . 53 . . . . . . u? a...»5.9;..695.5.1‘}\szCS“.2a...<.Ig§§§.§.EiEI—3§\giggéglni.x§§§!Mk». :9 . 2. .. . - . 8 .5 1 . : 1‘..il..i:alx:.?i€l.k=u!.?§¥dlugdK».95:....—X {2 ! — !9 : a: Ii i : 83 3 .....ktlav.85:BE:.2!an.6.3 2 2 69 p. 3 3 8 : 9: 51 . 3 2 . . EVER!.5§25].:41in§:u3.§14.hin0.._...v.F....a........-w..55..9.S.3:—3..l.ariaa....53 . . xi Sa l .. . .. . - k 95 2 n y a n....I.........H.,.3....2.:7...an...a... Si . .. . . . . .. . - e . .. . .. . : i . a .. Ixv\‘1‘.....:35...!,k.2...“.3E5. £5 8 51 : : B 5. 8 ! a. . . ?t .3.31.5.:.....:525:3_!=Ba§l.¢li§5a§ihn?ii§?§3..:aHui...InE.E.:§au3§§¥h!xiauéu§t§;.:...:u...?.‘Fund-1. [It 333ESE...-3:g.Si“1%.in ....3.5:.«a.....3 .. m m ? b k 1‘.8“mm“m..A‘Vm..lu-:—....._z.._...25.«.5!.3a.!.311..1....128...aging?!....5......“.3...”a:.H...._...;....N.a.145+._....aa.«1...:. i.. . mthmew$52be:.......:,.....a.Z ...a . .. u... ...tsi».....rm...,.manual..S. . . ._.._“a._.z..u 1 iii....Hullhis......3...1,. .. . . ~ P. ., .4.“..._.y.ya]....I......... L ? , . ..._...a.»._....._.....t.,. _ gé??§¥3.9:a:.523...!Rd:.1!a:.........—?,......2».:.......z . . x giggggggggpipggg....,-4:.3...3 v . .. . kb.a.Lab..i....»r.......a5z ._ .u:ii“mam.8.._.J.a: . .a.......8......2!E.a....2:usa;.a504.3“.leJinan-434:.Jig.....a... . u.\58,.he.ISayH..5.3 .. .. «a.fag:Siam...Bit:2.5:3:......minEdit?. , ..t..I“an.«a . .......... .. . a: ...is!.a.5..uai.vwe:..5.ant.5...:I:14.»:k..._.52...35....» _ .. ._ ..,.83.!....:3!le..._ .932....33!aily..3....B.....Ed5.3...1_5.5 .. HE,...8.r..om.B.can!1.1.._...n...;....?..w v. i.....n.hu.was......KW.mm..........2..... ..,,a......1x. . . :5.me..2,.2...._.y..2n .H. a. . . :..:0.‘ . .....AEu _5.. 2 . ...“M55!.2:.n.5..o lr ? y ....a....E... ._ r x. ....a.L..5_ .. . . ._n......6.a....diq.it....s....ml:.....,e .a..r,....5...EIn...I..L..a.l.1......n...........«wanUrn-aw.é.AEducaIa.....um..3...........8r.:.:aa...349...:?aw......33as.85$2..:uB5:5!:...:.23.Eaa,“”gush....53gm.‘.1%.?!.5Kimkgmnm?ezub....bQQNKNMSRQQa?quw?”$.38EEEEK.8me.6EB5335......_ES...iswhimanhuts:sang.amargin.KN2283.BBREESENSESMME(S.653...wE.233M26WWEQKIWQE35..thkm3:135”: ”E D M O ? . ~5 1 Pa g e 6 5 o f 1 7 4 VAC2025-003 Page 66 of 174 Page 67 of 174 Item:Westerly 20'Tierra Vida Phase One ROW Vacation Applicant(s):DuaIte,Ortega &Mu?oz File #:VAC 2025—003 Vicinity Eureka Ava 506 rpm F:‘ ',‘1 J v 3302 3335 33m 3314 MM 3433 3m -'_.1r Pa g e 6 8 o f 1 7 4 Resolution Setting PH for ROW Vacation (VAC2025-003) - 1 RESOLUTION NO. 4692 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON SETTING 7:00 PM, FEBRUARY 17, 2026, AS THE TIME AND DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE VACATION OF THE WESTERLY 20 FEET OF TIERRA VIDA PHASE ONE, AS ESTABLISHED BY AUDITOR’S FILE NUMBER 1691585. WHEREAS, from time to time in response to petitions or in cases where it serves the general interest of the City of Pasco, the City Council may vacate rights-of-way; and WHEREAS, a petition for vacation of the westerly 20 feet of the right-of-way dedicated through the Tierra Vida Phase One Final Plat, as established by Auditor’s File Number 1691585 by owners of more than two-thirds abutting the part of the street and alley to be vacated has been submitted to the City; and WHEREAS, the vacation process, by petition application, provided in the Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) Chapter 12.40 requires a survey, title report, an appraisal of value, and compensation unless waived by City Council; and WHEREAS, the City may waive the requirements for a survey pursuant to PMC Section 12.40.110 if the location and legal description of the street or alley proposed for vacation is sufficiently known to the City such that an accurate legal description can be determined with certainty without a survey; and WHEREAS, pursuant to PMC Section 12.40.120, compensation for vacated rights-of- way, an appraisal and title report may be waived if one or more of the following are applicable: the vacation is initiated by Council resolution; the vacation is at the request of the City; the right- of-way to be vacated was previously determined by Council not to be essential to public traffic circulation and is available for vacation; the grant of a substitute right-of-way has value as a right- of-way at least equal to the right-of-way to be vacated; or the resulting benefit to the community of the project requiring vacation outweighs the appraised value of the right-of-way to be vacated; and WHEREAS, the City staff is requesting that Council make a determination concerning whether to waive the requirements of a title report, appraisal of value, and compensation pursuant to PMC 12.40.120(2) after holding a public hearing; and WHEREAS, PMC Section 12.40.040 requires public hearings on vacations to be fixed by resolution, and to provide notice for such hearing which shall occur no later than sixty (60) days after, nor earlier than twenty (20) days after, the passage of this Resolution setting a public hearing. Page 69 of 174 Resolution Setting PH for ROW Vacation (VAC2025-003) - 2 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON: Notice of Hearing. That a public hearing to consider vacating the following as described below and depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto, will be held before City Council of the City of Pasco in the Council Chambers at 525 N. Third Avenue, Pasco, Washington at the hour of 7:00 p.m., on the 17th day of February 2026: THAT PORTION OF THAT 20.00' WIDE STRIP DEDICATED AS PUBLIC ROAD RIGHT OF WAY ON THE PLAT OF TIERRA VIDA, PHASE ONE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME D OF PLATS, PAGE 317, RECORDS OF FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASINGTON, SITUATE IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 9 NORTH, RANGE 30 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF PASCO, FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 27; THENCE NORTH 0°03'30" EAST 485.01 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 27 TO THE WESTERLY MOST SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PLAT OF TIERRA VIDA PHASE ONE AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 0°03'30" EAST 355.11 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID PLAT TO THE WESTERLY MOST NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 89°00'18" EAST 20.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PLAT TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 6 OF SAID PLAT; THENCE SOUTH 0°03'30" WEST 354.88 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINES OF LOTS 6, 5, AND 4 OF SAID PLAT TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 4; THENCE NORTH 89°38'17"WEST 20.00 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PLAT TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Be It Further Resolved, that the City Clerk of the City of Pasco give notice of said public hearing as required by law. Be It Further Resolved, that the City Council will decide whether to waive the requirements for an appraisal, title report, and compensation after the February 17, 2026, public hearing. Be It Further Resolved, that this Resolution shall take effect immediately. Page 70 of 174 Resolution Setting PH for ROW Vacation (VAC2025-003) - 3 PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, this 5th day of January, 2026. CharlesGrimmMayor ATTEST: Debra Barham, MMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ogden Murphy Wallace, PPC City Attorney Page 71 of 174 Page 72 of 174 Page 73 of 174 Pasco City Council February 17, 2026 Regular Meeting Pa g e 7 4 o f 1 7 4 Public Hearing & Ordinance for a Right-of-Way Vacation of the Westerly 20’ of Tierra Vida Phase One- VAC2025-003 February 17, 2026 Pasco City Council Pa g e 7 5 o f 1 7 4 01 History 02 PMC 03 Vicinity Map 04 Timeline Pa g e 7 6 o f 1 7 4 HISTORY TIERRA VIDA PHASE ONE FINAL PLAT-2006 ORDINANCE 4646-2023 Pa g e 7 7 o f 1 7 4 VAC 2025-003 Westerly 20’ Tierra Vida Phase One Right-of-Way Vacation Public Hearing & Ordinance City Council Vacation Approval Criteria The City Council considers the following when reviewing a vacation petition: 1.Traffic Circulation The vacation must not negatively impact traffic accessibility or circulation in the area or the City as a whole. 2.Future Public Use The right-of-way must not be planned or needed for future public purposes. 3.Property Access No adjacent property should become landlocked or experience significantly reduced access as a result of the vacation. 4.Public Interest The vacation must not harm public needs and should offer a public benefit or serve a public purpose. PMC 12.40.120 Compensation and Appraisal Compensation for the vacated area and an appraisal may be waived in whole or in part • A larger and more valuable substitute public right-of-way was previously provided. This action corrects the record for a right-of- way vacation ordinance already adopted, as the substitute right-of-way includes infrastructure and public benefits that exceed the area proposed for vacation, justifying the waiver of appraisal and compensation requirements. Pa g e 7 8 o f 1 7 4 Pa g e 7 9 o f 1 7 4 January 5, 2026 •Resolution setting 7:00PM, February 17, 2026, as the time and date for a public hearing. Tonight -February 17, 2026 •Public hearing. •Following the public hearing, the City Council may act by ordinance to vacate the right-of-way. After-February 17, 2026 •Upon adoption and recording, petitioners will be notified and will formally acquire the land intended to be conveyed under Ordinance 4646. VAC 2025-003 Right-of-Way Vacation Process Timeline Pa g e 8 0 o f 1 7 4 Questions? Thank you! Pa g e 8 1 o f 1 7 4 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council January 22, 2026 TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/17/26 FROM: Haylie Matson, Director Community & Economic Development SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 4815 - Code Amendment Allowing Sandwich Board Signs within the Downtown Pasco Overlay District (CA2025-002) (5 minute staff presentation) I. ATTACHMENT(S): Ordinance Exhibit A - Report to Planning Commission December 18, 2025 PC Meeting Minutes January 15, 2026 PC Meeting Minutes Power Point Presentation II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4815, amending Title 17 (Sign Code) of the Pasco Municipal Code to establish regulations allowing sandwich board signs within the Downtown Pasco Overlay District and, further, authorize publication by summary only. III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: Background: On September 18, 2006, the City of Pasco adopted a comprehensive update to Title 17 (Sign Code) through Ordinance No. 3790, which introduced the definition of sandwich or A-frame signs. As of September 1, 2006, private signs placed within the public right-of-way were prohibited, and that restriction has remained in effect for more than 19 years, despite the continued use of sandwich board signs by businesses. At the direction of the City Council and the City Manager’s Office, staff is proposing a focused code amendment to permit sandwich board signs within Page 82 of 174 the Downtown Pasco Overlay District, subject to specific regulatory conditions. The amendment was reviewed during a Planning Commission workshop on December 18, 2025, prior to the public hearing held on January 15, 2026. In accordance with Pasco Municipal Code requirements, public notice of the proposal was posted at City Hall on December 23, 2025, and published in the Tri-City Herald on December 31, 2025 for the public hearing. a during City with discussed Council was ordinance proposed The also workshop on February 9, 2026. During that workshop, Council did not provide direction to modify the proposed code amendments but raised questions regarding outreach related to the code change in light of public feedback received from downtown business owners. Written comments were submitted prior to the meeting, and public testimony was provided during the workshop by downtown business owners. Following that feedback, staff incorporated several targeted revisions to the proposed ordinance for Council’s consideration to provide additional flexibility for businesses. Impact (other than fiscal): The proposed amendment allows limited use of sandwich board signs in the Downtown Pasco Overlay District under clear, enforceable standards. This change supports business visibility and downtown activation while ensuring pedestrian safety, ADA accessibility, and adequate sight distance. By providing a legal framework for these signs, the City can reduce informal or unsafe placement practices and allow Code Enforcement staff to focus on other priorities. V. DISCUSSION: Conclusion & Recommendation: Staff and the Planning Commission find that the originally proposed code amendment is consistent with the request initiated by the City Council and the City Manager’s Office and fulfills the intent of that request. Accordingly, staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed code amendment adoption the of through February 9, on presented 2026, associated ordinance. Following the February 9, 2026, Council workshop and feedback from downtown business owners, staff incorporated several targeted revisions to the proposed ordinance. These revisions were not reviewed by the Planning Commission. Council may choose to approve the ordinance as revised tonight or remand the proposal back to the Planning Commission for additional review if the Council determines the revisions to be substantial. Staff’s assessment is that the revisions primarily add flexibility related to sign placement and frontage-based Page 83 of 174 allowances. While the updated proposal may allow somewhat more signage than significant the consider not changes staff proposed, originally does enough to require additional Planning Commission review. Accordingly, staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed code amendment through adoption of the associated ordinance. Constraints (Time or other considerations): Because this is an internally initiated legislative action, there are no set time constraints in the Pasco Municipal Code for adoption. The City Council may pause consideration at its discretion, refer the proposal back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration, and bring the matter forward again at a later date. The only timing requirements that apply are the minimum public notice periods associated with any public hearing, should the Council determine that a hearing is appropriate. Staff Summary of the proposed amendment: The proposed amendment makes targeted and clarifying changes to the Sign Code. It updates an existing sign definition to include the word “board,” adds Sub note 18 to allow sandwich board signs within the public right-of-way only in the Downtown Pasco Overlay District, and establishes a new section, PMC 17.15.025, entitled “Sandwich Board Signs.” the public and meeting to Based submitted comments written on prior testimony provided by downtown business and property owners, staff identified several stakeholder requests for Council’s consideration in order to offer additional flexibility to business owners while maintaining safety, administrative clarity, and the City’s broader sign regulations. The proposed ordinance now allows limited placement of a sandwich board sign on the same block face with written permission from the property owner or business owner at the proposed location. Signs placed under this provision count toward the maximum number of signs permitted for the business granting permission. The ordinance also includes a frontage-based allowance for sandwich board signs. Each tenant with building frontage is permitted one sandwich board sign. One additional sandwich board sign is allowed for each 30 lineal feet of tenant frontage beyond the first 30 lineal feet. Tenants located on corner lots may place sandwich board signs on either or both facades adjacent to the public sidewalk, provided the total number of signs does not exceed the number permitted based on tenant frontage. This approach aligns sign allowances with typical downtown storefront widths while maintaining pedestrian safety and a consistent streetscape. Allowing one additional sandwich board sign per 30 feet of lineal frontage creates a proportional standard that recognizes differences in storefront Page 84 of 174 size while maintaining reasonable limits to prevent sidewalk clutter. The frontage- based administered be that standard can clear, a provides calculation objective consistently. This structure balances business visibility needs with the City’s responsibility to manage the public right-of-way safely and equitably. Legal staff recommends retaining the indemnification provision because public not is Staff right-of-way. the board placed are signs sandwich in proposing changes to awning clearance requirements at this time but will continue researching potential alternative signage options to address visibility concerns. Next Steps: The City Clerk’s Office will record it with the Franklin County Auditor and coordinate with General Code to ensure the updated code is published and effective on the adoption date. Alternatives:  Take No Action Sandwich board signs would continue to be prohibited within the public right-of-way, maintaining the status quo.  Expand Allowance Citywide Extending the allowance for sandwich board signs throughout the entire City of Pasco could increase benefits for businesses, but would require additional analysis, public outreach, and policy consideration before implementation. Page 85 of 174 Ordinance – Amending PMC Title 17 – Sign Code - 1 ORDINANCE NO. 4815 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, AMENDING PASCO MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 17 SIGN CODE RELATED TO SANDWICH BOARD SIGNS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Pasco adopted a new Sign Code and repealed the previous Sign Code through Ordinance 3790 in 2006; and WHEREAS, the City of Pasco adopted the first comprehensive Downtown Pasco Master Plan in January of 2023; and WHEREAS, the Downtown Pasco Master Plan includes a vision for creating a Downtown that provides flexibility for signage; and WHEREAS, the City of Pasco recognizes the allowance of Sandwich Board Signs within public right-of-way to be of benefit to downtown businesses. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The definition of “Sign – sandwich board or A-frame” contained in PMC Section 17.10.010 is hereby amended as follows: “Sign – sandwich board or A-frame” means a temporary portable two-faced board-style sign that is readily movable and has no permanent attachment to a building, structure, or the ground. Section 2. PMC Section 17.15.010, Interpretation of sign allowance table, is hereby amended as follows: 17.15.010 Interpretation of sign allowance table. (1)The sign allowance table, as incorporated herein, determines whether a specific sign is allowed in a zone district or by land use activity. The zone district or land use activity is identified in the left column and the specific sign allowances are located in the rows of the table. (2)If no symbol or number appears in the table box at the intersection of the column and row, the sign is not allowed in that category or is not subject to an allowance. Page 86 of 174 Ordinance – Amending PMC Title 17 – Sign Code - 2 (3) If a number appears in the table box at the intersection of the column and row or in the column or row heading, the sign may be allowed subject to the appropriate requirement and specific conditions indicated in the table footnotes. (4) All applicable requirements shall govern a sign whether or not the requirements are cross- referenced in the table. Sign Allowance Table Permit requirement | Material restrictions | | Number of signs | | | Allowable surface area in sq. ft. (1) | | | | Height in feet (2) | | | | | Projection over ROW to curb line | | | | | | Spacing in linear feet (3) | | | | | | | Visible ground plane/passage area (4) | | | | | | | | Setback from adjacent property line | | | | | | | | | Setback from ROW in feet (5) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Duration (days) | | | | | | | | | | | Notes | | | | | | | | | | | | Access, landmark, and informational signs - all zones entry/exit freestanding pedestal/pole sign yes durable 1 4 4 5 0 per exit/entry landmark wall sign/plaque yes durable 1 10 8 5 0 per building frontage informational - private (6) wall sign no durable 1 2 8 5 0 per building frontage freestanding pedestal/pole sign no durable 1 6 4 5 0 per street frontage informational - public wall sign no durable 1 2 8 5 0 per building frontage freestanding pedestal/pole sign no durable 1 6 4 5 0 per street frontage Permanent signs Residential districts - RT, R-S-20, R-S-12, R-S-1, R-1, RFAH-1/1A, R-2, R-3, R-4, RMHP Page 87 of 174 Ordinance – Amending PMC Title 17 – Sign Code - 3 Sign Allowance Table Permit requirement | Material restrictions | | Number of signs | | | Allowable surface area in sq. ft. (1) | | | | Height in feet (2) | | | | | Projection over ROW to curb line | | | | | | Spacing in linear feet (3) | | | | | | | Visible ground plane/passage area (4) | | | | | | | | Setback from adjacent property line | | | | | | | | | Setback from ROW in feet (5) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Duration (days) | | | | | | | | | | | Notes | | | | | | | | | | | | identification - dwelling unit wall sign no durable 1 2 8 5 0 per property freestanding pedestal/pole sign (17) no durable 1 2 4 5 0 per property identification - bldg complex wall sign yes durable 1 24 20 5 0 per building frontage freestanding pedestal/pole sign (17) yes durable 1 24 4 5 0 per street frontage daycare facility wall sign yes durable 1 16 20 5 0 per building frontage commercial freestanding pedestal/pole sign (17) yes durable 1 16 15 5 0 per street frontage school/religious use (15) wall sign yes durable 1 24 20 5 0 per building frontage freestanding pedestal/pole sign (17) yes durable 1 40 15 5 0 per street frontage freestanding marquee/readerboard sign (17) yes durable 1 24 15 5 0 per street frontage Office/commercial districts - O, C-1, C-2, C-3, C-R, BP, I-1, I-2, I-3 Composite allowance - all sign surfaces Page 88 of 174 Ordinance – Amending PMC Title 17 – Sign Code - 4 Sign Allowance Table Permit requirement | Material restrictions | | Number of signs | | | Allowable surface area in sq. ft. (1) | | | | Height in feet (2) | | | | | Projection over ROW to curb line | | | | | | Spacing in linear feet (3) | | | | | | | Visible ground plane/passage area (4) | | | | | | | | Setback from adjacent property line | | | | | | | | | Setback from ROW in feet (5) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Duration (days) | | | | | | | | | | | Notes | | | | | | | | | | | | maximum per sign window sign (11) no transparent na 25% 15 per building/street frontage awning sign per business yes durable 1 24 15 (2) 8 may extend over walkway canopy sign yes maintained na 25% 24 (2) 8 may extend over walkway wall sign yes durable na 25% na 14 0 blade/projecting sign yes durable 1 125 (2) (2) 5 0 freestanding pedestal sign yes durable 1 350 15 0 5 0 freestanding marquee/readerboard sign (17) yes durable 1 48 15 5 0 per street frontage freestanding pole - tenant directory sign (17) yes durable 1 12 35 0 6 5 0 up to 12 tenants per sign freestanding pole sign (17) yes durable 1 350 35 0 6 5 0 freestanding billboard sign (7)(17) yes durable 1 250 35 0 500 6 5 0 Maximum 25 billboard sign structures in City. freestanding digital billboard sign (7)(17) yes durable 1 250 35 0 500 6 5 0 Page 89 of 174 Ordinance – Amending PMC Title 17 – Sign Code - 5 Sign Allowance Table Permit requirement | Material restrictions | | Number of signs | | | Allowable surface area in sq. ft. (1) | | | | Height in feet (2) | | | | | Projection over ROW to curb line | | | | | | Spacing in linear feet (3) | | | | | | | Visible ground plane/passage area (4) | | | | | | | | Setback from adjacent property line | | | | | | | | | Setback from ROW in feet (5) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Duration (days) | | | | | | | | | | | Notes | | | | | | | | | | | | off-premises directional sign (14) yes durable 1 5 15 5 0 Commercial/industrial districts - C-3, C-R, BP, I-1, I-2, I-3 maximum per sign freeway sign yes durable 1 350 70 500 6 35 35 per freeway frontage per freeway or freeway interchange (9) sign yes durable 1 480 70 500 6 35 35 per 15-acre site minimum frontage property and freeway readerboard (9) sign yes durable 1 150 35 500 6 35 35 per 15-acre site minimum Limited duration signs Undeveloped property Residential freestanding pedestal/pole sign yes durable 1 24 8 5 0 15 after closing - lot - tract freestanding pedestal/pole sign yes durable 1 60 8 5 0 15 after last closing Commercial freestanding pedestal/pole sign yes durable 1 24 8 5 0 15 after closing - lot - tract freestanding pedestal/pole sign yes durable 1 60 8 5 0 15 after closing Page 90 of 174 Ordinance – Amending PMC Title 17 – Sign Code - 6 Sign Allowance Table Permit requirement | Material restrictions | | Number of signs | | | Allowable surface area in sq. ft. (1) | | | | Height in feet (2) | | | | | Projection over ROW to curb line | | | | | | Spacing in linear feet (3) | | | | | | | Visible ground plane/passage area (4) | | | | | | | | Setback from adjacent property line | | | | | | | | | Setback from ROW in feet (5) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Duration (days) | | | | | | | | | | | Notes | | | | | | | | | | | | Construction wall/banner sign yes durable 1 24 8 5 0 const freestanding pedestal/pole sign yes durable 1 32 8 5 0 const Real estate sales/rentals per building or property Residential zones window/poster sign no 1 2 0 15 after closing freestanding pedestal/pole sign (10) no durable 1 6 8 5 0 15 after closing freestanding sign (10) no durable 2 2 8 5 0 15 after closing Commercial zones (12) window/poster sign no 1 2 0 15 after closing wall/banner sign no durable 1 6 20 5 0 15 after closing freestanding pedestal/pole sign (9) no durable 1 6 8 5 0 15 after closing Temporary signs Open house - real estate sales sandwich - directional (10) no durable 4 6 4 5 0 after event sandwich - site (10) no durable 1 6 4 5 0 after event Special event - sales, charities, etc. Page 91 of 174 Ordinance – Amending PMC Title 17 – Sign Code - 7 Sign Allowance Table Permit requirement | Material restrictions | | Number of signs | | | Allowable surface area in sq. ft. (1) | | | | Height in feet (2) | | | | | Projection over ROW to curb line | | | | | | Spacing in linear feet (3) | | | | | | | Visible ground plane/passage area (4) | | | | | | | | Setback from adjacent property line | | | | | | | | | Setback from ROW in feet (5) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Duration (days) | | | | | | | | | | | Notes | | | | | | | | | | | | Schools, churches, parks, farmers mkt, Xmas trees sandwich - directional (10) no durable 4 6 4 5 0 after event sandwich - site (10) no durable 1 6 4 5 0 after event window poster no na 50% after event window banner no durable 1 16 0 after event wall sign/banner no durable 1 64 20 5 0 after event banner - mounted freestanding pole no durable 1 10 20 (2) 8 5 0 after event marquee/readerboard - portable no durable 1 18 4 5 0 after event balloons (12) no biodegradable 15 20 5 after event Residential zones sandwich - directional (10) no durable 2 6 4 5 0 after event sandwich - site (10) no durable 1 6 4 5 0 after event Commercial zones sandwich - directional (10) no durable 2 6 4 5 0 after event sandwich - site (10) no durable 1 6 4 (18) 5 (18) 0 (18) after event Page 92 of 174 Ordinance – Amending PMC Title 17 – Sign Code - 8 Sign Allowance Table Permit requirement | Material restrictions | | Number of signs | | | Allowable surface area in sq. ft. (1) | | | | Height in feet (2) | | | | | Projection over ROW to curb line | | | | | | Spacing in linear feet (3) | | | | | | | Visible ground plane/passage area (4) | | | | | | | | Setback from adjacent property line | | | | | | | | | Setback from ROW in feet (5) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Duration (days) | | | | | | | | | | | Notes | | | | | | | | | | | | window poster no na 50% after event window banner no durable 1 16 0 after event wall sign/banner no durable 1 64 20 5 0 after event banner - mounted freestanding pole no durable 1 16 20 (2) 8 5 0 after event marquee/readerboard - portable no durable 1 18 4 5 0 after event balloons (12) no biodegradable 15 20 5 after event inflatables (13) yes nonflammable 1 350 70 250 5 0 after event SR-12/395 and I-182 inflatables (13) yes nonflammable 1 350 70 500 5 0 after event Political (16) freestanding no durable na 6 4 5 0 10 after election 1 The area within a continuous perimeter enclosing the outer limits of the sign face, but not including structural elements, which are not a part of the display. The area of a two-sided sign equals the area of one side. The area of a spherical, cubical, or polyhedral sign equals 1/2 the total surface area. 2 Height: measured from the average finished grade at the sign foundation. Page 93 of 174 Ordinance – Amending PMC Title 17 – Sign Code - 9 Awning signs shall be at least 8 and no more than 16 feet above the walkway. Blade/projecting signs shall not extend more than 10 feet above the building facade or 6 feet from the face of the building. 3 Spacing: the linear distance between signs, or sign structures, in feet. 4 The area under the sign that shall be free of obstructions to allow passage of pedestrians and vehicles. 5 Setback: shall be that portion of any sign or sign structure that is closest to the property line. 6 Private informational signs must be for an original purpose and may not simply repeat the same message over and over. 7 Signs visible from Washington State Highways may be subject to the Highway Advertising Control Act of 1971 and require approval by the Washington State Department of Transportation in additional to local approval. 8 On private property adjacent to an arterial road: not within 100 feet of a public street intersection, 300 feet of a residential district, within 250 feet of a freestanding sign of 200 sf of display area. 9 Freeway interchange signs must be located within 1,000 feet of an interchange, and 300 feet of ROW, on site of business on a minimum 15-acre site. 10 Square feet per one face of a two-sided sandwich board. 11 Window signs may include credit card logos and advertise hours of operation and address. 12 Balloons shall be no larger than 18 inches in diameter, not attached to a roofline. 13 Inflatables shall be securely anchored to the ground and not create a traffic or other hazard in the event of deflation. Inflatables shall be measured by square feet of surface volume. 14 Off-premises directional signs shall be of the material, color, lettering font, and structure specified by the Building Official. 15 Excepting Pasco High School Bulldogs stadium sign. 16 Campaign signs on private property are limited to 32 square feet in size. Page 94 of 174 Ordinance – Amending PMC Title 17 – Sign Code - 10 17 Permanent freestanding pole signs are not allowed within the downtown core, as illustrated in PMC 25.95.050(2) of the downtown Pasco overlay zone. 18 Sandwich board signs may be located within the public right-of-way only within the Downtown Pasco Overlay District, subject to requirements of PMC 17.15.025. Section 3. A new section 17.15.025, entitled “Sandwich Board Signs,” is hereby adopted to read as follows: 17.15.025 Sandwich Board Signs - Downtown Pasco Overlay District Sandwich board signs located within the Downtown Pasco Overlay District shall comply with the regulations identified as “sandwich - site(10).” in the PMC 17.15.010 Sign Allowance Table, as referenced under Temporary signs, Special event - sales, charities, etc. - Commercial zones, in addition to the requirements outlined below. (1) Placement Area. (a) Signs shall be located on the business frontage or parcel frontage addressed by the business. (b) Where no building exists on a parcel, signage shall be limited to the frontage of that parcel. (c) A sign may be placed on the same block face in front of another business only with written permission from the property owner or business owner at the proposed sign location. Such placement shall count toward the maximum number of signs permitted for the business granting permission. Written permission shall be maintained by the business placing the sign and provided to the city upon request. (d) Signs shall be located between the sidewalk and the curb. Placement on private property is permitted at the discretion of the business owner. In areas with unimproved right-of-way, signs shall be restricted to the road verge or parcel. (e) Signs shall not block building entrances, stairways, private driveway access, or other points of access. (2) Sign Limit. Each tenant with building frontage is permitted one sandwich board sign. One additional sandwich board sign is allowed for each 30 lineal feet of tenant frontage beyond the first 30 lineal feet. (a) Tenants located on corner lots may place sandwich board signs on either or both façades adjacent to the public sidewalk, provided the total number of signs does not exceed the number permitted based on tenant frontage. (3) Hours of Display. Signs may be displayed only during the operating hours of the establishment. (4) Intersection Placement. Corner lot businesses shall place their sandwich board sign at the point along the frontage that is furthest from the intersection while still fronting the business. Where this is not feasible, a minimum clearance of ten (10) feet from the actual radius curb line or road verge Page 95 of 174 Ordinance – Amending PMC Title 17 – Sign Code - 11 shall be maintained to ensure adequate sight distance for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. (5) Liability. The sign owner shall indemnify and hold the City and its agents, employees, and/or officers harmless from and shall process and defend at its own expense any and all claims, demands, suits, at law or equity, actions, penalties, loss, damages, or costs, of whatsoever kind or nature, brought against the City arising out of, or in connection with, or incident to, the placement of a sandwich board sign; provided, however, that if such claims are caused by or result from the concurrent negligence of the City, its agents, employees, and/or officers, this indemnity provision shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of the negligence of the sign owner; and provided further, that nothing herein shall require the sign owner to hold harmless or defend the City, its agents, employees, and/or officers for damages or loss caused by the City’s sole negligence. (6) Prohibited Mounting. Signs shall not be affixed to, mounted upon, or placed on vehicles parked in the public right-of-way. (7) Removal and Return of Violations. (a) Signs placed in violation of this section may be removed by the City. (b) Signs removed more than twice from public property may be destroyed; otherwise, removed signs may be returned to the owner. (8) ADA Compliance. (a) Signs shall preserve accessible pedestrian routes at all times. (b) Signs shall not encroach into any portion of a handicapped ramp. (9) Prohibited Locations. (a) Signs shall not be placed within travel lanes, medians, or roundabouts. (b) Signs shall not be placed within fire hydrant clear zones, utility poles, or transit stops. (10) Sign Stability and Maintenance Requirements. Signs shall be constructed and installed in a manner that prevents tipping, falling, or displacement from their intended location due to wind or other conditions. All signs shall be maintained in good repair and in a safe, orderly condition at all times. Section 4. PMC Section 17.15.040(3) is hereby amended as follows: (3) Private signs placed in or upon a public right-of-way, except as expressly provided herein; (a) Sandwich board signs located within the public right-of-way in the Downtown Pasco Overlay District shall comply with PMC 17.15.025. Section 5. PMC Section 17.25.030, Traffic obstruction and visibility, is hereby amended as follows: 17.25.030 Traffic obstruction and visibility. Page 96 of 174 Ordinance – Amending PMC Title 17 – Sign Code - 12 (1) No sign shall be erected so as to obstruct the vision of vehicular traffic, or at any location where it may interfere with, or be confused with, any traffic signal or device. (2) No sign or sign structure, except sandwich board signs located within the Downtown Pasco Overlay District, which shall comply with PMC 17.15.025, shall be erected within the vision triangle of a corner lot property measured (20 feet along the property line from the intersection of two streets or 15 feet from the intersection of a street and alley). Section 6. PMC Section 17.35.010, Generally, is hereby amended as follows: 17.35.010 Generally. Except where otherwise specifically permitted by this codetitle, it shall be unlawful and constitute a civil infraction for any person or entity to erect, maintain, locate, or relocate any off- premises sign of any kind within the City of Pasco. Section 7. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this ordinance should be held to the invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, subsection, sentence, clause phrase or word of this ordinance. Section 8. Corrections. Upon approval by the city attorney, the city clerk or the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including scrivener’s errors or clerical mistakes; reference to other local, state, or federal laws, rules, or regulations; or numbering or referencing of ordinances or their sections and subsections. Section 9. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after approval, passage and publication as required by law. Page 97 of 174 Ordinance – Amending PMC Title 17 – Sign Code - 13 PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington this ___ day of _____, 202_. _____________________________ Charles Grimm Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ ___________________________ Krystle Shanks, CMC Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC City Clerk City Attorney Published: _____________________________ Page 98 of 174 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers THURSDAY, JANUARY 15, 2026 6:30 PM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Ivan Barragan, Planner III SUBJECT: Public Hearing - Code Amendment (CA 2025-002) – Sandwich Board Signs within public right-of-way in the Downtown Pasco Overlay District File Number: CA 2025-002 Applicant: City of Pasco Description: Allowance of sandwich board signs in the public right-of-way exclusively within the Downtown Pasco Overlay District, subject to specified provisions. Environmental Determination This amendment is exempt from an environmental determination under WAC 197-11-800(19), as it constitutes a text amendment that does not result in any substantive environmental impacts. Exhibits: 1 Downtown Overlay District Map 2 Proposed PMC Title 17 changes 3 Cities’ Sandwich Board Sign Codes 4 Public Hearing Notice History On September 18, 2006, the City of Pasco adopted a comprehensive update to Title 17 – Sign Code and repealed the previous code through Ordinance No. 3790. This update introduced the definition of “sign – sandwich or A-frame.” As of September 1, 2006, private signs placed in or upon the public right-of-way became prohibited, and this restriction has remained in effect for over 19 years. Background Although sandwich board signs have long been used by businesses, their placement within the public right-of-way has technically remained prohibited. With recent direction from the City Council and City Manager’s Office, staff is bringing forward a targeted amendment to allow these signs within the Downtown Pasco Overlay District under regulated conditions. Exhibit "A" Page 99 of 174 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers THURSDAY, JANUARY 15, 2026 6:30 PM On December 18, 2025, the Planning Commission and Staff held a workshop to initially discuss the proposed changes in advance of this public hearing. While the workshop generated many questions, little input was provided in terms of suggested changes. Staff has considered this discussion in preparing the proposed amendment. Notice Public notice for this proposal was posted at City Hall on December 23, 2025, and published in the Tri-City Herald on December 31, 2025, in accordance with Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 4.02.090, Public Notice, subsections (4)(a) and (b). Discussion The proposed amendment would allow sandwich board signs within sidewalk or unimproved areas of the public right-of-way in the Downtown Pasco Overlay District, provided that: x Signs are placed directly in front of the associated business, with no more than one sign per business frontage x All required Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) clearances are maintained x Signs are displayed only during business hours x Corner lot signs must be placed as far from the intersection as possible; if not feasible, maintain at least 10 feet from the curb or road edge to preserve sight distance. x Sign owner holds the City harmless x Prohibits mounting on vehicles x Clarifies prohibited sign locations This approach supports business visibility and activation of the streetscape while maintaining pedestrian safety, accessibility and preventing sign clutter. Analysis The proposed amendment provides a clear regulatory framework to allow small, pedestrian- oriented signs in sidewalk or unimproved right-of-way areas while ensuring ADA compliance and maintaining proper sight-distance standards. Key benefits include: x Increased flexibility for Downtown businesses to advertise and activate the streetscape x A regulatory mechanism to oversee placement, preventing the current situation where such signs—if used—are technically prohibited Page 100 of 174 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers THURSDAY, JANUARY 15, 2026 6:30 PM x Ability for the City to apply different sight-distance considerations for Sandwich Board Signs Alternatives 1. Take no action. Sandwich board signs would remain prohibited within the public right-of-way. 2. Allow signs in the right-of-way without regulation. This could result in ADA conflicts, liability concerns, visual clutter, and safety hazards. 3. Expand the allowance citywide. Allowing such signs throughout the entire City of Pasco would broaden benefits but would require additional analysis, outreach, and policy consideration. Recommendation & Motion Recommendation: Staff requests that the Planning Commission conduct the public hearing and support the amendment of Title 17 – Sign Code, including the creation of a new section entitled “Sandwich Board Signs.” Suggested Motion: “I move that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve Code Amendment CA 2025-002, allowing sandwich board signs within the public right-of-way only in the Downtown Pasco Overlay District, as proposed in Exhibit 2.” Page 101 of 174 &9)*#*5 Pa g e 1 0 2 o f 1 7 4 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes 17.10.010 Generally. For the purpose of this title, certain abbreviations, terms, phrases, words, and their derivatives shall be construed as specified in this chapter and are to be used only for the implementation of this title. Words used in the singular include the plural, and the plural the singular. Words used in the masculine gender include the feminine, and the feminine the masculine. “Alley” means a public street not designed for general travel and used primarily as a means of access to the rear of residences and business establishments. “Building” means any structure built for the support, shelter, or enclosure of persons, animals, chattels, or property of any kind. “Building code” means the building codes of the City adopted by PMC Title 16. “Building line” means a line established by ordinance beyond which no building may extend. “Building Official” means the Building Official of the City and/or the person designated to enforce the sign code by the City Manager. “Change of copy” means the change of a logo, and/or message upon the face or faces of a legal sign. “City” means the City of Pasco, Washington. “Community event” means a community-wide event open to the general public and sponsored by a public agency, a public or private school, or a not-for-profit civic organization. “Curb line” means the line at the face of the curb nearest to the street or roadway. In the absence of a curb, the City Engineer shall establish the curb line. “Display surface” means the area made available by the sign structure for the purpose of displaying the advertising message. “District” or “zoning district” means any district established pursuant to the provisions of PMC Title 25. Page 103 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes “Durable” means a nonbiodegradable material that withstands degradation from the elements such as weatherproof card stock, aluminum, metal, UV-protected plastics, treated or painted wood concrete, stone and similar materials. “Erects” means to build, construct, attach, place, suspend, or affix, including the painting of a wall sign. “Face of building” means the general outer surface of any exterior wall of a building or other structure. “Facade” means the entire building front or street wall face, including the grade to the top of the parapet or eaves, and the entire width of the building elevation. “Fence – subdivision” means a common fence constructed along the rear line of residential lots that back on arterial streets and constructed as part of the subdivision improvements. “Filling station, public motor fuels” means any area of land, including any structure or part thereof, that is used or designed to be used for the supply of motor fuels; also deemed to be included within this term shall be: Any area or structure used or designed to be used for polishing, greasing, washing, spraying (other than paint), dry cleaning, or otherwise cleaning or servicing such motor vehicles. “Frontage” means the measurement of the length of the property line or building front. “Hearing Examiner” means the Pasco Hearing Examiner as set forth in Chapter 25.195 PMC. “Incombustible material” means any material which will not ignite at, or below, a temperature of 1,200 degrees Fahrenheit during an exposure of five minutes, and which will not continue to burn or glow at that temperature. “Mansard roof” means a sloped roof or roof-like facade architecturally able to be treated as a building wall. “Multiple-building complex” means a group of commercial or industrial structures. “Multiple-tenant building” means a single structure that houses more than one retail business, office or commercial venture, but that does not include residential apartment buildings sharing the same lot, access and/or parking facilities. Page 104 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes “Nonconforming signs” are those which were lawfully installed, but which do not comply with the requirements of this title. “Nonstructural trim” means the molding, batons, caps, nailing strips, latticing, cutouts or letters and walkways that are attached to the sign structure. “Parapet” means a false front or wall extension above the roof line. “Parcel” means the real property on which a business is located or the portion of real property designated for use of a business. “Parcel” shall include all adjacent property used by a business including yards, parking lots, and storage yards. Where more than one business is located within a building, the property on which that building is located is considered one parcel. “Perimeter” means a square or rectangle required to enclose the sign area. “Periphery of right-of-way” means that portion of the right-of-way lying behind the street improvement. (See definition for “Street improvements.”) “Person” means and includes persons, firms, partnerships, associations, corporations, and other business entities. “Premises” means the real estate as a unit, upon which is displayed the sign or signs mentioned in this chapter. “Private road or driveway” means every way or place in private ownership and used for travel of vehicles by the owner or those having express or implied permission from the owner, but not by other persons. “Projection” means the distance by which a sign extends over public property or beyond the property line. “Right-of-way (ROW)” means that area of land dedicated for public use or secured by the public for purposes of ingress and egress to abutting property and other public purposes, including that space between the adjacent property line and the back of the street and/or sidewalk improvements. “Roadway” means that portion of a highway improved, designed, or ordinarily used for vehicular travel, exclusive of the sidewalk or shoulder. In the event a highway includes two or more separated roadways, the term “roadway” shall refer to any such roadway separately but shall not refer to all such roadways collectively. Page 105 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes “Roofline” means the top edge of a roof or parapet or the top line of a building silhouette. “Setback” means the distance measured on a horizontal plane between a public right-of-way line or a property line and the closest portion of a sign thereto. “Sidewalk” means that property between the curb lines or the lateral lines of a roadway and the adjacent property, set aside and intended for the use of pedestrians, or such portion of private property parallel and in proximity to a public highway and dedicated to use by pedestrians. “Sign” means a name, identification, description, display or illustration that is affixed to, or represented directly or indirectly upon, a building, structure, or piece of land and that directs attention to an object, product, place, activity, person, institution, organization or business. However, a “sign” shall exclude any display of official court or public office notice, emblem or insignia of a nation, political unit, school, or religious group. A “sign” shall not include a sign located completely within an enclosed building unless the public may view the sign from a roadway or sidewalk, or the context of this chapter shall so indicate. “Sign, abandoned” means a sign that no longer correctly directs or exhorts any person nor advertises a bona fide business, lessor, owner, product or activity conducted or available on the premises whereon such sign is located. “Sign area” means the total area of a sign visible from any one viewpoint or direction, excluding the sign support structure, architectural embellishments, or framework that contains no written copy, and includes only one side of a double-faced sign. Individual letter signs using a wall as the background without added decoration or change in wall color shall be calculated by measuring the perimeter enclosing each letter. The combined total area of each individual letter shall be considered the total area of the sign. Module signs consisting of more than one sign cabinet shall be computed by adding together the total area of each module. Perimeter or sign area shall be established by the smallest rectangle enclosing the extreme limits of the letter module or advertising message being measured. “Sign – awning” means a sign that is hung from and below a building awning or canopy that may extend outwards under the awning or canopy and over the walkway or parking area. “Sign – banner” means flexible material on which a sign is painted or printed that is attached to a building or displayed on the grounds. Page 106 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes “Sign – billboard” means an off-premises sign or off-premises sign structure supported by one or more uprights and braces in the ground upon which general advertising matter is placed, usually by the poster method, erected entirely upon private property. “Sign – billboard, digital” means an off-premises sign or off-premises sign structure supported by one or more uprights and braces in the ground, erected entirely upon private property, upon which general advertising messages are changed by any electronic process or remote control; provided, that the change from one message to another message is no more frequent than once every eight seconds and the actual change process is accomplished in two seconds or less. The display will operate at an illumination intensity not to exceed three-tenths (0.3) foot-candles over ambient light as measured at 150 feet and must be equipped with a light sensor that automatically adjusts the intensity of the display in real-time according to the amount of ambient light. “Sign – blade or projecting” means a sign that is wall-mounted perpendicular to the building that may extend upwards and above the facade and/or outwards and over the walkway or parking area. “Sign – business” means a sign which directs attention to a business or profession conducted, or to a commodity, service, or entertainment sold, or offered upon the premises where such sign is located, or to which it is affixed. “Sign – canopy” means a sign that is painted onto the face or edge of an awning or canopy that is mounted to the building facade. “Sign – changing message center” means an electronically controlled public service time and temperature sign, message center, or readerboard where different copy changes of a public service or commercial nature are shown on the same lamp bank. “Sign – combination” means any sign incorporating any combination of the features of freestanding, projecting and roof signs. “Combination sign” shall include signs commonly referred to as “fin signs.” “Sign – community event regional” means a sign that identifies events occurring at a regional sports/entertainment/convention/trade facility containing 60 or more acres located within 1,000 feet of a freeway interchange and adjacent to a highway of statewide significance. “Sign – construction” means a temporary sign designating the contractor(s), architect(s), and engineer(s) participating in a construction project underway on the same premises. A construction sign may also include the name of the project. Page 107 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes “Sign – directional” means any sign designated and used solely for the purpose of indicating the location or direction of a place on the premises upon which the sign is located. “Sign – directional off-premises kiosk” means a structure erected by the City or a private party through a license agreement with the City in approved locations bearing multiple off-premises directional signs. “Sign – directional traffic” means a sign that is located to guide or direct pedestrian or vehicular traffic to parking entrances, exits and service areas. “Sign – directory of tenants” means a sign that identifies the building or project name and the tenants which share a single structure or development. “Sign – double-faced” means a sign with two faces. “Sign – electrical” means a sign or sign structure in which electrical wiring, connections, and/or fixtures are used as part of the sign proper. “Sign – flashing” means an electrical sign or portion thereof that changes light intensity in a sudden transitory burst or that switches on and off in a constant pattern with more than one-third of the light source that is not constant being off at any one time. “Sign – follow-through” means a sign which identifies the location of a business for the purpose of participating in the Washington State Department of Transportation Motorist Information Sign Program. “Sign – freestanding pedestal” means a self-supported sign permanently attached directly to the ground upon a pedestal base or monument foundation and not attached to any building, wall or fence (also called pedestal or monument sign). “Sign – freestanding pole” means a self-supported sign permanently attached directly to the ground supported by upright poles or posts or braces placed on or in the ground (also called ground or pole sign). “Sign – freeway” means a freestanding sign located on the premises where the business, product or service is located, with said sign being within 250 feet of I-182, SR-395 or SR-12. “Sign – freeway interchange” means a sign that provides only regional identification for a group of businesses within an area defined by a state-recognized business association where the businesses collectively occupy a minimum of 15 acres of land. Page 108 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes “Sign – garage or yard sale” means a sign advertising a private sale of personal household possessions; not for the use of any commercial venture. “Sign height” means the vertical distance measured from the adjacent grade at the base of the sign support to the highest point of the sign or sign structure, whichever is higher. “Sign – identification” means a sign of an informational nature that directs attention to certain uses other than businesses, individual private residences. “Sign – inflatable” means a large balloon or balloon-like object greater than 18 inches in any dimension that uses blown air or a gas to remain inflated. “Sign – informational private” means a sign placed for the convenience of the property owner used for the sole purpose of designating property control and warning signs such as “no trespassing,” “no dumping,” “patrolled by dogs,” etc. “Sign – informational public” means a sign placed for the convenience of the public used for the sole purpose of designating restrooms, hours of operations, entrances and exits to buildings and parking lots, help wanted, public telephones, public notary, etc. Also included are plaques, tablets or inscriptions that are an integral part of a building. “Sign – interior” means any sign attached to the interior surface of the window of any building or structure, or maintained within the building or structure. “Sign – landmark” means a sign or plaque that is attached to the surface of the building or on a site that identifies or describes the historical, cultural, social, or other significance of a building or site. “Sign – limited duration” means any sign advertising real estate sales or rentals or construction projects utilized for a specified period of time. “Sign, marquee or readerboard” means a sign that displays a changing message using manually mounted lettering or electronic printout that may be mounted on a building or freestanding pedestal or pole. “Sign, marquee or readerboard – portable” means a sign that displays a changing message using manually mounted lettering or electronic printout that may be mounted on an easel, trailer, or other movable equipment. Page 109 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes “Sign – nameplate” means a sign which indicates no more than the name and address of the resident of the premises. “Sign – nonconforming” means any sign lawfully constructed prior to the enactment of the ordinance codified in this title, which fails to conform to the provisions of this title. “Sign – off-premises” means a sign that carries a message of any kind or directs attention to a business, commodity, service, or entertainment conducted, sold, or offered elsewhere than upon the premises where such sign is located, or to which it is affixed. Signs identifying a business complex and containing the names of multiple businesses within the complex shall not be considered an off-premises sign. “Sign – off-premises directional” means a sign providing directions to a public or other community event or facility in a location different than the property on which the sign is posted. “Sign – off-premises informational” means a sign providing information about events conducted at a public or other community facility in a location different than the property on which the sign is posted. “Sign – open house” means a sign welcoming viewers to a piece of residential real estate that is being offered for sale. “Sign – pedestrian-oriented” means a sign the primary purpose of which is to provide information for pedestrians and bicyclists. “Sign – political” means a temporary sign that identifies a candidate(s) for public elective office; urges a particular vote on a ballot measure in a pending public election, whether local, state or national; or expresses an opinion on a public issue. “Sign – portable” means an unlighted business sign, including paper, cardboard, wood or metal, that is capable of being moved easily and that is not permanently affixed to the ground, structure or building. This includes a sidewalk or sandwich board signs, except those worn by a person. “Sign – poster” means a decorative placard or advertisement intended to advertise a movie, theater production, video or CD, or other product or special event that is being conducted or offered for sale. “Sign – readerboard” means a lighted or unlighted business sign or part of a sign on which the letters are readily replaceable such that the copy can be changed from time to time at will. Page 110 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes “Sign – readerboard, portable” means a lighted or unlighted business sign or part of a sign on which the letters are readily replaceable such that the copy can be changed from time to time at will. A portable readerboard is capable of being moved or trailer mounted and is not permanently affixed to the ground, structure or building. “Sign – real estate” means a temporary sign erected by the owner, or his/her agent, that advertises the real estate upon which the sign is located for rent, lease or sale, or directing people to the property. “Sign – real estate directional” means a temporary and/or portable sign that is intended to assist people finding the location of difficult-to-locate property that is for sale, rent, or lease. “Sign – revolving” means any sign that rotates or turns in a circular motion by electrical or mechanical means and does not exceed eight revolutions per minute. “Sign – roof” means a business sign erected upon or above a roof or parapet of a building or structure. Mansard roof signs shall be considered wall signs. “Sign – sandwich board or A-frame” means a temporary portable two-faced board-style sign that is readily movable and has no permanent attachment to a building, structure, or the ground. “Sign – special event” means a temporary sign advertising activities concerning a drive or event of a political, civic, seasonal, cultural, philanthropic, educational or religious event or organization that will occur intermittently. “Sign structure” means any structure supporting or capable of supporting any sign defined in this chapter. A sign structure may be a single pole or may or may not be an integral part of the building or structure. “Sign – temporary” means any real estate, open house, special event, garage sale, or political sign corresponding to a specific event and displayed for a limited period of time. “Sign – tract” means signs used for the sale of real property in a platted subdivision. “Sign – wall” means any sign or graphic design which is attached parallel to, or flat against, or is painted on, the wall or exterior of a building or structure having a commercial message or identification. “Sign – wall-mounted” means a sign attached or erected parallel to and extending from the facade or wall of any building to which it is attached. A wall sign is supported through its entire Page 111 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes length with the exposed face of the sign parallel to the plane of said wall or facade. A sign painted on the wall of a building or a sign painted or attached to a marquee shall be considered a wall-mounted sign. “Sign – window” means any sign which is painted or mounted onto an exterior window pane, or which is hung directly inside the window, including advertisements for services or products in the form of decals, emblems, paint, exposed neon, banners, etc., within three feet of the window pane. “Sign – window, temporary indoor” means any sign (or poster) of a temporary nature displayed within a commercial building on the inside of the glass or in close proximity to the window and may be viewed by persons outside of the building. “Street” means a public or private way open to general public use including all classes of roadways and excepting alleys, driveways, and interstate freeways, but including major internal circulation corridors within parking lots. “Street frontage” means the side of the building facing a street that abuts the property on which the building is located. “Street improvements” means the paved roadway, and adjoining curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping. “Structure” means anything constructed or erected, the use of which requires location on the ground or attachment to something having location on the ground. “U.L.” means Underwriters Laboratory. Zone, Zoning District. See definition under “District.” [Ord. 4729 § 1, 2024; Ord. 4678 § 1, 2023; Ord. 4190 § 1, 2014; Ord. 3909 § 1, 2009; Ord. 3790 § 2, 2006; Code 1970 § 17.03.010.] Chapter 17.15 SIGN ALLOWANCE TABLE Sections: 17.15.010 Interpretation of sign allowance table. 17.15.020 Special provisions by sign classification. 17.15.025 Sandwich Board Signs. 17.15.030 Exempt signs. 17.15.040 Prohibited signs. Page 112 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes 17.15.050 Sign illustrations. 17.15.010 Interpretation of sign allowance table. (1) The sign allowance table, as incorporated herein, determines whether a specific sign is allowed in a zone district or by land use activity. The zone district or land use activity is identified in the left column and the specific sign allowances are located in the rows of the table. (2) If no symbol or number appears in the table box at the intersection of the column and row, the sign is not allowed in that category or is not subject to an allowance. (3) If a number appears in the table box at the intersection of the column and row or in the column or row heading, the sign may be allowed subject to the appropriate requirement and specific conditions indicated in the table footnotes. (4) All applicable requirements shall govern a sign whether or not the requirements are cross- referenced in the table. Sign Allowance Table Permit requirement | Material restrictions | | Number of signs | | | Allowable surface area in sq. ft. (1) | | | | Height in feet (2) | | | | | Projection over ROW to curb line | | | | | | Spacing in linear feet (3) | | | | | | | Visible ground plane/passage area (4) | | | | | | | | Setback from adjacent property line | | | | | | | | | Setback from ROW in feet (5) |||||||||| ||||||||||Duration (days) ||||||||||| Notes ||||||||||| | Access, landmark, and informational signs - all zones entry/exit freestanding pedestal/pole sign yes durable 1 4 4 5 0 per exit/entry Page 113 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes Sign Allowance Table Permit requirement | Material restrictions | | Number of signs | | | Allowable surface area in sq. ft. (1) | | | | Height in feet (2) | | | | | Projection over ROW to curb line | | | | | | Spacing in linear feet (3) | | | | | | | Visible ground plane/passage area (4) | | | | | | | | Setback from adjacent property line | | | | | | | | | Setback from ROW in feet (5) |||||||||| ||||||||||Duration (days) ||||||||||| Notes ||||||||||| | landmark wall sign/plaque yes durable 1 10 8 5 0 per building frontage informational - private (6) wall sign no durable 1 2 8 5 0 per building frontage freestanding pedestal/pole sign no durable 1 6 4 5 0 per street frontage informational - public wall sign no durable 1 2 8 5 0 per building frontage freestanding pedestal/pole sign no durable 1 6 4 5 0 per street frontage Permanent signs Residential districts - RT, R-S-20, R-S-12, R-S-1, R-1, RFAH-1/1A, R-2, R-3, R-4, RMHP identification - dwelling unit wall sign no durable 1 2 8 5 0 per property freestanding pedestal/pole sign (17) no durable 1 2 4 5 0 per property identification - bldg complex wall sign yes durable 1 24 20 5 0 per building frontage freestanding pedestal/pole sign (17) yes durable 1 24 4 5 0 per street frontage daycare facility wall sign yes durable 1 16 20 5 0 per building frontage Page 114 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes Sign Allowance Table Permit requirement | Material restrictions | | Number of signs | | | Allowable surface area in sq. ft. (1) | | | | Height in feet (2) | | | | | Projection over ROW to curb line | | | | | | Spacing in linear feet (3) | | | | | | | Visible ground plane/passage area (4) | | | | | | | | Setback from adjacent property line | | | | | | | | | Setback from ROW in feet (5) |||||||||| ||||||||||Duration (days) ||||||||||| Notes ||||||||||| | commercial freestanding pedestal/pole sign (17) yes durable 1 16 15 5 0 per street frontage school/religious use (15) wall sign yes durable 1 24 20 5 0 per building frontage freestanding pedestal/pole sign (17) yes durable 1 40 15 5 0 per street frontage freestanding marquee/readerboard sign (17) yes durable 1 24 15 5 0 per street frontage Office/commercial districts - O, C-1, C-2, C-3, C-R, BP, I-1, I-2, I-3 Composite allowance - all sign surfaces maximum per sign window sign (11) no transparent na 25% 15 per building/street frontage awning sign per business yes durable 1 24 15 (2) 8 may extend over walkway canopy sign yes maintained na 25% 24 (2) 8 may extend over walkway wall sign yes durable na 25% na 14 0 blade/projecting sign yes durable 1 125 (2)(2) 5 0 Page 115 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes Sign Allowance Table Permit requirement | Material restrictions | | Number of signs | | | Allowable surface area in sq. ft. (1) | | | | Height in feet (2) | | | | | Projection over ROW to curb line | | | | | | Spacing in linear feet (3) | | | | | | | Visible ground plane/passage area (4) | | | | | | | | Setback from adjacent property line | | | | | | | | | Setback from ROW in feet (5) |||||||||| ||||||||||Duration (days) ||||||||||| Notes ||||||||||| | freestanding pedestal sign yes durable 1 350 15 0 5 0 freestanding marquee/readerboard sign (17) yes durable 1 48 15 5 0 per street frontage freestanding pole - tenant directory sign (17) yes durable 1 12 35 0 6 5 0 up to 12 tenants per sign freestanding pole sign (17) yes durable 1 350 35 0 6 5 0 freestanding billboard sign (7)(17) yes durable 1 250 35 0 5006 5 0 Maximum 25 billboard sign structures in City. freestanding digital billboard sign (7)(17) yes durable 1 250 35 0 5006 5 0 off-premises directional sign (14) yes durable 1 5 15 5 0 Commercial/industrial districts - C-3, C-R, BP, I-1, I-2, I-3 maximum per sign freeway sign yes durable 1 350 70 500 6 35 35 per freeway frontage per freeway or freeway interchange (9) sign yes durable 1 480 70 500 6 35 35 per 15-acre site minimum Page 116 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes Sign Allowance Table Permit requirement | Material restrictions | | Number of signs | | | Allowable surface area in sq. ft. (1) | | | | Height in feet (2) | | | | | Projection over ROW to curb line | | | | | | Spacing in linear feet (3) | | | | | | | Visible ground plane/passage area (4) | | | | | | | | Setback from adjacent property line | | | | | | | | | Setback from ROW in feet (5) |||||||||| ||||||||||Duration (days) ||||||||||| Notes ||||||||||| | frontage property and freeway readerboard (9) sign yes durable 1 150 35 500 6 35 35 per 15-acre site minimum Limited duration signs Undeveloped property Residential freestanding pedestal/pole sign yes durable 1 24 8 5 0 15 after closing -lot -tract freestanding pedestal/pole sign yes durable 1 60 8 5 0 15 after last closing Commercial freestanding pedestal/pole sign yes durable 1 24 8 5 0 15 after closing -lot - tract freestanding pedestal/pole sign yes durable 1 60 8 5 0 15 after closing Construction wall/banner sign yes durable 1 24 8 5 0 const freestanding pedestal/pole sign yes durable 1 32 8 5 0 const Real estate sales/rentals per building or property Residential zones window/poster sign no 1 2 0 15 after closing Page 117 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes Sign Allowance Table Permit requirement | Material restrictions | | Number of signs | | | Allowable surface area in sq. ft. (1) | | | | Height in feet (2) | | | | | Projection over ROW to curb line | | | | | | Spacing in linear feet (3) | | | | | | | Visible ground plane/passage area (4) | | | | | | | | Setback from adjacent property line | | | | | | | | | Setback from ROW in feet (5) |||||||||| ||||||||||Duration (days) ||||||||||| Notes ||||||||||| | freestanding pedestal/pole sign (10) no durable 1 6 8 5 0 15 after closing freestanding sign (10) no durable 2 2 8 5 0 15 after closing Commercial zones (12) window/poster sign no 1 2 0 15 after closing wall/banner sign no durable 1 6 20 5 0 15 after closing freestanding pedestal/pole sign (9) no durable 1 6 8 5 0 15 after closing Temporary signs Open house - real estate sales sandwich - directional (10) no durable 4 6 4 5 0 after event sandwich - site (10) no durable 1 6 4 5 0 after event Special event - sales, charities, etc. Schools, churches, parks, farmers mkt, Xmas trees sandwich - directional (10) no durable 4 6 4 5 0 after event sandwich - site (10) no durable 1 6 4 5 0 after event window poster no na 50% after event Page 118 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes Sign Allowance Table Permit requirement | Material restrictions | | Number of signs | | | Allowable surface area in sq. ft. (1) | | | | Height in feet (2) | | | | | Projection over ROW to curb line | | | | | | Spacing in linear feet (3) | | | | | | | Visible ground plane/passage area (4) | | | | | | | | Setback from adjacent property line | | | | | | | | | Setback from ROW in feet (5) |||||||||| ||||||||||Duration (days) ||||||||||| Notes ||||||||||| | window banner no durable 1 16 0 after event wall sign/banner no durable 1 64 20 5 0 after event banner - mounted freestanding pole no durable 1 10 20 (2) 8 5 0 after event marquee/readerboard -portable no durable 1 18 4 5 0 after event balloons (12) no biodegradable 15 20 5 after event Residential zones sandwich - directional (10) no durable 2 6 4 5 0 after event sandwich - site (10) no durable 1 6 4 5 0 after event Commercial zones sandwich - directional (10) no durable 2 6 4 5 0 after event sandwich - site (10) no durable 1 6 4 (18)5 (18)0 (18)after event window poster no na 50% after event window banner no durable 1 16 0 after event wall sign/banner no durable 1 64 20 5 0 after event banner - mounted freestanding pole no durable 1 16 20 (2) 8 5 0 after event Page 119 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes Sign Allowance Table Permit requirement | Material restrictions | | Number of signs | | | Allowable surface area in sq. ft. (1) | | | | Height in feet (2) | | | | | Projection over ROW to curb line | | | | | | Spacing in linear feet (3) | | | | | | | Visible ground plane/passage area (4) | | | | | | | | Setback from adjacent property line | | | | | | | | | Setback from ROW in feet (5) |||||||||| ||||||||||Duration (days) ||||||||||| Notes ||||||||||| | marquee/readerboard -portable no durable 1 18 4 5 0 after event balloons (12) no biodegradable 15 20 5 after event inflatables (13) yesnonflammable 1 350 70 250 5 0 after event SR-12/395 and I-182 inflatables (13) yesnonflammable 1 350 70 500 5 0 after event Political (16) freestanding no durable na 6 4 5 0 10 after election 1 The area within a continuous perimeter enclosing the outer limits of the sign face, but not including structural elements, which are not a part of the display. The area of a two-sided sign equals the area of one side. The area of a spherical, cubical, or polyhedral sign equals 1/2 the total surface area. 2 Height: measured from the average finished grade at the sign foundation. Awning signs shall be at least 8 and no more than 16 feet above the walkway. Blade/projecting signs shall not extend more than 10 feet above the building facade or 6 feet from the face of the building. 3 Spacing: the linear distance between signs, or sign structures, in feet. Page 120 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes 4 The area under the sign that shall be free of obstructions to allow passage of pedestrians and vehicles. 5 Setback: shall be that portion of any sign or sign structure that is closest to the property line. 6 Private informational signs must be for an original purpose and may not simply repeat the same message over and over. 7 Signs visible from Washington State Highways may be subject to the Highway Advertising Control Act of 1971 and require approval by the Washington State Department of Transportation in additional to local approval. 8 On private property adjacent to an arterial road: not within 100 feet of a public street intersection, 300 feet of a residential district, within 250 feet of a freestanding sign of 200 sf of display area. 9 Freeway interchange signs must be located within 1,000 feet of an interchange, and 300 feet of ROW, on site of business on a minimum 15-acre site. 10 Square feet per one face of a two-sided sandwich board. 11 Window signs may include credit card logos and advertise hours of operation and address. 12 Balloons shall be no larger than 18 inches in diameter, not attached to a roofline. 13 Inflatables shall be securely anchored to the ground and not create a traffic or other hazard in the event of deflation. Inflatables shall be measured by square feet of surface volume. 14 Off-premises directional signs shall be of the material, color, lettering font, and structure specified by the Building Official. 15 Excepting Pasco High School Bulldogs stadium sign. 16 Campaign signs on private property are limited to 32 square feet in size. 17 Permanent freestanding pole signs are not allowed within the downtown core, as illustrated in PMC 25.95.050(2)of the downtown Pasco overlay zone. 18 Sandwich board signs may be located within the public right-of-way only within the Downtown Pasco Overlay District and shall comply with PMC 17.15.025. Page 121 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes [Ord. 4729 § 2, 2024; Ord. 4678A § 2, 2024; Ord. 4678 § 2, 2023; Ord. 3865 § 1, 2008; Ord. 3790 § 2, 2006; Code 1970 § 17.05.010.] 17.15.025 Sandwich Board Signs Sandwich board signs located within the Downtown Pasco Overlay District shall comply with the regulations identified as “sandwich - site (10).” in the PMC 17.15.010 Sign Allowance Table, as referenced under Temporary signs, Special event - sales, charities, etc. - Commercial zones, in addition to the requirements outlined below. (1) Placement Area. (a) Signs shall be located on the business frontage or parcel frontage addressed by the business. (b) Where no building exists, signage shall be restricted to the parcel frontage. (c) Signs shall be located between the sidewalk and the curb. Placement on private property is permitted at the discretion of the business owner. In areas with unimproved right-of-way, signs shall be restricted to the road verge or parcel. (d) Signs shall not block building entrances, stairways, private driveway access, or other points of access. (2) Sign Limit. Only one sandwich board sign is allowed per business tenant. (3) Hours of Display. Signs are permitted only during the business’s operating hours. (4) Intersection Placement. Corner lot businesses shall place their sandwich board sign at the point along the frontage that is furthest from the intersection while still fronting the business. Where this is not feasible, a minimum clearance of ten (10) feet from the actual radius curb line or road verge shall be maintained to ensure adequate sight distance for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. (5) Liability. The public shall hold the City harmless against any and all claims arising from the placement or presence of sandwich board signs in the public right-of-way. (6) Prohibited Mounting. Signs shall not be affixed to, mounted upon, or placed on vehicles parked in the public right-of-way. (7) Removal and Return of Violations. (a) Signs placed in violation of this section may be removed by the City. (b) Signs removed more than twice from public property may be destroyed; otherwise, removed signs may be returned to the owner. (8) ADA Compliance. (a) Signs shall preserve accessible pedestrian routes at all times. (b) Signs shall not encroach into any portion of a handicapped ramp. (9) Prohibited Locations. Page 122 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes (a) Signs shall not be placed within travel lanes, medians, or roundabouts. (b) Signs shall not be placed within fire hydrant clear zones, utility poles, or transit stops. 17.15.040 Prohibited signs. From and after September 1, 2006, it is unlawful for any person to maintain, erect or place within the City: (1) A swinging projecting sign; (2) Signs attached to or placed upon a vehicle or trailer parked on private or public property designed to operate as a de facto permanent advertising sign. This provision is not to be construed as prohibiting the identification of a firm or its principal products on a vehicle operating during the normal course of business. This does not include automobile for sale signs or signs attached to licensed buses or taxis; (3) Private signs placed in or upon a public right-of-way, except as expressly provided herein; (a) Sandwich board signs located within the public right-of-way in the Downtown Pasco Overlay District shall comply with PMC 17.15.025. (4) Any sign that constitutes a traffic hazard or detriment to traffic safety because of size, location, movement, content, or method of illumination. Any sign that obstructs the vision of drivers or detracts from the visibility of any official traffic control device or diverts or tends to divert the attention of drivers of moving vehicles away from traffic movement on streets, roads, intersections, or access facilities. No sign shall be erected so that it obstructs the vision of pedestrians, or which by its glare or by its method of illumination constitutes a hazard to traffic. No sign may use words, phrases, symbols or characters in such a manner as to interfere with, mislead, or confuse the steady and safe flow of traffic; (5) Any sign or advertising structure or supporting structure that is torn, damaged, defaced or destroyed; (6) Signs attached to utility poles, trees, rocks or other natural features; (7) Signs attached to subdivision fences; (8) Signs attached to benches on public rights-of-way; Page 123 of 174 EXHIBIT “2” Proposed PMC Title 17 changes (9) Roof signs, including signs painted directly on a sloped or gabled roof surface; strobe lights, lasers; strings of streamers; and all other signs not otherwise specifically authorized or exempted by this chapter; (10) Off-premises signs except those expressly permitted herein; (11) Balloons or inflatables attached, anchored or tethered to a roof of a building. [Ord. 4729 § 3, 2024; Ord. 3790 § 3, 2006; Code 1970 § 17.05.040.] 17.25.030 Traffic obstruction and visibility. (1) No sign shall be erected so as to obstruct the vision of vehicular traffic, or at any location where it may interfere with, or be confused with, any traffic signal or device. (2) No sign or sign structure, except sandwich board signs located within the Downtown Pasco Overlay District, which shall comply with PMC 17.15.025,shall be erected within the vision triangle of a corner lot property measured (20 feet along the property line from the intersection of two streets or 15 feet from the intersection of a street and alley). [Ord. 3790 § 5, 2006; Code 1970 § 17.09.030.] Page 124 of 174 EXHIBIT “3” CITIES’ SANDWICH BOARD SIGN CODES City of Puyallup "ôƱĲĖťĖĺĲŜ (31) "Sandwich board sign" ıôÍĲŜϙÍϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙŜĖČĲϙŜôťϙŪŕĺĲϙťēôϙČŘĺŪĲîϠϙèĺĲŜĖŜťĖĲČϙĺċϙťſĺϙŜĖČĲϙċÍèôŜϙēĖĲČôîϙÍťϙťēôϙťĺŕϙ ÍĲîϙŜôŕÍŘÍťôîϙÍťϙťēôϙæĺťťĺıϙťĺϙıÍħôϙĖťϙŜôīċ-ŜťÍĲîĖĲČϙŪŕĺĲϙťēôϙČŘĺŪĲîϟ (d) ÍĲîſĖèēϙĺÍŘîϙĖČĲŜϟ (i) ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙĲĺťϙôƄèôôîϙôĖČēťϙŜŗŪÍŘôϙċôôťϙĖĲϙÍŘôÍϙĺĲϙôÍèēϙŜĖîôϠϙċĺŘϙÍϙťĺťÍīϙ ĺċϙ͕͐ϙŜŗŪÍŘôϙċôôťϙĖĲϙÍŘôÍϟ (ii) ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙĲĺťϙôƄèôôîϙťēŘôôϙÍĲîϙĺĲô-ēÍīċϙċôôťϙϼ͓͑ϙĖĲèēôŜϽϙĖĲϙēôĖČēťϟ (iii) ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙŕôŘıĖťťôîϙſĖťēĖĲϙŕŪæīĖèϙŘĖČēťŜ-ĺċ-ſÍƅϙĺĲīƅϙſēôŘôϙťēôϙ i®ϙÍæŪťŜϙÍϙϠϙaϠϙϙĺŘϙaϙƏĺĲôϠϙôƄèôŕťϙťēÍťϙĲĺϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙÍīīĺſôîϙĖĲϙ ťēôϙèŪŘæϙôƄťôĲŜĖĺĲϙŕīÍĲťĖĲČϙŜťŘĖŕŜϙĖĲϙťēôϙi®ϙÍæŪťťĖĲČϙŕÍŘèôīŜϙſĖťēĖĲϙťēôϙ"-ĺŘôϙƏĺĲôϟϙ >ĺŘϙťēôϙŕŪŘŕĺŜôŜϙĺċϙťēĖŜϙŘôČŪīÍťĖĺĲϙťēôϙÍæŪťťĖĲČϙi®ϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙıôÍŜŪŘôîϙċŘĺıϙťēôϙŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϙ īĖĲôϙťĺϙťēôϙèôĲťôŘīĖĲôϙĺċϙťēôϙi®ϟ (iv) ĺııôŘèĖÍīϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙĺĲīƅϙæôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙîŪŘĖĲČϙťēôϙēĺŪŘŜϙťēôϙèĺııôŘèĖÍīϙŕŘôıĖŜôŜϙĺŘϙ æŪŜĖĲôŜŜϙĖŜϙĺŕôĲϙťĺϙťēôϙČôĲôŘÍīϙŕŪæīĖèϠϙæŪťϙĖĲϙÍĲƅϙôŽôĲťϙĲĺϙôÍŘīĖôŘϙťēÍĲϙ͘ϡ͏͏ϙÍϟıϟϙĺŘϙīÍťôŘϙ ťēÍĲϙ͖ϡ͏͏ϙŕϟıϟϙϼ͖ϡ͏͏ϙÍϟıϟϙĺŘϙīÍťôŘϙťēÍĲϙ͖ϡ͏͏ϙŕϟıϟϙĖĲϙϙÍĲîϙaϙƏĺ ĲôŜϽϠϙÍĲîϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙŘôıĺŽôîϙ ċŘĺıϙťēôϙŘĖČēť-ĺċ-ſÍƅϙæôťſôôĲϙťēôϙēĺŪŘŜϙĺċϙ͖ϡ͏͏ϙŕϟıϟϙťĺϙ͘ϡ͏͏ϙÍϟıϟ (v) "ŪôϙťĺϙťēôϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙĲÍťŪŘôϙĺċϙťēôϙŜĖČĲϼŜϽϙÍĲîϙťēôϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôĲťϙċĺŘϙîÍĖīƅϙŕīÍèôıôĲťϙÍĲîϙ ŘôıĺŽÍīϙĖĲϙÍèèĺŘîÍĲèôϙſĖťēϙťēôϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôĲťŜϙŜôťϙċĺŘťēϙĖĲϙŜŪæŜôèťĖĺĲ (1)(d)(iv) ĺċϙťēĖŜϙ ŜôèťĖĺĲϠϙĖťϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙťēôϙŘôŜŕĺĲŜĖæĖīĖťƅϙĺċϙťēôϙŜĖČĲϙĺſĲôŘϙťĺϙôĲŜŪŘôϙŕŘĺŕôŘϙŕīÍèôıôĲťϟϙĖťƅϙ ŜťÍƯϙĖŜϙÍŪťēĺŘĖƏôîϙťĺϙĖııôîĖÍťôīƅϙŘôıĺŽôϙÍĲîϙîôŜťŘĺƅϙÍĲƅϙŜĖČĲŜϙċĺŪĲîϙťĺϙæôϙĖĲϙŽĖĺīÍťĖĺĲϙĺċϙ ťēôϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôĲťŜϙĺċϙťēĖŜϙŜôèťĖĺĲϟ (vi) ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙıŪŜťϙæôϙŕīÍèôîϙĖĲϙŕÍŘħĖĲČϙĺŘϙŕīÍĲťĖĲČϙŜťŘĖŕŜϠϙĖϟôϟϠϙťēôϙÍŘôÍϙ æôťſôôĲϙťēôϙŜĖîôſÍīħϙÍĲîϙťēôϙŜťŘôôťϠϙĺŘϙſēôŘôϙťēôŘôϙÍŘôϙĲĺϙŜĖîôſÍīħŜϠϙťēôϙŪĲĖıŕŘĺŽôîϙŕÍŘťϙ ĺċϙťēôϙi®ϟ (vii) ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙēÍŽôϙÍťϙīôÍŜťϙċĺŪŘϙċôôťϙĺċϙèīôÍŘÍĲèôϙťĺϙôĲŜŪŘôϙťēÍťϙťēôƅϙîĺϙ ĲĺťϙæīĺèħϙÍϙŜĖîôſÍīħϟ (viii) ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙĲĺťϙôĲèŘĺÍèēϙĖĲťĺϙÍĲƅϙŕĺŘťĖĺĲϙĺċϙÍϙēÍĲîĖèÍŕŕôîϙŘÍıŕϟ (ix) ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙÍŘôϙĲĺťϙÍīīĺſôîϙſĖťēĖĲϙťŘÍŽôīϙīÍĲôŜϠϙıôîĖÍĲŜϠϙĺŘϙŘĺŪĲî-ÍæĺŪťŜϟ Page 125 of 174 (x) bĺϙŜĖČĲϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙīĺèÍťôîϙèīĺŜôŘϙťēÍĲϙťſĺϙċôôťϙċŘĺıϙťēôϙċÍèôϙĺċϙèŪŘæϙťĺϙťēôϙĲôÍŘôŜťϙŜĖČĲϙ ôîČôϙĺŘϙŜĖƄϙċôôťϙċŘĺıϙťēôϙôîČôϙĺċϙŕÍŽôıôĲťϙťĺϙťēôϙĲôÍŘôŜťϙŜĖČĲϙôîČôϙÍīĺĲČϙŘĺÍîſÍƅŜϙſĖťēϙĲĺϙ èŪŘæϟ City of Everett "ϟϙĺŘťÍæīôϙĖČĲŜϟϙĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲŜϙÍīīĺſôîϙĖĲϙŜĖČĲϙèÍťôČĺŘĖôŜϙϙÍĲîϙϟϙēôϙċĺīīĺſĖĲČϙ ŘôČŪīÍťĖĺĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙÍŕŕīƅϙťĺϙÍīīϙŕĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲŜϡϙ ͐ϟϙĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙĲĺťϙôƄèôôîϙôĖČēťϙŜŗŪÍŘôϙċôôťϙŕôŘϙŜĖîôϙĺŘϙċĺŘťƅ-ťſĺϙĖĲèēôŜϙĖĲϙēôĖČēťϟϙ ͑ϟϙbĺϙıĺŘôϙťēÍĲϙĺĲôϙŕĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲϙıÍƅϙæôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙŕôŘϙôĲťĖťƅϟϙ ͒ϟϙīīϙŕĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙīĺèÍťôîϙĺĲϙťēôϙŕŘôıĖŜôŜϙſēĖèēϙťēôƅϙÍŘôϙŜôŘŽĖĲČϙŪĲīôŜŜϙīĺèÍťôîϙ ĺĲϙťēôϙŕŪæīĖèϙŜĖîôſÍīħϠϙĖĲϙſēĖèēϙèÍŜôϙÍϙıĖĲĖıŪıϙŜĖƄ-ċĺĺťϙèīôÍŘϙƏĺĲôϙĖŜϙŕŘĺŽĖîôîϟϙēôϙĖĲťôĲťϙ ĺċϙťēĖŜϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôĲťϙĖŜϙťĺϙÍīīĺſϙċĺŘϙŜÍċôϙÍĲîϙŪĲĺæŜťŘŪèťôîϙŪŜôϙĺċϙťēôϙŜĖîôſÍīħϙæƅϙ ŕôîôŜťŘĖÍĲŜϟϙ ͓ϟϙĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙīĺèÍťôîϙîĖŘôèťīƅϙĖĲϙċŘĺĲťϙĺċϙťēôϙŜŕĺĲŜĺŘĖĲČϙôĲťĖťƅϙîŪŘĖĲČϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϙēĺŪŘŜϙ ĺĲīƅϟϙ ͔ϟϙĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙīĺèÍťôîϙŜĺϙÍŜϙĲĺťϙťĺϙèŘôÍťôϙÍϙťŘÍƯĖèϙŜÍċôťƅϙēÍƏÍŘîϙæƅϙĺæŜťŘŪèťĖĲČϙťēôϙŽĖŜĖĺĲϙ ĺċϙıĺťĺŘĖŜťŜϙĺĲϙŕŘĖŽÍťôϙŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϙĺŘϙŕŪæīĖèϙŘĖČēť-ĺċ-ſÍƅϟϙ ͕ϟϙiſĲôŘŜϙĺċϙŜŪèēϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙÍŜŜŪıôϙīĖÍæĖīĖťƅϙċĺŘϙîÍıÍČôϙĺŘϙĖĲĤŪŘƅϙŘôŜŪīťĖĲČϙċŘĺıϙťēôĖŘϙŪŜôϙ ÍĲîϙŜēÍīīϙŕŘĺŽĖîôϙťēôϙèĖťƅϙſĖťēϙÍĲϙÍŕŕŘĺŕŘĖÍťôϙīôČÍīϙîĺèŪıôĲťϙŜÍťĖŜċÍèťĺŘƅϙťĺϙťēôϙèĖťƅϙ ÍťťĺŘĲôƅϙēĺīîĖĲČϙťēôϙèĖťƅϙēÍŘıīôŜŜϙÍĲîϙĖĲîôıĲĖċƅĖĲČϙťēôϙèĖťƅϙċĺŘϙŜŪèēϙŘôŜŪīťĖĲČϙīĺŜŜϙÍĲîϯĺŘϙ ĖĲĤŪŘƅϟϙ ͖ϟϙĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙĲĺĲĖīīŪıĖĲÍťôîϟϙ ͗ϟϙĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙĺĲīƅϙîŪŘĖĲČϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϙēĺŪŘŜϟ City of Alexandria, Virginia [ĖıĖťÍťĖĺĲŜϙċĺŘϙŕĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲŜϟϙϼ͐ϽϙĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙīĺèÍťôîϙĺĲϙťēôϙŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϙĺċϙťēôϙŜĖČĲϙĺſĲôŘϠϙ ĺŪťŜĖîôϙÍϙıĖĲĖıŪıϙīÍťôŘÍīϙſÍīħſÍƅϙèīôÍŘÍĲèôϙĺċϙƱŽôϙċôôťϙċĺŘϙŕôîôŜťŘĖÍĲϙťŘÍŽôīϠϙſĖťēĖĲϙ͔͐ϙ ċôôťϙĺċϙťēôϙċŘĺĲťϙæŪĖīîĖĲČϙſÍīīϠϙÍĲîϙÍϙıĖĲĖıŪıϙĺċϙ͔͐ϙċôôťϙċŘĺıϙÍĲƅϙîŘĖŽôſÍƅϙĺŘϙĖĲťôŘŜôèťĖĺĲϢϙ ÍĲîϙϼ͑ϽϙĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙĺĲīƅϙæôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙîŪŘĖĲČϙĺŕôŘÍťĖĲČϙēĺŪŘŜϙĺċϙťēôϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϟ City of Snoqualmie 17.75.025 Sandwich board signs. ϟ >ĺŘϙŕŪŘŕĺŜôŜϙĺċϙťēĖŜϙťĖťīôϠϙÍϙЊŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîЋϙŜĖČĲϙŜēÍīīϙıôÍĲϙÍϙĺĲô- ĺŘϙťſĺ-ċÍèôîϙ- ċŘÍıôϙŜťƅīôϙŜĖČĲϙťēÍťϙĖŜϙŘôÍîĖīƅϙıĺŽÍæīôϙÍĲîϙēÍŜϙĲĺϙŕôŘıÍĲôĲťϙÍťťÍèēıôĲťϙťĺϙÍϙæŪĖīîĖĲČϠϙ Page 126 of 174 ŜťŘŪèťŪŘôϙĺŘϙťēôϙČŘĺŪĲîϠϙÍĲîϙıÍƅϙĖĲèīŪîôϙĺťēôŘϙŜťƅīôŜϙĺċϙċŘôôŜťÍĲîĖĲČϙĺĲô- ĺŘϙťſĺ-ŜĖîôîϙ ŜĖČĲŜϙťēÍťϙĺťēôŘſĖŜôϙıôôťϙťēôϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôĲťŜϙċĺŘϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϟ ϟ IĲϙÍîîĖťĖĺĲϙťĺϙĺťēôŘϙŕôŘıĖťťôîϙŜĖČĲϙťƅŕôŜϠϙĺĲôϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲϙıÍƅϙæôϙŕôŘıĖťťôîϙċĺŘϙ ÍĲƅϙèĺııôŘèĖÍīϙŕŪŘŕĺŜôϙſēôĲϙèĺıŕīôťôīƅϙŪŕĺĲϙŕŘĖŽÍťôϙŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϙÍĲîϙŪŕĺĲϙťēôϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϙ ŕŘôıĖŜôŜϠϙŕŘĺŽĖîôîϙŜŪèēϙŜĖČĲϙıôôťŜϙÍīīϙĺťēôŘϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôĲťŜϙĺċϙťēĖŜϙŜôèťĖĺĲϟ ϟ bĺϙċÍèôϙĺċϙÍϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲϠϙſēôĲϙŕôŘıĖťťôîϙæƅϙťēĖŜϙťĖťīôϠϙŜēÍīīϙôƄèôôîϙ͓͑ϙĖĲèēôŜϙæƅϙ ͕͒ϙĖĲèēôŜϢϙÍĲîϙċŪŘťēôŘϙŕŘĺŽĖîôîϠϙťēôϙċĺŘôČĺĖĲČϙĲĺťſĖťēŜťÍĲîĖĲČϠϙĲĺϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲϙ ŜēÍīīϙæôϙĺċϙŜŪèēϙÍϙŜĖƏôϙťēÍťϙĖťϙĖĲťŘŪîôŜϙĖĲťĺϙÍĲƅϙÍŘôÍϙŘôŗŪĖŘôîϙťĺϙæôϙċŘôôϙĺċϙĖıŕôîĖıôĲťŜϙ ŕŪŘŜŪÍĲťϙťĺϙťēôϙ®ÍŜēĖĲČťĺĲϙťÍťôϙÍŘŘĖôŘϙ>ŘôôϙĺŘϙıôŘĖèÍĲŜϙſĖťēϙ"ĖŜÍæĖīĖťĖôŜϙèťϙ ŘôČŪīÍťĖĺĲŜϙÍŜϙťēôƅϙĲĺſϙôƄĖŜťϙĺŘϙıÍƅϙēôŘôÍċťôŘϙæôϙÍıôĲîôîϟϙīīϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙĺċϙŜĺŪĲîϙ èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲϙÍĲîϙîôŜĖČĲôîϙťĺϙťēôϙŜÍťĖŜċÍèťĖĺĲϙĺċϙťēôϙæŪĖīîĖĲČϙĺƯĖèĖÍīϙťĺϙſĖťēŜťÍĲîϙēĖČēϙ ſĖĲîŜϟ "ϟ ēôϙŕôŘıĖťϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙĖŜŜŪôîϙæƅϙťēôϙîĖŘôèťĺŘϠϙÍĲîϙťēôϙċôôϙċĺŘϙťēôϙĖŜŜŪÍĲèôϙĺċϙŜŪèēϙŕôŘıĖťϙ ŜēÍīīϙæôϙщ͔͏ϟ͏͏ϢϙŕŘĺŽĖîôîϠϙťēôϙèĖťƅϙèĺŪĲèĖīϙıÍƅϙċŘĺıϙťĖıôϙťĺϙťĖıôϙæƅϙŘôŜĺīŪťĖĺĲϙôŜťÍæīĖŜēϙÍϙ îĖƯôŘôĲťϙċôôϟϙēôϙÍŕŕīĖèÍťĖĺĲϙċĺŘϙŜŪèēϙŕôŘıĖťϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙŪŕĺĲϙÍϙċĺŘıϙŕŘôŜèŘĖæôîϙæƅϙťēôϙ îĖŘôèťĺŘϠϙÍĲîϙŜēÍīīϙĖĲèīŪîôϙťēôϙŕŘĺŕĺŜôîϙīĺèÍťĖĺĲϙÍĲîϙîĖıôĲŜĖĺĲŜϙĺċϙťēôϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙ ŜĖČĲϠϙÍϙıÍŕϙîŘÍſĲϙťĺϙÍϙŜťÍĲîÍŘîϙŜèÍīôϙŜēĺſĖĲČϙťēôϙīĺèÍťĖĺĲϙĺċϙťēôϙŜĖČĲϙĖĲϙŘôīÍťĖĺĲϙťĺϙŜťŘôôťŜϠϙ ŜĖîôſÍīħŜϠϙæŪĖīîĖĲČŜϠϙÍĲîϙĺťēôŘϙċôÍťŪŘôŜϙſĖťēĖĲϙ͑͏ϙċôôťϠϙÍĲîϙôĖťēôŘϙÍϙîŘÍſĖĲČϙĺŘϙŕēĺťĺČŘÍŕēϙ ĺċϙťēôϙŜĖČĲϟϙŕŕīĖèÍťĖĺĲŜϙċĺŘϙŕôŘıĖťŜϙċĺŘϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙôƄôıŕťϙċŘĺıϙťēôϙ ŘôŗŪĖŘôıôĲťŜϙĺċϙĺťēôŘϙŕŘĺŽĖŜĖĺĲŜϙĺċϙťēĖŜϙťĖťīôϠϙÍĲîϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙŕŘĺèôŜŜôîϙæƅϙťēôϙîĖŘôèťĺŘϙĺŘϙ îôŜĖČĲôôϙĺĲϙÍĲϙôƄŕôîĖťôîϙæÍŜĖŜϟϙŪèēϙŕôŘıĖťŜϙŜēÍīīϙŘôıÍĖĲϙŽÍīĖîϙċĺŘϙÍĲϙĖĲîôƱĲĖťôϙŕôŘĖĺîϙŜĺϙ īĺĲČϙÍŜϙťēôϙŕôŘıĖťťôîϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲϙıôôťŜϙťēôϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôĲťŜϙĺċϙťēĖŜϙŜôèťĖĺĲϙÍĲîϙĖŜϙĖĲϙ èĺıŕīĖÍĲèôϙſĖťēϙÍĲƅϙèĺĲîĖťĖĺĲŜϙĺċϙťēôϙŕôŘıĖťϢϙÍĲîϙċŪŘťēôŘϙŕŘĺŽĖîôîϠϙťēÍťϙĖĲϙÍîîĖťĖĺĲϙťĺϙťēôϙ ŕôŘıĖťϠϙÍϙŽÍīĖîϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙīĖèôĲŜôϙēÍŜϙæôôĲϙĺæťÍĖĲôîϙŕŪŘŜŪÍĲťϙťĺϙa ͖͐ϟ͔͒ϟ͔͑͒ϼϽϙ ÍĲîϙťēôϙīĖèôĲŜôϙċôôϙŕÍĖîϟϙϙīôČĖæīôϙıĺĖŜťŪŘôϙŘôŜĖŜťÍĲťϙèĺŕƅϙĺċϙťēôϙÍŕŕŘĺŽôîϙīĖèôĲŜôϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙ ÍƯĖƄôîϙťĺϙťēôϙŪĲîôŘŜĖîôϙĺċϙťēôϙŜĖČĲϙÍťϙÍīīϙťĖıôŜϟ (ϟ ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙĲĺťϙæôϙÍƯĖƄôîϙťĺϠϙıĺŪĲťôîϙŪŕĺĲϙĺŘϙŕīÍèôîϙŪŕĺĲϙŽôēĖèīôŜϙ ŕÍŘħôîϙſĖťēĖĲϙťēôϙŕŪæīĖèϙŘĖČēť-ĺċ-ſÍƅϟ >ϟ ͐ϟ ēôϙîĖŘôèťĺŘϙŜēÍīīϙÍîıĖĲĖŜťôŘϙťēôϙŕôŘıĖťťĖĲČϙŕŘĺŽĖŜĖĺĲŜϙĺċϙťēĖŜϙŜôèťĖĺĲϟ ͑ϟ ēôϙæŪĖīîĖĲČϙĺƯĖèĖÍīϠϙťēôϙèĺîôϙôĲċĺŘèôıôĲťϙĺƯĖèôŘϙĺŘϙÍĲƅϙŕĺīĖèôϙĺƯĖèôŘϙıÍƅϙôĲċĺŘèôϙťēôϙ ŕŘĺŽĖŜĖĺĲŜϙĺċϙťēĖŜϙŜôèťĖĺĲϙŘôīÍťĖĲČϙťĺϙŪĲŕôŘıĖťťôîϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϟ ͒ϟ ĲƅϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲϙŕīÍèôîϙĖĲϙŽĖĺīÍťĖĺĲϙĺċϙÍĲƅϙĺċϙťēôϙŕŘĺŽĖŜĖĺĲŜϙĺċϙťēĖŜϙŜôèťĖĺĲϙıÍƅϙ æôϙŜŪııÍŘĖīƅϙŘôıĺŽôîϟ Page 127 of 174 ͓ϟ ĲƅϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲϙŘôıĺŽôîϙŕŪŘŜŪÍĲťϙťĺϙťēĖŜϙŜŪæŜôèťĖĺĲϙıÍƅϙæôϙŘôťŪŘĲôîϙťĺϙťēôϙ ĺſĲôŘϙĺĲīƅϙŪŕĺĲϙťēôϙĺſĲôŘЍŜϙŜôèŪŘĖĲČϙĺċϙÍϙŕôŘıĖťϠϙÍĲîϙÍϙīĖèôĲŜôϙĖċϙŘôŗŪĖŘôîϢϙŕŘĺŽĖîôîϠϙÍĲƅϙ ŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲϙŘôıĺŽôîϙċŘĺıϙŕŪæīĖèϙĺŘϙŕŘĖŽÍťôϙŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϙıĺŘôϙťēÍĲϙťſĺϙťĖıôŜ ıÍƅϙæôϙ îôŜťŘĺƅôîϟ @ϟ ®ĖīīċŪīϙŽĖĺīÍťĖĺĲϙĺċϙťēôϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôĲťϙťĺϙĺæťÍĖĲϙÍϙŕôŘıĖťϙĺŘϙīĖèôĲŜôϙċĺŘϙÍϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙ ŜĖČĲϠϙÍŜϙôŽĖîôĲèôîϙæƅϙťēŘôôϙĺŘϙıĺŘôϙÍèťĖĺĲŜϙťĺϙôĲċĺŘèôϙŜŪèēϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôĲťŜϙæƅϙŘôıĺŽÍīϙĺċϙ ÍĲƅϙŜĖČĲϙĺſĲôîϙæƅϙťēôϙŜÍıôϙĺſĲôŘϠϙŜēÍīīϙèĺĲŜťĖťŪťôϙÍϙıĖŜîôıôÍĲĺŘϟϙϼiŘîϟϙ͐͐͗͘ϙЯ ͑͑ϙϼ(Ƅēϟϙ "ϽϠϙ͑͏͖͐ϢϙiŘîϟϙ͐͐͘ϙЯ ͒Ϡϙ͑͏͏͑Ͻϟ City of Orting ͐͒-͖-͖ϡ b"®IFϙi"ϙI@bϡ ϟ ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙÍŘôϙÍϙťƅŕôϙĺċϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙŜĖČĲϙŕôŘıĖťťôîϙæƅϙťēôϙĖťƅϙĖĲϙ ÍèèĺŘîÍĲèôϙſĖťēϙťēĖŜϙēÍŕťôŘϟ ϟ ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙÍŘôϙÍīīĺſôîϙŜŪæĤôèťϙťĺϙťēôϙċĺīīĺſĖĲČϙŘôŜťŘĖèťĖĺĲŜϡ ͐ϟ ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙÍŘôϙīĖıĖťôîϙťĺϙťēĖŘťƅ-ŜĖƄϙĖĲèēôŜϙϼ͕͒ГϽϙĖĲϙēôĖČēťϙÍĲîϙťēĖŘťƅϙĖĲèēôŜϙ ϼ͒͏ГϽϙĖĲϙſĖîťēϟϙēôƅϙıŪŜťϙæôϙèĺĲŜťŘŪèťôîϙĺċϙîŪŘÍæīôϙıÍťôŘĖÍīŜϟ ͑ϟ ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙıÍƅϙæôϙīĺèÍťôîϙĺĲϙŕŪæīĖèϙŜĖîôſÍīħŜϙĺŘϙÍîĤÍèôĲťϙÍŘôÍŜϙĖĲϙÍϙ ıÍĲĲôŘϙŜĺϙÍŜϙťĺϙÍīīĺſϙÍîôŗŪÍťôϙŕôîôŜťŘĖÍĲϙèĖŘèŪīÍťĖĺĲϙÍīīĺſĖĲČϙÍϙıĖĲĖıŪıϙĺċϙťēŘôôϙϼ͒Ͻϙċôôťϙ ĺċϙÍŽÍĖīÍæīôϙŜĖîôſÍīħϙŕÍťēϠϙĖĲèīŪîĖĲČϙŜÍċôϙÍĲîϙŪĲèĺĲŜťŘÍĖĲôîϙÍèèôŜŜϙťĺϙŕÍŘħôîϙŽôēĖèīôŜϟϙ ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙŕīÍèôîϙÍîĤÍèôĲťϙťĺϙťēôϙŜĖČĲϙĺſĲôŘДŜϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϙĺŘϙŕŘôıĖŜôŜϙ ôƄèôŕťϙſēôĲϙťēôϙÍŕŕīĖèÍĲťϙèÍĲϙîôıĺĲŜťŘÍťôϙÍϙĲôôîϙċĺŘϙŕīÍèôıôĲťϙŪŕϙťĺϙĺĲôϙēŪĲîŘôîϙċôôťϙ ϼ͐͏͏ДϽϙċŘĺıϙťēôϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϙĺŘϙŕŘôıĖŜôŜϙÍĲîϙſĖťēϙťēôϙŕôŘıĖŜŜĖĺĲϙĺċϙťēôϙĖııôîĖÍťôīƅϙÍîĤÍèôĲťϙ ŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϙĺſĲôŘϼŜϽϟ ͒ϟ bĺϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙŕīÍèôîϙſĖťēĖĲϙťēĖŘťƅϙċôôťϙϼ͒͏ДϽϙĺċϙÍĲĺťēôŘϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙ æĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲϟ ͓ϟ ĲîôŘϙĲĺϙèĖŘèŪıŜťÍĲèôŜϙıÍƅϙÍϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲϙæôϙŕīÍèôîϙĺĲϙťēôϙŕĺŘťĖĺĲϙĺċϙťēôϙ ŕŪæīĖèϙŘĖČēťϙĺċϙſÍƅϙŪŕĺĲϙſēĖèēϙŽôēĖèīôŜϙŘôČŪīÍŘīƅϙťŘÍŽôŘŜôϙĺŘϙŕÍŘħϟϙbĺϙŜĖČĲϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙŕīÍèôîϙ ĖĲϙıôîĖÍĲϙŜťŘĖŕŜϠϙŕīÍĲťôŘϯťŘÍƯĖèϙĖŜīÍĲîŜϠϙĺŘϙĖĲϙťēôϙŘĺÍîſÍƅϠϙĖĲèīŪîĖĲČϙĺĲϙŽôēĖèīôŜϟϙēôϙĖťƅϙ ŜēÍīīϙîôťôŘıĖĲôϠϙÍťϙĖťŜϙŜĺīôϙîĖŜèŘôťĖĺĲϠϙťēôϙÍŕŕŘĺŽôîϙīĺèÍťĖĺĲϙĺċϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙťĺϙ ôĲŜŪŘôϙŕôîôŜťŘĖÍĲϙŜÍċôťƅϙÍĲîϙŽôēĖèīôϙèĖŘèŪīÍťĖĺĲϟϙÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙĲĺťϙæôϙ īĺèÍťôîϙſĖťēĖĲϙťēĖŘťƅϙċôôťϙϼ͒͏ДϽϙĺċϙŜťŘôôťϙĖĲťôŘŜôèťĖĺĲŜϙĺŘϙſēôŘôϙťēôƅϙĖĲēĖæĖťϙıĺťĺŘĖŜťϙŜĖČēťϙ îĖŜťÍĲèôŜϟ ͔ϟ bĺϙŜĖĲČīôϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϙĺŘϙĺťēôŘϙŕÍŘťƅϙŜēÍīīϙŜĖťôϙıĺŘôϙťēÍĲϙĺĲôϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲϙ ſĖťēĖĲϙťēôϙĖťƅϟ Page 128 of 174 ͕ϟ ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙıÍƅϙĺĲīƅϙæôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙîŪŘĖĲČϙťēôϙēĺŪŘŜϙťēôϙŕŘôıĖŜôŜϙĺŘϙ æŪŜĖĲôŜŜϙĖŜϙĺŕôĲϙťĺϙťēôϙČôĲôŘÍīϙŕŪæīĖèϠϙŕŘĺŽĖîôîϙĲĺĲ-èĺııôŘèĖÍīϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙ ıÍƅϙæôϙŕīÍèôîϙĖĲϙťēôϙŕŪæīĖèϙŘĖČēťϙĺċϙſÍƅϙċĺŘϙÍϙıÍƄĖıŪıϙŕôŘĖĺîϙĺ ċϙťſôīŽôϙϼ͐͑ϽϙēĺŪŘŜϙŕôŘϙ ôÍèēϙťſôĲťƅ-ċĺŪŘϙϼ͓͑ϽϙēĺŪŘϙŕôŘĖĺîϟ ͖ϟ ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙťēÍťϙÍŘôϙĲĺťϙŕôŘıĖťťôîϙĺŘϙÍŘôϙĺťēôŘſĖŜôϙĺŪťϙĺċϙèĺıŕīĖÍĲèôϙſĖťēϙ ťēĖŜϙēÍŕťôŘϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙÍæÍťôîϙæƅϙťēôϙĖťƅϠϙŕŪŘŜŪÍĲťϙťĺϙťēôϙŕŘĺèôŜŜϙŜôťϙĺŪťϙĖĲϙťēĖŜϙēÍŕťôŘϟ ͗ϟ ēôϙŜĖČĲϙĺſĲôŘϙŜēÍīīϙıÍĖĲťÍĖĲϙťēôϙŜĖČĲϙĖĲϙťēôϙèĺĲîĖťĖĺĲϙĺŘĖČĖĲÍīīƅϙÍŕŕŘĺŽôîϟ ͘ϟ ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙÍŘôϙĲĺťϙŜŪæĤôèťϙťĺϙťēôϙťĖıôϙīĖıĖťŜϙÍŜϙŜťÍťôîϙĖĲϙŜôèťĖĺĲ ͐͒-͖-8 - ͐-ĖĖĖϟ ϼiŘîϟϙ͑͏͐͘-͐͏͓͐Ϡϙ͔-͑͘-͑͏͐͘ϢϙiŘîϟϙ͑͏͑͒-͐͐͏͒Ϡϙ͐-͔͑-͑͏͑͒ϢϙiŘîϟϙ͑͏͑͒-͐͐͏͕Ϡϙ͕-͓͐-͑͏͑͒Ͻ City of Redmond Fϟ Permitted Temporary Portable and Temporary Freestanding Signs. ôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ ŕĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲŜ ſēĖèēϙÍŘôϙôƄôıŕťϙċŘĺıϙťēôϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôĲťϙĺċϙÍ ŜĖČĲ ŕôŘıĖťϠϙ ŪĲīôŜŜϙĺťēôŘſĖŜôϙŕŘĺŽĖîôîϠϙÍŘôϙŕôŘıĖťťôîϙĖĲϙÍĲƅϙƏĺĲôϙŜŪæĤôèťϙťĺϙťēôϙċĺīīĺſĖĲČϙ ŘôŗŪĖŘôıôĲťŜϡ ͐ϟ ôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ ŕĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲŜ ſēĖèēϙÍŘôϙôƄôıŕťϙċŘĺıϙťēôϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôĲťϙĺċϙÍ ŜĖČĲ ŕôŘıĖťϠϙ ŪĲīôŜŜϙĺťēôŘſĖŜôϙŕŘĺŽĖîôîϠϙÍŘôϙŕôŘıĖťťôîϙĖĲϙÍĲƅϙƏĺĲôϙŜŪæĤôèťϙťĺϙťēôϙċĺīīĺſĖĲČϙ ŘôŗŪĖŘôıôĲťŜϡ Íϟ Number. ēôϙĲŪıæôŘϙĺċϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙŕĺŘťÍæīôϙèĺııôŘèĖÍīϠϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϠϙÍĲî èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲϙ ŜĖČĲŜ Íīīĺſôî ŜēÍīī æôϙÍŜϙċĺīīĺſŜϢϙŕŘĺŽĖîôîϠϙťēÍťϙĲĺťēĖĲČϙēôŘôĖĲ ŜēÍīī æôϙèĺĲŜťŘŪôîϙÍŜϙ ÍŪťēĺŘĖƏĖĲČϙťēôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅϙĺċ ŜĖČĲŜ ĺťēôŘſĖŜôϙŕŘĺēĖæĖťôîϙŪĲîôŘϙÍŕŕīĖèÍæīôϙŕŘĺŽĖŜĖĺĲŜϙĺċϙťēĖŜϙ èĺîôϠϙĖĲèīŪîĖĲČϙæŪťϙĲĺťϙīĖıĖťôîϙťĺ ēĺıôϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜ ŜĖČĲŜϡ Ėϟ >ĺŘϙÍĲƅϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϠϙĺŘϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙŪĲĖťϠϙīĺèÍťôîϙĖĲϙťēôϙϠϙaϠϙ"(Ϡϙ"Ϡϙi«ϠϙiϠϙaϠϙ ϠϙaϠϙĺŘϙIϙƏĺĲĖĲČϙîĖŜťŘĖèťŜϠϙĲĺϙıĺŘôϙťēÍĲϙĺĲôϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙŕĺŘťÍæīôϙèĺııôŘèĖÍīϙĺŘ ŘôÍīϙ ôŜťÍťôϙŜĖČĲ ŜēÍīī æôϙÍīīĺſôîϙċĺŘϙôÍèēϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϙīĺèÍťĖĺĲϙĺŘϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙŪĲĖťϙĺƯôŘôîϙċĺŘϙŜÍīôϙĺŘϙ īôÍŜôϢϙŕŘĺŽĖîôîϠϙťēÍťϙÍϙıÍƄĖıŪıϙĺċϙĺĲô ŕĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲ ŜēÍīī æôϙÍīīĺſôîϙċĺŘϙÍĲƅϙıŪīťĖ- ŪĲĖť èĺıŕīôƄ ĲĺťſĖťēŜťÍĲîĖĲČϙťēôϙĲŪıæôŘϙĺċϙŘôĲťÍīϙĺŘ îſôīīĖĲČϙŪĲĖťŜ ťēôŘôĖĲϙèŪŘŘôĲťīƅϙ ÍŽÍĖīÍæīôϙċĺŘϙŜÍīôϙĺŘϙīôÍŜôϟϙ>ĺŘϙôÍèēϙıŪīťĖ-ŪĲĖť èĺıŕīôƄϠϙĺĲôϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙċŘôôŜťÍĲîĖĲČϙЊċĺŘϙ ŜÍīôЋϙĺŘϙЊċĺŘϙīôÍŜôЋ ŜĖČĲ ıÍƅ æôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙŕôŘ ŜťŘôôťϙċŘĺĲťÍČôϟ ĖĖϟ >ĺŘϙÍĲƅϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϙĺŘϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙŪĲĖťϙīĺèÍťôîϙĖĲϙťēôϙ-͔ϠϙbaϙĺŘϙbϙƏĺĲĖĲČϙîĖŜťŘĖèťϠϙĲĺϙ ıĺŘôϙťēÍĲϙťēŘôôϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙŕĺŘťÍæīôϙèĺııôŘèĖÍīϙĺŘ ŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙŜĖČĲŜ ŜēÍīī æôϙÍīīĺſôîϙċĺŘϙ ôÍèēϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϙīĺèÍťĖĺĲϙĺŘϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙŪĲĖťϙĺƯôŘôîϙċĺŘϙŜÍīôϙĺŘϙīôÍŜôϟϙ>ĺŘϙôÍèēϙŜĖĲČīô- Page 129 of 174 ċÍıĖīƅ ĺŘ ıĖîîīô-ēĺŪŜĖĲČ ŘôŜĖîôĲťĖÍī ŜĖťôϠϙĺĲôϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙċŘôôŜťÍĲîĖĲČϙЊċĺŘϙŜÍīôЋϙĺŘϙЊċĺŘϙ īôÍŜôЋ ŜĖČĲ ıÍƅ æôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙŕôŘ ŜťŘôôťϙċŘĺĲťÍČôϟ ĖĖĖϟ >ĺŘϙÍĲƅϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϙĺŘϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙŪĲĖťϙīĺèÍťôîϙĖĲϙťēôϙba>ϙĺŘϙťēôϙia>ϙƏĺĲĖĲČϙîĖŜťŘĖèťϙĲĺϙ ıĺŘôϙťēÍĲϙĺĲôϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙŕĺŘťÍæīôϙèĺııôŘèĖÍīϙĺŘ ŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙŜĖČĲ ŜēÍīī æôϙÍīīĺſôîϙċĺŘϙôÍèēϙ æŪŜĖĲôŜŜϙīĺèÍťĖĺĲϙĺŘϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙŪĲĖťϙĺƯôŘôîϙċĺŘϙŜÍīôϙĺŘϙīôÍŜôϢϙŕŘĺŽĖîôîϠϙťēÍťϙÍϙıÍƄĖıŪıϙĺċϙ ĺĲôϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ ŕĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲ ŜēÍīī æôϙÍīīĺſôîϙċĺŘϙÍĲƅϙıŪīťĖ-ŪĲĖťϙŘôŜĖîôĲťĖÍīϙÍŕÍŘťıôĲťϙĺŘϙ èĺĲîĺıĖĲĖŪı èĺıŕīôƄ ĲĺťſĖťēŜťÍĲîĖĲČϙťēôϙĲŪıæôŘϙĺċϙŘôĲťÍīϙĺŘ îſôīīĖĲČϙŪĲĖťŜ ťēôŘôĖĲϙ èŪŘŘôĲťīƅϙÍŽÍĖīÍæīôϙċĺŘϙŜÍīôϙĺŘϙīôÍŜôϟϙ>ĺŘϙôÍèēϙıŪīťĖ-ŪĲĖťϙŘôŜĖîôĲťĖÍīϙÍŕÍŘťıôĲťϙĺŘϙ èĺĲîĺıĖĲĖŪı èĺıŕīôƄϠϙĺĲôϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙċŘôôŜťÍĲîĖĲČϙЊċĺŘϙŜÍīôЋϙĺŘϙЊċĺŘϙīôÍŜôЋ ŜĖČĲ ıÍƅ æôϙ îĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙŕôŘ ŜťŘôôťϙċŘĺĲťÍČôϟ ĖŽϟ >ĺŘϙÍĲƅ èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲ ŜĖťô īĺèÍťôîϙĖĲϙÍĲƅϙƏĺĲĖĲČϙîĖŜťŘĖèťϙſĖťēĖĲϙťēô Ėťƅ īĖıĖťŜϠϙĲĺϙıĺŘôϙ ťēÍĲϙťſĺϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲϙŜĖČĲŜ ŜēÍīī æôϙÍīīĺſôîϙċĺŘϙôÍèē èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲ ŕŘĺĤôèť ŜĖťôϟ æϟ Size. Figure 21.44.010I Sandwich Board Sign Page 130 of 174 Ėϟ ĺııôŘèĖÍīϙÍĲîϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ ŕĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲŜ ŜēÍīī ĲĺťϙôƄèôôîϙŜĖƄϙŜŗŪÍŘôϙċôôťϙ ŕôŘ ŜĖČĲ ċÍèôϠϙÍĲîϙĲĺϙŜŪèē ŜĖČĲ ŜēÍīī èĺĲťÍĖĲϙıĺŘôϙťēÍĲϙťſĺ ŜĖČĲ ċÍèôŜϟϙĺııôŘèĖÍīϙÍĲîϙ ŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ ŕĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲŜ ŜēÍīī ĲĺťϙôƄèôôîϙŜĖƄϙċôôťϙĖĲϙēôĖČēťϠϙıôÍŜŪŘôîϙċŘĺıϙťēôϙ ŕŘôôƄĖŜťĖĲČϙČŘĺŪĲîϙīôŽôīϙťĺϙťēôϙťĺŕϙĺċϙťēô ŜĖČĲϟ ĖĖϟ ôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲϙŜĖČĲŜ ĖĲϙťēôϙϠϙ"(Ϡϙ"ϠϙaϠϙi«ϠϙiϠϙaϠϙϠϙaϠϙIϠϙ ia>ϠϙĺŘϙba>ϙƏĺĲĖĲČϙîĖŜťŘĖèť ŜēÍīī ĲĺťϙôƄèôôîϙ͒͑ϙŜŗŪÍŘôϙċôôťϙŕôŘ ŜĖČĲ ċÍèôϠ ŜēÍīī Ĳĺťϙ èĺĲťÍĖĲϙıĺŘôϙťēÍĲϙťſĺ ŜĖČĲ ċÍèôŜϠϙÍĲî ŜēÍīī ĲĺťϙôƄèôôîϙ͐͏ϙċôôťϙĖĲϙēôĖČēťϙſēôĲϙıôÍŜŪŘôîϙ ċŘĺıϙŕŘôôƄĖŜťĖĲČϙČŘĺŪĲîϙīôŽôīϙťĺϙťēôϙťĺŕϙĺċϙťēô ŜĖČĲϟ ĖĖĖϟ ôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲϙŜĖČĲŜ īĺèÍťôîϙĖĲϙťēôϙbaϙĺŘϙbϙƏĺĲĖĲČϙîĖŜťŘĖèťϠϙſēôĲϙ ÍŜŜĺèĖÍťôîϙſĖťēϙÍ ŜŪæîĖŽĖŜĖĺĲϠ ŜēÍīī ĲĺťϙôƄèôôîϙ͒͑ϙŜŗŪÍŘôϙċôôťϙŕôŘ ŜĖČĲ ċÍèôϠ ŜēÍīī Ĳĺťϙ èĺĲťÍĖĲϙıĺŘôϙťēÍĲϙťſĺ ŜĖČĲ ċÍèôŜϠϙÍĲî ŜēÍīī ĲĺťϙôƄèôôîϙ͐͏ϙċôôťϙĖĲϙēôĖČēťϙſēôĲϙıôÍŜŪŘôîϙ ċŘĺıϙŕŘôôƄĖŜťĖĲČϙČŘĺŪĲîϙīôŽôīϙťĺϙťēôϙťĺŕϙĺċϙťēô ŜĖČĲϟ Page 131 of 174 ĖŽϟ ôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲϙŜĖČĲŜ īĺèÍťôîϙĖĲϙťēôϙbϙƏĺĲĖĲČϙîĖŜťŘĖèťϠϙſēôĲϙĲĺťϙÍŜŜĺèĖÍťôîϙ ſĖťēϙÍ ŜŪæîĖŽĖŜĖĺĲϠ ŜēÍīī ĲĺťϙôƄèôôîϙŜĖƄϙŜŗŪÍŘôϙċôôťϙŕôŘ ŜĖČĲ ċÍèôϠ ŜēÍīī ĲĺťϙèĺĲťÍĖĲϙıĺŘôϙ ťēÍĲϙťſĺ ŜĖČĲ ċÍèôŜϠϙÍĲî ŜēÍīī ĲĺťϙôƄèôôîϙŜĖƄϙċôôťϙĖĲϙēôĖČēťϙſēôĲϙıôÍŜŪŘôîϙċŘĺıϙŕŘôôƄĖŜťĖĲČϙ ČŘĺŪĲîϙīôŽôīϙťĺϙťēôϙťĺŕϙĺċϙťēô ŜĖČĲϟ èϟ Location. bĺϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙŕĺŘťÍæīôϙèĺııôŘèĖÍīϠϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙĺŘ èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲϙŜĖČĲ ŜēÍīī æôϙ īĺèÍťôîϙſĖťēĖĲ ŽôēĖèīô īÍĲôŜϠϙæĖħôſÍƅŜϠϙťŘÍĖīŜϠϙŜĖîôſÍīħŜϠϙĺŘϙıôîĖÍĲϙŜťŘĖŕŜϟϙbĺϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙ ŕĺŘťÍæīôϙèĺııôŘèĖÍīϠϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϠϙĺŘ èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲϙŜĖČĲ ŜēÍīī æīĺèħ îŘĖŽôſÍƅŜ ĺŘϙæôϙÍƯĖƄôîϙ ťĺ ŪťĖīĖťƅϙŕĺīôŜϠ ťŘôôŜϠϙĺŘϙťŘÍƯĖè ŜĖČĲŜϟ ĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲ ťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙŜĖČĲŜ ıÍƅ æôϙÍƯĖƄôîϙťĺϙ ċôĲèĖĲČϙĺĲϙÍ èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲ ŜĖťôϠϙæŪťϙĲĺϙèĺııôŘèĖÍīϙĺŘϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ ŕĺŘťÍæīôϙ ŜĖČĲ ŜēÍīī æôϙÍƯĖƄôîϙťĺϙÍϙċôĲèôϟϙbĺϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙŕĺŘťÍæīôϙèĺııôŘèĖÍīϠϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϠϙ ĺŘ èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲϙŜĖČĲ ŜēÍīī æôϙŜťŘŪĲČϙæôťſôôĲ ťŘôôŜϟ Ėϟ ôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙŕĺŘťÍæīôϙèĺııôŘèĖÍīϠϙŘôÍīϙŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϠϙÍĲî èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲϙŜĖČĲŜ ıÍƅ æôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙ ĺĲīƅϙĖċϙťēôϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϠϙŘôÍīϙŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϠϙĺŘ èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲ ŜĖťô ťĺϙſēĖèēϙťēôƅϙŘôīÍťôϙĖŜϙīĺèÍťôîϙſĖťēĖĲϙ ôîıĺĲî Ėťƅ īĖıĖťŜϟ îϟ Festoons Prohibited. ēôϙŪŜôϙĺċϙæÍīīĺĺĲŜϠϙċôŜťĺĺĲ ƲÍČŜϠ ƲÍČŜϠϙŕôĲĲÍĲťŜϠϙīĖČēťŜϠϙĺŘϙÍĲƅϙ ĺťēôŘϙŜťÍĲî-ÍīĺĲôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅϙĺŘϙÍťťÍèēôîϙîĖŜŕīÍƅϙĺĲϙÍϙèĺııôŘèĖÍīϠϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙ ĺŘ èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲ ťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ ŕĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲ ĖŜϙŕŘĺēĖæĖťôîϟ ôϟ Animation Prohibited. bĺϙèĺııôŘèĖÍīϠϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙĺŘ èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲ ťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ ŕĺŘťÍæīôϙ ŜĖČĲ ŜēÍīī æôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙſēĖīôϙæôĖĲČϙŘĺťÍťôîϠϙſÍŽôîϠϙĺŘϙĺťēôŘſĖŜôϙĖĲϙıĺťĖĺĲϟ ċϟ Duration. Ėϟ ĺııôŘèĖÍīϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ ŕĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲŜ ıÍƅ æôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙĺĲīƅϙîŪŘĖĲČϙťēôϙēĺŪŘŜϙſēôĲϙťēôϙ èĺııôŘèĖÍīϙôŜťÍæīĖŜēıôĲťϙťĺϙſēĖèēϙťēôƅϙŘôīÍťôϙĖŜϙĺŕôĲϙċĺŘϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϟ ĖĖϟ ôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ ŕĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČĲŜ ıÍƅ æôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙĺĲīƅϙîŪŘĖĲČϙťēôϙēĺŪŘŜϙſēôĲϙťēôϙ ŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙťĺϙſēĖèēϙťēôƅϙŘôīÍťôϙĖŜϙťēôϙŜŪæĤôèťϙĺċϙÍĲϙĺŕôĲϙēĺŪŜôϙĺŘϙſēôĲϙÍ èĺıŕīôƄ ıÍĲÍČôŘϙ ĖŜϙÍŽÍĖīÍæīôϙťĺϙŜēĺſϙťēôϙŪĲĖťϟ ĖĖĖϟ ôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲϙŜĖČĲŜ ıÍƅ æôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙĺĲīƅϙîŪŘĖĲČϙťēôϙŕôŘĖĺîϙæôťſôôĲϙ ĖŜŜŪÍĲèôϙĺċ èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲ ŕôŘıĖťŜϙÍĲîϙĖŜŜŪÍĲèôϙĺċϙÍϙèôŘťĖƱèÍťôϙĺċϙĺèèŪŕÍĲèƅϙĺŘϙƱĲÍīϙ ĖĲŜŕôèťĖĺĲϙÍŕŕŘĺŽÍīϙċĺŘϙťēô èĺĲŜťŘŪèťĖĺĲϟ ĖŽϟ ôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙċŘôôŜťÍĲîĖĲČ ŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙŜĖČĲŜ ıÍƅ æôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙťēôϙôĲťĖŘôϙťĖıôϙťēôϙ ŪĲîôŘīƅĖĲČϙŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϙĖŜϙċĺŘϙŜÍīôϟ City of Poulsbo 18.170.090 Sandwich board signs. Page 132 of 174 ϟ ôŘıĖťϙôŗŪĖŘôîϟϙÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙĖĲťôĲîôîϙċĺŘϙŕôŘıÍĲôĲťϙîĖŜŕīÍƅϙϼıĺŘôϙťēÍĲϙ ċĺŪŘťôôĲϙîÍƅŜϙĖĲϙÍϙèÍīôĲîÍŘϙƅôÍŘϽϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙŘôŗŪĖŘôîϙťĺϙĺæťÍĖĲϙÍϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲϙŕôŘıĖťϙ ċŘĺıϙťēôϙèĖťƅϟ ͐ϟ ŜϙŕÍŘťϙĺċϙťēôϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲϙŕôŘıĖťϙċĺŘϙŜĖČĲŜϙťĺϙæôϙīĺèÍťôîϙĖĲϙťēôϙŕŪæīĖèϙŘĖČēť-ĺċ- ſÍƅϠϙťēôϙÍŕŕīĖèÍĲťϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙŘôŗŪĖŘôîϙťĺϙŕŘĺŽĖîôϙÍϙŜĖČĲôîϙÍĲîϙĲĺťÍŘĖƏôîϙŜťÍťôıôĲťϙÍŜŜŪıĖĲČϙ ÍīīϙīĖÍæĖīĖťƅϙċĺŘϙÍĲƅϙîÍıÍČôϙŘôŜŪīťĖĲČϙċŘĺıϙťēôĖŘϙŪŜôϙĺċϙťēôϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲϙÍĲîϙēĺīîĖĲČϙ ťēôϙèĖťƅϙēÍŘıīôŜŜϙċŘĺıϙÍĲƅϙīĺŜŜôŜϟ ͑ϟ ēôϙŕôŘıĖťϙÍŕŕīĖèÍťĖĺĲϙŜēÍīīϙĖĲèīŪîôϙťēôϙċĺīīĺſĖĲČϙĖĲċĺŘıÍťĖĺĲϙÍĲîϙæôϙŕŘĺèôŜŜôîϙĖĲϙ ÍèèĺŘîÍĲèôϙſĖťēϙôèťĖĺĲ ͐͗ϟ͖͐͏ϟ͐͑͏ϡ Íϟ ĖƏôϙÍĲîϙēôĖČēťϟ æϟ IĲťôĲîôîϙŕīÍèôıôĲťϙīĺèÍťĖĺĲϼŜϽϙĺĲϙÍĲîϙĺƯϙŕŘôıĖŜôŜϟ èϟ aÍťôŘĖÍīŜϟ ϟ ƅŕôϟ ͐ϟ iĲ-ŕŘôıĖŜôŜϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙÍŘôϙŕīÍèôîϙĺĲϙŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϙſēôŘôϙťēôϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϠϙŪŜôϙĺŘϙ ĺŘČÍĲĖƏÍťĖĺĲϙĖŜϙīĺèÍťôîϙĺŘϙĖııôîĖÍťôīƅϙÍîĤÍèôĲťϙťĺϙťēôϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϠϙŪŜôϙĺŘϙĺŘČÍĲĖƏÍťĖĺĲϙ ċŘĺĲťÍČôϟ ͑ϟ iƯ-ŕŘôıĖŜôŜϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙÍŘôϙĲĺťϙŕôŘıĖťťôîϟ ϟ ĖƏôϟϙÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙĲĺťϙôƄèôôîϙŜĖƄϙŜŗŪÍŘôϙċôôťϙĖĲϙŜĖƏôϙŕôŘϙċÍèôϙÍĲîϙŜēÍīīϙ ĲĺťϙôƄèôôîϙċĺŪŘϙċôôťϙĖĲϙēôĖČēťϟϙēôϙŜĖČĲϙŜēÍīīϙĲĺťϙæôϙÍŘťĖƱèĖÍīīƅϙĖĲèŘôÍŜôîϙÍæĺŽôϙťēôϙÍīīĺſôîϙ ıÍƄĖıŪıϙēôĖČēťϙæƅϙôīôŽÍťĖĲČϙťēôϙŜĖČĲϙĺƯϙĺċϙČŘĺŪĲîϙīôŽôīϙæƅϙÍĲƅϙıôÍĲŜϟ "ϟ bŪıæôŘϟϙbĺϙıĺŘôϙťēÍĲϙĺĲôϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲϙŕôŘϙŜťŘôôťϙċŘĺĲťÍČôϙϼĲĺťϙťĺϙôƄèôôîϙťſĺϙ ťĺťÍīϽϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙŕôŘıĖťťôîϙċĺŘϙÍĲƅϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϠϙĺŘČÍĲĖƏÍťĖĺĲϠϙĺŘϙŪŜôϟ (ϟ īÍèôıôĲťϟ ͐ϟ iĲ-ŕŘôıĖŜôŜϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙıŪŜťϙæôϙīĺèÍťôîϙĺĲϙŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϙîĖŘôèťīƅϙĖĲϙċŘĺĲťϙĺċϙťēôϙ æŪŜĖĲôŜŜϙîĖŜŕīÍƅĖĲČϙťēôϙŜĖČĲϠϙĺŘϙĖĲϙŘĖČēť-ĺċ-ſÍƅϙĺĲϙťēôϙŜÍıôϙŜĖîôϙĺċϙŜťŘôôťϙÍĲîϙĖııôîĖÍťôīƅϙ ÍîĤÍèôĲťϙťĺϙťēôϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϟ ͑ϟ ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙÍŘôϙĲĺťϙťĺϙæôϙŕīÍèôîϙĺĲϙŜĖîôſÍīħŜϠϙôƄèôŕťϙĖĲϙťēôϙ-͐ϙƏĺĲĖĲČϙ îĖŜťŘĖèťϢϙŕŘĺŽĖîôîϠϙťēÍťϙıĖĲĖıŪıϙ"ϙŜĖîôſÍīħϙſĖîťēϙŘôıÍĖĲŜϙÍŽÍĖīÍæīôϟ ͒ϟ ĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙĲĺťϙèŘôÍťôϙÍϙťŘÍƯĖèϙŜÍċôťƅϙēÍƏÍŘîϙæƅϙĺæŜťŘŪèťĖĲČϙťēôϙŽĖôſϙĺŘϙŕÍŜŜÍČôϙĺċϙ ŕôîôŜťŘĖÍĲŜϠϙèƅèīĖŜťŜϙĺŘϙıĺťĺŘĖŜťŜϟ ͓ϟ ĖČĲϙŕīÍèôıôĲťϙıÍƅϙĲĺťϙĺæŜťŘŪèťϙÍĲϙôĲťŘÍĲèôϙťĺϙÍϙæŪĖīîĖĲČϠϙŜťôŕŜϙĺŘϙîŘĖŽôſÍƅϙÍèèôŜŜϟ Page 133 of 174 ͔ϟ bĺϙŜĖČĲϙıÍƅϙæôϙŕīÍèôîϙſĖťēĖĲϙÍϙŜĖČēťϙŽĖŜĖĺĲϙèīôÍŘÍĲèôϙťŘĖÍĲČīôϙĺŘϙſĖťēĖĲϙƱŽôϙċôôťϙĺċϙÍϙ ſēôôīèēÍĖŘϙŘÍıŕϟ ͕ϟ bĺϙŜĖČĲϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙŕīÍèôîϙſĖťēĖĲϙťēôϙŘĺÍîſÍƅϠϙťŘÍƯĖèϙĖŜīÍĲîϠϙıôîĖÍĲϙĺŘϙèĖŘèīôϟ >ϟ ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙıÍƅϙæôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙĺĲīƅϙîŪŘĖĲČϙťēôϙēĺŪŘŜϙĺċϙôĖČēťϙÍϟıϟϙťĺϙťôĲϙŕϟıϟϙ ĺĲϙîÍƅŜϙťēôϙæŪŜĖĲôŜŜϙîĖŜŕīÍƅĖĲČϙŜŪèēϙŜĖČĲϙĖŜϙĺŕôĲϟϙ®ēôĲϙŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙÍŘôϙ èĺĲťĖĲŪĺŪŜīƅϙîĖŜŕīÍèôîϙÍĲîϙĲĺťϙŘôıĺŽôîϙîÍĖīƅϠϙťēôϙèĖťƅϙŜēÍīīϙēÍŽôϙťēôϙÍŪťēĺŘĖťƅϙťĺϙŘôıĺŽôϙ ŜÍĖîϙŜĖČĲϙŕŪŘŜŪÍĲťϙťĺϙôèťĖĺĲ ͐͗ϟ͖͐͏ϟ͓͐͏ϼϽϠϙÍĲîϙıÍƅϙŘôŽĺħôϙĖťŜϙŕôŘıĖťϟ @ϟ ÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϙîôťôŘıĖĲôîϙťĺϙŕĺŜôϙÍϙťēŘôÍťϙťĺϙťēôϙŕŪæīĖèЍŜϙŜÍċôťƅϙĺŘϙÍŘôϙīĺèÍťôîϙ ĖĲϙŜĖČēťϙèīôÍŘÍĲèôϙÍŘôÍŜϙſĖīīϙæôϙŘôıĺŽôîϙæƅϙťēôϙèĖťƅϠϙŪĲîôŘϙťēôϙŕŘĺŽĖŜĖĺĲŜϙĺċϙ ôèťĖĺĲ ͐͗ϟ͖͐͏ϟ͓͐͏ϼϽϟ Fϟ [ĖČēťĖĲČϠϙŜťŘôÍıôŘŜϠϙæÍīīĺĺĲŜϠϙſĖĲîŜĺèħŜϠϙÍĲîϙĺťēôŘϙıÍťôŘĖÍīŜϙŜēÍīīϙĲĺťϙæôϙÍťťÍèēôîϙťĺϙ ŜÍĲîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČĲŜϟ Iϟ ĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙèĺĲŜťŘŪèťôîϙĺċϙſôÍťēôŘ-ŘôŜĖŜťÍĲťϙıÍťôŘĖÍīŜϠϙŕŘĺċôŜŜĖĺĲÍīīƅϙīôťťôŘôîϙÍĲîϙ ĲôÍťīƅϙŕÍĖĲťôîϟϙēôϙŜĖČĲϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙèĺĲŜťŘŪèťôîϙťĺϙÍŽĺĖîϙæôĖĲČϙæīĺſĲϠϙťĖŕŕĖĲČϙĺŘϙċÍīīĖĲČϙċŘĺıϙĖťŜϙ ĖĲťôĲîôîϙīĺèÍťĖĺĲϟϙĖČĲŜϙŜēÍīīϙŘôıÍĖĲϙĖĲϙČĺĺîϙèĺĲîĖťĖĺĲϙÍĲîϙŘôŕÍĖŘôîϙÍĲîϙıÍĖĲťÍĖĲôîϙÍŜϙ ĲôôîôîϟϙϼiŘîϟϙ͑͏͓͑-͏͔ϙЯ ͑ϙϼ(ƄēϟϙϙЯ ͓͐ϽϠϙ͑͏͓͑ϢϙiŘîϟϙ͑͏͐͒-͏͓ϙЯ ͑ϙϼ(ƄēϟϙϙϼŕÍŘťϽϽϠϙ͑͏͐͒Ͻ Page 134 of 174 Community Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499 EXHIBIT “4” Public Hearing Notice City of Pasco NOTICE OF OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARING AND CONTINUED OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARING FOR CODE AMENDMENTS AND EMERGENCY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Si necesita ayuda para entender este aviso o necesita más información, por favor llame al Departamento de Desarrollo Comunitario y Económico de la Ciudad de Pasco a 509-545-3441. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: The City of Pasco is considering proposed code amendment(s) and an emergency comprehensive plan amendment. The Pasco Planning Commission will hold an open record public hearing and a continued open record public hearing to receive public comment on the proposed amendments at 6:30 p.m. on January 15, 2026, in the Council Chambers at Pasco City Hall, 525 N. 3rd Avenue, Pasco, Washington (please use the east side parking lot entrance). Final action on the proposed Code Amendments and Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment will be taken by the City Council at a later date. Please note that City Council action on the Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment must occur within sixty (60) days of receipt of the Planning Commission’s findings and recommendations. This notice also serves as notification to the general public regarding the public hearing. At this hearing, the Planning Commission will hear public testimony regarding the following proposed amendments: CA2025-002 Sandwich Board Signs within Right-of-Way:The City of Pasco Planning Commission will conduct an open record public hearing to consider a proposed code amendment regarding the allowance of sandwich board (A- frame) signs within the public right-of-way. The Planning Commission previously held a workshop on December 18, 2025, to discuss the proposal. The targeted amendment would allow sandwich board signs within the Downtown Pasco Overlay District, where placement within the sidewalk area has been technically prohibited since 2006. Under the proposed regulations, each business would be permitted one sign per frontage, all required ADA clearances must be maintained, signs may only be displayed during business hours, and signs located near intersections must be positioned to minimize impacts on sightlines. This regulated approach is intended to support business visibility and streetscape activation while maintaining pedestrian safety and accessibility, preventing visual clutter, and establishing clear standards for sign placement and oversight. For more information please contact: 509-544-4146 / barragani@pasco-wa.gov CPA2025-002/CA2025-003 Emergency Amendment-Low Density Residential Land Use-R-S-20 Zone Changes:The City of Pasco Planning Commission held an open record hearing on December 18, 2025, at 6:30 p.m., to review an emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Code Amendment. During the hearing, the Planning Commission voted to continue the discussion to January 15, 2026, to allow for further research and review. As part of this research, the Commission has asked staff to revise the original proposal to maintain the proposed “Riverview” land use designation to allow 2-5 units per acre but with a zoning designation for the area that provides for less density at 2-3 or 2-4 units per acre with revised corresponding development regulations in code relating to lot sizes and dimensions. ORIGINAL NOTICE:On April 17, 2023, the City adopted Ordinance No. 4663, which amended PMC 25.215.015 and the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Density Table (Table LU-1). The ordinance revised allowable gross densities for Low Density Residential (LDR) zoning districts from 2–5 dwelling units per acre to 3–6 dwelling units per acre, and established that all new development must meet the minimum density requirements in PMC 25.215.015. In the R- S-20 zone, classified as Low Density Residential with a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet, a one-acre lot can accommodate only two dwelling units. Under the current standards, such development is prohibited, effectively creating a moratorium on small-lot development in the R-S-20 zone. The City has received several requests from property owners to divide land in this zone, but those applications have been denied for failing to meet the adopted Page 135 of 174 density requirements. To address this issue, the Planning Division has been directed to initiate an amendment. The proposed land use designation of 2–5 units per acre would provide the policy framework for low-density housing, while the zoning code would implement this direction through parcel-level regulations. To align zoning with the revised land use designation, staff proposes replacing the R-S-20 zone with a new R-9 Low Density Residential District, establishing a minimum lot size of 8,700 square feet. This change allows zoning to support the full density range permitted by the land use designation while still acco mmodating larger half-acre parcels where septic systems are an option. The proposed R-9 district provides a balanced approach that restores consistency, reflects infrastructure realities, and prepares the City for future statewide housing obligations. The City of Pasco has transmitted the proposed emergency amendment to the Washington State Department of Commerce for the required 60-day agency review. A State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) checklist will be reviewed for this action and made available for public review and comment in accordance with WAC 197-11-355, with the optional Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) process applied as appropriate. For more information please contact: 509- 544-4146 / barragani@pasco-wa.gov Public Comment Period: Written comments must be submitted to the Community and Economic Development Department no later than 5:00 p.m. on January 15, 2026. Any interested party may submit written comments, attend the public hearing to provide oral testimony, or request notification of the Planning Commission’s findings and recommendations to the City Council, as well as the City Council’s final decision when action is taken. To submit comments, request notification, or ask questions regarding these proposals, please contact the Planning Division using the phone number or email address provided after the project description, or by mail or in person at the address below. Please note that written comments submitted prior to the meeting will be accepted and included in the official record. Oral testimony provided during the meeting will also be accepted and entered into the record at that time. City of Pasco – Planning Division P.O. Box 293 Pasco, WA 99301 In Person: 525 N. 3rd Avenue, 1st Floor (CED) Pasco, WA 99301 If you wish to participate in the hearing virtually, please register at least 2 hours prior to the meeting at the following registration link: Public Comment. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar. The City of Pasco welcomes full participation in public meetings by all citizens. No qualified individual with a disability shall be excluded or denied the benefit of participating in such meetings. If you wish to use auxiliary aids or require assistance to comment at this public meeting, please contact the Community Development Department at (509) 545-3441 or TDD (509) 585-4425 at least ten days prior to the date of the meeting to make arrangements for special needs. Page 136 of 174 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES City Hall - Council Chambers 525 North Third Avenue Pasco, Washington THURSDAY, DECEBMER 18, 2025 6:30 PM Page 1 of 6 CALL TO ORDER The City of Pasco Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m., by Chair Jerry Cochran. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Cochran led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Austin Crawford, Pat Jones, Dana Crutchfield, Jay Hendler and Jerry Cochran, a quorum was declared. Commissioners Excused: Rosa Torres, Kim Lehrman, and Rob Waites Staff Present: C& ED Director Haylie Matson, C&ED Deputy Director Craig Raymond, and Administrative Assistant II Carmen Patrick DECLARATIONS Chair Cochran asked if there were any Planning Commission members who have a declaration at this time regarding any of the items on the agenda.  No declarations were heard. Chair Cochran asked if anyone in the audience objected to any Planning Commission member hearing any of the items on the agenda.  No declarations were heard. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Jones motioned to approve the Planning Commission meeting minutes of November 20, 2025. Commissioner Hendler seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. OLD BUSINESS None PUBLIC HEARINGS • CPA 2025-001 Emergency Comp Plan Amendment Pasco School District #1 Capital Facilities Plan Adoption Craig Raymond presented the staff report for the Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The amendment is considered “emergency” because it is occurring outside the normal annual cycle and during an active major Comprehensive Plan update. The City Council initiated the process by Resolution 4679, 60-day Commerce notice has been provided, and the Planning Commission is being asked to conduct the public hearing and make a formal recommendation to Council, which will take final action within 60 days. The amendment incorporates the school district’s updated Capital Facilities Plan, including service standards, facility inventory, capacity, enrollment forecasts, facility needs/costs, financing, and impact fee calculations. The update reflects recently completed and significant upcoming school projects, which influenced impact fee changes. Page 137 of 174 Page 2 of 6 Council adopted Ordinance 4774 revising school impact fees: single-family impact fees were eliminated, and multifamily impact fees decreased from $4,525 per unit to $2,595 per unit. Despite reductions, future facility needs remain. Questions/Comments from Commissioners Commissioner Crutchfield ask what the reasoning was behind them being lowered so much. Craig Raymond explained that they have multiple funding sources (including impact fees, bonds, and levies). Major projects have recently been completed, and future facility needs are shifting in a different direction. Director Matson noted that school impact fees must have a clear nexus to new student population generated by new development, not the city’s existing population. State law strictly limits how much can be charged. Fees cannot be increased to make new development pay for existing deficiencies (e.g., an entirely new high school serving current students). Fees must be directly tied to impacts created by new growth. Chair Cochran opened the public hearing, nothing was heard, Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Jones moved that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 2025-001, incorporating the Pasco School District 2025, Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City of Pasco 2018 Comprehensive Plan by addendum. Motions was seconded by Commissioner Hendler, motion passed unanimously. • CPA 2025-002 Emergency Comp Plan Amendment Residential Density Amendment Director Matson presented the staff report and asked the Commission to consider a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, companion rezone, and related text amendments to address an inconsistency between Comprehensive Plan density requirements and RS-20 zoning in the Riverview area. The proposal restores a 2–5 units per acre land-use designation and replaces RS-20 with a new R-9 Low Density Residential zone to enable subdivision and development. Changes are limited to the Riverview area and reflect sewer service constraints and larger lot character. Proposed development standards include an 8,700 sq. ft. minimum lot size, lot coverage up to 45% (previously 40%), and modest front and rear setback reductions, with side setbacks retained. The action maintains low-density character, better aligns with infrastructure limitations, and positions the city for future housing law compliance. Two motions were requested: one for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and one for the zoning/text amendments. Questions/Comments from Commissioners Commissioner Crutchfield asked whether the proposed action constitutes a true code change rather than a simple renaming and whether notice to all affected property owners is required. She Expressed concern that this is a significant change and that each resident and property owner in the area should be notified in advance of the public hearing so they can understand potential impacts. Director Matson replied that this action is treated as a citywide or area-wide rezone, and current code does not require direct mailed notice to all affected property owners. She noted that past practice for similar broad rezonings has not included individual mailings. Commissioner Crutchfield expressed concern that the proposal represents a significant change for existing Riverview neighborhoods, particularly with the potential introduction of triplexes in established areas where residents invested with certain expectations. She recalled prior assurances about preserving neighborhood character. Crutchfield also asked whether state law mandates construction of higher- density housing on eligible lots or whether owners may still choose to build single-family homes. Director Matson clarified that while 2–5 units per acre is modest in an urban context, it represents a significant change for the Riverview area, effectively more than doubling current density. She explained Page 138 of 174 Page 3 of 6 that the proposal follows prior City Council direction and responds to property owners seeking greater ability to develop their land, while recognizing that opinions will differ. Director Matson emphasized that the current proposal maintains single-family and does not allow triplexes; those discussions relate to future state-mandated “missing middle” housing requirements under HB 1110 and will be discussed at a later time. Commissioner Crutchfield stated that she feels this deserves a lot more consideration and letting the property owners in the area know because they don't as there was only newspaper notification of the hearing. Crutchfield stated that she is aware the city is not bound to do that by code, but this is a significant change. Commissioner Jones asked if the City of Pasco adopted the Uniform Building Code for their rules for how they build. What rule book did they follow and do those setbacks and those kinds of things you talked about; do they fall into those guidelines? Director Matson answered International Building Codes, International Resident Codes, and State-specific Energy Codes have been adopted and clarified that building separation depends on fire code and construction standards. With appropriate firewalls, buildings may be attached; without firewalls, typical separation is governed by required setbacks (e.g., 10 feet between structures, 5 feet per side). Setbacks and lot coverage limits are determined by city regulations. Commissioner Crutchfield asked if the property owners within Franklin County, the Donut Hole area, since they're part of the urban growth, are they subject to these changes as well? Director Matson stated no. Commissioner Crutchfield stated she understood that the current proposal applies only to the Riverview area, and that future citywide changes may be required later in response to state mandates. Director Matson clarified that citywide densities are currently designated at 3–6 units per acre, and that various zoning districts (R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4) already exist across the city. Citywide changes are not automatically required at this time. Commissioner Crutchfield stated, for the record, that she views the proposal as a significant change affecting a relatively small portion of the city, despite being characterized as citywide. She reiterated her concern that, if the City intends to pursue this action, the minimum level of consideration should have included providing written notice to the affected property owners. While she acknowledged that staff explained the City is not required to notify all property owners citywide, she emphasized that the specific property owners impacted by the proposal should have received notice of the public hearing in advance, so they would be aware and have an opportunity to engage before being presented with a decision they cannot influence. She stated that, in her view, this consideration for property owners who have invested in their properties is more important than prioritizing the development community’s desire to receive an answer by the end of the year. Chair Cochran expressed that the issue is complex and politically sensitive. He noted that many `Riverview residents are concerned about increased density, especially replacement of large-lot properties with multiple new homes, which could change neighborhood character. Suggested aligning with Council direction in the least impactful way, potentially targeting densities closer to three units per acre to balance development opportunities with protection of existing neighborhood feel. Chair Cochran emphasized the desire from many homeowners to maintain the current Riverview/West Pasco lifestyle and larger-lot character. Director Matson clarified that in 2023 Council set a citywide density range of 3–6 units per acre and later directed staff to pursue a 2–5 unit per acre range for the Riverview Comprehensive Plan designation. Explained that 2–5 units per acre functions as an umbrella range, under which different zoning options (e.g., 2–3 units per acre) could still comply. Noted that the Planning Commission is Page 139 of 174 Page 4 of 6 making a recommendation to Council, which makes the final decision. Also cautioned that limiting density to around three units per acre would likely remove the option for development on septic, requiring sewer availability instead. Chair Cochran stated we are a recommendation to the council. They can completely ignore and overrule like they have done on occasion. That's their prerogative because they're the elected officials. But I do think if you want a recommendation out of this body, you're going to have to come up with a more moderate approach. Commissioner Crutchfield agreed and emphasized the importance of respecting existing homeowners who have already invested in the area and avoiding situations where they are surprised by nearby development that could negatively affect them. Commissioner Hendler followed with support for maintaining lower density in the Riverview area, noting that many larger cities are increasing density by reducing development standards, but those pressures are not yet present locally. Emphasized the desire to keep the area livable and consistent with its current character. Chair Cochran opened the public hearing, nothing was heard, Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Crutchfield made a motion to send the package back to staff for rework based on some recommendations the Commission have made. Commissioner Crawford asked Director Matson what the item would be sent back for and what additional information would come from that process to help the Commission. Director Matson noted that a wide range of opinions were shared and said staff is seeking clearer direction from the Planning Commission, especially on public noticing. She explained that if no action is taken, development would remain prohibited in RS-20 areas, which creates some urgency, but emphasized the importance of getting the changes right rather than rushing. She also stated that staff is willing to continue the discussion over multiple meetings. Director Matson explained that the proposal has two main parts: adjusting the Comprehensive Plan designation in the Riverview area from 3–6 units per acre to 2–5 units per acre and making related zoning changes. Commissioner Jones seconded the motion, motion passed unanimously. WORSHOP • CA2025-002 Sandwich Board Signs within Right-of-Way Ivan Barragan presented a proposal to allow sandwich board signs within the public right-of-way in the Downtown Overlay District and a 300-foot buffer area. The intent is to permit signs along business frontages within sidewalk or improved frontage areas, with placement standards to protect visibility at intersections and accessibility. Proposed code changes would also address removal of violations and clarify prohibited locations (e.g., travel lanes, medians, roundabouts). Examples from other cities were provided for comparison. Potential benefits include added flexibility for downtown businesses and clearer enforcement standards. Alternatives discussed included no action, unregulated allowance (not recommended), or expanding the allowance citywide. Staff requested Planning Commission input and recommended scheduling a January 15, 2026, public hearing. Questions/Comments from Commissioners Commissioner Jones raised concerns about ADA accessibility and sidewalk width impacts from sandwich board signs, noting variability in sidewalk conditions. Emphasized the need for an enforceable ordinance and requested clarification on who would be responsible for enforcement and whether it would be complaint-based or proactive. Staff indicated that enforcement would likely fall to Code Page 140 of 174 Page 5 of 6 Enforcement and, given current staffing constraints, would primarily be complaint-based rather than proactive patrols. Commissioner Crutchfield raised concern about prohibited sandwich board signs being placed in the public right-of-way, potentially impacting pedestrian accessibility and safety. Clarification was requested on enforcement responsibility. Questions were also raised about allowing one sign per business tenant in multi-tenant buildings and whether this could result in excessive sidewalk obstructions due to lack of spacing or placement standards. Ivan Barragan noted that, due to limited code enforcement capacity, not all prohibited signs are currently being addressed. The proposal would allow sandwich board signs with specific restrictions. Flexibility for multi-tenant buildings was discussed to provide signage opportunities while acknowledging potential visual clutter. As the proposal is in the early stages, recommendations are being considered, and the matter will move forward by consensus. Chair Cochran asked if there's no enforcement of prohibited signs, what makes them think there would be any change in enforcement of regulated signs? Director Matson stated that while enforcement of sandwich board sign violations does occur, it is limited and not a primary focus due to staffing constraints and higher-priority life safety issues. Enforcement is generally complaint-driven, with staff responding when a sign poses a problem. • Comprehensive Plan and Economic Development discussion Director Matson provided an overview of the economic development element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, noting that consultants are underway and internal and partner discussions have begun, including coordination with the Port of Pasco and economic development specialists. It was shared that monthly workshop discussions will be brought forward to gather Council vision and feedback, with no immediate decisions required. Key topics discussed included Pasco’s strengths and gaps in retail, commercial, and entertainment offerings; the desire to attract destination retail and unique uses that draw visitors to Pasco; opportunities for expanded shopping, dining, and entertainment; and long-term healthcare needs, particularly in West Pasco. Workforce considerations were also discussed, including Pasco’s younger and diverse workforce, the need for higher-wage employment opportunities, and potential future industries such as aerospace manufacturing. The economic development element is intended to be implementation-focused and actionable rather than aspirational, and Council feedback will be shared with the consultant as the plan is developed. Questions/Comments from Commissioners Commissioner Jones commented from a newer perspective; the City of Pasco and the broader Tri-Cities area lack a dedicated fine arts venue. It was suggested that the region has sufficient population and higher-wage employment to support such a facility, and that developing a fine arts venue could represent a potential opportunity for Pasco’s economic development. Commissioner Hendler emphasizing the Columbia River as a major, underutilized asset for Pasco. It was suggested that greater focus be placed on river-oriented development, including recreation, hospitality, and business uses, and that opportunities to better connect the city to the riverfront should be explored despite regulatory challenges. Commissioner Crawford stated that expanding retail in Pasco is a necessity given the City’s rapid residential growth and increasing infrastructure demands. While Pasco has strong housing growth and a high per capita student population, reliance as a bedroom community does not generate sufficient tax revenue to support long-term infrastructure needs, underscoring the importance of attracting additional retail and commercial development. Page 141 of 174 Page 6 of 6 Commissioner Crutchfield support was expressed for the proposed ideas, with emphasis on leveraging Pasco’s unique assets, such as the river, while continuing to pursue additional retail. The importance of ensuring adequate transportation and infrastructure to support growth was noted, particularly along key corridors. It was also noted that Pasco’s distinct amenities and character, when developed in synergy with neighboring communities, can help strengthen the City’s overall economic position. Commissioner Crawford added that economic development functions as a reinforcing cycle, with employers and retailers evaluating factors such as household income and housing costs when choosing locations. It was noted that Pasco currently faces stronger competition from neighboring cities in these areas, and that falling further behind could make it increasingly difficult to attract higher-wage employers and retail investment. Chair Cochran reiterated for river-focused development, noting that regulatory constraints have limited progress and that coordinated advocacy may be needed. It was also noted that attracting higher-wage jobs may require Pasco to focus on targeted economic specializations. Focusing on specific industries that bring higher-wage jobs. Data centers were mentioned as one possible opportunity given Pasco’s strong power infrastructure, and targeting these types of industries could help strengthen and diversify the local economy. OTHER BUSINESS Director Matson shared that another Comprehensive Plan workshop topic will be brought forward next month. A staffing update was provided, noting the department is nearing full staffing with a senior planner starting soon and a Planner II position still open. Despite recent changes, staff are performing well, and major permit system improvements are underway. Online permit payments are expected to be available next month, with fully online, fillable permit applications anticipated later this year. These updates are intended to improve customer service, reduce phone inquiries, and streamline internal processes. Staff and IT were thanked for their work, with acknowledgment that some initial system adjustments are expected as the new tools are implemented. ADJOURNMENT Chair Cochran stated with no other business, I recommend a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Crutchfield made the motion to adjourn the meeting, it was seconded by Commissioner Crawford, and the motion passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8:11 pm. YouTube link to watch full meeting: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=pasco+wa+planning+commission+meeting+20025 Respectfully submitted, Carmen Patrick, Administrative Assistant II Community & Economic Development Department Page 142 of 174 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES City Hall - Council Chambers 525 North Third Avenue Pasco, Washington THURSDAY, JANUARY 15, 2026 6:30 PM Page 1 of 8 CALL TO ORDER The City of Pasco Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m., by Chair Jerry Cochran. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Cochran led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Rosa Torres, Austin Crawford, Pat Jones, Kim Lehrman, Rob Waites, Dana Crutchfield, Miguel Miranda and Jerry Cochran, a quorum was declared. Commissioners Excused: Brian Tungesvik Staff Present: C&ED Director Haylie Matson, C&ED Deputy Director Craig Raymond, Senior Planner Daniel Leavitt, Planner III Ivan Barragan and Administrative Assistant II Carmen Patrick DECLARATIONS Chair Cochran asked if there were any Planning Commission members who have a declaration at this time regarding any of the items on the agenda.  Miguel Miranda recused himself on items CPA2025-002, Z2025-001 and CA2025-006, as a realtor of the community, he has an active client that is directly impacted by the decisions made tonight.  Commissioner Lehrman wanted to clarify two meetings ago in November, she had made a correction. She is not living in the SR20 Riverview area, and that correction during the meeting was not reflected in the meeting minutes in December. Chair Cochran asked if anyone in the audience objected to any Planning Commission member hearing any of the items on the agenda.  No declarations were heard. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Jones motioned to approve the Planning Commission meeting minutes of December 18, 2025. Commissioner Crawford seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. OLD BUSINESS None PUBLIC HEARINGS • CA2025-002 Sandwich Board Signs within Right-of-Way The proposed code amendment was previously reviewed by the Planning Commission in a workshop and later advanced to a public hearing. Notice was posted at City Hall and published in the Tri-City Herald. No public comments were received. Staff presented a limited code amendment to allow sandwich board signs within the public right-of-way in the Downtown Pasco Overlay District and a 300-foot buffer area. The proposal updates the sign code, clarifies definitions, revises the allowance table, and creates a new section, PMC 17.15.025 (Sandwich Board Signs). Page 143 of 174 Page 2 of 8 The amendment establishes clear standards governing placement, number of signs per business, hours of display, ADA accessibility, intersection safety, prohibited locations, enforcement and removal procedures, and includes a hold harmless provision, along with minor consistency updates to Title 17. A revision from the prior proposal adjusts corner lot standards, allowing signs closer to intersections when frontage placement is not feasible, provided a minimum 10-foot clearance from the curb radius or verge is maintained for pedestrian safety and sight distance. Staff noted this represents a significant update to a long-standing prohibition and provides added flexibility for downtown businesses while maintaining pedestrian safety. Alternatives included taking no action, allowing signs without regulation (not recommended), or expanding the allowance citywide. Staff recommended the Planning Commission forward a recommendation to City Council for consideration at the February 9, 2026, workshop, with final action anticipated at the February 17, 2026, meeting. Questions/Comments from Commissioners Commissioner Jones asked about a slide depicting a vehicle marked with an “X” and its purpose. Ivan Barragan explained that the image was intended to clarify that sandwich board signs are not permitted on vehicles. Commissioner Lehrman stated that she appreciated the language clarifying the construction of the signs but noted that the code does not specify that signs should be weighted. Given wind conditions in the area, she encouraged staff to consider adding language to address this concern. Ivan Barragan commented that he understood. Commissioner Crutchfield expressed concerns regarding enforcement and staffing capacity, noting the limited availability of code enforcement resources. She referenced an example observed along Court Street near Andy’s Diner where multiple sandwich board signs—located in areas that would not be permitted under the proposal—were placed in the middle of the sidewalk, potentially obstructing pedestrian access and ADA compliance. She questioned how the proposed standards would be effectively enforced given these constraints. Director Matson explained that enforcement is complaint-based and prioritized by life-safety concerns due to limited staffing. With two code enforcement officers handling a high volume of inquiries, issues are triaged, with immediate hazards addressed first. Staff noted that sandwich board signs are already a citywide issue and that the proposed amendment would establish clearer standards within downtown, where visibility and oversight are greater. The amendment is not expected to significantly change current enforcement practices. Chair Cochran opened the meeting for public comment, no individuals appeared, he then closed the public hearing for this item. Commissioner Lehrman asked if there was insight as far as potential opportunities for additional code enforcement staff. Director Matson noted that a presentation to City Council on code enforcement priorities and staffing levels is planned for later this year at the request of the City Manager’s Office. Staff explained that reductions in staffing have required corresponding adjustments to enforcement priorities citywide. Staff recommended bringing the issue to City Council for policy direction, noting that expanding enforcement across all issues citywide would require additional staffing and would be a budget consideration. Commissioner Crutchfield stated that, given the challenges facing code enforcement, she questioned the Page 144 of 174 Page 3 of 8 wisdom of taking action on an issue that will likely require enforcement when similar activity is already occurring in areas where it is not proposed and is difficult to enforce. She noted that while these issues may not be as severe as other reported violations, the enforcement challenges remain. Director Matson added that the proposal would reduce enforcement burden by allowing sandwich board signs under clear standards rather than prohibiting them outright. Establishing defined parameters would provide clarity for both business owners and code enforcement, reduce conflicts, and allow the Downtown Overlay District to serve as a pilot area to evaluate compliance and effectiveness. Chair Cochran noted an additional benefit of the proposal is reduced City liability. Establishing regulations and a hold harmless provision would help protect the City in the event of injuries related to sandwich board signs in the public right-of-way, as compared to having no clear standards or enforcement framework in place. Commissioner Lehrman asked about funding for code enforcement officers and whether Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds are used. Director Matson explained that approximately $70,000 is allocated to one or both positions, but those funds are restricted by CDBG requirements and must be spent in designated low-income areas, limiting applicability to downtown enforcement. Future funding levels are uncertain. Commissioner Lehrman also asked whether codifying sandwich board sign regulations could lead to increased complaints used to harass business owners. Director Matson responded that clear, objective standards are expected to reduce disputes rather than increase them by providing consistency, clarity, and allowing downtown businesses to better self-manage compliance. Commissioner Jones stated “I move that the Planning Commission recommend, and the City Council approve Code Amendment CA2025-002, allowing Sandwich Board Signs within the public right of way only in the Downtown Pasco Overlay District as proposed in Exhibit 2.” Motion seconded by Commissioner Crawford, motion passed unanimously. • CPA 2025-002 Emergency Comp Plan Amendment Residential Density Amendment Director Matson provided background on an inconsistency between the City’s land use map and zoning code. In 2023, the city updated its low-density residential designation citywide to 3–6 units per acre; however, the RS-20 zoning district retains a 20,000-square-foot minimum lot size, effectively allowing approximately two units per acre. This conflict was identified at the staff and legal levels following a development proposal, and development in the affected RS-20 areas has been paused. She noted that property owners have been unable to develop for approximately 18 months due to this inconsistency and requested Commission action to provide relief. She acknowledged broader policy concerns and upcoming state requirements but explained that the proposal would resolve the immediate issue while keeping the area at the lowest density in the city. Director Matson presented a revised proposal establishing a new R-15 zoning designation allowing 2–3 units per acre and reverting the land use designation to 2–5 units per acre. This represents a modest increase from historic standards and maintains consistency with long-standing zoning policy. Staff noted public comments requesting larger lots for septic feasibility but explained that RS-20 has never allowed densities below two units per acre and that further reductions would conflict with city policy and Growth Management Act requirements. She emphasized that Pasco must plan for approximately 18,000 new housing units over the next 20 years and that reducing density in the Riverview area would require increased density elsewhere in the city. The Page 145 of 174 Page 4 of 8 proposal recognizes Riverview’s unique conditions, including larger lots and limited sewer availability, while limiting reliance on septic systems. Director Matson also discussed a potential lot size adjustment allowing up to a 20 percent variation to address septic and site constraints, consistent with flexibility allowed in other zoning districts. Staff recommended forwarding the revised 2–3 units per acre proposal to City Council, noting it represents the lowest density staff supports, and clarified that final recommendations rest with the Planning Commission. Questions/Comments from Commissioners Chair Cochran thanked staff for responding to Commission direction and for balancing developer and property owner interests while preserving West Pasco’s character. The Chair noted the proposal addressed a code inconsistency consistent with City Council direction and emphasized the importance of resolving the current issue independently of broader state housing policy discussions. The item was then opened for Commission discussion. Commissioner Crutchfield stated that staff clearly incorporated prior Commission and City Council feedback, noting the importance of avoiding a one-size-fits-all approach and honoring commitments made to residents at annexation regarding neighborhood character. While acknowledging that change is inevitable, she appreciated the proposal’s attempt to balance flexibility with community character. She asked for clarification on the purpose of a maximum lot size and whether a nearly one-acre lot could still be developed with a single-family home. Director Matson explained that state law allows a single-family home on any existing legal lot regardless of size, and such development would not be denied. The maximum lot size applies only to subdivisions and is intended to maintain the overall zoning density of 2–3 units per acre, while still allowing flexibility through varied lot sizes. Lots larger than one-half acre would need to be balanced by smaller lots within the same subdivision to meet density requirements. Similar density controls existed under the former RS-20 zoning. Commissioner Lehrman asked staff to respond to concerns raised by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife regarding septic systems near the shoreline and potential Shoreline Master Program conflicts, and whether Shoreline Master Program updates would be required if the proposal is forwarded to City Council. Director Matson stated that staff reviewed the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife comments and found no conflict with the Shoreline Master Program, noting the proposed density is lower than the shoreline’s allowed density range. She explained this position and stated that no Shoreline Master Program update is proposed at this time, as the concern reflects differing agency interpretations rather than a true conflict. Commissioner Jones expressed concern about septic systems near the shoreline and the importance of sewer connections to protect water quality, and thanked staff for the prior response. She asked how sewer would be provided where it is not currently available, who would bear the cost, and whether per-foot cost estimates exist. Director Matson explained that extending sewer infrastructure is expensive and can make development infeasible, which is a key reason for proposing a reduction to two units per acre to allow limited septic use where appropriate. Under the City’s 2023 land use changes, development generally assumed sewer connection at the property owner’s expense or delayed development until service is available. Where septic is not feasible, sewer extension or delayed development would be required. She explained that the City has attempted to partner with developers to extend sewer service in the area, Page 146 of 174 Page 5 of 8 including discussions about a lift station involving City Manager Zable. These efforts have been limited by the need for multiple easements and funding constraints, making projects infeasible. While grant opportunities continue to be explored, no funding is currently available, and future sewer extensions would likely require developer partnerships, which have not been successful to date. Commissioner Crutchfield asked for clarification on the proposed administrative adjustment authority for minimum lot sizes, questioning the City’s role given Health District oversight of septic systems and expressing concern about administrative discretion. She suggested that Hearing Examiner review with public notice could provide greater transparency. Director Matson responded that the proposed 20 percent adjustment is intended to address site-specific constraints, such as irregular lot shapes, while avoiding the added cost and time of a Hearing Examiner process. The adjustment would allow minimum lot sizes to range from approximately 11,000 square feet up to one-half acre, providing flexibility in lot design while maintaining overall density standards. She stressed that the provision is optional and could be revised or removed at the Commission’s direction, noting that an alternative would be a fixed minimum lot size of 14,520 square feet and a maximum of one-half acre with no adjustment. Commissioner Crawford asked whether the code amendments were intended to provide maximum flexibility to avoid hamstringing existing properties. Director Matson confirmed that the proposal is largely developer- and property-owner-focused and provides substantial flexibility, though it cannot resolve constraints imposed by septic requirements. She explained that where Health District standards require larger lots, flexibility is limited, but the proposal helps address site-specific challenges such as irregular lot shapes, topography, or parcels divided by roads, allowing more varied lot configurations. Commissioner Miranda commented that the proposed 20 percent adjustment may not be sufficient in some cases, citing an example where a 2.48-acre parcel cannot be reasonably subdivided into five half-acre lots due to septic requirements. He asked what guidance the city would provide in that situation. Director Matson responded that in such cases, development would need to proceed at a lower intensity or wait until sewer service is available. Allowing exceptions below two units per acre could shift overall land- use patterns and risk broader reliance on septic systems, which would hinder long-term sewer planning. She emphasized the need for coordinated planning for future sewer service rather than parcel-by-parcel exceptions. Commissioner Lehrman asked whether staff would have sufficient capacity to manage case-by-case decisions given the City’s move toward more automated permitting systems. Director Matson stated that the proposal is straightforward to administer and largely aligns with existing automated processes. The built-in flexibility is workable, and in cases of uncertainty staff would likely allow the 20 percent adjustment. She does not anticipate an increased workload for staff and noted that, after the area being effectively paused for over a year, there may be an initial increase in applications that can be managed with existing staffing levels. Public Comment: Roger Wright lives on Willow Way in the city of Pasco: As a local civil engineer, thanked Council and City staff for their service and responsiveness. He expressed support for the City’s goal of creating housing but emphasized the need for practical and logical standards. He explained that on-site septic systems require a minimum lot size of 0.5 acres per Health Department regulations, which limits flexibility when parcels do not divide evenly. He shared a current project example where sewer service was initially pursued, including funding infrastructure, but delays in updating the sewer comprehensive plan ultimately made sewer infeasible. As a result, the project shifted to septic, but parcel Page 147 of 174 Page 6 of 8 configuration prevents exact half-acre lots. He stated that while the proposed 20% lot size flexibility could help, averaging lot sizes below the half-acre minimum is not allowed by the Health Department. He requested a workable, common-sense solution for irregular parcels while acknowledging and supporting the City’s two-units-per-acre policy. Chuck Rambo lives on Warnett Rd. between Road 64 and 68 in the city of Pasco: Stated that the proposal may inadvertently prohibit subdivision of parcels between approximately 2.4 and 2.5 acres. With a 20% lot size adjustment, 2.4 acres is the maximum size that can accommodate four half- acre septic lots, while 2.5 acres is the minimum needed to meet Health Department requirements, resulting in parcels that cannot feasibly be subdivided into either four or five lots. He indicated this outcome was likely unintended. He suggested that a larger adjustment, such as 25%, could provide a workable solution for smaller parcels, noting that without such flexibility the result would be very low-density development, which he did not believe was the City’s or State’s intent. He concluded that he would follow up with staff to discuss the technical details further. Brett Lott lives on Castle Holly Court in the city of Pasco: Noted that he is working with staff on the same project and reiterated that sewer service was the preferred option but is not currently feasible due to City constraints. He emphasized that while most developments fit within standard regulations, some sites present unique conditions that do not align cleanly with rigid standards. He expressed concern that strict policies without flexibility can unintentionally prevent otherwise reasonable development, particularly when minor deviations exceed the 20% allowance by a small margin. He cautioned that over time, the intent of the policy may be lost, leaving permit staff constrained by exact language rather than intent. He emphasized the broader housing shortage at the state and national level and stated that delays in development directly increase housing costs. He requested additional flexibility in the policy—such as increasing the allowable adjustment or including a provision for case-by-case consideration—to allow staff discretion in unique situations. He provided an example where City-required road placement results in compliant half-acre lots on one side and slightly larger lots on the other, narrowly exceeding the limit. He concluded by encouraging the City to seek solutions that enable development rather than prohibit it, noting that not all projects are large enough to independently fund sewer infrastructure. Commissioner Jones observed a common theme among the speakers that additional lot size flexibility— potentially up to 25%—could help projects move forward. He asked whether a framework that maintains a 20% standard but allows applicants to request additional flexibility through a review process might address unique site conditions. He noted that land parcels are not always uniform and that some discretion may be appropriate. He expressed that developers bring valuable expertise and that it may be in the City’s best interest to work collaboratively to find solutions rather than rely solely on rigid standards. He suggested the concept warranted further discussion. Chair Cochran asked Director Matson whether there are potential mechanisms that would allow limited exceptions without undermining the intent of the proposed change. He highlighted the need to balance flexibility with maintaining the overall purpose of the policy and invited staff to share any suggestions, based on the testimony received, that could allow discretion while preserving the framework for further discussion. Director Matson stated that staff does not recommend additional exceptions without undermining the intent of the proposal. She explained that increasing flexibility to 25 percent would expand allowable density beyond the intended 2–3 units per acre, effectively allowing densities closer to 1–3 units per acre. The 20 percent adjustment does not resolve cases where larger lots are required for septic systems, and staff emphasized concerns about expanding long-term reliance on septic systems. Page 148 of 174 Page 7 of 8 She stated coordinated sewer infrastructure as the preferred solution but noted progress has been limited by funding constraints, despite coordination efforts with developers beginning in September 2025. Given current infrastructure and timing, staff stated that a coordinated sewer solution is not realistic in the near term and cautioned that allowing larger septic lots would likely undermine the City’s ability to implement a future sewer system. Commissioner Crutchfield asked whether the City typically installs sewer trunk lines with connection costs passed on to developers or property owners. Staff confirmed this remains the City’s practice and noted that connection costs can be significant. Director Matson explained that sewer connection fees are paid at the time of connection to cover system capacity, treatment, and maintenance, and are typically passed through as part of development or building permits. While costly, sewer connections provide long-term benefits by eliminating reliance on septic systems and supporting city infrastructure. Commissioner Lehrman asked whether developers would bear the cost of extending sewer trunk lines where infrastructure is not in place. Director Matson confirmed that developers would be responsible in those cases and noted that alternative funding tools, such as TIF, could potentially be explored for smaller developers. Staff also confirmed that the Health Department continues to regulate septic systems within the city. Chuck Rambo lives on Warnett Rd. between Road 64 and 68 in the city of Pasco: Noted that Washington State has enforced strict septic system standards for decades, and that newer systems are highly regulated and less prone to failure. He stated that the proposed 20% lot size adjustment works for parcels larger than three acres but does not address smaller parcels, particularly those around 2.5 acres. He expressed concern that such parcels could become unbuildable and remain vacant, which can negatively affect surrounding neighborhoods. He suggested that a 25% adjustment, particularly for smaller parcels, could help address these situations. Chair Cochran closed the public hearing. Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment Motion: Commissioner Lehrman stated “I move that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approved Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 2025-002, including proposal land use map amendment established the low-density residential Riverview designation 2-5 dwelling units per acre development. As shown in Exhibit 2 and the 2018 conference plan addendum shown as Exhibit 7.” Commissioner Jones seconded, motion passed unanimously. Residential Density Amendment Motion: Commissioner Jones stated “I move to recommend that the City Council consider approval of the rezone replacing the R-S-20 zone with the R-15 Low Density Residential District, as shown in the zoning map revision (Exhibit 4), and approval of the associated zoning map, Comprehensive Plan, and text amendments identified in Exhibit 6. This includes revising PMC 21.20 to replace references to R-S-20 with R-15.” Commissioner Lehrman seconded. Motions passed with a vote of 7 ayes to 1 opposed. Next Steps: This will go to the City Council for a workshop, then to a regular meeting. WORSHOP None OTHER BUSINESS Director Matson introduced the city’s new Senior Planner Daniel Leavitt. Page 149 of 174 Page 8 of 8 Informed the Commission that Framework has been contracted with the city to help with the municipal code changes. Stated that CED is still looking to fill vacancies for a Planner II, a Permit Tech and a Senior Plan Examiner. Let the Commission know of the status of the new online permit system that will be implemented in February. Commissioner Lehrman commented towards the end of the meeting, after motions are passed, show a graphic or flow chart of the upcoming steps in order for the motions to then become a code and that more graphics and pictures be included for a better understanding of residents. Director Matson agreed, stating both can be added to the PowerPoint presentation. ADJOURNMENT Chair Cochran stated with no other business, I recommend a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Jones made the motion to adjourn the meeting, it was seconded by Commissioner Lehrman, and the motion passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8:18 pm. YouTube link to watch full meeting: https://youtu.be/8hu7LneA_rE Respectfully submitted, Carmen Patrick, Administrative Assistant II Community & Economic Development Department Page 150 of 174 Pasco City Council February 17, 2026 Regular Meeting Pa g e 1 5 1 o f 1 7 4 Ordinance-Sandwich Board Signs- Downtown Pasco Overlay District- CA2025-002 February 17, 2026 Pasco City Council Pa g e 1 5 2 o f 1 7 4 Timeline PMC proposed changes Downtown Pasco Overlay District 01 02 03 Pa g e 1 5 3 o f 1 7 4 Timeline Planning Commission •Workshop December 18, 2025 •Public Hearing January 15, 2026 City Council •Workshop February 9, 2026 •Tonight-Ordinance February 17, 2026 Pa g e 1 5 4 o f 1 7 4 PMC proposed changes Pa g e 1 5 5 o f 1 7 4 Downtown Pasco Overlay District Pa g e 1 5 6 o f 1 7 4 Questions? Thank you! Pa g e 1 5 7 o f 1 7 4 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council November 12, 2025 TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/17/26 FROM: Richa Sigdel, Deputy City Manager City Manager SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 4816 - Creation of Transportation Benefit District (5 minute staff presentation) I. ATTACHMENT(S): Ordinance II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4816, amending Pasco municipal code to enact a new chapter 3.270 Pasco Transportation Benefit District, establishing a transportation benefit district, specifying the boundaries for the transportation benefit district, pavement maintenance & reconstruction, street and traffic maintenance and operations, and other transportation related capital projects; providing for severability and establishing an effective date, and, further, authorize publication by summary only. III. FISCAL IMPACT: Revenue Street Fund - $2.3 million The Street Fund, which covers personnel, equipment, and materials for city roadway infrastructure operation and maintenance, has faced a growing structural financial deficit for a long time. While primary revenues like utility taxes and fuel taxes have remained stagnant for a decade, operating expenses continue to rise. Additionally, the number and extent of roadways owned and operated by the City has grown. To manage this gap, starting in 2017, City shifted internal crews to projects funded by the Street Overlay Fund. While this maintains financial stability, it creates an operational trade-off; staff are diverted from core tasks such as:  Pothole repair and crack sealing.  Striping and traffic safety markings.  Ice and snow removal. Page 158 of 174  Traffic calming. Before 2017, City mostly utilized private contractors for overlay work to keep the small municipal crews focused on these essential services. While the General Fund has occasionally provided subsidies to bridge the gap, current budget constraints make this support increasingly difficult to sustain. City's 2025-2026 budget was prepared with Street Fund slated to be in deficit by nearly $600 thousand. IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: Background: A Transportation Benefit District (TBD) is a state-authorized, special-purpose district created to fund transportation improvements within a defined area. The Washington State Legislature authorized the formation of TBDs under RCW 36.73 in 1987, with the intent of providing cities and counties with tools to fund critical transportation investments not covered by traditional revenues. As of 2024, 124 cities across Washington have established TBDs. These include nearby jurisdictions such as:  City of Richland (established 2017), which collects $20 vehicle license fee; recently revised to 0.1% sales tax.  City of Kennewick (established November 2024), which implements a 0.1% sales tax.  City of Prosser (established 2009), which adopted a $25 vehicle license fee.  City of Walla Walla (established 2011), which authorized a 0.2% sales tax. TBDs allow for flexible, locally controlled funding options such as:  A vehicle license fee of up to $50 (incrementally adopted without voter approval). o $20 can be imposed immediately. o $40 can be imposed after $20 has been in effect for 24 months. o $50 can be imposed after $40 has been in effect for 24 months.  A sales tax of up to 0.1% approved by the governing board (if the TBD covers the entire jurisdiction).  A sales tax above 0.1%, or other revenue measures, subject to voter approval. Most cities that have formed a TBD have also passed a subsequent ordinance to "assume" the powers of the TBD, allowing the City Council to govern it directly without needing a separate governing body or meetings. Impacts (Other than fiscal): Page 159 of 174 The funds generated must be used for transportation improvements identified in local, regional, or state transportation plans, including but not limited to roadway preservation, safety preservation, safety projects, non-motorized improvements, and transit-supportive infrastructure. Council has discussed this issue during August 25, 2025 Council Workshop meeting additionally, meeting. Regular Council and 17, November 2025 Council scheduled a Public Hearing on the November 17 meeting. Information on TBD also has been posted on City's social media channels. On November's meeting staff requested City Council's direction on whether to proceed with the establishment of a Transportation Benefit District (TBD) for the purpose of generating for transportation stream improvements. dedicated a funding Council directed staff to bring this item back for discussion in early 2026. On February 2nd Regular Meeting, Council conducted a public hearing and directed staff to move forward with process to establish the Transportation Benefit District with 0.1% sales tax. V. DISCUSSION: Recommendation: Staff recommends the approval of ordinance as presented. This ordinance:  Establishes the Transportation Benefit District.  Establishes Pasco City Council as the governing board of the district.  Gives powers to the board as defined in RCW 36.73.015. Next Steps: Once the district is formed:  Conduct public meeting as the district.  Assume the powers of the district - TBD work can be done within City Council meetings.  Imposition of sales tax as directed and other housekeeping activities.  Staff works with State agencies to finalize necessary next steps and timeline of tax implementation. Constraints:  Once the District is formed and sales tax is imposed, it is expected to take 6-9 months for the tax to be implemented. Alternatives:  Council declines to create a transportation benefit district and direct staff to evaluate other funding sources to maintain City streets.  Council directs staff to explore placing the creation of a transportation benefit district on the ballot. Page 160 of 174 Ordinance – Creating Chapter 3.270 - TBD - 1 ORDINANCE NO. 4816 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, AMENDING PASCO MUNICIPAL CODE TO ENACT A NEW CHAPTER 3.270 PASCO TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT, ESTABLISHING A TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT, SPECIFYING THE BOUNDARIES FOR THE TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT, PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE & RECONSTRUCTION, STREET AND TRAFFIC MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS, AND OTHER TRANSPORTATION RELATED CAPITAL PROJECTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pasco has the responsibility under the Constitution of the State of Washington for the improvement, maintenance, protection, and operation of public ways within the corporate limits of the City pursuant to RCW 35A.11.020 and Chapter 35A.47 RCW; and WHEREAS, the City has limited transportation funding to pay for necessary pavement maintenance & reconstruction, street and traffic maintenance and operations, and other transportation related capital projects; and WHEREAS, while dedicated revenues have decreased, the ongoing annual costs to preserve and maintain the City’s transportation infrastructure continue to rise leaving the City unable to continue to adequately preserve and maintain the City’s transportation infrastru cture; and WHEREAS, Chapter 36.73 RCW provides for the establishment of transportation benefit districts and for the levying of additional revenue sources for transportation improvements within the District that are consistent with existing state, regional, and local transportation plans and necessitated by existing or reasonably foreseeable congestion levels; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.21.225 authorizes the City Council to establish a transportation benefit district subject to the provisions of Chapter 36.73 RCW; and WHEREAS, the City desires to form a Transportation Benefit District which includes the entire City of Pasco as the boundaries currently exist or as they may exist following future annexations; and WHEREAS, prior to establishing a Transportation Benefit District, the City Council conducted the required public hearing on February 2, 2026, which was noticed in accordance with RCW 36.73.050. All persons desiring to comment were given a full and complete opportunity to be heard; and Page 161 of 174 Ordinance – Creating Chapter 3.270 - TBD - 2 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pasco finds it to be in the best interests of the City to establish a Citywide Transportation Benefit District for pavement maintenance and reconstruction, street and traffic maintenance and operations, and other transportation related capital projects consistent with Chapter 36.73 RCW, to protect the City’s long-term investments in that infrastructure, to reduce the risk of transportation facility failure, to improve safety, to continue optimal performance of the infrastructure over time, and to avoid more expensive infrastructure replacements in the future; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pasco shall be the governing body for the Transportation Benefit District acting in an ex officio and independent capacity. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to establish a Transportation Benefit District pursuant to RCW 35.21.225 and RCW 36.73. The City Council finds it is in the public interest to provide adequate levels of funding for the purposes of ongoing transportation improvements that preserve, maintain, and as appropriate, construct or reconstruct the transportation infrastructure of the City of Pasco, consistent with Chapter 36.73 RCW. Section 2. Adoption of Chapter. PMC 3.270 Pasco Transportation Benefit District is hereby created and shall read as follows: Chapter 3.270 TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT Sections: 3.270.010 Establishing Transportation Benefit District. 3.270.020 Governing Board. 3.270.030 Functions of the District. 3.270.040 Transportation Improvements Funded. 3.270.050 Dissolution of District. 3.270.010 Establishing Transportation Benefit District. There is created a transportation benefit district to be known as the Pasco Transportation Benefit District or “District” with geographical boundaries comprised of the corporate limits of the City as they currently exist or as they may exist following future annexations. 3.270.020 Governing Board. (1) The governing board or “Board” of the District shall be the Pasco City Council acting in an ex officio and independent capacity, which shall have the authority to exercise the statutory powers set forth in Chapter 36.73 RCW. Page 162 of 174 Ordinance – Creating Chapter 3.270 - TBD - 3 (2) The treasurer of the District shall be the City Finance Director. (3) The Board shall develop a material change policy to address major plan changes that affect project delivery or the ability to finance the plan, pursuant to the requirements set forth in RCW 36.73.160(1). At a minimum, if a transportation improvement exceeds its original cost by more than twenty percent, as identified in the District’s original plan, a public hearing shall be held to solicit public comment regarding how the cost change should be resolved. (4) The Board shall issue an annual report, pursuant to the requirements of RCW 36.73.160(2). 3.270.030 Functions of the District. The District Board shall have and may exercise any powers provided by law to fulfill the purpose of the District. 3.270.040 Transportation Improvements Funded. The funds generated by the District shall be used for any lawful purpose for Transportation Improvements, as that term is defined in RCW 36.73.015, consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.73 RCW. 3.270.050 Dissolution of District. The District shall be automatically dissolved when all indebtedness of the District has been retired and when all of the District's anticipated responsibilities have been satisfied. Street preservation, maintenance, and operation are ongoing, long-term obligations of the City. Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this ordinance should be held to the invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, subsection, sentence, clause phrase or word of this ordinance. Section 4. Corrections. Upon approval by the city attorney, the city clerk or the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including scrivener’s errors or clerical mistakes; reference to other local, state, or federal laws, rules, or regulation s; or numbering or referencing of ordinances or their sections and subsections. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after approval, passage and publication as required by law. Page 163 of 174 Ordinance – Creating Chapter 3.270 - TBD - 4 PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ___ day of _____, 2026. _____________________________ Charles Grimm Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ ___________________________ Krystle Shanks Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC Deputy City Clerk City Attorney Published: _____________________________ Page 164 of 174 Page 1 of 8 TO: Mayor, Charles Grimm Members of the City Council FROM: Harold Stewart, City Manager DATE: February 17, 2026 City Manager: The last several days have been filled with internal and organizational meetings. Legislative Session is reaching a point where no new bills are being proposed, hearings have concluded, and a limited number of bills are advancing. While the Department Heads will provide updates specific to their responsibilities here are several priorities identified by the City Manager since taking office being worked on in addition to the regular day to day operational duties (Changes/updates from the last report are highlighted in red): 1. Broadmoor Development- Meetings are ongoing discussing developer interest, progress, and potential City partnership. Agreements are being negotiated. 2. HAPO Center- Lease expired after December 2025. County and City discussing future, roles and partnership going forward. Lease extension has been provided to the County. 4. Animal Shelter- Serves the entire Tri-Cities. Cost sharing between the three jurisdictions needs re-evaluated and agreed upon. In addition, some issues have arisen with the old facility that will require significant investment to repair. Staff is preparing and identifying the anticipated needs and associated costs to discuss with Council in the near future.. 5. Transportation Benefit District- Council directed staff to proceed with sales tax based Transportation Benefit District fee. This item will be placed on February 17th Regular Council meeting as directed by Council at the February 2nd Council meeting. 6. Hiring City Attorney-Position has been reposted with a first review date in mid- February. Management is also evaluating continuing to contract out the service. 7. Grievances/Personnel Matters 8. Reviewing Boulevard Design, Traffic study, Lighting, and Curb, Gutter, Sidewalk Policies-All in various stages of review. See Community and Economic Development Directors report for more information. 9. Evaluating Executive Structure (CM, DCM, ACM) and responsibilities-Ongoing. Potential redistribution of department reporting structure. 10. Consideration of annexation into Library District-Council, Library Board and County Commission have all approved this to go on the ballot. County staff was able Page 165 of 174 Page 2 of 8 to complete the necessary actions to place this on the February 2026 Special Election Ballot. 11. Consideration of annexation into Conservation District- Was to be discussed at the October 27th Council Agenda, however, staff has been working with legal counsel and the Conservation District to verify the proper process and actions. There is some unclarity due to State law language and the fact the City opted out of the District years ago. This action is now scheduled for presentation on March 9th Council Workshop and will also include options for citywide contract for shrub steppe mitigation to remove development barriers. 12. Water Conservation Program- Since the August 25 presentation, staff have advanced key water conservation initiatives, including public outreach, irrigation retrofits, and updated development and boulevard standards. Work is also underway on a City facility water audit, landscape conversion projects, and potential residential incentives to promote xeriscaping. 13. Court Street Traffic Concerns- Traffic Radar signs have been installed and are collecting data. Engineer’s recommendation was to analyze the data after 6 months, which will be January of 2026. Upon completion of data collection staff will need time to analyze and will discuss results with Council in February or March of 2026. Staff has begun review of the data. 14. Pop up Vendors- Ongoing monitoring by staff and coordination with the Health District. 15. FY 27/28 Budget-Staff is beginning the process of establishing a timeline for budget development, and internal processes for preparation. 16. Public Dollars for Public Benefit- Staff is researching as directed by Council at the February 2nd meeting. 17. Aquatics Facility- Staff is working on staffing and hiring needs, and coordinating with the PFD regarding an achievable date for opening the facility which allows for proper training of staff. Meetings attended since the last report: Communication meetings with the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, and all Council members; communication meeting with County Administrator; Shoreline Reconveyance Working Group meeting; regular communication meeting with Pasco Chamber Director; City Manager/Administrator communication meeting; Ride along with Police Department; Non-Fiction Ribbon-cutting; communication meeting with Pasco School District Superintendent; attended Kiwanis meeting; Attended the Animal Control Authority meeting; ; several legislative session related meetings; and many other internal communication and project meetings. Human Resources Director, Sara Matzen Reporting Month: January 2026 1. Headcount vs. Budgeted Positions • Active Headcount: 448 • Budgeted Positions: 510.35 • Variance: (-62.35) 2. Recruitment Activity • Open Positions (as of month-end): 17 • Positions Filled This Month: 8 • Critical/Hard to Fill positions Page 166 of 174 Page 3 of 8 o Senior Engineer: Hard to find related experience for the role – specific engineering license. Involving staffing agency for assistance. The role is reposted on our careers page and external job boards. o Senior Traffic Engineer: Position is looking for specific license & exp. with traffic design that is hard to find. Involved staffing agency for assistance, the role is reposted on our careers page and external job boards. o Water Plant Operators: Ongoing recruitment, candidates do not have the appropriate level of certification, reposting to Industry specific job boards 3. Medical Claims – Trends & Budget to Actual (this data is prior month, ex. Jan report = Dec Data) • YTD Claims (Budget vs. Actual): $7,444,649 vs. $11,359,282 • % of Budget Used YTD: 152.6% • 12-Month Trend Snapshot: 4. Monthly Medical Claim Costs by Plan 5. Leave Counts • Protected Leave of Absence (PFML, FMLA) o Intermittent Schedule: 8 Employees o Continuous: 18 employees • Workers’ Compensation: 2 employees Page 167 of 174 Page 4 of 8 6. Turnover Rate (YTD) • Voluntary: 0.45% • Involuntary: 0.22% • Total Turnover YTD: 0.67% • Average Length of Service at separation: 4.5 years 7. Strategic Projects / Updates Aquatics Center Staffing (Interlocal Agreement / PFD): Following Council approval of the Interlocal Agreement funded through the Public Facilities District (PFD), Human Resources has begun work with Parks & Recreation on job descriptions, compensation, and classification for eight (8) new full-time positions needed to support the Aquatics Center. HR and Parks & Recreation anticipate bringing a budget request to Council in the near future for approval of these positions, which will be funded through the approved ILA. Fire Administrative Contract Negotiations: Human Resources and Fire Department leadership met with IAFF representatives to continue negotiations on the Fire Administrative staff collective bargaining agreement. Implementation of Recently Ratified Labor Agreements: HR has been working closely with Payroll to implement wage, benefit, and contractual changes associated with the recently ratified IUOE and PPOA-Non-Uniformed contracts. Employee Handbook Modernization: The City continues significant work on a comprehensive update to the Employee Handbook. This is a large, multi-department effort that will require extensive employee training and impact bargaining with represented labor groups. The goal is to bring an updated handbook to Council for consideration later this summer. Health Plan Transition and Administration: The City’s transition to Premera was largely successful. As anticipated, some administrative challenges occurred within Police and Fire plans due to their negotiated provision of 100% member-only coverage. Because this structure is uncommon among benefit vendors, it creates additional administrative complexity that HR continues to manage. Benefits Cost Containment Planning: HR will be meeting with the City’s benefits broker, Alliant, to begin strategic planning and cost- containment discussions for the 2026 and 2027 benefit plan year. Benefits Portal & Process Modernization: HR is collaborating with Information Technology to develop an online benefits portal for employees, including open enrollment functionality. The City currently completes benefit enrollment through manual, paper-based processes, which is highly time-intensive and administratively inefficient. Leave Policy Compliance & Risk Management: HR is actively reviewing and updating the City’s leave policies in response to recent changes to Washington Paid Family & Medical Leave (PFML), expanded protected leave requirements, and anti-stacking rules. These changes significantly increase compliance obligations and administrative workload for municipalities. Page 168 of 174 Page 5 of 8 Finance Director, Kevin Hebdon I’m pleased to announce that Julie Thompson has been selected as our new Finance Manager. Julie began working in our department today, Friday, January 30, 2026. Julie is a trusted and well-respected professional in the Tri-Cities, with nearly 30 years of local governmental accounting experience. Julie brings to the City of Pasco: • Proven integrity, honesty, and a strong work ethic • A calm, objective, and approachable leadership style • A genuine commitment to mentoring staff and building strong teams internally and across departments • Deep expertise in governmental accounting, audits, internal controls, GAAP, and the BARS manual • Extensive experience with financial statements, ACFR, CIP, budgeting, grants, payroll, AP/AR, treasury, and year-end closeout • Strong technical skills and experience implementing ERP systems and improving processes • A mindset focused on continuous improvement — never settling for “that's the way we’ve always done it” Section 108 Loan Payment with Interfund Loan The City received a variable rate loan from U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) for $3,781,000 on May 26, 2021 for the Peanuts Park Rehabilitation Project. In conjunction with the loan, the City receives annual Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) allocation of $245,000 to support annual debt service. Allocation for 2026 will be $250,000. However, fluctuating and rising interest rates over the past few years have resulted in higher debt service costs, significantly exceeding the CDBG allocation. The amount exceeding the CDBG allocations have been covered by General Fund. The total covered by General Fund since 2023 year-to-date is over $300,000. HUD and the City worked through a process to establish a fixed rate on the loan beginning in summer of 2024 with expected completion of year-end 2024. This was postponed by HUD in mid-January 2025, however they expected to resume efforts later in 2025. Efforts to come together and agree upon a rate restructure have not been successful while interest rates continued to increase. Back in October of 2025 City staff put before City Council an option to approve an interfund loan to pay off the ever-increasing interest loan through HUD. The City Council approved Resolution No. 4658 on that date. Payoff has been challenging to obtain from HUD with their shutdowns and changes in staffing in their agency. Finance is pleased to announce that as of 2/6/2026 the loan with HUD will be paid off and the interfund loan will be executed. This loan restructure saves the City higher interest costs and what interest we do pay will be paid to ourselves through the interfund loan. Utility Billing Update (Shutoffs) City staff anticipated that the transition to a new utility payment portal could create confusion for customers. In response, Utility Billing made the proactive decision to temporarily forgo late fees and water shutoffs during the transition period. Extensive efforts were made to inform and guide customers through the change, including direct mailings, social media outreach, billing inserts, Page 169 of 174 Page 6 of 8 radio and television advertising, and email notifications sent through Constant Contact to all email addresses on file from the previous payment system. The new payment portal officially went into effect on November 24, 2025. Due to staffing and operational capacity, City Hall is unable to read meters, generate bills, and process payments for all 24,000 utility accounts within a single billing cycle. As a result, the city is divided into four billing cycles, with one cycle processed each week of the month. All four billing cycles have now completed two full billing cycles under the new payment portal, providing customers ample time to transition. During this period, no late fees were assessed and no shutoffs were performed. The City has now resumed its regular shutoff schedule, which occurs weekly for each billing cycle. During the first week of resumed shutoffs, 153 accounts were shut off due to nonpayment. Over the next three weeks, the remaining three billing cycles will experience their first week of shutoffs, and staff will continue to monitor the numbers. Once each cycle has completed its initial shutoff week, activity is expected to normalize. Despite significant outreach efforts, some customers did not receive or act on the communications regarding the transition. By way of example, shortly after starting employment with the City, I discovered that my own household had missed the transition and fallen behind on payments. Once identified, we promptly set up the new payment portal and brought the account current. The City has a duty and obligation to collect payment for services provided. In determining when to resume shutoffs, staff also considered the statute of limitations on delinquent accounts that predated the portal transition, as well as the upcoming summer months, during which state regulations will limit the City’s ability to shut off water service for nonpayment. Thank you for your support and understanding as we work through this challenging transition. I would like to note that the UB team has been phenomenal during this transition. They are yelled at and treated rudely, and I hear their responses and find them to be kind and respectful in tone. They are truly amazing at what they do. 2027-2028 Budget Schedule & Plan Finance is working to develop a budget cycle schedule and plan to communicate to management at the 2/12/2026 Manager's Meeting. More details to come. 2025 Year-End Close Finance staff are busy reconciling accounts and funds in efforts to close the 2025 fiscal year. At the same time we are ramping up to prepare all of the year financial reports for review and audit. Requirement to the State Auditor's Office is May 31,2026 Community & Economic Development Director, Haylie Matson Time Has Come! Online Payments and Permit Portal for Customers We are excited to introduce this improvement, which provides customers with additional payment options beyond the current in-person debit payment method. Customers can now pay online using debit cards, credit cards, or a free e-check option. In addition, a new permit portal is being implemented to create a smoother, more customer- focused service experience. Over the next few months, customers will be able to apply for all Page 170 of 174 Page 7 of 8 permits online through an easy, step-by-step application process, reducing the need for emails and phone calls to staff. The new system will also allow customers to track the status of their permits more easily, and clear timelines will be established within the system for both staff and applicants to follow. CED would like to thank all staff for their efforts in making this project possible. This has truly been a team effort to deliver a more efficient and customer-focused permitting experience for our community. Connecting Housing to Infrastructure (CHIP) Grant Award The City of Pasco has been awarded $1,000,000 through the Washington State Department of Commerce’s Connecting Housing to Infrastructure (CHIP) Program for the City of Pasco, Housing Authority of Pasco and Franklin County project Award Letter. This funding will support critical infrastructure investments needed to facilitate affordable housing development. The grant is administered by the Department of Commerce’s Growth Management Services unit, and the City will now proceed through the required pre-contracting steps, including site control verification, affordability monitoring requirements, and coordination with state and tribal partners. The city would like to specifically recognize and thank Kristin Webb, the City’s Block Grant Administrator, for her leadership and work on this application and her continued administration of the City’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. Her efforts were instrumental in securing this significant funding for the community. Public Works Director, Maria Serra Water Rights Portfolio Management At the end of January every year, the City of Pasco is required to report its annual water rights usage to the Washington State Department of Ecology. Pasco manages a complex water rights portfolio supporting three utilities and the City’s parks irrigation system. Over the past year, City staff worked closely with staff at the Department of Ecology to better understand compliance requirements and chart a practical path toward full compliance. Through this collaboration, the City implemented a comprehensive strategy combining operational changes, water rights portfolio management, and conservation efforts. These actions included mid-season monitoring, shifting water use to available Columbia River sources, reducing irrigation at City parks, ending the irrigation season earlier, and improving meter and source tracking. At the same time, the City is pursuing multiple water right purchases, transfers, and change applications, as well as contract water, to increase legal supply in constrained systems. While 2025 was not fully compliant, the adjustments implemented during the season and being refined for 2026 are expected to build on one another as these strategies are combined. Together, these efforts reflect a coordinated approach to manage system complexity, support responsible growth, and achieve long-term, sustainable compliance. Water Right Annual Use Report and cover letter are enclosed to this report. Comprehensive Safety Action Plan (CSAP) At the February 23 workshop, staff will present the Final Comprehensive Safety Action Plan (CSAP) for City Council review. The presentation will summarize key findings from five years of crash data, community engagement, and High Injury Network analysis that prioritize policy and infrastructure improvements to reduce fatal and serious injury crashes in alignment with the USDOT Safe System Approach and the City’s goal of a 50 percent reduction by 2035. Staff will Page 171 of 174 Page 8 of 8 also outline next steps, including incorporating any final Council feedback and advancing the CSAP for formal adoption at the March 2, 2026 Council meeting. The timely adoption is necessary to meet Safe Streets for All (SS4A)S4A program requirements and preserve the City’s eligibility to apply for the upcoming City Safety Program (HSIP) grant. The City’s proposed application will be for systemic pedestrian crossings improvements. HSIP grant application has a strict deadline of March 6, 2026. Freight Project Opportunities The City of Pasco plans to submit applicable projects from the Adopted TIP to the 2026 WSDOT call for inclusion in the Washington Freight System Plan, which guides statewide multimodal freight policy and investment and incorporates regional priorities through Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) submissions. In our Region, the MPO is Benton Franklin Council of Governments (BFCOG). While the local MPO will compile regional projects for WSDOT, it will not rank them. In addition, the City intends to pursue funding through the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) 2026 Six-Year Investment Program, a biennial opportunity targeting high-priority freight projects in the state. Eligible projects include asset preservation, operational improvements, system expansion, and innovative freight solutions located on designated Strategic Freight Corridors. This dual approach positions the City to advance key freight projects and leverage both state planning and targeted construction funding opportunities. Page 172 of 174 Public Works Department | 525 N 3rd Avenue, Pasco, WA 99301 | 509-543-5738 | www.Pasco-WA.gov January 31, 2026 Johnny Jones, Ph.D., J.D. Columbia Basin Watermaster Department of Ecology 4601 North Monroe Street Spokane, WA 99502-1295 Email: johnny.jones@ecy.wa.gov Re: 2025 Metering Report Dear Dr. Jones, Thank you for your technical assistance letter dated June 26, 2025, and for meeting with us in August and October to discuss our system operations and water use. We appreciate your guidance as we work toward compliance with water rights requirements. As you know, the City owns and operates three separate utilities (Potable Water, Irrigation, and PWRF) as well as a City parks irrigation program, all of which rely on the three Water Rights Systems we report on. For the Irrigation Utility and the parks program, water sources span multiple water rights systems, and the utilities are not interconnected. This has historically created a complex operational and monitoring environment. Our discussions over the past year on this issue have been extremely helpful in improving our understanding of compliance requirements and in optimizing operations to better align with those requirements. Following your letter and meetings, we implemented corrective actions to reduce water use in Systems B and C, including a mid-season water use review, increased reliance on Columbia River sources (System A), and operational adjustments. These actions eliminated the projected overage in System B and significantly reduced the overage in System C. Corrective Actions  Conducted a mid-season meter reading in September 2025 to evaluate system-specific water use and support operational adjustments.  Shifted irrigation demand to System A sources where surplus capacity and infrastructure allowed. This included shutting off two wells in late September 2025 within the water right system projected to exceed authorized use.  Coordinated with the Parks and Recreation Department to reduce irrigation at City Parks by decreasing watering frequency and ending irrigation earlier than normal.  Accelerated the end of the irrigation season by rescheduling system shutoff one week earlier than prior years; effective irrigation shutdown occurred on October 13, 2025.  Completed a source and meter inventory to clarify operations, identify improvements for the 2026 irrigation season, and correct a malfunctioning meter at McGee School. Page 173 of 174 Public Works Department | 525 N 3rd Avenue, Pasco, WA 99301 | 509-543-5738 | www.Pasco-WA.gov  Launched a monthly meter reading program for both Public Works and Parks and Recreation to improve monitoring and enable timely operational response to water right limitations by system. We are continuing to research our technical needs and system design limitations to better understand what investments or operation changes could be implemented to better monitor our water use and optimize source utilization. Water Rights Management We are actively pursuing water right changes and acquisitions to increase authority in System C:  Darigold (G3-27030(C)) – Change in process with Franklin County WCB; expected to add 532 acre-feet/year by the end of the 2026 irrigation season.  Ambrose (G3-28379(C)) – Application planned for early 2026; expected to add 45.76 acre- feet/year by the end of 2026.  SCBID Contract Water – Contract for 1,000 acre-feet/year; pump station construction scheduled for 2027.  508-14 Rights – Additional changes underway to enable use from System C wells, targeted for completion by the end of 2026. Water Conservation Our conservation efforts continue to focus on public education, efficient operations, and infrastructure improvements. We are also evaluating additional measures such as smart meter retrofits, expanded outreach, and voluntary odd-even irrigation schedules, with the goal of strengthening conservation in 2026. We recognize the complexity of our systems and the challenges associated with rapid growth; yet remain committed to achieving compliance. Through operational changes, water rights management, and conservation efforts, we are working toward full compliance in 2026 and long- term sustainable operations. We appreciate your continued collaboration. Sincerely, Maria L. Serra, PE Public Works Director City of Pasco Page 174 of 174