HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026.02.17 Council Meeting Packet - AMENDED
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 180
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 180
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 - 87 (a) Ordinance No. 4817 - Moratorium on Essential Public Facilities
(Secure Community Transition Facilities)
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4817, an ordinance of the
City of Pasco, Washington, imposing a six-month moratorium on
applications related to Essential Public facilities, including Secure
Community Transition Facilities; establishing an immediate effective
date; authorizing publication by summary only; and directing staff to
develop an return to City Council with recommended land use
regulations addressing the siting of these facilities within six months
of adoption of the moratorium.
88 - 163 (b) 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.
Page 3 of 180
164 - 170 (c) 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.
10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
11. NEW BUSINESS
12. MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION
171 - 180 (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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
Page 29 of 180
Page 30 of 180
Page 31 of 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 $150.00 penalty for each occurrence in which the City is
required to dispatch a Public Works employee to respond to a location due to
the Contractor’s failure to respond as required.
Penalties assessed under this section do not relieve the Contractor of its obligation
to complete the required services.
Page 47 of 180
CURRENT 4/1/2025 4/1/2026 4/1/2027 4/1/2028 4/1/2029
1) Per meter read 1.32$ 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
8
0
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
Page 60 of 180
Page 61 of 180
Page 62 of 180
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
8
0
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
$3
!
'
|
:5
}
J
'~
'
§
§
S
§
§
_%
_
_
4*
.1
rm
:
mu
m
Pa
g
e
6
4
o
f
1
8
0
tau!25..5:225.
£5
.
1
3
:5
3
.
.
.
a.
.
.
KHz-1:5.—
.E
g
r
i
n
4
§
Ca
n
c
u
n
:
N5
ca:2.gE
13
a
n
.
kW
5.
5
%
I?!:8.I.3
Lm
?
:2
Bk
:
ER
3:
:
a.
.9
?scal—IE.
.t
a
n
a
p
a
n
—
Q
—
Ka
n
-
p
l
a
n
s
;
cniniwn—B»
38
5
9
.
En
g
“
!
5-
8
£892.85;
ii
i
-
:
9
CR
!
“
.3
8.;v.3
,K
W
!
!
S
§
53
.
5
.
”
q
u
rennincng
RE
S
-
.
2
C
“R
E
.
can:FE
E
.
lm
l
v
n
£4
:
53
Itl????-wu.
TF
3
.3
.
1
5.
Lt?lr._.5.
ii
i
-
.
8
a.
Ir
w
i
n
;
:
n
53:235..
§g
.
n
.
§
(a
n
;
Id
;
:3«?xanE.—
..
A
?
'3
.
3
v3
.E
v
a
u
23
H
g
.t.‘5:I5..
‘K
R
II
3
.9
ER
Sn
-
R
g
{REuw‘g
.E
'
13
.
I
.5
Ra
m
wa
y
:
3
5.
.
high—KLE-
Ea
l
s
.
I?
:8
3
.
.
-
E5
4
,H3.13
€3
1
.
4
3
3
on
Bi
.
1.
9
NE
:2
a.
.
.
a.
EL
F
R724:A!.15!!!.....HhNo-?aH!NRaNFNSQM.la.4.£35...I 5h.1!Sign3:Hull.m....9:uzhhiahJNNWVNUV!’n53...EE-.-$§:.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
8
0
VAC2025-003
Page 66 of 180
Page 67 of 180
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
8
0
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 180
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 180
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 180
Page 72 of 180
Page 73 of 180
Pasco City Council
February 17, 2026
Regular Meeting
Pa
g
e
7
4
o
f
1
8
0
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
8
0
01 History
02 PMC
03 Vicinity Map
04 Timeline
Pa
g
e
7
6
o
f
1
8
0
HISTORY
TIERRA VIDA PHASE ONE FINAL PLAT-2006 ORDINANCE 4646-2023
Pa
g
e
7
7
o
f
1
8
0
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
8
0
Pa
g
e
7
9
o
f
1
8
0
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
8
0
Questions?
Thank you!
Pa
g
e
8
1
o
f
1
8
0
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: Ordinance No. 4817 - Moratorium on Essential Public Facilities (Secure
Community Transition Facilities)
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
Draft Ordinance
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4817, an ordinance of the City of
Pasco, Washington, imposing a six-month moratorium on applications related
to Essential Public facilities, including Secure Community Transition Facilities;
establishing an immediate effective date; authorizing publication by summary
only; and directing staff to develop an return to City Council with recommended
land use regulations addressing the siting of these facilities within six months of
adoption of the moratorium.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Fiscal:
None anticipated at this time.
Impact (Other than Fiscal):
This will be a matter of significant public concern and will likely generate
community discussion and participation.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Background:
The Washington State Department of Social and Health Services implemented
the Less Restrictive Alternative (LRA) program in an effort to distribute the
housing of sexual offenders across the state, proportional to regional
demographics. State law requires local jurisdictions to allow the location of
these facilities. Cities do maintain some local control of the siting of these
Page 82 of 180
facilities regarding land use regulations but cannot regulate the operation of
them. One form of LRA housing is a Secure Community Transition Facility
(SCTF), which provides supervised residential placement and treatment
services.
Under as classified are SCTFs Act, Management Growth Washington’s
Essential Public Facilities (EPFs). State law requires local jurisdictions to allow
the siting of EPFs but allows cities to regulate land use aspects such as
zoning, development standards, and siting criteria, while not regulating facility
operations.
The neighboring community of Kennewick has recently been dealing with the
public their of one in facilities these of one of siting the to response
neighborhoods. In anticipation of the probable siting of a facility in Pasco, staff
has assessed Pasco’s land use regulations regarding these uses.
After review staff has determined Pasco’s land use ordinances do not currently
establish a dedicated siting process or decision criteria specifically applicable
to EPFs or SCTFs.
V. DISCUSSION:
Recommendation:
Staff recommends the development of land use requirements for LRAs within
Pasco.
In addition, given the public and legal concerns and anticipated impacts
surrounding LRAs staff recommends the City Council implement a moratorium
on the acceptance of applications related to Essential Public Facilities,
including Secure Community Transition Facilities until staff has prepared and
Council has approved appropriate and necessary regulations addressing these
topics.
It is imperative the development of these land use regulations be determined
as soon as possible. Staff also recommends the coordination of significant
public input during the regulation development. As such staff recommends the
following:
Next Steps:
1. Council approve the attached ordinance implementing a moratorium on
the acceptance of applications related to Essential Public Facilities,
including Secure Community Transition Facilities for a period of 6
months from the date of adoption to allow time for the development of
necessary land use regulations and public input.
2. A public hearing regarding the moratorium is required by State law
Page 83 of 180
within 60 days of its implementation.
3. Staff recommends additional public hearings to identify public concerns
that can be addressed through land use regulations.
4. Staff develops and recommends a SCTF ordinance no later than July.
5. Council adopts ordinance and lifts moratorium no later than 6 months
following adoption of the moratorium.
Alternatives:
1. Council could direct staff to develop an interim/emergency ordinance
between the moratorium and final ordinance. This would minimize the
length of the moratorium, and the use of the interim ordinance is easier
to extend if necessary than the moratorium.
2. Council could decide to leave LRAs unregulated by Pasco Land Use
ordinances.
Page 84 of 180
Ordinance - 1
Version 1.8.26
ORDINANCE NO. __________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,
IMPOSING A SIX-MONTH MORATORIUM ON APPLICATIONS RELATED
TO ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES, INCLUDING SECURE COMMUNITY
TRANSITION FACILITIES; AND ESTABLISHING AN IMMEDIATE
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Council has authority under Article XI, Section 11 of the
Washington State Constitution, RCW 35A.63.220, RCW 36.70A.200, and RCW 36.70A.390 to
regulate land uses and adopt interim zoning controls and moratoria; and
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.200 requires cities to include provisions for the siting of
Essential Public Facilities (“EPFs”); and
WHEREAS, Secure Community Transition Facilities (“SCTFs”) are a type of Essential
Public Facility governed in part by RCW 71.09; and
WHEREAS, the Pasco Municipal Code does not currently establish a dedicated siting
process or decision criteria specifically applicable to EPFs or SCTFs; and
WHEREAS, RCW 71.09.285 establishes siting considerations for SCTFs, including
proximity to “risk potential activities and facilities,” emergency service response times, public
safety considerations, and site characteristics; and
WHEREAS, RCW 71.09.020 defines “risk potential activities and facilities” to include
schools, school bus stops, licensed daycare facilities, preschools, parks, trails, playgrounds,
sports fields, community centers, libraries, youth camps, and places of worship; and
WHEREAS, RCW 71.09.096 establishes a minimum separation distance of 500 feet
between certain residential placements associated with SCTFs and K-12 schools, daycares, and
preschools; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that additional time is necessary to develop a clear
Essential Public Facility and Secure Community Transition Facility siting process, evaluate
zoning regulations and development standards, map risk-potential facilities using GIS, establish
separation criteria consistent with state law, evaluate public safety and compatibility
considerations, and adopt interim or permanent development regulations; and
WHEREAS, without a moratorium, business license and/or permit applications related to
EPFs or SCTFs could vest under existing regulations that do not contain siting criteria or review
procedures; and
WHEREAS, the City Council intends to study EPF and SCTF siting regulations with
input from the Planning Commission, staff, and the community; and
Page 85 of 180
Ordinance - 2
Version 1.8.26
WHEREAS, a temporary moratorium is necessary to protect the public health, safety,
and welfare while the City develops appropriate regulations; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance is intended to include necessary supporting recitals
incorporated as findings of fact, impose a moratorium on acceptance and processing of
applications related to EPFs and SCTFs, exempt vested applications, establish a six-month
duration, require a public hearing within 60 days, and declare an emergency establishing an
immediate effective date.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings of Fact. The recitals set forth above are adopted as the City
Council’s initial findings of fact in support of the moratorium established by this ordinance.
Section 2. Declaration of Emergency. The City Council declares this moratorium to
be an emergency measure necessary for the immediate protection of public health, safety,
property, and welfare.
Section 3. Moratorium Imposed. Pursuant to Article XI, Section 11 of the Washington
State Constitution, RCW 35A.63.220, and RCW 36.70A.390, the City hereby imposes a
temporary moratorium on the acceptance and processing of development permit applications
related to Essential Public Facilities, including Secure Community Transition Facilities. This
moratorium applies to, but is not limited to, business license applications, building permit
applications, conditional use permit applications, site plan review applications, binding site plan
applications, subdivision and short subdivision applications, pre-application conferences, and
any other land-use approvals or development permit applications related to Essential Public
Facilities or Secure Community Transition Facilities.
Section 4. Effect on Vested Rights. This moratorium applies prospectively only and
does not affect applications determined to be complete prior to the effective date of this
ordinance.
Section 5. Duration of Moratorium. This moratorium shall remain in effect for six (6)
months from the date of adoption unless extended in accordance with RCW 35A.63.220 and
RCW 36.70A.390 or replaced by interim or permanent regulations.
Section 6. Public Hearing. The City Council shall hold a public hearing within sixty
(60) days of adoption of this ordinance to receive public testimony and consider additional
findings of fact.
Section 7. Interpretive Authority. The City Manager or designee is authorized to issue
official interpretations necessary to implement this ordinance.
Page 86 of 180
Ordinance - 3
Version 1.8.26
Section 8. 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 9. 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 10. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon
adoption.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington this ___ day of _____,
202_.
Charles Grimm
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ ___________________________
Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC
City Clerk City Attorney
Published: _____________________________
Page 87 of 180
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 88 of 180
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 89 of 180
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 90 of 180
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 91 of 180
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 92 of 180
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 93 of 180
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 94 of 180
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 95 of 180
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 96 of 180
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 97 of 180
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 98 of 180
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 99 of 180
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 100 of 180
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 101 of 180
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 102 of 180
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 103 of 180
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 104 of 180
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 105 of 180
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 106 of 180
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 107 of 180
&9)*#*5
Pa
g
e
1
0
8
o
f
1
8
0
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 109 of 180
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 110 of 180
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 111 of 180
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 112 of 180
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 113 of 180
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 114 of 180
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 115 of 180
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 116 of 180
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 117 of 180
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 118 of 180
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 119 of 180
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 120 of 180
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 121 of 180
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 122 of 180
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 123 of 180
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 124 of 180
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 125 of 180
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 126 of 180
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 127 of 180
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 128 of 180
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 129 of 180
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 130 of 180
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®ϙÍæŪťŜϙÍϙϠϙaϠϙ ϙĺŘϙaϙƏĺIJôϠϙôƄèôŕťϙťēÍťϙIJĺϙŜÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJŜϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙÍīīĺſôîϙĖIJϙ
ťēôϙèŪŘæϙôƄťôIJŜĖĺIJϙŕīÍIJťĖIJČϙŜťŘĖŕŜϙĖIJϙťēôϙi®ϙÍæŪťťĖIJČϙŕÍŘèôīŜϙſĖťēĖIJϙťēôϙ "- ĺŘôϙƏĺIJôϟϙ
>ĺŘϙťēôϙŕŪŘŕĺŜôŜϙĺċϙťēĖŜϙŘôČŪīÍťĖĺIJϙťēôϙÍæŪťťĖIJČϙi®ϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙıôÍŜŪŘôîϙċŘĺıϙťēôϙŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϙ
īĖIJôϙťĺϙťēôϙèôIJťôŘīĖIJôϙĺċϙťēôϙi®ϟ
(iv) ĺııôŘèĖÍīϙŜĖČIJŜϙŜēÍīīϙĺIJīƅϙæôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙîŪŘĖIJČϙťēôϙēĺŪŘŜϙťēôϙèĺııôŘèĖÍīϙŕŘôıĖŜôŜϙĺŘϙ
æŪŜĖIJôŜŜϙĖŜϙĺŕôIJϙťĺϙťēôϙČôIJôŘÍīϙŕŪæīĖèϠϙæŪťϙĖIJϙÍIJƅϙôŽôIJťϙIJĺϙôÍŘīĖôŘϙťēÍIJϙ͘ϡ͏͏ϙÍϟıϟϙĺŘϙīÍťôŘϙ
ťēÍIJϙ͖ϡ͏͏ϙŕϟıϟϙϼ͖ϡ͏͏ϙÍϟıϟϙĺŘϙīÍťôŘϙťēÍIJϙ͖ϡ͏͏ϙŕϟıϟϙĖIJϙ ϙÍIJîϙaϙƏĺ IJôŜϽϠϙÍIJîϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙŘôıĺŽôîϙ
ċŘĺıϙťēôϙŘĖČēť-ĺċ-ſÍƅϙæôťſôôIJϙťēôϙēĺŪŘŜϙĺċϙ͖ϡ͏͏ϙŕϟıϟϙťĺϙ͘ϡ͏͏ϙÍϟıϟ
(v) "ŪôϙťĺϙťēôϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙIJÍťŪŘôϙĺċϙťēôϙŜĖČIJϼŜϽϙÍIJîϙťēôϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôIJťϙċĺŘϙîÍĖīƅϙŕīÍèôıôIJťϙÍIJîϙ
ŘôıĺŽÍīϙĖIJϙÍèèĺŘîÍIJèôϙſĖťēϙťēôϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôIJťŜϙŜôťϙċĺŘťēϙĖIJϙŜŪæŜôèťĖĺIJ (1)(d)(iv) ĺċϙťēĖŜϙ
ŜôèťĖĺIJϠϙĖťϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙťēôϙŘôŜŕĺIJŜĖæĖīĖťƅϙĺċϙťēôϙŜĖČIJϙĺſIJôŘϙťĺϙôIJŜŪŘôϙŕŘĺŕôŘϙŕīÍèôıôIJťϟϙ Ėťƅϙ
ŜťÍƯϙĖŜϙÍŪťēĺŘĖƏôîϙťĺϙĖııôîĖÍťôīƅϙŘôıĺŽôϙÍIJîϙîôŜťŘĺƅϙÍIJƅϙŜĖČIJŜϙċĺŪIJîϙťĺϙæôϙĖIJϙŽĖĺīÍťĖĺIJϙĺċϙ
ťēôϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôIJťŜϙĺċϙťēĖŜϙŜôèťĖĺIJϟ
(vi) ÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJŜϙıŪŜťϙæôϙŕīÍèôîϙĖIJϙŕÍŘħĖIJČϙĺŘϙŕīÍIJťĖIJČϙŜťŘĖŕŜϠϙĖϟôϟϠϙťēôϙÍŘôÍϙ
æôťſôôIJϙťēôϙŜĖîôſÍīħϙÍIJîϙťēôϙŜťŘôôťϠϙĺŘϙſēôŘôϙťēôŘôϙÍŘôϙIJĺϙŜĖîôſÍīħŜϠϙťēôϙŪIJĖıŕŘĺŽôîϙŕÍŘťϙ
ĺċϙťēôϙi®ϟ
(vii) ÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJŜϙŜēÍīīϙēÍŽôϙÍťϙīôÍŜťϙċĺŪŘϙċôôťϙĺċϙèīôÍŘÍIJèôϙťĺϙôIJŜŪŘôϙťēÍťϙťēôƅϙîĺϙ
IJĺťϙæīĺèħϙÍϙŜĖîôſÍīħϟ
(viii) ÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJŜϙŜēÍīīϙIJĺťϙôIJèŘĺÍèēϙĖIJťĺϙÍIJƅϙŕĺŘťĖĺIJϙĺċϙÍϙēÍIJîĖèÍŕŕôîϙŘÍıŕϟ
(ix) ÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJŜϙÍŘôϙIJĺťϙÍīīĺſôîϙſĖťēĖIJϙťŘÍŽôīϙīÍIJôŜϠϙıôîĖÍIJŜϠϙĺŘϙŘĺŪIJî-ÍæĺŪťŜϟ
Page 131 of 180
(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 132 of 180
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 133 of 180
͓ϟ IJƅϙŜÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJϙŘôıĺŽôîϙŕŪŘŜŪÍIJťϙťĺϙťēĖŜϙŜŪæŜôèťĖĺIJϙıÍƅϙæôϙŘôťŪŘIJôîϙťĺϙťēôϙ
ĺſIJôŘϙĺIJīƅϙŪŕĺIJϙťēôϙĺſIJôŘЍŜϙŜôèŪŘĖIJČϙĺċϙÍϙŕôŘıĖťϠϙÍIJîϙÍϙīĖèôIJŜôϙĖċϙŘôŗŪĖŘôîϢϙŕŘĺŽĖîôîϠϙÍIJƅϙ
ŜÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJϙŘôıĺŽôîϙċŘĺıϙŕŪæīĖèϙĺŘϙŕŘĖŽÍťôϙŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϙıĺŘôϙťēÍIJϙťſĺϙťĖıôŜ ıÍƅϙæôϙ
îôŜťŘĺƅôîϟ
@ϟ ®ĖīīċŪīϙŽĖĺīÍťĖĺIJϙĺċϙťēôϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôIJťϙťĺϙĺæťÍĖIJϙÍϙŕôŘıĖťϙĺŘϙīĖèôIJŜôϙċĺŘϙÍϙŜÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙ
ŜĖČIJϠϙÍŜϙôŽĖîôIJèôîϙæƅϙťēŘôôϙĺŘϙıĺŘôϙÍèťĖĺIJŜϙťĺϙôIJċĺŘèôϙŜŪèēϙŘôŗŪĖŘôıôIJťŜϙæƅϙŘôıĺŽÍīϙĺċϙ
ÍIJƅϙŜĖČIJϙĺſIJôîϙæƅϙťēôϙŜÍıôϙĺſIJôŘϠϙŜēÍīīϙèĺIJŜťĖťŪťôϙÍϙıĖŜîôıôÍIJĺŘϟϙϼiŘîϟϙ͐͐͗͘ϙЯ ͑͑ϙϼ(Ƅēϟϙ
"ϽϠϙ͑͏͖͐ϢϙiŘîϟϙ͐͐͘ϙЯ ͒Ϡϙ͑͏͏͑Ͻϟ
City of Orting
͐͒-͖-͖ϡ b"®I Fϙi"ϙI@bϡ
ϟ ÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJŜϙÍŘôϙÍϙťƅŕôϙĺċϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅϙŜĖČIJϙŕôŘıĖťťôîϙæƅϙťēôϙ ĖťƅϙĖIJϙ
ÍèèĺŘîÍIJèôϙſĖťēϙťēĖŜϙ ēÍŕťôŘϟ
ϟ ÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJŜϙÍŘôϙÍīīĺſôîϙŜŪæĤôèťϙťĺϙťēôϙċĺīīĺſĖIJČϙŘôŜťŘĖèťĖĺIJŜϡ
͐ϟ ÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJŜϙÍŘôϙīĖıĖťôîϙťĺϙťēĖŘťƅ-ŜĖƄϙĖIJèēôŜϙϼ͕͒ГϽϙĖIJϙēôĖČēťϙÍIJîϙťēĖŘťƅϙĖIJèēôŜϙ
ϼ͒͏ГϽϙĖIJϙſĖîťēϟϙēôƅϙıŪŜťϙæôϙèĺIJŜťŘŪèťôîϙĺċϙîŪŘÍæīôϙıÍťôŘĖÍīŜϟ
͑ϟ ÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJŜϙıÍƅϙæôϙīĺèÍťôîϙĺIJϙŕŪæīĖèϙŜĖîôſÍīħŜϙĺŘϙÍîĤÍèôIJťϙÍŘôÍŜϙĖIJϙÍϙ
ıÍIJIJôŘϙŜĺϙÍŜϙťĺϙÍīīĺſϙÍîôŗŪÍťôϙŕôîôŜťŘĖÍIJϙèĖŘèŪīÍťĖĺIJϙÍīīĺſĖIJČϙÍϙıĖIJĖıŪıϙĺċϙťēŘôôϙϼ͒Ͻϙċôôťϙ
ĺċϙÍŽÍĖīÍæīôϙŜĖîôſÍīħϙŕÍťēϠϙĖIJèīŪîĖIJČϙŜÍċôϙÍIJîϙŪIJèĺIJŜťŘÍĖIJôîϙÍèèôŜŜϙťĺϙŕÍŘħôîϙŽôēĖèīôŜϟϙ
ÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJŜϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙŕīÍèôîϙÍîĤÍèôIJťϙťĺϙťēôϙŜĖČIJϙĺſIJôŘДŜϙæŪŜĖIJôŜŜϙĺŘϙŕŘôıĖŜôŜϙ
ôƄèôŕťϙſēôIJϙťēôϙÍŕŕīĖèÍIJťϙèÍIJϙîôıĺIJŜťŘÍťôϙÍϙIJôôîϙċĺŘϙŕīÍèôıôIJťϙŪŕϙťĺϙĺIJôϙēŪIJîŘôîϙċôôťϙ
ϼ͐͏͏ДϽϙċŘĺıϙťēôϙæŪŜĖIJôŜŜϙĺŘϙŕŘôıĖŜôŜϙÍIJîϙſĖťēϙťēôϙŕôŘıĖŜŜĖĺIJϙĺċϙťēôϙĖııôîĖÍťôīƅϙÍîĤÍèôIJťϙ
ŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϙĺſIJôŘϼŜϽϟ
͒ϟ bĺϙŜÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙŕīÍèôîϙſĖťēĖIJϙťēĖŘťƅϙċôôťϙϼ͒͏ДϽϙĺċϙÍIJĺťēôŘϙŜÍIJîſĖèēϙ
æĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJϟ
͓ϟ IJîôŘϙIJĺϙèĖŘèŪıŜťÍIJèôŜϙıÍƅϙÍϙŜÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJϙæôϙŕīÍèôîϙĺIJϙťēôϙŕĺŘťĖĺIJϙĺċϙťēôϙ
ŕŪæīĖèϙŘĖČēťϙĺċϙſÍƅϙŪŕĺIJϙſēĖèēϙŽôēĖèīôŜϙŘôČŪīÍŘīƅϙťŘÍŽôŘŜôϙĺŘϙŕÍŘħϟϙbĺϙŜĖČIJϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙŕīÍèôîϙ
ĖIJϙıôîĖÍIJϙŜťŘĖŕŜϠϙŕīÍIJťôŘϯťŘÍƯĖèϙĖŜīÍIJîŜϠϙĺŘϙĖIJϙťēôϙŘĺÍîſÍƅϠϙĖIJèīŪîĖIJČϙĺIJϙŽôēĖèīôŜϟϙēôϙ Ėťƅϙ
ŜēÍīīϙîôťôŘıĖIJôϠϙÍťϙĖťŜϙŜĺīôϙîĖŜèŘôťĖĺIJϠϙťēôϙÍŕŕŘĺŽôîϙīĺèÍťĖĺIJϙĺċϙŜÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJŜϙťĺϙ
ôIJŜŪŘôϙŕôîôŜťŘĖÍIJϙŜÍċôťƅϙÍIJîϙŽôēĖèīôϙèĖŘèŪīÍťĖĺIJϟϙÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJŜϙŜēÍīīϙIJĺťϙæôϙ
īĺèÍťôîϙſĖťēĖIJϙťēĖŘťƅϙċôôťϙϼ͒͏ДϽϙĺċϙŜťŘôôťϙĖIJťôŘŜôèťĖĺIJŜϙĺŘϙſēôŘôϙťēôƅϙĖIJēĖæĖťϙıĺťĺŘĖŜťϙŜĖČēťϙ
îĖŜťÍIJèôŜϟ
͔ϟ bĺϙŜĖIJČīôϙæŪŜĖIJôŜŜϙĺŘϙĺťēôŘϙŕÍŘťƅϙŜēÍīīϙŜĖťôϙıĺŘôϙťēÍIJϙĺIJôϙŜÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJϙ
ſĖťēĖIJϙťēôϙ Ėťƅϟ
Page 134 of 180
͕ϟ ÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJŜϙıÍƅϙĺIJīƅϙæôϙîĖŜŕīÍƅôîϙîŪŘĖIJČϙťēôϙēĺŪŘŜϙťēôϙŕŘôıĖŜôŜϙĺŘϙ
æŪŜĖIJôŜŜϙĖŜϙĺŕôIJϙťĺϙťēôϙČôIJôŘÍīϙŕŪæīĖèϠϙŕŘĺŽĖîôîϙIJĺIJ-èĺııôŘèĖÍīϙŜÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJŜϙ
ıÍƅϙæôϙŕīÍèôîϙĖIJϙťēôϙŕŪæīĖèϙŘĖČēťϙĺċϙſÍƅϙċĺŘϙÍϙıÍƄĖıŪıϙŕôŘĖĺîϙĺ ċϙťſôīŽôϙϼ͐͑ϽϙēĺŪŘŜϙŕôŘϙ
ôÍèēϙťſôIJťƅ-ċĺŪŘϙϼ͓͑ϽϙēĺŪŘϙŕôŘĖĺîϟ
͖ϟ ÍIJîſĖèēϙæĺÍŘîϙŜĖČIJŜϙťēÍťϙÍŘôϙIJĺťϙŕôŘıĖťťôîϙĺŘϙÍŘôϙĺťēôŘſĖŜôϙĺŪťϙĺċϙèĺıŕīĖÍIJèôϙſĖťēϙ
ťēĖŜϙ ēÍŕťôŘϙŜēÍīīϙæôϙÍæÍťôîϙæƅϙťēôϙ ĖťƅϠϙŕŪŘŜŪÍIJťϙťĺϙťēôϙŕŘĺèôŜŜϙŜôťϙĺŪťϙĖIJϙťēĖŜϙ ēÍŕťôŘϟ
͗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 >ĺŘϙÍIJƅϙæŪŜĖIJôŜŜϠϙĺŘϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙŪIJĖťϠϙīĺèÍťôîϙĖIJϙťēôϙϠϙ aϠϙ"(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 135 of 180
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 136 of 180
Ėϟ ĺııôŘèĖÍīϙÍIJîϙŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ ŕĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČIJŜ ŜēÍīī IJĺťϙôƄèôôîϙŜĖƄϙŜŗŪÍŘôϙċôôťϙ
ŕôŘ ŜĖČIJ ċÍèôϠϙÍIJîϙIJĺϙŜŪèē ŜĖČIJ ŜēÍīī èĺIJťÍĖIJϙıĺŘôϙťēÍIJϙťſĺ ŜĖČIJ ċÍèôŜϟϙ ĺııôŘèĖÍīϙÍIJîϙ
ŘôÍīϙôŜťÍťôϙťôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ ŕĺŘťÍæīôϙŜĖČIJŜ ŜēÍīī IJĺťϙôƄèôôîϙŜĖƄϙċôôťϙĖIJϙēôĖČēťϠϙıôÍŜŪŘôîϙċŘĺıϙťēôϙ
ŕŘôôƄĖŜťĖIJČϙČŘĺŪIJîϙīôŽôīϙťĺϙťēôϙťĺŕϙĺċϙťēô ŜĖČIJϟ
ĖĖϟ ôıŕĺŘÍŘƅ èĺIJŜťŘŪèťĖĺIJϙŜĖČIJŜ ĖIJϙťēôϙϠϙ"(Ϡϙ" Ϡϙ aϠϙi«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 137 of 180
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 138 of 180
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 139 of 180
͔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 140 of 180
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 141 of 180
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 142 of 180
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 143 of 180
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 144 of 180
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 145 of 180
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 146 of 180
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 147 of 180
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 148 of 180
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 149 of 180
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 150 of 180
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 151 of 180
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 152 of 180
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 153 of 180
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 154 of 180
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 155 of 180
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 156 of 180
Pasco City Council
February 17, 2026
Regular Meeting
Pa
g
e
1
5
7
o
f
1
8
0
Ordinance-Sandwich
Board Signs-
Downtown Pasco
Overlay District-
CA2025-002
February 17, 2026
Pasco City Council
Pa
g
e
1
5
8
o
f
1
8
0
Timeline
PMC proposed changes
Downtown Pasco Overlay District
01
02
03
Pa
g
e
1
5
9
o
f
1
8
0
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
6
0
o
f
1
8
0
PMC proposed changes
Pa
g
e
1
6
1
o
f
1
8
0
Downtown Pasco Overlay District
Pa
g
e
1
6
2
o
f
1
8
0
Questions?
Thank you!
Pa
g
e
1
6
3
o
f
1
8
0
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 164 of 180
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 165 of 180
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 166 of 180
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 167 of 180
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 168 of 180
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 169 of 180
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 170 of 180
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 171 of 180
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 172 of 180
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 173 of 180
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 174 of 180
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 175 of 180
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 176 of 180
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 177 of 180
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 178 of 180
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 179 of 180
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 180 of 180