HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026.04.20 Council Meeting Packet
AGENDA
City Council Regular Meeting
7:00 PM - Monday, April 20, 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 872 702 197#.
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 431
Regular Agenda and considered separately.
6 - 16 (a) Approval of Meeting Minutes for April 6th
To approve the minutes of the Pasco City Council Special Meeting
and Regular Meeting both held on April 6, 2026.
17 - 20 (b) Bills and Communications - Approving Claims in the Total
Amount of $7,775,038.99 and Write-off Totaling $#,272.00
(delinquent bad debt)
To approve claims in the total amount of $7,775,038.99
($2,635,974.83 in Check Nos. 277475 - 277810; $2,350,723.66 in
Electronic Transfer Nos. 852663 - 852888, 852891 - 852910, 852913
- 852918, 852924 - 852930, 852933 - 852937; $12,681.32 in Check
Nos. 55164 - 55221; $2,775,659.18 in Electronic Transfer Nos.
30240065 - 30241413).
To approve bad debt write-off for accounts receivable including Utility
Billing, Ambulance, Cemetery, General Accounts, and Miscellaneous
Accounts in the total amount of $3,272.00 and, of that amount,
authorize $3,272.00 to be turned over for collection.
21 - 36 (c) Resolution No. 4728 - Professional Services Agreement
Amendment No. 1 with RH2 Engineering, Inc. for Design
Services for the Foster Wells Lift Station Improvements Project
To approve Resolution No. 4728, authorizing the City Manager to
execute Amendment No. 1 for the professional services agreement
with RH2 Engineering, Inc. for the design of the Foster Wells Lift
Station Improvements Project.
(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
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.
Page 2 of 431
7. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND/OR OFFICERS
(a) Verbal Reports from Councilmembers
8. HEARINGS AND COUNCIL ACTION ON ORDINANCES AND
RESOLUTIONS RELATING THERETO
37 - 53 (a) Public Hearing & Ordinance No. 4826 - Assuming Powers of the
Pasco Transportation Benefit District
CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4826, assuming the rights,
powers, functions, immunities, and obligations of the Pasco
Transportation Benefit District; providing for severability and
establishing an effective date; authorizing publication by summary
only.
54 - 200 (b) Public Hearing and Ordinance Nos. 4827 and 4828: Emergency
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendment (CPA 2025-002)
– Low Density Residential Land Use Changes, and Rezone of R-
S-20 and the newly added parcels with associated text
amendments (CA2025-006 and Z2025-011) (5 minute staff
presentation)
CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4827, adopting the 2018
comprehensive plan amendment: low density Residential-Riverview
by reference and incorporating such into the city of Pasco
comprehensive plan by addendum and further authorize publication
by summary only.
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4828, amending and
repealing sections of Pasco Municipal Code, in Title 17 Sign Code,
Title 21 Urban Area Subdivision Regulations, and Title 25 Zoning,
related to changes made to the R-S-20 Suburban District and further
amending the official zoning map classification from R-S-20 suburban
district and Parcels 118431055 and 118461013 (zoned R-1) and
Parcel 118461031 (zoned R-S-12) to R-15 low density residential
district, and further authorize publication by summary only.
9. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS NOT RELATING TO HEARINGS
201 - 238 (a) Ordinance No. 4829 - Emergency Comprehensive Plan
Amendment- School District Capital Facilities Plan Update (5
minute staff presentation)
Page 3 of 431
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4829, adopting the Pasco
School District No. 1 2025 Update to the Capital Facilities Plan by
reference and incorporating such into the City of Pasco
Comprehensive Plan by addendum and further authorize publication by
summary only.
239 - 293 (b) Ordinance No. 4830 - Special Event Code and Downtown Update
(10 minute staff presentation)
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4830, amending Title 5,
Business Licenses and Regulations to Implement the Pasco
Downtown Master Plan by expanding opportunities for community
events and sales throughout the City; providing for severability and
establishing an effective date.
294 - 325 (c) Ordinance No. 4831 - Approving NFC Northwest, LLC Franchise
Agreement (5 minute staff presentation)
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4831, approving a Non-
Exclusive Franchise to construct, install, operate, maintain, repair, or
remove fiber optic cables within the public ways of the City of Pasco
and, further, authorize publication by summary only.
326 - 339 (d) *Resolution No. 4729 - Acceptance of work for the Memorial Pool
Bubble Cover New Construction Project (5 minute staff
presentation)
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. 4729, accepting work
performed by ESF Solutions LLC, of Walla Walla WA, under contract
for the Memorial Pool Bubble Cover New Construction Project.
340 - 397 (e) *Resolution No. 4730 - Participation in the National Six Remnant
Defendants Opioids Settlement (2 minute staff presentation)
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. 4730, authorizing the
City Manager to Sign Settlement Participation Forms for the National
Six Remnant Defendants Opioids Settlement.
10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
11. NEW BUSINESS
398 - 421 (a) Process Water Reuse Facility (PWRF) Customer Rates Annual
Review (15 minute staff presentation)
12. MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION
422 - 429 (a) City Manager Report
Page 4 of 431
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 #....”
430 - 431 (b) Adopted Council Goals (Reference Only)
Page 5 of 431
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 10, 2026
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular
Meeting: 4/20/26
FROM: Krystle Shanks, City Clerk
City Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of Meeting Minutes for April 6th
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
4.6.2026 Draft Council Minutes
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
To approve the minutes of the Pasco City Council Special Meeting and Regular
Meeting both held on April 6, 2026.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
V. DISCUSSION:
Page 6 of 431
MINUTES
City Council Special Meeting
5:00 PM - Monday, April 6, 2026
Pasco City Hall, Council Chambers & Microsoft Teams Webinar
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 5:00 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 and Lauren Richards, Executive
Assistant
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Council adjourned into Executive Session at 5:06 PM for 60 minutes returning at
6:06 PM to discuss the performance of a public employee per RCW
42.30.110(1)(g) with the City Manager and Dave Mercier, Facilitator.
At 6:06 PM Mayor Grimm announced that the Executive Session would continue
for another 15 minutes starting at 6:07 PM.
At 6:22 PM Mayor Grimm announced that the Executive Session would continue
for another 5 minutes starting at 6:23 PM.
Mayor Grimm called the meeting back to order at 6:28 PM.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:29 PM.
Page 1 of 2Page 7 of 431
PASSED and APPROVED on _______________________.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
Charles Grimm, Mayor Lauren Richards, Executive Assistant
Page 2 of 2Page 8 of 431
MINUTES
City Council Regular Meeting
7:00 PM - Monday, April 6, 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: 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, Interim Parks & Recreation Director; Kevin Crowley, Fire Chief;
Kevin Hebdon, Finance Director; Daniel Kenny, City Attorney; Haylie Matson,
Community & Economic Development Director; William Crane, Interim IT Director;
Brent Cook, Interim Police Chief; Maria Serra, Public Works Director; and Lauren
Richards, Executive Assistant
The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance.
CONSENT AGENDA
Scrivener's Errors: Approved Ordinance No. 4824 was administratively corrected
after the meeting to Ordinance No. 4825.
Approval of Meeting Minutes for March 9th, March 16th and March 23rd
To approve the minutes of the Pasco City Council Regular Workshop held on
March 9, 2026, Regular Meeting held on March 16, 2026 and Regular Workshop
held on March 23, 2026.
Bills and Communications - Approving Claims in the Total Amount of
$8,090,656.57
Page 1 of 8Page 9 of 431
To approve claims in the total amount of $8,090,656.57 ($3,470,740.50 in Check
Nos. 277144 - 277474; $3,327,943.75 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 852642 -
852643, 852645 - 852647, 852649 - 852656, 852658 - 652662; $2,837.07 in
Check Nos. 55161 - 55163; $1,289,135.25 in Electronic Transfer Nos.30239393 -
30240064).
Ordinance No. 4824 - Amending Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 13.45.020 &
13.65
To adopt Ordinance No. 4824, amending Pasco Municipal Code Section
13.45.020 Connection to Existing Lines and Chapter 13.65 Sewer Extensions
Providing Severability and Establishing an Effective Date, and authorize
publication by summary only.
Resolution No. 4717 - Change Order No. 4 Sylvester Street Safety
Improvements with Granite Construction Company
To approve Resolution No. 4717, authorizing the City Manager to sign and
execute Change Order No. 4 with Granite Construction Company for the
Sylvester Street Safety Improvements Project.
Resolution No. 4718 - Change Order No. 10 Citywide Traffic Signal
Improvements Phase 2 with Apollo, Inc
To approve Resolution No. 4718, authorizing the City Manager to sign and
execute Change Order No. 10 with Apollo, Inc. for the Citywide Traffic Signal
Improvements Phase 2 project.
Resolution No. 4719 - Washington State Recreation & Conservation Office
Grant Applications
To approve Resolution No. 4719, approving submission of grant applications to
the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office for a variety of grant
programs.
Resolution No. 4720 – Acceptance of a Washington Association of Sheriffs
and Police Chiefs (WASPC) Traffic Safety Grant
To approve Resolution No. 4720, authorizing the acceptance of a Washington
Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs (WASPC) Traffic Safety Grant, and,
authorizing the City Manager to execute all documents necessary to implement
the grant.
Resolution No. 4721 - Interlocal Agreement with and Southeast Regional
Internet Crimes Against Children
To approve Resolution No. 4721, authorizing the City Manager to Execute an
amended and restated Southeast Regional internet Crimes Against Children Task
Force (SERICAC) Interlocal Cooperative Agreement.
Page 2 of 8Page 10 of 431
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Milne moved, seconded by Councilmember Perales
to approve the Consent Agenda as read by Roll Call vote.
RESULT: Motion carried 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, provided comments and requested information
regarding the Pasco Aquatic Center, animal control operations, financial practices,
environmental concerns.
Sarah Bumgardner, representing the Benton-Franklin Health District, invited Council
and the public to attend an upcoming event to discuss the Community Health
Improvement Plan, highlighting key focus areas and encouraging community
participation and provided handouts to the Clerk.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND/OR OFFICERS
Councilmember Cotta reported attending the Tri-City Chamber annual meeting, Chief
Roski’s retirement event, and a Mid-Columbia EMS and Trauma Care Council
meeting. He also discussed a recent housing meeting in Pasco, noting emotional
public testimony and encouraging community members to attend upcoming meetings
and share their input.
Councilmember Figueroa highlighted attending a Visit Tri-Cities board meeting, noting
the Tri-Cities Ironman 70.3 Circuit was ranked number one globally. He also served
as a judge at Orion High School, recognizing student engagement in local
infrastructure and community issues. Additionally, he attended the air mail centennial
event at the airport with the Mayor, highlighting Pasco’s historical significance.
Mayor Grimm reported attending the Federal Partners Coalition Rural Development
event and efforts to connect with federal agencies for potential funding, and
recognized staff for coordinating a tour with a federal representative. He discussed a
recent housing meeting, encouraging community participation, and attended the Dust
Devils 25th anniversary and air mail centennial events, highlighting Pasco’s aviation
history.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Council adjourned into Executive Session at 7:20 PM for 40 minutes returning at 8:00
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, City Attorney, Katherine
A.J. Robertson and Laurel McQuade.
At 8:00 PM Mayor Grimm announced that the Executive Session would continue for
Page 3 of 8Page 11 of 431
another 15 minutes.
Mayor Grimm called the meeting back to order at 8:15 PM.
At the conclusion of Executive Session, Attorney Daniel Kenny had questions for
Council regarding the Madison Park final appeal, and what should be included in that
record.
(1) Should the City Council allow the appendices and exhibits which were
attached to the final plat appeal be included in the appeal record?
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Milne moved, seconded by Councilmember Perales
that the City Council should allow the appendices and exhibits which were
attached to the final plat appeal to be included in the appeal record.
RESULT: Motion carried 7-0
AYES: Mayor Grimm, Mayor Pro Tem Milne, Councilmember
Figueroa, Councilmember Perales, Councilmember
Cotta, Councilmember Hernandez, and Councilmember
Campos
(2) Should the Council require the City to provide unredacted emails between staff
and the City's attorneys in this matter?
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Milne moved, seconded by Councilmember Perales
that the City does not allow unredacted emails between the City's attorneys
and staff.
RESULT: Motion carried 7-0
AYES: Mayor Grimm, Mayor Pro Tem Milne, Councilmember
Figueroa, Councilmember Perales, Councilmember
Cotta, Councilmember Hernandez, and Councilmember
Campos
(3) Should City Council allow the addition of infrastructure related improvement
documents as proposed by both the appellant and City team?
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Milne moved, seconded by Councilmember Perales
to accept infrastructure improvements from both parties.
RESULT: Motion carried 7-0
AYES: Mayor Grimm, Mayor Pro Tem Milne, Councilmember
Figueroa, Councilmember Perales, Councilmember
Cotta, Councilmember Hernandez, and Councilmember
Campos
HEARINGS AND COUNCIL ACTION ON ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
Page 4 of 8Page 12 of 431
RELATING THERETO
Public Hearing - NFC Northwest, LLC Franchise Agreement
Ms. Serra introduce Ms. Ames who presented a proposed telecommunications
franchise agreement with NFC Northwest LLC, explaining federal, state, and local
regulations governing use of the public right-of-way. Staff noted the agreement
supports a partnership with Ziply Fiber to expand fiber infrastructure and service
within the city.
Council asked for clarification on expansion areas, and staff explained the
agreement allows for future installations through the permitting process.
Mayor Grimm opened the public hearing and called for public comments three (3)
times and no one came forward to speak, therefore the hearing was closed.
ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS NOT RELATING TO HEARINGS
*Resolution No. 4722 - Change Order No. 58 Lewis Street Overpass
Ms. Serra introduced project engineer, Michael Uhlman with HLA Engineering,
who presented Change Order No. 58 as the final reconciliation for the Lewis
Street Overpass project, adjusting quantities to match actual work completed as
part of project closeout. It was noted that the change order reflects a credit of
approximately $710,000 due to lower-than-anticipated quantities.
Council acknowledged the update and expressed appreciation for the project
nearing completion, with no further questions.
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Milne moved, seconded by Councilmember Cotta to
approve Resolution No. 4722, authorizing the City Manager to execute Change
Order No. 58 to the construction contract with Cascade Bridge, LLC. for the
Lewis Street Overpass Project.
RESULT: Motion carried 7-0
AYES: Mayor Grimm, Mayor Pro Tem Milne, Councilmember
Figueroa, Councilmember Perales, Councilmember
Cotta, Councilmember Hernandez, and Councilmember
Campos
*Resolution No. 4723 - Resolution Setting Public Hearing for Assumption of
Powers of the Pasco Transportation Benefit District
Ms. Sigdel presented a resolution to set a public hearing regarding the City’s
intent to assume the powers of the Pasco Transportation Benefit District. Staff
explained the action is part of the required process and would allow the City
Council to operate more efficiently by consolidating functions of the district.
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Milne moved, seconded by Councilmember Perales
Page 5 of 8Page 13 of 431
to approve Resolution No. 4723, setting a public hearing regarding the City's
intended assumption of the Pasco Transportation Benefit District pursuance to
Chapter 36.74 RCW.
RESULT: Motion carried 7-0
AYES: Mayor Grimm, Mayor Pro Tem Milne, Councilmember
Figueroa, Councilmember Perales, Councilmember
Cotta, Councilmember Hernandez, and Councilmember
Campos
*Resolution No. 4724 - Consideration of Waiver Related to PMC Section
9.40.020(e) for Special Event Application No. 44023
Ms. Sigdel presented a request for a waiver to allow alcohol service at a public
event in Memorial Park for the Tri-Cities Pride Festival, noting current code
prohibits alcohol at public events in parks without Council approval. Staff
explained similar approvals were granted previously and that code updates are
underway to address this administratively in the future.
Councilmembers asked about transitioning approvals to an administrative process
and a Councilmember expressed support for the event, noting its value to the
community and appreciation for the application being submitted earlier this year.
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Milne moved, seconded by Councilmember Perales
to approve the Resolution No. 4724, authorizing the limited used of liquor
within a designated area at Memorial Park for special event application for
2026 Pride Festival at Memorial Park. Park.
RESULT: Motion carried 7-0
AYES: Mayor Grimm, Mayor Pro Tem Milne, Councilmember
Figueroa, Councilmember Perales, Councilmember
Cotta, Councilmember Hernandez, and Councilmember
Campos
*Resolution No. 4725 - Irrigation Utility Transfer Agreement - SG Irrigation
Services LLC (Barker Ranch Subdivision)
Ms. Serra presented an agreement to transfer irrigation service for the Barker
Ranch subdivision from a private system to the City’s irrigation utility. Staff
explained the subdivision infrastructure meets City standards, and the agreement
would allow customers to connect to the City system, including payment of
applicable fees and requirements.
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Milne moved, seconded by Councilmember Perales
to approve Resolution No. 4725, authorizing the City Manager to execute the
Irrigation Utility Transfer Agreement with SG Irrigation Services LLC.
RESULT: Motion carried 7-0
AYES: Mayor Grimm, Mayor Pro Tem Milne, Councilmember
Page 6 of 8Page 14 of 431
Figueroa, Councilmember Perales, Councilmember
Cotta, Councilmember Hernandez, and Councilmember
Campos
*Resolution No. 4726 - Setting Time and Date for a Public Hearing for a
Right-of-Way Vacation-Harris Road ROW Vacation (VAC2026-001)
Ms. Sigdel presented a resolution to set a public hearing for a proposed right-of-
way vacation for a portion of Harris Road. Staff explained the request meets code
requirements and is consistent with planned roadway changes, noting the area
will be reconfigured with a new connection and that access and utilities will be
maintained.
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Milne moved, seconded by Councilmember Perales
to approve Resolution No. 4726, setting 7:00 PM on Monday, May 4, 2026, as
the time and date for a public hearing to consider the vacation of the Harris
Road Right-of-Way, between Road 103 and Broadmoor Boulevard, within the
Broadmoor Area.
RESULT: Motion carried 7-0
AYES: Mayor Grimm, Mayor Pro Tem Milne, Councilmember
Figueroa, Councilmember Perales, Councilmember
Cotta, Councilmember Hernandez, and Councilmember
Campos
MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION
City Manager Stewart provided updates on upcoming housing outreach meetings,
transportation planning meetings (TIP and CIP), and the start of irrigation season,
including recommended watering schedules. He also shared updates from Parks and
Recreation, including pool operations and an upcoming Arbor Day event.
Councilmember Hernandez announced the return of an art scholarship program in
partnership with the Pasco School District and a local business, noting student
artwork will be displayed downtown and encouraging interested students to contact
their teachers.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:47 PM.
PASSED and APPROVED on _______________________.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
Page 7 of 8Page 15 of 431
Charles Grimm, Mayor Lauren Richards, Executive Assistant
Page 8 of 8Page 16 of 431
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 9, 2026
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular
Meeting: 4/20/26
FROM: Kevin Hebdon, Director
Finance
SUBJECT: Bills and Communications - Approving Claims in the Total Amount of
$7,775,038.99 and Write-off Totaling $#,272.00 (delinquent bad debt)
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
Accounts Payable 03.19.26 to 04.08.26
Write-offs (direct and bad debt)//Collection 03.19.26 to 04.08.26
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
To approve claims in the total amount of $7,775,038.99 ($2,635,974.83 in
Check Nos. 277475 - 277810; $2,350,723.66 in Electronic Transfer Nos.
852663 - 852888, 852891 - 852910, 852913 - 852918, 852924 - 852930,
852933 - 852937; $12,681.32 in Check Nos. 55164 - 55221; $2,775,659.18 in
Electronic Transfer Nos. 30240065 - 30241413).
To approve bad debt write-off for accounts receivable including Utility Billing,
Ambulance, Cemetery, General Accounts, and Miscellaneous Accounts in the
total amount of $3,272.00 and, of that amount, authorize $3,272.00 to be
turned over for collection.
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.
Page 17 of 431
V. DISCUSSION:
Page 18 of 431
REPORTING PERIOD:
April 20, 2026
Claims Bank Payroll Bank Gen'l Bank Electronic Bank Combined
Check Numbers 277475 - 277810 55164 - 55221
Total Check Amount $2,635,974.83 $12,681.32 Total Checks 2,648,656.15$
Electronic Transfer Numbers 852663 - 852888 30240065 - 30241413
852891 - 852910
852913 - 852918
852924 - 852930
852933 - 852937
Total EFT Amount $2,350,723.66 $2,775,659.18 $0.00 $0.00 Total EFTs 5,126,382.84$
Grand Total 7,775,038.99$
Councilmember B
100 647,590.72
110 183,862.95
125 16,267.50
140 17,665.01
142 1,724.20
145 936.95
150 158,823.74
160 18,346.22
165 9,878.21
168 32,994.08
170 855.84
180 817.36
185 44.22
194 9,832.06
195 351.19
367 146,160.14
410 1,482,776.60
510 23,253.69
520 610,684.10
630 13,109.47
690 4,399,064.74
GRAND TOTAL ALL FUNDS:7,775,038.99$
March 19 2026 to April 8 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
We, the undersigned City Councilmembers of the City Council of the City of Pasco, Franklin County, Washington, do hereby certify on this
20th day of April, 2026 that the merchandise or services hereinafter specified have been received and are approved for payment:
C.D. BLOCK GRANT
HOME CONSORTIUM GRANT
MARTIN LUTHER KING COMMUNITY CENTER
AMBULANCE SERVICE
Councilmember A
SUMMARY OF CLAIMS BY FUND:
GENERAL FUND
STREET
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES
RIVERSHORE TRAIL & MARINA MAIN
CEMETERY
ATHLETIC PROGRAMS
ANIMAL CONTROL
SENIOR CENTER OPERATING
MULTI-MODAL FACILITY
EQUIPMENT RENTAL - OPERATING GOVERNMENTAL
MEDICAL/ DENTAL/ VISION INSURANCE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
STADIUM/ CONVENTION CENTER
GENERAL CAP PROJECT CONSTRUCTION
UTILITY, WATER/ SEWER
FLEX
PAYROLL CLEARING
Page 19 of 431
BAD DEBT WRITE-OFF/COLLECTION
March 19 2026 to April 8 2026
1. UTILITY BILLING - These are all inactive accounts, 60 days or older. Direct write-offs under
$20 with no current forwarding address or are accounts in "occupant" status. Accounts
submitted for collection exceed $20.00.
2. AMBULANCE - These are all delinquent accounts over 90 days past due or statements are
returned with no forwarding address. Those submitted for collection exceed $10.00. Direct
write off including DSHS and Medicare customers; the law requires that the City accept
assignment in these cases.
3. CODE ENFORCEMENT – LIENS - These are Code Enforcement violation penalties which
are either un-collectable or have been assigned for collections because the property owner has
not complied or paid the fine. There are still liens in place on these amounts which will
continue to be in effect until the property is brought into compliance and the debt associated
with these liens are paid.
4. CEMETERY - These are delinquent accounts over 120 days past due or statements are returned
with no forwarding address. Those submitted for collection exceed $10.00.
5. GENERAL - These are delinquent accounts over 120 days past due or statements are returned
with no forwarding address. Those submitted for collection exceed $10.00.
6. MISCELLANEOUS - These are delinquent accounts over 120 days past due or statements are
returned with no forwarding address. Those submitted for collection exceed $10.00.
Direct Referred to Total
Write-off Collection Write-off
Utility Billing $ - - -
Ambulance $ - - -
Code Enforcement $ -
3,272.00
3,272.00
Cemetery $ - - -
General $ - - -
Miscellaneous $ - - -
TOTAL: $ -
3,272.00
3,272.00
Page 20 of 431
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 1, 2026
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular
Meeting: 4/20/26
FROM: Maria Serra, Director
Public Works
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 4728 - Professional Services Agreement Amendment
No. 1 with RH2 Engineering, Inc. for Design Services for the Foster
Wells Lift Station Improvements Project (5 minute staff presentation)
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
Resolution
Exhibit A - Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION:City the authorizing 4728, No. approve to move I Resolution
Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 for the professional services agreement
with RH2 Engineering, Inc. for the design of the Foster Wells Lift Station
Improvements Project.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Summary:
Original PSA $62,265.00
Proposed Amendment No. 1 $251,923.00
New PSA Total $314,188.00
Project funds are planned for this item as follows:
$1,344,500 is bonded
$4,419,564 has been identified as Community Project Funding (CPF)
administered through Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for this
project
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Background
The City of Pasco (City) owns and operates the Foster Wells Lift Station
(FWLS), located near the intersection of East Foster Wells Road and Industrial
Page 21 of 431
Way. The station was designed and constructed in 1994 to convey process
wastewater from several fruit and vegetable processors in the area, including
Pasco Processing, Twin City Foods, and Reser’s Fine Foods. The FWLS
collects and transfers this wastewater to the Pasco Resource Recovery Center
for primary treatment. From there, process water is conveyed either to the
Process Water Reuse Facility (PWRF) for storage or to the land treatment
system for land application and crop production.
The FWLS has a firm pumping capacity of 4,300 gallons per minute (gpm) with
4 vertical turbine pumps. All four (4) pumps have 100 horsepower (hp) motors.
Pump Nos.1 and 2 are connected to a 16-inch carbon steel discharge manifold
while pump Nos. 3 and 4 are connected to a 24-inch carbon steel discharge
manifold.
The FWLS Improvements project intends to replace both discharge manifolds
to avoid failure, as they have exhibited pinhole leaks. The proposed stainless
steel discharge manifolds will be replumbed within the FWLS so that Pump
Nos. 1 and 3 will be connected to a common 20-inch header, and Pump Nos. 2
and 4 will be connected to a second 20-inch stainless steel header. This will
balance discharge from the FWLS and provide operators with more operational
flexibility. This project will also perform an updated condition assessment of the
entire lift station, including structural, mechanical, electrical, and control
components, to determine if any components need to be rehabilitated with the
manifold replacement project.
The PWRF Foster Wells Lift Station Improvements project will also address
corrosion issues caused by process water from contributing processors. This
involves replacing the existing header at the Foster Wells Lift Station and
adding a second header for system redundancy.
for Request through selected the (RH2) Inc., Engineering, RH2 was
Qualifications process and originally contracted on September 24, 2025 by the
City provide FWLS, of assessment the a perform to condition
recommendations for rehabilitation, include City-selected rehabilitation
components into the final design, and provide construction contract
administration.
The condition assessment concludes that the most critical deficiencies at the
FWLS are associated with the mechanical systems, electrical system, and
controls including infrastructure. The existing mechanical components,
corroded manifolds, piping, and valves, exhibit advanced deterioration and
constant leakage, representing the highest near-term risk to continued reliable
operation. The recommended wet well ventilation system improvements should
be implemented concurrently with the mechanical upgrades. Electrical and
control improvements represent the next highest priority.
Page 22 of 431
This amendment provides scope and fee for the consultant to design and
support the public bid process of the selected items from the condition
assessment.
Impact (other than fiscal)
The proposed upgrades will provide the collection and conveyance repairs and
redundancy needed to meet the PWRF customer needs, served at this pump
station.
V. DISCUSSION:
Recommendation
This item was presented to Council at the April 13, 2026, Workshop as a
discussion item.
Staff has reviewed and recommends approval of Amendment No. 1 to the PSA
with RH2 Engineering in the amount of $251,923.00 for the PWRF - Foster
Wells Lift Station Improvements project.
The proposed Amendment No. 1 to RH2 Professional services agreement
allows for the design, permitting, support during bidding, and support services
during construction for the implementation of the city selected improvements
identified during the condition assessment. The most critical deficiencies at the
FWLS, identified as part of the condition assessment, are associated with the
mechanical systems, electrical system, and controls infrastructure.
Constraints
The construction of this project should be completed as soon as reasonably
possible due to the ongoing efforts of City staff regularly repairing items at the
Lift Station. To save construction costs, the majority of the construction work
should be completed in concurrence with processor low flow times which will
reduce the amount of time of by-pass piping and equipment. If these repairs
are not done, downtime from repairs or failure could result in claims for
disrupted service and failure to comply with regulations in the Department of
Ecology Permit.
Next Steps
Provided the Council approves the amendment, staff will work with the
consultant to complete all necessary contractual documentation and begin
design.
Alternatives
Council may choose to reject the amendment. If so, options in the
Technical Memo for the condition assessment can be re-evaluated by
the City for a reduced scope or phasing approach if implementation of
Page 23 of 431
needed items.
Page 24 of 431
Resolution - Foster Wells Lift Station Improvements PSA Amendment No. 1 - 1
RESOLUTION NO. ______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,
APPROVES AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
AMENDMENT NO. 1 FOR THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH RH2 ENGINEERING, INC. FOR THE DESIGN OF THE FOSTER
WELLS LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT.
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco (City) and RH2 Engineering, Inc., entered into a
Professional Service Agreement on September 4th, 2025, to provide Engineering services with
respect to the Foster Wells Lift Station Improvements project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, has after due
consideration, determined that it is in the best interest of the City to enter into Amendment No. 1
with RH2 Engineering, Inc..
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
Amendment No. 1 between the City of Pasco, and RH2 Engineering 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 Amendment No. 1 on behalf of the
City of Pasco, and
Be It Further Resolved, that this resolution shall take effect immediately.
Page 25 of 431
Resolution - Foster Wells Lift Station Improvements PSA Amendment No. 1 - 2
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ____ day of April,
2026.
Charles Grimm
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ ___________________________
Krystle Shanks Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC
Deputy City Clerk City Attorney
Page 26 of 431
1
2/12/2026 1:28:13 PM \\CORP.RH2.COM\PROJECTS\PROJECT\DATA\PSC\25-0198\00 CONTRACT\A-1\A1_SOW_FOSTER WELLS LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS.DOCX
EXHIBIT A
Scope of Work
Amendment No. 1
City of Pasco
Foster Wells Lift Station Improvements
February 2026
Background
The City of Pasco (City) owns and operates the Foster Wells Lift Station (FWLS), located near the
intersection of East Foster Wells Road and Industrial Way. The station was designed and constructed
in 1994 to convey process wastewater from several fruit and vegetable processors in the area,
including Pasco Processing, Twin City Foods, and Reser’s Fine Foods. The FWLS collects and transfers
this wastewater to the Pasco Resource Recovery Center for primary treatment. From there, process
water is conveyed either to the Process Water Reuse Facility for storage or to the land treatment
system for land application and crop production.
The FWLS has a firm pumping capacity of 4,300 gallons per minute (gpm) at 255 feet of total dynamic
head (TDH) with 4 vertical turbine pumps. Pump Nos. 1 and 2 have 100 horsepower (hp) motors and
are capable of pumping 1,850 gpm at 185 feet of TDH. Pumps Nos. 3 and 4 have 100 hp motors and
are capable of pumping 3,890 gpm at 264 feet of TDH. Pumps Nos. 1 and 2 are connected to a 16-
inch carbon steel discharge manifold. Pumps Nos. 3 and 4 are connected to a 24-inch carbon steel
discharge manifold.
The City intends to replace both discharge manifolds to avoid failure, as they have exhibited pinhole
leaks. The proposed stainless steel discharge manifolds will be replumbed within the FWLS so that
Pump Nos. 1 and 3 will be connected to a common 20-inch header, and Pump Nos. 2 and 4 will be
connected to a second 20-inch stainless steel header. This will balance discharge from the FWLS and
provide operators with more operational flexibility.
The City would also like an updated condition assessment of the entire lift station , including
structural, mechanical, electrical, and control components, to determine if any components need to
be rehabilitated with the manifold replacement project.
RH2 Engineering, Inc., (RH2) completed the condition assessment of FWLS on October 29, 2025.
Based on that assessment, RH2 provided preliminary findings and recommendations for upgrades to
the City at an in-person meeting on November 3, 2025. Due to the time sensitivity of these
improvements, the technical memorandum for Task 2 – Lift Station Site Investigation from the
original scope of work and final design will occur concurrently.
This Scope of Work captures the effort to provide the bid-ready design, bidding support services, and
limited services during construction of the City-selected FWLS improvements based on the
November 3, 2025, meeting, with support provided by RH2’s subsidiary Control Systems NW LLC
(CSNW) via subcontract.
Page 27 of 431
City of Pasco Exhibit A – Scope of Work
Foster Wells Lift Station Improvements Amendment No. 1
2
2/12/2026 1:28:13 PM \\CORP.RH2.COM\PROJECTS\PROJECT\DATA\PSC\25-0198\00 CONTRACT\A-1\A1_SOW_FOSTER WELLS LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS.DOCX
General Assumptions
The following assumptions were made when preparing this Scope of Work:
• RH2 will rely upon the accuracy and completeness of information, data, and materials
generated or produced by the City in relation to this Scope of Work. RH2 assumes that the
entity providing such information to RH2 is either the owner of such information or has
obtained written authorization from the owner to distribute said information.
• Deliverables will be submitted in electronic format (PDF) unless otherwise noted.
• Due to the limited mechanical changes anticipated at the FWLS, there will be no hydraulic
modeling developed for this Scope of Work. Piping will be sized to maintain existing flow
velocities through the new piping.
• Construction of the proposed improvements will occur in phases to facilitate the continuous
operation of the FWLS and prioritize the replacement of the existing header.
• The City intends to acquire and utilize funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) for this project. HUD funding requires compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and for construction, incorporation of Build America, Buy
America (BABA) requirements. Consequently, this Scope of Work includes effort to assist the
City with project requirements related to federal funding.
Task 1 — Project Management and Administration Services
Objective: Manage the RH2 project team and maintain regular communication with the City for
efficient coordination of various tasks. Attend and participate in project meetings and perform
quality control reviews of project deliverables.
Approach:
1.7 Provide direction, coordination, and oversight to the RH2 project team. Organize, manage, and
coordinate technical disciplines as described herein, and implement quality assurance and
quality control reviews of project deliverables.
1.8 Attend one (1) kick-off meeting with the City to discuss final design criteria and the project
schedule.
Task 3 — Bid-Ready Design
Objective: Prepare bid-ready project plans and specifications.
Approach:
3.1 Prepare cover sheets and general information sheets.
3.2 Prepare the mechanical plans for the FWLS, including new discharge piping from all four (4)
existing pumps, two (2) new discharge headers with (1) header being relocated to the
breezeway outside of the FWLS, extending discharge piping from the newly relocated header
to the existing discharge piping, replacing two (2) check valves on the larger pumps, adding two
Page 28 of 431
City of Pasco Exhibit A – Scope of Work
Foster Wells Lift Station Improvements Amendment No. 1
3
2/12/2026 1:28:13 PM \\CORP.RH2.COM\PROJECTS\PROJECT\DATA\PSC\25-0198\00 CONTRACT\A-1\A1_SOW_FOSTER WELLS LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS.DOCX
(2) new flow meters on above-grade discharge piping outside of the FWLS, and minor
mechanical equipment sizing.
3.3 Prepare structural plans and calculations to support the mechanical improvements and
improve maintenance access and construction activities. Improvements include proposed pipe
penetrations through existing walls, a gantry crane over the discharge piping within the FWLS,
pipe supports for the new headers and discharge piping, and a new access door on the western
wall of the FWLS to facilitate removal of mechanical piping and fittings. Structural plans will
include exterior elevations, floor plan, building sections, and pipe support details. It is assumed
that the structural improvements will be above grade and will match the architectural look of
the existing building, utilizing a concrete floor, concrete masonry unit walls, and a wood-framed
roof.
3.4 Prepare heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) plans to support the replacement and
relocation of the header and electrical gear. Improvements include the replacement and
relocation of the wet well air exchange system, the replacement of indoor HVAC units with
exhaust fans, and the replacement of the existing heaters within the building.
3.5 Prepare electrical and control plans for the installation of new outdoor-rated variable
frequency drives (VFDs), a new automatic transfer switch, flow meters, radar level transducers,
and freeze protection of outdoor piping.
3.6 Prepare technical specifications using RH2’s modified Construction Specifications Institute
format (Divisions 1 through 18) and incorporate with the City’s construction contract
documents and general conditions.
3.7 Prepare a 60-percent, 90-percent, and bid-ready opinion of probable construction cost (OPCC).
3.8 Meet with the City to review the 60-percent, 90-percent, and bid-ready design documents and
OPCC. Prepare meeting minutes and distribute to attendees.
3.9 Incorporate BABA and other applicable federal-funding requirements into project design and
construction documents. This subtask assumes up to thirty (30) hours of RH2 effort to
incorporate federal funding requirements into project plans, specifications, and estimate (PSE),
as needed.
Assumptions:
• VFDs will be relocated to the exterior of the FWLS, with operator interface screens located
inside the building.
• Discharge piping and headers will be stainless steel.
• There will be no structural or mechanical improvements related to the existing pumps.
Provided by City:
• Construction contract documents and general conditions in MS Word format.
• Attendance at design review meetings and comments on 60-percent, 90-percent, and
bid-ready design documents.
Page 29 of 431
City of Pasco Exhibit A – Scope of Work
Foster Wells Lift Station Improvements Amendment No. 1
4
2/12/2026 1:28:13 PM \\CORP.RH2.COM\PROJECTS\PROJECT\DATA\PSC\25-0198\00 CONTRACT\A-1\A1_SOW_FOSTER WELLS LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS.DOCX
RH2 Deliverables:
• 60-percent, 90-percent, and bid-ready design plans, specifications, and OPCC.
• Attendance at design review meetings and meeting minutes.
Task 4 — Permitting
Objective: Assist the City with local and federal permit compliance to facilitate project construction.
Coordinate with the City and HUD regarding NEPA compliance , prepare NEPA documentation, and
facilitate HUD's review and buy-off on NEPA compliance. Support the City in obtaining a Commercial
Building Permit for project construction.
Approach:
4.1 Coordinate with City Planning regarding project improvements and anticipated State
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) exemption for the project. Confirm SEPA exemption for the
file and the Commercial Building Permit (CBP) application.
4.2 Prepare CBP application package, provide to the City for review and signatures, finalize and
submit the final permit application to the City for review and approval. This subtask assumes
up to twenty-five (25) hours of RH2 effort to prepare and submit the CBP application.
4.3 Coordinate with the City and HUD regarding project funding and NEPA compliance
requirements. Prepare HUD-specific form, project narrative, design information, maps,
discussion of project compliance with applicable federal statutes, and supporting materials to
justify project applicability as a categorically excluded (CE) activity. Submit CE package to HUD
for review and NEPA compliance processing. Respond to HUD questions and facilitate HUDs
review of the NEPA documentation and issuance of a CE determination for the project.
Assumptions:
• Local permitting will be through the City as the FWLS is within City limits.
• Improvements to the FWLS apply for a SEPA exemption as a repair, remodeling, or
maintenance activity (Washington Administrative Code [WAC] 197-11-800(3)). SEPA
exemption confirmation will be made by the City’s Planning Department as the SEPA Lead
Agency. RH2 will coordinate with City Planning to confirm and record the exemption for this
project.
• Improvements at the FWLS will apply under HUD’s list of categorically excluded activities (24
Code of Federal Regulation 58.35). Based on RH2’s review of HUD's CE activities,
improvements planned are anticipated to be covered under activities reconstruction of
existing utility facilities or buildings. Consequently, RH2 has assumed the level of effort for
NEPA compliance will be commiserate with a CE type, as opposed to an Environmental
Assessment level of effort. Subtask 4.3 assumes up to sixty (60) hours of RH2 effort for
Page 30 of 431
City of Pasco Exhibit A – Scope of Work
Foster Wells Lift Station Improvements Amendment No. 1
5
2/12/2026 1:28:13 PM \\CORP.RH2.COM\PROJECTS\PROJECT\DATA\PSC\25-0198\00 CONTRACT\A-1\A1_SOW_FOSTER WELLS LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS.DOCX
coordination with HUD and the City, preparation of the CE package, submittal, and facilitation
of HUD approval.
• FWLS is located outside of any Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation (DAHP) National Register of Historic Properties listed properties or sites. The site
is within a moderate risk polygon for DAHP’s predictive index of the potential for encountering
cultural resources. Site disturbance is anticipated to be within areas of the site that have
already been disturbed. Additionally, the project activities are anticipated to apply for a CE
type for NEPA compliance. Consequently, this Scope of Work assumes compliance with Section
106 of the National Historic Preservation Act will not require a cultural resources survey (CRS).
If HUD determines a CRS is needed for NEPA compliance, an amendment to this Scope of Work
may be warranted.
• Site improvements involve less than 1 acre of land disturbance and will not involve discharge
to State waters; consequently, the project will not require Construction Stormwater General
Permit coverage.
Provided by City:
• Submission of permit applications and payment of permit fees.
• Review of preliminary permit packages, as desired.
• Attendance at any virtual meetings with HUD, if determined to be necessary for NEPA
compliance discussions.
RH2 Deliverables:
• Electronic records of City and HUD coordination, emails, etc.
• Record of project SEPA exemption through City Planning.
• Preliminary and final CBP application package.
• CE package for NEPA compliance.
Task 5 — Bidding Support Services
Objective: Assist the City with the bidding of the FWLS Improvements project. It is assumed that the
City will advertise the project and be the main point of contact for bidders. RH2 will refer all interested
bidders with questions to the City.
Approach:
5.1 Assist the City with the pre-procurement bid package of the stainless-steel fabricated header if
necessary.
5.2 Prepare bid advertisement and coordinate the timing and placement of the bid advertisement
with the City. The City will submit the advertisement to the appropriate publications and pay
advertisement fees.
5.3 Attend one (1) pre-bid walkthrough with prospective bidders.
Page 31 of 431
City of Pasco Exhibit A – Scope of Work
Foster Wells Lift Station Improvements Amendment No. 1
6
2/12/2026 1:28:13 PM \\CORP.RH2.COM\PROJECTS\PROJECT\DATA\PSC\25-0198\00 CONTRACT\A-1\A1_SOW_FOSTER WELLS LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS.DOCX
5.4 Respond to contractor or supplier technical questions during bidding.
5.5 Prepare up to two (2) addenda as requested to clarify, revise, or change the construction plans,
technical specifications, or project conditions during the bidding process.
5.6 Attend the bid opening virtually and review the bid tabulation. Review bidders’ qualifications
and prepare a letter of recommendation of award.
5.7 Create electronic conformed for construction contract documents for contractors, if requested.
Provided by City:
• Submission of the advertisement and bid documents to the appropriate publications and
payment of fees.
• Attendance at pre-bid walkthrough with prospective bidders.
• Issuance of addenda as needed.
• Administer bid opening and prepare bid tabulation.
• Potential pre-procurement of the stainless steel fabricated header to ensure replacement can
occur before June 2026.
RH2 Deliverables:
• Pre-procurement bid package (if necessary)
• Bid advertisement.
• Attendance at pre-bid walkthrough.
• Responses to contractor or supplier questions via telephone or email.
• Up to two (2) addenda.
• Letter of recommendation of award.
• Conformed for construction contract documents, if requested.
Task 6 — Services During Construction (Limited)
Objective: Provide limited engineering services during construction to support the City. As the
engineer of record, coordinate with the City, its designated utilities, and the special inspector to
respond to technical questions and issues. Review limited technical submittals, as requested by the
City, for general conformance to the project specifications. Provide written comments to the City.
Services include reviewing limited technical submittals, responding to requests for information
(RFIs), performing on-site observations, and assisting with change proposals and change orders.
Approach:
6.1 Respond to contractor RFIs, as requested by the City. Document and transmit responses to the
City.
Page 32 of 431
City of Pasco Exhibit A – Scope of Work
Foster Wells Lift Station Improvements Amendment No. 1
7
2/12/2026 1:28:13 PM \\CORP.RH2.COM\PROJECTS\PROJECT\DATA\PSC\25-0198\00 CONTRACT\A-1\A1_SOW_FOSTER WELLS LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS.DOCX
6.2 Perform limited on-site observations up to forty (40) hours, as requested by the City, in
coordination with the City’s designated inspector(s). Provide brief field notes summarizing
observations.
6.3 Assist with change proposals and change orders as requested by the City.
6.4 Review technical submittals as requested by the City.
6.5 Provide programming and integration services for the controls installed during construction.
Programming will include programmable logic controllers, operator interface screens, and the
computer-based supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system. It is assumed that
the programming will be based on standard programming developed for the City by RH2’s
subsidiary, CSNW. Integrate the programming upgrades with the existing City system, including
connecting the existing Historian system to the SCADA system programmed as part of this
project. It is assumed that the FWLS will communicate with the Process Water Reuse Facility’s
existing SCADA system.
6.6 Provide observation and support during startup activities, including the final operation of the
newly installed hardware/software components.
6.7 Review field records provided by the contractor and prepare construction record drawings
based on the changes.
Assumptions:
• It is anticipated that the City will be the lead inspector, lead construction contract
administration, and be responsible for day-to-day activities. A maximum of 146 hours is
estimated to review technical submittals, respond to contractor questions, provide limited on-
site observations, assist with change orders, and provide programming and startup services
as shown in the attached Fee Estimate. If additional effort is needed, that extr a work will be
mutually determined by the City and RH2.
• RH2 and CSNW are not responsible for site safety, or for determining means and methods or
directing others in their work.
RH2 Deliverables:
• Technical submittals.
• Applicable RFI responses.
• Field notes summarizing on-site observations.
• Change order proposals.
• Programming and integration services.
• Attendance at startup activities.
• Construction record drawings.
Page 33 of 431
City of Pasco Exhibit A – Scope of Work
Foster Wells Lift Station Improvements Amendment No. 1
8
2/12/2026 1:28:13 PM \\CORP.RH2.COM\PROJECTS\PROJECT\DATA\PSC\25-0198\00 CONTRACT\A-1\A1_SOW_FOSTER WELLS LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS.DOCX
Project Schedule
It is anticipated that RH2 will receive notice to proceed in March 2026. Bid-ready design is anticipated
to occur within twelve (12) weeks following notice to proceed, on a date mutually agreed upon by
the City and RH2. Bidding is anticipated to occur by May 1, 2026, with bid award occurring before
June 1, 2026. Services during construction are anticipated to occur in two phases under one contract.
Phase 1 – Header Replacement will occur prior to June 1, 2026. Phase 2 – Electrical and HVAC
Improvements is anticipated to be completed by October 2026.
Page 34 of 431
EXHIBIT B
Fee Estimate
Amendment No. 1
City of Pasco
Foster Wells Lift Station Improvements
Feb-26
Description
Total
Hours
Total RH2
Labor
Total Subconsultant Total RH2
Expense
Total Expense Total Cost
Task 1 Project Management and Administration Services 84 22,204$ 3,480$ 736$ 736$ 26,420$
Task 3 Bid-Ready Design 387 83,650$ 20,954$ 9,049$ 9,049$ 113,653$
Task 4 Permitting 95 19,477$ -$ 1,201$ 1,201$ 20,678$
Task 5 Bidding Support Services 88 19,987$ 1,160$ 1,344$ 1,344$ 22,491$
Task 6 Services During Construction (Limited)166 38,712$ 26,880$ 3,089$ 3,089$ 68,681$
PROJECT TOTAL 820 184,030$ 52,474$ 15,419$ 15,419$ 251,923$
\\corp.rh2.com\projects\Project\Data\PSC\25-0198\00 Contract\A-1\A1_FEE_Foster Wells Lift Station Improvements 2/12/2026 4:37 PM
Page 35 of 431
price per mile
(or Current IRS Rate)
Subconsultants 15%Cost +
Outside Services at cost
RATE LIST RATE UNIT
Professional I $182 $/hr
Professional II $199 $/hr
Professional III $222 $/hr
Professional IV $243 $/hr
Professional V $259 $/hr
Professional VI $280 $/hr
Professional VII $306 $/hr
Professional VIII $333 $/hr
Professional IX $336 $/hr
Technician I $139 $/hr
Technician II $154 $/hr
Technician III $178 $/hr
Technician IV $189 $/hr
Technician V $206 $/hr
Technician VI $226 $/hr
Technician VII $245 $/hr
Technician VIII $257 $/hr
Control Specialist I $182 $/hr
Control Specialist II $199 $/hr
Control Specialist III $222 $/hr
Control Specialist IV $243 $/hr
Control Specialist V $259 $/hr
Control Specialist VI $280 $/hr
Control Specialist VII $306 $/hr
Control Specialist VIII $333 $/hr
Control Specialist IX $336 $/hr
Control Technician I $139 $/hr
Control Technician II $154 $/hr
Control Technician III $178 $/hr
Control Technician IV $189 $/hr
Control Technician V $206 $/hr
Control Technician VI $226 $/hr
Control Technician VII $245 $/hr
Control Technician VIII $257 $/hr
Administrative I $94 $/hr
Administrative II $109 $/hr
Administrative III $129 $/hr
Administrative IV $154 $/hr
Administrative V $180 $/hr
CAD/GIS System $27.50 $/hr
CAD Plots - Half Size $2.50 price per plot
CAD Plots - Full Size $10.00 price per plot
CAD Plots - Large $25.00 price per plot
Copies (bw) 8.5" X 11"$0.09 price per copy
Copies (bw) 8.5" X 14"$0.14 price per copy
Copies (bw) 11" X 17"$0.20 price per copy
Copies (color) 8.5" X 11"$0.90 price per copy
Copies (color) 8.5" X 14"$1.20 price per copy
Copies (color) 11" X 17"$2.00 price per copy
Technology Charge 2.50%% of Direct Labor
Night Work 10.00%% of Direct Labor
Mileage $0.7250
EXHIBIT C
RH2 ENGINEERING, INC.
2026 SCHEDULE OF RATES AND CHARGES
Rates listed are adjusted annually.
Page 36 of 431
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular
Meeting: 4/20/26
FROM: Richa Sigdel, Deputy City Manager
City Manager
SUBJECT: Public Hearing & Ordinance No. 4826 - Assuming Powers of the Pasco
Transportation Benefit District
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
Ordinance
Presentation
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Conduct Public Hearing
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4826, assuming the rights, powers,
functions, immunities, and obligations of the Pasco Transportation Benefit
District; providing for severability and establishing an effective date; authorizing
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 growing a faced has infrastructure and operation maintenance,
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, the 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.
Page 37 of 431
Ice and snow removal.
Traffic calming.
Before 2017, the 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. The City's
2025-2026 budget was prepared with the Street Fund slated to be in deficit by
nearly $600,000.
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.
Page 38 of 431
Impacts (Other than fiscal)
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 established Pasco Transportation Benefit District on February 17,
2026. Council has directed staff to move forward with next steps including
assumption of powers of the district to facilitate efficient decision making.
Furthermore, its indicating resolution approved 2026, 6 April on Council
intention to conduct a hearing concerning the assumption of such rights,
powers, functions, and obligations and on April 20 2026, Council conducted
said public hearing.
V. DISCUSSION:
Recommendation
Staff recommends that City Council adopt the proposed ordinance assuming all
rights, of Pasco the obligations functions, immunities, powers, and
Transportation Benefit District. Keeping the district as its separate entity results
in additional administrative and reporting burdens, including separate annual
financial reports and potential separate audits.
Next Steps
Upon assumption, the TBD no longer exists as a separate legal entity.
City Council assumes the role of TBD governing body.
5/4 - Council considers ordinance to add the additional sales and use
tax to generate revenue to fund TBD.
Constraints
Once the sales tax is imposed, it is expected to take 6-9 months for the
tax to be implemented.
Alternatives
Do not approve the ordinance. Council may opt not to assume TBD
powers and instead operate the TBD as an independent governing
body. This is less common and results in additional administrative and
reporting reports financial annual and including burdens, separate
potential separate audits.
Page 39 of 431
Ordinance – Creating Chapter 3.270 - TBD - 1
ORDINANCE NO. ____
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,
ASSUMING THE RIGHTS, POWERS, FUNCTIONS, IMMUNITIES, AND
OBLIGATIONS OF THE PASCO TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, on February 17, 2026, the City Council of the City of Pasco adopted
Ordinance No. 4816 creating the Pasco Transportation Benefit District (“Pasco TBD”) with the
same boundaries as the City limits, in accordance with Chapter 36.73 RCW; 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, 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 infrastructure;
and
WHEREAS, Chapter 36.74 authorizes the City to assume the rights, powers, functions,
and obligations of the existing Pasco TBD; and
WHEREAS, the Pasco Transportation Benefit District has not yet collected any funds,
does not have any contracts, has not committed to any projects and has not spent any funds, which
simplifies the transfer of authority; and
WHEREAS, the Pasco Transportation Benefit District as yet does not have any assets,
simplifying the transfer of authority; and
WHEREAS, on April 6, 2026, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 4723 declaring
the City’s intent to conduct a public hearing to consider the proposed assumption of the rights,
powers, functions and obligations of the existing Pasco TBD; and
WHEREAS, on April 20, 2026, the City Council conducted a public hearing allowing all
persons interested in the proposed assumption the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the public interest and welfare will be
satisfied by the City assuming the rights, powers, immunities, functions, and obligations of the
existing Pasco TBD.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO,
WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Page 40 of 431
Ordinance – Creating Chapter 3.270 - TBD - 2
Section 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The above-mentioned recitals are incorporated as
though fully set forth herein.
Section 2. TBD Assumed. The rights, powers, immunities, functions, and obligations
of the Pasco Transportation Benefit District are hereby assumed by the City of Pasco which is
hereby vested with every right, power, immunity, function, and obligation currently granted to or
possessed by the Pasco TBD. By this action the Pasco Transportation Benefit District will cease
to exist as a separate entity.
Section 3. No Existing Right Impaired. Pursuant to RCW 36.74.040, this assumption
does not impair or alter any existing rights acquired by the Pasco TBD under Chapter 36.73 RCW
or any other provision of law relating to transportation benefit districts. Nor does this assumption
impair or alter any actions, activities, or proceedings validated thereunder; any administrative
action taken thereunder; or the validity of any act performed by the Pasco TBD or division thereof
or any officer thereof prior to the assumption of such rights, powers, functions, and obligations by
the City as authorized by the law.
Section 4. Pending Business. Pursuant to RCW 36.74.040, all pending business before
the board of the Pasco TBD shall be continued and acted upon by the City Council. The assumption
does not affect the validity of any official act performed by any official or employee prior to the
assumption authorized under the law.
Section 5. Records of Pasco TBD. Pursuant to RCW 36.74.060 all reports, documents,
surveys, records, files, papers, or other writings relating to the administration of the powers, duties,
and functions available to the Pasco TBD must be made available to the City.
Section 6. TBD Governing Body Abolished. Immediately following the assumption
of the TBD by the City, the Pasco Transportation Benefit District Board of Directors is abolished
as required by RCW 36.74.030(2). The Pasco City Council shall have the authority to exercise the
statutory powers set forth in Chapter 36.74 RCW. The City shall implement the 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). The City shall issue an annual report
pursuant to the requirements of RCW 36.73.160(2). The City shall have the authority to establish
fees and other revenue sources consistent with Chapter 36.73.
Section 7. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance
should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall
not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, clause or phrase of this ordinance.
Section 8. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days
after approval, passage and publication as required by law.
Page 41 of 431
Ordinance – Creating Chapter 3.270 - TBD - 3
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 42 of 431
April 20, 2026
Pasco City Council
Regular
Pa
g
e
4
3
o
f
4
3
1
TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT (TBD)
2
•Special Purpose District that funds transportation
improvements within specific area.
•City Council serves as the governing board of the district,
holding separate meeting as the TBD.
•City Council can decide to assume powers of TBD, so a
different board is not needed.
•124 cities in Washington state have adopted TBD.
Pa
g
e
4
4
o
f
4
3
1
REVENUE TYPES – Vehicle License Fee
3
•Up to $50 can be implemented by majority vote of the
governing board, but must be phased in over time:
•$20 can be imposed immediately.
•$40 can be imposed after $20 has been in effect for
24 months.
•$50 can be imposed after $40 has been in effect for
24 months (subject to referendum).
•Revenue projection for City - $1.3M
Pa
g
e
4
5
o
f
4
3
1
REVENUE TYPES – Sales Tax
4
•0.1% can be implemented by majority vote of the
governing board.
•Additional 0.1% must be approved by a simple majority of
voters.
•Revenue projection for City - $2.3MPa
g
e
4
6
o
f
4
3
1
BENCHMARKS
5
Service Vehicle
License Fee Sales Tax
Pasco None None
Kennewick 0.1%
Richland 0.1%
West Richland None None
Prosser $25
Walla Walla 0.20%
Pa
g
e
4
7
o
f
4
3
1
REVENUE NEED
6
•Street Fund:
•Maintains City streets
•Potholes
•Chip seal
•Striping
•Traffic calming
•Snow and ice removal
•External revenue has been stagnant in the last decade.
•Expenses have increased with high inflation overall and
in construction sector.
Pa
g
e
4
8
o
f
4
3
1
REVENUE NEED
7
•Ongoing revenues like
motor vehicle fuel and
utility taxes.
•Deficit has been financed
mostly by Overlay Fund
financed projects.
•Overlay Fund cannot
continue to sustain the
Street Fund.
•Street crew are doing work
that takes them away from
their core mission.
Pa
g
e
4
9
o
f
4
3
1
GROWTH
8
•Road miles have grown by 23% since 2015 and 43%
since 2010.
•Street crew size has remained unchanged since 2010
due to lack of funding.
•Street crew got assigned small overlay projects to
generate revenue for the fund.
Pa
g
e
5
0
o
f
4
3
1
ROAD CONDITIONS
9
•Current roads are in good condition mainly due to their
age.
•Staff anticipates large portions of City pavement to
degrade in the next 3-5 years without regular
maintenance.
•Deferred maintenance is not a permanent savings; it is
a financial liability.
•Faster Deterioration
•Safety Hazards
•Increased Driver Costs
•Reduced Service Quality
Pa
g
e
5
1
o
f
4
3
1
TBD - ACTION
10
•Decision Points
•Creation of the district
•Geographic boundary of the district
•Resolution setting public hearing for City’s intention to
assume the powers of the TBD
•Public Hearing and assumption of powers
•Sales and use tax consideration
Effective 6-months after approval & notification to
Department of Licensing and Department of Revenue.
Pa
g
e
5
2
o
f
4
3
1
FeedbackPa
g
e
5
3
o
f
4
3
1
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council February 17, 2026
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular
Meeting: 4/20/26
FROM: Haylie Matson, Director
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: Emergency 4828: and 4827 Nos. Hearing and Public Ordinance
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendment (CPA 2025-002) –
Low Density Residential Land Use Changes, and Rezone of R-S-20 and
the newly added parcels with associated text amendments (CA2025-006
and Z2025-011).
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
01 Ordinance CPA Amendment to Low Density Residential Zone
02 Ordinance Text Amendments and Rezone
03 Ordinance 4663
04 BFHD Table XI
05 Original SEPA Notice and Affidavit
06 Original SEPA2025-036 Checklist Submitted
07 Original SEPA Decision
08 Commerce Notice
09 Public Hearing Notice – Planning Commission
10 Public Comments (13a, 13b & 13c)
11 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
12 Original SEPA - Withdrawal Notice
13 New SEPA Checklist with New Parcels
14 New SEPA and NOA Notice with New Parcels
15 Notice of Public Hearing 04-20-2026
16 Newly Added Parcels Zone and Land Use Changes
17 Powerpoint
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING
MOTION: 2018 the 4827, No. adopting adopt to move I Ordinance
by comprehensive plan amendment: low density Residential-Riverview
reference and incorporating such into the city of Pasco comprehensive plan by
addendum and further authorize publication by summary only.
Page 54 of 431
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4828, amending and repealing
sections of Pasco Municipal Code, in Title 17 Sign Code, Title 21 Urban Area
Subdivision Regulations, and Title 25 Zoning, related to changes made to the
R-S-20 zoning official the amending map and District Suburban further
118431055 classification from R-S-20 suburban district and Parcels and
118461013 (zoned R-1) and Parcel 118461031 (zoned R-S-12) to R-15 low
density residential district, and further authorize publication by summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with adoption of the proposed
ordinances. This action is a legislative amendment that does not authorize
capital expenditures or require additional City staffing or resources. Any future
development enabled by the amendment would be subject to existing permit
fees, impact fees, and utility connection requirements adopted by the City.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Land Use Designation and Zoning Relationship:
In Pasco, land use designations in the Comprehensive Plan establish the City’s
long-range policy direction for the general type and density of development,
while zoning regulations in the Pasco Municipal Code provide the specific,
enforceable development standards for individual properties. Zoning
implements the Comprehensive Plan by translating broad land use policies into
detailed requirements such as lot size, setbacks, and permitted uses, and must
remain consistent with the assigned land use designation. Under this proposal,
the Comprehensive Plan land use designation allows for 2–5 dwelling units per
acre to preserve long-term flexibility, while the implementing zoning regulations
currently limit development to 2–3 dwelling units per acre.
History of Proposal
On April 17, 2023, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 4663 (Exhibit 03),
amending Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 25.215.015 and the Comprehensive
Plan Land Use Density Table (Table LU-1). This amendment revised the
allowable gross density range for areas designated as Low Density Residential
from 2–5 dwelling units per acre to 3–6 dwelling units per acre.
Ordinance No. 4663 also established that the gross density of any proposed
development within a zoning district shall not fall below the corresponding
minimum created change This 25.215.015. an in identified density PMC
unintended conflict with the R-S-20 zoning district, where minimum lot sizes
and infrastructure constraints are not compatible with the higher minimum
density requirements.
Page 55 of 431
The City Council was briefed on this matter on three occasions in 2025 and the
City the revising inconsistency the by to staff directed Council resolve
comprehensive plan designation from 3-6 units per acre to 2-5 units per acre
and revise the zoning from allowing 2 units per acre to 2-5 units per acre.
Staff conducted a workshop with the Planning Commission on November 20,
2025, followed by a public hearing on December 18, 2025, to discuss options
for resolving this inconsistency. The proposal presented in December 2025
sought to restore a 2–5 dwelling units per acre land use designation for
properties currently zoned R-S-20 and to replace the R-S-20 zone with a new
R-9 Low Density Residential District, establishing a minimum lot size of 8,700
square feet.
The Planning Commission did not support allowing densities of 2–5 dwelling
units per acre and directed staff to revise the proposal to reduce the density
range to 2–3 dwelling units per acre and to schedule a second public hearing in
January to review the changes.
The Planning Commission held a second public hearing on January 15, 2026,
to review the revised proposal as noted above, and recommended that the City
Council approve the following actions:
1. including the 2025-002), Plan Amendment Comprehensive (CPA
proposed Land Use Map amendment establishing the Low Density
Residential–Riverview designation at 2–5 dwelling units per acre; and
2. Replacement/rezone of the R-S-20 zone with the R-15 Low Density
Residential District, and approval of the associated zoning and
Comprehensive Plan text amendments, including a revision to PMC
21.20 added during the meeting.
Full meeting minutes for the Planning Commission meetings held on November
20, 2025, December 18, 2025, and January 15, 2026, are attached as Exhibit
11.
The City Council was briefed on this matter during the February 23, 2026,
workshop. Prior to the March 2, 2026, decision meeting, staff and the City
Council received a request to include three additional parcels within the R-15
zoning district and corresponding comprehensive plan designation: Parcels
118431055 and 118461013, currently zoned R-1, and Parcel 118461031,
currently zoned R-S-12. These are referred to in this staff report as the newly
added parcels (see Exhibit 16).
This adjustment required revisions to both ordinances, withdrawal of the
previous SEPA determination (Exhibit 12), issuance of a new SEPA notice
(Exhibit 14), and issuance of a public hearing notice with scheduling for Council
consideration. Although these properties do not technically qualify under the
emergency amendment procedures, staff is seeking to include them as an
efficiency measure so they can be addressed now rather than later this year
Page 56 of 431
with several other comprehensive plan amendments.
Background
Since the adoption of Ordinance 4663 (Exhibit 03), several subdivision
applications within the R-S-20 district have been denied due to a mismatch
between the Comprehensive Plan’s current minimum density requirements and
the zoning district’s large lot standards. Many parcels in this area are also
located far from existing City sewer infrastructure, leaving septic systems as
the only feasible wastewater option. Under Benton-Franklin Health District
Table XI (Exhibit 04), parcels using septic on Soil Type 1 must be at least one-
half acre, which limits achievable density to two units per acre below the
Comprehensive Plan’s current minimum density.
Because for difficult it make constraints infrastructure and zoning these
property owners to meet the Plan’s existing density standards, the City Council
directed staff to initiate a Comprehensive Plan amendment and corresponding
zoning code revisions to restore the previous 2–5 unit-per-acre designation for
properties zoning the Commission suggested R-S-20. zoned Planning
designation be 2-3 units per acre.
The materials and staff report propose amending the R-S-20 zoning district to
R-15 Low Density Residential and redesignating properties currently zoned R-
S-20 plan In designation. comprehensive Low-Density the to Riverview
addition, three properties are proposed to be included in this change: Parcels
118431055 and 118461013 (currently zoned R-1) and Parcel 118461031
(currently zoned R-S-12).
Impact (other than fiscal)
The proposal resolves a long-standing inconsistency between the
Comprehensive Plan’s minimum density requirements and the R-S-20 zoning
district’s improving a restoring and standards, regulatory large-lot clarity
The feasible development pathway for affected properties. amendments
maintain low-density neighborhood character while allowing modestly smaller
lots where urban services are available. Wastewater standards remain driven
by infrastructure conditions: lots capable of connecting to sewer must do so,
while septic development remains limited by Health District requirements. The
proposal does not approve a specific development; environmental protections,
including critical areas regulations, remain unchanged and will be applied
during project review.
Under the existing 3–6 unit-per-acre land use designation, the R-S-20 zone
cannot achieve the required minimum density due to its 20,000-square-foot lot
size and the reliance on septic systems in areas lacking sewer access. These
combined factors have resulted in a functional moratorium on subdivisions in
the district because properties cannot meet both the density requirements of
the Comprehensive Plan and the infrastructure realities on the ground.
Page 57 of 431
Restoring the 2–5 unit-per-acre land use designation and rezoning the area to
allow 2-3 units per acre, resolves this regulatory conflict and enables a
consistent framework for both 14,520-square-foot lots and larger half-acre lots
where septic remains necessary. This adjustment restores development
feasibility, supports existing neighborhood patterns, and allows zoning
regulations to match actual service conditions.
Septic systems remain limited to lots of at least one-half acre located more
than 200 feet from an accessible sewer line, while smaller lots must connect to
City sewer; therefore, infrastructure availability (not zoning) ultimately
determines achievable density in these areas.
V. DISCUSSION:
Analysis
Under the proposed amendment, the restored 2–5 dwelling unit per acre land
use designation provides the appropriate policy basis for low-density residential
development in the Riverview area. To implement this designation, staff
propose replacing the R-S-20 zone and the newly added parcels with a new R-
15 Low Density Residential District that establishes a minimum lot size of
14,520 square feet. This zoning framework allows development within the
density range contemplated by the Comprehensive Plan while continuing to
accommodate larger half-acre lots in areas that rely on on-site septic systems.
Not all development would be eligible for septic systems, as wastewater
service will remain dependent on project size, site conditions, and proximity to
City sewer infrastructure. To address site-specific constraints, the proposed
code allows limited flexibility in individual lot sizes (up to 25 percent smaller or
larger) provided overall density requirements are met. This flexibility is intended
to improve site design options and alleviate certain, but not all, constraints
associated with septic system requirements.
The proposed R-15 district reestablishes consistency between the
Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations, supports long-term growth
management objectives, and aligns Pasco’s development standards with
emerging statewide housing requirements.
Analysis - Proposed Setback and Lot Revisions
Under current zoning standards, 20,000-square-foot lots are subject to
minimum setbacks of 25 feet in the front and rear and 10 feet on each side,
with a maximum lot coverage of 40 percent. These standards were designed
for larger lots with greater separation between homes.
The proposed zoning revision would allow smaller lots, down to 14,520 square
Page 58 of 431
feet, while still permitting lots up to one-half acre. To ensure these smaller lots
remain buildable, staff proposes modest reductions to the front and rear
setbacks while retaining the existing side setback requirement.
Specifically, the proposal would revise setbacks to 20 feet in the front, 10 feet
on each side, and 20 feet in the rear, and increase maximum lot coverage from
40 percent to 45 percent. These changes align development standards with the
reduced minimum lot size while maintaining reasonable separation between
homes and protecting neighborhood character.
spacing and preserve helps privacy side 10-foot the Retaining setbacks
between structures, even as lot sizes decrease. Table 1 summarizes the
proposed changes to development standards.
Table 1. Development Standards Comparison Table
The proposed code also allows limited flexibility in individual lot sizes when site
conditions require it, such as septic system constraints, provided the overall
development remains within the planned low-density range of 2–3 dwelling
units development proceed can ensures while This acre. per flexibility
maintaining consistency with adopted density standards. The proposed
language code is included in Exhibit 02 (PMC 25.30.050).
General Approval Criteria for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment,
Rezone and Text Amendments
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Criteria
Per Pasco Municipal Code 25.215.020(8)(c), The City may approve
Comprehensive Plan amendments if it finds that:
(i) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public
health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment;
(ii) The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter
36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan
not affected by the amendment;
(iii) The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or
(iv) The the deficiency identified in addresses amendment proposed an
Comprehensive Plan.
In addition, per Pasco Municipal Code 25.215.020(9) The City must also
consider Plan the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive
amendments:
(a) The effect upon the physical environment;
(b) The effect on open space and natural features including, but not limited to,
topography, streams, rivers, and lakes;
(c) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding
neighborhoods;
Page 59 of 431
(d) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities, including utilities,
roads, public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools;
(e) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type
and density and the demand for such land;
(f) The current and projected project density in the area; and
(g) The effect, if any, upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan.
Below is an analysis of these criteria:
1.Does the proposed amendment bear a substantial relationship to the public
health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment?
This code change would change the R-S-20 zone and the newly added parcels
to allow for 2-3 units per acre. Septic systems could be permitted on lots a half-
acre in size. Anything over 2 units per acre would need to be connected to city
sewer.
2.Is the proposed amendment consistent with the requirements of the
Washington State Growth Management Act and to the affected portion(s) of the
adopted Pasco Comprehensive Plan?
Yes. The emergency amendment is intended to retain the previous 2–5 units
per acre land use designation. The proposed rezone to R-15 would allow
development at 2–3 units per acre, supporting slightly smaller lot sizes in the
Riverview area and the area southwest of West Court Street and Harris Road,
and better aligning zoning with the Comprehensive Plan and state housing
requirements.
Under the Growth Management Act, cities are required to plan for increased
housing capacity. Very large minimum lot sizes are generally discouraged in
urban areas because they limit housing supply and increase infrastructure
costs. The proposed zoning change supports more efficient land use while
maintaining low-density character.
Additionally, by the end of 2026, state law (including HB 1110) will require
cities to allow increased housing types citywide, regardless of existing zoning.
This zoning update positions Pasco to remain compliant with state law while
supporting gradual, appropriately scaled residential growth.
3. Does the proposed amendment correct a mapping error?
The proposed amendment corrects an error in the Pasco Municipal Code
where the R-S-20 zone (based on the minimum lot size) does not coincide with
the land use range currently adopted which is 3-6 units per acre. The newly
added parcels included are not to correct a mapping error but rather included
Page 60 of 431
due to a request of the property owners.
4. Does the proposed amendment address a deficiency in the Comprehensive
Plan?
The proposed amendment will modify the Comprehensive Plan, assigning a
low-density range of 2-5 units per acre to properties currently located within the
R-S-20 zone and the newly added parcels.
5. What are the effects on the physical environment, including open space and
natural features?
Lot sizes will be a minimum of 14,520 square feet. Any critical areas will be
addressed consistently with the City’s critical areas ordinance outlined in Title
28.
6.What is the compatibility and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding
neighborhoods?
The proposed minimum lot size of 14,520 square feet is significantly larger
than the 8,700-square-foot lot size presented at the December public hearing.
Accordingly, the potential development intensity and associated impacts are
expected to be substantially less.
Introducing 14,520-square-foot lots into an established neighborhood
in shifts create parcels can and half-acre by characterized one-acre
development pattern and neighborhood character. Larger lots typically feature
wider setbacks, greater separation between homes, and more private open
space, while smaller lots result in homes placed closer together with reduced
yard areas. This change in spacing, combined with differences in building
scale, architectural style, and streetscape improvements such as sidewalks or
street lighting, can create a visual contrast with older large-lot areas. These
differences may also influence perceptions of privacy, traffic activity, and
overall neighborhood feel.
However, these compatibility issues are not inherently problematic and can be
effectively addressed through thoughtful planning and design. Landscaping
buffers, fencing, and enhanced setbacks along shared edges can soften
transitions development. Architectural smaller-lot between large-lot and
standards, window placement, and streetscape design can further support
compatibility and help new development blend with the existing character. With
these tools, an 14,520-square-foot lot pattern can integrate successfully into
older and neighborhoods while still supporting the City’s housing needs
planning objectives.
Page 61 of 431
7.What are the impacts on public facilities, and utilities, transportation system,
parks, recreation, and public schools?
Development at a 14,520-square-foot minimum lot size is generally associated
with low to moderate impacts on public facilities and services. Compared to
larger half-acre or one-acre lots, this lot size may result in a modest increase in
dwelling sewer, water, on stormwater, corresponding and units demand
transportation, parks, and schools. These impacts are anticipated under the
City’s Comprehensive Plan and Capital Facilities Plan and are consistent with
planning assumptions for low-density residential development.
Overall, development at this scale is not expected to create significant or
unmanageable impacts and represents a balanced approach that limits density
while allowing more efficient use of infrastructure compared to very large-lot
development.
8. What is the effect on other components of the adopted Comprehensive
Plan?
The proposed density and lot pattern generally remain consistent with the
overarching goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, particularly those
related to efficient land use, housing supply, and urban growth management.
Allowing development at approximately 14,520-square-foot lots supports a
more efficient use of residential land compared to existing half-acre and one-
acre lots, helping the City meet its Growth Management Act (GMA) housing
capacity obligations. This approach aligns with Comprehensive Plan policies
that more encourage compact, well-connected residential neighborhoods,
efficient infrastructure utilization, and a balanced distribution of growth across
the community. It also supports broader goals related to equity, housing
variety, and long-term fiscal sustainability by reducing per-unit infrastructure
costs and increasing opportunities for moderately sized homes.
Rezone and Text Amendment Criteria
Per Pasco Municipal Code 25.210.030, the petition for a change of zoning
classification must show the following criteria provided below followed by staff
analysis in bold italics:
1. The date the existing zone became effective;
The existing zone was created on April 19, 1999 via ordinance 3354.
2. The changed conditions which are alleged to warrant other or additional
zoning;
Page 62 of 431
The rezone from R-S-20 to R-15 Low Density Residential District is needed to
comply with the proposed CPA amendment change to allow for 2-5 units per
acre as a land use designation and 2-3 units per acre for the zoning. The newly
added parcels 118431055 and 118461013 (currently zoned R-1) and Parcel
118461031 (currently zoned R-S-12) are being converted to R-15 which has a
lower density requirement.
3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health,
safety and general welfare;
general safety, health, public and advances amendment zoning The the
welfare by restoring regulatory consistency; ensuring safe wastewater disposal;
supporting orderly, predictable development; expanding attainable low-density
housing opportunities; improving infrastructure efficiency; maintaining
for with compliance the City and compatibility; neighborhood positioning
statewide housing requirements. The amendment resolves a conflict that
prevented lawful development and ensures development patterns that protect
environmental and quality, promote public services, preserve long-term
community well-being.
4. The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property
and the Comprehensive Plan;
The proposed zoning amendment will not adversely affect the value or
character of adjacent property, as it maintains low-density residential
development patterns similar to existing neighborhoods and promotes
regulatory clarity and predictability. The amendment strengthens the
Comprehensive Plan by restoring internal consistency, aligning land use
designations with infrastructure realities, and supporting adopted policies
regarding housing, growth management, and neighborhood quality.
5. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted;
If the zoning change is not approved, property owners within the current R-S-
20 district will remain unable to lawfully subdivide or develop their property
because the existing minimum lot size and septic requirements prevent them
from achieving the Comprehensive Plan’s required minimum density of three
dwelling a creates conflict regulatory functional acre. per units This
development moratorium, limiting the owners’ reasonable use of their land and
preventing investment, homebuilding, and property improvement. Denial would
therefore continue to restrict property rights, depress development potential,
and perpetuate uncertainty regarding future land use expectations.
6. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property; and
The Comprehensive Plan criterion is met because a companion amendment
establishes the Low Density Residential–Riverview designation of 2–5 dwelling
units per acre for the subject properties. This restored designation reflects the
development patterns and infrastructure limitations of the area and provides
Page 63 of 431
the appropriate policy basis for the proposed R-15 zoning district. With the land
use designation and zoning aligned, the rezone is fully consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
7. Such other information as the Hearing Examiner requires.
This criterion is not applicable because the request is not an applicant-initiated
petition but a legislative, area-wide rezone initiated by the City. Based on staff’s
review a for process the appropriate code applicable the of provisions,
legislative rezone is a public hearing before the Planning Commission followed
by a recommendation to the City Council. Staff notes that related procedural
sections of the municipal code will be clarified and improved during the
comprehensive code update scheduled for next year in coordination with the
Comprehensive Plan. Of note, Parcels 118431055 and 118461013 (currently
zoned R-1) and Parcel 118461031 (currently zoned R-S-12) were added at the
request of the applicant; however, staff is incorporating these properties as part
of a City-initiated action, as rezoning them to R-15 is consistent with the
surrounding area and planning framework. Accordingly, the proposal remains a
legislative, citywide action.
Public Notice & Public Comment
The original public hearing notice (Exhibit 09) for the Planning Commission
was processed in accordance with PMC 27.12.090. Written comments related
to the public hearing notice were not received, however, there were verbal
public comments at the public hearing as outlined in the Planning Commission
meetings Act (SEPA) Policy Environmental Written 11). (Exhibit State
comments received are addressed below.
Original SEPA Notice
for 05) (Exhibit notice SEPA period closed comment public The the on
December 30, 2025. Three comments were received. One comment was
submitted by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, which staff
determined was not applicable, as the proposed action would result in lower
residential density than is currently allowed for the site. A second comment
was received from the Bonneville Power Administration and was noted by staff;
no changes were required in response.
The third comment addressed lot size and on-site septic system requirements.
Staff have responded to this comment, as provided in Exhibit 13c.
The SEPA Determination of Non-Significance (Exhibit 07) was issued on
January 27, 2026. No appeals were filed.
New SEPA Notice
The original SEPA notice was withdrawn (Exhibit 12). A new SEPA notice and
Notice of Application (Exhibit 14) was processed to include the newly added
Page 64 of 431
parcels. The SEPA DNS was issued on April 3, 2026 (Exhibit 18). One public
comment was received and responded to by staff (Exhibit 19).
Public Hearing Notice
The public hearing is scheduled on April 20th, 2026. The hearing notice is
attached as Exhibit 15.
Recommendation
Staff recommends the City Council approve the two proposed ordinances
following the public hearing on April 20, 2026.
Constraints (time or other considerations)
Staff respectfully recommend timely action on this matter to resolve the code
inconsistency and lift the current prohibition on development for affected
property owners.
Next Steps
None.
Alternatively, Council May
The City Council may:
1. Approve of the proposed ordinances;
2. Approve with Modifications;
3. Deny; or
4. Remand the issue to Planning Commission for further vetting.
Page 65 of 431
Ordinance – 2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendment - 1
Version 1.8.26
ORDINANCE NO. ____
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,
ADOPTING THE 2018 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: LOW-
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL-RIVERVIEW BY REFERENCE AND
INCORPORATING SUCH INTO THE CITY OF PASCO COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN BY ADDENDUM.
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco City Council adopted Ordinance No. 4663 on April 17,
2023, amending Pasco Municipal Code 25.215.015 and Comprehensive Plan Land Use Density
Table (Table LU-1) allowing gross density range for areas designated as Low Density Residential
from 2-5 dwelling units per acre to 3-6 dwelling units per acre; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 4663 created an unintended conflict with the R-S-20 zoning
district, where minimum lot sizes and infrastructure constraints are not compatible with the higher
density minimum density requirements; and
WHEREAS, comprehensive plan emergency amendments may be reviewed and acted
upon outside the annual amendment review cycle; and.
WHEREAS, such amendments shall be initiated by resolution approved by a vote of the
Council upon a finding that a situation exists that necessitates expeditious action to preserve the
health, safety or welfare of the public, or to support the social, economic or environmental well-
being of the City; and
WHEREAS, on November 17, 2025, The Pasco City Council ADOPTED Resolution 4679
authorizing the initiation of an emergency amendment to the City Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, City of Pasco Planning Staff conducted a workshop with the Planning
Commission on November 20, 2025, followed by public hearings on December 18, 2025, and
January 15, 2026, to discuss options for resolving the unintended conflict; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco Planning Commission at the January 15, 2026 meeting,
passed a motion recommending the City Council approve Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA
2025-002, including the Land Use Map Amendment establishing the Low Density Residential-
Riverview designation of 2-5 dwelling units per acre.
WHEREAS, the City Council held a workshop and regular meeting on February 23, 2026,
and March 2, 2026, respectively, and directed staff to include Parcels 118431055, 118461013, and
118461031 (currently designated as Low Density Residential, 3-6 dwelling units per acre) in the
Low Density Riverview Designation of 2-5 dwelling units per acre;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Page 66 of 431
Ordinance – 2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendment - 2
Version 1.8.26
Section 1. The City Council finds that an emergency exists and wishes to proceed with
a comprehensive plan amendment outside of the annual cycle as allowed by RCW
36.70A.130(2)(b).
Section 2. The City of Pasco adopts by reference, Exhibit A below, referred to as the
2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendment: Low-Density Residential-Riverview Addendum.
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 regulations; 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.
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 Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC
Deputy City Clerk City Attorney
Published: _____________________________
Page 67 of 431
Ordinance – 2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendment - 3
Version 1.8.26
EXHIBIT A
2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendment: Low-Density Residential-Riverview Addendum
City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan Addendum
R-S-20 Zone & Low-Density Residential Land Use changes
1. Purpose of Addendum
This amendment is intended to correct an existing internal inconsistency between
the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and the City’s zoning map by designating properties
currently zoned R-S-20 as Low Density Residential – Riverview on the Comprehensive Plan/Land
Use Map. This amendment does not increase development capacity beyond what is currently
allowed by zoning. All related Comprehensive Plan text, land use tables, and growth and capacity
analysis will be updated as part of the City’s 2026 Periodic Comprehensive Plan Update.
The amendment further includes Parcels 118431055, 118461013, and 118461031 (currently
designated as Low Density Residential, 3-6 dwelling units per acre) to be converted to Low
Density Riverview Designation of 2-5 dwelling units per acre referred to throughout this document
as the newly added parcels.
2. Introduction and Purpose
This addendum supplements the City of Pasco’s 2018 Comprehensive Plan to re-establish the
appropriate density range for properties within the existing R-S-20 zoning district and introduce a
new land use sub-designation, Low Density Residential–Riverview, allowing 2–5 dwelling units
per acre.
This addendum does not alter, strike, or amend the adopted Comprehensive Plan document.
Instead, it provides supplemental direction and replaces a specific portion of the Land Use Map
for the Riverview area to ensure consistency between land use policy, zoning implementation, and
infrastructure limitations.
3. Background and Need for Addendum
Following adoption of Ordinance 4663 (2023), the citywide Low Density Residential range
increased from 2–5 dwelling units per acre to 3–6 du/acre. However, this amendment
unintentionally created an inconsistency for the R-S-20 zone, which allows only two units per acre
based on a 20,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size and the septic system requirements identified in Benton-
Franklin Health District Table XI.
Page 68 of 431
Ordinance – 2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendment - 4
Version 1.8.26
This inconsistency resulted in subdivision denials and prevented development within the R-S-20
district. Staff analysis determined that restoration of the 2–5 du/ac density range for these parcels
is necessary to align policy with achievable development patterns and ensure internal consistency.
4. Supplemental Land Use Designation: Low Density Residential–Riverview
This addendum establishes a new sub-designation:
Low Density Residential–Riverview (2–5 dwelling units per acre)
This designation applies only to properties currently zoned R-S-20 (and the newly added parcels)
and identified on the supplemental exhibits. It supports a range of lot sizes from 14,520 sq. ft.
(when sewer is available) to 21,780 sq. ft. (for septic-dependent parcels) with lot size flexibility
built into the proposed zoning code.
This designation restores historic density assumptions for the Riverview area without changing
other Low Density Residential areas in the city.
5. Replacement of Land Use Map for the Riverview Area
To maintain the integrity of the adopted 2018 Comprehensive Plan while ensuring policy
consistency, this addendum replaces only the affected portion of the Land Use Map applicable to
the Low Density Residential–Riverview area shown in Exhibit C.
The following exhibits are hereby adopted as the controlling land use maps for all parcels shown
as Low Density Residential-Riverview in Exhibit C:
• Exhibit B: Existing Land Use Map
• Exhibit C: Low Density Residential–Riverview Supplemental Land Use Map
These exhibits replace and supersede the corresponding geographic portion of the 2018
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map without modifying any other part of the document.
All other land use designations and mapping in the 2018 Comprehensive Plan remain unchanged.
6. Scope of Supersession
• Replacement applies exclusively to the Low Density Residential-Riverview-area parcels
shown in Exhibit C.
• Outside the affected geography, the 2018 Land Use Map continues to govern.
• Staff, the Planning Commission, and the City Council shall rely on Exhibit C when
interpreting or applying land use designations in the Riverview area.
7. Relationship to Zoning – Implementation Through R-15 Low Density Residential
District
To implement the restored density range, the city proposes replacing the R-S-20 zone and the
newly added parcels with a new zone: R-15 Low Density Residential District (2-3 units per acre).
This zoning district:
• Aligns with the 2–5 dwelling units per acre land use policy framework
Page 69 of 431
Ordinance – 2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendment - 5
Version 1.8.26
• Supports a mix of sewer-served lots and larger septic-served lots
• Eliminates the inconsistency created by Ordinance 4663
• Prepares the City for mandatory middle housing integration under HB 1110 by 2026
The zoning revision does not alter the Comprehensive Plan; it implements this supplemental land
use direction.
8. Findings and Policy Basis
The proposed addendum is consistent with the 2018 Comprehensive Plan because it advances the
Plan’s goals of providing diverse and attainable housing, ensuring the efficient use of residential
land, maintaining compatibility with long-range planning assumptions, and supporting fiscally
responsible infrastructure planning. It also corrects a policy inconsistency created by Ordinance
4663, which established a minimum density that cannot be achieved under existing R-S-20
zoning or in areas dependent on septic systems. Restoring the 2–5 dwelling-units-per-acre range
at the land use level and 2-3 units-per-acre range at the zoning level aligns achievable
development patterns with the Comprehensive Plan’s intent and resolves the mismatch between
allowable density and infrastructure constraints. In addition, the proposed density range is
consistent with the City’s established planning assumptions for sewer and utility system
expansion, transportation modeling, stormwater capacity, and parks and school facility planning,
ensuring coordinated and predictable long-term growth.
9. Applicability
This addendum applies only to parcels labeled Low Density Residential-Riverview in Exhibit C.
10. Implementation and Forward Integration
This supplemental designation and map replacement remain in effect until the city completes its
2026 mandated periodic Comprehensive Plan update, at which time the land use map and density
ranges may be comprehensively evaluated and integrated.
11. Adoption
This addendum was reviewed by the Planning Commission, subject to public notice and hearing,
and adopted by the City Council as part of Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 2025-002,
pursuant to PMC 25.215.020.
Page 70 of 431
Ordinance – 2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendment - 6
Version 1.8.26
EXHIBIT B
Page 71 of 431
Ordinance – 2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendment - 7
Version 1.8.26
EXHIBIT C
Page 72 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 1
ORDINANCE NO. ____
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, AMENDING AND
REPEALING SECTIONS OF PASCO MUNICIPAL CODE, IN TITLE 17 SIGN CODE, TITLE
21 URBAN AREA SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, AND TITLE 25 ZONING, RELATED TO
CHANGES MADE TO THE R-S-20 SUBURBAN DISTRICT AND FURTHER AMENDING
THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP CLASSIFCATION FROM R-S-20 SUBURBAN DISTRICT
AND PARCELS 118431055 AND 118461013 (ZONED R-1) AND PARCEL 118461031
(ZONED R-S-12) TO R-15 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTAL DISTRICT.
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco City Council adopted Ordinance No. 4663 on April 17,
2023, amending Pasco Municipal Code 25.215.015 and Comprehensive Plan Land Use Density
Table (Table LU-1) allowing gross density range for areas designated as Low Density Residential
from 2-5 dwelling units per acre to 3-6 dwelling units per acre; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 4663 created an unintended conflict with the R-S-20 zoning
district, where minimum lot sizes and infrastructure constraints are not compatible with the higher
density minimum density requirements; and
WHEREAS, Parcels 118431055 and 118461013 (zoned R-1) and Parcel 118461031
(zoned R-S-12) will be rezoned to R-15 low density residential district; and
WHEREAS, City of Pasco Planning Staff conducted a workshop with the Planning
Commission on November 20, 2025, followed by public hearings on December 18, 2025, and
January 15, 2026 to discuss options for resolving the unintended conflict; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco Planning Commission at the January 15, 2026 meeting,
passed a motion recommending the City Council approve Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA
2025-002, including the Land Use Map Amendment establishing the Low Density Residential-
Riverview designation of 2-5 dwelling units per acre; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco Planning Commission at January 15, 2026, Planning
Commission meeting passed a motion recommending the City Council replace/rezone the R-S-20
zone with the R-15 Low Density Residential District, along with the associated Pasco Municipal
Code changes below.
WHEREAS, the City Council held a workshop and regular meeting on February 23, 2026,
and March 2, 2026, respectively, and directed staff to include Parcels 118431055 and 118461013
(currently zoned R-1) and Parcel 118461031 (currently zoned R-S-12) in the proposed rezone to
the R-15 Low Density Residential district;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO,
WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Page 73 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 2
Section 1. The City Council finds that an emergency exists and wishes to proceed with
a comprehensive plan amendment outside of the annual cycle as allowed by RCW
36.70A.130(2)(b).
Section 2. The Zoning Map, accompanying and being part of said Ordinance shall be
and herby is changed from the R-S-20 Suburban District and Parcels 118431055 and 118461013
(currently zoned R-1) and Parcel 118461031 (currently zoned R-S-12) to R-15 Low Density
Residential District as shown in Exhibit A:
Page 74 of 431
C-2
R-S-12
R-2
R-S-1/PUD
C-1
R-15
R-3/PUD
I-1
MU
I-2
BP
R-1-A2
O
C-3
R-3
C-R
RP
R-1/PUD
R-1
R-S-1
R-1-A
R-T
R-4
I-3
Zoning
²0 1 2
Miles
Legend
Zoning
BP
C-1
C-2
C-3
C-R
I-1
I-2
I-3
MU
O
R-1
R-1-A
R-1-A2
R-1/PUD
R-15
R-2
R-3
R-3/PUD
R-4
R-S-1
R-S-1/PUD
R-S-12
R-T
RP
3/6/2026
PLOT DATE
Pa
g
e
7
5
o
f
4
3
1
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 4
Section 3. PMC Title 17.15.010 Sign Allowance Table, is hereby amended and shall
read as follows:
Chapter 17.15 SIGN ALLOWANCE TABLE
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
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Page 76 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 5
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-20R-15, 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
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
Page 77 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 6
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
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
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
Page 78 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 7
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
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
Page 79 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 8
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
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 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 80 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 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.
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.
Page 81 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 10
Section 3. PMC Title 17.15.030, Exempt signs, is hereby amended and shall read as
follows:
17.15.030 Exempt signs.
The following signs shall not require application, fee or sign permit. These exceptions shall not
be construed as relieving the owner of the sign from responsibility for its erection, and its
compliance with provisions of this code or any other law or ordinance regulating the same:
(1) Changing of the advertising copy or message on theater marquees, readerboards, and similar
signs.
(2) Painting, repainting, cleaning, repairing and other normal maintenance, unless structural or
electrical changes are made.
(3) Signs erected or installed by or at the direction of the City, such as traffic signs, legal notices,
railroad warning signs, signs showing the location of underground public utility facilities, and
other signs of a nonadvertising nature erected for warning or emergency purposes.
(4) Interior signs; provided, that no interior sign shall be permitted in the R-T, R-S-20R-15, R-S-
12, R-S-1, R-l and R-2, R-3, R-4, R-1-A and R-1-A2 zoning districts.
(5) Temporary signs and decorations that are customary for special holidays and that are erected
on private property.
(6) Signs directly related to a municipal building, structure or installed by the City or required
by a governmental entity.
(7) Bona fide religious symbols on the buildings or grounds of religious institutions.
(8) Traffic or pedestrian control signs, signs required by law, or signs indicating scenic or
historic points of interest that are erected by or on the order of a public officer in the performance
of his public duty.
(9) Sculptures, fountains, mosaics, and design features that do not incorporate advertising or
identification.
(10) The flags of governments or noncommercial institutions such as schools, with the poles
treated as structures.
(11) Official public notices of federal, state or local governments, official court notices.
(12) Signs not intended to be viewed by the public from the street right-of-way.
(13) Lettering or symbols painted directly onto or flush-mounted magnetically onto an operable
vehicle.
Page 82 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 11
(14) Identification signs upon recycling collection containers for public, charitable or nonprofit
organizations.
(15) Emblems of local nonprofit organizations and community service clubs, including signs
less than two square feet that identify the meeting place and time.
(16) Political signs.
Section 4. PMC Title 21.15.010, Street connectivity, is hereby amended and shall
read as follows:
21.15.010 Street connectivity.
(1) Connectivity to Abutting Lands. The street system of a proposed subdivision shall be
designed to provide direct and efficient connections to existing, proposed, and planned streets
adjacent to the subdivision. Wherever a proposed development abuts unplatted land or a future
development phase of an existing development, street stubs shall be provided to allow access to
future abutting subdivisions and to extend the street system into the surrounding area. Street ends
shall contain turnarounds constructed to Uniform Fire Code standards and shall be designed to
facilitate future extension in terms of grading, width, and temporary barricades.
(2) Future Street Plan. Subdivision applicants must demonstrate, pursuant to City standards, that
the proposed development does not preclude future street connections to adjacent lands.
(3) Public Street and Street Connectivity Requirements. Dedicating or deeding property for
right-of-way or a portion thereof to the City for public streets within, or along the boundaries of
all residential subdivisions or developments, shall be required as a condition of application
approval where the following can be demonstrated:
(a) Facts support that such dedication is reasonably necessary as a result of the impact created
by the proposed development;
(b) Such dedication will result in proportionate mitigation of the impact in the reasonably
foreseeable future;
(c) Connectivity to the existing or foreseeable future public right-of-way is feasible; and
(d) One or more of the following circumstances are met:
(i) A city transportation plan indicates the necessity of a new or additional right-of-way or
portion thereof for street purposes;
(ii) The dedication is necessary to provide additions of right-of-way to existing right-of-way to
meet city road standards;
Page 83 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 12
(iii) The dedication is necessary to extend or to complete the existing or future neighborhood
street pattern;
(iv) The dedication is necessary to comply with road standards and city transportation plans;
(v) The dedication is necessary to provide a public transportation system that supports future
development of abutting property consistent with the Comprehensive Plan or Pasco Municipal
Code.
(4) Dead-End Streets. Dead-end streets are prohibited; except, where the Comprehensive Plan or
preliminary plat indicates a street is to continue past the subdivider’s property, the City may
allow the dead end until such time as the street can be built through at a later date. Dead-end
streets may be permitted in the R-S-20 R-15 and R-S-12 districts as provided in PMC 21.15.080.
(5) Half Streets. Half streets shall be prohibited except that the City may permit their inclusion
in cases where a normal alignment of a present or future planned street will fall half on an
adjoining ownership.
(6) Street Names. Streets shall be named to conform with existing streets on the same or
reasonably similar alignment. New street names shall be reviewed by the Planning Department,
the Fire Department and/or the Emergency 911 Coordinator to ensure that no confusion with
existing street names occurs.
Section 5. PMC Title 21.15.080, hammerhead/T, is hereby amended and shall read
as follows:
21.15.080 Hammerhead/T.
Hammerhead/Ts are only permitted in R-S-20 R-15 and R-S-12 zoning districts where property
was platted in the county prior to annexation and existing development precludes the expectation
requirement that a standard cul-de-sac can be developed.
(1) Dead-end streets with hammerheads should normally be less than 300 feet, but will be
permitted up to 450 feet in length.
(2) Streets with hammerheads shall not serve more than eight lots.
(3) Right-of-Way Widths for Streets Intersecting Hammerheads. Minimum right-of-way widths
for all dead-end streets with hammerheads serving no more than eight lots shall not be less than
40 feet, with no on-street parking.
(4) Right-of-Way Widths for Hammerheads. Minimum right-of-way widths for hammerheads
shall not be less than 30 feet, with no on-street parking.
Page 84 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 13
(5) Roadway Widths. Minimum roadway widths for all dead-end streets with hammerheads shall
not be less than the following dimensions:
(a) Thirty-two feet from the face of curb to the face of curb;
(b) Thirty feet of pavement width where there is no curb and gutter;
(c) Twenty-eight feet of pavement for hammerheads;
(6) Hammerheads shall comply with the minimum requirements set forth in Figure 21.15.080.01
or 21.15.080.02.
(6) Hammerheads shall comply with the minimum requirements set forth in Figure
21.15.080.01 or 21.15.080.02.
Figure 21.15.080.01. Connecting Road
Page 85 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 14
Figure 21.15.080.02. Connecting Road
Section 6. PMC Title 21.20.060, Lots without public street frontage, is hereby
amended and shall read as follows:
21.20.060 Lots without public street frontage
(1) Purpose. These regulations are intended to implement comprehensive plan goals and policies
encouraging infill development, more efficient use of the remaining developable land, protection
of environmentally sensitive areas, and creating opportunities for more affordable housing.
(2) Applicability. All applications proposing residential lots without public street frontage may
be approved only when each of the requirements identified below have been met. These
conditions are supplemental to any other requirements found in this title. In the event of any
conflict, the conditions in this section shall apply.
(a) All applications shall include a site map depicting proposed lot layout, including the location
of existing structures on adjacent parcels, if any;
Page 86 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 15
(b) Permitted only where, due to geometric, topographic, or other physical features in proportion
to the size of the development, it would be impractical to extend or build a publicly dedicated
street;
(c) Lots without public street frontage shall not be permitted within the RS-20 R-15 zoning
district;
(d) There shall be no more than three adjoining lots created without public street frontage;
(e) Emergency Access. When the furthest point of a proposed structure is greater than 150 feet in
distance from the public right-of-way, as measured along an accessible route, an approved fire
vehicle turnaround with a minimum inside turning radius of 30 feet is required as defined by the
International Fire Code;
(f) All corners shall have a minimum inside turning radius of 30 feet;
(g) Parking. No parking is permitted along the access (shared driveway) portion of the lot. The
installation of no parking signage shall be required as a condition of approval;
(h) Utilities and Improvements. All impacted and new utilities and improvements shall be
constructed to the standards identified in the Pasco Design and Construction Standards and
Specifications;
(i) Drainage and storm water shall meet the requirements of PMC 16.10.050;
(j) Signage with addresses shall be posted on the public street side for all properties that are
adjacent to any private shared driveway or access. Signage shall comply with the requirements of
PMC Title 17. All addresses shall be displayed on the same pedestal unless otherwise authorized;
(k) Structural setbacks on lots without public street frontage shall conform to the requirements
of the applicable zone;
(l) The shared access must be located no closer than five feet to any existing structure;
(m) Access, maintenance and utility easements necessary to accommodate and maintain
proposed driveway/shared access improvements and utilities shall be approved through the
subdivision process in this title and included on the face of the final plat;
(n) The shared driveway/access must be maintained by the homeowner’s association or by the
adjoining property owners. A maintenance agreement must be recorded prior to the issuance of
the certificate of occupancy and signage on the plat and must include provisions for snow
removal, garbage pickup and any other necessary provisions as determined by the City; and
(o) The shared driveway/access shall have a minimum paved width of 20 feet.
Section 9. PMC Section 25.20.010, Establishment of zoning districts, is hereby
Page 87 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 16
amended and shall read as follows:
25.20.010 Establishment of zoning districts.
For the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the City,
the City is divided into the following types of zones:
R-T District Residential Transition District
R-S-20 District
R-15
Residential Suburban District
Low-Density Residential District
R-S-12 District Residential Suburban District
R-S-1 District Low-Density Suburban Residential District
R-1 District Low-Density Residential District
R-1-A District Low-Density Residential Alternative District
R-1-A2 District Low-Density Residential Alternative District
R-2 District Medium-Density Residential District
R-3 District Medium-Density Residential District
R-4 District High-Density Residential District
RP District Residential Park District
O District Office District
C-1 District Retail Business District
C-2 District Central Business District
C-2 Overlay District Central Business Overlay District
C-3 District General Business District
C-R District Regional Commercial District
BP District Business Park District
I-182 Overlay District I-182 Corridor Overlay District
I-1 District Light Industrial District
Page 88 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 17
I-2 District Medium Industrial District
I-3 District Heavy Industrial District
MU District Mixed-Use District
Section 10. PMC Chapter 25.30, R-S-20 Suburban District, is hereby amended and
shall read as follows:
Chapter 25.30 R-S-20 SUBURBAN DISTRICT R-15 Low Density Residential
District
Sections:
• 25.30.010 Purpose.
• 25.30.020 Permitted uses.
• 25.30.030 Permitted accessory uses.
• 25.30.040 Conditional uses.
• 25.30.050 Development standards.
Section 11. PMC Section 25.30.010, Purpose, is hereby amended and shall read as
follows:
25.30.010 Purpose.
The R-S-20 suburban district R-15 Low Density Residential District is established to
provide a low-density residential environment permitting a gross density of two to five three
dwelling units per acre., as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table in
PMC 25.215.015. Lands within this district shall, unless specifically allowed herein,
contain suburban residential development with large lots and expansive yards. Structures
in this district are limited to single-family dwellings and customary accessory structures.
Certain public facilities and institutions may also be permitted, provided their nature and
location are not detrimental to the intended suburban residential environment.
Section 12. PMC Section 25.30.020, Permitted Uses, is hereby amended and shall read
as follows:
25.30.020 Permitted uses.
The following uses shall be permitted in the R-S-20 suburban district:
(1) Single-family dwellings; and
Page 89 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 18
(2) New factory-assembled homes.
(3) Nothing contained in this section shall be deemed to prohibit the use of vacant
property for gardening or fruit raising.
Section 13. PMC Section 25.30.030, Permitted accessory uses, is hereby amended and
shall read as follows:
25.30.030 Permitted accessory uses.
The following uses shall be permitted as accessory to a permitted use in the R-S-20 suburban
district:
(1) Detached residential garages as defined in PMC 25.15.090, provided they do not exceed the
height of 18 feet and are no larger than 1,600 square feet in area. For each additional 20,000
square feet of lot area, the gross floor area of detached shops and garages can be increased by
400 square feet. A greater height may be approved by special permit based upon the review
criteria listed in PMC 25.200.080 and 25.200.090;
(2) Home occupations as defined in PMC 25.15.100;
(3) Storage buildings cumulatively not exceeding 480 square feet of gross floor area and 15 feet
in height; provided no container storage, as defined in PMC 25.15.210, shall be permitted. For
each additional 20,000 square feet of lot area, the gross floor area of storage sheds can be
increased by 400 square feet;
(4) Agricultural uses (limited), as defined in PMC 25.15.030 (except that the keeping of animals
shall be permitted on parcels consisting of 10,000 square feet over and above an area equal in
size to 12,000 square feet set aside for the dwelling on the parcel);
(5) One animal unit (as defined in PMC 25.15.030) shall be allowed for each full 10,000-square-
foot increment of land over and above an area equal in size to 12,000 square feet set aside for the
dwelling on the same parcel, provided all barns, barnyards, chicken houses, or corrals shall be
located not less than 25 feet from a public roadway and not less than 10 feet from any adjoining
property held under separate ownership; and provided, that said number of chickens, fowl or
rabbits does not exceed two animal units;
(6) The keeping of dogs and cats, provided such number of animals does not exceed three dogs
and three cats;
(7) Family day care home in conformance with Chapter 388-73 WAC as now existing and as
amended and Chapter 25.150 PMC;
(8) Accessory dwelling units;
(9) Family home preschool in conformance with Chapter 25.150 PMC; and
Page 90 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 19
(10) For lots with a minimum of 5,000 square feet but less than 22,000 square feet the keeping
of dogs, cats, rabbits, and chicken hens, provided such number of animals does not exceed three
dogs and/or three cats, and/or three rabbits and/or three chicken hens, the total number of
animals not to exceed six; in all cases, animals shall not be allowed to roam or fly to other
properties; roosters are not allowed. Structures related to rabbits and/or chicken hens, such as
rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops, must be at least 10 feet from any property line, may not
exceed six feet in height and 30 square feet in size, and must be located behind the rear line of
the dwelling. Property owners shall not allow such structures to become a nuisance due to noise
or odor.
Section 14. PMC section 25.30.050, “Development standards” is hereby amended and
shall read as follow: Exemptions,” is hereby added to read as follows:
25.30.050 Development standards.
(1) Minimum lot area: 20,000 square feet.
Minimum Lot Area: 14,520 square feet.
Maximum Lot Size: One-half (½) acre.
Permitted Density: 2–3 dwelling units per acre.
(a) Lot Size Adjustments: The Director may approve adjustments to individual lot sizes of up to
twenty five (25) percent above or below the minimum lot area where necessary to comply with
Benton-Franklin Health Department on-site septic system requirements or to address site-specific
constraints such as soil conditions, drainage, topography, or irregular parcel configuration.
Any adjustment to individual lot size approved under this subsection shall be accommodated
through lot size averaging, such that the overall development maintains a density of 2–3 dwelling
units per acre. Development of densities outside this range is not permitted.
(2) Density: One dwelling unit per lot, except as provided in PMC 25.30.030(8).
(3) Maximum lot coverage: 405 percent.
(4) Minimum Yard Setbacks.
(a) Front: 25 20 feet.
(b) Side: 10 feet.
(c) Rear. Principal building: 25 20 feet.
Accessory buildings: Accessory buildings adjacent to an alley may be placed on the alley line,
provided there are no openings in the wall adjacent to the alley. Garages with vehicle doors
Page 91 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 20
adjacent to an alley shall be set back from the alley 20 feet. Where there is no alley, the setback
shall be 10 feet.
(5) Maximum Building Height.
(a) Principal building: 35 feet, except a greater height may be approved by special permit.
(b) Accessory buildings: 15 feet.
(6) Fences and hedges: See Chapter 25.180 PMC.
(7) Parking: See Chapter 25.185 PMC.
(8) Landscaping: See Chapter 25.180 PMC.
(9) Residential design standards: See PMC 25.165.100.
Section 15. PMC Section 25.165.200, Vehicle-related uses, is hereby amended and
shall read as follows:
25.165.200 Vehicle-related uses.
(1) Any building to be used as an auto body shop, as defined in PMC 25.15.030, shall have a
spray paint room or spray paint booth which complies with the requirements of the International
Fire Code and/or International Building Code;
(2) Inoperable vehicles, as defined in PMC 25.15.240, are permitted within the R-T, R-S-20 R-
15, R-S-12, R-S-1, R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, and RFA-1/1-A districts and on all nonconforming
residential uses in other districts subject to the following conditions:
(a) Only one inoperable vehicle may be stored outside of a fully enclosed building on the
property, as an accessory use to a dwelling unit.
(b) The inoperable vehicle stored outside shall not be stored upon a public right-of-way or in the
front or side yard areas of the property, and shall not conflict with other residential requirements,
such as off-street parking and lot coverage.
(c) The trunk of the outside inoperable vehicle shall be removed or locked at all times it is
unattended, and the unattended vehicle shall be completely enclosed within a six-foot fence,
which is fully sight obscuring.
(d) All vehicle parts not properly installed upon a vehicle shall be stored inside a fully enclosed
building, except that parts may be stored within the outside inoperable vehicle.
Page 92 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 21
(3) In the C-3 and I-1 zoning districts, inoperable vehicles, as defined in PMC 25.15.240, and
vehicle parts, tires and accessories that are not readily movable and for immediate sale shall be
stored or parked behind screening as provided by PMC 25.180.040(1)(d).
Section 16. PMC Section 25.175.020, Setbacks, is hereby amended and shall read as
follows:
25.175.020 Setbacks.
(1) Variable Yard Requirements. The City Council, on recommendation of the Planning
Commission, and after a public hearing held by the Planning Commission, may establish a
building line along certain streets throughout certain zones or throughout certain natural areas,
other than the setback requirements as established herein, when it is found that to do so will
protect public health, welfare and safety;
(2) Where any setback is required, no building shall be hereafter erected, altered, or placed in
the setback, except:
(a) Eaves, cornices, belt courses, and similar ornamentation may project into the setback not
more than two feet;
(b) Steps, platforms, and open porches may extend into the rear yard setback, but not more than
four feet;
(3) An open or enclosed porch shall be considered part of a building in the determination of the
front yard setback and lot coverage;
(4) (a) Where two contiguous corner lots, or two lots separated only by an alley, form the entire
frontage between two parallel streets and there is erected a solid six-foot fence, permitted
accessory buildings may be located not closer than five feet from the property line along the
street on which there is a solid six-foot fence. This reduced setback shall not apply to
garages or accessory buildings higher than 10 feet.
(b) Where two contiguous corner lots form the entire frontage between two parallel streets,
the front yard along the common flanking street shall be reduced to 15 feet. This reduction
shall not apply to garages that are accessed from the flanking street.
(c) Within the R-S-20 R-15, R-S-12, R-S-1 and R-1-A/A2 districts, where the front yard of
a lawfully existing structure is less than that required for the district in which the structure is
located, alteration or enlargement of said structure may be permitted, but shall not further
reduce the existing front yard dimension or be located closer than 15 feet from the front
property line, whichever is the most restrictive;
Page 93 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 22
(d) Within the R-S-20 R-15, R-S-12, R-S-1 and R-1-A/A2 districts, where the front yards
provided for lawfully existing structures upon the majority of lots within the same block
front and on the same side of the street are of less depth than required by the applicable
district regulation, the minimum front yard requirement for the remaining unoccupied lots
within the same block front and on the same side of the street shall be reduced to a depth not
less than the average front yard dimension provided by said existing structures, but in no
case shall the front yard depth be less than 15 feet.
(e) Handicapped access ramps may encroach within the front yard setback of all residential
zoning districts, provided such ramps are built to the Washington State Building Code
standards. The ramps must also be constructed and finished to complement the dwelling
with respect to finishes and construction materials and must be built in a workmanlike
manner;
(5) Commercial Yard Exception Requirements. Where a lot in a commercial district abuts or
adjoins a front, side or rear yard in a residential district, any building on the commercial lot
shall conform to and meet the front, side or rear yard setbacks in the adjoining residentially
zoned lot;
(6) Residential Yards in Commercial Districts. Nonconforming residential uses in
commercial or industrial districts must maintain residential setbacks as provided in
PMC 25.45.050; and
(7) Vision Triangle. No building, wall, fence or other structure higher than 36 inches above
curb grade shall be placed in a C-3 or I-1 district within any vision triangle, the equal legs of
which are formed by lines 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 17. PMC Section 25.185.030, General Provisions, is hereby amended and
shall read as follows:
25.185.030 General provisions.
(1) The off-street parking and loading facilities required by this chapter shall be established prior
to the occupancy of any new or enlarged structure;
(2) Required off-street parking spaces shall provide vehicle parking only for residents,
customers, patrons, and employees and shall not be used for the storage of equipment or
materials, or for the sale, repair or servicing of any vehicle;
(3) Any area once designated for required off-street parking shall not be used for any other
purpose unless and until equal facilities are provided elsewhere and a site plan has been
Page 94 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 23
approved to reflect the change, or the primary use of the property is changed to a use requiring
less off-street parking;
(4) The required front yard in the single-family residential districts shall not be used for off-
street parking for five or more cars. The storage and parking of vehicles in front yard areas of
single-family properties shall be limited to that area formed and bounded by parallel lines
extending from the outer dimension of a garage, carport, or parking slab to the right-of-way. An
additional area between the nearest side property line and the driveway of not more than 10 feet
by 20 feet may be used for additional parking. On lots with 100 feet of frontage or more, parking
may be permitted on circular drives. All primary parking areas and driveways in front yards shall
be hard surfaced, except in the R-S-20 R-15 and R-S-12 districts, driveways may be of an all-
weather surface, provided the first 20 feet from the right-of-way is hard surfaced; and
(5) In the R-2, R-3 and R-4 residential districts off-street parking spaces for multiple-family
dwellings shall not be located in the front yard, except that a single two-lane drive may extend
through the required front yard, provided no portion of the drive is within 10 feet of a dwelling
unit entry nor five feet from any portion of a residential structure.
Section 18. PMC Section 25.185.140, Recreational equipment parking, is hereby
amended and shall read as follows:
25.185.140 Recreational equipment parking.
Boats, motor homes, camp trailers, travel trailer, fifth wheels, pickup campers, utility trailers,
and snowmobiles as defined herein may be stored in all yard areas within the R-1, R-2, R-3 and
R-4 districts, and only within the side and rear yards in the R-S-20 R-15, R-S-12 and R-S-1
districts. All storage areas shall be surfaced with all-weather materials such as asphalt, brick,
stone, concrete or gravel. Additionally, the storage and parking of said items in residential
districts shall, at all times, comply with the parking conditions in PMC 25.185.030(4). Bona fide
guests of the occupants of the premises may temporarily park on driveways for periods not to
exceed 10 days in any 60-day period.
Section 19. PMC Section 25.215.015, Comprehensive Plan land use density table, is
hereby amended and shall read as follows:
25.215.015 Comprehensive Plan land use density table.
Maximum gross density of any proposed development within any zoning district, expressed as
dwelling units per acre, shall be no less than the corresponding minimum density expressed in
Page 95 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 24
this section and no greater than the corresponding maximum density expressed in this section,
except as provided in Chapter 25.161 PMC.
Classification Purpose and Description Zoning
Open Space/Parks Land where development will be
severely restricted: park lands, trails and
critical areas
All zoning districts
(Development of parks
and recreation facilities
requires special permit
review)
Low Density Residential -
Riverview
Variety of residential housing at a
density of 2-5 units per acre.
R-15
Low Density Residential Variety of residential housing at a
density of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre
R-S-20; R-S-12; R-S-1;
R-1; R-1-A; R-1-A2
Medium Density Residential Variety of residential housing at a
density of 6 to 20 dwelling units per
acre.
R-2 through R-4; RP
High Density Residential Variety of residential housing at a
density 21 units per acre or more
R-4
Mixed
Residential/Commercial
Accommodates a diverse range of
housing, nonresidential uses,
commercial uses, neighborhood retail
and office uses, parks and recreation
areas, and civic uses at a density of 5 to
29 dwelling units per acre
R-1 through R-4; C-1 and
O; Waterfront
Commercial Neighborhood, community and regional
shopping and specialty centers, business
parks, service and office uses
O; BP; C-1; C-2; C-3;
CR
Industrial Manufacturing, food processing, storage
and wholesale distribution of equipment
and products, hazardous material
storage, and transportation related
facilities
I-1; I-2; I-3
Public and Quasi-Public Schools, civic centers, fire stations and
other public uses
By special permit in all
districts (except I-3
Page 96 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 25
which has various
restrictions)
Airport Reserve Land occupied by the Tri-Cities Airport I-1
DNR Reserve Transition lands owned and presently
managed by DNR for natural resource
production. Characteristics include, but
are not limited to, proximity to urban-
type development, road and utility
infrastructure, and market demand.
I-1
Section 20. 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 21. 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 22. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after
approval, passage and publication as required by law.
Page 97 of 431
Ordinance – Amending PMC Titles 12, 17, 21, & 25- page 26
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington 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 98 of 431
ORDINANCE NO.4663
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,
AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESCRIPTIONS AND THE
PASCO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 25.215.015 "COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN LAND USE DENSITY TABLE" RELATED TO 2022 COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN DOCKET AND BROADMOOR MASTER PLAN.
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act authorizes the City to, among other things,
amend the Comprehensive Plan on an annual basis; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted workshops and public hearings
pursuant to legally required notice on the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and
recommended approval to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered and discussed the proposed annual amendment
to the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the Future Land Use Map Descriptions
and Density Table.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO,
WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council finds that the amendment has met the decision criteria
contained in PMC 25.215.020; and that the amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
and the goals and policies of the City.
Section 2. That Section 25.215.015 entitled "Comprehensive Plan land use density
table" of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows:
25.215.015 Comprehensive Plan land use density table.
Maximum gross density of any proposed development within any zoning district,
expressed as dwelling units per acre, shall be no less than the corresponding
minimum density expressed in this section and no greater than the corresponding
maximum density expressed in this section, except as provided in Chapter 25.161
PMC.
Classification Purpose and Description Zoning
Open Space/Parks Land where development All zoning districts
will be severely Development of parks
restricted: park lands, and recreation facilities
trails and critical areas
Ordinance — Future Land Use Map &Amending PMC 25.215.015- 1
Page 99 of 431
Classification Purpose and Description Zoning
requires special permit
review)
Low Density Residential Stele -€ate VarietyfR-S-20; R-S-12; R-S- residential
housinL, 1; R-1; R-1-A; R-1- de,
at a density A2 of —
to 5 3 to E. dwelling units
per acre Medium
Density Single f dwel '„g-s, R-2 through R-4; RP fflilyResidential
heffies, townhoeses, patiod
eendefnifl
Variety of residential
housing, at a density
of 6 to 20 dwelling
units per acre. High
Density Residential Multiple unit a„aftmeig R-4 or-
eendaminium Variety, of
residential housing at a density
21 units per acre or
more Mixed
Allow a eambina4ion of R-1 through R-4; C-1 Residential/
Commercial ffiixed use eside,Aia eeffhffier-
eial in the sam ae,,
oel ...meat Single faiiaily
n r and
O; Waterfront homes,
t f4 e apai4fflef4s-,
effd eendeminiums
Accommodates
a diverse range
of housing, non- residential
uses commercial
uses, neighborhood
retail and office
uses, parks and recreation
areas and civic
uses at
a density of 5 to 29 dwelling
units per acre. and
k oare s, o 0
parks, rs
aREIe. Commercial
Neighborhood, O;
BP; C-1; C-2; C- community and regional
3; CR shopping and specialty
Ordinance — Future Land
Use Map &Amending PMC 25.215.015- 2
Page 100 of 431
Classification Purpose and Description Zoning
centers, business parks,
service and office uses
Industrial Manufacturing, food I-1;1-2; I-3
processing, storage and
wholesale distribution of
equipment and products,
hazardous material
storage, and
transportation related
facilities
Public and Quasi -Public Schools, civic centers, By special permit in
fire stations and other all districts (except I -
public uses 3 which has various
restrictions)
Airport Reserve Land occupied by the I-1
Tri-Cities Airport
DNR Reserve Transition lands owned I-1
and presently managed
by DNR for natural
resource production.
Characteristics include,
but are not limited to,
proximity to urban -type
development, road and
utility infrastructure, and
market demand.
Medium High Density
Re i,lent'.,1
Bfe,,dRiee,- e, ly; single
te. flhe.,senT
6611deffliflieffis, and
ltif milt'; 4 15
N i.,e,-1 Use 1pAeFel,ange B-e.,.lme 1y; .,long 1 N4U-1r- ai
192 e eefftmutef
eek ele.... sef yieen an
b-Lee , e .n>
e ffiee and retail ttses-
Ordinance - Future Land Use Map &Amending PMC 25.215.015- 3
Page 101 of 431
Classification Purpose and Description Zoning
te..,ff a„sew „kift.,i;1<.
neiglbefkeed
stores, e,e• ell,
neighbefheed seale
ffiees aiidases
T iEe.l Use Deg e,...,1 Br-e.,dmee.. N4U4only; general
retaila e+•ons an
shops, gr-aeefy star -es,
s;,1e.,t;al .,be .er-e
1 /e f ee, . liig
dens t.,
dining, ePAet4aiflffiei4
use
Of4ee Weadffieer-emsy;
1e e o
to
04
Ord. 4575 § 14, 2022.]
Section 3. 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 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 regulations; 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.
Ordinance — Future Land Use Map &Amending PMC 25.215.015- 4
Page 102 of 431
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this 17th day of April,
2023.
Blanche Barajas
Mayor
ATTEST:
Debra Barham, CMC
City Clerk
Published:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
e Law, PLLC
City rneys
Ordinance — Future Land Use Map &Amending PMC 25.215.015- 5
Page 103 of 431
Table XI
mum Land Area Requirement For Each Single-F:Residence or Unit Volume 11fSewage and
M nimum Usable Land Area
Soil Type (defined by WAC 246-212A-0220)
1 2 a A 5 s
Public 11,780 sq.ft-
WalerSuPPlY1.5 acres‘
Nonpublic 1.0 acre
WalerSuPPlY1.5 acres‘
0.5 acre 0.5 acre 0.5 acre 0.5 acre 13,000 sq.ft.
M mum Land Area
1.0 acre 1.0 acre 1.0 acre 2.0 acres 1.0 acres
um Usable Land Area .75 acre 6,750 sq.ft.7,500 sq.fr.9,000 sq.ft.10,000 sq.ft.10,000 sq.ft.
1 as mm:mm sewage um ind :nmv SSA:musl have a mlllmlnn ranama m z 5 am as wnc zwvznmum.
Pa
g
e
1
0
4
o
f
4
3
1
Community Development Department
PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301
P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499
NOTICE OF APPLICATION/SEPA DETERMINATION
(Optional DNS Process)
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.
SEPA Comment Period Deadline: December 30, 2025
Proposal: 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 updated 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 required
that all new development meet the minimum density standards in PMC 25.215.015. In the R-S-20 zone, with a
minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet, a one-acre lot can accommodate only two dwelling units, effectively creating
a moratorium on small-lot development. Several requests from property owners to divide land in this zone have
been denied for not meeting density requirements.
To address this issue, the Planning Division has initiated an emergency Comprehensive Plan amendment. The City
Council adopted a resolution initiating this amendment on November 17, 2025, and the proposal was presented to
the Planning Commission as a workshop on November 20, 2025. The amendment includes a land use designation of
2–5 dwelling units per acre to provide policy guidance for low-density housing, implemented at the parcel level
through zoning. Staff proposes replacing the R-S-20 zone with a new R-9 Low Density Residential District with a
minimum lot size of 8,700 square feet. This change allows the zoning to support the full density range permitted by
the land use designation while still accommodating larger half-acre parcels where septic systems are an option. The
proposed R-9 district is intended to restore consistency, reflect infrastructure realities, and prepare the City for
future statewide housing obligations. The proposed emergency amendment has been transmitted to the
Washington State Department of Commerce for the required 60-day agency review.
Public Comment Period: Written comments must be submitted to the Community Development Department by
5:00 p.m. on December 30, 2025. Only comments received by the referenced date will be included in the SEPA
record. If you have questions on the proposal, contact the Planning Division at (509) 544-4146 or via e-mail to:
barragani@pasco-wa.gov.
Open Record Hearing: No public hearing is required for the SEPA review. The SEPA determination will be issued
administratively by the City’s SEPA Administrator. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing for the
emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment on December 18, 2025, and final action by the City Council will be
scheduled at a later date, no sooner than 60 days after November 14, 2025, in accordance with Pasco Municipal
Code.
Determination of Completeness: The application has been declared complete for the purpose of processing.
Environmental Documents and/or Studies Applicable to this Application: Environmental Determination No.
SEPA2025-036 has been assigned to this proposal. The SEPA comment period will end December 30, 2025. It is
probable that a Determination of Non-Significance or Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance will be issued for
this proposal (WAC 197.11.355 optional DNS process). This may be the only opportunity to comment on the
environmental impacts of this proposal or to appeal any State Environmental Policy Act related decisions.
Preliminary Determination of Regulations Used for Non-Project Mitigation: To evaluate the impacts of the
proposed non-project, the following may be used for mitigation, consistency, and the development of findings and
conclusions:
Page 105 of 431
Community Development Department
PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301
P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499
�� Title 12 (Streets and Sidewalks), Title 16 (Buildings and Construction), Title 21 (Subdivision), Title 25
(Zoning), Title 28 (Critical Areas) regulations of the Pasco Municipal Code, and the land use policies
contained in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan;
�� Regulations of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Department of
Ecology, Washington State Department of Natural Resources and Washington State Department of
Archaeology and Historic Preservation;
�� Other required agency evaluations, approvals, permits, and mitigations as necessary.
Estimated Date of the Decision: A DNS or MDNS will be issued following the close of the comment period on
December 30, 2025.
To receive notification of the threshold determination and any other information concerning this action, contact the
Pasco Planning Division at barragani@pasco-wa.gov or at the address and telephone number listed below.
Phone: 509-544-4146
Appeals:
You may appeal the subsequent threshold determination by submitting a written appeal to one of the following
addresses:
Email: barragani@pasco-wa.gov
Physical Address: City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department 525 N. 3rd Avenue, First Floor
Pasco, WA 99301
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 293 Pasco, WA 99301
Appeals must be submitted within 14 days of issuance of the threshold determination. The appeal must be in writing,
include a concise statement identifying the matter being appealed, and provide the basic rationale for the appeal. A
filing fee is required in accordance with the City’s Fee Resolution.
Please note: Failure to file a timely and complete appeal shall constitute a waiver of all rights to an administrative
appeal under City Code.
All appeals should be directed to: Haylie Matson, CED Director
All comments should be directed to: Ivan Barragan, Planner III
Prepared: November 24, 2025
By: Ivan Barragan
Page 106 of 431
C-1
C-1
I-1
I-1
I-2
C-1
C-3
C-R
C-1
R-4
C-1
R-3
I-1
I-1
R-S-20
R-S-12
R-S-12
C-3
R-S-12
I-2
C-3
I-2
I-2
C-3
C-1
R-S-12
R-3
R-S-20
R-3
C-1
R-1
R-S-1
R-S-20
I-1
C-1
R-3
R-S-20
R-1
C-RR-3
R-4
R-2
C-3
R-T
I-1
I-1
I-1
I-1
R-S-20
R-S-12
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-4
R-4
MU
R-S-20
R-3
C-3
R-3
R-S-1
C-3
R-4
I-2
R-2
C-3
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-S-1/PUD
C-1
C-1
MU
R-S-20
R-S-20
R-S-20
R-1
R-1
I-1
C-1
MU
R-4
R-S-20
I-1
RP
I-1
I-1
I-1
I-2
BP
R-1
R-4
R-S-20
R-T
C-1
R-4
C-R
R-S-12
I-1
I-1
C-1
C-1
C-1
C-3
R-T
R-3
C-3
C-3
I-1
R-S-20
R-3
R-3
R-T
I-1
I-1
C-1
C-1
C-1
R-1
R-1
C-3
R-3
R-1
R-1
I-1
R-4
R-S-12
C-1
C-1
C-1
R-1
RP
I-1
C-1
R-4
R-S-1
R-1
C-1
R-4
R-1
R-1
C-3
R-S-1
C-R
RP
I-1
C-1
C-1
R-4
C-3
I-2
R-1
OR-1R-S-20
I-2
I-1
I-1
C-3
R-3
R-S-1
R-S-12
R-1
I-1
I-1
R-T
RP
R-1
I-2
R-T
R-T
R-1
I-1
RP
R-1
R-1
C-1
R-1
I-2
R-3R-2
R-3
I-1
R-T
R-1
R-4
R-S-20
I-2
I-1
R-1
R-1
C-1
R-3
R-TR-T
I-1
I-1
C-R
R-3
I-3
I-3
Do
c
u
m
e
n
t
P
a
t
h
:
\\
g
s
d
a
t
a
s
t
o
r
e
\
G
I
S
\
G
I
S
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
D
e
p
t
C
E
D
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
\
Z
O
N
I
N
G
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
_
F
I
L
E
\
Z
O
N
I
N
G
\
Z
O
N
I
N
G
.
a
p
r
x
1:28,000
ZONING
FILE NAME
PROPOSED - ZONING
1 of 1
SHEET NUMBERSCALE
kaufmannc
CREATED BY
11/17/2025
PLOT DATE
NOTES
NOTICE: WARRANTY OF ACCURACY.
The materials provided with this product, including but not limited to,
data, maps, and tables (collectively, 'information'), are presented 'AS IS'
without any warranty, express or implied. The City of Pasco and its staff
do not warrant the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of the
information and shall not be liable for any inaccuracies or omissions. The
information is subject to change and is intended solely for general
informational purposes. Users should independently verify critical
information and seek professional advice when necessary. Prior to any
digging or excavation, it is essential for safety and compliance with local
regulations that users contact 'Call Before You Dig' services by dialing
811. This ensures the location and safety of underground utilities are
confirmed before any ground is broken. The City of Pasco does not
endorse any specific commercial products or services referenced in the
information. Reliance on this information is at the user's own risk.
LEGEND
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPT
GIS
Scale: 1:28,000
0 0.5 1 1.5 2Miles
²
FRANKLIN COUNTY
Zone
BP, Business Park
C-1, Retail Business District
C-2, Central Business Overlay District
C-3, General Business District
C-R, Regional Commercial District
I-1, Light Industrial District
I-2, Medium Industrial District
I-3, Heavy Industrial District
MU, Mixed Use
O, Office District
R-1-A, Low-Density Residential
Alternative District
R-1-A2, Low-Density Residential
Alternative District
R-1/PUD, Low Density Residential
Planned-Unit Development
R-2, Medium-Density Residential
District
R-3, Medium-Density Residential
District
R-3/PUD, Medium Density Residential
R-4, High-Density Residential District
R-9, Low Density Residential District
R-S-1, Low-Density Suburban
Residential District
R-S-1/PUD, Suburban Panned-Unit
Development
R-S-12, Residential Suburban District
R-T, Residential Transition District
RP, Residential Park District
Other Boundaries
City Limits
Urban Growth Areas
Road Centerlines
Interstate
Highway
Ramp
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Major Collector
Minor Collector
Neightborhood Collector
Local
Other
Principal Arterial Future
Major Collector Future
Minor Collector Future
Minor Arterial Future
Neightborhood Collector Future
Convert
R-S-20 to R-9
Low Density
Residential
District
Pa
g
e
1
0
7
o
f
4
3
1
THANK YOU for your legal submission!
Your legal has been submitted for publication. Below is a confirmation of your legal placement. You will
also receive an email confirmation.
ORDER DETAILS
Order Number:
IPL0293939
Order Status:
Submitted
Classification:
Legals & Public Notices
Package:
TRI - Legal Ads
Site:
tricity
Final Cost:
$790.32
Referral Code:
SEPA2025-036 NOA R-S-20 ZONE CHANGES
Payment Type:
Account Billed
User ID:
IPL0018633
ACCOUNT INFORMATION
Debra Barham
525 North Third Ave.
Pasco, WA 99301
509-544-3096
cityclerk@pasco-wa.gov
City of Pasco
TRANSACTION REPORT
Date
November 24, 2025 4:43:34 PM EST
Amount:
$790.32
SCHEDULE FOR AD NUMBER IPL02939390
November 30, 2025
Tri-City Herald Print Publication
<< Click here to print a printer friendly version >>
PREVIEW FOR AD NUMBER IPL02939390
4.9inches x 8.91inches
11/24/25, 4:43 PM Adportal Self Service Advertising Confirmation
https://placelegal.mcclatchy.com/legals/tricity/home/confirmation.html?id=274975&returnto=1/1Page 108 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 1 of 15
SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Purpose of checklist
Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your
proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance,
minimization, or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an
environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal.
Instructions for applicants
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please
answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult
with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use “not applicable” or
"does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is
unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and
accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the
decision-making process.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of
time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your
proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to
explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may
be significant adverse impact.
Instructions for lead agencies
Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to
evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse
impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to
make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is
responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals
For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable
parts of sections A and B, plus the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions (Part D). Please completely
answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site"
should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency
may exclude (for non-projects) questions in “Part B: Environmental Elements” that do not contribute
meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal.
SEPA2025-036 R-S-20 Zone Changes Emergency CPA
Page 109 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 2 of 15
A. Background Find help answering background questions
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
2. Name of applicant:
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
4. Date checklist prepared:
5. Agency requesting checklist:
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be
prepared, directly related to this proposal.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
City of Pasco
11/24/2025
City of Pasco/State of Washington
525 N Third Ave509-544-4136Haylie Matson
There are no development plans associated with this request at this time. This is a citywide Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Low Density Residential designation, specifically addressing changes to the R-S-20 Zone
A non-project Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was completed in September 2020 for the City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan. This FEIS remains relevant and applicable to the current non-project proposal.
See last supplemental page for answer.
The Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment was submitted to the Washington State Department of Commerce for review on November 14, 2025. At this time, no specific properties are affected; the amendment applies citywide.
City Council approval of the application at a later date. SEPA Determination. Dept. of Commerce approval.
Page 110 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 3 of 15
11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the
size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you
to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on
this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information
on project description.)
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the
precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section,
township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the
range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and
topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by
the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any
permit applications related to this checklist.
See last supplemental page for answer.
Throughout all R-S-20 zoned lots and Pasco Municial Code text.
Page 111 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 4 of 15
B. Environmental Elements
1. Earth Find help answering earth questions
a. General description of the site:
Circle or highlight one: Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other:
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat,
muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them, and note any agricultural
land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of
these soils.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describe.
e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any
filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill.
f. Could erosion occur because of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any.
No specific soils have been identified at this time. It would be prudent to address soil-related considerations during future, site-specific project actions.
City of Pasco R-S-20 zoned lots.
Although the City is generally flat, it is difficult to provide a specific answer, as this is a citywide, non-project proposal.
This is a citywide, non-project proposal and is not specific to any individual site or action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Existing City development regulations currently govern and control erosion during construction activities.
Page 112 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 5 of 15
2. Air Find help answering air questions
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation,
and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate
quantities if known.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any.
3. Water Find help answering water questions
a. Surface Water: Find help answering surface water questions
1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round
and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names.
If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If
yes, please describe and attach available plans.
3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed
from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate
the source of fill material.
4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give a general description,
purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan.
Not applicable-non-project action.
No plans are proposed at this time, as this is a City-wide Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Specific projects will need to address this issue when they are developed.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Some lots affected by this amendment may be located near the river; however, as this is a non-project action, any specific project proposals will need to address this issue at the time of development.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Page 113 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 6 of 15
6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so,
describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
b. Ground Water: Find help answering ground water questions
1. Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a
general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the
well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give a general description, purpose, and
approximate quantities if known.
2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources,
if any (domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals…; agricultural; etc.).
Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be
served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
c. Water Runoff (including stormwater):
a) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any
(include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If
so, describe.
b) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
c) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so,
describe.
d) Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage
pattern impacts, if any.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Page 114 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 7 of 15
4. Plants Find help answering plants questions
a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site:
☐ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
☐ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
☐ shrubs
☐ grass
☐ pasture
☐ crop or grain
☐ orchards, vineyards, or other permanent crops.
☐ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
☐ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
☐ other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation
on the site, if any.
e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site.
5. Animals Find help answering animal questions
a. List any birds and other animals that have been observed on or near the site or are known to be
on or near the site.
Examples include:
• Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
• Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
• Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any.
e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Page 115 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 8 of 15
6. Energy and Natural Resources Find help answering energy and natural resource questions
1. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the
completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing,
etc.
2. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally
describe.
3. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other
proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any.
7. Environmental Health Find help with answering environmental health questions
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and
explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur because of this proposal? If so, describe.
1. Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses.
2. Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development
and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines
located within the project area and in the vicinity.
3. Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced
during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating
life of the project.
4. Describe special emergency services that might be required.
5. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Page 116 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 9 of 15
b. Noise
1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:
traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term
or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours
noise would come from the site)?
3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any.
8. Land and Shoreline Use Find help answering land and shoreline use questions
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land
uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe.
b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How
much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other
uses because of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many
acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use?
1. Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal
business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling,
and harvesting? If so, how?
c. Describe any structures on the site.
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
R-S-20
Low Density Residential
This is a City-wide amendment affecting lots currently zoned R-S-20. The nature of this proposal is non-project.
Page 117 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 10 of 15
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so,
specify.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any.
l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land
uses and plans, if any.
m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term
commercial significance, if any.
9. Housing Find help answering housing questions
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-
income housing.
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Page 118 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 11 of 15
10. Aesthetics Find help answering aesthetics questions
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is
the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any.
11. Light and Glare Find help answering light and glare questions
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur?
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any.
12. Recreation Find help answering recreation questions
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities
to be provided by the project or applicant, if any.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Page 119 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 12 of 15
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation Find help answering historic and cultural preservation
questions
a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old
listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers? If so, specifically
describe.
b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This
may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas
of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the
site to identify such resources.
c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on
or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of
archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc.
d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to
resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required.
14. Transportation Find help with answering transportation questions
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe
proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If
not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop?
c. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle,
or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate
whether public or private).
d. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe.
e. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be
trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models
were used to make these estimates?
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
According to DAHP’s statewide predictive model, most of the City of Pasco has a high to very high probability of containing cultural resources. Since this proposal is non-project in nature, any specific development projects will need to address these resources at the time they are proposed.
Page 120 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 13 of 15
f.Will the proposal interfere with, affect, or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest
products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe.
g.Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any.
15. Public Services Find help answering public service questions
a.Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection,
police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
b.Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
16. Utilities Find help answering utilities questions
a.Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service,
telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other:
b.Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service,
and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which
might be needed.
C. Signature Find help about who should sign
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead
agency is relying on them to make its decision.
X
Type name of signee: Click or tap here to enter text.
Position and agency/organization: Click or tap here to enter text.
Date submitted: Click or tap to enter a date.
Community & Economic Development Department
This application was reviewed by the Planning Division of the Community & Economic
Development Department. Any comments or changes made by the Department are entered in the body of the
checklist and contain initials of the reviewer.
Signature: ______________________________________________________
Name of signee: __________________________________________________
Position: ___________________________________
Date Reviewed: _____________
____________________
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Ivan Barragan
11/24/2025
Craig Raymond
Deputy CED Director
Ivan Barragan
Planner III City of Pasco
11/24/2025
Page 121 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 14 of 15
D. Supplemental sheet for nonproject actions Find help for the nonproject actions
worksheet
IT IS NOT REQUIRED to use this section for project actions. Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction
with the list of the elements of the environment.
When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of
activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate
than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms.
1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; pro-
duction, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise?
• Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are:
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
• Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are:
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
• Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or
areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection, such as parks,
wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or
cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
• Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it
would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?
• Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
See answers below question number 7, for answers to questions 1 through 7.
Page 122 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 15 of 15
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public
services and utilities?
• Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or
requirements for the protection of the environment.
1. This proposal is a non-project Comprehensive Plan Amendment and does not authorize any specific development, construction, or physical site activity. As such, it does not directly result in discharges to water, emissions to air, noise generation, or the production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances.
Any future development that may occur under the revised land use designation or new zoning district would be reviewed through separate project-level permitting processes. At that time, all environmental impacts—including stormwater, air emissions, noise, and hazardous materials—would be evaluated in accordance with applicable City, state, and federal regulations. Therefore, no direct environmental impacts are anticipated as part of this non-project action.
Question 6 from page 2- This proposal is non-project in nature. The anticipated timeline for this emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment includes a public hearing with the Planning Commission scheduled for December 18, 2025. Final action by the City Council to adopt the amendments will occur at a later date, no sooner than 60 days after November 14, 2025, which is the date the Washington State Department of Commerce was notified.
Question 11 from page 3- This non-project proposal is an emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment initiated by City Council resolution on November 17, 2025. The amendment addresses a conflict created by Ordinance No. 4663, adopted on April 17, 2023, which revised allowable gross densities in the Low Density Residential (LDR) designation from 2–5 to 3–6 dwelling units per acre and required all new development to meet minimum density standards outlined 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. To resolve this inconsistency, the Planning Division has been directed to initiate an amendment establishing a land use designation of 2–5 dwelling units per acre. To align zoning with this designation, staff proposes replacing the R-S-20 zone with a new R-9 Low Density Residential District, featuring a minimum lot size of 8,700 square feet. This change would support the full permitted density range, maintain compatibility with areas reliant on septic systems, restore consistency between land use and zoning, and better position the Cityto meet future statewide housing obligations.
Page 123 of 431
2. This is a non-project, policy-level amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan and does not authorize any specific development or construction activity. As such, the proposal would not directly result in increased discharges to water, air emissions, noise generation, or the release oftoxic or hazardous substances.
Any future site-specific development enabled by subsequent zoning or permit actions would be subject to separate environmental review, including evaluation of potential impacts to water, air quality, noise, and hazardous materials. Appropriate mitigation would be required at the time individual development proposals are submitted.
3. The amendment itself does not authorize construction and therefore would not directly consume or deplete energy or natural resources.
Any potential increase in development capacity resulting from future zoning changes would be evaluated during project-level permitting, at which time energy use, resource consumption, and required mitigation measures would be addressed through applicable codes and SEPA review.
4. Because this is a non-project Comprehensive Plan Amendment, it does not authorize any specific development, construction, or physical changes to the environment. As a policy-level action, the amendment only adjusts the land use designation for Low Density Residential areas and proposes replacing the R-S-20 zone with a new R-9 Low Density Residential District.
The proposal does not directly affect environmentally sensitive areas, parks, critical areas, wildlifehabitat, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmland. Any future site-specific development proposals would be reviewed under existing local, state, and federal regulations, including the City’s critical areas ordinance, SEPA requirements, and applicable permitting processes. At that time, impacts to environmentally sensitive areas would be evaluated and mitigation applied as necessary.
5. Because this is a non-project legislative amendment, it will not directly change or authorize any specific land or shoreline use. The proposal adjusts the Low Density Residential land use designation to 2–5 units per acre and replaces the R-S-20 zoning designation with a new R-9 Low Density Residential District to restore consistency between the Comprehensive Plan and zoning code. These changes do not expand urban growth areas, introduce new shoreline designations, or authorize development inconsistent with the City's adopted plans.
Any future site-specific development would still be required to comply with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, zoning code, shoreline regulations (if applicable), critical areas ordinance, and all permitting requirements. Therefore, the proposal is not expected to allow or encourage land or shoreline uses that are incompatible with existing plans.
Page 124 of 431
6. Because this is a non-project policy amendment, it does not authorize any specific development and would not directly increase demands on transportation systems, utilities, or public services. The amendment revises the land use designation for areas currently zoned R-S-20 and establishes a framework for the eventual creation of a new R-9 Low Density Residential District.
Any future increase in demand for transportation, water, sewer, stormwater, police, fire, or other municipal services would depend on separate, site-specific development proposals, each of which would undergo its own permit review and SEPA evaluation.
The amendment itself is not expected to generate immediate or measurable increases in service or utility demands, and any future development resulting from zoning changes would be planned and reviewed in coordination with adopted Comprehensive Plan policies, the Capital Facilities Plan, and available infrastructure capacity.
7. The proposed amendment is a non-project action that adjusts Comprehensive Plan policy for Low Density Residential areas and replaces the R-S-20 zone with a new R-9 Low Density Residential District. Because it does not authorize any specific development, it does not directly conflict with local, state, or federal environmental protection requirements. Any future development occurring under the amended land use designation andzoning would remain subject to all applicable regulations, including the City’s development standards, critical areas ordinance, stormwater requirements, and SEPA review at the project level.
While House Bill 1110 (Middle Housing) will be implemented by the City of Pasco at a later date, this amendment is a temporary policy and zoning correction intended solely to address density inconsistencies in the R-S-20 zone until HB 1110 is fully adopted.
Page 125 of 431
Community Development Department
PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301
P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499
SEPA DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE
(Optional DNS Process)
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.
Issuance Date: January 27, 2026
Lead Agency: City of Pasco
Project Name: R-S-20 Zone Changes Emergency CPA
Project Number: SEPA2025-036
Applicant/Proponent: City of Pasco
C/o Haylie Matson
525 N 3rd Ave
Pasco, WA 99301
Proposal Description: At the direction of the City Council, the proposal includes a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment to revise the City’s Land Use Map by adding a new Low
Density Residential–Riverview designation, which would allow development at 2–5 dwelling
units per acre on properties currently designated R-S-20. The proposal also includes a rezone
and municipal code amendment to replace the existing R-S-20 zoning designation with a new R-
15 Low Density Residential zoning district.
Proposal Location: Various locations citywide within Pasco, Washington (99301).
Lead Agency: The City of Pasco, acting as lead agency for this proposal, has determined that the
proposal will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This
Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) is issued under the optional DNS process in WAC 197-
11-355, and no further comment period will be provided. This decision is based on review of
the completed environmental checklist, consultation with legal counsel, and consideration of
other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public upon
request.
Appeals: You may appeal the threshold determination by submitting a written appeal to
one of the following addresses:
Email: barragani@pasco-wa.gov
Page 126 of 431
Physical Address: City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department 525
N. 3rd Avenue, First Floor Pasco, WA 99301
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 293 Pasco, WA 99301
Appeals must be submitted within 14 days of issuance of the threshold determination.
The appeal must be in writing, include a concise statement identifying the matter being
appealed, and provide the basic rationale for the appeal. A filing fee is required in
accordance with the City’s Fee Resolution.
Please note: Failure to file a timely and complete appeal shall constitute a waiver of all
rights to an administrative appeal under City Code.
All appeals should be directed to: Haylie Matson, CED Director
Responsible Official: Haylie Matson
Position/Title: Community and Economic Development Director
Phone (509) 544-4136
Address: 525 N. 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301
Responsible Official: ________________________________________________
Haylie Matson, Community & Economic Development Director
Page 127 of 431
THANK YOU
We have received your amendment submission. Please allow 1-3 business days for review. Please keep the Submittal ID as your receipt and for any future
questions. We will also send an email receipt to all contacts listed in the submittal.
Submittal ID: 2025-S-11143
Submittal Date Time: 11/17/2025
Submittal Information
Jurisdiction City of Pasco
Submittal Type 60-day Notice of Intent to Adopt Amendment
Amendment Type Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Categories
Submittal Category
Capital Facilities
Comprehensive Plan
Emergency
Schools
Anticipated/Proposed Date of Adoption 01/20/2026
n Yes, this is a part of the 10-year periodic update schedule, required under RCW 36.70A.130.
Brief Description
This emergency amendment updates the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan to maintain consistency with the City ’s adopted budget and
current capital planning needs. The amendment also relates to school impact fee policies and utilizes the Pasco School District ’s adopted Capital Facilities
Plan.
Amendment Information
City Council Date 11/17/2025Planning Commissions Date 11/20/2025
Planning Commissions Date 12/18/2025
Page 128 of 431
Intake Received Date 11/17/2025
Full Name Ivan Barragani
Email barragani@pasco-wa.gov
Attachments
Attachment Type File Name Upload Date
Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Draft ____ Resolution - Initiating Emergency CPA - PSD Capital
Facilities Plan (CPA2025-001) - FINAL.pdf
11/17/2025 12:35 PM
Supporting Documentation or Analysis CPA2025-001 School Capital Facilities Plan-Agency-Notice-
Cover-Sheet.docx
11/17/2025 12:36 PM
Correspondence Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendments Initial
Notice.msg
11/17/2025 12:36 PM
Correspondence RE Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendments Initial
Notice.msg
11/17/2025 12:37 PM
Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Draft ECPA Coversheet to COM.pdf 11/17/2025 12:37 PM
SEPA Materials Notice of Application CPA 2025 Emergency Amendments.pdf 11/17/2025 12:37 PM
Yes, I would like to be contacted for Technical Assistance.n
Entered by Sarah Van Etten Leupold on 11/17/2025 12:39:31 PM
Contact Information
Prefix Ms.
First Name Haylie
Last Name Matson
Title CED Director
Work (509) 544-4136
Cell
Email matsonh@pasco-wa.gov
Certification
Page 129 of 431
Community Development Department
PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301
P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499
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 squa re 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
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
Page 130 of 431
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 accommodating 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 131 of 431
1
Haylie Miller
From:Rodgers,Deborah (CONTR) - TERR-TRI CITIES RMHQ <dxrodgers@bpa.gov>
Sent:Tuesday, December 23, 2025 1:33 PM
To:Ivan Barragan
Cc:Connell,Valorie L (BPA) - TERR-PASCO
Subject:RE: Notice of Application-SEPA2025-036 R-S-20 Zone Changes Emergency CPA
(CPA2025-002)- City of Pasco
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Pasco -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments
unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Ivan,
Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) has had the opportunity to review Preliminary Plat Review Notice
of Application-SEPA2025-036 R-S-20 Zone Changes Emergency CPA (CPA2025-002)- City of Pasco.
In researching our records, we have found that this proposal will not directly impact BPA facilities. BPA
does not have any objections to the approval of this request at this time.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at (360) 624-0566 or BPA
realty specialist Valorie Connell at (509) 544-4746.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this application.
Deborah Rodgers
BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
(CONTR) Actalent
Right-of-Way Agent | Real Property Field Services | TERR/Tri-Cities-RMHQ
dxrodgers@bpa.gov | 360-624-0566
From: Ivan Barragan <barragani@pasco-wa.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2025 12:13 PM
To: Ivan Barragan <barragani@pasco-wa.gov>
Subject: Notice of Application-SEPA2025-036 R-S-20 Zone Changes Emergency CPA (CPA2025-002)- City of Pasco
Good afternoon,
In consideration of the upcoming public hearing, we want to clarify that the public hearing / Notice of
Application sent on November 21, 2025, for CPA2025-002 and the SEPA review being issued now are
separate processes. The public hearing is for the Planning Commission’s consideration of the proposed
amendment, which will then proceed to City Council review at a later date, no sooner than 60 days after
November 14, 2025. The SEPA review, on the other hand, is an administrative process. However,
because both pertain to the same non-project proposal, it is worth noting them together. For the SEPA
review, we are opting for the optional DNS process under WAC 197-11-355, with a 30-day comment
period following the publication date, which is scheduled for November 30, 2025.
Page 132 of 431
2
Attached are the following materials:
· Notice of Public Hearing / Notice of Application (sent November 21, 2025)
· SEPA2025-036 Notice of Application
· SEPA2025-036 checklist
· Resolution 4680 (recently became available)
· Initial packet presented at the Planning Commission workshop on November 20, 2025
Comments on the SEPA review are due by December 30, 2025, at 5:00 PM. All pertinent materials are
available in the SEPA register.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Thank you,
Ivan Barragan | Planner III | (509) 544-4146 | 525 N. 3rd Avenue | Pasco, WA 99301 | barragani@pasco-wa.gov
Notice of Public Disclosure: This e-mail and any response may be public record under Washington State law and subject to inspection and copying by
the public upon request. Accordingly, there can be no expectation of privacy.
From: Ivan Barragan
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2025 12:29 PM
To: Ivan Barragan <barragani@pasco-wa.gov>
Subject: Notice of Application/Notice of Public Hearing Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendments CPA2025-001 and
CPA2025-002
Good afternoon,
Please see the attached Notice of Application/Notice of Public Hearing for two emergency
Comprehensive Plan Amendments, initiated by City Council resolutions on November 17, 2025. The
public hearing is scheduled for December 18, 2025, at 6:30 PM. Please submit any comments by
5:00 PM on December 18, 2025.
Summary of Proposals:
CPA2025-001: Emergency Amendment – Pasco School District 2025 Capital Facilities Plan
The Planning Commission will hold an open record hearing to consider an emergency amendment to the
Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The amendment updates the element to align with
the City’s adopted budget and reflect the Pasco School District’s 2025 Capital Facilities Plan, including
policies related to school impact fees. The amendment has been transmitted to the Washington State
Department of Commerce for the required 60-day review. The Community and Economic Development
Department will process it following standard Comprehensive Plan procedures. The School District’s
plan previously received a SEPA Determination of Non-Significance (DNS).
CPA2025-002: Emergency Amendment – Low Density Residential Land Use (R-S-20 Zone)
The Planning Commission will also consider an emergency amendment addressing a conflict between
current Low Density Residential (LDR) standards and development in the R-S-20 zone, where one-acre
lots can only accommodate two dwelling units, eBectively creating a moratorium on small-lot
development.
The amendment proposes:
· A land use designation of 2–5 dwelling units per acre
Page 133 of 431
3
· Creation of a new R-9 Low Density Residential District with a minimum lot size of 8,700 square
feet
This approach aligns zoning with the Comprehensive Plan, accommodates larger parcels where septic
systems are an option, restores consistency, reflects infrastructure realities, and prepares the City for
future statewide housing obligations.
The City has transmitted the amendment to the Washington State Department of Commerce for the
required 60-day review. A SEPA checklist will be 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.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Thank you,
Ivan Barragan
Planner III
O: 509-544-4146
barragani@pasco-wa.gov | www.pasco-wa.gov
City Hall, 525 N. 3rd Avenue, Pasco, WA 99301
This e-mail and any response to this e-mail may be a public record under Washington State Law and subject to inspection and copying by the public upon
request. Accordingly, there can be no expectation of privacy.
Page 134 of 431
Pa
g
e
1
3
5
o
f
4
3
1
Pa
g
e
1
3
6
o
f
4
3
1
State of Washington
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
South Central Region • Region 3 • 1701 South 24th Avenue, Yakima, WA 98902-5720
Telephone: (509) 575-2740 • Fax: (509) 575-2474
December 1, 2025
Ivan Barragan
Planner III
City of Pasco Planning Division
525 N. 3rd Ave Pasco WA 99301
Subject: City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA2025-002.
Dear Mr. Barragan,
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed Comprehensive Plan
Amendment CPA 2025-002 regarding changes in density to the low-density residential land use
zone, R-S-20. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) generally supports ability
for jurisdictions to allow high densities within the urban environment as it results in less urban
spread and greater overall protection of habitats. WDFW does have a concern with this proposal
as it relates to impacts on shoreline habitat.
There are parcels that are currently zoned with the R-S-20 designation that are either partially or
wholly within the shoreline environment of the Columbia River. WDFW is concerned that this
amendment could increase housing density within the shoreline environment, which would be
both inconsistent with the city’s shoreline master program and protection of functions and values
of the shoreline ecosystem. WDFW recommends a modification to this amendment that either
excludes these shoreline parcels from the proposed amendment or specifies that any new
dwelling units beyond the two currently allowed must be located outside of the shoreline
environment.
If you have questions regarding any of the above comments, please contact me at 509-607-3578
or Scott.Downes@dfw.wa.gov.
Sincerely,
Scott Downes
Regional Land Use Lead
Cc: Troy Maikis, WDFW Area Habitat Biologist
Page 137 of 431
Page 138 of 431
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
City Hall - Council Chambers
525 North Third Avenue
Pasco, Washington
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2025
6:30 PM
Page 1 of 5
CALL TO ORDER
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, Pat Jones, Kim Lehrman, Rob Waites, Jay Hendler, and Jerry
Cochran, a quorum was declared.
Commissioners Excused: Austin Crawford and Dana Crutchfield
Staff Present: CED Director Haylie Matson, Deputy Director Craig Raymond, and Administrative Assistant
II Carmen Patrick
Others Present: Denise Stiffarm, Pasco School Representative
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.
Commissioners Cochran and Lehrman declared they both live in the Riverview area, even though a
vote was not required.
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 Lehrman motioned to approve the Planning Commission meeting minutes of November 18,
2025. Commissioner Jones seconded, and the motion carried unanimously.
OLD BUSINESS
None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
None
WORSHOP
• CPA2025-001 Emergency Comp Plan Amendment Pasco School District #1 Capital Facilities Plan
Adoption
Staff provided an overview of the proposed Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment, clarifying that the
term “emergency” refers to an amendment being processed outside of the City’s normal update cycle and is
not intended to imply any immediate public safety concern. The amendment is necessary due to time-
sensitive items that cannot wait for the full periodic Comprehensive Plan update currently underway.
An emergency amendment is defined as a change to the Comprehensive Plan that arises from circumstances
requiring expeditious action. City Council determined that such an emergency exists and, on June 17, 2025,
Page 139 of 431
Page 2 of 5
adopted a resolution initiating the amendment process in accordance with City Code and RCWs. A 60-day
notice was provided to the Washington State Department of Commerce, and the proposal will come before
the Planning Commission for a public hearing and recommendation to City Council.
The amendment incorporates the Pasco School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s
Comprehensive Plan. The School District adopted the revised plan in March 2025 following an extensive
planning process. The plan includes six primary elements:
• District standards of service
• Inventory of facilities
• Capacity by grade span
• Six-year enrollment forecast
• Facility needs and costs
• Financing plan and calculation of school impact fees
Staff noted that community concerns regarding school overcrowding frequently arise during annexation and
subdivision hearings. However, the School District actively monitors growth trends and plans accordingly
through this Capital Facilities Plan. While Pasco continues to experience significant growth, particularly in
northwest Pasco, enrollment increases have remained within manageable projections, and the District has
constructed multiple new school facilities to address capacity needs.
Following adoption of the updated Capital Facilities Plan, City Council approved Ordinance No. 4774 on
June 15, 2025, revising school impact fees. This included elimination of the single-family dwelling school
impact fee and a reduction of the multi-family fee from $4,525 per unit to $2,595 per unit.
Staff concluded the presentation by introducing Denise Stiffarm, representing the Pasco School District,
who attended the meeting virtually and was available to answer questions from the Planning Commission.
Questions/Comments from Commissioners:
Chair Cochran asked while acknowledging that the elimination of single-family impact fees and the
reduction of multi-family fees appears beneficial, he questioned whether increased zoning density and large
multi-family developments, such as the Broadmoor project, could result in greater overall impacts to
developers. He asked if any analysis had been conducted on this issue and whether feedback had been
received from the development community.
Denise Stiffarm explained that the revised school impact fees are based on updates to the School District’s
Capital Facilities Plan. Prior plans included elementary and high school projects, which carried higher
student generation rates and higher fees. Those projects are now complete and were removed from the
calculation. The current fees are based on a planned new middle school, which generates fewer students and
results in lower impact fees. Staff also noted that the elimination of the single-family fee reflects current
data showing more students are generated from multi-family development, and while multi-family fees were
reduced, they still apply.
• CPA2025-002 Emergency Comp Plan Amendment Residential Density Amendment
Director Matson presented the second Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment addressing a
discrepancy between the RS-20 zoning designation and the City’s residential land use designation. A 2023
Comprehensive Plan amendment allowed 2–5 units per acre in the Riverview area, while the RS-20 zone
still limited development to 2 units per acre, creating a conflict that has impacted development applications.
Staff proposes revising the land use designation for RS-20 properties to 2–5 units per acre and subsequently
renaming the zone to R-9 Low Density Residential, allowing a minimum lot size of approximately 8,700
Page 140 of 431
Page 3 of 5
square feet. This change would correct the inconsistency and allow development to proceed.
Director Matson noted that two units per acre would still allow septic systems, while densities of three units
per acre or greater would require sewer connection, which is currently limited in portions of Riverview. She
stated that the development community supports the proposal due to infrastructure constraints and
development feasibility.
She also previewed upcoming state-mandated middle housing requirements that will require all residential
lots to allow up to six units by next year. Finally, she explained that staff is requesting expedited action due
to the existing code conflict, prior applicant reliance, and staffing delays. The proposal is scheduled for a
public hearing in December, followed by City Council consideration in January.
Questions/Comments from Commissioners
Commissioner Hendler asked whether parking requirements have been coordinated with upcoming middle-
housing mandates, noting that increased density could create significant parking challenges on some lots. He
requested clarification on current parking standards and whether any flexibility is being considered.
Director Matson explained that the State is significantly reducing parking requirements for middle housing,
generally allowing zero to one space per unit regardless of size. While Pasco currently requires two spaces
per single-family home, state law allows one space per unit on lots over 6,000 square feet and zero spaces
on lots under 6,000 square feet. Staff noted these changes may present challenges for communities like
Pasco and stated the City may consider consultant assistance during future middle housing code adoption to
address potential safety and parking impacts.
Commissioners expressed concern that the proposed approach could create future challenges, including
emergency vehicles and garbage trucks and shared initial observations for consideration as the process
moves forward.
Commissioner Jones raised concerns about potential impacts to existing residents, including whether
property owners currently on septic systems could be required to connect to and help fund sewer in the
future. He also expressed concern about how increased density and smaller lots could affect neighborhood
expectations, particularly where existing residents believed adjacent properties would remain undeveloped
or preserve views.
Director Matson stated explained that existing homeowners on septic systems are vested and generally will
not be required to connect to City sewer unless their system fails and sewer is available nearby.
Development in Riverview is limited to two units per acre when septic is used; any development at three
units per acre or more requires sewer connection under Ben Franklin Health District standards.
Staff noted that all existing setback, fire separation, and safety requirements remain in place, and cities may
adopt stricter standards in preparation for future middle-housing mandates. Regarding concerns about views
and new development, staff emphasized that the City has no authority to prevent the State’s upcoming
middle-housing requirements, which will allow increased density on all residential lots. While the City can
adjust local land-use designations, residents should not expect surrounding vacant land to remain
undeveloped, as cities are required by State law to accommodate additional housing.
Commissioner Jones asked about the potential consequences of not complying with state requirements. Staff
responded that failure to comply could result in the State withholding grant funding for City projects.
Commissioner Hendler strong concern about the impacts of increased residential density on traffic, parking,
and established low-density neighborhoods. He stated for the record that he does not support the proposed
change at this time, regardless of state mandates.
Page 141 of 431
Page 4 of 5
Chair Cochran expressed frustration with state mandates and the loss of local control, stating that reliance on
state grant funding limits the City’s ability to oppose state requirements. The Commissioner noted that while
change may require action at the state level, the City must also consider the importance of continued access
to funding for critical infrastructure and public improvements.
Director Matson stated the public hearing will be noticed per City code, and public comments will be shared
with the Commission. While lower density options remain available to support septic use, staff
recommended the proposed 2–5 units per acre range to allow smaller single-family lots, provide flexibility,
and better align with future state housing requirements for the Riverview area.
Commissioner Lehrman asked so point of clarification, at this point in time there's no lots that are currently
being built on that have more than two units per, per lot.
Director Matson explained that any higher-density development occurring in the area has likely resulted
from individual rezones to R-1 or R-4. Properties that remain zoned RS-20 are limited to two units per acre
and cannot currently develop due to the existing code conflict, which has halted new applications in recent
months. Staff emphasized that RS-20 has never allowed more than two units per acre under current
standards.
Commissioner Crawford asked when Ordinance 4663 was, you know, passed in 2023, what were they trying
to accomplish?
Director Matson explained that the 2023 density change was intended to increase residential density
citywide and reduce reliance on septic systems, as a unified sewer system is more efficient to operate and
maintain. However, with new Council members and upcoming state middle-housing requirements that will
mandate additional density regardless of local policy, staff noted that the issue has become largely moot.
Staff stated that maintaining a two-unit minimum would allow continued use of septic in Riverview, but
increasing the range to 2–5 units per acre would provide a more balanced approach for future development
in the RS-20 area.
She outlined that a public hearing is planned for December and emphasized the importance of having a
quorum. Commissioners unable to attend were asked to notify staff in advance so alternate scheduling can
be considered. Staff noted the development community is expecting resolution by year-end and will
include any public feedback received in the staff report.
OTHER BUSINESS
• Director Items
Director Matson outlined plans for a December workshop with the Planning Commission to discuss Pasco’s
economic development priorities and gather input to support the Comprehensive Plan update. Staff also
noted that monthly Planning Commission meetings will be required throughout the update process, with
parallel coordination occurring with City Council.
Director Matson introduced new City Planner II James Bagley to the Commissioners.
She also thanked the Commissioners for the work they do, that they are volunteers and appreciated their
hard work.
ADJOURNMENT
Chair Cochran stated with no other business, I recommend a motion to adjourn.
Page 142 of 431
Page 5 of 5
Commissioner Jones made the motion to adjourn the meeting, it was seconded by Commissioner
Lehrman, and the motion passed unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 7:33 pm.
YouTube link to watch full meeting: City of Pasco Planning Commission November 20, 2025
Respectfully submitted,
Carmen Patrick, Administrative Assistant II
Community & Economic Development Department
Page 143 of 431
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 144 of 431
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 145 of 431
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 146 of 431
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 147 of 431
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 148 of 431
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 149 of 431
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 150 of 431
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 151 of 431
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 152 of 431
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 153 of 431
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 154 of 431
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 155 of 431
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 156 of 431
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 157 of 431
Community Development Department
525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301
P: 509.545.3441
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
Withdrawal Notice
Determination of Non-Significance
Date of Issuance: March 12, 2026
Lead Agency: City of Pasco, Washington
Agency Contact: Haylie Matson
Director, Community & Economic Development
(509) 544-4136
Project Number: SEPA2025-036
Description of Proposal: At the direction of the City Council, the proposal includes a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment to revise the City’s Land Use Map by adding a new Low
Density Residential–Riverview designation, which would allow development at 2–5 dwelling
units per acre on properties currently designated R-S-20. The proposal also includes a rezone
and municipal code amendment to replace the existing R-S-20 zoning designation with a new R-
15 Low Density Residential zoning district.
Location of Proposal: Various locations citywide within Pasco, Washington (99301).
Proponent(s): City of Pasco
C/o Haylie Matson
525 N 3rd Ave
Pasco, WA 99301
The City of Pasco is withdrawing the SEPA Determination of Non-Significance for SEPA2025-036,
issued on January 27, 2026, because three additional parcels—Parcel Nos. 118461031,
118461013, and 118431055—are being added to the proposal. The proposal will be re-noticed,
and a new threshold determination will be issued following the comment period.
Responsible Official: ________________________________________________
Haylie Matson, Community & Economic Development Director
Page 158 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 1 of 15
SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Purpose of checklist
Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your
proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance,
minimization, or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an
environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal.
Instructions for applicants
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please
answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult
with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use “not applicable” or
"does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is
unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and
accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the
decision-making process.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of
time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your
proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to
explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may
be significant adverse impact.
Instructions for lead agencies
Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to
evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse
impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to
make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is
responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals
For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable
parts of sections A and B, plus the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions (Part D). Please completely
answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site"
should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency
may exclude (for non-projects) questions in “Part B: Environmental Elements” that do not contribute
meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal.
SEPA2025-036 R-S-20 Zone Changes Emergency CPA Plus Three Parcels
Page 159 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 2 of 15
A. Background Find help answering background questions
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
2. Name of applicant:
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
4. Date checklist prepared:
5. Agency requesting checklist:
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be
prepared, directly related to this proposal.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
City of Pasco
11/24/2025
City of Pasco/State of Washington
525 N Third Ave509-544-4136Haylie Matson
There are no development plans associated with this request at this time. This is a citywide Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
A non-project Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was completed in September 2020 for the City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan. This FEIS remains relevant and applicable to the current non-project proposal.
See last supplemental page for answer.
City Council approval of the application at a later date. SEPA Determination. Dept. of Commerce approval.
Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Low Density Residential designation, specifically addressing changes to the R-S-20 Zone and three parcels
The Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment was submitted to the Washington State Department of Commerce for review on November 14, 2025. At this time, no specific properties are affected; the amendment applies citywide with the inclusion of three parcels.
Page 160 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 3 of 15
11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the
size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you
to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on
this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information
on project description.)
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the
precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section,
township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the
range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and
topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by
the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any
permit applications related to this checklist.
See last supplemental page for answer.
Throughout all R-S-20 zoned lots including Parcels 118431055 zoned R-1, 118461013 zoned R-1 and 118461031 zoned R-S-12 and Pasco Municial Code text.
Page 161 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 4 of 15
B. Environmental Elements
1.Earth Find help answering earth questions
a.General description of the site:
Circle or highlight one: Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other:
b.What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
c.What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat,
muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them, and note any agricultural
land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of
these soils.
d.Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describe.
e.Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any
filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill.
f.Could erosion occur because of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
g.About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
h.Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any.
City of Pasco R-S-20 zoned lots plus the three parcels stated in #12.
No specific soils have been identified at this time. It would be prudent to address soil-related considerations during future, site-specific project actions.
Although the City is generally flat, it is difficult to provide a specific answer, as this is a citywide, non-project proposal.
This is a citywide, non-project proposal and is not specific to any individual site or action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Existing City development regulations currently govern and control erosion during construction activities.
Page 162 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 5 of 15
2. Air Find help answering air questions
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation,
and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate
quantities if known.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any.
3. Water Find help answering water questions
a. Surface Water: Find help answering surface water questions
1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round
and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names.
If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If
yes, please describe and attach available plans.
3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed
from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate
the source of fill material.
4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give a general description,
purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan.
Not applicable-non-project action.
No plans are proposed at this time, as this is a City-wide Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Specific projects will need to address this issue when they are developed.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Some lots affected by this amendment may be located near the river; however, as this is a non-project action, any specific project proposals will need to address this issue at the time of development.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Page 163 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 6 of 15
6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so,
describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
b. Ground Water: Find help answering ground water questions
1. Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a
general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the
well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give a general description, purpose, and
approximate quantities if known.
2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources,
if any (domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals…; agricultural; etc.).
Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be
served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
c. Water Runoff (including stormwater):
a) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any
(include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If
so, describe.
b) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
c) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so,
describe.
d) Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage
pattern impacts, if any.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Page 164 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 7 of 15
4. Plants Find help answering plants questions
a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site:
☐ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
☐ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
☐ shrubs
☐ grass
☐ pasture
☐ crop or grain
☐ orchards, vineyards, or other permanent crops.
☐ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
☐ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
☐ other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation
on the site, if any.
e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site.
5. Animals Find help answering animal questions
a. List any birds and other animals that have been observed on or near the site or are known to be
on or near the site.
Examples include:
• Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
• Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
• Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any.
e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Page 165 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 8 of 15
6. Energy and Natural Resources Find help answering energy and natural resource questions
1. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the
completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing,
etc.
2. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally
describe.
3. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other
proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any.
7. Environmental Health Find help with answering environmental health questions
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and
explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur because of this proposal? If so, describe.
1. Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses.
2. Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development
and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines
located within the project area and in the vicinity.
3. Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced
during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating
life of the project.
4. Describe special emergency services that might be required.
5. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Page 166 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 9 of 15
b. Noise
1.What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:
traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
2.What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term
or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours
noise would come from the site)?
3.Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any.
8.Land and Shoreline Use Find help answering land and shoreline use questions
a.What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land
uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe.
b.Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How
much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other
uses because of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many
acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use?
1.Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal
business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling,
and harvesting? If so, how?
c.Describe any structures on the site.
d.Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
e.What is the current zoning classification of the site?
f.What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
R-S-20 and those three additional parcels mentioned in question 12 of page 3 zoned R-1 and R-S-12.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Low Density Residential
This is a City-wide amendment affecting lots currently zoned R-S-20 and those three additional lots added.The nature of this proposal is non-project.
R-S-20 and those three additional.
Page 167 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 10 of 15
g.If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
h.Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so,
specify.
i.Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
j.Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
k.Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any.
l.Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land
uses and plans, if any.
m.Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term
commercial significance, if any.
9.Housing Find help answering housing questions
a.Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-
income housing.
b.Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Page 168 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 11 of 15
10.Aesthetics Find help answering aesthetics questions
a.What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is
the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
b.What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any.
11.Light and Glare Find help answering light and glare questions
a.What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur?
b.Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
c.What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
d.Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any.
12.Recreation Find help answering recreation questions
a.What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
b.Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities
to be provided by the project or applicant, if any.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Page 169 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 12 of 15
13.Historic and Cultural Preservation Find help answering historic and cultural preservation
questions
a.Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old
listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers? If so, specifically
describe.
b.Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This
may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas
of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the
site to identify such resources.
c.Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on
or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of
archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc.
d.Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to
resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required.
14.Transportation Find help with answering transportation questions
a.Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe
proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
b.Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If
not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop?
c.Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle,
or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate
whether public or private).
d.Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe.
e.How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be
trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models
were used to make these estimates?
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
According to DAHP’s statewide predictive model, most of the City of Pasco has a high to very high probability of containing cultural resources. Since this proposal is non-project in nature, any specific development projects will need to address these resources at the time they are proposed.
Page 170 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 13 of 15
f.Will the proposal interfere with, affect, or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest
products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe.
g.Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any.
15. Public Services Find help answering public service questions
a.Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection,
police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
b.Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
16. Utilities Find help answering utilities questions
a.Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service,
telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other:
b.Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service,
and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which
might be needed.
C. Signature Find help about who should sign
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead
agency is relying on them to make its decision.
X
Type name of signee: Click or tap here to enter text.
Position and agency/organization: Click or tap here to enter text.
Date submitted: Click or tap to enter a date.
Community & Economic Development Department
This application was reviewed by the Planning Division of the Community & Economic
Development Department. Any comments or changes made by the Department are entered in the body of the
checklist and contain initials of the reviewer.
Signature: _______________________________________________________________________
Name of signee: __________________________________________________
Position: ___________________________________
Date Reviewed: _____________
____________________
+D\OLH 0DWVRQ
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Not applicable-non-project action.
Ivan Barragan
Ivan Barragan
Planner III City of Pasco
03/12/2026
03/12/2026
CED Director
Page 171 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 14 of 15
D. Supplemental sheet for nonproject actions Find help for the nonproject actions
worksheet
IT IS NOT REQUIRED to use this section for project actions. Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction
with the list of the elements of the environment.
When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of
activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate
than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms.
1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; pro-
duction, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise?
• Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are:
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
• Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are:
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
• Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or
areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection, such as parks,
wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or
cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
• Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it
would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?
• Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
See answers below question number 7, for answers to questions 1 through 7.
Page 172 of 431
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 15 of 15
6.How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public
services and utilities?
•Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
7.Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or
requirements for the protection of the environment.
Question 6, page 2: This proposal is non-project in nature. The anticipated timeline for this emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment included Planning Commission public hearings held on December 18, 2025, and January 15, 2026. Final action by the City Council will occur at a later date—no sooner than 60 days after November 14, 2025, which is when the Washington State Department of Commerce was notified. The City Council public hearing is anticipated for April 20, 2026.
Question 11 from page - This non-project proposal is an emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment initiated by City Council on November 1, 2025. The amendment addresses a conflict created by 0rdinance No. 466 adopted April 1, 202
, which increased allowable densities in the -ow Density 3esidential designation from 2r5 to r6 dwelling units per acre and reRuired all new development to meet the minimum density standards in P.C 25.215.015. This created an inconsistency for the 3-S-20 [one, which is classified as -ow Density 3esidential but reRuires a minimum lot si[e of 20,000 sRuare feet.To resolve this, the Planning Division was directed to initiate an amendment establishing a land-use designation of 2r5 dwelling units per acre. To align [oning with this designation, staff proposes replacing the 3-S-20 [one with a new 3-15 -ow Density 3esidential District, which would have a minimum lot si[e of 14,520 sRuare feet. This change also applies to the additional parcels listed in Question 12 on page .This amendment restores consistency between land use and [oning, supports the full permitted density range, maintains compatibility with areas served by septic systems, and positions the City to better meet future statewide housing reRuirements.
1. This proposal is a non-project Comprehensive Plan Amendment and does not authorize anyspecific development, construction, or physical site activity. As such, it does not directly result indischarges to water, emissions to air, noise generation, or the production, storage, or release oftoxic or hazardous substances.
Any future development that may occur under the revised land use designation or new zoning district would be reviewed through separate project-level permitting processes. At that time, all environmental impacts—including stormwater, air emissions, noise, and hazardous materials—would be evaluated in accordance with applicable City, state, and federal regulations. Therefore, no direct environmental impacts are anticipated as part of this non-project action.
Page 173 of 431
2. This is a non-project, policy-level amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan and does not authorize any specific development or construction activity. As such, the proposal would not directly result in increased discharges to water, air emissions, noise generation, or the release oftoxic or hazardous substances.
Any future site-specific development enabled by subsequent zoning or permit actions would be subject to separate environmental review, including evaluation of potential impacts to water, air quality, noise, and hazardous materials. Appropriate mitigation would be required at the time individual development proposals are submitted.
3. The amendment itself does not authorize construction and therefore would not directly consume or deplete energy or natural resources.
Any potential increase in development capacity resulting from future zoning changes would be evaluated during project-level permitting, at which time energy use, resource consumption, and required mitigation measures would be addressed through applicable codes and SEPA review.
4. Because this is a non-project Comprehensive Plan Amendment, it does not authorize any specific development, construction, or physical changes to the environment. As a policy-level action, the amendment only adjusts the land use designation for Low Density Residential areas and proposes replacing the R-S-20 zone with a new R-15 Low Density Residential District. This includes those additional lots mentioned in question 12 of page 3.
The proposal does not directly affect environmentally sensitive areas, parks, critical areas, wildlifehabitat, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmland. Any future site-specific development proposals would be reviewed under existing local, state, and federal regulations, including the City’s critical areas ordinance, SEPA requirements, and applicable permitting processes. At that time, impacts to environmentally sensitive areas would be evaluated and mitigation applied as necessary.
5. Because this is a non-project legislative amendment, it will not directly change or authorize any specific land or shoreline use. The proposal adjusts the Low Density Residential land use designation to 2–5 units per acre and replaces the R-S-20 zoning designation with a new R-15 Low Density Residential District to restore consistency between the Comprehensive Plan and zoning code including the three additional lots. These changes do not expand urban growth areas, introduce new shoreline designations, or authorize development inconsistent with the City's adopted plans.
Any future site-specific development would still be required to comply with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, zoning code, shoreline regulations (if applicable), critical areas ordinance, and all permitting requirements. Therefore, the proposal is not expected to allow or encourage land or shoreline uses that are incompatible with existing plans.
Page 174 of 431
6. Because this is a non-project policy amendment, it does not authorize any specific development and would not directly increase demands on transportation systems, utilities, or public services. The amendment revises the land use designation for areas currently zoned R-S-20 including the three additional lots and establishes a framework for the eventual creation of a new R-15 Low Density Residential District.
Any future increase in demand for transportation, water, sewer, stormwater, police, fire, or other municipal services would depend on separate, site-specific development proposals, each of which would undergo its own permit review and SEPA evaluation.
The amendment itself is not expected to generate immediate or measurable increases in service or utility demands, and any future development resulting from zoning changes would be planned and reviewed in coordination with adopted Comprehensive Plan policies, the Capital Facilities Plan, and available infrastructure capacity.
7. The proposed amendment is a non-project action that adjusts Comprehensive Plan policy for Low Density Residential areas and replaces the R-S-20 zone including the three additional lots with a new R-15 Low Density Residential District. Because it does not authorize any specific development, it does not directly conflict with local, state, or federal environmental protection requirements. Any future development occurring under the amended land use designation andzoning would remain subject to all applicable regulations, including the City’s development standards, critical areas ordinance, stormwater requirements, and SEPA review at the project level.
While House Bill 1110 (Middle Housing) will be implemented by the City of Pasco at a later date, this amendment is a temporary policy and zoning correction intended solely to address density inconsistencies in the R-S-20 zone including those three additional lots until HB 1110 is fully adopted.
Page 175 of 431
Community Development Department
525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301
P: 509.545.3441
NOTICE OF APPLICATION/SEPA DETERMINATION
(Optional DNS Process)
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.
SEPA Comment Period Deadline: April 1, 2026
Proposal: 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 increased allowable gross densities in Low
Density Residential (LDR) areas from 2–5 to 3–6 dwelling units per acre and required all new development to meet
the minimum density standards in PMC 25.215.015. In the R-S-20 zone, the minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet
limits development to approximately two dwelling units per acre, creating a conflict with the updated density
requirements and preventing small-lot subdivision.
To address this issue, the Planning Division has initiated an emergency Comprehensive Plan amendment. City Council
adopted a resolution initiating this amendment on November 17, 2025, and the proposal was presented to the
Planning Commission as a workshop on November 20, 2025. The amendment establishes a land-use designation of
2–5 dwelling units per acre to guide low-density housing, implemented at the parcel level through zoning. Staff
proposes replacing the R-S-20 zone with a new R-15 Low Density Residential District, which would have a minimum
lot size of 14,520 square feet. This change restores consistency between land use and zoning and maintains
compatibility with areas where septic systems may be used.
In addition to the R-S-20 area, Parcels 118431055 and 118461013 (zoned R-1) and Parcel 118461031 (zoned R-S-12)
are included in this amendment for consistency within the broader planning area.
The proposed emergency amendment was transmitted to the Washington State Department of Commerce for the
required 60-day agency review.
Public Comment Period: Written comments must be submitted to the Community Development Department by
5:00 p.m. on April 1, 2026. Only comments received by the referenced date will be included in the SEPA record. If
you have questions on the proposal, contact the Planning Division at (509) 544-4146 or via e-mail to:
barragani@pasco-wa.gov.
Open Record Hearing: No public hearing is required for the SEPA review. The SEPA determination will be issued
administratively by the City’s SEPA Administrator. The City Council will hold a public hearing on the emergency
Comprehensive Plan Amendment on April 20, 2026, with final action to occur following that hearing and no sooner
than 60 days after November 14, 2025, in accordance with the Pasco Municipal Code.
Determination of Completeness: The application has been declared complete for the purpose of processing.
Environmental Documents and/or Studies Applicable to this Application: Environmental Determination No.
SEPA2025-036 has been assigned to this proposal. The SEPA comment period will end April 1, 2026. It is probable
that a Determination of Non-Significance or Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance will be issued for this
proposal (WAC 197.11.355 optional DNS process). This may be the only opportunity to comment on the
environmental impacts of this proposal or to appeal any State Environmental Policy Act related decisions.
Page 176 of 431
Community Development Department
525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301
P: 509.545.3441
Preliminary Determination of Regulations Used for Non-Project Mitigation: To evaluate the impacts of the
proposed non-project, the following may be used for mitigation, consistency, and the development of findings and
conclusions:
�� Title 12 (Streets and Sidewalks), Title 16 (Buildings and Construction), Title 21 (Subdivision), Title 25
(Zoning), Title 28 (Critical Areas) regulations of the Pasco Municipal Code, and the land use policies
contained in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan;
�� Regulations of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Department of
Ecology, Washington State Department of Natural Resources and Washington State Department of
Archaeology and Historic Preservation;
�� Other required agency evaluations, approvals, permits, and mitigations as necessary.
Estimated Date of the Decision: A DNS or MDNS will be issued following the close of the comment period on April
1, 2026.
To receive notification of the threshold determination and any other information concerning this action, contact the
Pasco Planning Division at barragani@pasco-wa.gov or at the address and telephone number listed below.
Phone: 509-544-4146
Appeals:
You may appeal the subsequent threshold determination by submitting a written appeal to one of the following
addresses:
Email: barragani@pasco-wa.gov
Physical Address: City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department 525 N. 3rd Avenue, First Floor
Pasco, WA 99301
Mailing Address: 525 N 3rd Ave Pasco, WA 99301
Appeals must be submitted within 14 days of issuance of the threshold determination. The appeal must be in writing,
include a concise statement identifying the matter being appealed, and provide the basic rationale for the appeal. A
filing fee is required in accordance with the City’s Fee Resolution.
Please note: Failure to file a timely and complete appeal shall constitute a waiver of all rights to an administrative
appeal under City Code.
All appeals should be directed to: Haylie Matson, CED Director
All comments should be directed to: Ivan Barragan, Planner III
Prepared: March 12, 2026
By: Ivan Barragan
Page 177 of 431
C-2
R-S-12
R-2
R-S-1/PUD
C-1
R-15
R-3/PUD
I-1
MU
I-2
BP
R-1-A2
O
C-3
R-3
C-R
RP
R-1/PUD
R-1
R-S-1
R-1-A
R-T
R-4
I-3
Zoning
²0 1 2
Miles
Legend
Zoning
BP
C-1
C-2
C-3
C-R
I-1
I-2
I-3
MU
O
R-1
R-1-A
R-1-A2
R-1/PUD
R-15
R-2
R-3
R-3/PUD
R-4
R-S-1
R-S-1/PUD
R-S-12
R-T
RP
3/6/2026
PLOT DATE
Pa
g
e
1
7
8
o
f
4
3
1
N
R
o
ad
7
6
N
Road
76
N
Ro
a
d
7
6
118431180
118432134
118461031
118461013
118431055 118482072
118462080
118462094
118462106
118461050 118461051 118461052 118461053 118461054 118461055
R-1
R-S-12
R-S-20
R-S-12
R-S-12
Current Zoning
Parcel #118461031, 118461013, & 118431055
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/6/2026DATE
¯
SITE LOCATION
Page 179 of 431
N
R
o
ad
7
6
N
Road
76
N
Ro
a
d
7
6
118431180
118432134
118461031
118461013
118431055 118482072
118462080
118462094
118462106
118461050 118461051 118461052 118461053 118461054 118461055
R-S-12
R-15
Proposed Zoning
Parcel #118461031, 118461013, & 118431055
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/6/2026DATE
¯
SITE LOCATION
Page 180 of 431
Community Development Department
525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301
P: 509.545.3441
City of Pasco
NOTICE OF OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARING FOR CODE AMENDMENT & 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 a proposed emergency Comprehensive Plan amendment and related code
amendment. The Pasco City Council will hold an open record public hearing to receive public comment on the
proposed amendments at 7:00 p.m. on April 20, 2026, in the Council Chambers at Pasco City Hall, 525 N. 3rd
Avenue, Pasco, Washington (please use the east side parking lot entrance). Following the public hearing, the City
Council is expected to consider final action on the proposed amendments by ordinance.
Proposed Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendment: CPA2025-002 / CA2025-003 – Emergency Comprehensive
Plan Amendment and R-S-20 Zone Changes with Three Additional Parcels: On April 17, 2023, the City adopted
Ordinance No. 4663, which amended Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 25.215.015 and the Comprehensive Plan Land
Use Density Table (Table LU-1). This ordinance increased allowable densities in Low Density Residential (LDR) areas
from 2–5 dwelling units per acre to 3–6 dwelling units per acre and required new development to meet updated
minimum density standards.
Within the R-S-20 zoning district, the minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet limits development to approximately
two dwelling units per acre, which conflicts with the updated Comprehensive Plan density requirements and
restricts the ability to subdivide property into smaller lots.
To address this inconsistency, the City’s Planning Division initiated an emergency Comprehensive Plan amendment.
The City Council adopted a resolution initiating the amendment on November 17, 2025. The proposal was presented
to the Planning Commission as a workshop on November 20, 2025, followed by public hearings on December 18,
2025, and January 15, 2026.
The proposed amendment would establish a Comprehensive Plan land use designation of 2–5 dwelling units per
acre, labeled Low Density Residential – Riverview, to guide low-density housing development in the area. This
designation would be implemented at the parcel level through zoning.
To align zoning with the Comprehensive Plan, staff proposes replacing the R-S-20 zoning district with a new R-15
Low Density Residential District. The proposed district would allow a minimum lot size of 14,520 square feet and a
maximum lot size of 21,780 square feet, supporting a density of approximately 2–3 dwelling units per acre, which
is consistent with the proposed 2–5 dwelling units per acre land use designation. This change would restore
Page 181 of 431
consistency between land use policy and zoning regulations while maintaining compatibility with areas where septic
systems may be used.
In addition to properties currently zoned R-S-20, the following parcels are included in the amendment area to
maintain consistency within the broader planning area:
Parcel 118431055 (zoned R-1)
Parcel 118461013 (zoned R-1)
Parcel 118461031 (zoned R-S-12)
The proposed emergency amendment was transmitted on November 14, 2025 to the Washington State Department
of Commerce for the required 60-day agency review.
Environmental review for this proposal is being conducted under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) using
the Optional Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) process under WAC 197-11-355. An administrative SEPA
threshold determination will be issued at least 15 days prior to the public hearing.
For more information please contact: 509-544-4146 / barragani@pasco-wa.gov
Public Comment Period:
Written comments: Submit via email to barragani@pasco-wa.gov, by mail to 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301, or in
person at City Hall. Comments will be accepted from March 23, 2026, through April 16, 2026, at 5:00 PM. All
written comments will be included in the City Council’s meeting packet.
Verbal comments: Members of the public may provide comments during the City Council meeting. Verbal
comments may also be submitted virtually by filling out a form on the City’s website: www.pasco-
wa.gov/publiccomment. Requests to comment remotely must be received by 4:00 p.m. on April 20, 2026.
Determination of Completeness: The application has been declared complete for the purpose of processing.
Estimated Date of the Decision: The City Council is anticipated to take action on the proposed emergency
comprehensive plan amendment and code amendment on April 20, 2026.
For questions about the proposal, please contact the Planning Division at (509) 544-4146 or via email at
barragani@pasco-wa.gov or go to the City of Pasco website at: www.Pasco-WA.gov and click on “Public Notices.”
Page 182 of 431
N
R
o
ad
7
6
N
Road
76
N
Ro
a
d
7
6
118431180
118432134
118461031
118461013
118431055 118482072
118462080
118462094
118462106
118461050 118461051 118461052 118461053 118461054 118461055
R-1
R-S-12
R-S-20
R-S-12
R-S-12
Current Zoning
Parcel #118461031, 118461013, & 118431055
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/6/2026DATE
¯
SITE LOCATION
Page 183 of 431
N
R
o
ad
7
6
N
Road
76
N
Ro
a
d
7
6
118431180
118432134
118461031
118461013
118431055 118482072
118462080
118462094
118462106
118461050 118461051 118461052 118461053 118461054 118461055
R-S-12
R-15
Proposed Zoning
Parcel #118461031, 118461013, & 118431055
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/6/2026DATE
¯
SITE LOCATION
Page 184 of 431
Current Zoning
Parcel #118461031, 118461013, & 118431055
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/30/2026DATE
¯
SITE LOCATION
Page 185 of 431
Public Hearing Emergency
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map
Amendment (CPA 2025-002) –Low
Density Residential Land Use Changes,
and the R-S-20 Rezone with Associated
Text Amendments (CA2025-006 &
Z2025-011)
April 20, 2026
Pasco City Council
Pa
g
e
1
8
6
o
f
4
3
1
HISTORY
•2023:Ordinance No. 4663 amended Low Density Residential to 3–6 du/ac, creating an unintended
conflict with R-S-20 zoning standards
•2025:City Council briefed and directed staff to resolve the inconsistency
Planning Commission Process:
•Nov. 20, 2025:Workshop
•Dec. 18, 2025:Public hearing; revisions requested
•Jan. 15, 2026:Second public hearing and recommendation
City Council:
•February 23 and March 2, 2026: Workshop and Regular meetings
•Request to add three parcels to the zoning and land use change
•Withdrawal of Original SEPA
•NEW: SEPA Notice, Notice of Application, Public Hearing Notice.
•Public Hearing Scheduled for April 20, 2026
Pa
g
e
1
8
7
o
f
4
3
1
HISTORY
Recommendation to Council:
•Approve CPA 2025-002 establishing Low Density Residential–Riverview at 2–5 du/ac*
•Replace R-S-20 with R-15 Low Density Residential*
•Approve associated zoning and Comprehensive Plan text amendments (incl. PMC 21.20)
*for areas currently zoned R-S-20 and newly added parcels
Pa
g
e
1
8
8
o
f
4
3
1
KEY CHANGES
1.Comprehensive Plan Amendment –Emergency
2.Zoning Map change/Rezone
3.Pasco Municipal Code changes
Pa
g
e
1
8
9
o
f
4
3
1
KEY CHANGES
Pa
g
e
1
9
0
o
f
4
3
1
Existing → Proposed Land Use:
3-6 units/acre → 2-5 units/acre
Existing → Proposed Zoning:
R-S-20 (2 units/acre) → R-15 (2-3 units/acre)
PLUS, NEWLY ADDED PARCELS
Pa
g
e
1
9
1
o
f
4
3
1
OTHER
1.Public Comments
2.Periodic Update/Municipal Code Changes
3.Upcoming – standards for sidewalks and curbs
Pa
g
e
1
9
2
o
f
4
3
1
Questions?
Pa
g
e
1
9
3
o
f
4
3
1
Pa
g
e
1
9
4
o
f
4
3
1
Pa
g
e
1
9
5
o
f
4
3
1
Pa
g
e
1
9
6
o
f
4
3
1
Pa
g
e
1
9
7
o
f
4
3
1
Community Development Department
525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301
P: 509.545.3441
SEPA DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE
(Optional DNS Process)
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.
Issuance Date: April 3, 2026
Lead Agency: City of Pasco
Project Name: R-S-20 Zone Changes Emergency CPA Plus Three Parcels
Project Number: SEPA2025-036
Applicant/Proponent: City of Pasco
C/o Haylie Matson
525 N 3rd Ave
Pasco, WA 99301
Proposal Description: The proposal consists of an emergency Comprehensive Plan amendment
and associated zoning changes to address inconsistencies between adopted density standards
and existing zoning regulations.
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) to increase allowable gross
densities in Low Density Residential (LDR) areas from 2–5 to 3–6 dwelling units per acre and to
require minimum density standards for new development. Existing zoning in certain areas,
including the R-S-20 district, is not consistent with these updated density requirements due to
larger minimum lot sizes that limit achievable density.
To address this inconsistency, the proposal includes:
• Establishing a Comprehensive Plan land use designation of 2–5 dwelling units per acre
for applicable low-density residential areas;
• Replacing the existing R-S-20 zoning district with a new R-15 Low Density Residential
district, which would allow approximately 2–3 dwelling units per acre, with a minimum
lot size of 14,520 square feet and a maximum lot size of one-half acre; and
• Applying the amendment to additional parcels (Franklin County Assessor’s Parcel Nos.
118431055, 118461013, and 118461031) to maintain consistency within the broader
planning area.
Page 198 of 431
The proposal is intended to better align zoning regulations with Comprehensive Plan density
standards while maintaining compatibility with areas that may require septic systems.
The proposed amendment has been transmitted to the Washington State Department of
Commerce for the required 60-day review.
Proposal Location: The proposed amendment applies to properties within the City of Pasco
currently zoned R-S-20 and includes additional parcels identified as Franklin County Assessor’s
Parcel Nos. 118431055, 118461013, and 118461031.
Lead Agency: The City of Pasco, acting as lead agency for this proposal, has determined that the
proposal will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This
Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) is issued under the optional DNS process in WAC 197-
11-355, and no further comment period will be provided. This decision is based on review of
the completed environmental checklist, consultation with legal counsel, and consideration of
other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public upon
request.
Appeals: You may appeal the threshold determination by submitting a written appeal to
one of the following addresses:
Email: barragani@pasco-wa.gov
Physical Address: City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department 525
N. 3rd Avenue, First Floor Pasco, WA 99301
Mailing Address: 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301
Appeals must be submitted within 14 days of issuance of the threshold determination.
The appeal must be in writing, include a concise statement identifying the matter being
appealed, and provide the basic rationale for the appeal. A filing fee is required in
accordance with the City’s Fee Resolution.
Please note: Failure to file a timely and complete appeal shall constitute a waiver of all
rights to an administrative appeal under City Code.
All appeals should be directed to: Haylie Matson, CED Director
Responsible Official: Haylie Matson
Position/Title: Community and Economic Development Director
Phone (509) 544-4136
Address: 525 N. 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301
Responsible Official: ________________________________________________
Haylie Matson, Community & Economic Development Director
Page 199 of 431
1
Haylie Matson
From:Ivan Barragan <barragani@pasco-wa.gov>
Sent:Tuesday, March 31, 2026 9:32 AM
To:Teresa Nastri
Subject:RE: Rd 76 SEPA Determination
Good morning,
I apologize for any confusion this may have caused, particularly regarding concerns about increased
density. This proposal does not increase density; it is currently proposing approximately 2–3 dwelling
units per acre, compared to the previously allowed 3–6 dwelling units per acre.
I hope this helps clarify and alleviate any concerns. Please feel free to reach out if you have any
questions.
Thank you,
Ivan Barragan | Planner III | (509) 544-4146 | 525 N. 3rd Avenue | Pasco, WA 99301 | barragani@pasco-wa.gov
Notice of Public Disclosure: This e-mail and any response may be public record under Washington State law and subject to inspection and copying by
the public upon request. Accordingly, there can be no expectation of privacy.
From: Teresa Nastri <teresa.nastri@yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2026 8:06 PM
To: Ivan Barragan <barragani@pasco-wa.gov>
Subject: Rd 76 SEPA Determination
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Pasco -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments
unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Hi Mr. Barragan,
I am a resident off of road 76 in Pasco and I would like to voice my concerns. I received a letter of
"SEPA" determination and a code amendment. I am highly concerned about increasing the number
of homes being built in the zones along road 76. Currently the road is quite narrow and is full of holes
and crumbling asphalt. Many a time I have had near misses with oncoming cars due to the
narrowness of the road. The infrastructure of Road 76 as it is does not support the addition of high
density housing.
Sincerely,
Teresa Nastri
7505 Ter Ray Ct.
Pasco, WA 99301
509 531 7704
You don't often get email from teresa.nastri@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important
Page 200 of 431
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council March 27, 2026
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular
Meeting: 4/20/26
FROM: Haylie Matson, Director
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 4829 - Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment-
School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
Ordinance
Powerpoint
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No.4829, adopting the Pasco School
District No. 1 2025 Update to the Capital Facilities Plan by reference and
incorporating such into the City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan by addendum
and further authorize publication by summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
The Ordinance informs and supports school impact fees as established by
Ordinance 4774, adopted by Council on June 16, 2025. School impact fees are
collected by the City when building permits are issued. Each month, city staff
transmits any school impact fees collected that month to the School District,
therefore having no fiscal impact to the Cities budget.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Background:
The capital the with consistent must Plan Comprehensive City’s remain
planning efforts of local service providers, including the Pasco School District.
The Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan is required to be
maintained City’s and periodically updated to ensure alignment with the
adopted budget and to accurately reflect planned improvements for public
facilities, including schools.
Pasco School District No. 1 (PSD) recently adopted an updated Capital
Page 201 of 431
Facilities Plan that is intended to accomplish a number of things. The plan
identifies District Capital Facility accomplishments, student enrollment trends,
community growth projections and financial needs for future capital projects.
Until March of 2025, the most recent adoption of an amended plan was in
2022.
Impact (other than fiscal):
The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan allows for the continued collection
of school district impact fees that periodically are adjusted due to emerging
trends project and budgets district capital growth, community in school
demands.
V. DISCUSSION:
Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130, comprehensive plans and their implementing
development regulations must be reviewed and, if necessary, amended to
maintain internal consistency and alignment with capital facility planning and
financing. Similarly, PMC 25.215 establishes the procedures and criteria for
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, including provisions for emergency
amendments necessary to ensure consistency with adopted capital facility
programs and ordinances. Identifying school facilities as necessary to support
development is a prerequisite for the City’s continued imposition of school
impact fees as a funding mechanism for the Pasco School District.
Without this identification, the City cannot legally collect these fees. Through
Ordinance No. 4774, adopted on June 16, 2025, the City previously updated
school impact fees to reflect the PSD’s most recent Capital Facilities Plan. This
amendment ensures that the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive
Plan remains consistent with both state law and the City’s adopted ordinances.
General Approval Criteria:
Per Pasco Municipal Code 25.215.020(8)(c), The City may approve
Comprehensive Plan amendments if it finds that:
(i) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public
health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment;
(ii) The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter
36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan
not affected by the amendment;
(iii) The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or
(iv) The deficiency the in identified amendment addresses proposed an
Comprehensive Plan.
In addition, per Pasco Municipal Code 25.215.020(9) The City must also
consider Comprehensive the following factors prior to approving Plan
Page 202 of 431
amendments:
(a) The effect upon the physical environment;
(b) The effect on open space and natural features including, but not limited to,
topography, streams, rivers, and lakes;
(c) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding
neighborhoods;
(d) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities, including utilities,
roads, public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools;
(e) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type
and density and the demand for such land;
(f) The current and projected project density in the area; and
(g) The effect, if any, upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan.
Below is an analysis of these criteria:
1.Does the proposed amendment bear a substantial relationship to the
public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment?
The PSD Capital Facilities Plan is intended to directly support the health, safety
and welfare of the community through building the necessary infrastructure
necessary to support the District’s standard of service.
2.Is the proposed amendment consistent with the requirements of the
Washington State Growth Management Act and to the affected portion(s)
of the adopted Pasco Comprehensive Plan?
Yes. The adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is intended to
maintain timely updates that reflect emerging trends and maintaining
consistency across various PSD and City plans and goals.
3.Does the proposed amendment correct a mapping error?
The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error.
4.Does the proposed amendment address a deficiency in the
Comprehensive Plan?
The proposed amendment is intended to address new PSD Capital Facility
needs and financing requirements and to ensure that City Ordinances are
supported by the Comprehensive Plan.
5.What are the effects on the physical environment, including open space
and natural features?
This is a non-projection proposal. Effects will be determined on a project
specific basis if/when plans are brought forward for necessary permits and
approvals.
6.What is the compatibility and impact on adjacent land uses and
Page 203 of 431
surrounding neighborhoods?
This is a non-projection proposal. Effects will be determined on a project
specific basis if/when plans are brought forward for necessary permits and
approvals.
7.What are the impacts on public facilities, and utilities, transportation
system, parks, recreation, and public schools?
PSD Capital Facilities Plan is intended to identify “the District’s standard of
service, an inventory of facilities, capacity by grade span, a six year enrollment
forecast, facility needs and costs, a finance plan and calculation of the school
impact fees.”
8.What is the effect on other components of the adopted Comprehensive
Plan?
The proposed amendment will not adversely impact utility or public service
plans.
Recommendation:
Based on analysis of the review criteria above, staff recommends approval of
this proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, adoption of the Pasco School
District No. 1 2025 Capital Facilities Plan Update.
Constraints (time or other consideration):
Approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is necessary in order to
continue to charge and collect the school impact fees as amended by
Ordinance 4774.
Next Steps:
Upon approval, staff will notify Washington State Department of Commerce as
required.
Alternatives:
The City Council may elect to reject the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and
direct staff to coordinate with Pasco School District No. 1 how best to facilitate
enacting the School District's Capital Facilities Plan.
Page 204 of 431
Ordinance - PSD No. 1 Update to Capital Facilities Plan - 1
ORDINANCE NO. ____
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,
ADOPTING THE PASCO SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1 2025 UPDATE TO THE
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN BY REFERENCE AND INCORPORATING
SUCH INTO THE CITY OF PASCO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY
ADDENDUM.
WHEREAS, Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130, comprehensive plans and their implementing
development regulations must be reviewed and, if necessary, amended to maintain internal
consistency and alignment with capital facility planning and financing.; and
WHEREAS, capital facilities must be identified as necessary to support development
when the City imposes school impact fees as a funding strategy for the Pasco School District; and
WHEREAS, on March 25th, 2025, the Pasco School District adopted its 2025 Capital
Facilities Plan; and
WHEREAS, emergency amendments may be reviewed and acted upon outside the annual
amendment review cycle; and.
WHEREAS, such amendments shall be initiated by resolution approved by a vote of the
Council upon a finding that a situation exists that necessitates expeditious action to preserve the
health, safety or welfare of the public, or to support the social, economic or environmental well-
being of the City; and
WHEREAS, on November 17, 2025, The Pasco City Council ADOPTED Resolution 4679
authorizing the initiation of an emergency amendment to the City Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2025, the Pasco Planning Commission held a public
hearing to receive testimony regarding said Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2025, the Pasco Planning Commission did move and
approve a motion to recommend approval of said Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Pasco School District No. 1 Update to the Capital Facilities Plan is
sufficient in consideration of the imposition of Impact Fees authorized by adopted of Ordinance
4774 .
Section 2. The City adopts by reference as if fully set forth herein, The Pasco School
District No. 1 2025 Update to the Capital Facilities Plan and incorporates such into the City of
Pasco Comprehensive Plan by addendum.
Page 205 of 431
Ordinance - PSD No. 1 Update to Capital Facilities Plan - 2
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 regulations; 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.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington this ___ day of ______,
2026.
Charles Grimm
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Krystle Shanks
Deputy City Clerk
Published: ____________________
Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC
City Attorney
Page 206 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 1 of 26
March 2025
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Amanda Brown, President
Steve Simmons, Vice President
John Kennedy, Member
Steve Norberg, Member
Amy Phillips, Member
PASCO SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1
2025 UPDATE TO THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SUPERINTENDENT
Michelle Whitney
Proposed CFP Scheduled for Review by the Pasco School Board
on February 11, 2025
Page 207 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 2 of 26
March 2025
Section 6 Financing Plan ........................................ 14
Section 7 School Impact or Mitigation Fees .......... 15
Appendices
Appendix A—Charts & Supporting Data… ....... 17
Building Capacity ................................... 18
Building Condition Scores… .................. 20
Projected Enrollments ............................ 21
Needed Capacity ..................................... 22
Necessary Improvements & Costs… .... 23
Capital Facilities Financing Plan ............ 24
Appendix B—Impact Fee Calculations ............. 25
2025 Impact Fee… .................................. 26
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1 Introduction ............................................... 3
Section 2 Program Standards ................................... 6
Section 3 Capital Facilities Inventory ....................... 8
Section 4 Enrollment Projections & Capacity ........ 11
Section 5 Capital Facilities Needs…………………..13
Page 208 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 3 of 26
March 2025
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose of the 2025 Update to the Capital Facilities Plan
The Pasco School District (the “District”) in 2011 first adopted a Capital Facilities Plan (the
“2011 CFP”) in compliance with the Washington State Growth Management Act, Chapter
36.70A RCW (the “GMA”), and City of Pasco Ordinance 4046 (the “School Impact Fee
Ordinance”). The City of Pasco adopted the 2011 CFP on April 16, 2012, and adopted updates
to the CFP in 2014, 2016, 2019, and 2022.
Section 3.133.025 of the School Impact Fee Ordinance describes the elements that must be
addressed in the CFP. They include “the District’s standard of service, an inventory of facilities,
capacity by grade span, a six year enrollment forecast, facility needs and costs, a finance plan
and calculation of the school impact fees.” Once the CFP with these elements is adopted, the
Ordinance says “[t]he District shall file an update to its capital facility plan at least once every
two years.” And, “[a]t least once every two years, commencing on April 15, 2014, the City
Council shall review and consider the District submitted capital facilities plan update.” Following
the 2016 CFP, the District adopted an updated CFP in April 2018 and forwarded the 2018 CFP
update to the City of Pasco and Franklin County shortly thereafter. The City Council reviewed
but did not act on that update. The District subsequently submitted in 2019 and 2022 updated
CFPs to the City and the County, with the City subsequently adopting the 2019 and 2022 CFP.
Franklin County has yet to adopt a version of the District’s Capital Facilities Plan. The District
intends for this 2025 CFP update to replace the 2022 CFP for all purposes, including the
District’s compliance with the above requirements in the School Impact Fee Ordinance. The
2025 CFP update supplements and updates the core information in the 2011 CFP. The 2025
update also includes an updated calculation for the District’s school impact fees.
B. Changes in the Pasco School District
The District now serves approximately 18,523 students (Chart 3 herein – October 2024 reported
enrollment), an increase of approximately 200 students since 2022. Steady residential development
within the District’s boundaries continues. The latest demographics study prepared by the District
(Chart 3) projects that enrollment growth will continue at all grade levels over the six-year planning
period and beyond. Since 2021, the City of Pasco approved the construction of more than 1,000 new
single family units and approximately 35 multi-family units. There is also continuing plat activity in
the District’s boundaries within unincorporated Franklin County. The District continues to review
new residential development applications in Franklin County subject to SEPA review. Additional
SEPA-exempt residential development activity may also exist in Franklin County.
Over the past 12 years, the District has engaged in community-driven capital planning
activities intended to construct all the improvements that are required to serve existing
needs (including those from recent residential growth) and forecasted growth. These
activities include:
November 2013 bond: This bond was developed with several strategies to significantly reduce
the cost of the bond projects after the previous bond failed with a 48% yes vote in April 2011.
The Board engaged a community task force to provide recommendations regarding strategies
for handling enrollment growth. The task force considered multi-track/year-round options, and
recommended constructing additional elementary school capacity (vs. a middle school, which
Page 209 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 4 of 26
March 2025
would have been a more expensive project) and that the District use the additional elementary
capacity to house 6th grade students at the elementary level instead of the middle level.
• The three elementary schools approved in the 2013 bond opened in the 2014-2015
school year (one school) and the 2015-2016 school year (two schools). The added
capacity allowed the District to complete the plan to transition to a K-6 and 7-8
grade configuration in 2015-2016.
November 2017 bond: The District’s voters in November 2017 approved a $99.5 million
bond measure with a 60.07% yes vote (approval of a bond requires 60% yes votes) to fund
two new elementary schools, a new Middle School #4, and the replacement and expansion
of Stevens Middle School. The District’s Community Builders Group recommended these
projects for the bond, with the understanding that the additional middle level capacity would
cause the district to transition 6th grade back to the middle school. These projects are now
complete and the District has moved back to a K-5 and 6-8 grade model.
February 2023 bond: In February 2023, the voters approved a $195.5 million bond
measure with yes votes of 60.91% to fund a new comprehensive high school (Sageview
High School), a smaller innovative high school (Orion High School), athletic field and facility
improvements, enhanced and modernized career and technical education spaces at
Chiawana and Pasco High Schools, and the purchase of land for additional schools.
Sageview and Orion High Schools are on track to open in the fall of 2025.
The District has continued to engage in cost-saving measures in facilities planning, and will
continue to use cost-reduction strategies and District construction standards to save taxpayer
dollars. Pasco School District’s construction costs have normally been lower than other school
construction costs around the State of Washington. Examples of cost-reduction strategies
includes the following:
• Use property already owned by the district for school sites;
• Use the updated Pasco design that has been built multiple times for Pasco schools,
thereby saving A/E, construction and maintenance costs;
• Curie and Whittier Elementary Schools share one playground, reducing the amount
of land to be purchased;
• Build larger elementary schools to reduce the total number needed and create
efficiencies in operations;
• Build schools to serve at least 50 years; and
• Maintain school buildings well to ensure they last several decades;
• Seek alternative sources of facilities funding such as grants or private donations;
• Relocate portable classrooms to locations where enrollment is growing in lieu of
purchasing additional portable classrooms, wherever possible.
The voters of Washington State passed Initiative 1351 in 2014. The initiative imposes class
size values as recommended by the Legislature’s Quality Education Council (QEC). The class
size requirements have been implemented in part and delayed in part. Under the Supreme
Court’s McCleary decision, the Legislature is under court order to fully fund basic K-12
education, including the K-3 class size reductions. Initiative 1351 class sizes are reflected in
Chart 1 and position the District for full legislative implementation.
The District implemented All-Day Kindergarten (ADK) in every elementary school in the 2015-
2016 school year. The District added portable classrooms to meet this requirement.
Page 210 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 5 of 26
March 2025
In Chart 2 in the Appendix, State scoring matrices show that Pasco School District is
effectively maintaining its schools as a community investment and asset, according to a third
party review. The schools’ adjusted maintenance score is significantly above its expected
score for the facility’s age, demonstrating effective maintenance by the district. These data
mean that they will last longer and be able to serve more students before needing to be
replaced.
Page 211 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 6 of 26
March 2025
SECTION 2
DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM STANDARDS
The District’s core and special program needs, which are used to define the standard of service,
are addressed in the 2011 Capital Facilities Plan. The District has implemented K-3 class size
reduction and All Day Kindergarten and is positioned to implement I-1351’s targets for grades 4-
12. Below is the District’s adopted educational program standards (or standard of service).
A. Elementary Educational Program Standards
The state is required to provide funding for a student-to-teacher ratio of 17-1 in grades K-3 (15-1
for high poverty schools), consistent with QEC recommendations, Initiative 1351, and McCleary.
The class size of 15-17 impacts all elementary schools.
Elementary Class Size Requirements-Initiative 1351
Grades K-3 Enacted by the Legislature
Grades 4-12 Implementation Delayed
Grade
Levels
Initiative 1351
Class Sizes
District Contract
Class Sizes
High-Poverty Schools Non-High Poverty Schools
K-1 15 17 21
2-3 15 17 24
4-5 25 26
4 22
5 23
Capt. Gray
Whittier
Robinson Livingston
Longfellow
Chess
Emerson
Frost
Twain
Curie
Franklin
McGee
Three Rivers
McClintock
Markham
Angelou
Columbia River
B. Middle and High School Program Standards
Secondary (Middle and High) school class size standards also are projected to be reduced to
levels set by Initiative 1351 with recommendations to be mandated under McCleary as noted
below.
Page 212 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 7 of 26
March 2025
Secondary Class Size Requirements-Initiative 1351
Grades K-3 Enacted by the Legislature
Grades 4-12 Implementation Delayed
Grade
Levels
Initiative 1351
Class Size
District Contract
Class Size
High-Poverty Schools Non-High Poverty Schools
6-8 23 25 30/145
per day
9-12 23 25 30/120
per day
Stevens MS
Ochoa MS
McLoughlin MS
Reynolds MS
Pasco HS
Chiawana HS
New Horizons HS
Page 213 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 8 of 26
March 2025
SECTION 3
CAPITAL FACILITIES INVENTORY
As described in the 2011 CFP, the District’s facilities inventory establishes a baseline for
determining the facilities necessary to accommodate future demand (student enrollment) at
acceptable levels of service. While the District has not added new permanent capacity since
the 2022 CFP, this 2025 CFP anticipates new high school permanent capacity opening in the
fall of 2025 at Sageview and Orion High Schools. The District will also move portables
between schools and grade levels as additional capacity is needed.
A. Capacity Calculation and Standard of Service
The District’s Board of Directors directed staff to conduct a comprehensive review of school
building capacity in 2017. The purpose of the review was to ensure consistent, reasonable
measures were being used to determine the capacity of each school building, and to provide a
safe and equitable standard of service for students throughout the school system.
Student safety has been a critical consideration for the District in determining this standard of
service. In 2014 and again in 2018, the District conducted a comprehensive safety review of
schools, including brick and mortar buildings and portable classrooms. It is the District’s goal to
house students in permanent facilities with controlled points of access, which can be best
accomplished by housing students in one contained brick and mortar building. Portable
classrooms will continue to be used as a temporary solution to provide student housing.
However, to achieve the desired standard of service to enhance student and staff safety,
portable classrooms should not be counted in the District’s permanent classroom inventory.
The state does not count portable classrooms when calculating a school district’s classroom
inventory for purposes of eligibility for state assistance for construction. In the 2011 CFP, the
District counted some portables into the permanent capacity calculation after consultation with
the City of Pasco. However, since 2017, the District’s CFP has not included portable
classrooms in calculating permanent capacity but still recognizes the capacity purpose. The
2025 CFP update carries forward the 2017 CFP methodology.
B. Elementary Schools
The District currently has seventeen (17) elementary schools serving grades K-5 and providing
capacity to serve 8,900 students in permanent capacity. As of October 1, 2024, there were
8,026 FTE elementary students enrolled.
Two new elementary schools, Columbia River Elementary School and Three Rivers
Elementary School, providing additional capacity for 1,288 elementary students, were
constructed and opened in the 2019 and 2020 school years, respectively.
As of the 2024-25 school year, there are 103 portable classrooms at the elementary schools
providing additional capacity to house 2,538 students.
The District purchased the former Pasco Senior Center and an adjacent vacant lot from the City
in 2016 for the purpose of the converting the building into an early learning facility. The District
pursued, and was granted, two capital appropriations from the state totaling $1.3 million dollars
to help offset the costs. The Early Learning Center opened in January 2018, with designated
Page 214 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 9 of 26
March 2025
programs transitioned to the Center by September 2018. In addition, the District used ESSER
funds and impact fees to add capacity K-12 by purchasing and renovating 4403 W. Court
Street. These projects have allowed the District to provide additional capacity for K-5 students
in elementary buildings by relocating early learning classes from the elementary buildings to the
new facilities and adding capacity for online programs K-12.
C. Middle Schools
The District has four middle schools serving grades 6-8. The middle schools provide permanent
capacity to serve approximately 4,134 students. As of October 1, 2024, there were 4,255 FTE
students enrolled in those schools.
Reynolds Middle School and the replacement and expansion of Stevens Middle School added
permanent capacity for approximately 1,377 students in 2020 and 2021, respectively.
As of the 2024-25 school year, there are 48 portable classrooms at the middle schools
providing additional capacity to house 1,094 students. Since 2011, the District added eighteen
(18) new portable classrooms as temporary capacity at the middle school level. The District
plans to add portable capacity at the middle school level during the six years of this CFP
(either newly purchased or relocated from the elementary grade level).
D. High Schools
There are currently two traditional high schools serving grades 9-12. There is permanent
capacity in those schools to serve 4,156 students. As of October 1, 2024 there were 6,119 FTE
students enrolled in the high school program. Pasco High School has additional capacity to
serve students in 29 portable classrooms and Chiawana High School has additional capacity to
serves students in 32 portable classrooms.
New Horizons High School moved into a leased brick and mortar building on the Columbia
Basin College campus in 2017. The building capacity is 248. With New Horizons the
District has a total of 4,404 permanent capacity seats at the 9-12 level. The District
shares capacity at Delta, a STEM based high school with Kennewick and Richland School
Districts.
The opening of Sageview High School, with a capacity of 2,091, and Orion High School, with a
capacity of 594, will address existing capacity needs and provide capacity for future growth
needs.
E. Support Facilities
Bus parking has been expanded into the District’s maintenance lay-down yard at the Port of
Pasco property (Building 210). The District leased additional space from the Port to replace the
lost lay-down yard capacity, and is also leasing additional warehouse space. The November
2017 bond provided funding for expansion of transportation and maintenance facilities, which
is expected to be complete in December 2022.
Page 215 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 10 of 26
March 2025
F. Land Inventory
The District currently owns nine unimproved parcels, totaling approximately ±188 acres.
Site Name Tax Parcel(s) # Location/Cross Streets Acreage Status
Undeveloped A 115-180-042 Rd 108 & Burns Rd 70.18 Undeveloped
Undeveloped B 115-170-072 Burns Rd & Rd 90 13 Undeveloped
Undeveloped C 114-330-059
Burns/Powerline Rd & Rd
60 (N of Sageview HS) 14.32 In Progress
Undeveloped D
114-330-058, 114-
330-055 Clark & Rd 52 81.2 Undeveloped
Undeveloped F 119-121-307 Rd 44 & Court St 0.56 Undeveloped
Undeveloped G 112-152-300 7th Ave & Brown St 0.59 Undeveloped
Undeveloped H 113-501-070 Salt Lake & Utah 3.49 Undeveloped
Undeveloped I 123-200-133 4171 Elm Rd 5.1 Undeveloped
Page 216 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 11 of 26
March 2025
SECTION 4
STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS
AND CAPACITY BY GRADE SPAN
A. Projected Student Enrollment
Since 2016, the District received and reviewed five enrollment forecasts. For purposes of the
2025 CFP Update, the District is relying on the comprehensive forecast prepared internally by
the District. The forecast considers recent trends, including enrollment anomalies occurring
during the Covid-19 pandemic, previous data provided by MGT of America and demographer
Paul Dennis, updated information provided by JUB Engineering, and information related to
known residential development data throughout the District’s boundaries. See Appendix, Chart
3.
In October 2011, there were 15,707 students enrolled in grades K-12. In October 2024, there
were 18,523 headcount students enrolled, which is an increase of 2,816 students. While the
global pandemic impacted enrollment in the fall of 2020 and for a short time thereafter, the
District’s enrollment has stabilized and steadily increased since 2022. By 2030, the forecast
predicts there will be 19,943 students enrolled in grades K-12, which is an additional 1,420
students over 2024. The District plans to watch enrollment closely and will update the CFP
accordingly. The District’s new high school capacity, opening in the fall of 2025, will help
address growth needs over the planning period of this CFP, and the District will need to add
permanent and temporary capacity at the elementary and middle school levels in order to serve
expected growth.
B. Capacity by Grade Span
Current enrollment at each grade level is identified in Chart 1, which provides the actual
FTE enrollment in District facilities as of October 1, 2024. Projected available student
capacity was derived by subtracting projected student 2030 enrollment (Chart 31) from total
existing October 2024 school capacity (Chart 1).
Enrollment in grades K-5 is expected to grow by approximately 755 students by 2030. Growth
at the K-5 level is expected to continue beyond the six year planning period. The recent
construction of Columbia River Elementary School and Three Rivers Elementary School
helped to provide needed capacity at the elementary school level for existing and growth
projected over the six-year planning period. The District plans over the six year planning
period to address continued elementary needs with a new-in-lieu Markham Elementary School
and converting that school to a K-8 program (and adding capacity at the elementary and
middle school level), and replacing and expanding Captain Gray, Livingston, and McGee
Elementary Schools.
Enrollment at the 6-8 level is projected to grow over the six year planning period and beyond,
with approximately 217 middle school students added by 2030. The construction of Reynolds
Middle School and the replacement/expansion of Stevens Middle School, along with grade
reconfiguration in 2015, helped to provide needed capacity to serve recent growth at the 6-8
level. However, growth at the middle school grade level has continued in recent years,
creating additional needs. The District will need to add capacity at the middle school level to
serve, existing student needs, growth expected by 2030, and growth expected beyond 2030.
In addition to the conversion to a K-8 and expansion of Markham Elementary School (as
1 Chart 3 uses headcount enrollment vs. full-time equivalent figures (used in Chart 1).
Page 217 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 12 of 26
March 2025
discussed above), the District is planning to replace and expand McLoughlin Middle School
and build a new Middle School No. 5.
Enrollment in grades 9-12 is also forecasted for continued growth, adding nearly 448 students
by 2030. The new Sageview High School and Orion High School, planned to open in fall of
2025, will provide capacity to serve existing, recent, and future growth needs at the high school
level.
The current capacity in the existing schools and the capacity that is needed to serve forecast
growth through 2030 is shown on Chart 4 in the Appendix. Chart 4 does not consider
capacity additions planned through 2030 (including the planned 2025 opening of Orion and
Sageview High Schools) and beyond.
Page 218 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 13 of 26
March 2025
SECTION 5
CAPITAL FACILITIES NEEDS
To determine future facility needs, existing school program capacity was compared to
projected enrollment throughout the six-year forecast period. See Section 4.
In November 2017, the District’s voters passed a $99.5 million bond measure to help fund
the construction of two new elementary schools (Columbia River Elementary School and
Three Rivers Elementary School), a new middle school (Reynolds Middle School), the
expansion and replacement of Stevens Middle School, safety and health improvements at
various schools, and improvements to the District’s transportation and maintenance
facilities. In February 2023, the voters approved a $95.5 million bond measure funding the
construction of Sageview High School and Orion High School, both expected to open in
2025, athletic field and facility improvements at Pasco High School, enhanced and
modernized CTE spaces at Chiawana and Pasco High Schools, and the purchase of land
for additional schools. See Chart 5, Appendix. The 2023 bond projects are ongoing.
The opening of Sageview and Orion High Schools will address existing capacity needs as well
as providing available capacity to serve growth at the 9-12 level through the six-year planning
period. The District is now in the planning stage for adding elementary and middle school
capacity needed to serve existing and anticipated growth. Those projects are expected to
include the following: planning for a new Middle School No. 5, replacing and expanding
capacity at McLoughlin Middle School, replacing Markham Elementary School with expanded
capacity and converting that school to a K-8 program, and replacing and expanding Captain
Gray, Livingston, and McGee Elementary Schools. The District will also continue to seek to
acquire land for future school projects.
Portable classrooms will be used to provide temporary facilities while funding is secured to
construct brick and mortar facilities and while construction occurs over time. The new schools
and portable classrooms will provide the needed capacity identified in Section 4 above.
In addition to building schools that add capacity for growth, the District will make other
improvements to serve students. The improvements will be constructed in phases and cannot
occur until bonds are approved by the voters. The District will continue with long term facilities
planning efforts using community recommendations to identify which projects should be
prioritized.
The District will continue to plan for needs beyond 2030. Chart 5 includes estimated permanent
improvements and capacity conditioned on future funding. Future updates to this CFP will
provide more specific information as to the District’s updated planning.
Page 219 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 14 of 26
March 2025
SECTION 6
CAPITAL FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN
The District's ability to fund the planned improvements that will add capacity is dependent upon
the passage of bond elections at a 60% supermajority and receipt of State Construction
Assistance Program (SCAP) funds, also known as “state match” funds. Costs for improvements
that add capacity to serve projected new growth are used to calculate school impact fees.
School impact fees, or SEPA mitigation fees collected from some new development projects in
unincorporated Franklin County, will be used to pay for a portion of the improvements that add
growth-related capacity. The majority of the costs to construct the capacity improvements will
be paid for with bonds and state match funds. See Section 6 of the 2011 CFP for a complete
discussion regarding the framework for financing planned improvements.
To serve growth needs identified in this CFP, the District plans to construct new schools and
new school capacity consistent with the funding identified in this CFP. Charts 5 and 6 have
detailed information on the 2023 Bond projects and planned future bond projects,
with the Sageview High School, Orion High School, and CTE program improvements at PHS
and CHS funded by the 2023 Bond and the planned middle school capacity additions (including
the new Middle School No. 5 and the additional middle school capacity resulting from the
replacement/expansion of McLoughlin Middle School and replacement/expansion/K-8
conversion at Markham Elementary School) all being growth-related projects. The District may
also add portables to serve interim growth needs.
In addition to construction of facilities to add capacity, the District also needs to acquire school
sites for future construction, and must make a variety of improvements that are needed at
existing facilities.
The Capital Facilities Financing Plan in Chart 6 demonstrates how the District intends to fund
new construction and improvements to school facilities during the six-year planning period
(and also includes financing information related to the 2023 projects in process).
The District continues to use a variety of strategies to plan, reduce costs, and mitigate the
effects of student enrollment growth. Receipt of impact fees remains critical to ensuring the
District can manage growth by providing sufficient student facilities. The forecast of steady
enrollment growth over the next six years underscores the need to use a variety of financing
measures, including the passage of bonds, expenditure from the General Fund, and impact
fees/SEPA mitigation fees to meet the needs of the community.
Page 220 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 15 of 26
March 2025
SECTION 7
SCHOOL IMPACT OR MITIGATION FEES
The District’s ability to fund the improvements that are needed to serve forecast growth depends
on new development contributing to the cost to build the schools that will serve the students that
live in new housing. The District is collecting school impact fees from development in the City
and will continue to seek mitigation fees from developers in Franklin County (and continue to
request that Franklin County adopt a GMA-based school impact fee ordinance). The District’s
desire and intent is that school mitigation is collected from all residential development within the
District in an equitable and comprehensive manner. The District files annual reports with the
City regarding the use of the school impact fees.
The District has calculated school impact fees using a standard school impact fee formula,
adopted by the City of Pasco and many other Washington cities and counties, that complies
with the Growth Management Act. The resulting figures are based on the District’s cost per
dwelling unit to construct schools needed to serve new development. A student factor (or
student generation rate) is used to identify the average cost per dwelling unit by measuring the
average number of students generated by each housing type (single-family dwellings and multi-
family dwellings). The District hires a consultant to update the student factor methodology
based upon the last six years of residential development data within the District, as required
by the City of Pasco School Impact Fee Ordinance. In this year’s CFP, the District’s student
generation rates are based on an analysis performed by JUB Engineering considering
Franklin County and City of Pasco residential development data from 2018 through the
first quarter of 2024 . As required under the GMA, credits are applied in the formula to account
for State School Construction Assistance funds to be reimbursed to the District and projected
future property taxes to be paid by the dwelling unit. The costs of projects that do not add
capacity are not included in the impact fee calculations. Furthermore, impact fees will not be
used to address existing deficiencies.
The following projects are included in the impact fee calculation:
• New Middle School No. 5
Please see Chart 6.
The calculated impact fee amounts (reduced by 25%), in Appendix B, are $0 for each single
family residence and $2,595. The primary reason for the significant decline in the impact fee
calculated in the 2022 Capital Facilities Plan is the removal from the formula of the elementary
capacity projects (Columbia River and Three Rivers Elementary Schools, completed in 2019a
and 2020, but continuing to provide available capacity for new growth) and the soon to be
completed high school capacity projects. While the fee formula includes this year a new middle
school, using current student generation rates, the middle school project alone does not
generate a single family cost per dwelling unit that exceeds the single family tax credit in the
formula. As such, the tax credit nullifies any unfunded impact per single family unit. In both
cases, the District’s voters front-funded capacity that remains available for the benefit of new
development. The District is requesting the City collect school impact fees in the following
amounts:
Single Family: $0
Multi Family: $2,595
Page 221 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Page 16 of 26
March 2025
The District began receiving impact fees from the City in 2012. Through December 2024, the District
has received approximately $26.9 million in impact fee and mitigation fee revenue. Of that amount,
$1,250,000 was used to reduce the principal of the 2013 bond, $5,374,972 has been used for portable
classrooms (new and relocated), $14.3 million has helped fund property acquisitions, and $2,000,000
was used to reduce the principal of the 2017 bond. The District plans to use remaining revenue for
growth-related projects including portables, land acquisition, and reducing the cost of current and
future bond projects. The District will use future impact fees and mitigation fees as allowed by law for
growth-related impacts identified in the CFP.
Page 222 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Appendix A
Page 17 of 26
February 2025
APPENDIX A
Charts with Supporting Data
Page 223 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Appendix A
Page 18 of 26
February 2025
Chart 1
Building Capacity
October 2024
Elementary Schools
88% Scheduling Factor Applied Building Capacity
Oct 1, 2024
Enrollment
Over/Under
Capacity
Angelou 594 554 40
Capt. Gray 487 408 79
Chess 495 404 91
Columbia River 644 621 23
Curie 771 376 395
Emerson 474 447 27
Franklin 617 543 74
Frost 474 464 10
Livingston 423 543 120
Longfellow 405 309 96
Markham 255 209 46
McClintock 575 568 7
McGee 438 499 61
Robinson 604 474 130
Three Rivers 644 655 11
Twain 526 573 47
Whittier 474 379 95
Elementary Totals 8,900 8,026 874
Middle Schools
76% Scheduling Factor Applied Building Capacity
Oct 1, 2024
Enrollment
Over/Under
Capacity
McLoughlin 1,011 1,172 161
Reynolds 1,131 1,294 163
Ochoa 1,006 832 174
Stevens 986 957 29
Middle School Totals 4,134 4,255 121
Page 224 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Appendix A
Page 19 of 26
February 2025
High Schools
75% Scheduling Factor Applied Building Capacity
Oct 1, 2024
Enrollment
Over/Under
Capacity
Chiawana 2,348 3,153 805
Pasco 1,808 2,616 808
New Horizons 248 350 102
Delta* 173
High School Totals 4,577 6,119 1,931
Academy of Learning 52
Innovative Experiences/E-Learning 71
Pasco Digital Learning Totals 0 123
Grand Totals 17,611 18,523 1,178
* Delta total capacity is 518 to be shared between PSD, KSD and RSD ** iPAL high
school students are enrolled in the iPAL program and their home school
Capacity Calculation Methodology
Elementary – Capacity calculated by School Design, K-3 Class Size Reduction, Grades 4-5 Collective
Bargaining Agreement, Grades K-5 Weighted Average and 88% Scheduling Factor
Middle School – Capacity calculated by School Design, Collective Bargaining Agreement and 76%
Scheduling Factor
High School - Capacity calculated by School Design, Collective Bargaining Agreement and 75%
Scheduling Factor
Page 225 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Appendix A
Page 20 of 26
March 2025
Chart 2
Pasco School District Asset Preservation Program
2024 Building Condition Scores
OSPI 2022 2023 2024
Building
Age in
Years
Current
Draft Score
by Age
Adjusted
B.C.E.
Adjusted
B.C.E.
Adjusted
B.C.E.
Emerson 27 78 82.25 79.20 79.20
Frost 27 82 81.56 81.40 82.56
Franklin 11 97 97.34 97.34 97.34
McClintock 10 96 96.21 95.57 95.57
Curie 11 97 98.04 96.4 96.4
Chiawana High School 16 86 92.05 86.73 86.78
Delta High School 11 95 N/R 96.10 95.78
Three Rivers 6 100 N/R 100 100
Columbia River 5 100 N/R 100 100
Ray Reynolds Middle School 5 100 N/R 100 100
Stevens Middle School 5 100 N/R 100 100
“B.C.E.” is the Building Condition Evaluation score given by OSPI for those facilities in which
State School Construction Assistance Program (state match) dollars were used. The
Current Draft Score” is OSPI’s expected score for the age of the facility, given average use
and maintenance. Buildings were not reviewed (N/R) in 2019 due to COVID.
Pasco High School is no longer assigned a B.C.E. score for purposes of state reporting
because of the age of the facility. However, the district continues to monitor and score Pasco
High School for internal monitoring purposes.
Page 226 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Appendix A
Page 20 of 26
March 2025
Chart 3
Projected Enrollment
Pasco School District Projected Enrollment
Grade 24-25* 25-26 26-27 27-28 28-29 29-30 30-31
K 1,227.00 1,245.41 1,264.09 1,283.05 1,302.29 1,321.83 1,341.65
1 1,316.00 1,335.74 1,355.78 1,376.11 1,396.75 1,417.71 1,438.97
2 1,389.00 1,409.84 1,430.98 1,452.45 1,474.23 1,496.35 1,518.79
3 1,414.00 1,435.21 1,456.74 1,478.59 1,500.77 1,523.28 1,546.13
4 1,338.00 1,358.07 1,378.44 1,399.12 1,420.10 1,441.41 1,463.03
5 1,391.00 1,411.87 1,433.04 1,454.54 1,476.36 1,498.50 1,520.98
8,075.00 8,196.13 8,319.07 8,443.85 8,570.51 8,699.07 8,829.55
6 1,425.00 1,428.56 1,432.13 1,435.71 1,439.30 1,442.90 1,446.51
7 1,461.00 1,464.65 1,468.31 1,471.98 1,475.66 1,479.35 1,483.05
8 1,443.00 1,446.61 1,479.16 1,512.44 1,546.47 1,581.26 1,616.84
4,329.00 4,339.82 4,379.60 4,420.14 4,461.44 4,503.52 4,546.40
9 1,460.00 1,478.25 1,496.73 1,515.44 1,534.38 1,553.56 1,572.98
10 1,529.00 1,548.11 1,567.46 1,587.06 1,606.90 1,626.98 1,647.32
11 1,531.00 1,550.14 1,569.51 1,589.13 1,609.00 1,629.11 1,649.47
12 1,599.00 1,614.99 1,631.14 1,647.45 1,663.93 1,680.57 1,697.37
6,119.00 6,191.49 6,264.85 6,339.08 6,414.20 6,490.22 6,567.14
18,523.00 18,727.44 18,963.52 19,203.07 19,446.14 19,692.80 19,943.10
*October 2024 reported enrollment (OSPI Report 1251H)
Page 227 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Appendix A
Page 22 of 26
March 2025
Chart 4
2030 Student Capacity and Future Need
Building
Capacity
2024
Total Capacity
(Permanent/Portable)
2024
Oct 24
Enrollment
Forecast
Enrollment
2030
Needed
Capacity
(Permanent)
2030
Elementary
(K-5)
8,900
11,438 8,075 8,830 (70)
Middle (6-8) 4,134 5,229 4,329 4,546 412
High (9-
12) 4,404 5,775 6,119 6,567 2,163
“Building Capacity” is the number of classrooms multiplied by the weighted average I-1351
class size for non-high poverty schools, multiplied by a utilization factor to allow for planning
time and other uses. See Chart 1.
“Forecast Enrollment 2030” is based on Chart 3.
“Needed Capacity” includes total (permanent/portable) capacity but does not include new
capacity planned for completion through 2030 (including the opening of Sageview High
School and Orion High School), portable additions/relocations, or grade reconfiguration.
Page 228 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Appendix A
Page 23 of 26
March 2025
Chart 5
Necessary Facility Improvements, Added Capacity and Costs
2025 Update
2023 BOND PROJECTS
Sageview High School 2,091 $185,363,000
Orion High School 594 $37,500,000
CTE PHS/CHS 75 $12,000,000
Athletic Fields N/A $2,000,000
Land Acquisition N/A $10,000,000
Total 2023
Bond Projects
2,760 $246,863,000
ESTIMATED PERMANENT IMPROVEMENTS & ADDED/NEW CAPACITY
CONDITIONED ON FUTURE BOND AND STATE ASSISTANCE
Livingston Replacement 300 $57,825,949
Middle School #5 1,250 $90,577,498
Markham Replacement 300 $43,659,000
Land Acquisition (80 acres) N/A $12,000,000
McGee Replacement 220 $57,825,949
Captain Gray Replacement 300 $57,825,949
McLoughlin MS Replacement 250 $90,557,498
Total Permanent Capacity 2,620 $410,271,843
TEMPORARY CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS
Portable Classrooms 460 $3,250,000
Total 460 $3,250,000
Page 229 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Appendix B, Page 24 of 26
March 2025
Chart 6
Capital Facilities Financing Plan
Project Estimates
2023 Bond Projects and
Future Planning for Anticipated 2028 Bond
Project
New/
Added
Capacity
Est.
Cost
Source of Funding
Bonds State
Match
Impact/
Mitigation Fees
General
Fund
February 2023 Bond Projects and Other Improvements
High School #3 2,091 $185,000,000 $195,500,00 $67,514,530 Portion TBD
Innovative High School 594 $37,500,000 $37,500,000 $0 Portion TBD
CTE CHS/PHS 75 $12,000,000 $12,000,000 $0
Portion TBD
Athletic Fields $2,000,000 $2,000,000
Land Acquisition $10,000,000 $10,000,000 Portion TBD
Future Bond Projects (Subject to Future Planning & Board Approval)
Livingston Replacement 200 $57,825,949 $44,740,767 $13,085,184 Portion TBD
Middle School #5 900 $90,577,498 $90,577,498 $0 Portion TBD
Markham Replacement 600 $57,825,949 $57,825,949 $0 Portion TBD
Land Acquisition (80 acres) $12,000,000 N/A N/A Portion TBD
McGee Replacement 220 $57,825,949 $44,866,849 $12,959,460 Portion TBD
McLoughlin MS Replacement 0 $90,557,498 $57,509,658 $33,047,840 Portion TBD
Gray Replacement 0 $13,476,263 $0 $13,476,263 Remodel
Portable Classrooms 460 $3,250,000 $3,250,000 $0 Portion TBD
Livingston Replacement 850 $57,825,949
Middle School #5 1,250 $90,577,498
Markham Replacement 450 $43,659,000
Land Acquisition (80 acres) N/A $12,000,000
McGee Replacement 850 $57,825,949
Captain Gray Replacement 850 $57,825,949
McLoughlin MS Replacement 1,250 $90,557,498
Total Permanent Capacity 5,500 $410,271,843
“State Match” refers to funds allocated by the State of Washington through the School
Construction Assistance Program administered by OSPI. This number is an estimate of state
matching funds and is subject to verification by OSPI.
*The “portion TBD” of impact fee revenue used to fund the growth-related capacity projects will
be determined based upon impact fee revenue received from new development. Impact fee
revenue may be able to offset debt service on the bonds and result in tax savings to the
existing community.
Page 230 of 431
Pasco School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
Appendix B, Page 26 of 26
March 2025
APPENDIX B IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS
PASCO SCHOOL DISTRICT 25% reduction
2024 Impact Fee APPENDIX B
Single Family Residence:
Elementary Middle School High School Formula
$0.00 $90,500,000.00 $0.00 Facility Cost
620 1400 2000 Additional Capacity
$0.00 $64,642.86 $0.00 Cost per Student (CS)
0.230 0.090 0.100 Student Factor (SF)
$0.00 $5,817.86 $0.00 CS x SF
$0.00 $375.00 $0.00 Boeck Index
90.00 108.00 130.00 OSPI Sq Ft
0.00%0.00%0.00%State Match Eligibility %
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 State Match Credit (SM)
$0.00 $5,817.86 $0.00 CS x SF - SM
$5,817.86 Cost per Single Family Residence
0.0383 Average Interest Rate
0.456225193 Tax Credit Numerator
0.055773425 Tax Credit Denominator
8.179974492 Tax Credit Multiplier (TCM)
$398,005.00 Average Assessed Value (AAV)
3255670.75 TCM x AAV
0.00184 Tax Levy Rate (TLR)
$5,981.64 TCM x AAV x TLR = (TC)
-$163.79 Cost per Single Family Residence - Tax Credit
-$40.95 25% reduction (A)
-$122.84 Calculated Single Family Fee Amount
$0 Recommended Fee Amount
Multi-Family Residence:
Elementary Middle School High School Formula
$0.00 $90,500,000.00 $0.00 Facility Cost
620 920 2000 Additional Capacity
$0.00 $64,642.86 $0.00 Cost per Student (CS)
0.180 0.080 0.100 Student Factor (SF)
$0.00 $5,171.43 $0.00 CS x SF
$0.00 $375.00 $0.00 Boeck Index
90.00 108.00 130.00 OSPI Sq Ft
0.00%0.00%0.00%State Match Eligibility %
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 State Match Credit (SM)
$0.00 $5,171.43 $0.00 CS x SF - SM
$5,171.43 Cost per Multi-Family Residence
0.0383 Average Interest Rate
0.456225193 Tax Credit Numerator
0.055773425 Tax Credit Denominator
8.179974492 Tax Credit Multiplier (TCM)
$113,100.00 Average Assessed Value (AAV)
925155.12 TCM x AAV
0.00185 Tax Levy Rate (TLR)
$1,711.54 TCM x AAV x TLR = (TC)
$3,459.89 Cost per Multi-Family Residence - Tax Credit
$864.97 25% reduction (A)
$2,594.92 Calculated Multi- Family Fee Amount
$2,595 Recommended Fee Amount
()()()
()FCATLRAAVii
iSMSFCSSIF -´úú
û
ù
êê
ë
é
÷÷
ø
ö
çç
è
æ ´´+
-+--=10
10
1
11
Page 231 of 431
04/20/2026
Pasco City Council
Meeting
Pa
g
e
2
3
2
o
f
4
3
1
•CPA 2025-001 Emergency Comp Plan Amendment
Pasco High School #1 Facilities Plan Adoption
Pa
g
e
2
3
3
o
f
4
3
1
Emergency Comp Plan Amendment
•PMC 25.215.020(3) (c)Emergency
amendments may be reviewed and acted upon
outside the annual amendment review cycle
•Provide 60-day notice to Dept. of Commerce
•Council adopted Resolution 4679 on November
17, 2025 initiating the process
•Planning Commission Public Hearing
•Planning Commission Recommendation
•City Council Final Action within 60 Days
Pa
g
e
2
3
4
o
f
4
3
1
Pa
g
e
2
3
5
o
f
4
3
1
Pasco School District
Capital Facilities Plan Elements
•District’s standard of service
•Inventory of facilities
•Capacity by grade span
•Six-year enrollment forecast
•Facility needs and costs
•Finance Plan and calculation of the school
impact fees
Pa
g
e
2
3
6
o
f
4
3
1
Pasco School District
Changes to Impact Fees
•June 15, 2025 Ordinance 4774 Revised
School Impact fees
•Single Family Dwelling fees eliminated
•Multi-Family changed from $4,525 per unit
to $2,595 per unit
Pa
g
e
2
3
7
o
f
4
3
1
Questions?
Pa
g
e
2
3
8
o
f
4
3
1
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 3, 2026
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular
Meeting: 4/20/26
FROM: Haylie Matson, Director
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 4830 - Special Event Code and Downtown Update
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
Proposed Ordinance Special Events, Assemblies and Sales
PowerPoint
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No.4830, amending Title 5, Business
Licenses and Regulations to Implement the Pasco Downtown Master Plan by
expanding opportunities for community events and sales throughout the City;
providing for severability and establishing an effective date.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Streamlining the event permit process is anticipated to have a positive effect on
the Community and Economic Development Budget at the same time as
decreasing the amount of effort and expense event organizers expend
organizing, hosting and obtaining permits for special events and sales.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Background
During the Downtown Master Planning process, significant feedback was
received regarding the cumbersome and confusing nature of the Special Event
permit process. In response, the city continued its partnership with Framework
Cultural Placemaking to audit Title 5 codes, permit processes, and potential
code amendments related to Special Events and sales activities.
On August 25, 2025, the Community & Economic Development Department
presented an overview to City Council outlining the goals of the update and key
findings from the initial code audit. City Council provided feedback and
Page 239 of 431
direction to staff at that time. An outreach event was held on February 17th and
applicable suggestions related to the outreach have been incorporated into the
draft ordinance.
This effort is intended to modernize and simplify the City’s Special Event and
sales-related permitting processes while maintaining appropriate safety
updates proposed The standards administrative and focus oversight. on
making the process clearer, predictable, and user-friendly for applicants and
staff, while supporting vibrant community events and economic activity.
Special Event Code Audit Process:
The consultant and City team completed the following work:
Overall review of Title 5 – Business Licenses and Regulations to
evaluate clarity, organization, and compatibility with project goals
Interviews with representatives from the Police Department, Parks
Department, Business Licensing Division, and HAPO Center
Precedent study evaluating how other Tri-Cities jurisdictions manage
Special Events
Presentation to and feedback from City Council (August 25, 2025)
Presentation to past and frequent special event hosts and public on
February 17, 2026 to solicit feedback on draft Ordinance
The outcome of the audit guided the development of the draft code
amendments presented with this report.
Primary improvements include:
Establishing clear thresholds for when Special Event permits are
required
Eliminating or consolidating permits that were redundant or unnecessary
Creating an Event Risk Factor Scoring Matrix to provide objective
security recommendations based on event size, activities, alcohol
service, and other risk factors
Clarifying rules for street closures and neighborhood block parties
Streamlining the permit review process to reduce turnaround time
Simplifying Temporary Sales Event and sidewalk-sales permitting
February 17th outreach event yielded good questions from the public
and we received generally positive feedback on the draft Ordinance
Impact (other than fiscal):
Providing a clearer and more predictable framework for organizing events is
expected to encourage more community events and cultural activities, support
economic development opportunities for local businesses and vendors, and
reduce confusion and administrative burden for both applicants and staff. The
proposed updates will also help maintain consistent safety expectations for
public gatherings. Overall, these changes are intended to make events easier
to organize, easier to administer, and safer for participants, while supporting
the Downtown Master Plan goal of increasing activity and vibrancy in Pasco.
Page 240 of 431
V. DISCUSSION:
Recommendation:
Staff recommend that the City Council review and adopt the attached
Ordinance as presented
Constraints (time or other consideration):
Adoption of the Ordinance in a timely fashion is desired to help streamline the
Special Event permit process, encouraging and promoting the upcoming
summer event season.
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:
The City Council may elect to forgo special event permit amendments or direct
staff to consider alternative approaches to enhance special events and sales in
the City of Pasco.
Page 241 of 431
ORDINANCE NO. ____
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,
AMENDING TITLE 5 BUSINESS LICENSES AND REGULATIONS TO
IMPLEMENT THE PASCO DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN BY EXPANDING
OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMMUNITY EVENTS AND SALES
THROUGHOUT THE CITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND
ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco (City) adopted its first Downtown Master Plan in January
2023 following extensive public engagement that resulted in strong support for the plan; and
WHEREAS, the City and the community have prioritized implementing the Downtown
Pasco Master Plan which is an ongoing effort; and
WHEREAS, the Downtown Master Plan includes many strategies to activate public spaces
including expanding opportunities for community events and commerce; and
WHEREAS, applicants for Special Event Permits have expressed that the application
process includes unreasonable barriers; and
WHEREAS, the City benefits from increased foot traffic in commercial areas that results
from community events; and
WHEREAS, expanding the ways in which residents can exchange goods promotes local
culture and resilient communities; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to streamline permit processes while ensuring that adequate
regulations remain in place to ensure public safety.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO,
WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Amending the Pasco Municipal Code Chapter 5.35 Special Events and
Entertainment
Chapter 5.35
SPECIAL EVENTS AND ENTERTAINMENT, ASSEMBLIES, AND SALES
Sections:
5.35.010 Finding and purpose. Intent.
5.35.020 Permit required. Definitions.
5.35.030 Exemption to permit requirements. Special Events in Public Space.
5.35.040 Definitions. Road Closures.
5.35.050 Application. Special Assemblies.
5.35.060 Temporary special sales event. Temporary Sales.
Page 242 of 431
5.35.070 Dance halls. Security Assessment.
5.35.080 Auction sales. Procedure for Application Approval.
5.35.090 Public dance. Appeal.
5.35.100 Carnivals and circuses. Revocation of Permit.
5.35.110 Concerts, outdoor music festivals and athletic or competitive events.
5.35.120 Outdoor music festival – Additional requirements.
5.35.130 Permit fee.
5.35.140 Procedure for application approval.
5.35.150 Appeal.
5.35.160 Revocation of permit.
5.35.170 Crowd and traffic control.
5.35.180 Street and intersection closures.
5.35.010 Finding and purpose. Intent
The City finds that to preserve each citizen’s right of free speech and assembly, in both public and private
places, the coordination of the City services is necessary to maintain the safety of the persons and properties of
the participants and those electing not to participate in the event, and to provide continued municipal services
for the benefit of all the citizens of the City, minimal regulations are necessary to provide for the coordination
of essential municipal services. These regulations are established for the purpose of regulating those events
which are intended to draw large numbers of people, involve use of public facilities and to establish a fee
required to defray the costs of assuring the public health and safety. [Ord. 3524 § 4, 2001; Code 1970 § 5.25.005.]
Special events are opportunities for Pasco residents and visitors to gather, learn, enjoy entertainment, and
exchange ideas and they are seen as a positive contribution to Pasco’s culture and public realm. Large events,
those with high risk, and those that substantially alter the use of public space necessitate City services to
maintain safety for attendees and to prevent unreasonable inconvenience for those who choose not to attend
but are impacted by the event. These regulations are established for the purpose of regulating those events
which are intended to draw large numbers of people, involve use of public facilities, or involve use of
buildings outside of their established occupancy use in order to ensure public health and safety.
5.35.020 Permit required. Definitions
(1) It shall be unlawful for any person or promoter to initiate, conduct, promote, or participate in any public
dance, dance hall, concert, outdoor music festival, parade, demonstration, athletic or competitive event or
temporary special sales events on public or private roadways, sidewalks, parks or places within the City until a
special events permit therefor has been secured.
(2) Special event permits will be required for (but not limited to) the following:
Page 243 of 431
(a) Public dance;
(b) Dance hall;
(c) Concert;
(d) Outdoor music festival;
(e) Parade;
(f) Demonstration;
(g) Athletic or competitive event;
(h) Temporary special sales event involving one or more unlicensed City of Pasco businesses;
(i) Dances, concerts and special sales events that involve one or more unlicensed City of Pasco businesses
held at the Trade Recreation and Agricultural Center (TRAC). [Ord. 3822, 2007; Ord. 3764 § 3, 2006; Ord. 3524 § 4,
2001; Code 1970 § 5.25.010.]
Neighborhood Block Party: A Neighborhood Block Party is a gathering of friends and neighbors on their
shared block. With a permit, the closure of one block to vehicular traffic provides a temporary venue for these
events, which can include shared meals, communal art projects, or other activities.
Road Closure: Road closures temporarily block roads to car traffic through the use of cones and barricades.
Two types of road closure permits, Street Festival Permits and Neighborhood Block Party Permits, allow
applicants to make use of streets as temporary venues for public gatherings.
Street Festival: A Street Festival is the use of the street for events such as markets, athletic events, concerts, or
car shows.
Security Guard: In this chapter, security guards refer to those who are licensed and state certified. These
individuals are trained on fire prevention, evacuation processes, critical incident response, and other skills that
equip them to provide assistance at events and in cases of emergencies.
Security Personnel: In this chapter, security personnel refer to those who are tasked with monitoring events for
safety and security. Security personnel can use de-escalation tactics to reduce conflict and may carry skills
such as CPR or Stop the Bleed training. These individuals should be visible and equipped to quickly
communicate with event organizers and first responders.
Special Event: A Special Event is a general term that refers to a meeting, celebration, or demonstration that
gathers a group of people.
Page 244 of 431
5.35.030 Exemption to permit requirements. Special Events in Public
Space
The following events shall be exempt from the special event requirements and application process and
payment of permit fee; provided, however, the person or promoter initiating or conducting such event shall be
responsible for collecting any applicable vendor(s) fee and payment of applicable admissions tax:
(1) Events conducted by public or private elementary, secondary and college-level educational institutions
held at educational facilities;
(2) Events held at the Trade Recreation and Agricultural Center (TRAC) (Please note: PMC 5.35.020(2)(i)
listed above);
(3) Private events not open to the public;
(4) City sponsored events;
(5) Ongoing events either operating under a City permit or;
(6) A business-licensed event in a facility designed for the event (e.g., baseball games at the baseball stadium,
soccer matches at the City soccer fields, softball at the City softball complex);
(7) Other similar events. [Ord. 3822, 2007; Code 1970 § 5.25.015.]
Pasco’s City-owned parks and public ways can be utilized as places for gathering, commerce, learning, and
celebration. The permit process ensures that the City can provide the services necessary to facilitate events that
are safe and successful. If applicants demonstrate successful event management, including adhering to all
requirements in 5.35.030(2), they may apply for an ongoing permit for recurring events.
(1) Permit Required
A Special Event in Public Space Permit is required when an event takes place in a city-owned park or public
way AND
(a) Is expected to draw 100 or more people at one time; OR
(b) Requires a ticket or paid admission; OR
(c) Includes a high risk activity such as fireworks, a petting zoo, or bounce house; OR
(d) Involves commercial filming or use of drones; OR
(e) Alcohol will be served at the event; OR
(f) Event proposes to include the closure of a City street per PMC 5.35.040.
Page 245 of 431
(2) Event Requirements and Restrictions
(a) All events serving alcohol must display appropriate permit from the Washington State Liquor and
Cannabis Board.
(b) If food will be prepared and served during the event, event organizers must display appropriate
permits from the Benton-Franklin Health District.
(c) If the event is providing portable toilets, 5% of the toilet units provided must be accessible in
compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
(d) Events with 250 or more attendees must provide a properly maintained and fully functioning AED
which is visible to the public and available for immediate use.
(3) Permit Application Requirements.
(a) All event applicants and listed contacts shall be 18 years or older. The applicant shall provide their
name, address, and valid identification.
(b) Applicant must provide a Site Plan that shows the event location (including street names) as well
as the location of any portable toilets, vendor booths, eating areas, first aid location, fire hydrants,
fencing, and all major structures. Site Plan should be drawn to scale and include all relevant
measurements.
(c) Application shall include a Security Assessment Form per PMC 5.35.070.
(d) Applicant shall provide proof of broad form commercial general liability coverage (occurrence
type trigger) with bodily injury and property damage liability minimum limits of $1,000,000 per
occurrence.
(e) The application shall include the applicable fee as set forth in PMC 3.35.050.
(e) Application shall be submitted no less than 30 days prior to the date of the event.
(4) Application Approval
(a) Applications require approval by the Community & Economic Development Department, Police
Department, and Parks & Recreation Department.
5.35.040 Definitions. Road Closures.
The following definitions shall apply to this chapter:
Page 246 of 431
“Athletic, competitive or festival events” means any event to which the members of the public are invited, with
or without charge, to be conducted upon the public right-of-way, public parks, places or facilities for the
purpose of athletic events, such as but not limited to foot races, walk-a-thons, bicycle races, sponsored walks;
mechanical competitions including, but not limited to, auto racing, auto-cross, motor-cross or vehicle racing;
and festivals or celebrations, including but not limited to food festivals, craft shows, art shows and special
events celebration.
“Concert” means any music festival, dance festival, rock festival or similar musical activity to which music is
provided by paid or amateur performers or by prerecorded means, and to which members of the public are
invited or admitted with or without charge, membership fee or donation.
“Dance hall” means any privately owned place in which a public dance is conducted, operated, or maintained
or made available on a periodic or reoccurring basis and includes the premises in which the public dance is
conducted, operated, or maintained, including but not limited to all public parking areas, hallways, bathrooms,
and other adjoining areas on the premises accessible to the public during the dance.
“Demonstration” means a gathering or assembly of 50 or more people upon the public right-of-way, public
park, place or facility for the purpose of demonstrating, protesting, informing or persuading a political or
ideological point of view.
“Outdoor music festival” means any concert to be held outdoors or outside of a walled and covered structure
for the primary purpose of presenting live or recorded music or other amplified sounds for entertainment.
“Parade” means an informal or formal march or procession or movement of a body of people, vehicles or
things marshaled in succession upon the public right-of-way or public parks, places or facilities.
“Promoter” means any person, group of persons, association, partnership, corporation, or firm engaged in the
business of providing to any vendor, directly or indirectly, sales areas within a temporary special event
location for the purpose of using such location during the term of a temporary event permit, or sponsor of an
athletic, competitive or festival event, concert, outdoor music festival, public dance, demonstration or parade.
“Public dance” means any dance held in a dance hall that is open to the public and which permits the entry of
any person with or without the payment of an admission fee, membership fee or donation from any of the
persons admitted; or any dance not held open to the public, but to which 100 or more people are invited or
attend, except for the following:
(1) A dance operated, held and sponsored by and for the licensees of premises licensed for dancing pursuant
to PMC 5.35.020, provided the dance is in conjunction with the licensee’s regular business;
(2) A dance operated, held and sponsored by a fraternal, veteran, service or charitable organization which is
generally recognized as such and is registered as a nonprofit organization in the State of Washington, by a
bona fide church, or by a political party organization eligible to be on the ballot in Washington State which is
held on premises owned or regularly leased by the organization, or which is generally limited to members of
Page 247 of 431
the organization when held on premises licensed for dancing pursuant to PMC 5.35.020 not owned or regularly
leased by the organization;
(3) A dance operated, held, or sponsored by a generally recognized nonprofit organization registered as such
in the State of Washington when held on premises licensed for dancing pursuant to PMC 5.35.020 and which
is part of a special function of said organization and is not held primarily for the purposes of being a public
dance;
(4) A dance operated, held or sponsored by an educational institution either in or not in conjunction with a
recognized student group which is held on the premises of the institution, attendance to which is restricted to
students and members of the educational institution and individual guests thereof. This exception is not
applicable to dances open to members of another school not cosponsoring it as a joint activity or open to
members of the public.
The determination of nonprofit status for organizations seeking exemption under subsections (2) and (3) of this
section shall be consistent with the applicable definitions and process contained in Chapter 3.05 PMC.
“Sales area” means any stall, booth, stand, space, section, unit or specified floor area within any temporary
special event location where goods or services are offered or displayed by a vendor for the purpose of sale,
trade, barter, exchange or advertisement.
“Temporary special sales event” means the congregation of one or more vendors who rent, lease, purchase or
otherwise obtain a temporary sales area for the purpose of selling, bartering, exchanging, trading or displaying
goods or services at an event which is open to the public for a period not to exceed 10 consecutive calendar
days.
“Temporary special sales location” means an area open to the public, wherein one or more vendors locate for
the purpose of participating in a temporary special sales event.
“Vendor” means any person, association, group, partnership, corporation or firm who exhibits goods or
services in a temporary special sales event location for the purpose of selling, bartering, trading, exchanging or
advertising such goods or services. [Ord. 3764 § 4, 2006; Ord. 3524 § 4, 2001; Code 1970 § 5.25.020.]
(1) Intent
Temporarily closing roads to vehicular traffic can free up space for many types of gatherings including
markets, athletic events, neighborhood block parties, and car shows. The city encourages these uses of public
streets and must also ensure that these events do not pose safety risks or cause unreasonable inconvenience for
other residents. The City offers two types of permits that allow for the temporary closure of roads to vehicular
traffic: Neighborhood Block Party Permits and Street Festival Permits.
A Neighborhood Block Party Permit is intended for residential gatherings that bring together friends and
neighborhoods on their shared block. These permits are available for events that meet a stricter set of criteria
compared to Street Festival Permits.
Page 248 of 431
Street Festival Permits are intended for events such as markets, athletic events, concerts, or car shows. They
may last more than one calendar day, may be ticketed and closed to the public, and can take place in
Commercial and Mixed-use zones.
If applicants demonstrate successful event management, including adhering to all applicable event
requirements, they may apply for an ongoing permit for recurring events.
(2) General Requirements
The following requirements apply to all road closures.
(a) When road closure will disrupt public transit services, permit will require approval from Ben
Franklin Transit (BFT).
(b) Event organizers shall procure barricades, traffic cones, or signs based on what is required for their
road closure type (see PMC 5.35.050(3)(b) and PMC 5.35.050(4)(b) for specific requirements.) The
City does not provide or lend traffic control equipment except for City-sponsored events and closures.
(c) All road closures must maintain 20 feet of clearance for emergency vehicle access. Only easily
movable items may be placed in this area.
(d) An assigned safety monitor must be present at both sides of the block.
(3) Neighborhood Block Party
(a) Eligibility
In order to qualify for a Neighborhood Block Party permit, an event must meet ALL of the following
criteria:
(i) Closure is limited to 1 street block.
(ii) Street is located in a residential zone (any R zones).
(iii) Street is “Local,” as designated by the most recent Transportation Master Plan.
(iii) Event is limited to 8 hours in length, between 9:00 AM and 12:00 AM, and no more than
1 calendar day.
(iv) Event is free and open to the public.
(b) Event Requirements and Restrictions
(i) Road must be blocked on both sides using Type II barricades or garbage/recycling bins
measuring two feet wide at a minimum. Barricades must be placed 6 feet apart or less, with
rope or other material draped between them.
Page 249 of 431
(c) Permit Application Requirements.
(i) Applicant must be 18 years or old and a resident of the block they are proposed to
temporarily close.
(ii) Applicant shall provide their name, address, and valid identification.
(iii) Applicant shall provide a description of activities that will take place during the event.
(vi) Applicant shall provide a site plan showing proposed road closure and cross streets
(labeled), with 20’ of emergency access indicated. Plan should also indicate locations of Type
II barricades and/or waste bins.
(vii) Application shall be submitted no less than 30 days prior to the date of the event.
(d) Permit Approval
Neighborhood Block Party Permits will be reviewed and require approval by the Community &
Economic Development Department, Police Department, Public Works, and City Engineer.
(4) Street Festival Permit
(a) Eligibility
Street closure applications that do not meet the criteria for a Neighborhood Block Party fall under the
umbrella of Street Festival.
(b) Restrictions and Requirements
(i) Road must be blocked on both sides using Type III barricades placed 6 feet apart or less,
with rope or another material draped between them. See the “Street Festival Template” for an
example of the correct configuration.
(c) Application Requirements
Street Festival permits shall be submitted as a supplement to a Special Event in Public Space
Permit, no less than 30 days prior to the date of the event. In addition to the application
requirements for a Special Event in Public Space Permit, Street Festival applicants shall
provide:
(i) Site Plan (drawn to scale) showing proposed road closure and cross streets, including
length and width of street area to be closed. Twenty feet of emergency access across the
whole closure length should also be indicated on the Site Plan. These items can be indicated
on the same Site Plan that is submitted for the Special Events in Public Space Permit, or
separately.
Page 250 of 431
(ii) Traffic Control Plan showing locations of Type III barricades and signage in accordance
with the most current version of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD)
as adopted by the State of Washington. Traffic Control Plan can be included on the Site Plan,
or separately.
(iii) Applications must include the applicable fee as set forth in PMC 3.35.050.
(d) Application Approval
Street Festival Permits will be reviewed and require approval by the Community & Economic
Development Department, Police Department, Public Works, and City Engineer.
5.35.050 Application. Special Assemblies.
A special events permit for all events covered by this chapter, including demonstrations or parades, may be
obtained from the City upon application made in writing at least 30 days prior to the date on which the event is
to be held, upon application forms furnished by the City.
The application form shall include but not be limited to the following information:
(1) Name, age, residence or mailing address of person making the application. If the application is made by a
partnership, corporation or association, the application must be signed by the president or other authorized
officer thereof, and must contain the name and addresses of the officers, managers, or partners of the entity.
(2) A statement of the kind, character or type of event, which the applicant proposes to conduct, operate or
carry on. Give a general description of the event including the names of any performers, specific plans for the
conduct of the event, etc.
(3) The address(es) and description(s) of the place(s) where the proposed event is to be conducted, operated
or carried on and the route of travel if the event includes a parade, or utilizes multiple facilities. If the place or
the event is not a public place, the owner of the premises must provide written consent for the site to be used
for the proposed event.
(4) The date(s) and hours during which said event is to be conducted. Include planned or estimated times for
event setup and takedown, as applicable.
(5) An estimate of the number of participants, spectators, customers or other persons expected to attend said
event for each day it is conducted.
(6) A plat or map showing the location of the special event, including any route of travel and the arrangement
of necessary facilities, including parking, egress and ingress, fire lanes, and such other facilities as may be
necessary for the safe accomplishment of the event.
Page 251 of 431
(7) For events where amplification equipment is proposed to be used, the applicant shall be required to sign a
statement acknowledging receipt of a copy of the City’s noise control regulations (Chapter 9.130 PMC) and
stating applicant’s intent to abide by all applicable provisions thereof.
(8) For events where admission is charged, the applicant shall furnish the name and address of the individual
responsible for the collection and payment of the admission tax and the owner, lessee or custodian of the
premises, who shall be jointly and severally liable to the City for collection and remittance of such tax as
described in PMC 3.05.090, Admissions tax – Remittance of tax. [Ord. 3764 § 5, 2006; Ord. 3592 § 1, 2002; Ord.
3524 § 4, 2001; Code 1970 § 5.25.030.]
Special assembly permits are required when events involve the use of temporary structures and/or will result in
changes to occupancy use. The intent is to mitigate fire and other risks associated with large crowds, dense
gatherings, use of fire or heating facilities, and temporary structures.
If applicants demonstrate successful event management, including adhering to all applicable event
requirements, they may apply for an ongoing permit for recurring events.
(1) Permit Required
A Special Assembly Permit is required when an event is open to the public or a fee is charged for entry, AND;
(a) Event will utilize temporary tents or membrane structures 400 square feet or more in size or an
aggregate area of multiple tents of 700 square feet; OR
(b) Event includes amusement rides or inflatable structures/rides; OR
(c) Event includes temporary stages, bleachers, or other structures; OR
(d) Event takes place in an unsprinklered building and results in a change in occupancy use that
requires sprinklers. For example, events in A2 Occupancies that use 350 square feet or more of space
primarily for standing, dancing, and viewing performance, thereby triggering the nightclub definition
under RCW 19.27.510.
(2) Event Requirements and Restrictions
(a) Events that trigger sprinkler requirements in unsprinklered buildings require designated fire watch
staff. The Fire Marshal will advise on protocol.
(3) Permit Application Requirements
(a) The permit applicant shall provide their name, address, and valid identification.
(b) Site Plan (drawn to scale) showing event location, dimensions of event space, and locations of
structures and activity areas.
(c) Applications must include the applicable fee as set forth in PMC 3.35.050.
Page 252 of 431
(d) Application shall be submitted no less than 30 days prior to the date of the event.
(4) Application review:
Permits will be reviewed and require approval by the Community & Economic Development Department and
Police Department.
5.35.060 Temporary special sales event. Temporary Sales.
(1) In addition to the application stated in PMC 5.35.050, the applicant for temporary special sales events
shall include:
(a) A list of the total number of vendors participating at the temporary special sales event for which the
permit is sought. The list shall include the vendor’s name, address and business phone number, together with a
general description of the goods and/or services offered by each vendor.
(2) Each permit issued under this section shall be limited to the number of days approved for operation of the
temporary special sales event for which the permit is issued. No permit shall be effective for more than 10
consecutive calendar days. [Ord. 3524 § 4, 2001; Code 1970 § 5.25.035.]
Temporary Sales Permits allow one or more vendors to conduct sales without a Pasco Business License for a
limited time. This can apply to many event types, such as a Farmers Market held in a City-owned park, a trade
show held in a privately owned building, or the temporary use of a private parking lot by a single vendor.
If applicants demonstrate successful event management, including adhering to all applicable event
requirements, they may apply for an ongoing permit for recurring temporary sales.
(1) Permit Required
A Temporary Sales Permit is required when one or more vendors will be selling goods without a Pasco
Business License.
(2) Event Requirements and Restrictions
(a) Each permit issued under this section shall be limited to the number of days approved for operation
of the temporary special sales event for which the permit is issued. No permit shall be effective for
more than 10 consecutive calendar days.
(b) Sales permitted to use city-owned sidewalks or other public ways must adhere to the standards set
forth in 5.75.100 Mobile vendor standards.
(3) Application Requirements
(a) Name, address, and valid identification for the permit applicant.
Page 253 of 431
(b) Address of where sale is to take place.
(c) List of vendors participating as well as a general description of goods being sold.
(d) Days and hours the event will take place.
(e) If sales event proposes use of public sidewalk, application shall also include a site plan. Site plan
(drawn to scale) shall show sale location including cross streets, indicate size of vending space, and
show where the vending space will be positioned on the sidewalk.
(f) Applications must include the applicable fee as set forth in PMC 3.35.050.
(g) Application shall be submitted no less than 30 days prior to the date of the event.
(4) Application Review:
Permits will be reviewed and require approval by the Community & Economic Development Department.
5.35.070 Dance halls. Security Assessment.
In addition to the application as required in PMC 5.35.050, the applicant for dance hall operation shall submit:
(1) A statement that the premises are in compliance with all City laws, including but not limited to building,
zoning, planning and fire codes, together with attached documentation of an inspection of the premises
conducted not more than 60 days prior to the date of application.
(2) A statement that the applicant will, in the conduct and operation of the dance hall, comply with all City
laws, including but not limited to the noise control ordinance.
(3) A security plan identifying the method and qualification for providing one security officer for each 100
persons upon the premises.
(4) Description of other food, beverage, or services provided on the premises with copies of necessary
permits and licenses.
(5) A statement identifying the individual entity liable for the collection and payment of the City admission
tax.
(6) The City shall perform a criminal history check in accordance with PMC 5.65.050 for all applicants
seeking a permit under this chapter. [Ord. 4022, 2011; Ord. 3524, 2001; Code 1970 § 5.25.040.]
Providing proper security staff can help mitigate the risks inherent to gathering groups of people in public
space. For large and high-risk events, licensed and state-certified security guards may be necessary. For lower
Page 254 of 431
risk events, staff or volunteers may be assigned to monitor the event, deescalate situations when necessary, and
contact appropriate help in the case of a medical or other emergency.
Applicants for Special Events in Public Space Permits, Street Festivals, and Special Assemblies shall complete
a Security Assessment Form to estimate the type and number of security personnel they will need. The Chief
of Police shall have the final determination on security needs.
(1) Event Risk Scoring Matrix
The matrix below shall be used to approximate the risk level associated with the proposed event. Applicants
shall total up points based on their proposed event to yield a total score.
Table: Event Risk Factor Scoring Matrix
(2) Risk Scoring Guide
Using the table below, applicants can use their total score to determine their recommended security level based
on their event’s score:
Page 255 of 431
Table: Security Level Assessment
(3) Security Requirements
Using the table below, applicants can estimate security personnel needed for the event based on their assessed
risk level. On the Security Assessment Form, applicants will outline their proposed security plan based on their
assessed risk level. The Police Department will review and approve this plan or provide guidance for an
alternative security plan.
Note: event size describes the estimated maximum number of people that will be present at the same time
throughout the duration of the event.
Table: Estimated Security Requirement
Page 256 of 431
5.35.080 Auction sales. Procedure for Application Approval.
(1) All auction sales shall pay a fee for a term of up to three consecutive days; provided, however, that the fee
requirements of this subsection shall not be applicable to persons, firms or corporations having established
places of business in the City and having valid business licenses issued by the City, who wish to hold an
auction for the purpose of disposing of excess inventory, damaged goods, or for promotion; provided,
however, that any auction conducted under this provision shall not exceed one day in length and the person,
firm or corporation holding such auction shall, as a condition precedent, file written notice with the City Clerk
of the date, time, place and nature of the goods to be auctioned and the reasons for conducting the auction.
Notice as required herein shall be filed with the City representative at least 30 days prior to the date the auction
is to be held; and provided further, that no person, firm or corporation shall be entitled to hold more than one
auction each calendar year under this provision without being required to pay the fee. This provision shall not
apply in the following cases:
(a) Judicial sales held pursuant to an order of the court; or
(b) Nonjudicial sales held under the authority of and pursuant to a federal or state statute; or
(c) An auction conducted by or on behalf of a political organization or a charitable corporation or association
if the person conducting the sale receives no compensation; or
(d) An auction conducted by or under the direction of a public authority; or
(e) Wholesale auctions and stockyard auctions, which will be required to pay the regular license fee.
(2) All auction sales to which the above license fee provision applies shall be required to submit with their
license application a legible photocopy of the auctioneer’s current certificate of registration issued by the
Washington State Department of Licensing and the auction company’s certificate of registration issued by the
Washington State Department of Licensing.
(3) Auction sales shall be required to comply with the special events provisions as set forth in this chapter.
[Ord. 4372 § 31, 2017; Ord. 3560 § 6, 2002; Ord. 2831 § 1, 1991; Code 1970 § 5.25.045.]
(1) Applications shall be made to the Community & Economic Development Department, who may issue a
permit, deny a permit, or set conditions, limitations or restrictions that must be met before a permit may be
granted. The City shall process a complete application and respond to the applicant within two weeks of
submittal.
(2) The denial of any permit or the imposition of any conditions, limitations or restrictions incident to the
granting of a permit shall be based solely upon those requirements reasonably necessary to protect the peace,
health, safety and welfare of those both participating in the event and others using the public facilities. No
permit shall be granted, conditioned or denied based upon the content of the applicant’s stated purpose,
expression of lawful speech because of race, creed, color, national origin, families with children, sex, marital
Page 257 of 431
status, age, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability or the use of a trained dog guide or
service animal by a disabled person.
(3) If conditions are imposed, the applicant shall furnish proof that all conditions have been met before any
permit may be issued.
(4) The permit shall be posted in a conspicuous place on the premises where the event is conducted. No permit
issued pursuant to this chapter shall be transferable to any entity or person other than applicant, or removed to
another location, date or time than that stated on the application.
5.35.090 Public dance. Appeal.
Any public dance, other than those conducted on the premises of a dance hall, and in addition to the
application provided in PMC 5.35.050, shall:
(1) Identify the date and time of the conduct of the public dance. A permit shall be required for each date and
time the public dance is to be conducted and shall only be good for the place, date and time specified in the
permit.
(2) A security plan identifying the method and qualification for providing one security officer for each 100
persons upon the premises.
(3) Description of other licensed food, beverage, or services provided on the premises.
(4) A statement identifying the individual liable for the collection and payment of the City admission tax.
(5) The City shall perform a criminal history check in accordance with PMC 5.65.050 for all applicants
seeking a permit under this chapter. [Ord. 4022, 2011; Ord. 3524 § 4, 2001; Code 1970 § 5.25.050.]
Any person aggrieved by the issuance, denial, or conditions imposed upon the permit may seek review of the
determination by the Community & Economic Development Department within five days of the determination.
At such hearing, the applicant shall have the burden of proof showing that the determination was arbitrary,
capricious, or contrary to the requirements of this chapter.
The determination of the Community & Economic Development shall be final unless appealed to the City
Council within 10 days of the determination.
5.35.100 Carnivals and circuses. Revocation of Permit.
(1) License Required. It shall be unlawful for a carnival or circus, as defined in subsection (2) of this section,
to engage in business within the City of Pasco without first having obtained a business license.
Page 258 of 431
(2) Definitions. The following terms and definitions shall be used in the administration of this chapter:
“Carnival” shall mean a business activity featuring an assemblage of mechanical rides for the enjoyment,
amusement, entertainment, merriment or pastime of the patrons thereof, and usually but not necessarily offers
patrons in addition to the rides food and beverage services, as well as games involving throwing, pitching or
shooting skills.
“Circus” shall mean any institution whose general occupation is that of exhibiting wild animals, feats of
horsemanship, animal stunts and acrobatic or aquatic sports, to which a fee is charged for admission.
(3) Application. Any person, firm, or corporation desiring to secure a license to operate a carnival or circus
shall make application to the City on forms provided by the City. Such application shall provide:
(a) The name or names and address of the applicant;
(b) The location of the proposed carnival or circus;
(c) Nature of the business activity;
(d) Each license application for a carnival or circus shall be accompanied with the following
information to establish compliance with applicable codes:
(i) The number of food vending conveyances, if any, to be utilized in conjunction with the
proposed business activity;
(ii) Proof of insurance as required by subsection (8) of this section;
(iii) Proof of a valid electrical permit from the Department of Labor and Industries;
(iv) A statement explaining the method of trash and litter disposal being proposed;
(v) A notarized written authorization from the owners of the property so noted on the
application;
(vi) A drawing of a scale not greater than 50 feet per inch and not less than 10 feet per inch,
which drawing shall depict the following information:
(A) The portion of the property to be occupied by the business;
(B) The portion of the property to be used for automobile parking and the number
of automobiles accommodated in said area;
(C) The location of driveways providing ingress and egress to the property;
(D) The location of existing buildings and structures located on the property noting
the use of each building or structure so identified.
Page 259 of 431
(4) Investigation and Determination. Upon receipt of such application, the City Clerk shall cause such
investigation of such person’s or persons’ business responsibility to be made as is deemed necessary for
protection of the public good and shall refer the application to the Community Development and Fire
Departments for determination as to compliance with applicable codes. Criminal history checks shall be
performed in accordance with PMC 5.65.050. An application shall be denied by the City Clerk upon written
findings that the applicant’s business responsibility is unsatisfactory or that the proposed business activity will
violate any applicable law, rule or regulation. Otherwise, upon submittal of the required application and
information and following collection of fees and receipt of approvals from applicable City departments, the
Health District (if applicable) and the Department of Labor and Industries, the City Clerk shall issue the
license.
(5) Appeals. Any person aggrieved by the denial of an application for a license or by the revocation of a
license as provided for in this chapter shall have the right to appeal to the City Council. Such appeal shall be
taken by filing with the City Clerk within 14 calendar days after the notice of decision has been mailed, by
certified mail, to the applicant’s or licensee’s last known address, a written statement setting forth the grounds
for the appeal. The Council shall set the time and place for hearing on such appeal, and notice of such hearing
shall be given by certified mail or personal service to the appellant at least five calendar days prior to the date
fixed for such hearing.
(6) Standards. All carnivals and circuses licensed under this chapter shall conform to the following standards:
(a) No carnival or circus shall be licensed for a location in a residential zoning district or office
district, as defined in PMC Title 25, excepting Edgar Brown Stadium;
(b) No carnival or circus shall be located within 500 feet of a residential zoning district as defined in
PMC Title 25;
(c) No carnival or circus activity shall locate or operate in such a manner as to interfere with traffic
circulation, emergency services or other normal City operations;
(d) No carnival or circus shall be located within 50 feet of flammable combustible liquid or gas
storage and dispensing structures;
(e) Provisions must be made for the control of dust and litter;
(f) Provisions for off-street parking on the site and a reasonable and safe means of ingress/egress
must be shown;
(g) All amusement rides shall be set back from all public rights-of-way and electrical distribution
lines a distance equal to the height of the amusement ride;
(h) All signs and equipment must be removed and the premises shall be free of all trash, litter and
debris within three days after the termination of the use.
Page 260 of 431
(7) License Fee. Every circus and carnival shall pay a license fee as set forth in Chapter 3.35 PMC for the
first day and an additional fee for each and every day after the first day of operation. All food booths require a
separate food handler’s license and per Chapter 5.50 PMC. Each licensee shall pay the regular admission tax
on all admission tickets or admissions for which a charge is made. The license fee is paid in advance for each
day said carnival or circus proposes to operate within the City, except that a no fee license to qualifying
nonprofit organizations may be issued under PMC 5.05.170.
(8) Insurance. Before any license shall be granted, the applicant must present certificates of insurance with
original endorsements effecting coverage required by this section. The certificates and endorsements are to be
signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The City reserves the right to
require complete certified copies of all required insurance policies at any time. The applicant shall maintain
broad form commercial general liability coverage (occurrence type trigger) with bodily injury and property
damage liability minimum limits of $1,000,000 per occurrence.
(9) Penalty. It is unlawful for any person to violate any terms of this chapter. Every person found in violation
of any terms of this chapter shall be punished by fine of not more than $300.00. [Ord. 4372 § 32, 2017; Ord. 4022,
2011; Ord. 3560 § 15, 2002; Ord. 3190 § 6, 1996; Ord. 2850 § 1, 1991; Code 1970 § 5.25.055.]
Notwithstanding any of the provisions of this chapter, the City may issue an emergency order revoking a
permit upon a failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the permit, or when the Chief of Police, the
Fire Chief, or the Community & Economic Development Director or designee believes that such action is
necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety or general welfare. The emergency
order shall set forth the grounds upon which it is based, including a statement of facts constituting the
emergency necessitating such action. The emergency order shall be effective immediately upon issuance and
service, whether written or verbal, upon the permittee and participants. Failure to comply with any conditions
of approval or representations made within the application documents shall be grounds for immediate
revocation of the permit.
5.35.110 Concerts, outdoor music festivals and athletic or
competitive events.
(1) In addition to the application required in PMC 5.35.050, the applicant for a concert, outdoor music
festival, athletic or competitive event shall submit an event facility plan, which shall include the following:
(a) The estimated number of customers, spectators or participants expected to attend, and the total
number of tickets available for sale. The number of tickets actually sold or distributed shall be
provided to public safety officials 24 hours before the event. A statement identifying the
individual/entity liable for the collection and payment of the City admissions tax.
Page 261 of 431
(b) A full and detailed outline of all show requirements, including stage, lighting, personnel, bleacher
and seating requirements, canopies, power and cable needs and locations, and illumination. A drawing
of the event site shall be included showing the arrangement of the above facilities.
(c) A plan showing the proposed location and description of the methods of providing for the
following:
(i) Security and fire protection;
(ii) Water supplies and facilities;
(iii) Food supplies and facilities;
(iv) Sanitary facilities;
(v) Medical facilities and services, including emergency medical personnel and emergency
medical transport services available;
(vi) A feasible plan for parking;
(vii) Vehicle access and on-site traffic control.
(d) Contingent plans for numbers of spectators in excess of the estimate.
(e) Provisions for cleanup of the premises and removal of rubbish.
(f) Proof of premises and liability insurance in such amount and coverage as recommended by the
City’s insurance provider.
(2) Security plan including, but not limited to the following:
(a) The name of the organization providing security, including the number of security officers,
consisting of not less than one officer for every 100 anticipated persons in attendance. The proposed
security organization must be approved by the Chief of Police.
(b) Coordination with the City Police Department.
(c) Provisions for control of spectators in excess of the estimated number of facility capacities and
emergency vehicle access.
(3) A statement identifying the individual entity liable for the collection and payment of the City admission
tax. [Ord. 3764 § 6, 2006; Ord. 3524 § 4, 2001; Code 1970 § 5.25.060.]
Page 262 of 431
5.35.120 Outdoor music festival – Additional requirements.
In addition to the requirements in PMC 5.35.050 and 5.35.110, the applicant for an outdoor music festival shall
provide the information required by RCW 70.108.040, which includes:
(1) The name of the person or other legal entity on behalf of whom said application is made; provided, that a
natural person applying for such permit shall be 18 years of age or older.
(2) A financial statement of the applicant (except where the applicant is a qualified political, religious,
charitable or nonprofit organization).
(3) The nature of the business organization of the applicant.
(4) Names and addresses of all individuals or other entities having a 10 percent or more proprietary interest in
the festival.
(5) The principal place of business of applicant.
(6) A legal description of the land to be occupied, and the name and address of the owner thereof, together
with a document showing the consent of said owner to the issuance of a permit, if the land be owned by a
person other than the applicant.
(7) The schedule of performances and programs.
(8) Names and addresses of any and all vendors, peddlers or tradesmen who will conduct a business on the
festival premises. All vendors selling or distributing food items to the public must have been approved by, and
received a health permit from, the local health department as necessary.
(9) Written confirmation from the local health officer that he or she has reviewed and approved plans for site
and development in accordance with rules, regulations and standards adopted by the State Board of Health.
Such rules and regulations shall include criteria as to the following and such other matters as the State Board of
Health deems necessary to protect the public’s health:
(a) Submission of plans;
(b) Site;
(c) Insect and rodent control;
(d) Shelter;
(e) Dust control;
(f) Lighting;
(g) Emergency air evacuation;
Page 263 of 431
(h) Attendant physicians;
(i) Communication systems; and
(j) If it is proposed or expected that spectators or participants will remain at night, or
overnight, arrangements for illuminating the premises and for camping or for similar facilities.
(10) A written confirmation from the appropriate law enforcement agency from the area where the outdoor
music festival is to take place, showing that traffic control and crowd protection policing have been contracted
for or otherwise provided by the applicant meeting the following conditions:
(a) One person for each 200 persons reasonably expected to be in attendance at any time during the
event for purposes of traffic and crowd control. Approved security personnel shall be present on site
for the two hours preceding and two hours after the scheduled event times.
(b) The names and addresses of all traffic and crowd control personnel shall be provided to the
appropriate law enforcement authority; provided, that not less than 20 percent of the traffic and crowd
control personnel shall be commissioned police officers or deputy sheriffs.
(c) During the hours that the festival site shall be open to the public, there shall be at least one
regularly commissioned police officer employed by the jurisdiction wherein the festival site is located
for every 1,000 persons in attendance and said officer shall be on duty within the confines of the
actual outdoor music festival site. The applicant shall pay the full cost of said officer to the City in
advance of the event.
(d) All law enforcement personnel shall be charged with enforcing the provisions of this chapter and
all existing statutes, ordinances and regulations.
(11) A written confirmation from the appropriate law enforcement authority that sufficient access roads are
available for ingress and egress to the parking areas of the outdoor music festival site and that parking areas are
available on the actual site of the festival or immediately adjacent thereto which are capable of accommodating
one auto for every four persons in estimated attendance at the outdoor music festival site.
(12) A written confirmation from the Department of Natural Resources, where applicable, and the Director of
Community Services, through the Fire Chief, that all fire prevention requirements have been complied with.
(13) A written statement of the applicant that all state and local law enforcement officers, fire control officers
and other necessary governmental personnel shall have free access to the site of the outdoor music festival.
(14) A statement that the applicant will abide by the provisions of this chapter.
(15) The verification of the applicant warranting the truth of the matters as set forth in the application to the
best of the applicant’s knowledge, under the penalty of perjury. [Ord. 3569 § 5, 2002; Ord. 3524 § 4, 2001; Code 1970
§ 5.25.065.]
Page 264 of 431
5.35.130 Permit fee.
(1) The application provided under this chapter shall be accompanied by the payment of a permit fee as set
forth in Chapter 3.35 PMC for each of the following categories:
(a) Auctions;
(b) Carnivals and circuses;
(c) Concerts, athletic and competitive events and festivals;
(d) Dance hall. Base permit fee as provided in PMC 5.05.130 and 5.05.140 is applicable;
(e) Demonstrations, parades, public dances;
(f) Outdoor music festivals;
(g) Temporary Special Sales Events. The permit fee shall be calculated per vendor, except for
businesses already holding a current city business license. In no event shall a total business license for
such an event exceed the maximum fee set forth in Chapter 3.35 PMC for temporary sales events. The
fee shall be paid by the promoter for each vendor who intends to be included under the promoter’s
temporary special sales event permit and shall be remitted by the promoter to the City three days prior
to commencement of the temporary special sales event. The promoter shall be personally responsible
for all sums collected, or any sum which should have been collected from a vendor.
(2) In the event the City is to provide either all or a portion of the crowd or traffic control, in addition to the
fee provided above, an additional fee in the amount to be determined by the Chief of Police, which will be
calculated upon the number of police officers that must be present to provide adequate public safety, multiplied
by the current overtime hourly rate paid for the highest patrolman classification in effect at the time of the
event for the period of time for which traffic and/or crowd control will be necessary.
(3) The permit fee (other than the City’s costs for crowd and/or traffic control) may be waived by the City
Council upon application sponsored by a bona fide nonprofit corporation, charity, religious or political
organization.
No fee shall be imposed when prohibited by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States
Constitution or the Washington Constitution. Political or religious activity intended primarily for the
communication or expression of ideas shall be presumed to be a constitutionally protected event. Factors that
may be considered in evaluating whether or not the fee applies include: the nature of the event; the extent to
which the fee creates an unreasonable burden upon constitutionally protected activities; the extent of
commercial activity, such as the sales of goods, food, and services; product advertising or promotion, or other
business participation in the event; the use or application of any funds raised in the conduct of previous events
sponsored by the same promoter.
Page 265 of 431
(4) Bond. The City may require the posting of a bond of sufficient amount to insure the satisfactory
compliance with the conditions of permit issuance, including the costs of cleanup and repairs.
(5) Nothing herein shall relieve any promoter or applicant from complying with all other required federal,
state, and local regulations, fees and licensing requirements.
(6) The permit fee shall be paid prior to the event and shall not be refundable. [Ord. 4372 § 33, 2017; Ord. 3560
§ 22, 2002; Ord. 3524 § 4, 2001; Code 1970 § 5.25.070.]
5.35.140 Procedure for application approval.
(1) Applications shall be made to the City Clerk. All applications for permits issued under this chapter shall
be made no less than 30 days prior to the scheduled event, except in the case of outdoor music festivals, which
shall be submitted not less than 90 days prior to the first scheduled day of the event. The completed application
and required documents shall be circulated by the City Clerk for review and recommendation to the Chief of
Police, the Fire Chief, and the Community Services Director. Based upon the recommendation of the said
department heads, the City Clerk may issue a permit, deny a permit, or set conditions, limitations or
restrictions that must be met before a permit may be granted. The City shall timely process a complete
application and promptly respond to the applicant.
(2) The denial of any permit or the imposition of any conditions, limitations or restrictions incident to the
granting of a permit shall be based solely upon those requirements reasonably necessary to protect the peace,
health, safety and welfare of those both participating in the event and others using the public facilities. No
permit shall be granted, conditioned or denied based upon the content of the applicant’s stated purpose,
expression of lawful speech because of race, creed, color, national origin, families with children, sex, marital
status, age, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability or the use of a trained dog guide or
service animal by a disabled person.
(3) If conditions are imposed, the applicant shall furnish proof that all conditions have been met before any
permit may be issued.
(4) The permit shall be posted in a conspicuous place on the premises where the event is conducted. No
permit issued pursuant to this chapter shall be transferable to any entity or person other than applicant, or
removed to another location, date or time than that stated on the application. [Ord. 3560 § 23, 2002; Ord. 3524 § 4,
2001; Code 1970 § 5.25.080.]
5.35.150 Appeal.
Any person aggrieved by the issuance, denial, or conditions imposed upon the permit may seek review of the
determination by the City Manager within five days of the determination.
Page 266 of 431
At such hearing, the applicant shall have the burden of proof showing that the determination was arbitrary,
capricious, or contrary to the requirements of this chapter.
The determination of the City Manager shall be final unless appealed to the City Council within 10 days of the
City Manager’s determination. [Ord. 3524 § 4, 2001; Code 1970 § 5.25.090.]
5.35.160 Revocation of permit.
Notwithstanding any of the provisions of this chapter, the City may issue an emergency order revoking a
permit upon a failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the permit, or when the Chief of Police, the
Fire Chief, or the City Manager believes that such action is necessary for the immediate preservation of the
public peace, health, safety or general welfare. The emergency order shall set forth the grounds upon which it
is based, including a statement of facts constituting the emergency necessitating such action. The emergency
order shall be effective immediately upon issuance and service, whether written or verbal, upon the permittee
and participants. Failure to comply with any conditions of approval or representations made within the
application documents shall be grounds for immediate revocation of the permit. [Ord. 3524 § 4, 2001; Code 1970
§ 5.25.100.]
5.35.170 Crowd and traffic control.
(1) In reviewing each application, the Police Chief shall determine the minimum number of police officers
and the number of hours for each officer to be in attendance at the event for the purpose of providing crowd
and traffic control.
(2) At the applicant’s request, the Police Department shall determine the minimum number of private security
officers and the number of hours for each officer to be in attendance at the event for the purpose of providing
traffic and crowd control. This shall be in lieu of the requirement of the City’s police officers. The applicant
may request a computation of the number of City police officers and their hours in combination with the
number of private security officers and their hours in lieu of having security provided entirely by the City
Police Department or entirely by private security officers.
(3) The number, duties, and gender of police or security officers that may be required by the Police
Department for approval shall be based upon the following:
(a) The type of event and the estimated attendance;
(b) The design and location of the premises;
(c) The past history of disorder, criminal events and demand for safety services associated with prior
events held by the applicant, the type of event, or the premises in which it is located;
Page 267 of 431
(d) The past record of the private security agency providing crowd and traffic control for such
events; and
(e) The physical abilities and training of the police officers or private security officers assigned to the
event.
(4) Police and fire officials shall be provided necessary access to the event premises. Failure to allow access
shall be grounds for permit revocation. [Ord. 3524 § 4, 2001; Code 1970 § 5.25.110.]
5.35.180 Street and intersection closures.
(1) Each application for a special events permit which includes a request for a closure (or partial closure) of a
street or intersection shall include the following:
(a) Indemnity. The applicant shall be required to sign a statement that he or she shall defend,
indemnify and otherwise hold harmless the City of Pasco, its officers, employees and agents from any
and all claims or liability arising from the City’s grant of permission for or the actual conduct of the
special event associated with, and including, such street closure.
(b) Insurance. The applicant shall provide evidence of liability insurance coverage, for review by the
City’s Risk Manager, with the City of Pasco, its officers, employees and agents named as additional
insured parties and offering death, personal injury and property damage liability in an amount not less
than $1,000,000.
(c) Notice. The applicant shall provide for payment of one newspaper publication and posting, at
each end of the to be closed portion of the street and at all intersecting streets, of the notice of street
closure (for closures of duration in excess of 12 hours) pursuant to RCW 47.48.020; or for closures of
less than 12 hours, posting of such notice, posting only as outlined above.
(d) Traffic Control Plan and Devices. The applicant shall provide a plan and such barricades, traffic
cones or signs, in conformance with the most current version of the Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices (MUTCD) as adopted by the State of Washington and approved by the City
Engineer, as are necessary to accomplish the proposed closure. The City does not provide or lend
traffic control equipment except for City-sponsored events and closures.
(e) Review Fee. A review fee, which shall be in addition to any special event fee, and as set forth in
Chapter 3.35 PMC, shall be required with each application for closure of a street or intersection. The
fee shall be nonrefundable, regardless of whether the application is approved or denied.
(2) Each street closure request contained within an application for special event shall be reviewed by a
committee consisting of the City Engineer (or designee), the Police Chief (or designee) and the City Fire Chief
(or designee). The committee shall determine if requested street or intersection closures will be allowed,
Page 268 of 431
together with any additional requirements for traffic flow, public safety, access or public notice. Any appeal of
the decision of the committee may be made to the City Manager pursuant to PMC 5.35.150.
(3) The committee shall approve an application for a street or intersection closure which satisfies the
requirements set out in subsection (1) of this section, together with such other requirements as the committee
may impose, pursuant to subsection (2) of this section, unless it finds one or more of the following conditions,
in which case the application shall be denied:
(a) That the closure is likely to unreasonably interfere with vehicle or pedestrian traffic flow; or
(b) That the closure is likely to create an unmitigatable danger to vehicular or pedestrian traffic; or
(c) That the closure will cause irrevocable interference with previously approved and/or scheduled
construction, maintenance or other activities; or
(d) That the closure will seriously inconvenience the general public’s use of public property,
services or facilities; or
(e) That there is not sufficient public safety personnel or other necessary city staff to accommodate
the closure so that it may occur in a reasonably safe manner; or
(f) That the closure would endanger public safety or health; or
(g) That the closure would be likely to cause unreasonable damage to public properties or facilities;
or
(h) That the closure is not necessary to accommodate an event or activity sponsored by a public
entity or available to the general public for the period of the closure. [Ord. 4074, 2012; Code 1970
§ 5.25.115.]
Section 2. Pasco Municipal Code Chapter 5.52 Parklets and Public Space Cafes is
amended as follows:
Chapter 5.52
PARKLETS, AND PUBLIC SPACE CAFÉS, AND SIDEWALK DISPLAYS
Sections:
5.52.010 Purpose and intent.
5.52.020 Permit required.
5.52.030 Definitions.
5.52.040 Eligibility.
5.52.050 Terms and conditions.
5.52.060 Design standards.
Page 269 of 431
5.52.070 Conversion of parking spaces for a public space café.
5.52.080 Application.
5.52.090 Sidewalk Displays
Section 3. Pasco Municipal Code 5.52.030 is amended as follows:
5.52.030 Definitions.
“Parklet” means the use of the sidewalk, planting strip, curb space, alley, or parking space by the City as a
temporary or semipermanent public space.
“Pedestrian clear zone” means an area of the sidewalk reserved for pedestrians and free of elements such as
street furniture, planters, fire hydrants, and street trees.
“Public space café” means the use of the sidewalk, planting strip, curb space, alley, or parking space by an
adjacent restaurant, café, or bar into a temporary or semipermanent area for use by patrons.
“Sidewalk Display” means the use of the sidewalk, planting strip, curb space, or alley by an adjacent retail
establishment for display of merchandise.
Note: The photos below are examples of public space uses and are not intended to serve as regulations or
standards as part of this code.
Figure 5.52.030.01. A public space café using sidewalk space adjacent to the business frontage to
provide additional seating for customers.
Page 270 of 431
Figure 5.52.030.02. A public space café positioned between the sidewalk and the curb takes advantage
of street trees to provide dappled shade to customers.
Figure 5.52.030.03. Parking spaces converted into a public space café using a platform to meet curb
grade.
Figure 5.52.030.04. A parklet design turns parking spaces into a public area with swings and tables.
Page 271 of 431
Figure 5.52.030.05. A nursery creates a sidewalk display using potted plants.
Figure 5.52.030.06. Shoppers browse through clothing racks displayed in front of a main street retail
store.
Section 4. Pasco Municipal Code Chapter 5.52.090 is amended as follows:
5.52.090 Sidewalk Displays.
Sidewalk displays provide a way for retail establishments to creatively display merchandise for view by
passersby by utilizing right-of-way space. Like Public Space Cafés, Sidewalk Displays add interest to the
pedestrian experience, while also providing ways for small businesses to attract customers. Sidewalk Displays
must not interfere with pedestrian movement or other functions of the public way.
(1) Permit Required
Page 272 of 431
(a) No person shall operate a sidewalk display in the public place without obtaining a sidewalk display
permit.
(c) A sidewalk display permit expires if: the business changes ownership or the business vacates the
premises, except when a permit transfer is approved by the Community and Economic Development
Department; the sidewalk display permit duration expires; or sidewalk display permit fees are not
paid.
(c) All public space café permits are of a temporary nature and vest no permanent rights. The
Community and Economic Development Department may suspend any public space café permit for
transportation mobility or public safety purposes.
(2) Eligibility
To be eligible for a Sidewalk Display, businesses must have building frontage in Pasco on a street with a speed
limit of 30 mph or less
(3) Requirements
(a) Sidewalk Displays are allowed on sidewalks, parking spaces, alley ways or other public spaces
abutting the eligible business’s property.
(b) Sidewalk Displays shall only include merchandise for sale and display materials such as clothing
racks. Additional permitted items include chairs or benches.
(c) The placement of a Sidewalk Display shall not obstruct vehicular traffic or the use of any
crosswalk, wheelchair ramp, bus, or taxi zone
(d) Use of sidewalks shall not reduce pedestrian clear zone to less than three feet.
(e) A setback of five feet or greater from curb ramps, traffic signs, utility poles, fire hydrants, bike
racks, and other street fixtures is required.
(f) A setback of three feet or greater from the front of the curb is required wherever a display abuts a
parking lane.
(g) A setback of 10 feet or greater from the corner curb radius area is required.
Section 5. Pasco Municipal Code 5.75.040 is amended as follows:
5.75.040 Exemptions.
The provisions of this chapter shall not be construed to apply to the following: (1) The following shall not be
required to obtain a mobile vending permit:
Page 273 of 431
(a) Persons selling only fruits, vegetables, berries, eggs or any farm produce or edibles raised,
gathered, produced or manufactured by such persons in the State of Washington per RCW 36.71.090.
(b) Persons selling only trees used for the celebration of the Christmas season. [Ord. 4722 § 3, 2024;
Ord. 2826 § 1, 1991; Code 1970 § 5.10A.030. Formerly 5.75.030.]
(2) The above described vendors shall adhere to the requirements set forth in 5.75.100(1).
Section 6. Pasco Municipal Code Chapter 5.90 Rummage and Yard Sales is amended as
follows:
Chapter 5.90
RUMMAGE AND YARD SALES
Sections:
5.90.010 Definitions.
5.90.020 Yard sales.
5.90.030 Rummage sales.
5.90.040 Sales in hospitals or schools.
5.90.050 Violations.
5.90.010 Definitions.
“Nonprofit organization” includes but is not limited to fraternal organizations, hobby societies, educational
societies, historical societies, museums, hospital auxiliary groups, churches, church auxiliary organizations,
student groups and parent-teacher organizations.
“Rummage sale” means a rummage sale, white elephant sale, auction sale or any similar sale of merchandise
by a nonprofit organization when the proceeds of such sale are intended to be used in a community service,
child or youth activity, charitable or other welfare work.
“Yard sale” means a yard sale, patio sale, garage sale or any similar sale of merchandise by an individual or
group for profit when the merchandise to be sold is offered to the general public. [Ord. 1499 § 1, 1971; Code 1970
§ 5.52.010.]
5.90.020 Yard sales.
Page 274 of 431
(1) Yard sales shall be limited to two such sales in each calendar year for each individual household. No sale
shall be conducted for a period of no more than two consecutive calendar days.
(2) Merchandise offered for sale at a yard sale must consist of used or secondhand material owned by the
person granted the permit or members of the individual household.
(3) Any individual household before conducting any yard sale must have a permit. Such a permit is obtained
by making application at least 24 hours prior to commencement of the sale, at the Finance office or online at
the City’s website (permit application). The application must be made by a member of the individual
household 18 years of age or older and shall describe the location and dates of the sale.
(4) Upon completion and approval of the application a permit shall be issued containing the information
shown in the application. No fee shall be required for yard sale permits.
(5) Permits issued under this section. Yard sales shall be restricted to properties zoned or used for residential
purposes on private property and shall not be permitted on sidewalks, alleys, streets or any other public way.
Location shall be limited to property occupied by the person making the application for the permit. Sales in
commercial or industrial areas are subject to “temporary special sales events” permits per Chapter PMC 5.35
PMC.
(6) Any sale shall be conducted in an orderly manner and shall not constitute a public nuisance nor hazard to
persons or property.
(7) Yard sale signs are allowed only for permitted yard sales in conformance with PMC 17.15.020. [Ord. 4100,
2013; Ord. 3560 § 45, 2002; Ord. 1499 § 2, 1971; Code 1970 § 5.52.020.]
5.90.030 Rummage sales.
(1) Nonprofit organizations as defined herein may conduct rummage sales upon issuance of a permit by the
City Clerk. The permit will be issued when an application is submitted by an authorized member of the
organization. The application shall show the name and type of organization, intended use of proceeds from the
sale, type of materials to be sold, the location and the date of the sale.
(2) A fee as set forth in Chapter 3.35 PMC shall accompany each application for permit and a permit shall be
required for each separate sale. The sale shall be conducted for a continuous period of not more than two
calendar days. The permit shall be displayed at the site of the sale.
(3) Location shall not be limited by application of any zoning requirements, but shall be restricted to private
property not necessarily occupied by the organization conducting the sale. Sale shall not be conducted on
sidewalks, alleys, streets or other public ways; except as expressly authorized by the City Council.
(4) Sales permitted herein shall be conducted in an orderly manner and shall not constitute a public nuisance
nor hazard to persons or property. [Ord. 3560 § 46, 2002; Ord. 1499 § 3, 1971; Code 1970 § 5.52.030.]
Page 275 of 431
5.90.040 Sales in hospitals or schools.
Nothing contained in this chapter shall restrict or prohibit the operation of gift shops in neither hospitals nor
sales by school or parent-teacher organizations within public or private schools. [Ord. 1499 § 4, 1971; Code 1970
§ 5.52.040.]
5.90.050 Violations.
The conduct of any sale described herein without possession of the permit required herein or any false
statement made in an application for a sale permit shall be considered a violation of this chapter. Any person or
organization who shall violate any provision of this chapter will be subject to a fine of not more than $500.00.
Each day of violation hereof may be considered a separate offense. [Ord. 1499 § 5, 1971; Code 1970 § 5.52.050.]
Section 7. Pasco Municipal Code Chapter 5.95 Sidewalk Sales is hereby repealed.
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 full force and effect five (5) days
after approval, passage and publication as required by law.
Page 276 of 431
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington 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 277 of 431
February 13, 2026 | 1
Memo
To: City of Pasco
Cc:
From: Framework Cultural Placemaking
Date: 11/06/2025
Re: City Council Meeting 08/25/25
Special Events and Sales Permit Code Update
The City of Pasco Community & Economic Development Department (CED) has been working with
consultant firm Framework on code amendments focused on Title 5 Business Licenses and Regulations,
specifically related to Special Events and different types of sales. On August 25, CED delivered a presentation
to City Council outlining overarching goals for the update, as well as key findings from the initial code audit.
This Memo outlines proposed code updates aimed at creating an easier process for applicants and review
staff that maintains the necessary framework for encouraging safe, vibrant, and well-functioning events.
Project Background
This effort is part of the implementation of the Pasco Downtown Master Plan, one of the goals of which is
to have more events Downtown. The project also comes in response to feedback from Special Event permit
applicants who have been deterred or frustrated by the current process. This review also considers sales
events, of which there are many types with differing requirements within Title 5.
By making updates to Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) and the accompanying permit processes related to
Special Events and sales events, this project aims to provide more opportunities for cultural enrichment,
economic development, and vibrant public spaces throughout Pasco.
Code Audit Process:
The consultant and City team performed the following:
• Overall review of Title 5 to evaluate clarity, organization, and compatibility with project goals.
• Interviews with members of the Police Department, Parks Department, Business Licensing
Department, and HAPO Center.
• Precedent study to evaluate how other Tri-cities manage Special Events.
• Presentation to and feedback from City Council.
Page 278 of 431
February 13, 2026 | 2
Proposed Code Updates: Overview
The results of the audit, which are highlighted below, yielded the following goals:
• Outline clear thresholds for requiring a Special Event Permit.
• Outline clear requirements for number and type of security personnel.
• Offer pre-approved plans for street closures of various scales.
• Clarify and remove some permit requirements related to sales events.
• Streamline the permit process to reduce turnaround time.
Proposed Code Updates: Special Events
Thresholds
When is a gathering a “Special Event” that requires a permit? Does a barbeque in the park require a permit?
A ribbon-cutting ceremony? A wedding held at a restaurant? Do all events need to adhere to the same
permit requirements?
Different cities have different systems and thresholds for determining when a Special Event Permit is
required. Generally, permits are required when events will require the use of City infrastructure and
resources such as:
• An influx of drivers creating additional traffic or occupying parking spaces.
• The need for City staff during events, or for set-up and clean-up.
• Road closures for festivals, races, etc.
• The use of public parks, sidewalks, or other public ways.
• The need for police presence.
Currently, Pasco’s Special Event Permits are based on event types, which require different fees and forms.
The interview process revealed the following challenges:
• The event-specific requirements are not well-understood by applicants or staff.
• Some events do not fall into the prescribed categories, and complying with event-specific
requirements may pose an unnecessary burden for these applicants. For example, a ribbon-cutting
ceremony may not warrant insurance requirements or security personnel.
• There is confusion around what is required of the HAPO center and generally of events that occur
within buildings.
Page 279 of 431
February 13, 2026 | 3
Recommendation:
The proposed update is to establish clear thresholds for when a Special Event Permit is required, with
specific forms and fees required based on the content of the event (i.e. road closure, ticket sales, vendors).
The proposed thresholds are as follows:
A Special Event Permit is required when:
(1) The activities and/or expected attendance will trigger a change in occupancy use. For example, a karaoke
night with the use of floor space for standing room/dancing that triggers sprinkler requirements based on
RCW 19.27.510 “Nightclub” defined” in an unsprinklered building; OR
(2) The event involves closing a public street to car traffic; OR
(3) The event includes takes place in a park or public way AND
(1) Is expected to draw 100 or more people at one time; OR
(2) Requires a ticket or paid admission; OR
(3) Includes a high risk activity such as fireworks, a petting zoo, or bounce house; OR
(4) Involves commercial filming or use of drones; OR
(5) Alcohol will be served at the event.
The above thresholds are based on the evaluation of several precedent cities, and are aimed at requiring
permits for events that will impact the public or pose a safety risk. All other gatherings that do not meet the
above thresholds will not require a Special Event Permit.
Security Personnel
Another key source of confusion around Special Event applications concerns requirements to staff events
with security personnel. The current code (5.35.170: Crowd and traffic control) stipulates that:
• Police will review applications and determine how many officers shall be present at the event.
• Police shall determine the minimum number of private security officers required to be present at the
event.
However, the Police Department reports that they do not attend events outside of responding to calls for
service. Further, they report that there is confusion around the requirements for security personnel, which
do not necessarily need to be licensed security guards. In some cases, security guards are not needed, or
event staff can perform security duties, allowing them to avoid the fees logistics associated with hiring a
certified provider.
Precedent:
In Kennewick, events with an expected attendance of 1000 or more people at one time and location, as well
as events with higher risk activities such as alcohol consumption may be subject to security review. In
Page 280 of 431
February 13, 2026 | 4
Richland, security personnel is required for alcohol-free events with 1000 attendees or more, and events
with alcohol with 500 attendees or more.
Pasco Police Department Analysis:
The police department drafted a system for determining the required number and type of security personnel
for events based on risk factors of the event. This system includes a matrix that assigns points for elements of
an event that may increase risk, with recommendations for security personnel based on those scores. Below
is a version of this matrix that has been updated based on testing and a desire for objective requirements.
TABLE 1: Event Risk Factor Scoring Matrix
Using the above table, we tested the following event types to evaluate how they might score:
• Ribbon-cutting ceremony: 2 points
• Pride Festival: 11 points
• Marathon: 6 points
Page 281 of 431
February 13, 2026 | 5
Below, the risk-scoring guide translates point scores into 4 security levels. Based on the above example, we
slightly modified the draft scoring guide to align with the above examples.
TABLE 2: Risk-Scoring Guide
Using the table below, applicants can ascertain their recommended security team based on their event’s risk
level:
TABLE 3: Security Recommendations
Page 282 of 431
February 13, 2026 | 6
Using the above examples, we can deduce the following security recommendations for our event examples:
• Ribbon-cutting ceremony: 1-2 trained staff/volunteers
• Pride Festival: 15-25 security personnel
• Marathon: 2-4 security personnel or trained volunteers
Recommendation:
Applicants can use the above system to determine their required number and type of security personnel.
The Police Department will continue to review applications and confirm whether the proposed security plan
is adequate.
Road Closures
Temporarily closing streets to car traffic can free up space for many types of gatherings, from athletic events
to street fairs, neighborhood block parties to car shows. These creative uses of public right-of-way also bring
safety, convenience, and logistics factors that must be considered.
The two main themes that emerged from interviews are:
• 4th Avenue between Lewis St. and Columbia St. works well for events when closed to car traffic.
Permanent closure of this street could be considered in the future to bring additional space for
events and daily pedestrian use to Downtown. Alternatively, or as a shorter term solution, offering
pre-approved street closure plans for 4th Street could facilitate its regular use for events.
• Residents desire to occasionally close residential blocks for neighborhood gatherings. These
neighborhood block parties may not warrant the same requirements as road closures in commercial
areas.
Recommendation:
• Offer pre-approved street closure plans for 4th Avenue between Lewis St. and Columbia St.
• Offer a permit and toolkit for Neighborhood Block Parties.
Neighborhood Block Parties could entail the following characteristics:
• The use of one city block in a residential zone on a Local or Neighborhood Collector Street (see the
Transportation Master Plan for street designations).
• Free and open to the public.
• Occur for no more than one day, between 9:00 AM and dusk.
• Do not take place on a street that has bus service.
• All furniture and other event-related items must be easily movable in case of need for emergency
service vehicles.
• Use of large structures such as a stage or bounce house not permitted.
Page 283 of 431
February 13, 2026 | 7
Sales Licenses and Permits
Chapter 5 includes provisions for several types of sales events and establishments, including:
• 5.35.060: Temporary Sales Events (under Special Events)
• 5.35.080: Auction Sales (under Special Events)
• 5.80: Pawnbrokers and Secondhand Dealers
• 5.85: Flea Markets, Swap Meets, Buy-Sell Markets “and the Like”
• 5.90: Rummage and Yard Sales
• 5.95: Sidewalk Sales
Audit interviews and analysis brought forth the following focuses:
Temporary Sales Events
WAC 458-20-101 (8)(a) states that “Temporary businesses, for the purposes of registration, are those with
definite, predetermined dates of operation for no more than two events each year with each event lasting no
longer than one month.”
Under current Pasco Municipal Code, Special Event Permits for Temporary Sales Events allow one of more
vendors to come together under a single permit for up to ten consecutive days. These events must be open
the public, and it is not specified whether they are to take place on public or private property.
Temporary Sales Events can vary greatly in scale—they may be farmers markets that bring together dozens
of vendors for a public event, or a handful of vendors who wish to utilize the permit as an option for selling
their goods outside of a permanent business license. They therefore may not need to adhere to Special
Events requirements for security personnel or insurance requirements.
Precedent:
In Kennewick, temporary vendors have several tiers of permit options. At the most basic, they can apply for a
temporary business license, which has a flat fee of $55. Temporary Events with Vendors pay a $15 per
vendor, and the permit includes additional requirements such as a site plan.
Rummage and Yard Sales
Chapter 5.90 outlines requirements for Rummage and Yard Sales, which both require a permit. Rummage
Sales may be conducted by nonprofits, who pay a fee, which Chapter 5.90 states is outlined in Chapter 3.35,
but no such fee listing currently exists. Yard sale permits are free and are limited to two sales per year. Both
Rummage Sales and Yard Sales are to be conducted on private property unless authorized otherwise.
Residents and City staff report that yard sale applications present an undue burden on both applicants and
staff. Yard sales act as an item of interest for people walking through neighborhoods, and are a way for
Page 284 of 431
February 13, 2026 | 8
people to meet each other and exchange items that might otherwise end up in landfill. They are overall a
positive activity that the City should encourage.
Precedent:
In Kennewick, permits are not required for yard sales. Rummage sale permits are $5.
Recommendations:
• Remove permit requirement for yard sales; specify permit cost for rummage sales or remove the
permit requirement.
• Offer a Temporary Sales Event permit that includes rummage sales and events with vendors.
Sidewalk Sales
Chapter 5.95 outlines that a permit is required to conduct a sale on City sidewalks, streets, or other public
ways. It stipulates that the permit application shall include a description of the sale location, days, and amount
of public way that will be utilized.
This chapter overlaps somewhat with the Mobile Vending Chapter (5.75) as well as the Temporary Sales
Event section (5.35.060). Chapter 5.75 outlines a framework for licensed vendors who may use specific
public areas for mobile vending, with a permit. The Temporary Sales Event section outlines a permit for
temporary vending outside of a permanent business license. Chapter 5.95: Sidewalk Sales seems to be
tailored towards both: temporary vendors occupying City ways. However, this permit could potentially be
utilized by brick-and-mortar businesses who wish to display merchandise on the sidewalk.
Recommendation:
Sidewalk sales could be incorporated into the new Temporary Sales chapter, which can include a permit
option for utilization of the sidewalk.
Summary: Types of Permits
Using the above recommendations, the City of Pasco would offer the following types of Special Event
Permits. Permit applicants may need to obtain more than one permit, depending on their planned event
activities:
• Special Event on Public Property
• Street Closure
• Neighborhood Block Party
• Special Assembly
• Temporary Sales Event
Page 285 of 431
Special Events Code
April 20, 2026
Pasco City Council
Pa
g
e
2
8
6
o
f
4
3
1
OVERVIEW
1.Overview of Special Event code updates
2.Summarize outreach and audit findings
3.Discuss proposed improvements to permit process
4.Other Downtown Initiatives
5.Request City Council direction on draft code
amendments
Pa
g
e
2
8
7
o
f
4
3
1
Why this update? – Special Events
•Downtown Master Plan implementation item
•Feedback from event applicants and staff
•Permit process currently complex and difficult to navigate
•Opportunity to modernize and streamline Title 5
Pa
g
e
2
8
8
o
f
4
3
1
Code audit process – Special Events
•Title 5 audit completed with Framework Cultural Placemaking
•Interviews with Police, Parks, Business Licensing, and HAPO Center
•Tri-Cities precedent review
•Council briefing August 25, 2025
•Draft code amendments developed from audit findings
Pa
g
e
2
8
9
o
f
4
3
1
Key Improvements Proposed – Special Events
•Clear thresholds for Special Event permits
•Event Risk Factor Scoring Matrix for security
•Simplified permit categories
•Clarified street closure and block party process
•Streamlined review timelines
•Simplified Temporary Sales Event and sidewalk-sales permit
Pa
g
e
2
9
0
o
f
4
3
1
Expected outcomes – Special Events
•More community events and cultural activities
•Increased economic opportunities for vendors and businesses
•Reduced administrative burden
•Clearer expectations for applicants
•Consistent safety standards
Pa
g
e
2
9
1
o
f
4
3
1
Recommendation - Special Events
Staff recommends that the City Council:
•Adopt the amendments to the Special Event Code
Pa
g
e
2
9
2
o
f
4
3
1
Questions?
Pa
g
e
2
9
3
o
f
4
3
1
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council March 23, 2026
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular
Meeting: 4/20/26
FROM: Maria Serra, Director
Public Works
SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 4831 - Approving NFC Northwest, LLC Franchise
Agreement (5 minute staff presentation)
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
Ordinance
Presentation
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4831, approving a Non-Exclusive
Franchise to construct, install, operate, maintain, repair, or remove fiber optic
cables within the public ways of the City of Pasco and, further, authorize
publication by summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
NFC Northwest, LLC has paid the fee required by PMC 15.80.020 and
3.35.115.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Background
Fiber optic cable is a telecommunications technology that uses strands of glass
or plastic to transmit data as light signals. This technology allows for high-
speed internet, phone service, and other data communications that support
homes, businesses, schools, healthcare, and public safety operations.
Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) provides for fiber optic franchises within Title 15
Telecommunications. Through a franchise agreement, the City may authorize a
private provider to install and maintain fiber optic facilities within the public
right-of-way, subject to City standards. Allowing access to the right-of-way
supports expanded connectivity and economic development while ensuring
infrastructure is installed, maintained, and regulated in a manner
Page 294 of 431
that protects public assets.
A fiber optic franchise falls under the general provisions of PMC Chapter 15.40
and does not qualify as either a cable system franchise, which would be
covered by PMC Chapter 15.96, or a small cell system, covered under PMC
Section 15.40.050 and related provisions.
Last year, a strategic partnership with Ziply Fiber created Network FiberCo
(NFC). As part of this partnership, an identical franchise agreement has been
requested for NFC Northwest, LLC, which will own a portion of the network
between the Ziply Fiber network and the resident or businesses served.
Because Ziply Fiber Pacific will still own some facilities in the Pasco ROW, that
franchise cannot be assigned to NFC Northwest. Therefore, a new franchise
has been requested. This franchise agreement requires a public hearing in
accordance with PMC Subsection 15.20.080(2).
Impact (other than fiscal)
Allowing fiber optic infrastructure within the public right-of-way enhances
broadband access and reliability for residents and businesses. The franchise
requires installation, construction, for permits to provider the obtain
maintenance, repair, or removal of facilities, ensuring City oversight and
protection of public infrastructure.
V. DISCUSSION:
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the fiber optic cable franchise agreement with
NFC Northwest, LLC for a ten-year term.
Constraints
NFC Northwest, LLCs application was considered complete as of March 17,
2026. PMC 15.40.100 states that franchise applications shall be acted upon by
the City within 90 days. This schedule is within those guidelines.
Next Steps
After approval, the franchise will be in effect for ten (10) years.
Alternatives
Deny the franchise based on criteria that serve community interest.
Page 295 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 1
ORDINANCE NO. ____
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,
APPROVING A NON-EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO CONSTRUCT,
INSTALL, OPERATE, MAINTAIN, REPAIR, OR REMOVE FIBER OPTIC
CABLES WITHIN THE PUBLIC WAYS OF THE CITY OF PASCO
WHEREAS, RCW 35A.11.010 grants the City authority to regulate the use of the public
rights-of-way, subject to applicable state and federal law; and
WHEREAS, the Pasco City Council passed Pasco City Ordinance 1823 on August 3,
1976, adopting the classification of non-chartered code city for the City of Pasco; and
WHEREAS, Article 11, section 11, of the Washington State Constitution provides that
the City of Pasco may make and enforce within its limits all such local police, sanitary and
other regulations as are not in conflict with general laws; and
WHEREAS, the Pasco City Council, by section 35A.11.020 of the Revised Code of
Washington, through section 35A.13.230 of the Revised Code of Washington, has any
authority ever given to any class of municipality or to all municipalities of this state, and all
powers possible for a city or town to have under the Constitution of this state, and not
specifically denied to code cities by law, which may be exercised in regard to the regulation or
use of public ways and property of all kinds and improvements thereto; and
WHEREAS, the Pasco City Council enacted chapter 15.40 of the Pasco Municipal
Code by Ordinance 3287 on March 3, 1998, regulating the use of public ways and public
property for placement of telecommunication facilities in public ways, and, providing in part
that facilities must be located underground unless otherwise provided in a franchise or lease
granted by the City; and
WHEREAS, the Pasco City Council passed Ordinance 4414 on January 7, 2019
adopting amendments to its local telecommunications regulations in chapters 15.40, 15.60,
15.10.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, Section 35A.47.040 of the Revised Code of Washington authorizes the
City to grant, permit, and regulate non-exclusive franchises for the use of public ways;
WHEREAS, the Pasco City Council passed City Ordinance 4537 on June 7, 2021,
adopting an updated comprehensive plan for the City of Pasco, including without limitation,
policies requiring underground installation of new utility services, conversion of existing
overhead systems to underground systems, coordination of utility projects, and minimization
of negative impacts upon the character of the community, and policies recognizing, preserving
and protecting Pasco's urban forest; and
WHEREAS, Franchisee has applied to the City of Pasco, Washington for
non-exclusive franchise to enter, occupy, and use public ways to construct, install, operate,
Page 296 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 2
maintain, and repair fiber optic facilities to offer and provide telecommunications service for
hire, sale, or resale in the City of Pasco; and
WHEREAS, the 1934 Communications Act, as amended by the 1996
Telecommunications Act, 47 USC 151, et seq., relating to telecommunications providers
recognizes and provides state and local government certain authority to manage the public
rights-of-way and to require fair and reasonable compensation on a competitively neutral and
nondiscriminatory basis; and
WHEREAS, Washington's Telecommunications Services Act, 2000 Wash. Laws,
Chapter 83, as amended, RCW Ch. 35.99, relating to telecommunications providers
recognizes and provides Washington cities authority to require franchises and use permits for
constructing, installing, operating, maintaining, repairing, or removing telecommunication
facilities in public rights-of-way; and
WHEREAS, a franchise is a legislatively approved master permit granting general
permission to a service provider to enter, use, and occupy the public ways for the purpose of
locating facilities subject to requirements that a Franchisee must also obtain separate use permits
from the City for use of each and every specific location in the public ways in which the Franchisee
intends to construct, install, operate, maintain, repair or remove identified facilities; and
WHEREAS, a franchise does not include, and is not a substitute for any other permit,
agreement, or other authorization required by the City, including without limitation, permits
required in connection with construction activities in public ways which must be
administratively approved by the City after review of specific plans; and
WHEREAS, the grant of a non-exclusive franchise under RCW 35A.47.040 shall not
be adopted or passed by the City’s legislative body on the day of its introduction nor for five
days thereafter, nor at any other than a regular meeting, nor without first being submitted to
the City attorney, an affirmative vote of at least a majority of the entire City Council and
publication at least once in newspaper of general circulation before becoming effective; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the franchise terms and conditions contained
in this ordinance are in the public interest.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: Definitions.
For the purposes of this Ordinance, the following terms, phrases, words, and their derivations will
have the meanings given herein. When not inconsistent with the context, words used in the present
tense include the future, words in the plural include the singular, and words in the singular include
the plural. Words not defined will have the meaning ascribed to those words in the Pasco
Municipal Code unless inconsistent herewith.
Page 297 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 3
"Cable Service" has the meaning set forth in, 47 U.S.C. § 522(6).
"City" has the meaning set forth in PMC 15.10.020
"City Property" has the meaning set forth in PMC 15.10.020
"Conduit" means optical cable housing, jackets, or casing, and pipes, tubes, or tiles used for receiving
and protecting wires, lines, cables, and communication and signal lines.
"Costs" means costs, expenses, and other financial obligations of any kind whatsoever.
“Days” means calendar days when the reference is to more than 10 Days, and business days when
the reference is to 10 days or less.
"Effective Date" means five days following the publication of this Franchise or a summary
thereof occurs in an official newspaper of the City as provided by law.
"Emergency" has the meaning set forth in PMC 15.10.020.
"Existing" means in actual physical being upon the effective date of this Franchise, or a repair
or replacement of such physical being.
"Facilities" means all of the plant, equipment, fixtures, appurtenances, and other facilities
necessary to furnish and deliver telecommunications services, including but not limited to
poles with crossarms, poles without crossarms, wires, lines, conduits, cables, communication
and signal lines and equipment, braces, guys, anchors, vaults, and all attachments,
appurtenances, and appliances necessary or incidental to the distribution and use of
telecommunications services.
"Fiber Optics" has the meaning set forth in PMC 15.10.020.
"Franchisee" means NFC Northwest, LLC and the lawful successor, transferee or assignee of
said person subject to such conditions as defined herein.
"Information" means knowledge or intelligence represented by any form of writing, signs,
signals, pictures, sounds, or any other symbols.
“Maintenance” or “Maintain” shall mean examining, testing, inspecting, repairing,
maintaining and replacing the existing Franchisee Facilities or any part thereof as required
and necessary for safe operation.
"Municipal Arborist" means the City's director of parks and recreation, or such other person
appointed by the Pasco City Manager to carry out the provisions of the Pasco Municipal Code.
"Optical Cable" means wires, lines, cables and communication and signal lines used to convey
communications by fiber optics.
Page 298 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 4
"Overhead Facilities" has the meaning set forth in PMC 15.10.020
“PMC” means the Pasco Municipal Code.
"Person" has the meaning set forth in PMC 15.10.020
"Personal Wireless Services" means commercial mobile radio services as defined by
federal laws and regulations.
"Public Street" has the meaning set forth in PMC 15.10.020
"Public Way" has the meaning set forth in PMC 15.10.020.
“Relocation” means permanent movement of Franchisee facilities required by the City,
and not temporary or incidental movement of such facilities, or other revisions Franchisee
would accomplish and charge to third parties without regard to municipal request.
"Relocation” also means to protect, support, temporarily disconnect, relocate, or remove
facilities.
“Right-of-Way” has the meaning set forth in PMC 15.10.020.
“Standards” means the Design and Construction Standards and Specifications for Public
Works Improvements, latest edition at the time of submission of each right-of-way permit
associated with this Franchise Agreement.
"Street Tree" means any tree located in, or that portion over-hanging, any public way and any
tree planted on private property near a public way at the direction of the City.
"Telecommunications Service" has the meaning set forth in 47 U.S.C. Section 153(53).
"State" means the State of Washington, its agencies, departments, and governmental
subdivisions, and all agencies, departments, and divisions of its agencies, departments,
and governmental subdivisions.
"Underground Facilities" has the meaning set forth in PMC 15.10.020
"Utility Poles" has the meaning set forth in PMC 15.10.020.
Section 2: Franchise.
A. The City grants to Franchisee, subject to the terms and conditions of this Franchise,
a non-exclusive Franchise to enter, occupy, and use public ways for constructing,
installing, operating, maintaining, repairing, and removing wireline facilities necessary to
provide telecommunications services, on property located within the corporate
boundaries of the City of Pasco, as specified in Exhibit A, attached hereto and
incorporated by reference (the “Franchise Area”), provided that the Franchise Area shall
Page 299 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 5
be expanded to include territory annexed into the City of Pasco during the term hereof,
and as approved under City permits issued pursuant to this Franchise (hereinafter
“Franchise”). Except as expressly provided otherwise in this Franchise, Franchisee shall
construct, install, operate, maintain, repair, and remove its facilities at its expense.
B. The Franchisee agrees that its use of Franchise Area shall at all times be
subordinated to and subject to the City and the public’s need for municipal infrastructure,
travel, and access to the Franchise Area, except as may be otherwise required by law.
C. The Franchisee shall reimburse the City for all costs of one publication of this
Franchise in a local newspaper and required legal notices regarding this Franchise,
contemporaneous with its acceptance of this Franchise.
D. As set forth PMC 15.30.010, Franchisee must first obtain a right-of-way use permit
in the event it desires to occupy Public Ways. Nothing contained herein shall relieve
Franchisee from the requirement for obtaining permits as more fully set forth in Section
12 below.
E. Nothing in this Franchise grants authority to Franchisee to enter, occupy, or use
public ways for constructing, installing, operating, maintaining, repairing or removing
wireless communication facilities.
F. Nothing in this Franchise grants authority to Franchisee to enter, occupy, or
use City Property. If Franchisee desires to use City Property, including poles and
structures within the public ways it shall negotiate a separate lease or license agreement
with the City.
G. Any rights, privileges, and authority granted to Franchisee under this Franchise are
subject to the legitimate rights of the police power of the City to adopt and enforce general
ordinances necessary to protect the safety and welfare of the public, and nothing in this
Franchise excuses Franchisee from its obligation to comply with all applicable general
laws enacted by the City pursuant to such power. Any conflict between the terms or
conditions of this Franchise and any other present or future exercise of the City's police
powers will be resolved in favor of the exercise of the City's police power.
H. Nothing in this Franchise excuses Franchisee of its obligation to comply with
applicable codes, rules, regulations, and standards subject to verification by the City of
such compliance.
I. Nothing in this Franchise shall be construed to limit taxing authority or other
lawful authority to impose charges or fees, or to excuse Franchisee of any obligation to
pay lawfully imposed taxes, charges or fees.
J. Nothing in this Franchise grants authority to Franchisee to impair or damage any
City Property, Public Way, other ways or other property, whether publicly or privately
owned, except as provided herein.
Page 300 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 6
K. Nothing in this Franchise grants authority to Franchisee to alter the City's urban
forest to accommodate Franchisee's Facilities, and nothing in this Franchise shall be
construed to give Franchisee's Facilities priority of use of public ways over the
preservation and protection of the City's urban forest.
L. Nothing in this Franchise shall be construed to create a duty upon the City to be
responsible for construction of facilities or to modify public ways to accommodate the
Franchisee’s Facilities.
M. Nothing in this Franchise grants authority to Franchisee to provide or offer Cable
Service.
N. Nothing in this Franchise grants authority to Franchisee to provide or offer personal
wireless services to the general public.
O. Nothing in this Franchise shall be construed to create, expand, or extend any liability of
the City to any third-party user of Franchisee's Facilities or to otherwise recognize or create
third party beneficiaries to this Franchise.
P. Nothing in this Franchise shall be construed to permit Franchisee to unlawfully enter or
construct improvements upon the property or premises of another.
Q. Nothing in this Franchise authorizes Franchisee to enter or construct improvements on, in,
under, over, across, or within any private property of any third party without that party's
permission.
Section 3: Term.
A. Authorization granted under this Franchise shall be for a period of ten (10) years from
the effective date of this Franchise.
B. Renewal. Franchisee may renew this Franchise pursuant to PMC 15.020.070(1).
C. Failure to Renew Franchise – Automatic Extension. If the parties fail to formally renew
this Franchise prior to the expiration of its term, the Franchise automatically continues month to
month until renewed or until either party gives written notice at least one hundred eighty (180)
days in advance of its intent not to renew the Franchise to the other party.
Section 4: Location of Facilities.
A. Franchisee may place optical cable, optical cable housing, and splicing connections on
Existing utility poles as overhead facilities if approved by the owner of the utility poles as well
as place the same underground in accordance with the provisions of PMC 15.70.110.
Page 301 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 7
B. Franchisee's Facilities shall not damage or impair the City's urban forest. Franchisee
shall not place optical cable, optical cable housing, or splicing connections as overhead facilities
in any area where the municipal arborist of the City determines, in his or her sole discretion, that
the facilities will damage or impair a street tree.
C. Franchisee's facilities shall not unreasonably interfere with the use of public ways or
City property by the City, the general public, or other persons authorized to enter, occupy, or
use public ways or City property as set forth in PMC 15.70.160.
D. Franchisee shall not impair or damage any City property, public way, other ways or
other property, whether publicly or privately owned.
E. Relocation or removal of Franchisee’s facilities shall be governed by PMC 15.70.180.
1. Where the construction, alteration, repair or improvement of a Public Way is
primarily for private benefit, the Franchisee may seek reimbursement from the private
party or parties for the cost of relocation in the same proportion as their contribution
to the costs of the project; provided, however, in no event shall the City be considered
a private party for purposes of seeking reimbursement under this section. Franchisee
may require a deposit or other pre-payment of costs before doing any work on a project
covered by this section.
2. Where other utilities are present and involved in an undergrounding project and
Franchisee is required to pay for such undergrounding, Franchisee shall only be required
to pay its fair share of common costs borne by all utilities, in addition to the costs
specifically attributable to the undergrounding of Franchisee Facilities. Common costs
shall include necessary costs for common trenching and utility vaults. Fair share shall be
determined in comparison to the total number and size of all other utility facilities being
undergrounded.
F. Franchisee shall relocate its facilities at its expense at the request of the City in the
event of an unforeseen emergency or causes interference with public facilities as described in
Section 4(C) that creates an immediate threat to the public safety, health or welfare.
Section 5: Pole, Structures and Property Owned By Others.
Franchisee will obtain separate agreements from owners of utility poles, structures and property
not owned by the City. The City makes no representation and assumes no responsibility for the
availability of utility poles, structures, and property owned by third parties for the installation of
Franchisee’s facilities.
Section 6: Construction and Installation Requirements.
A. Neither approval of plans by the City nor any action or inaction by the City shall relieve
Franchisee of any duty, obligation, or responsibility for the competent design, construction,
and installation of its Facilities. Franchisee is solely responsible for the supervision, condition,
Page 302 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 8
and quality of the work done, whether it is performed by itself or by its contractors, agents, or
assigns.
B. The Franchisee shall provide the City at least 72-hours’ notice of its intent to work in the
public right-of-way and, for permits relating to underground work, shall indicate the issued permit
for the work planned to be performed.
C. Working Hours. All work related to this Franchise Agreement (with the exception of
emergency repairs described in this agreement) performed by the Franchisee shall only occur
Monday through Saturday and no work will be performed on Sunday’s or holidays recognized by
the City of Pasco unless otherwise agreed by the City. Such restriction shall not apply to any
service drops used in connecting subscribers to Franchisee’s Facilities.
D. Dangerous Conditions. Franchisee shall comply with PMC 15.70.280.
E. Utility Locates. Franchisee shall comply with PMC 15.70.080.
F. Qualified, Informed Personnel. The Franchisee shall have qualified, informed personnel
onsite anytime construction is occurring that are familiar with the permit requirements, and the
City requirements for construction.
G. Licensed, Bonded Contractors. All work performed by the Franchisee shall be performed
by licensed, bonded Contractors who have a business license allowing them to work within the
City of Pasco.
H. Contractor named on Right-of-Way Permit. The Franchisee shall specifically name the
Contractor who will be performing work on the right-of-way permit application. If the Franchisee
desires to switch to using another contractor on an open right-of-way permit, the Franchisee shall
so notify the City.
I. Sidewalk Safety. At times, weather is not conducive to concrete placement, which can
delay surface restoration work if concrete sidewalk panels or curb ramps were removed as part of
a construction project. When this occurs, the Franchisee shall use either 5/8 crushed rock or cold
patch asphalt (temporary surface type is at the discretion of the City) to maintain a safe, ADA
accessible walking surface until the site can be adequately restored.
J. Local Emergency Contact. The Franchisee shall at all times maintain an emergency
contact at its Network Operations Center who can be contacted by the City if there is an emergency,
or an issue with lack of compliance with the terms of this Franchise Agreement. This emergency
contact shall be available as needed 7 days a week, 24 hours a day.
Section 7: Coordination of Construction and Installation Activities and Other Work.
A. Franchisee shall coordinate its construction and installation activities and other work
with the City and other users of the public ways at least annually or as determined by the City.
Page 303 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 9
B. All construction or installation locations, activities and schedules shall be coordinated,
as ordered by the City, to minimize public inconvenience, disruption or damages.
C. At least twenty-four hours prior to entering a public way to perform construction and
installation activities or other work, Franchisee shall give notice, at its cost, to owners and
occupiers of property adjacent to such public ways indicating the nature and location of the
work to be performed. Such notice shall be physically posted by door hanger. Franchisee shall
make a good faith effort to comply with the property owner or occupier's preferences, if any,
on location or placement of underground facilities, consistent with sound engineering
practices.
D. Franchisee shall make available open trenches for use by third party utilities with the
costs to be allocated as agreed between the parties provided that such third party has a similar
obligation with respect to Franchisee.
E. The City shall give reasonable advance notice to Franchisee of plans to open Public
Ways for construction or installation of Facilities and Franchisee afforded the opportunity to
install facilities in the applicable location, when possible; provided, however, the City shall
not be liable for damages for failure to provide such notice. When notice has been given,
Franchisee may provide notice to City of its intent to construct in the open Public Way and
provide information regarding its requirements for such constructions. If so elected,
Franchisee may only construct or install facilities during such period that the City has opened
the Public Way for construction or installation.
F. Emergency Operations. Franchisee shall comply with PMC 15.70.250.
Section 8: Temporary Removal, Adjustment or Alteration of Facilities.
See Section 4 above.
Section 9: Safety and Maintenance Requirements.
Franchisee shall comply with PMC 15.70.280.
Section 10: Abandonment of Facilities.
PMC 15.70.260(1) shall govern the abandonment of facilities.
Section 11: Restoration of Public Ways and Other Property.
A. When Franchisee, or any person acting on its behalf, does any work in or affecting any
Public Way or other property, it shall, at its own expense, promptly remove any obstructions
therefrom and restore, at Franchisee's cost, such ways and property to as good a condition as
existed before the work was undertaken, unless otherwise directed by the City. Upon
completion of any construction by the Franchisee, the site of construction shall be restored in
Page 304 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 10
accordance with all the requirements in the PMCs and the City’s Standards, including but not
limited PMC 15.70.270.
B. If weather or other conditions do not permit the complete restoration required by this
section; the Franchisee shall temporarily restore the affected ways or property. Such
temporary restoration shall be at the Franchisee's cost, and Franchisee shall promptly
undertake and complete the required permanent restoration when the weather or other
conditions no longer prevent such permanent restoration.
C. All restoration work is subject to inspection and final approval by the City. If restoration
is not made to the satisfaction of the City within the established time frame, the City may
make the restoration itself at the cost of Franchisee or have them made at the cost of Franchisee.
Section 12: Use and/or Development Authorization and Permits.
A. Franchisee shall obtain use and/or development authorization and required permits
from the City and all other appropriate regulatory authorities prior to constructing or installing
facilities or performing other work in a public way.
The City must act on applications for use and/or development authorization or required permits
within thirty (30) days of receipt of a completed application, unless Franchisee consents to a
different time period. The City may, upon notice to Franchisee, extend this period to ensure that
the City has adequate resources available to provide the necessary inspection work. Franchisee
agrees to reimburse the City for any additional costs required to provide inspections for work
performed by the Franchisee after-hours and on weekends.
B. A permit may require the posting of a construction bond. Any such requirement and
amount of the bond is set forth in City code.
Section 13: Hold Harmless and Assumption of Risk.
The Franchisee agrees to be bound by the provisions of PMC 15.70.290(2) which are hereby
incorporated into this Franchise.
Section 14: Insurance.
Franchisee shall obtain and maintain, at its cost, worker's compensation insurance and the
following liability insurance policies insuring both Franchisee and the City, and its elected
and appointed officers, officials, agents, employees, representatives, engineers, consultants,
and volunteers as an additional insureds against claims for injuries to persons or damages to
property which may arise from or in connection with the exercise of the rights, privileges, and
authority granted to Franchisee:
A. 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 liability,
independent contractors, products-completed operations, personal injury and advertising
Page 305 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 11
injury, and liability assumed under an insured contract. There shall be no exclusion for liability
arising from explosion, collapse or underground property damage. The City shall be named as
an additional insured under the Franchisee's Commercial General Liability insurance policy
with respect this Franchise Agreement using ISO endorsement CG 20 12 05 09 if the
Franchise Agreement is considered a master permit, or CG 20 26 07 04 if it is not, or substitute
endorsement providing at least as broad coverage.
Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written with limits no less than $5,000,000
each occurrence, $5,000,000 general aggregate.
B. 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.
Automobile Liability insurance with a minimum combined single limit for bodily injury and
property damage of $5,000,000 per accident.
C. Contractors Pollution Liability insurance shall be in effect throughout the entire
Franchise Agreement covering losses caused by pollution conditions that arise from the
operations of the Franchisee. Contractors Pollution Liability shall cover bodily injury,
property damage, cleanup costs and defense, including costs and expenses incurred in the
investigation, defense, or settlement of claims.
Contractors Pollution Liability insurance shall be written in an amount of at least $2,000,000
per loss, with an annual aggregate of at least $2,000,000.
D. Workers' Compensation coverage as required by the Industrial Insurance laws of the
State of Washington.
E. Excess or Umbrella Liability insurance shall be excess over and at least as broad in
coverage as the Franchisee's Commercial General Liability and Automobile Liability
insurance.
Excess or Umbrella Liability insurance shall be written with limits of not less than $5,000,000
per occurrence and annual aggregate. The Excess or Umbrella Liability requirement and limits
may be satisfied instead through Franchisee's Commercial General Liability and Automobile
Liability insurance, or any combination thereof that achieves the overall required limits.
F. Other Insurance Provisions. Franchisee's Commercial General Liability, Automobile
Liability, Excess or Umbrella Liability, Contractors Pollution Liability insurance policy or
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 Franchisee's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
G. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M.
Best rating of not less than A: Vil.
Page 306 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 12
H. Verification of Coverage. The Franchisee 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
Franchise. Upon request by the City, the Franchisee shall furnish certified copies of all
required insurance policies, including endorsements, required in this Franchise and evidence
of all subcontractors' coverage.
I. Subcontractors. The Franchisee shall cause each and every Subcontractor to provide
insurance coverage that complies with all applicable requirements of the Franchisee-provided
insurance as set forth herein, except the Franchisee shall have sole responsibility for
determining the limits of coverage required to be obtained by Subcontractors. The Franchisee
shall ensure that the City is an additional insured on each and every Subcontractor's
Commercial General liability insurance policy using an endorsement as least as broad as ISO
CG 2026.
J. Cancellation. The Franchisee’s insurance cannot be terminated by the Franchisee except
after thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to the City by certified mail, return receipt requested,
has been given to the City.
K. Failure to Maintain Insurance. Failure on the part of the Franchisee to maintain the
insurance as required shall constitute a material breach of this Franchise, upon which the City
may, after giving five business days' notice to the Franchisee to correct the breach, terminate
the Franchise 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.
L. City Full Availability of Franchisee Limits. If the Franchisee 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 Franchisee, irrespective
of whether such limits maintained by the Franchisee are greater than those required by this
Franchise or whether any certificate of insurance furnished to the City evidences limits of
liability lower than those maintained by the Franchisee.
M. Franchisee - Self-Insurance. If the Franchisee is self-insured or becomes self-insured
during the term of the Franchise Agreement, Franchisee or its affiliated parent entity shall
comply with the following: (i) provide the City, upon request, a copy of Franchisee's or its
parent company's most recent audited financial statements, if such financial statements are not
otherwise publicly available; (ii) Franchisee or its parent company is responsible for all
payments within the self-insured retention; and (iii) Franchisee assumes all defense and
indemnity obligations as outlined in the indemnification section of this Franchise Agreement.
N. Primary Insurance. The Franchisee’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance
as respects the City. Any insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained
by the City shall be in excess of the Franchisee’s insurance and shall not contribute with it.
Page 307 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 13
O. Coverage Scope. The coverage shall contain no special imitations on the scope of
protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, or employees. In addition, the insurance
policy shall contain a clause stating that coverage shall apply separately to each insured
against whose claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer’s
liability. Franchisee’s insurance shall be primary. Any insurance, self-insurance, or insurance
pool coverage maintained by the City shall be in excess of the Franchisee’s insurance, and
shall not contribute with it. Coverage shall not be suspended, voided, cancelled by either
party, reduced in coverage or in limits for the duration of this Franchise Agreement.
Section 15: Performance Bond.
A. Franchisee shall provide a performance bond in the amount of fifty thousand dollars
($50,000) to ensure the faithful performance of its responsibilities under this Franchise and
applicable law, including, by way of example and not limitation, its obligations to relocate and
remove its facilities. The performance bond shall be in a standard industry form. Grantee shall
pay all premiums or costs associated with maintaining the bond, and shall keep the same in full
force and effect at all times.
B. The bond shall not be canceled or materially altered so as to be out of compliance with the
requirements of this Section without forty-five (45) days written notice first being given to the
City. If the bond is canceled or materially altered so as to be out of compliance with the
requirements of this Section within the term of this Franchise, Franchisee shall provide a
replacement bond.
C. After the giving of notice by the City to Franchisee, and expiration of any applicable cure
period, the performance bond may be drawn upon by the City for purposes that include, but are
not limited to the following:
1. Failure of Franchisee to pay the City sums due under the terms of this Franchise;
2. Reimbursement of costs borne by the City to correct Franchise violations not
corrected by Franchisee; and
3. Damages assessed against Franchisee as provided in this Franchise.
D. The City shall give Franchisee written notice of any withdrawal under this Section upon
such withdrawal. Within ten (l0) days following receipt of such notice, Franchisee shall restore
and replenish the performance bond to the amount required under this Franchise. Franchisee’s
maintenance of the performance bond shall not be construed to excuse unfaithful performance by
Franchisee or limit the liability of Franchisee to the amount of the performance bond or otherwise
limit the City’s recourse to any other remedy available at law or in equity.
E. Franchisee shall have the right to appeal to the City Council for reimbursement in the event
Franchisee believes that the performance bond was drawn upon improperly. After a determination
Page 308 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 14
by the City Council, Franchisee shall also have the right of judicial appeal if Franchisee believes
the performance bond has not been properly drawn upon in accordance with this Franchise. Any
funds the City erroneously or wrongfully withdraws from the performance bond shall be returned
to Franchisee with interest, from the date of withdrawal at a rate equal to the prime rate of interest
as quoted in The Wall Street Journal on the date the City withdrew funds from the performance
bond until the date the City returns the funds to Franchisee.
Section 16: Taxes, Charges, And Fees.
Franchisee shall pay and be responsible for taxes permitted by law.
Section 17: Acquisition of Facilities.
Upon Franchisee's acquisition of any facilities in the Public Way, or upon any addition or
annexation to the City of any area in which Franchisee has facilities, such facilities shall
immediately be subject to the terms of this Franchise without further action of the City or
Franchisee.
Section 18: Vacation of Public Ways.
The City reserves the right to change, regrade, relocate, abandon, or vacate any right-of-
way within the Franchise Area. If, at any time during the term of this Franchise, the City
vacates any portion of the Franchise Area containing Franchisee Facilities, the City shall
reserve an easement for public utilities within that vacated portion, pursuant to RCW
35.79.030 and PMC 12.40, within which the Franchisee may continue to operate any
existing Franchisee Facilities under the terms of this Franchise for the remaining period
set forth under Section 3.
Section 19: Provision of Information.
Within thirty (30) days of a written request from the City, Franchisee shall furnish the City with
information reasonably requested by the City to coordinate municipal functions with Franchisee’s
activities, to fulfill municipal obligations under State law or to demonstrate compliance with terms
of this Franchise.
A. The documents and records maintained by Franchisee and requested by the City shall
be made available to the City at reasonable times and intervals; provided, however, that
nothing in this section shall be construed to require Franchisee to violate state or federal
law regarding subscriber privacy, nor shall this section be construed to require Franchisee
to disclose proprietary or confidential information without adequate safeguards for its
confidential or proprietary nature.
B. Franchisee shall reasonably cooperate in City’s planning efforts, including working with
the City in its development of its Comprehensive Plan Utilities Element. The cooperation may
include:
Page 309 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 15
1. An annual meeting or communications outlining the plans of Franchisee and the
City for the Public Ways during the upcoming year.
2. Coordination of construction activities with the City and other franchisees.
3. Planning and implementation of emergency response procedures.
C. In connection with information requests mentioned above, the City may request as-built
drawings of Franchisee’s Facilities and maps showing the location of existing or planned facilities
within the City. Said information may be requested either in hard copy or electronic format, in a
format used by Franchisee in the maintenance of its own records.
D. Confidentiality. Information provided by Franchisee to the City shall be considered
confidential and proprietary to Franchisee. If the City receives a request under the Washington
State Public Records Act to inspect or copy the information provided by Franchisee and the City
determines that release of the information is required by the Public Records Act, the City notify
Franchisee (a) of the request and (b) of the date that such information will be released to the
requester unless Franchisee initiates a proceeding to enjoin that disclosure pursuant to the Public
Records Act.
Section 20: Assignment or Transfer.
Franchisee's rights, privileges, and authority under this franchise, and ownership or
working control of facilities constructed or installed pursuant to this Franchise, may not,
directly or indirectly, be transferred, assigned or disposed of by sale, lease, merger,
consolidation or other act of Franchisee, by operation of law or otherwise, except after
consent by the City, which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, no City consent shall be required in the event that this
Franchise is, directly or indirectly, transferred assigned or disposed by sale, lease, merger
consolidation of other act of Franchisee, by operation of law or otherwise, in connection
with any transaction approved by the Washington Utilities and Transportation
Commission, such approval to be deemed consent of the City.
Except as set forth above, PMC 15.70.320 shall apply to this Franchise.
Section 21: Notices.
A. Written notices to the parties shall be sent by certified mail to the following addresses,
unless a different address shall be designated in writing and delivered to the other party.
City: City of Pasco
Public Works Department
525 N. 3rd Avenue
Pasco, WA 99301
(509) 545-3463
Page 310 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 16
with a copy to: Pasco City Clerk
525 N. 3rd Avenue
Pasco, WA 99301
Franchisee: NFC Northwest, LLC
Jessica Epley, Regulatory & External Affairs
135 Lake Street South, Suite 155
Kirkland, WA 98033
legal@ziply.com
503-431-0458
B. Franchisee shall additionally provide a phone number and designated responsible
officials to respond to emergencies. After being notified of an emergency, Franchisee shall
cooperate with the City and make best efforts to immediately respond to minimize damage,
protect the health safety of the public and repair facilities to restore them to proper working
order. Annually, on request of the City, Franchisee will meet with City emergency response
personnel to coordinate emergency management operations and, at least once a year, at the
request of the City, actively participate in emergency preparations.
C. Any changes to the above-stated Franchisee information shall be sent to the City’s Director
of Community & Economic Development Department, with copies to the City Clerk, referencing
the title of this agreement.
D. The above-stated Franchisee and City telephone numbers shall be staffed at least during
normal business hours, Pacific time zone, notwithstanding the requirements of the Local
Emergency Contact provisions pursuant to Section 6(J).
Section 22: Non-waiver.
The failure of the City to exercise any rights or remedies under this Franchise or to insist upon
compliance with any terms or conditions of this Franchise shall not be a waiver of any such
rights, remedies, terms or conditions of this Franchise by the City and shall not prevent the
City from demanding compliance with such terms or conditions at any future time or pursuing
its rights or remedies.
Section 23: Eminent Domain.
This Franchise is subject to the power of eminent domain and the right of the City Council to
repeal, amend or modify the Franchise in the interest of the public. In any proceeding under
eminent domain, the Franchise itself shall have no value.
Page 311 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 17
Section 24: Limitation of Liability.
Administration of this Franchise may not be construed to create the basis for any liability on
the part of the City, its elected officials, officers, employees, servant, agents, and
representatives for any injury or damage from the failure of the Franchisee to comply with the
provisions of this Franchise; by reason of any plan, schedule or specification review,
inspection, notice and order, permission, or other approval or consent by the City; for any
action or inaction thereof authorized or done in connection with the implementation or
enforcement of this Franchise by the City; or for the accuracy of plans submitted to the City.
Section 25: Damage to Facilities.
Unless directly and proximately caused by the negligence of the City, the City shall not be
liable for any damage to or loss of any facilities as a result of or in connection with any public
works, public improvements, construction, excavation, grading, filling, or work of any kind
on, in, under, over, across, or within a public way done by or on behalf of the City.
Section 26: Governing Law and Venue.
This Franchise and use of the applicable public ways will be governed by the laws of the State
of Washington, unless preempted by federal law. Franchisee agrees to be bound by the laws
of the State of Washington, unless preempted by federal law, and subjected to the jurisdiction
of the Courts of the State of Washington. Any action relating to this Franchise must be brought
in the Superior Court of Washington for Franklin County, or in the case of a federal action, the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington at Richland, Washington,
unless an administrative agency has primary jurisdiction.
Section 27: Severability.
If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Franchise or its application to any person or
entity should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality will not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other
section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Franchise nor its application to any other person or
entity.
Section 28: Repair and Emergency Work.
The terms of PMC 15.70.250 are hereby incorporated into this Franchise.
Section 29: Location Preference.
Any structure, equipment, appurtenance, or tangible property of a utility, other than the
Franchisee’s, which was installed, constructed, completed, in place, or planned for installation
prior in time to Franchisee’s application for a permit to construct or repair Franchisee Facilities
Page 312 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 18
under this Franchise shall have preference as to positioning and location with respect to the
Franchisee Facilities. The City reserves the right to deny of any of the Franchisee’s facilities that
may possibly interfere with possible future installation of City utilities. However, to the extent that
the Franchisee Facilities are completed and installed prior to another non-City utility’s submittal
of a permit for new or additional structures, equipment, appurtenances, or tangible property, then
the Franchisee Facilities shall have priority. All City utility and road infrastructure, whether
existing or future shall have priority over the Franchisee’s. These rules governing preference shall
continue in the event of the necessity of relocating or changing the grade of any City road or right-
of-way. A relocating utility shall not necessitate the relocation of another utility that otherwise
would not require relocation. This Section shall not apply to utilities that may in the future require
the relocation of Franchisee Facilities. Such relocations shall be governed by Section 4.
Franchisee shall comply with PMC 15.70.110.
Section 30: Enforcement and Remedies.
The terms of PMC 15.90.010-050 is hereby incorporated into this Franchise.
Section 31: Compliance with Laws and Regulations.
A. This Franchise is subject to, and the Franchisee shall comply with all applicable federal
and state or City laws, regulations and policies (including all applicable elements of the City's
comprehensive plan), in conformance with federal laws and regulations, affecting performance
under this Franchise. Furthermore, notwithstanding any other terms of this agreement appearing
to the contrary, the Franchisee shall be subject to the police power of the City to adopt and enforce
general ordinances necessary to protect the safety and welfare of the general public in relation to
the rights granted in the Franchise Area.
Section 32: Consequential Damages Limitation.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, in no event shall the City or other utility
providers (with the exception of the Franchisee) be liable for any special, incidental, indirect,
punitive, reliance, consequential or similar damages.
Section 33: Survival.
All the provisions, conditions and requirements of this agreement shall be in addition to any and
all other obligations and liabilities the Franchisee may have to the City at common law, by statute,
or by contract, and shall survive the City’s Franchise to the Franchisee for the use of the areas
mentioned herein, and any renewals or extensions thereof. All the provisions, conditions,
regulations, and requirements contained in this Franchise Ordinance shall further be binding upon
the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, legal representatives and assigns of the Franchisee
and all privileges, as well as all obligations and liabilities of the Franchisee shall inure to its heirs,
successors and assigns equally as if they were specifically mentioned wherever the Franchisee is
named herein.
Page 313 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 19
Section 34: Miscellaneous.
A. Equal Employment and Nondiscrimination. Throughout the term of this Franchise,
Franchisee will fully comply with all equal employment and nondiscrimination provisions
and requirements of federal, state, and local laws, and in particular, FCC rules and regulations
relating thereto.
B. Local Employment Efforts. Franchisee will use reasonable efforts to utilize qualified local
contractors, including minority business enterprises and woman business enterprises, whenever
the Franchisee employs contractors to perform work under this franchise.
C. Descriptive Headings. The headings and titles of the sections and subsections of this
Franchise are for reference purposes only and do not affect the meaning or interpretation of the
text herein.
D. Costs and Attorneys' Fees. If any action or suit arises in connection with this Franchise,
the prevailing party will be entitled to recover all of its reasonable costs, including attorneys'
fees, in addition to such other relief as the court may deem proper.
E. No Joint Venture. Nothing herein will be deemed to create a joint venture or
principal-agent relationship between the parties, and neither party is authorized to, nor
shall either party act toward third persons or the public in any manner that would indicate
any such relationship with the other.
F. Mutual Negotiation. This Franchise was mutually negotiated by the Franchisee and
the City and has been reviewed by the legal counsel for both parties. Neither party will be
deemed to be the drafter of this Franchise.
G. Third-Party Beneficiaries. There are no third-party beneficiaries to this Franchise.
H. Actions of the City or Franchisee. In performing their respective obligations under
this Franchise, the City and Franchisee will act in a reasonable, expeditious, and timely
manner. Whenever this Franchise sets forth a time for any act to be performed by
Franchisee, such time shall be deemed to be of the essence, and any failure of Franchisee
to perform within the allotted time may be considered a material breach of this Franchise,
and sufficient grounds for the City to invoke any relevant remedy.
I. Entire Agreement. This Franchise represents the entire understanding and agreement
between the parties with respect to the subject matter and supersedes all prior oral and written
negotiations between the parties.
J. Modification. The parties may alter, amend or modify the terms and conditions of this
Franchise upon written agreement of both parties to such alteration, amendment or
Page 314 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 20
modification. Nothing in this subsection shall impair the City's exercise of authority reserved
to it under this Franchise.
K. Non-exclusivity. This Franchise does not confer any exclusive right, privilege, or
authority to enter, occupy or use public ways for delivery of telecommunications services
or any other purposes. This Franchise is granted upon the express condition that it will
not in any manner prevent the City from granting other or further franchises in, on, across,
over, along, under or through any public way.
L. Rights granted. This Franchise does not convey any right, title or interest in public
ways, but shall be deemed only as authorization to enter, occupy, or use public ways for
the limited purposes and term stated in this Franchise. Further, this Franchise shall not be
construed as any warranty of title.
M. Contractors and subcontractors. Franchisee's contractors and subcontractors must be
licensed and bonded in accordance with the City's ordinances, rules, and regulations. Work by
contractors and subcontractors is subject to the same restrictions, limitations and conditions as
if the work were performed by Franchisee.
N. Risks. Franchisee acknowledges by acceptance of the grant that it has read the terms and
conditions of this agreement carefully, and accepts all reasonable risks related to the possible
interpretation of the provisions, terms, and conditions of this agreement.
Section 35: Acceptance of Franchise.
Within thirty (30) days after the passage and approval of this ordinance, this Franchise may be
accepted by the Franchisee by its filing with the City Clerk an unconditional written acceptance
thereof. Failure of the Franchisee to accept this Franchise within said period of time shall be
deemed a rejection thereof by the Franchisee, and the rights, privileges, and authority herein
granted shall, after the expiration of the 30-day period, absolutely cease and terminate, unless
the period is extended by ordinance duly passed for that purpose.
Section 36: The City Clerk.
The City Clerk is authorized and directed to publish a summary hereof in accordance with
Revised Code of Washington 35A.13.200 and 35A.12.160.
Section 37: 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 38: 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.
Page 315 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 21
Section 39: This Ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after approval, passage
and publication as required by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this 20th day of April,
2026.
_____________________________
Charles Grimm
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ ___________________________
Krystle Shanks, CMC Ogden Murphy Wallace
City Clerk City Attorneys
Published: _____________________________
Page 316 of 431
Ordinance – NFC Northwest Franchise - 22
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A NON-EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO CONSTRUCT,
INSTALL, OPERATE, MAINTAIN, REPAIR, OR REMOVE FIBER OPTIC CABLES WITHIN
THE PUBLIC WAYS OF THE CITY OF PASCO
The Pasco City Council passed Municipal Ordinance No. ____ at its April 20, 2026 regular
meeting which in summary grants a non-exclusive franchise to NFC Northwest, LLC to construct,
install, operate, maintain, repair, or remove fiber optic cables within the City right-of-way.
The full text of Municipal Ordinance ____ will be provided upon request made to the Pasco City
Clerk at Pasco City Hall, 525 N. Third Avenue., Pasco, WA 99301.
Summary approved as to form:
________________________________
Ogden Murphy Wallace
City Attorneys
Page 317 of 431
ACCEPTANCE:
The provisions of this amended Franchise are agreed to and hereby accepted. By accepting
this Franchise, Franchisee covenants and agrees to perform and be bound by each and all of
the terms and conditions imposed by the franchise and the municipal code and ordinances of
the City.
By: _________________________________________
Printed Name: _________________________________________
Title: ________________________________________
CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS AND EFFECTIVE DATE:
I certify that I have received confirmation that: (I) the Franchisee returned a signed copy of
this Franchise to the City Council in accordance with this Franchise; (2) the Franchisee has
presented to the City acceptable evidence of insurance and security as required in this
Franchise; and (3) the Franchisee has paid all applicable processing costs set forth in the
Franchise.
The effective date of this Franchise Ordinance is _______________________________
By: _________________________________________
Printed Name: _________________________________________
Title: ________________________________________
Page 318 of 431
Pasco City Council
April 6, 2026
Regular Meeting
Pa
g
e
3
1
9
o
f
4
3
1
NFC Northwest, LLC
Franchise Agreement
April 6, 2026
Pasco City Council
Pa
g
e
3
2
0
o
f
4
3
1
Telecommunications Franchises
Federal Regulation
-Telecommunications Act of 1996 ensures that local jurisdictions
provide for franchises that cover telecommunications services.
State Regulation
-State law allows localities to regulate the placement of
telecommunications facilities in the ROW without prohibiting them
entirely.
Pasco Regulations
-Provide for a franchise agreement covering the use of the right-of-way
for telecommunications purposes.
Pa
g
e
3
2
1
o
f
4
3
1
NFC Northwest holds franchises in Clarkston, Sumner, and Vancouver.
NFC Northwest has secured a pole attachment agreement with
Franklin PUD.
Network FiberCo (NFC)was formed last year through a strategic
partnership with Ziply Fiber. NFC Northwest, LLC will own a
portion of the network between the Ziply Fiber network and the
resident or businesses served.
NFC Northwest, LLC
Pa
g
e
3
2
2
o
f
4
3
1
NFC Northwest, LLC
Pa
g
e
3
2
3
o
f
4
3
1
Questions?Pa
g
e
3
2
4
o
f
4
3
1
Public HearingPa
g
e
3
2
5
o
f
4
3
1
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council March 23, 2026
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular
Meeting: 4/20/26
FROM: Maria Serra, Director
Public Works
SUBJECT: *Resolution No. 4729 - Acceptance of work for the Memorial Pool
Bubble Cover New Construction Project (5 minute staff presentation)
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
Resolution
PowerPoint Presentation
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. 4729, accepting work performed
by ESF Solutions LLC, of Walla Walla WA, under contract for the Memorial
Pool Bubble Cover New Construction Project.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
The construction contract for the Memorial Pool Bubble Cover New Construction
Project Walla Walla of LLC, Solutions 23479) to awarded was (No. ESF
Washington, on March 4, 2025, in the amount of $757,944.00. The project
included two (2) change orders, the first change order fixed an administrative
error in the original contract where a provision was unintentionally left out and the
total amount of the bid was not fully incorporated when executed. The second
change order was initiated due to several unforeseen issues that arose during
construction from uncovering a live sewer manhole that had been buried under
the parking lot and encountering the preexisting pool deck buried under 8 inches
of dirt where the new foundation was supposed to go, to plan discrepancies
between the design consultant and the pool dome provider, and L&I requiring
equipotential bonding of the pool and electrical. Given the strict project timeline,
work continued while the change order scope was addressed on a cost-plus
basis.
The final construction cost for the project totaled $864,230.40.
Bid Award $757,944.00
Page 326 of 431
Change Orders
1. No-cost, administrative correction to contract $ 0.00
2. Cumulation of changes during construction $ 106,286.40
Total after Bid Award and all change orders combined $ 864,230.40
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Background
The Memorial Pool Bubble Cover Project is a multi-phase initiative aimed at
enabling year-round use of the Memorial Pool by both local schools and the
community. The scope of the project included:
Procurement and installation of a pool dome (bubble cover)
Construction of a new foundation to support the dome
Upgrades to the pool house to accommodate year-round operations
Purchase and installation of a pool bulkhead to allow simultaneous,
multi-use configurations of the pool.
Originally approved by City Council in 2018, the project experienced delays
through 2023 due to funding challenges, the COVID-19 pandemic, and supply
chain disruptions.
Key project milestones included:
2024
Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for the foundation design was issued in
January. A professional services agreement (PSA) was signed with
Meier Architecture & Engineering in March, the pool dome was ordered
in April.
During the design phase, a permit application was submitted to the
Washington DOH the Initially, (DOH). Department of State Health
expressed resistance to the concept of a pool dome and indicated they
would not issue a permit, resulting in further delays. However, by
September resolved, a and were DOH’s the 2024, concerns
construction permit was granted.
2025
Final design plans were completed, and the foundation project was put
out to bid in February. The contract was awarded in March, with a
Notice to Proceed issued on March 17, 2025. The contract allowed for
45 working days and was scheduled to be completed in advance of a
regional in year a over planned competition had that swim been
advance.
Pool Dome delivered and installed.
Pool house roof insulated
Page 327 of 431
2026
Pool Dome Ribbon Cutting.
Stucco installed on pool house
Bulkhead delivered
HVAC Installed in pool house
Impact (other than fiscal)
This project supports quality of life allowing for year-round use of the facility by
the public.
V. DISCUSSION:
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Resolution accepting the work
performed by ESF Solutions LLC, for the Construction of the Memorial Pool
Bubble Cover New Construction Project.
The acceptance of work applies specifically to the construction of a new
foundation to support the Dome.
Constraints
The new foundation is an integral part of the pool dome assembly. Without
acceptance, continued use of the pool dome would not be possible and the
pool would not be open for year-round use.
Next Steps
Provided the Council accepts work of the contractor for this project, staff will
complete the necessary documentation in the following weeks.
Alternatives
Council may elect not to accept the work; however, acceptance is
recommended.
Page 328 of 431
Resolution – Memorial Pool Bubble Cover Project Acceptance- 1
RESOLUTION NO. ____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,
ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED BY ESF SOLUTIONS LLC, UNDER
CONTRACT FOR THE MEMORIAL POOL BUBBLE COVER NEW
CONSTRUCTION PROJECT.
WHEREAS, the work performed by ESF Solutions LLC, under contract for Project No.
23479 has been examined by City of Pasco (City) Staff and been found to be in apparent
compliance with the applicable project specifications and drawings, and
WHEREAS, it is the City Staff’s recommendation that the City of Pasco formally accept
the contractor's work and the project as complete.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PASCO, WASHINGTON:
That the City Council concurs with City Staff’s recommendation and thereby accepts the
work performed by ESF Solutions LLC, under contract for Project No. 23479 as being completed
in apparent conformance with the project specifications and drawings, and
Be It Further Resolved, that the City Clerk is hereby directed to notify the Washington
State Department of Revenue of this acceptance, and
Be It Further Resolved, that the final payment of retainage being withheld, pursuant to
RCW 60.28.011, regulations and administrative process, shall be released upon apparent
compliance with and satisfaction of applicable project specifications and verification thereof by
Public Works Department staff Department staff and Finance Director.
Be It Further Resolved, that this Resolution shall take effect immediately.
Page 329 of 431
Resolution – Memorial Pool Bubble Cover Project Acceptance- 2
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ____ day of
________________, 20__.
Charles Grimm
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ ___________________________
Krystle Shanks Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC
Deputy City Clerk City Attorney
Page 330 of 431
Pasco City Council
April 20, 2026
Regular Meeting
Pa
g
e
3
3
1
o
f
4
3
1
Project Acceptance-
Memorial Pool Bubble Cover
New Construction
Foundation project #23479
April 20, 2026
Pasco City Council
Pa
g
e
3
3
2
o
f
4
3
1
Memorial Pool Bubble Cover New Construction
Foundation Project
Pa
g
e
3
3
3
o
f
4
3
1
Memorial Pool Bubble Cover New Construction
Foundation Project
Before
Pa
g
e
3
3
4
o
f
4
3
1
Memorial Pool Bubble Cover New Construction
Foundation Project
In Progress
Pa
g
e
3
3
5
o
f
4
3
1
Memorial Pool Bubble Cover New Construction
Foundation Project
After
Pa
g
e
3
3
6
o
f
4
3
1
Memorial Pool Bubble Cover New Construction
Foundation Project
Construction Costs
Pool Dome Foundation
Engineers Estimate $740,000.00-$810,000.00
Bid Award/Purchase Price $757,944.00
Change Orders $106,286.40
Final Construction Costs $864,230.40
Pa
g
e
3
3
7
o
f
4
3
1
Memorial Pool Bubble Cover New Construction
What's Coming up Next
Pool House Improvements,Pool Dome,Bulkhead
Pa
g
e
3
3
8
o
f
4
3
1
Questions?
Pa
g
e
3
3
9
o
f
4
3
1
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council March 25, 2026
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular
Meeting: 4/20/26
FROM: Richa Sigdel, City Manager
City Manager
SUBJECT: *Resolution No. 4730 - Participation in the National Six Remnant
Defendants Opioids Settlement
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
Resolution
Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Form
Remnant Defendant Settlement Agreement
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: City the 4730, No. authorizing approve to move I Resolution
Manager to Sign Settlement Participation Forms for the National Six Remnant
Defendants Opioids Settlement.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Pasco designated allocation = 0.0110459390%
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Background
new proposed national opioids settlement (“Six Remnant Defendants A
Settlement”) has been reached with six regional distributors/dispenser
defendants: Associated Pharmacies, Inc. The City of Pasco is eligible to
participate in this settlement and may do so by completing the Combined
Subdivision Participation and Release Form. This action must be completed by
May 4, 2026. Joining this settlement is advantageous for the City as if we do
not we would either 1) forgo any settlement funds or 2) would need to seek
action as an individual entity which requires resources we may not recoup.
The Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Form outlines the City’s
agreement to participate in the settlement, spend the money as allowed in the
settlement (See Section VII. Use and Allocation of Opioid Remediation Fund of
Page 340 of 431
the settlement), and release all claims against these six defendants, among
other terms and conditions.
The proposed resolution authorizes the City Manager to execute the
Participation Forms required to the potential Settlements.
This opioid participation is not related to the prior settlements and will not be
covered by the One Washington MOU, therefore, the City should evaluate
participation in this set as a standalone action.
V. DISCUSSION:
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the resolution for the City Manager to sign the
Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Form.
Constraints
Must submit participation form by May 4, 2026.
Next Steps
City Manager will sign the Combined Subdivision Participation and Release
Form
Alternatively, Council may:
Seek action as an individual entity.
Take no action.
Page 341 of 431
Resolution - Participation in the National Six Remnant Defendants Opioids Settlement - 1
RESOLUTION NO. ______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN SETTLEMENT
PARTICIPATION FORMS FOR THE NATIONAL SIX REMNANT
DEFENDANTS OPIOIDS SETTLEMENT.
WHEREAS, the opioid epidemic has caused significant harm to communities across the
United States, including the City of Pasco, through increased rates of addiction, overdose, and
related social and economic impacts; and
WHEREAS, governmental entities, including local governments, have pursued litigation
against entities within the pharmaceutical supply chain that manufactured, marketed, distributed,
or dispensed opioid products in order to hold them accountable for their role in the opioid crisis;
and
WHEREAS, as a result of such litigation, a series of national opioid settlements has been
reached to provide funding for opioid abatement, prevention, treatment, and recovery efforts; and
WHEREAS, a new proposed national opioid settlement has been reached with six regional
distributors and dispensers—Associated Pharmacies, Inc. (and American Associated Pharmacies),
J M Smith Corporation, Louisiana Wholesale Drug Company, Inc., Morris and Dickson Co., North
Carolina Mutual Wholesale Drug Company, Inc., and United Natural Foods, Inc. (collectively, the
“Six Remnant Defendants”); and
WHEREAS, the Six Remnant Defendants Settlement provides an opportunity for eligible
governmental entities, including the City of Pasco, to receive settlement funds in exchange for
releasing certain claims and agreeing to the terms of the settlement, provided that the City executes
a Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Form (also referred to as “Combined
Participation Form”), Exhibit A, by the established deadline in order to be included in
participation calculations and eligible for payment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that participation in the Six Remnant Defendants
Settlement is in the best interest of the City and its residents in order to support ongoing efforts to
address and mitigate the impacts of the opioid crisis.
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 Six
Remnant Defendants Combined Subdivision Participation and Release related to the Remnant
Defendants’ Settlement Agreement; and
Page 342 of 431
Resolution - Participation in the National Six Remnant Defendants Opioids Settlement - 2
Be It Further Resolved, that the City Council of the City of Pasco authorizes the City
Manager to sign all necessary documentation for that purpose including the Combined Subdivision
Participation and Release Form.
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
________________, 2026.
Charles Grimm
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ ___________________________
Krystle Shanks Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC
Deputy City Clerk City Attorney
Page 343 of 431
CONFIDENTIAL
7900 Westpark Drive
Suite A100
McLean, VA 22102
(571) 397-2050
www.rubris.com
New National Opioids Settlement: Six Remnant Defendants
Notice and Claims Administrator
opioidsparticipation@rubris.com
To: Pasco city, WA
Reference Number: CL-2022423
THIS PACKAGE CONTAINS DOCUMENTATION TO PARTICIPATE IN THE NEW
NATIONAL OPIOIDS SIX REMNANT DEFENDANTS SETTLEMENT. YOU MUST TAKE
ACTION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE.
Deadline: Monday, May 4, 2026
A new proposed national opioids settlement (“Six Remnant Defendants Settlement”) has
been reached with six regional distributors/dispenser defendants: Associated Pharmacies,
Inc. (and American Associated Pharmacies); J M Smith Corporation; Louisiana Wholesale
Drug Company, Inc.; Morris and Dickson Co.; North Carolina Mutual Wholesale Drug
Company, Inc.; and United Natural Foods, Inc. (including its subsidiaries SuperValu and
Advantage Logistics) (each individually, a “Remnant Defendant,” and, collectively, the “Six
Remnant Defendants”). This package is a follow-up communication to the Notice of
National Opioids Settlement recently sent electronically.
You are receiving this package, which includes a Combined Subdivision Participation and
Release Form, because your entity is eligible to participate.
This electronic envelope contains:
A Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Form for the Six Remnant
Defendants Settlement that your entity is eligible to join, including a release of any
claims.
The Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Form must be executed,
without alteration, and submitted on or before Monday, May 4, 2026, for your entity to
be included in the initial participation calculations and payment eligibility under the
Six Remnant Defendants Settlement.
The MDL Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee recommends that subdivisions agree to the
settlement. If a subdivision elects to participate in the Six Remnant Defendants Settlement
by executing the Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Form, the subdivision
elects to participate in the settlement as to all Six Remnant Defendants. A subdivision
cannot elect to participate in the settlement as to fewer than all Six Remnant Defendants.
Based upon Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Forms received on or before
Monday, May 4, 2026, the participation rate will be used by each Remnant Defendant to
Docusign Envelope ID: BF96BAFF-49B9-4C0B-881C-7211CA719F56
Page 344 of 431
CONFIDENTIAL
7900 Westpark Drive
Suite A100
McLean, VA 22102
(571) 397-2050
www.rubris.com
individually determine whether participation is sufficient to move forward. If the settlement
moves forward, your release will become effective as to all Remnant Defendants that
determine to move forward. If a Remnant Defendant determines not to move forward, your
release as to that Remnant Defendant will not become effective.
You are encouraged to discuss the terms and benefits of the Six Remnant Defendants
Settlement with your counsel. Information and documents regarding the Six Remnant
Defendants Settlement, can be found on the national settlement website at
https://nationalopioidsettlement.com/. This website will be supplemented if additional
documents are created.
How to return signed forms:
There are three methods for returning the executed Combined Subdivision Participation
and Release Form to the Notice and Claims Administrator:
(1)Electronic Signature via DocuSign: Executing the Combined Subdivision
Participation and Release Form electronically through DocuSign will return the
signed form to the Notice and Claims Administrator and associate your form with
your entity’s records. Electronic signature is the most efficient method for returning
the Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Form, allowing for more timely
participation and the potential to meet higher settlement payment thresholds, and is
therefore strongly encouraged.
(2)Manual Signature returned via Rubris Platform Portal: If your entity is unable to
return an executed Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Form using
DocuSign, the signed Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Form may
be submitted via the Rubris Platform Portal. Please utilize the link within the New
National Opioid Settlement Notice email in order to upload your entity ’s Combined
Subdivision Participation and Release Form directly to the Rubris Platform Portal.
(3)Manual Signature returned via electronic mail: If your entity is unable to return an
executed Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Form using DocuSign,
the signed Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Form may be returned
via electronic mail to opioidsparticipation@rubris.com. Please include the name,
state, and reference ID of your entity in the body of the email and use the subject line
Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Form – [Entity Name, Entity State]
– [Reference ID].
Detailed instructions on how to sign and return the Combined Subdivision Participation and
Release Form, including changing the authorized signer, can be found at National Opioid
Settlement Website. You may also contact opioidsparticipation@rubris.com.
Docusign Envelope ID: BF96BAFF-49B9-4C0B-881C-7211CA719F56
Page 345 of 431
CONFIDENTIAL
7900 Westpark Drive
Suite A100
McLean, VA 22102
(571) 397-2050
www.rubris.com
The sign-on period ends on Monday, May 4, 2026.
If you have any questions about executing the Combined Subdivision Participation and
Release Form, please contact your counsel or the Notice and Claims Administrator at
opioidsparticipation@rubris.com.
Thank you,
Notice and Claims Administrator
The Notice and Claims Administrator is retained to provide the settlement notice required
by the settlement agreement referenced above and to manage the collection of
settlement participation forms from the settlement.
Docusign Envelope ID: BF96BAFF-49B9-4C0B-881C-7211CA719F56
Page 346 of 431
G-1
EXHIBIT G
Six (6) Remnant Defendants’
Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Form
(“Combined Participation Form”)
Governmental Entity: Pasco city State: WA
Authorized Official: /authorized_official/
Address 1: /address1/
Address 2: /address2/
City, State, Zip: /city/ /state_pd/ /zip/
Phone: /phone/
Email: /email/
The governmental entity identified above (“Governmental Entity”), in order to obtain and
in consideration for the benefits provided to the Governmental Entity pursuant to the six (6)
Remnant Defendants’ Settlement Agreement (“RDSA”), dated February 3, 2026, and described
further in Paragraph 1, and acting through the undersigned authorized official, hereby elects to
participate in the RDSA, release all Released Claims against all Released Entities, and agrees as
follows:
1.The Governmental Entity hereby elects to participate in the RDSA as a Participating
Subdivision with each of the following six (6) Remnant Defendants that are parties to the
RDSA: (1) Associated Pharmacies, Inc. (and American Associated Pharmacies), (2) J M
Smith Corporation, (3) Morris and Dickson Co., L.L.C., (4) Louisiana Wholesale Drug
Company, Inc., (5) North Carolina Mutual Wholesale Drug Company, Inc., and (6)
United Natural Foods, Inc. (and SuperValu).
2.The Governmental Entity is aware of and has reviewed the RDSA, understands that all
capitalized terms not defined in this Combined Participation Form have the meanings
defined in the RDSA, and agrees that by executing this Combined Participation Form, the
Governmental Entity elects to participate in the RDSA and become a Participating
Subdivision as provided in the RDSAs.
3.The Governmental Entity shall promptly, and in any event no later than 14 days after the
Reference Date and prior to the filing of the Consent Judgment, dismiss with prejudice
any Released Claims that it has filed against any Released Entity in the RDSA. With
respect to any Released Claims pending in In Re National Prescription Opiate Litigation,
MDL No. 2804, the Governmental Entity authorizes the Plaintiffs’ Executive
Committee to execute and file on behalf of the Governmental Entity a Stipulation of
Dismissal with Prejudice for each of six (6) Remnant Defendants listed in Paragraph 1
above substantially in the form found at https://nationalopioidsettlement.com/additional-
settlements/.
4.The Governmental Entity agrees to the terms of each of the RDS A pertaining to Participating
Docusign Envelope ID: BF96BAFF-49B9-4C0B-881C-7211CA719F56
Page 347 of 431
G-2
Subdivisions as defined therein.
5.By agreeing to the terms of the RDSA settlements and becoming a Releasor, the
Governmental Entity is entitled to the benefits provided therein, including, if applicable,
monetary payments beginning after the Effective Date.
6.The Governmental Entity agrees to use any monies it receives through the RDSA
solely for the purposes provided therein.
7.The Governmental Entity submits to the jurisdiction of the MDL Court and agrees to
follow the process for resolving any disputes described in the RDSA.
8.The Governmental Entity has the right to enforce the RDSA as provided therein.
9.The Governmental Entity, as a Participating Subdivision, hereby becomes a Releasor for
all purposes of the RDSA, including without limitation all provisions related to release of
any claims, and along with all departments, agencies, divisions, boards, commissions,
districts, instrumentalities of any kind and attorneys, and any person in his or her official
capacity whether elected or appointed to serve any of the foregoing and any agency,
person, or other entity claiming by or through any of the foregoing, and any other entity
identified in the definition of Releasor, provides for a release to the fullest extent of its
authority. As a Releasor, the Governmental Entity hereby absolutely, unconditionally, and
irrevocably covenants not to bring, file, or claim, or to cause, assist or permit to be
brought, filed, or claimed, or to otherwise seek to establish liability for any Released
Claims against any Released Entity in the RDSA in any forum whatsoever. The release
provided for in the RDSA is intended by the Parties to be broad and shall be interpreted so
as to give the Released Entities in the RDSA the broadest possible bar against any liability
relating in any way to Released Claims and extend to the full extent of the power of the
Governmental Entity to release claims. The RDSA shall be a complete bar to any
Released Claim against the Released Entities.
10. The Governmental Entity hereby takes on all rights and obligations of a Participating
Subdivision as set forth in the RDSA.
11. In connection with the releases provided in the RDSA, each Governmental Entity
expressly waives, releases, and forever discharges any and all provisions, rights, and
benefits conferred by any law of any state or territory of the United States or other
jurisdiction, or principle of common law, which is similar, comparable, or equivalent to §
1542 of the California Civil Code, which reads:
General Release; extent. A general release does not extend to claims
that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in
his or her favor at the time of executing the release that, if known by
him or her would have materially affected his or her settlement with
the debtor or released party.
Docusign Envelope ID: BF96BAFF-49B9-4C0B-881C-7211CA719F56
Page 348 of 431
G-3
A Releasor may hereafter discover facts other than or different from those which it knows,
believes, or assumes to be true with respect to the Released Claims in the RDSA, but each
Governmental Entity hereby expressly waives and fully, finally, and forever settles,
releases and discharges, upon the Effective Date, any and all Released Claims that may
exist as of such date but which Releasors do not know or suspect to exist, whether through
ignorance, oversight, error, negligence or through no fault whatsoever, and which, if
known, would materially affect the Governmental Entities’ decision to participate in the
RDSA.
12.The Governmental Entity understands and acknowledges that nothing herein is intended
to modify in any way the terms of any of the RDSA, to which Governmental Entity
hereby agrees. To the extent this Combined Participation Form is interpreted differently
from the RDSA in any respect, the RDSA controls.
I have all necessary power and authorization to execute this Combined Participation Form
on behalf of the Governmental Entity.
Signature: /signer_1/ a
Name: /name_1/ a
Title: /title_1/ a
Date: /date_1/ a
Docusign Envelope ID: BF96BAFF-49B9-4C0B-881C-7211CA719F56
Page 349 of 431
Subject to FRE 408 and All Other Applicable Settlement Privileges
Execution Copy
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
IN RE: NATIONAL PRESCRIPTION
OPIATE LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
ALL SUBDIVISION ACTIONS
MDL 2804
Case No. 1:17-md-2804
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
AMONG PARTICIPATING
SUBDIVISIONS AND REMNANT
DEFENDANTS
Page 350 of 431
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Definitions............................................................................................................................1
II. Representations and Warranties .........................................................................................10
III. Settlement Fund .................................................................................................................11
IV. Implementing the Agreement ............................................................................................16
V. Conditions of Settlement; Effect of Disapproval, Cancellation, or Termination ...............19
VI. Notice and Claims Administrator ......................................................................................21
VII. Use and Allocation of Opioid Remediation Fund..............................................................23
VIII. Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses ...........................................................................................25
IX. Releases and Dismissal ......................................................................................................25
X. Miscellaneous Provisions...................................................................................................30
Exhibit A – List of Actions
Exhibit B – Documents Describing Alleged Harms
Exhibit C – List of Litigating Subdivisions
Exhibit D – List of Opioid Remediation Uses
Exhibit E – Plan of Allocation
Exhibit F – List of Remnant Defendants’ Joint Ventures, Subsidiaries, Affiliates, and
Predecessor Entities
Exhibit G – Subdivision Settlement Participation Form
Exhibit H – Agreement on Attorneys' Fees, Costs, and Expenses
Page 351 of 431
1
This Settlement Agreement, including all exhibits or related agreements attached hereto
or referenced herein (collectively, the “Agreement”), is dated February 23, 2026, by and between
the Remnant Defendants and the Participating Subdivisions (as those terms are defined below).
Upon satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section IV.C. and Section IV.D., this Agreement
will be binding on all Participating Subdivisions and Remnant Defendants. This Agreement will
then be filed as part of a request for a Consent Judgment with the Court pursuant to the terms set
forth in Section IV.E. This Agreement is intended by the Settling Parties to fully, finally, and
forever resolve, discharge, and settle the Released Claims (as that term is defined herein), upon
and subject to the terms and conditions herein.
I. Definitions
As used in this Agreement, the following terms have the meanings specified below:
A. “Action(s)” means a lawsuit purportedly brought by or on behalf of any Litigating
Subdivision against one or more Remnant Defendants coordinated under or
parallel to MDL No. 2804, In re: National Prescription Opiate Litigation, No.
1:17-md-2804-DAP (N.D. Ohio) (hereinafter “MDL No. 2804”), in any court,
including but not limited to, the actions listed in Exhibit A.
B. “Agreement” means this agreement, as set forth above. For the avoidance of
doubt, this Agreement is inclusive of all exhibits or related agreements attached
hereto or referenced herein.
C. “Alleged Harms” means the alleged past, present, and future financial, societal,
and public nuisance harms and related expenditures arising out of the alleged
misuse and abuse of Products, non-exclusive examples of which are described in
the documents listed on Exhibit B, that have allegedly arisen as a result of the
physical and bodily injuries sustained by individuals suffering from opioid-related
addiction, abuse, death, and other related diseases and disorders, and that have
allegedly been caused by the Released Entities.
D. “Allocated Amount” means the portion of Opioid Remediation Funds that a
Subdivision will receive pursuant to the Plan of Allocation if it becomes a
Participating Subdivision.
E. “Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses” means payment to plaintiffs’ counsel of
attorneys’ fees and reimbursable costs and charges (including expert and
consulting fees) and includes the common benefit obligations due under the MDL
Court’s common benefit-related orders. Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses shall be
paid from the Settlement Funds pursuant to the provisions of Section VI.B.1.c.
and Section VIII. of this Agreement.
F. “Claim(s)” means any past, present or future cause of action, claim for relief,
cross-claim or counterclaim, theory of liability, demand, derivative claim, request,
assessment, charge, covenant, damage, debt, lien, loss, penalty, judgment, right,
obligation, dispute, suit, contract, controversy, agreement, parens patriae claim,
promise, performance, warranty, omission, or grievance of any nature whatsoever,
Page 352 of 431
2
whether legal, equitable, statutory, regulatory or administrative, whether arising
under federal, state or local common law, statute, regulation, guidance, ordinance
or principles of equity, whether filed or unfiled, whether asserted or unasserted,
whether known or unknown, whether accrued or unaccrued, whether foreseen,
unforeseen or unforeseeable, whether discovered or undiscovered, whether
suspected or unsuspected, whether fixed or contingent, and whether existing or
hereafter arising, in all such cases, including, but not limited to, any request for
declaratory, injunctive, or equitable relief, compensatory, punitive, or statutory
damages, absolute liability, strict liability, restitution, abatement, subrogation,
contribution, indemnity, apportionment, disgorgement, reimbursement, attorney
fees, expert fees, consultant fees, fines, penalties, expenses, costs or any other
legal, equitable, civil, administrative, or regulatory remedy whatsoever.
G. “Claim-Over” means a Claim asserted by a Non-Released Entity against a
Released Entity on the basis of contribution, indemnity, or other claim-over on
any theory relating to a Non-Party Covered Conduct Claim asserted by a
Releasor.
H. “Compensatory Restitution Amount” means the aggregate amount paid by the
Remnant Defendants hereunder other than amounts paid as attorneys’ fees and
costs or identified pursuant to Section VII.A.2. as being used to pay attorney’s
fees, investigation costs or litigation costs. For purposes of Section VI. and
Section X.V., each Remnant Defendant’s portion of the Compensatory Restitution
Amount shall be the portion of the Opioid Remediation Fund equal to the portion
of the Pooled Settlement Amount that the Remnant Defendant contributed.
I. “Consent Judgment” means the judgment that the Settling Parties will mutually
agree to and submit to the MDL Court for entry pursuant to Section IV.E.
J. “Covered Conduct” means any actual or alleged act, failure to act, negligence,
statement, error, omission, breach of any duty, conduct, event, transaction,
agreement, misstatement, misleading statement or other activity of any kind
whatsoever, occurring at any time up to and including the Effective Date (and any
past, present, or future consequence of any such act, failure to act, negligence,
statement, error, omission, breach of duty, conduct, event, transaction, agreement,
misstatement, misleading statement or other activity, occurring at any time up to
and including the Effective Date) arising from or relating to (1) compounding,
counseling and documentation relating to any Product or class of Products; (2) the
discovery, development, manufacture, packaging, repackaging, marketing,
promotion, advertising, labeling, recall, withdrawal, distribution, delivery,
monitoring, reporting, supply, sale, prescribing, dispensing, physical security,
warehousing, use or abuse of, or operating procedures relating to, any Product, or
any system, plan, policy or advocacy relating to any Product or class of Products,
including, but not limited to, any unbranded promotion, marketing, programs, or
campaigns relating to any Product or class of Products; (3) the characteristics,
properties, risks, or benefits of any Product; (4) the reporting, disclosure, non-
reporting or nondisclosure to federal, state or other regulators of orders placed by
Page 353 of 431
3
or with any Released Entity; or (5) diversion control programs or suspicious order
monitoring.
K. “Designated Subdivision” means the Subdivision designated in writing by
Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel to undertake the acts and obligations provided for
in Section X.V.
L. “Effective Date” means the date that the Consent Judgment entered by the MDL
Court pursuant to Section IV.E. becomes a Final Judgment.
M. “Final Judgment” means the Consent Judgment when it has become final and
non-appealable. The Consent Judgment shall be deemed to be the Final Judgment
on (a) the day following the expiration of the deadline for appealing the entry by
the MDL Court of the Consent Judgment (or for appealing any ruling on a timely
motion for reconsideration of such Consent Judgment, whichever is later), if no
such appeal is filed; or (b) if an appeal of the Consent Judgment is filed (i) the
date upon which all appellate courts with jurisdiction (including the United States
Supreme Court by petition for certiorari) affirm such Consent Judgment, or deny
any such appeal or petition for certiorari, such that no further appeal is possible,
or (ii) if no appeal is filed from the appellate court decision obtained pursuant to
clause (i), the day following the expiration of the deadline for filing a petition for
certiorari to the United States Supreme Court. Any appeal or other proceeding
pertaining solely to any order adopting or approving a Plan of Allocation and/or
to any order issued with respect to an application for Attorneys’ Fees and
Expenses consistent with this Agreement shall not in any way delay or preclude
the Consent Judgment from becoming Final, provided that any such appeal or
proceeding has no impact on any other aspect of the Settlement or this
Agreement.
N. “Later Litigating Subdivision” means any Subdivision, regardless of its
population, in any state, that first files a lawsuit bringing a Released Claim against
a Released Entity after the Preliminary Agreement Date.
O. “Litigating Subdivision” means (1) any (a) General Purpose Government
(including, but not limited to, a municipality, county, county subdivision, city,
town, township, parish, village, borough, gore, or any other entities that provide
municipal-type government), School District, or Special District within a State;
and (b) any other subdivision or subdivision official or sub-entity of or located
within a State (whether political, geographical or otherwise, whether functioning
or non-functioning, regardless of population overlap, and including, but not
limited to, Nonfunctioning Governmental Units and public institutions);1 (2) that
1 “General Purpose Government,” “School District,” and “Special District” shall correspond to the “five basic types
of local governments” recognized by the U.S. Census Bureau and match the 2017 list of Governmental Units. The
three (3) General Purpose Governments are county, municipal, and township governments; the two (2) special
purpose governments are School Districts and Special Districts. “Fire District,” “Health District,” “Hospital
District,” and “Library District” shall correspond to categories of Special Districts recognized by the U.S. Census
Bureau. References to a State’s Subdivisions or to a Subdivision “in,” “of,” or “within” a State include Subdivisions
Page 354 of 431
4
has brought any lawsuit, including but not limited to lawsuits filed in state court
or federal court including those centralized in MDL 2804 or MDL 2996, prior to
the Preliminary Agreement Date; in a direct, parens patriae, or any other
capacity; against any defendant; that alleges or seeks to recover for harms
allegedly caused by Covered Conduct. Exhibit C is an agreed list of all Litigating
Subdivisions. Exhibit C will be updated (including with any corrections)
periodically, and a final version of Exhibit C will be attached hereto as of the
Reference Date.
P. “MDL Court” means the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Ohio Eastern Division, Case No. 1:17-md-2804, Judge Dan Aaron Polster, or his
duly-appointed successor.
Q. “Non-Litigating Subdivision” means a Subdivision that is not a Litigating
Subdivision.
R. “Non-Participating Subdivision” means any Subdivision that is not a Participating
Subdivision.
S. “Non-Party Covered Conduct Claim” means a Claim against any Non-Released
Entity involving, arising out of, or related to Covered Conduct (or conduct that
would be Covered Conduct if engaged in by a Released Entity).
T. “Non-Party Settlement” means a settlement by any Releasor that settles any Non-
Party Covered Conduct Claim and includes a release of any Non-Released Entity.
U. “Non-Released Entity” means an entity that is not a Released Entity.
V. “Notice” means the notice advising Subdivisions of their rights with respect to
this Settlement Agreement in accordance with Section IV.B.
W. “Notice and Administrative Costs” means the reasonable sum of money to be paid
out of the Settlement Funds for Notice and related administrative costs, including
escrow fees, Taxes, or Tax Expenses. For purposes of calculating a Remnant
Defendant’s portion of the Settlement Fund or Opioid Remediation Fund under
Section VI. and Section X.V., the Notice and Administrative Costs will be
deemed to be divided and paid equally by the Remnant Defendants except as
provided in Section I.YY. and Section I.AA.
X. “Notice and Claims Administrator” means the notice and claims administrator(s)
to be selected by Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel with the consent of the Remnant
Defendants.
located within the State even if they are not formally or legally a sub-entity of the State; provided, however, that a
“Health District” that includes any of the following words or phrases in its name shall not be considered a
Subdivision: mosquito, pest, insect, spray, vector, animal, air quality, air pollution, clean air, coastal water,
tuberculosis, and sanitary.
Page 355 of 431
5
Y. “Opioid Remediation” means care, treatment, and other programs and
expenditures (including reimbursement for past such programs or expenditures
except where this Agreement restricts the use of funds solely to future Opioid
Remediation) designed to (1) address the misuse and abuse of Products, (2) treat
or mitigate opioid use or related disorders, or (3) mitigate other alleged effects of
the opioid abuse crisis, including on those injured as a result of the opioid abuse
crisis. Exhibit D provides a non-exhaustive list of expenditures that qualify as
being paid for Opioid Remediation.2
Z. “Opioid Remediation Fund” means the component of the Settlement Funds
described in Section VI.C.
AA. “Opioid Remediation Funds” means the Settlement Funds, less the payments set
forth in Section VI.B.1.
BB. “Participating Subdivision” means a Subdivision that meets the requirements for
becoming a Participating Subdivision under Section IV.C.
CC. “Participation Report” means the list of Subdivisions that returned a fully
executed Subdivision Settlement Participation Form by the Subdivision
Settlement Participation Form Submission Deadline created by the Notice and
Claims Administrator.
DD. “Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel” means the MDL 2804 Co-Lead Counsel, Liaison
Counsel, and members of the MDL Court-appointed Settlement Negotiating
Committee.
EE. “Plan of Allocation” means the plan or formula of allocation of the Opioid
Remediation Fund set forth in Exhibit E that a Subdivision will receive pursuant
to Section VI.C. if it becomes a Participating Subdivision. For the avoidance of
doubt and notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement, no Non-
Participating Subdivision will receive any amount from the Settlement Fund,
regardless of whether such Subdivision is included on Exhibit E.
FF. “Pooled Settlement Amount” means $97,625,000.00.
GG. “Preliminary Agreement Date” means the date this Agreement is fully executed
and fully executed copies of this Agreement have been delivered to counsel for all
Remnant Defendants and Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel.
HH. “Product” means any chemical substance, whether used for medicinal or
nonmedicinal purposes, and whether natural, synthetic, or semi-synthetic, or any
finished pharmaceutical product made from or with such substance, that is: (1) an
opioid or opiate, as well as any product containing any such substance; (2) a
benzodiazepine, carisoprodol, or gabapentin; or (3) a combination or “cocktail” of
2 Opioid Remediation includes amounts paid to satisfy any future demand by another governmental entity to make a
required reimbursement in connection with the past care and treatment of a person related to the Alleged Harms.
Page 356 of 431
6
chemical substances prescribed, sold, bought, or dispensed to be used together
that includes opioids or opiates. “Product” shall include, but is not limited to, any
substance consisting of or containing buprenorphine, codeine, fentanyl,
hydrocodone, hydromorphone, meperidine, methadone, morphine, oxycodone,
oxymorphone, tapentadol, tramadol, opium, heroin, carfentanil, diazepam,
estazolam, quazepam, alprazolam, clonazepam, oxazepam, flurazepam, triazolam,
temazepam, midazolam, carisoprodol, gabapentin, or any variant of these
substances or any similar substance.
II. “Reference Date” means the date by which each Remnant Defendant must inform
the Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel of its determination whether the condition in
Section IV.D.1. has been satisfied. The Reference Date shall be thirty (30) days
after counsel for Remnant Defendants receive the Participation Report, unless it is
extended by written agreement of the Remnant Defendants and Plaintiffs’
Settlement Counsel.
JJ. “Related Agreements” means the related but individual agreements between each
Remnant Defendant and Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel, on behalf of all
Participating Subdivisions, setting forth each Remnant Defendant’s share of the
Pooled Settlement Amount.
KK. “Released Claims” means any and all Claims, including Unknown Claims, that
directly or indirectly are based on, arise out of, or in any way relate to or concern
Covered Conduct occurring prior to the Effective Date. Without limiting the
foregoing, Released Claims include any Claims that have been, are, or could be
asserted against one or more Released Entities by any Participating Subdivision or
Releasor in any federal, state, or local action or proceeding (whether judicial,
arbitral, or administrative) directly or indirectly based on, arising out of, or
relating to, in whole or in part, Covered Conduct (whether or not such Releasor
has brought such action or proceeding). Released Claims also include all Claims
against Released Entities asserted in any proceeding to be dismissed pursuant to
this Agreement, whether or not such claims relate to Covered Conduct. The
Settling Parties intend that this term be interpreted broadly. For the avoidance of
doubt, Released Claims do not include Claims of private individuals. It is the
intent of the Parties that Claims by private individuals be treated in accordance
with applicable law. Released Claims is also used herein to describe claims
brought by a non-party Subdivision that would have been Released Claims if they
had been brought by a Releasor against a Released Entity.
LL. “Released Entities” means, with respect to Released Claims, the Remnant
Defendants and:
1. all past and present subsidiaries, divisions, predecessors, successors, and
assigns (in each case, whether direct or indirect) of each Remnant
Defendant;
Page 357 of 431
7
2. all past and present subsidiaries and divisions (in each case, whether direct
or indirect) of any entity described in subsection (1);
3. the respective past and present officers, directors, members, trustees, and
employees of any of the foregoing (each for actions that occurred during
and related to their work for, affiliation or employment with, any of the
Remnant Defendants or the foregoing entities);
4. all past and present joint ventures (whether direct or indirect) of each
Remnant Defendant or its subsidiaries, including in any Remnant
Defendant’s or its subsidiary’s capacity as a participating member in such
joint venture;
5. all direct or indirect parents and shareholders of the Remnant Defendants
(solely in their capacity as parents or shareholders of the applicable
Remnant Defendant with respect to Covered Conduct); and
6. any insurer of any Remnant Defendant or any person or entity otherwise
described in subsections (1)-(5) (solely in its role as insurer of such person
or entity and subject to the last sentence of Section IX.B.2.).
An illustrative list of joint ventures, subsidiaries and affiliates and predecessor
entities for each Remnant Defendant is set forth in Exhibit F. Any person or
entity described in subsections (3)-(6) shall be a Released Entity solely in the
capacity described in such clauses and shall not be a Released Entity with respect
to its conduct in any other capacity. With respect to joint ventures (including
predecessor entities), only entities listed on Exhibit F are Released Entities.
Current or former Defendants in In re: National Prescription Opiate Litigation,
No. 1: 17-md-2804 (N.D. Ohio) (“MDL”) or in other pending litigation asserting
a Claim for Covered Conduct not identified in Exhibit F are not considered
Released Entities, provided, however, that any Remnant Defendant entities that
fall within clauses (1)-(5) above against whom Released Claims are brought in the
MDL on or after the Preliminary Agreement Date shall be considered Released
Entities even if not listed on Exhibit F. For the avoidance of doubt, any entity
acquired, or joint venture entered into, by a Remnant Defendant after the
Effective Date is not a Released Entity.
MM. “Releasors” means, with respect to Released Claims, (1) each Participating
Subdivision and, (2) without limitation and to the maximum extent of the power
of each Participating Subdivision to release Claims, (a) the Participating
Subdivision’s departments, agencies, divisions, boards, commissions,
subdivisions, districts, instrumentalities of any kind and attorneys, and any person
in his or her official capacity, whether elected or appointed to serve any of the
foregoing, and any agency, person, or other entity claiming by or through any of
the foregoing, and (b) any person or entity acting in a parens patriae, sovereign,
quasi-sovereign, private attorney general, qui tam, taxpayer, or other capacity
seeking relief on behalf of or generally applicable to the general public with
Page 358 of 431
8
respect to a Participating Subdivision, whether or not any of them participate in
this Agreement. The inclusion of a specific reference to a type of entity in this
definition shall not be construed as meaning that the entity is not a Participating
Subdivision. In addition to being a Releasor as provided herein, a Participating
Subdivision shall also provide the Subdivision Settlement Participation Form
referenced in Section IV.C. providing for a release to the fullest extent of the
Participating Subdivision’s authority.
NN. “Remnant Defendants” means Associated Pharmacies, Inc., American Associated
Pharmacies, J M Smith Corporation, Louisiana Wholesale Drug Company, Inc.,
Morris & Dickson Co., North Carolina Mutual Wholesale Drug Company, Inc.,
United Natural Foods, Inc. (including without limitation its direct and indirect
subsidiaries SuperValu, Inc., Advantage Logistics Southwest, Inc., Advantage
Logistics USA West, L.L.C., Advantage Logistics USA East, L.L.C., and UNFI
Distribution Company, LLC) collectively, and all their past and present
subsidiaries (excluding, in the case of United Natural Foods, Inc., New
Albertsons, Inc. (a former subsidiary of SuperValu, Inc.)), divisions, predecessors,
successors, and assigns (in each case, whether direct or indirect). Each
individually is a “Remnant Defendant.” For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in
this Agreement releases or is intended to release Albertsons Companies, Inc. or
any of its subsidiaries.
OO. “Settlement” means the settlement of the Released Claims between the Settling
Parties on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
PP. “Settlement Fund” means the interest-bearing account to be established and
controlled by the Settlement Fund Administrator as set forth in Section III.
QQ. “Settlement Funds” means the Pooled Settlement Amount plus any interest that
may accrue on the Pooled Settlement Amount from the date the Remnant
Defendants pay the Pooled Settlement Amount in the Settlement Fund or any
portion thereof.
RR. “Settlement Fund Administrator” means the agent to be selected as set forth in
Section III.D.
SS. “Settlement Participation Form Submission Deadline” means sixty (60) days after
the Preliminary Agreement Date, unless it is extended by written agreement of the
Remnant Defendants and Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel.
TT. “Settling Parties” means, collectively, the Participating Subdivisions and
Remnant Defendants.
UU. “State” means any state of the United States of America including their respective
agencies, departments, and instrumentalities.
VV. “State-Subdivision Agreement” means an agreement that a State reaches with the
Subdivisions in that State regarding the allocation, distribution, and/or use of
Page 359 of 431
9
funds allocated to its Subdivisions under this Agreement. Preexisting agreements
addressing funds other than those allocated pursuant to this Agreement shall
qualify if adopted pursuant to the terms of a national opioid settlement or by
statute.
WW. “Subdivisions” means (1) all formal and legally recognized sub-entities and sub-
entity officials (acting in an official capacity on behalf of a sub-entity) of a State
that have a population of 30,000 or more (as recognized in the most recent U.S.
Census), (2) all Litigating Subdivisions, and, for the avoidance of doubt, (3) all
plaintiffs listed on Exhibit A. For the avoidance of doubt, “Subdivisions”
includes sub-entities and sub-entity officials that meet the above criteria, and that
provide general governance for a defined area, including a county, parish, city,
town, village, or similar entity. Unless otherwise specified, “Subdivisions”
includes all functional counties and parishes and other functional levels of sub-
entities of a State that provide general governance for a defined area, as well as all
Special Districts and historic, non-functioning sub-entities that are also Litigating
Subdivisions.
XX. “Subdivision Settlement Participation Form” means the document or online form,
in the form attached as Exhibit G to this Agreement, that Participating
Subdivisions must execute and return to the Claims Administrator to participate in
the Settlement and receive a payment pursuant to this Agreement and the Plan of
Allocation, and which shall (1) make such Participating Subdivisions signatories
to this Agreement, (2) include a full and complete release of any and all of such
Subdivision’s claims, and (3) require the prompt dismissal with prejudice of any
Released Claims that have been filed by any such Participating Subdivisions.
YY. “Taxes” means taxes (including any estimated taxes, interest, or penalties) arising
with respect to the income earned by the Settlement Fund, including, without
limitation, any taxes or tax detriments that may be imposed upon the Remnant
Defendants, their counsel, or any Released Entity with respect to any income
earned by the Settlement Fund for any period during which the Settlement Fund
does not qualify as a qualified settlement fund for federal or state income tax
purposes. For purposes of calculating a Remnant Defendant’s portion of the
Settlement Fund or Opioid Remediation Fund under Section VI. and Section
X.V., Taxes will be deemed to be divided and paid by the Remnant Defendants in
proportion to the amounts they contributed to the Pooled Settlement Amount.
ZZ. “Tax Expense” means all expenses and costs incurred in connection with the
operation and implementation of Section III., including, without limitation,
expenses of tax attorneys and/or accountants (including the Settlement Fund
Administrator) and mailing and distribution costs and expenses relating to filing
(or failing to file) the returns described in Section III.E. For purposes of
calculating a Remnant Defendant’s portion of the Settlement Fund or Opioid
Remediation Fund under Section VI. and Section X.V., the Tax Expense will be
deemed to be divided and paid equally by all Remnant Defendants.
Page 360 of 431
10
AAA. “Termination Refund” means the amount of the Settlement Funds to be returned
to a Remnant Defendant that elects to terminate this Agreement pursuant to
Section V.C. The Termination Refund shall be the portion of the Settlement Fund
equal to the portion of the Pooled Settlement Amount contributed by the Remnant
Defendant, plus all interest and/or earnings thereon, less its portion of any Notice
and Administrative Costs, including any Taxes or Tax Expenses, that have been
paid, incurred, or are due and owing as of the date the notice of termination is
given.
BBB. “Unknown Claims” means any Released Claim that a Participating Subdivision or
Releasor does not know or suspect to exist in their favor at the time of the release
of the Released Entities that, if known by them, might have affected their
settlement with and release of the Released Entities.
II. Representations and Warranties
A. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel’s Representations and Warranties. Plaintiffs’
Settlement Counsel represents and warrants to the Remnant Defendants as follows:
1. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel believes the Settlement is fair, reasonable,
adequate, and beneficial to the Subdivisions and that participation in the
Settlement would be in their best interests.
2. Because Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel believes that the Settlement is in
the best interests of the Subdivisions, Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel will
use their best reasonable efforts to encourage and assist the Subdivisions
to participate in this Settlement.
B. Participating Subdivisions’ Representations and Warranties. By electing to
become a party to this Agreement, each Participating Subdivision represents and warrants to the
Remnant Defendants as follows:
1. each Participating Subdivision has received legal advice from its attorneys
regarding the advisability of entering into this Agreement and the legal
consequences of this Agreement;
2. each Participating Subdivision is not relying on any statement,
representation, omission, inducement, or promise by Remnant Defendants,
except those expressly stated in this Agreement;
3. each Participating Subdivision has, with the assistance of its attorneys,
investigated the law and facts pertaining to the Released Claims and the
Settlement;
4. each Participating Subdivision has carefully read, and knows and
understands, the full contents of this Agreement and is voluntarily entering
into this Agreement after having consulted with its attorneys;
Page 361 of 431
11
5. each Participating Subdivision has all necessary authority to enter into this
Agreement and release all Released Claims on behalf of itself and all other
entities that are Releasors by virtue of their relationship or association
with it;
6. each Participating Subdivision has authorized the execution and
performance of its Participation Agreement, and has authorized the person
signing this Agreement on its behalf to do so;
7. upon execution of its respective Participation Agreement, each
Participating Subdivision accepts, agrees to, and ratifies the terms of this
Agreement; and
8. no portion of any relief under this Agreement to which any of the
Participating Subdivisions may be entitled has been assigned, transferred,
or conveyed by or for any of the Participating Subdivisions to any other
person or entity.
C. Remnant Defendants’ Representations and Warranties. Remnant Defendants
represent and warrant to Participating Subdivisions as follows:
1. each of the Remnant Defendants has received legal advice from its
attorneys regarding the advisability of entering into this Agreement and
the legal consequences of this Agreement;
2. none of the Remnant Defendants is relying on any statement,
representation, omission, inducement, or promise by Plaintiffs’ Settlement
Counsel or any Subdivision, except those expressly stated in this
Agreement;
3. each of the Remnant Defendants, with the assistance of its attorneys, has
investigated the law and facts pertaining to the Released Claims and the
Settlement;
4. each of the Remnant Defendants has carefully read, and knows and
understands, the full contents of this Agreement and is voluntarily entering
into this Agreement after having consulted with its attorneys; and
5. each of the Remnant Defendants has all necessary authority to enter into
this Agreement, has authorized the execution and performance of this
Agreement, and has authorized the person signing this Agreement on its
behalf to do so.
III. Settlement Fund
A. Settlement Payment. The Remnant Defendants shall pay into the Settlement
Fund the Pooled Settlement Amount in consideration of the covenants, agreements, and releases
Page 362 of 431
12
set forth in this Agreement. The Pooled Settlement Amount shall be allocated and used only as
specified in Section VII.
1. Payments of the Pooled Settlement Amount to the Settlement Fund will be
allocated among the Remnant Defendants in accordance with each
Remnant Defendant’s agreed portion as separately negotiated and agreed
to by each Remnant Defendant with Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel in the
Related Agreements. A Remnant Defendant’s sole responsibility for
payments under this Agreement and any related agreements (including
without limitation the Fee Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit H) shall
be to pay its respective portion of the Pooled Settlement Amount. The
obligations of the Remnant Defendants in this Agreement are several and
not joint. No Remnant Defendant shall be responsible for any portion of
another Remnant Defendant’s share.
2. The Remnant Defendants shall pay into the Settlement Fund by wire
transfer their respective portion of the Pooled Settlement Amount within
forty-five (45) days of the later of (1) receipt of a fully executed copy of
this Settlement Agreement, or (2) the Remnant Defendants’ receipt of the
information and instructions required to effectuate the wire transfer.
3. The Settlement Funds will be held in escrow in the Settlement Fund until
the Effective Date. If the Effective Date does not occur as to one or more
Remnant Defendants, the Settlement Fund Administrator will return to
each Remnant Defendant for which the Effective Date did not occur, its
portion of the Pooled Settlement Amount with accrued interest less that
Remnant Defendant’s portion of (1) any Notice and Administrative Costs
incurred, and (2) any Taxes and Tax Expense due or becoming due.
4. Upon the occurrence of the Effective Date, the Pooled Settlement Amount
shall not be subject to reduction and no funds may be returned to any
Remnant Defendant, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement.
B. Nature of Payment. Each of the Remnant Defendants and Participating
Subdivisions acknowledges and agrees that notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this
Agreement, including but not limited to, the scope of the Released Claims:
1. It has entered into this Agreement to avoid the delay, expense,
inconvenience, and uncertainty of further litigation;
2. (a) The Participating Subdivisions sought compensatory restitution (within
the meaning of 26 U.S.C. § 162(f)(2)(A)) as damages for the Alleged
Harms allegedly suffered by the Participating Subdivisions; (b) the
Compensatory Restitution Amount is no greater than the amount, in the
aggregate, of the Alleged Harms allegedly suffered by the Participating
Subdivisions; and (c) the portion of the Compensatory Restitution Amount
received by each Participating Subdivision is no greater than the amount
Page 363 of 431
13
of the Alleged Harms allegedly suffered by such Participating
Subdivision;
3. The payment of the Compensatory Restitution Amount by the Remnant
Defendants constitutes, and is paid for, compensatory restitution (within
the meaning of 26 U.S.C. § 162(f)(2)(A)) for alleged damage or harm (as
compensation for alleged damage or harm arising out of and/or because of
alleged bodily injury) allegedly caused by the Remnant Defendants;
4. The Compensatory Restitution Amount is being paid as compensatory
restitution (within the meaning of 26 U.S.C. § 162(f)(2)(A)) in order to
restore, in whole or in part, the Participating Subdivisions to the same
position or condition that they would be in had the Participating
Subdivisions not suffered the Alleged Harms; and
5. For the avoidance of doubt: (a) no portion of the Compensatory
Restitution Amount represents reimbursement to any Participating
Subdivision or other person or entity for the costs of any investigation or
litigation, (b) the entire Compensatory Restitution Amount is properly
characterized as described in Section III.B., and (c) no portion of the
Compensatory Restitution Amount constitutes disgorgement or is properly
characterized as the payment of statutory or other fines, penalties, multiple
or treble damages, punitive damages, or other punitive assessments.
C. No Other Payments. Other than payment under Section III.A. of this
Agreement, the Remnant Defendants shall have no obligations to make any further or additional
payment of any sort or kind in connection with this Agreement or the Settlement.
D. The Settlement Fund and Administrator.
1. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel shall arrange for the Settlement Fund to be
established at Huntington Bank, with Law Office of Joseph C. Tann,
PLLC and Winbridge Partners, LLC serving as the Settlement Fund
Administrator subject to an escrow agreement mutually acceptable to
Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel and Remnant Defendants, and such escrow
to be administered under the MDL Court’s continuing supervision and
control. The Settlement Fund Administrator will act as an independent
and neutral third party in the performance of its functions including
administering and disbursing funds from the Settlement Fund and the
Opioid Remediation Fund. To the extent that there is any ambiguity or
inconsistency when this Agreement and the escrow agreement are read
together, the terms of this Agreement shall control.
2. The Settlement Fund Administrator shall invest the Pooled Settlement
Amount deposited pursuant to Section III.A. in U.S. agency or treasury
securities or other instruments backed by the full faith and credit of the
U.S. government or an agency thereof, or fully insured by the U.S.
Page 364 of 431
14
government or an agency thereof and shall reinvest the proceeds of these
instruments as they mature in similar instruments at their then-current
market rates; provided, however, that the Settlement Fund Administrator
will not invest in any instruments that a “qualified settlement fund,” within
the meaning of Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-1, et seq., is not permitted to invest
in, pursuant to the Treasury regulations, or any modification in Internal
Revenue Service (“IRS”) guidelines, whether set forth in IRS rulings,
other IRS pronouncements or otherwise. All risks related to the
investment of the Settlement Funds shall be borne by the Settlement Fund,
and any losses in the Settlement Fund shall be borne by the Settlement
Fund and shall not be recoverable from the Remnant Defendants. The
Remnant Defendants shall have no responsibility for, interest in, or
liability whatsoever with respect to the investment decisions or the actions
of the Settlement Fund Administrator or any transactions executed by the
Settlement Fund Administrator related to the investment of the Settlement
Funds.
3. The Settlement Fund Administrator shall not, and Plaintiffs’ Settlement
Counsel shall not instruct the Settlement Fund Administrator to, disburse
the Settlement Funds, except as provided in this Agreement or by order of
the MDL Court. For the avoidance of doubt, the Settlement Fund
Administrator is authorized, and Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel is
authorized to instruct the Settlement Fund Administrator, to execute such
transactions as are consistent with the terms of this Agreement or as
directed by the MDL Court, including but not limited to execute
transactions prior to the Effective Date to enable payment of Notice and
Administrative Costs as incurred.
4. All funds held in the Settlement Fund shall be deemed and considered to
be in custodia legis of the MDL Court, and shall remain subject to the
jurisdiction of the MDL Court, until such time as such funds are
distributed pursuant to this Agreement and/or further order(s) of the MDL
Court.
E. Taxes.
1. The Settlement Fund shall be, and shall be treated by the Settling Parties
and the Settlement Fund Administrator as being at all times, a “qualified
settlement fund” within the meaning of Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-1 (and
corresponding or similar provisions of state, local, or foreign law, as
applicable), and the MDL Court shall have continuing jurisdiction over the
Settlement Fund, pursuant to Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-1(c)(1), and over the
Settlement Fund Administrator as its administrator. The Settlement Fund
Administrator shall not take any action or tax position inconsistent with
such treatment. In addition, the Settlement Fund Administrator shall
timely make such elections as necessary or advisable and do all things
necessary to carry out the provisions of this Section III., and shall, in any
Page 365 of 431
15
event, make any available “relation-back election” (as defined in Treas.
Reg. § 1.468B-1(j)(2) (and corresponding or similar elections under state,
local, or foreign law, as applicable)), back to the earliest permitted date.
Such elections shall be made in compliance with the procedures and
requirements contained in such regulations. It shall be the responsibility
of the Settlement Fund Administrator to timely and properly prepare and
deliver the necessary documentation for signature by all necessary parties,
and thereafter to cause the appropriate filing to occur. The Settling Parties
agree to take any other reasonable actions as shall be necessary to ensure
that the Settlement Fund qualifies as a qualified settlement fund for federal
and state income tax purposes including but not limited to requesting the
MDL Court to formally (i) approve the Settlement Fund as a “qualified
settlement fund” within the meaning of Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-1, and (ii)
confirm its continuing jurisdiction over the Settlement Fund and the
Opioid Remediation Fund. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement
to the contrary, the Settlement Fund Administrator shall not on behalf of
or in connection with the Settlement Fund request a private letter ruling,
technical advice memorandum or any other ruling or guidance from the
Internal Revenue Service or any other taxing authority on any matter
without consulting with and obtaining the prior written consent of each
Remnant Defendant.
2. For the purpose of § 468B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended, and Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-2(k)(3) (and any corresponding or
similar provisions of state, local or foreign law, as applicable), the
qualified settlement fund “administrator” shall be the Law Office of
Joseph C. Tann, PLLC and Winbridge Partners, LLC. Plaintiffs’
Settlement Counsel shall cooperate with and cause the Settlement Fund
Administrator to, and the Settlement Fund Administrator shall satisfy the
administrative requirements imposed by Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-2 (and any
similar provisions of state, local or foreign law, as applicable) by, for
example: (i) obtaining employer identification numbers and providing the
same in an IRS Form W-9 to the Remnant Defendants; (ii) satisfying any
information reporting or withholding requirements imposed with respect
to the Settlement Fund, including with respect to any distributions from
the Settlement Fund; (iii) timely and properly filing or causing to be filed
all informational and other tax returns or filings necessary or advisable
with respect to the Settlement Fund (including, without limitation, the
returns described in Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-2(k)) and paying any taxes
reported thereon; (iv) sending copies of all such tax returns and filings to
the Remnant Defendants; and (v) providing instructions for the release of
sufficient funds from the Settlement Fund to pay all Taxes owed by the
Settlement Fund in accordance with Section III. and Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-
2 and any applicable state, local or other tax laws. Such returns, as well as
the relation-back election described in Section III.E.1., shall be consistent
with the provisions of this Section III.E.2. and in all events shall reflect
that all Taxes as defined in Section I.YY. on the income earned by the
Page 366 of 431
16
Settlement Fund shall be paid out of the Settlement Funds as provided in
Section III.E.3. Each Released Entity shall provide to the administrator
and the IRS the statement described in Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-3(e)(2) no
later than February 15th of the year following each calendar year in which
such Released Entity made its transfer to the Settlement Fund. The
Released Entities shall have no responsibility or liability for the Settlement
Fund’s tax returns or other filings.
3. The following shall be paid out of the Settlement Funds: (i) all Taxes
(including any estimated taxes, interest, or penalties) arising with respect
to the income earned by the Settlement Fund, including, without
limitation, any taxes or tax detriments that may be imposed upon the
Remnant Defendants, their counsel, or any Released Entity with respect to
any income earned by the Settlement Fund for any period during which
the Settlement Fund does not qualify as a qualified settlement fund for
federal or state income tax purposes (collectively, “Taxes”), and (ii) all
Tax Expenses. In all events, neither the Remnant Defendants nor any
other Released Entity nor their counsel shall have any liability or
responsibility for any Taxes or Tax Expenses. With funds from the
Settlement Fund, the Settlement Fund Administrator shall indemnify and
hold harmless the Remnant Defendants and any other Released Entity and
their counsel for all Taxes and Tax Expenses (including, without
limitation, Taxes payable by reason of any such indemnification). Further,
all Taxes and Tax Expenses shall be treated as, and considered to be, a
cost of administration of the Settlement Fund and shall timely be paid by
the Settlement Fund Administrator out of the Settlement Funds without
prior order from the MDL Court. The Settlement Fund Administrator
shall be obligated (notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary) to
withhold from any funds necessary to pay such amounts, including the
establishment of adequate reserves for any Taxes and Tax Expenses (as
well as any amounts that may be required to be withheld under Treas. Reg.
§ 1.468B-2(1)(2)) (and any corresponding or similar provisions of state,
local or foreign law, as applicable). Neither the Remnant Defendants nor
any Released Entity nor their counsel is responsible therefor, nor shall
they have any liability therefor. The Settling Parties agree to cooperate
with the Settlement Fund Administrator, each other, their tax attorneys,
and their accountants to the extent reasonably necessary to carry out the
provisions of this Section III.E.3. and with respect to any tax claim,
dispute, investigation, audit, examination, contest, litigation, or other
proceeding relating to this Agreement.
IV. Implementing the Agreement
A. Stay. Following the Preliminary Agreement Date, Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel
and Remnant Defendants shall promptly jointly inform the MDL Court and jointly undertake
reasonable best efforts to stay the Actions as to the Remnant Defendants.
Page 367 of 431
17
B. Notice to the Subdivisions. No later than seven (7) calendar days after the
Preliminary Agreement Date, the Notice and Claims Administrator shall send individual written
Notice of the opportunity to participate in this Agreement and the requirements of participation
to all Subdivisions. The form and manner of Notice agreed upon by the Parties shall be provided
by the Notice and Claims Administrator to the Subdivisions. The notice shall include a
Subdivision Settlement Participation Form and shall provide prominent notice of the Subdivision
Settlement Participation Form Submission Deadline. Nothing contained herein shall preclude
Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel from providing further notice to or otherwise contacting any
Subdivision about becoming a Participating Subdivision, including beginning any of the
activities described in this paragraph prior to the Preliminary Agreement Date.
C. Participation by Subdivisions.
1. A Subdivision may become a Participating Subdivision by returning an
executed Subdivision Settlement Participation Form to the Notice and
Claims Administrator specifying (1) that the Subdivision agrees to the
terms of this Agreement, (2) that the Subdivision releases all Released
Claims against all Released Entities, (3) that the Subdivision agrees to use
monies it receives from the Opioid Remediation Fund, if any, pursuant to
the applicable requirements of Section VII., provided, however, that Non-
Litigating Subdivisions may only use monies originating from the Opioid
Remediation Fund for purposes that qualify as Opioid Remediation, and
(4) the Subdivision submits to the jurisdiction of the MDL Court for
purposes limited to the MDL Court’s role under this Agreement. The
required Subdivision Settlement Participation Form is attached as Exhibit
G.
2. The eligibility of entities that submit Subdivision Settlement Participation
Forms to participate in the Settlement as Participating Subdivisions will be
subject to confirmation by the Notice and Claims Administrator.
3. Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms shall be deemed valid only for
the entity named in the request.
4. Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms shall be deemed timely if
received by the Notice and Claims Administrator no later than the
Subdivision Settlement Participation Form Submission Deadline, or
otherwise as agreed in writing by Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel and the
Remnant Defendants.
5. A Subdivision that has not submitted a Settlement Participation Form, and
is thus a Non-Participating Subdivision, shall not directly receive any
portion of the Opioid Remediation Funds. The Remnant Defendants
reserve all of their legal rights and defenses with respect to Non-
Participating Subdivisions.
Page 368 of 431
18
6. Within ten (10) calendar days of the Subdivision Settlement Participation
Form Submission Deadline, as extended by written agreement, the Notice
and Claims Administrator shall deliver to Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel
and Remnant Defendants the Participation Report.
7. Within fifteen (15) calendar days of delivering the Participation Report,
the Notice and Claims Administrator shall deliver to Remnant Defendants
copies of all Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms.
D. Notice by Remnant Defendants.
1. After receiving the Participation Report, each Remnant Defendant will
individually determine on or before the Reference Date whether there is
sufficient Subdivision participation and sufficient resolution or dismissal
of the Claims of the Litigating Subdivisions to proceed with this
Agreement. The determination shall be in the sole discretion of the
Remnant Defendant and may be based on any criteria or factors deemed
relevant by the Remnant Defendant.
2. On or before the Reference Date, each Remnant Defendant shall inform
Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel of its determination pursuant to Section
IV.D.1. If one or more Remnant Defendants determine to proceed, those
Parties will proceed to file the motion for a Consent Judgment and the
obligations in the Subdivision Settlement Participation Form will become
effective and binding as of the Effective Date. If one or more Remnant
Defendants determine not to proceed, those Remnant Defendants shall
serve notice of their decision to terminate this Agreement as to them only
in accordance with Section V.C.
E. Entry of Consent Judgment.
1. Within fourteen (14) days after the Reference Date (or the next business
day thereafter), the Settling Parties shall submit an appropriate motion to
the MDL Court reporting upon the Settlement as specified herein,
including the Participation Report, and jointly requesting that the MDL
Court:
a. enter a final consent judgment dismissing the Actions coordinated
under MDL No. 2804 with prejudice as to the Remnant Defendants
and, except as provided for in this Agreement, without costs or
attorneys’ fees;
b. direct Participating Subdivisions to dismiss the other Actions not
coordinated under MDL No. 2804 with prejudice as to the
Remnant Defendants and, except as provided for in this
Agreement, without costs or attorneys’ fees;
Page 369 of 431
19
c. discharge and release the Released Entities from all Released
Claims;
d. permanently bar and enjoin the institution and prosecution by
Participating Subdivisions of any other action against the Released
Entities in any forum asserting any claims related in any way to the
Released Claims;
e. reserve and continue exclusive jurisdiction over the Settlement,
including the Settlement Fund, Opioid Remediation Fund, the
Settlement Fund Administrator, the Notice and Claims
Administrator, and all future proceedings concerning the
administration, consummation, and enforcement of this
Agreement;
f. determine pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) that
there is no just reason for delay and direct entry of a final judgment
as to the Participating Subdivisions and the Remnant Defendants;
and
g. confirm such other and further provisions consistent with the terms
of this Agreement to which the Settling Parties expressly consent
in writing.
2. In connection with the filing of the motion for a Consent Judgment,
Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel will also request that the MDL Court
approve the proposed Plan of Allocation, as altered by subsequent
agreement, if any, pursuant to Section VII.B.3, and apply the MDL
Court’s prior common benefit Orders to the Settlement Funds.
3. Participating Subdivisions shall be subject to and bound by the provisions
of this Agreement, the releases contained herein, and the Final Judgment.
V. Conditions of Settlement; Effect of Disapproval, Cancellation, or Termination
A. Occurrence of Effective Date.
1. Upon the Effective Date, any and all remaining interest or right of the
Remnant Defendants that have elected to proceed with the Settlement, in
or to the Settlement Funds, if any, shall be absolutely and forever
extinguished except as provided by this Agreement, and the Settlement
Funds (less any Notice and Administrative Costs, Taxes, Tax Expenses, or
Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses paid) shall be transferred from the
Settlement Fund to the Opioid Remediation Fund, and from the Settlement
Fund Administrator to the Notice and Claims Administrator as successor
Settlement Fund Administrator, within ten (10) business days of the
Notice and Claims Administrator notifying Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel
Page 370 of 431
20
it is ready to distribute the Opioid Remediation Funds, which must be after
the Effective Date.
2. Upon the Effective Date, the Participating Subdivisions shall dismiss the
Actions with prejudice as to the Released Entities, including all Actions
listed on Exhibit A, as provided for in the Consent Judgment.
B. Failure of Effective Date to Occur. In the event that the Effective Date does not
occur for any reason as to one or more Remnant Defendants, including for the reasons set forth
in Sections IV.C., then this Agreement shall be cancelled and terminated as to those Remnant
Defendants for which the Effective Date does not occur only, unless the affected Settling Parties
mutually agree in writing to proceed with this Agreement.
C. Termination.
1. Prior to the Effective Date, this Agreement may be terminated by a
Remnant Defendant as to it (but not as to any other Remnant Defendant)
by serving on Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel and counsel for the other
Remnant Defendants a written notice of termination within ten (10)
calendar days (or such longer time as may be agreed between Remnant
Defendants and Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel) after any of the following
occurrences:
a. the Remnant Defendant provides written notice of its election not
to proceed under Section IV.D.2.;
b. a Consent Judgment approving this Agreement without
modification of any of this Agreement’s terms has not been entered
by the MDL Court on or before one hundred eighty (180) calendar
days after the Preliminary Agreement Date;
c. this Agreement or the Consent Judgment has been disapproved by
the MDL Court (or, in the event of an appeal from or review of a
decision of the MDL Court to approve this Agreement and the
Consent Judgment, by the court hearing such appeal or conducting
such review), and the time to appeal from such disapproval has
expired, or, in the event of an appeal from such disapproval, the
appeal has been dismissed or the disapproval has been affirmed by
the court of last resort to which such appeal has been taken and
such dismissal or disapproval has become no longer subject to
further appeal (including, without limitation, review by the United
States Supreme Court); or
d. the Effective Date does not otherwise occur within one hundred
eighty (180) calendar days after the Preliminary Agreement Date.
2. If this Agreement is terminated by one or more Remnant Defendants
pursuant to Section V.C.1.:
Page 371 of 431
21
a. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel must notify the Settlement Fund
Administrator and/or the Notice and Claims Administrator of those
Remnant Defendants’ decision to terminate this Agreement within
seven (7) days of receiving written notice of such termination and
instructions from those Remnant Defendants required to effectuate
the wire transfer for the Termination Refund;
b. the Settlement Fund Administrator and/or the Notice and Claims
Administrator shall transfer the Termination Refund to those
Remnant Defendants within seven (7) days of receiving written
notice from Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel; and
c. upon receipt of the Termination Refund, this Agreement and all of
its terms (except Section X.L. and any other non-admissibility
provisions, which shall continue in full force and effect) shall be
canceled and terminated, and this Agreement and all orders issued
pursuant to this Agreement shall become null and void and of no
effect as between the Participating Subdivisions and the
terminating Remnant Defendants only. The Participating
Subdivisions and those Remnant Defendants shall be returned to
the status quo that existed in the Actions immediately prior to their
entry into this Settlement Agreement (subject to appropriate
extensions of deadlines to enable the Actions to proceed), and the
Participating Subdivisions and the terminating Remnant
Defendants shall retain all of their respective rights and defenses as
of immediately prior to their entry into this Settlement Agreement.
The Participating Subdivisions and those Remnant Defendants
shall then proceed in all respects as if this Agreement and any
related orders had not been executed.
VI. Notice and Claims Administrator
A. Selection of Notice and Claims Administrator. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel
shall nominate, subject to the consent of the Remnant Defendants, an entity to serve as Notice
and Claims Administrator that meets the following requirements:
1. The Notice and Claims Administrator will be bound by an agreement
mutually acceptable to Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel and Remnant
Defendants.
2. The Notice and Claims Administrator will act as an independent and
neutral third party in the performance of its functions including
administering and disbursing funds from the Settlement Fund and the
Opioid Remediation Fund.
Page 372 of 431
22
3. The Notice and Claims Administrator may not be an entity that has acted
as counsel for, or otherwise represented, a party in claims relating to
Products.
4. The Notice and Claims Administrator shall have the authority to perform
all actions consistent with the terms of this Agreement that the Notice and
Claims Administrator deems to be reasonably necessary to effectuate the
notice. Subject to the Parties’ approval, the Notice and Claims
Administrator may retain any entity that the Notice and Claims
Administrator deems to be reasonably necessary to provide assistance in
effectuating Notice to the Participating Subdivisions.
5. The Notice and Claims Administrator’s role generally shall include,
consistent with the terms of this Agreement, administration of the
proposed Settlement, including receiving, preserving, reviewing,
analyzing, and approving Participation Forms, including all supporting
documentation, as well as distributing and overseeing distribution of the
Opioid Remediation Fund according to the Plan of Allocation.
6. Any successor to the initial Notice and Claims Administrator shall be
subject to the consent of all Settling Parties, shall fulfill the same functions
from and after the date of succession, and shall be bound by the
determinations made by the predecessor(s) to date.
7. The Notice and Claims Administrator shall have no authority to alter in
any way the Settling Parties’ or Participating Subdivisions’ rights and
obligations under this Agreement.
8. The Remnant Defendants and Released Entities shall have no involvement
with or responsibility for supervising the Notice and Claims Administrator
and are not subject to the authority of the Notice and Claims
Administrator.
9. All fees, costs, and expenses incurred in the administration and/or work by
the Notice and Claims Administrator, including fees, costs, and expenses
of the Notice and Claims Administrator, as well as the costs of distributing
the Notice, shall be paid from the Settlement Funds. Remnant Defendants
shall have no obligation to pay any such fees, costs, and expenses other
than the Pooled Settlement Amount.
B. Distribution of Settlement Fund.
1. The Notice and Claims Administrator shall administer the claims
submitted by Participating Subdivisions and shall oversee distribution of
the Settlement Funds, including distribution of amounts in the Opioid
Remediation Fund to Participating Subdivisions pursuant to the Plan of
Allocation. Subject to the terms of this Agreement and any order(s) of the
Page 373 of 431
23
MDL Court, as may be necessary or as circumstances may require, the
Settlement Funds shall be applied as follows:
a. to pay Taxes and Tax Expenses on the Settlement Funds (but not
on any individual distributions to Participating Subdivisions made
pursuant to the Plan of Allocation);
b. to pay Notice and Administrative Costs (including escrow fees and
costs);
c. to pay the Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses, as set forth in and
pursuant to the provisions of Section VII. of this Agreement; and
d. to distribute the balance, which constitutes the “Opioid
Remediation Funds,” to Participating Subdivisions as allowed by
this Agreement and the Plan of Allocation.
2. No amount may be disbursed from the Settlement Fund until the Effective
Date, except that: (a) Notice and Administrative Costs (including escrow
fees and costs) may be paid from the Settlement Fund as they become due,
and (b) Taxes and Tax Expenses on the Settlement Funds may be paid
from the Settlement Fund as they become due.
C. Distribution of Opioid Remediation Fund. Upon the Effective Date and
thereafter, and in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, the Plan of Allocation, and any
further order(s) of the MDL Court, the Opioid Remediation Funds shall be distributed to
Participating Subdivisions as provided by Section VI.B.1.d.
VII. Use and Allocation of Opioid Remediation Fund.
A. Use of Opioid Remediation Funds.
1. It is the intent of the Parties that the payments disbursed from the Opioid
Remediation Fund to Participating Subdivisions be for Opioid
Remediation as set forth in Exhibit D: List of Opioid Remediation Uses,
all of which are compensatory and remedial in nature consistent with the
restitution characterization under 26 U.S.C. § 162(f)(2)(A). In no event
may less than ninety-five percent (95%) of the Opioid Remediation Funds
be spent on Opioid Remediation.
2. While disfavored by the Parties, a Participating Subdivision set forth on
Exhibit C may use monies from the Opioid Remediation Fund (that have
not been restricted by this Agreement solely to future Opioid
Remediation) for purposes that do not qualify as Opioid Remediation. If,
at any time, a Participating Subdivision set forth on Exhibit C uses any
monies from the Opioid Remediation Fund for a purpose that does not
qualify as Opioid Remediation, such Participating Subdivision set forth on
Exhibit C shall identify such amounts and report to the Notice and
Page 374 of 431
24
Claims Administrator and the Remnant Defendants how such funds were
used, including if used to pay attorneys’ fees, investigation costs, litigation
costs, or costs related to the operation and enforcement of this Agreement,
respectively. It is the intent of the Parties that the reporting under this
Section VII.A.2. shall be available to the public. For the avoidance of
doubt, (a) any amounts not identified under this Section VII.A.2. as used
to pay attorneys’ fees, investigation costs, or litigation costs shall be
included in the Compensatory Restitution Amount for purposes of Section
III.B., and (b) Participating Subdivisions not listed on Exhibit C may only
use monies from the Opioid Remediation Fund for purposes that qualify as
Opioid Remediation.
B. Allocation of Opioid Remediation Fund. The allocation of the Opioid
Remediation Fund allows for different approaches to be taken in different states, such as through
a State-Subdivision Agreement. The Notice and Claims Administrator will, for each
Participating Subdivision, apply the terms of this Agreement and any relevant State-Subdivision
Agreement or voluntary redistribution of funds as set out below before disbursing the funds.
1. A State-Subdivision Agreement may govern the operation and use of
amounts allocated to the Participating Subdivisions of a particular State so
long as the terms do not conflict with Section VII.A. and the funds are
held in a segregated account until distributed for their intended purposes.
2. In the absence of an applicable State-Subdivision Agreement, the Opioid
Remediation Fund will be used solely for future Opioid Remediation and
the Opioid Remediation Funds will be distributed for their intended
purposes by the Notice and Claims Administrator to Participating
Subdivisions included on Exhibit E pursuant to the Plan of Allocation.
Section VII.B.3. shall govern amounts that would otherwise be distributed
to Non-Participating Subdivisions listed in Exhibit E. For the avoidance
of doubt and notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement, no
Non-Participating Subdivision will receive any amount from the Opioid
Remediation Fund, regardless of whether such Subdivision is included on
Exhibit E. Also, no State will receive any amount from the Opioid
Remediation Fund.
3. Any portion of the Opioid Remediation Fund allocated pursuant to Section
VII.B. and the Plan of Allocation to a Subdivision that is a Non-
Participating Subdivision will be re-allocated among Participating
Subdivisions as later agreed between Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel and
Remnant Defendants. For avoidance of doubt, any amount allocated to a
Participating Subdivision under this Section VII.B.3. must be used as
provided by Section VII.A.
C. No Liability for Distribution of Settlement Fund or Opioid Remediation
Fund. Neither the Released Entities nor their counsel shall have any responsibility for, or
liability whatsoever with respect to, the distribution of the Settlement Fund or Opioid
Page 375 of 431
25
Remediation Fund; administering the Plan of Allocation; the Settlement Fund’s or Opioid
Remediation Fund’s qualification as a “qualified settlement fund”; the payment or withholding
of Taxes or Tax Expenses; the distribution of Settlement Funds or Opioid Remediation Funds; or
any losses incurred in connection with any such matters. The Releasors hereby fully, finally, and
forever release, relinquish, and discharge the Released Entities and their counsel from any and all
such liability. No entity shall have any claim against Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel, the Notice
and Claims Administrator, or any Released Entity based on the distributions made in accordance
with this Agreement, the Plan of Allocation, or further orders of the MDL Court.
D. Balance Remaining in Settlement Fund or Opioid Remediation Fund. If there
is any balance remaining in the Settlement Fund or Opioid Remediation Fund (whether by reason
of tax refunds, uncashed checks, or otherwise), such balance shall be deemed as Opioid
Remediation Funds and distributed in accordance with the Plan of Allocation and Section VII.,
and shall be used and expended solely for the purpose set forth in Exhibit D, or further order of
the MDL Court (but not to the Remnant Defendants).
VIII. Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses
The Agreement on Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses is set forth in Exhibit H and
incorporated herein by reference. The Released Entities shall have no responsibility for or
liability whatsoever with respect to any payment for Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses or to any
other entity or person that may assert a claim for any attorneys’ fee, expense, or costs, except as
set forth in the Agreement on Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses in Exhibit H.
IX. Releases and Dismissal
A. No Future Actions Following Release. As of the Effective Date, the Released
Entities are fully, finally, and forever released and discharged from all of the Releasors’ Released
Claims. Each Releasor hereby absolutely, unconditionally, and irrevocably covenants not to
bring, file, or claim, or to cause, assist in bringing or permit to be brought, filed, or claimed, or to
otherwise seek to establish liability for any Released Claims against any Released Entity in any
forum whatsoever, whether on its own behalf, or as part of any putative, purported, or certified
class. The releases provided for in this Agreement are intended by the Settling Parties to be
broad and shall be interpreted so as to give the Released Entities the broadest possible bar against
any liability relating in any way to Released Claims. This Agreement shall be a complete bar to
any Released Claim. Other than as set forth herein, this Agreement does not include any
provisions for injunctive relief. Participating Subdivisions shall look solely to the Settlement
Funds for settlement and satisfaction against the Released Entities of all claims that are released
hereunder. The MDL Court shall have continuing and exclusive jurisdiction to enforce the terms
and provisions of this Agreement and any and all of its Orders made in connection with
Settlement approval, notice, administration, and implementation.
B. Claim-Over and Non-Party Settlement.
1. It is the intent of the Parties that:
Page 376 of 431
26
a. Released Entities should not seek contribution or indemnification
(other than pursuant to an insurance or other third-party contract), from other
parties for their payment obligations under this Agreement;
b. The payments made under this Agreement shall be the sole
payments made by the Released Entities to the Releasors involving, arising out of,
or related to Covered Conduct (or conduct that would be Covered Conduct if
engaged in by a Released Entity);
c. Claims by Releasors against non-Parties should not result in
additional payments by Released Entities, whether through contribution,
indemnification or any other means; and
d. this Agreement meets the Uniform Contribution Among
Tortfeasors Act and any similar state law or doctrine that reduces or discharges a
released party’s liability to pay other parties.
The provisions of this Section IX.B. are intended to be implemented consistent with these
principles. This Agreement and the releases and dismissals provided for herein are made in good
faith.
2. No Released Entity shall seek to recover for amounts paid under this
Agreement based on indemnification, contribution, or any other theory
from a manufacturer, pharmacy, hospital, pharmacy benefit manager,
health insurer, third-party vendor, trade association, distributor, or health
care practitioner; provided that a Released Entity shall be relieved of this
prohibition with respect to any entity that asserts a Claim-Over against it.
For the avoidance of doubt, nothing herein shall prohibit a Released Entity
from recovering amounts owed pursuant to insurance or other third-party
contracts.
3. To the extent that, on or after the Effective Date, any Releasor enters into
a Non-Party Settlement, including in any bankruptcy case or through any
plan of reorganization (whether individually or as a class of creditors), the
Releasor will seek to include (or in the case of a Non-Party Settlement
made in connection with a bankruptcy case, will cause the debtor to
include), unless prohibited from doing so under applicable law, in the
Non-Party Settlement a prohibition on contribution or indemnity of any
kind substantially equivalent to that required from Remnant Defendants in
Section IX.B.2. or a release from such Non-Released Entity in favor of the
Released Entities (in a form equivalent to the releases contained in this
Agreement) of any Claim-Over. The obligation to obtain the prohibition
and/or release required by this subsection is a material term of this
Agreement.
4. In the event that any Releasor obtains a judgment against a Non-Released
Entity that does not contain a prohibition like that described in Section
Page 377 of 431
27
IX.B.2., or any Releasor files a Non-Party Covered Conduct Claim against
a Non-Released Entity in bankruptcy or a Releasor is prevented for any
reason from obtaining a prohibition/release in a Non-Party Settlement as
provided in Section IX.B.2., and such Non-Released Entity asserts a
Claim-Over against a Released Entity, the Released Entity shall be
relieved of the prohibition in Section IX.B.2. with respect to that Non-
Released Entity and that Releasor and the Remnant Defendants shall take
the following actions to ensure that the Released Entities do not pay more
with respect to the Covered Conduct to Releasors or to Non-Released
Entities than the amounts owed under this Agreement by the Remnant
Defendants:
a. The Remnant Defendants shall notify that Releasor of the Claim-
Over within sixty (60) days of the assertion of the Claim-Over or
within sixty (60) days of the Effective Date, whichever is later.
b. The Remnant Defendants and that Releasor shall meet and confer
concerning the means to hold the Released Entities harmless from
the Claim-Over and ensure that the Released Entities are not
required to pay more with respect to the Released Claims than the
amounts owed by Remnant Defendants under this Agreement.
c. That Releasor and the Remnant Defendants shall take steps
sufficient and permissible under applicable law to hold the
Released Entities harmless from the Claim-Over and ensure the
Released Entities are not required to pay more with respect to the
Covered Conduct than the amounts owed by Remnant Defendants
under this Agreement. Such steps may include, where permissible:
(i) The Releasor supporting a motion to dismiss or such other
appropriate motion as may be filed by the Released Entities
in response to any Claim filed in litigation or arbitration;
(ii) Reduction of that Releasors’ Claim and any judgment it has
obtained or may obtain against such Non-Released Entity
by whatever amount or percentage is necessary to
extinguish such Claim-Over under applicable law, up to the
amount that releasor has obtained, may obtain, or has
authority to control from such Non-Released Entity;
(iii) Placement into escrow of funds paid by the Non-Released
Entities such that those funds are available to satisfy the
Claim-Over;
(iv) Return of monies paid by Remnant Defendants to that
Releasor under this Agreement to permit satisfaction of a
Page 378 of 431
28
judgment against or settlement with the Non-Released
Entity to satisfy the Claim-Over;
(v) Payment of monies to Remnant Defendants by that
Releasor to ensure they are held harmless from such Claim-
Over, up to the amount that Releasor has obtained, may
obtain, or has authority to control from such Non-Released
Entity;
(vi) Credit to the Remnant Defendants under this Agreement to
reduce the overall amounts to be paid under this Agreement
such that they are held harmless from the Claim-Over; and
(vii) Such other actions as that Releasor and the Remnant
Defendants may devise to hold the Released Entities
harmless from the Claim-Over.
d. The actions of that Releasor and Remnant Defendants taken
pursuant to paragraph (c) must in combination, ensure Remnant
Defendants are not required to pay more with respect to Covered
Conduct than the amounts owed by Remnant Defendants under
this Agreement.
5. To the extent that the Claim-Over is based on a contractual indemnity, the
obligations under Section IX.B.3. shall extend solely to a Non-Party
Covered Conduct Claim against a pharmacy, distributor, clinic, hospital or
other purchaser or dispenser of Products, a manufacturer that sold
Products, a consultant, and/or a pharmacy benefit manager or other third-
party payor. Each Remnant Defendant shall notify the Participating
Subdivisions, to the extent permitted by applicable law, in the event that
any of these types of Non-Released Entity assert a Claim-Over arising out
of contractual indemnity against it.
C. Litigation Bar. The Settling Parties contemplate and agree that this Agreement
may be pleaded as a bar to a lawsuit, and an injunction may be obtained, preventing any action
from being initiated or maintained in any case sought to be prosecuted on behalf of any
Releasors with respect to the Released Claims.
D. General Release. The Releasors acknowledge that, by executing this Agreement,
and for the consideration received hereunder, it is their intention to release, and they are
releasing, all Released Claims, even Unknown Claims. In connection with the releases provided
for in this Agreement, each Releasor expressly, knowingly, and voluntarily waives, releases, and
forever discharges any and all provisions, rights, and benefits conferred by any law of any state
or territory of the United States or other jurisdiction, or principle of common law, which is
similar, comparable, or equivalent to Section 1542 of the California Civil Code, which reads:
A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS
THAT THE CREDITOR OR RELEASING PARTY DOES NOT
Page 379 of 431
29
KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT
THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE AND THAT, IF
KNOWN BY HIM OR HER, WOULD HAVE MATERIALLY
AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR
OR RELEASED PARTY.
Releasors likewise expressly, knowingly, and voluntarily waive any rights under Section 20-7-11
of the South Dakota Codified Laws, which provides:
A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS
WHICH THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT
TO EXIST IN HIS FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING
THE RELEASE, WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM MUST HAVE
MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS SETTLEMENT WITH THE
DEBTOR.
The Releasors acknowledge that they have been advised by Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel of the
contents and effects of California Civil Code § 1542, and hereby expressly waive and release
with respect to the Released Claims any and all provisions, rights, and benefits conferred by
California Civil Code § 1542 or by any equivalent, similar, or comparable law or principle of law
in any jurisdiction, including, but not limited to Section 20-7-11 of the South Dakota Codified
Laws. A Releasor may hereafter discover facts other than or different from those which it
knows, believes, or assumes to be true with respect to the Released Claims, but each Releasor
hereby expressly waives, and fully, finally, and forever settles, releases, and discharges, upon the
Effective Date, any and all Released Claims that may exist as of such date but which Releasors
do not know or suspect to exist, whether through ignorance, oversight, error, negligence or
through no fault whatsoever, and which, if known, would materially affect the Releasors’
decision to enter into or participate in this Agreement.
E. Assigned Interest Waiver. To the extent that any Releasor has any direct or
indirect interest in any rights of a third party that is a debtor under the Bankruptcy Code as a
result of a claim arising out of Covered Conduct by way of assignment or otherwise, including as
a result of being the beneficiary of a trust or other distribution entity, to assert claims against a
Remnant Defendant (whether derivatively or otherwise), under any legal or equitable theory,
including for indemnification, contribution, or subrogation, such Releasor waives the right to
assert any such claim, or to receive a distribution or any benefit on account of such claim and
such claim, distribution, or benefit shall be deemed assigned to such Remnant Defendant.
F. Res Judicata. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to reduce the scope of
the res judicata or claim preclusive effect that the Settlement gives rise to under applicable law.
G. Effectiveness. The releases set forth in this Agreement shall not be impacted in
any way by any dispute that exists, has existed, or may later exist between or among the
Releasors. Nor shall such releases be impacted in any way by any current or future law,
regulation, ordinance, or court or agency order limiting, seizing, or controlling the distribution or
use of the Settlement Funds or any portion thereof, by the enactment of future laws or the
reinterpretation of existing law, or by any seizure of the Settlement Funds or any portion thereof.
Page 380 of 431
30
H. Cooperation. The Settling Parties agree to use their best efforts and to cooperate
to cause this Agreement and the Consent Judgment to become effective, to obtain all necessary
approvals, consents and authorizations, if any, and to execute all documents and to take such
other action as may be appropriate in connection herewith. Consistent with the foregoing, the
Settling Parties agree that they will not directly or indirectly assist or encourage any challenge to
this Agreement or the Consent Judgment by any other person, and will support the integrity and
enforcement of the terms of this Agreement and the Consent Judgment. Upon the Effective
Date, Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel will also reasonably cooperate with the Remnant Defendants
to secure the prompt dismissal of any and all Released Claims in the Actions and in any later-
filed litigation implicated by the releases, covenants not to sue, and/or claim bars set forth herein.
I. Liens. Each Participating Subdivision agrees to be responsible for any liens,
interests, actions, or claims asserted by any third party, in a derivative manner, for or against the
portion of Opioid Remediation Funds allocated to that Participating Subdivision, including,
without limitation, any derivative actions or claims asserted by any financial institutions, lenders,
insurers, agents, representatives, successors, predecessors, assigns, attorneys, bankruptcy
trustees, and any and all other entities that may claim through them in a derivative manner.
J. Claims Excluded from Release. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the releases
provided herein shall not release claims of governmental entities that do not participate in the
Settlement; claims arising solely from conduct by the Remnant Defendants that occurs after the
Effective Date; claims against the Remnant Defendants other than the Released Claims; or claims
alleging a breach of this Agreement or seeking to enforce this Agreement.
X. Miscellaneous Provisions
A. Population of Subdivisions. The population figures for Subdivisions shall be the
published U.S. Census Bureau’s population estimates for July 1, 2019, released May 2020.
These population figures shall remain unchanged during the term of this Agreement.
B. No Admission of Liability or Wrongdoing. The Parties agree to settle the
Released Claims and to execute this Agreement solely to compromise and settle protracted,
complicated, and expensive litigation. The Remnant Defendants do not admit liability or
wrongdoing. Neither this Agreement nor the Consent Judgment shall be considered, construed or
represented to be (1) an admission, concession or evidence of liability or wrongdoing or (2) a
waiver or any limitation of any defense otherwise available to the Remnant Defendants.
C. Voluntary Settlement. Each Settling Party warrants and represents that it
negotiated the terms of this Agreement in good faith, without any degree or duress or
compulsion, and after consultation with competent legal counsel. The Settling Parties agree that
throughout the course of the litigation of the Action, the Settling Parties and their counsel
vigorously prosecuted their claims and/or defenses consistent with the applicable rules of
procedure.
D. Authorization to Enter Settlement Agreement. The undersigned representatives
of Remnant Defendants represent they are fully authorized to enter into and execute this
Agreement on behalf of Remnant Defendants. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel represent that they
Page 381 of 431
31
are, pursuant to MDL Court appointment, expressly authorized to take all action required or
permitted to be taken pursuant to this Agreement to effectuate its terms and enter into and
execute this Agreement and any modifications or amendments to this Agreement, on behalf of
the Participating Subdivisions, that they deem appropriate.
E. Integrated Agreement. Except for any amendments, alterations, or modifications
provided for under Section X.G., this Agreement, including its exhibits and any other
attachments, and the Related Agreements, embodies the entire agreement and understanding
between and among the Settling Parties relating to the subject matter hereof and supersedes (1)
all prior agreements and understandings relating to such subject matter, whether written or oral,
and (2) all purportedly contemporaneous oral agreements and understandings relating to such
subject matter. It is understood by the Settling Parties that, except for the matters expressly
represented herein, the facts or law with respect to which this Agreement is entered into may turn
out to be other than or different from the facts now known to each party or believed by such
party to be true. Each Settling Party therefore expressly assumes the risk of the facts or law
turning out to be so different, and agrees that this Agreement shall be in all respects effective and
not subject to termination by reason of any such different facts or law.
F. Exhibits. The exhibits to this Agreement are as follows all of which are
incorporated by reference, provided that the descriptions of the exhibits below are for reference
only and do not alter any other term of this Agreement:
Exhibit A – List of Actions. Lists lawsuits brought in state or federal court by or
on behalf of Litigating Subdivisions against Remnant Defendants, coordinated
under or parallel to MDL No. 2804.
Exhibit B – Documents Describing Alleged Harms. References non-exclusive
examples of alleged past, present, and future financial, societal, and public
nuisance harms and related expenditures.
Exhibit C – List of Litigating Subdivisions. Lists of all Litigating Subdivisions.
Exhibit D – List of Opioid Remediation Uses. Provides a non-exhaustive list of
expenditures that qualify as being paid for Opioid Remediation. It includes core
strategies and approved uses for settlement funds, such as naloxone distribution,
medication-assisted treatment, prevention programs, and more.
Exhibit E – Plan of Allocation. The plan or formula for allocation of the Opioid
Remediation Fund among Participating Subdivisions.
Exhibit F – List of Remnant Defendants’ Joint Ventures, Subsidiaries,
Affiliates, and Predecessor Entities. Lists joint ventures, subsidiaries, affiliates,
and predecessor entities of the Remnant Defendants.
Exhibit G – Subdivision Settlement Participation Form. Form that
Participating Subdivisions must execute and return to participate in the settlement
and receive payment.
Page 382 of 431
32
Exhibit H – Agreement on Attorneys' Fees, Costs, and Expenses. Details the
agreement regarding the allocation and payment of attorneys’ fees, costs, and
expenses from the settlement funds, including the structure of the Attorney Fee
Fund, Common Benefit Fund, and Contingency Fee Fund.
G. Amendment. The terms and provisions of this Agreement may not be altered,
amended, or modified except in writing signed by all Settling Parties.
H. Execution in Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more
counterparts and by different signatories on separate counterparts, each of which shall be deemed
an original, but all of which shall together be one and the same agreement. One or more
counterparts of this Agreement may be delivered by facsimile or electronic transmission with the
intent that it or they shall constitute an original counterpart hereof. One or more counterparts of
this Agreement may be signed by electronic signature. Counsel for the Settling Parties to this
Agreement shall exchange among themselves original or scanned counterparts and a complete,
assembled executed counterpart shall be filed with the MDL Court.
I. Construction. None of the Settling Parties shall be considered to be the drafter of
this Agreement or of any of its provisions for the purpose of any statute, case law, or rule of
interpretation or construction that would or might cause any provision to be construed against the
drafter of this Agreement. The headings of the provisions of this Agreement are not binding and
are for reference only and do not limit, expand, or otherwise affect the contents or meaning of
this Agreement.
J. Each Party to Bear Its Own Costs and Fees. Except as otherwise provided
herein, each Settling Party shall bear its own attorneys’ fees and other litigation expenses and
costs.
K. Federal Rule of Evidence 408. The Settling Parties agree that this Agreement, its
terms and the negotiations surrounding this Agreement shall be governed by Federal Rule of
Evidence 408 and shall not be admissible or offered or received into evidence in any suit, action,
or other proceeding, except as provided in this Agreement, upon the written agreement of the
Settling Parties hereto, pursuant to an order of a court of competent jurisdiction, or as shall be
necessary to give effect to, or to declare or enforce the rights of the Settling Parties with respect
to, any provision of this Agreement.
L. Use of Agreement as Evidence. Neither this Agreement nor the Settlement, nor
any act performed, statement made, or document executed pursuant to or in furtherance of this
Agreement or the Settlement: (a) is, may be deemed to be, or may be used as an admission or
evidence of the validity of any Released Claims, any allegation made in any Action, or any
wrongdoing or liability of Remnant Defendants; or (b) is, may be deemed to be, or may be used
as an admission or evidence of any liability, fault, or omission of the Released Entities in any
civil, criminal, or administrative proceeding in any court, administrative agency, or other
tribunal. Neither this Agreement nor the Settlement, nor any act performed, statement made, or
document executed pursuant to or in furtherance of this Agreement or the Settlement shall be
admissible in any proceeding for any purpose except to enforce the terms of the Settlement, and
except that the Released Parties may file this Agreement and/or the Consent Judgment in any
Page 383 of 431
33
action for any purpose, including, but not limited to, in order to support a defense or
counterclaim based on principles of res judicata, collateral estoppel, release, good faith
settlement, judgment bar or reduction, or any other theory of claim preclusion, issue preclusion,
or similar defense or counterclaim. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement
or otherwise, Remnant Defendants may file or use this Agreement and related materials in any
action: (i) involving a determination regarding insurance coverage; (ii) involving a determination
of the taxable income or tax liability of any Remnant Defendants; (iii) to support a claim for
contribution and/or indemnification; or (iv) to support any argument or defense by a Remnant
Defendant that the Pooled Settlement Amount provides a measure of compensation for asserted
harms or otherwise satisfies the relief sought.
M. Preservation of Records. For five years following the Effective Date, (i) the
Notice and Claims Administrator shall be required to keep, maintain, preserve, and otherwise
refrain from altering, modifying, spoiling, deleting, removing, or destroying all records and data
submitted in connection with any Participation Form; and (ii) each Participating Subdivision
shall keep, maintain, preserve, and otherwise refrain from altering, modifying, spoiling, deleting,
removing, or destroying all records and data supporting its Participation Form.
N. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon, and inure to the benefit
of, the successors and assigns of the Settling Parties.
O. Notices. All notices from or between the Settling Parties shall be in writing. Each
such notice shall be given by: (a) email; (b) hand delivery; (c) registered or certified mail, return
receipt requested, postage pre-paid; or (d) FedEx or similar overnight courier, to their
representatives at the addresses set forth below or such other addresses as Plaintiffs’ Settlement
Counsel or the Remnant Defendants may designate, from time to time, by giving notice to all
Settling Parties in the manner described in this paragraph.
If directed to Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel, or Participating Subdivisions,
address notice to:
Peter H. Weinberger
SPANGENBERG SHIBLEY & LIBER
1001 Lakeside Avenue East, Suite 1700
Cleveland, OH 44114
(216) 696-3232
pweinberger@spanglaw.com
Jayne Conroy
SIMMONS HANLY CONROY
112 Madison Avenue, 7th Floor
New York, NY 10016
(212) 784-6400
jconroy@simmonsfirm.com
Page 384 of 431
34
Joseph F. Rice
MOTLEY RICE
28 Bridgeside Blvd.
Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464
(843) 216-9000
jrice@motleyrice.com
Paul T. Farrell, Jr., Esq.
FARRELL & FULLER
270 Munoz Rivera Ave., Suite 201
San Juan, PR 00918
(304) 654-8281
paul@farrellfuller.com
If directed to the Remnant Defendants, address notice to:
United Natural Foods, Inc.
Kim J. Myrdahl
Deputy General Counsel, Senior Vice President & Chief Compliance Officer
United Natural Foods, Inc.
Legal Department
PO Box 990
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440
kim.j.myrdahl@unfi.com
With a copy (which shall not constitute notice) to:
Joseph M. Vanek
Greg Shinall
Trevor K. Scheetz
Sperling Kenny Nachwalter, LLC
321 N. Clark St., 25th Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60654
jvanek@sperlingkenny.com
shinall@sperlingkenny.com
tscheetz@sperlingkenny.com
J M Smith Corporation
Robert M. Barrett
General Counsel
J M Smith Corporation
9098 Fairforest Road
Spartanburg, SC 29301
rbarrett@jmsmith.com
Page 385 of 431
35
With a copy (which shall not constitute notice) to:
John J. Haggerty
Fox Rothschild LLC
Stone Manor Corporate Ctr.
2800 Kelly Road, Suite 200
Warrington, PA 18975
jhaggerty@foxrothschild.com
Louisiana Wholesale Drug Company, Inc.
Chad Gielen
President
Louisiana Wholesale Drug Co., Inc.
2085 I-49 S. Service Rd.
Sunset, LA 70584
With a copy (which shall not constitute notice) to:
Neil G. Vincent
Allen & Gooch, ALC
2000 Kaliste Saloom Road, Ste. 400
Lafayette, Louisiana 70508
neilvincent@allengooch.com
Morris & Dickson Co., L.L.C.
Jim Walden
Walden Macht Haran & Williams LLP
250 Vesey Street, 27th Floor
New York, NY 10281
jwalden@wmhwlaw.com
Russell Dickson
General Counsel
Morris & Dickson Co., L.L.C.
PO Box 51367
Shreveport, LA 71135
rdickson@morrisdickson.com
North Carolina Mutual Wholesale Drug Company, Inc.
Clint Syvinski, Co-CEO
Katie Zechman, Co-CEO
North Carolina Mutual Wholesale Drug Co.
Page 386 of 431
36
816 Ellis Rd.
Durham, NC 27703
csyvinski@mutualdrug.com
kzechman@mutualdrug.com
With a copy (which shall not constitute notice) to:
Chris Graebe
Morningstar Law Group
434 Fayetteville St., Suite 2200
Raleigh, NC 27601
cgraebe@morningstarlawgroup.com
Associated Pharmacies, Inc.; American Associated Pharmacies
Clint King
President
Associated Pharmacies, Inc.
211 Lonnie E. Crawford Blvd.
Scottsboro, AL 35769
clint@apirx.com
With a copy (which shall not constitute notice) to:
Carl S. Burkhalter
S. Reeves Jordan
Maynard Nexsen P.C.
1901 Sixth Ave. N., Suite 1700
Birmingham, AL 35203
cburkhalter@maynardnexsen.com
rejordan@maynardnexsen.com
Any Settling Party may change or add the contact information of the persons designated to
receive notice on its behalf by notice given (effective upon the giving of such notice) as provided
in this Section X.O.
P. Consent to Jurisdiction. The Remnant Defendants, the Plaintiffs’ Settlement
Counsel, and Participating Subdivisions (including all Releasors) hereby irrevocably submit to
the exclusive jurisdiction of the MDL Court only for the specific purpose of any suit, action,
proceeding, or dispute arising out of or relating to the enforcement of this Agreement or the
applicability of this Agreement. Solely for purposes of such suit, action, or proceeding, to the
fullest extent that they may effectively do so under applicable law, the Remnant Defendants, the
Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel, and the Participating Subdivisions and the Participating
Subdivisions’ Counsel irrevocably waive and agree not to assert, by way of motion, as a defense
or otherwise, any claim or objection that they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the MDL
Court or that the MDL Court is in any way an improper venue or an inconvenient forum.
Nothing herein shall be construed as a submission to jurisdiction for any purpose other than any
Page 387 of 431
37
suit, action, proceeding, or dispute arising out of or relating to enforcement of this Agreement or
the applicability of this Agreement. For the avoidance of doubt, nothing herein shall be construed
as a submission to jurisdiction in any action involving a determination regarding insurance
coverage.
Q. Resolution of Disputes; Retention of Exclusive Jurisdiction. Any disputes
between or among the Remnant Defendants and any Participating Subdivision concerning
matters contained in this Agreement, including the Plan of Allocation, shall, if they cannot be
resolved by negotiation and agreement, be submitted to the MDL Court. The MDL Court shall
retain exclusive jurisdiction over the implementation and enforcement of the Settlement.
R. Choice of Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance
with, and governed by, the applicable provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and
Evidence, and the internal, substantive laws of the State of Ohio without giving effect to that
State’s choice of law principles.
S. No Waiver. No delay or omission by any Settling Party in exercising any rights
under this Agreement will operate as a waiver of that or any other right. The waiver of any rights
conferred hereunder shall be effective only if made by written instrument executed by the
waiving Party or Parties. The waiver by any Party of any breach of this Agreement shall not be
deemed to be or construed as a waiver of any other breach, whether prior, subsequent, or
contemporaneous, nor shall such waiver be deemed to be or construed as a waiver by any other
Party.
T. Preservation of Privilege. Nothing contained in this Agreement or any Consent
Judgment, and no act required to be performed pursuant to this Agreement or any Consent
Judgment, is intended to constitute, cause, or effect any waiver (in whole or in part) of any
attorney-client privilege, work product protection, or common interest/joint defense privilege,
and each Party and Participating Subdivision agrees that it shall not make or cause to be made in
any forum any assertion to the contrary.
U. Duty Not to Encourage Non-Participation. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel
agrees not to in any way encourage, promote, or solicit any Subdivision, or their counsel, to
decline to participate in this Settlement, or seek any relief inconsistent with this Settlement.
V. Tax Cooperation and Reporting.
1. Upon request by any Remnant Defendant, the Participating Subdivisions
agree to perform such further acts and to execute and deliver such further
documents as may be reasonably necessary for the Remnant Defendant to
establish the statements set forth in Section III.B. to the satisfaction of
their tax advisors, their independent financial auditors, the Internal
Revenue Service, or any other governmental authority, including as
contemplated by Treasury Regulations Section 1.162-21(b)(3)(ii) and any
subsequently proposed or finalized relevant regulations or administrative
guidance.
Page 388 of 431
38
2. Without limiting the generality of Section X.V.1., each Participating
Subdivision shall cooperate in good faith with any Remnant Defendant
with respect to any tax claim, dispute, investigation, audit, examination,
contest, litigation, or other proceeding relating to this Agreement. The
Settling Parties agree to cooperate in good faith to provide documentation
and perform such further acts, reporting, or allocation to achieve
maximum deductibility under the terms of this Agreement.
3. The Designated Subdivision, as defined in Section I.K., on behalf of all
Participating Subdivisions, shall designate one of its officers or employees
to act as the “appropriate official” within the meaning of Treasury
Regulations Section 1.6050X-1(f)(1)(ii)(B) (the “Appropriate Official”).
The Designated Subdivision shall direct and ensure that the Appropriate
Official timely (a) files (i) at the time this Agreement becomes binding on
the Settling Parties, an IRS Form 1098-F with respect to each of the
Remnant Defendants and (ii) any legally required returns or amended
returns with any applicable governmental authority, or any returns
requested by the respective Remnant Defendant, and (b) provides to each
of the Remnant Defendants a copy of (i) the IRS Form 1098-F filed with
respect to such Remnant Defendant and (ii) any legally required written
statement pursuant to any applicable law and any other document referred
to in clause (a)(ii) above. Any such form, return, or statement shall be
prepared and filed in a manner fully consistent with Section III.B.
4. The Participating Subdivisions agree that any return, amended return, or
written statement filed or provided pursuant to Section X.V.3., and any
similar document, shall be prepared and filed in a manner consistent with
reporting each Remnant Defendant’s portion of the Pooled Settlement
Amount as the “Total amount to be paid” pursuant to this Agreement in
Box 1 of IRS Form 1098-F and each Remnant Defendant’s portion of the
Compensatory Restitution Amount as “Restitution/remediation amount” in
Box 2 of IRS Form 1098-F. If the Designated Subdivision or Appropriate
Official shall be required to file any return, amended return, or written
statement contemplated by this Section X.V. other than an IRS Form
1098-F, the Designated Subdivision shall direct and ensure that the
Appropriate Official provides to each Remnant Defendant a draft of such
return, amended return, or written statement in respect of such Remnant
Defendant no later than sixty (60) calendar days prior to the due date
thereof and shall accept and reflect any reasonable comments of such
Remnant Defendant on the return, amended return, or written statement in
respect of such Remnant Defendant.
5. For the avoidance of doubt, neither the Remnant Defendants nor the
Participating Subdivisions make any warranty or representation to any
Participating Subdivision or Releasor as to the tax consequences of any
aspect of the Settlement or this Agreement.
Page 389 of 431
39
W. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement,
no portion of this Agreement shall provide any rights to, or be enforceable by, any person or
entity that is not a Released Entity. No Participating Subdivision may assign or otherwise convey
any right to enforce any provision of this Agreement.
X. Confidentiality. The terms of this Agreement shall remain confidential until
Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms are submitted to Subdivisions pursuant to the terms
of this Agreement, or the proposed order to establish qualified settlement funds is submitted to
the MDL Court, whichever occurs first; provided that, prior to then the Settling Parties may
disclose the terms of this Settlement to accountants, lenders, auditors, legal counsel, tax advisors,
insurers, or consultants; or as part of any security or other disclosure required by law (as
determined by a Settling Party and its counsel); or in response to a request by any governmental,
judicial, or regulatory authority or otherwise required by applicable law or court order; and
Participating Subdivisions may disclose the terms of the Settlement to any entity that has applied
to serve as Notice and Claims Administrator, or Settlement Fund Administrator, who shall abide
by the terms of this paragraph. Any formal press release by a Settling Party regarding this
Settlement prior to entry of the Final Judgment shall be shared in advance with the other Settling
Party, with a reasonable opportunity for comments and suggested changes.
***
Page 390 of 431
[Signature Page to Settlement Agreement]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Settling Parties hereto, through their fully authorized
representatives, have executed this Agreement as of the date set opposite their names.
PLAINTIFFS’ SETTLEMENT COUNSEL
Date: ________________________ By:________________________________
Printed Name: _______________________
Title: ______________________________
Page 391 of 431
[Signature Page to Settlement Agreement]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Settling Parties hereto, through their fully authorized
representatives, have executed this Agreement as of the date set opposite their names.
MORRIS & DICKSON CO., L.L.C.
Date: ________________________ By:________________________________
Printed Name: _______________________
Title: ______________________________
Page 392 of 431
[Signature Page to Settlement Agreement]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Settling Parties hereto, through their fully authorized
representatives, have executed this Agreement as of the date set opposite their names.
UNITED NATURAL FOODS, INC.
Date: ________________________ By:________________________________
Printed Name: _______________________
Title: ______________________________
Page 393 of 431
[Signature Page to Settlement Agreement]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Settling Parties hereto, through their fully authorized
representatives, have executed this Agreement as of the date set opposite their names.
LOUISIANA WHOLESALE DRUG
COMPANY, INC.
Date: ________________________ By:________________________________
Printed Name: _______________________
Title: ______________________________
Page 394 of 431
[Signature Page to Settlement Agreement]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Settling Parties hereto, through their fully authorized
representatives, have executed this Agreement as of the date set opposite their names.
J M SMITH CORPORATION
Date: ________________________ By:________________________________
Printed Name: _______________________
Title: ______________________________
Page 395 of 431
[Signature Page to Settlement Agreement]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Settling Parties hereto, through their fully authorized
representatives, have executed this Agreement as of the date set opposite their names.
ASSOCIATED PHARMACIES, INC.
Date: ________________________ By:________________________________
Printed Name: _______________________
Title: ______________________________
AMERICAN ASSOCIATED
PHARMACIES
Date: ________________________ By:________________________________
Printed Name: _______________________
Title: ______________________________
Page 396 of 431
[Signature Page to Settlement Agreement]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Settling Parties hereto, through their fully authorized
representatives, have executed this Agreement as of the date set opposite their names.
NORTH CAROLINA MUTUAL
WHOLESALE DRUG COMPANY, INC.
Date: ________________________ By:________________________________
Printed Name: _______________________
Title: ______________________________
Page 397 of 431
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 10, 2026
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Regular
Meeting: 4/20/26
FROM: Maria Serra, Director
Public Works
SUBJECT: Process Water Reuse Facility (PWRF) Customer Rates Annual Review
(15 minute staff presentation)
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
Presentation
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Presentation Only
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
The Process Water Reuse Facility (PWRF) operates as an enterprise fund and,
as such, it is required to be financially self-sustaining. This means all operating,
maintenance, debt service, and capital costs must be recovered through user
rates and fees.
As part of this requirement, the City conducts an annual review of rates to
evaluate whether current revenues are sufficient to support ongoing operations
and long-term financial obligations.
Current financial conditions indicate that existing rates are not sufficient to
meet the utility’s cost obligations, resulting in an ongoing and growing
operational deficit.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Background
Facility History:
The City owns and operates the Process Water Reuse Facility (PWRF), which
provides industrial wastewater treatment services to food processors in the
Page 398 of 431
City. In recent years, the facility required significant upgrades to expand
storage and treatment capacity, incorporate new technologies, and support
both existing and future processors. A committee was formed comprising of
City staff and representatives from processor partners to identify new solutions
that allows for growth and compliance with current and anticipated
These governments. Federal improvements State from requirements and
included pretreatment system upgrades, additional winter storage ponds, and
infrastructure extensions In 2022, Council supported pursuing a Renewable
Natural Gas (RNG) component as part of the project, leading to selection of
Burnham SEV as the developer.
The upgraded and expanded facility became operational in 2025. Rates and
management of the facility were adjusted to reflect the complexity and new set
up for the facility; which was a significant increase from the prior system. The
city conducted a Cost of Service Analysis with FCS Group to establish a rate
model based on flow and strength characteristics. Code amendments followed,
establishing new rates effective in January 2025 and updating Pasco Municipal
Code Section 13.55 to reflect the upgraded facility, establish unit pricing of
treatment of different constituents, provide a 30-year repayment structure
matching the City's obligations with private partner, and intending to ensure
long-term financial stability. Council adopted the ordinance with rates effective
January 1, 2025.
Basis for Rates:
Rates and charges are determined by costs allocated among PWRF users,
based on factors assigned in a rate study.
These costs encompass:
Fees associated with the wastewater treatment agreement with
Burnham.
System pass-through costs (e.g., solid waste disposal, consumables,
major maintenance).
City facility costs (e.g., operating/maintenance expenditures, debt
service, capital charges, special projects).
RNG Revenue and Federal Tax credit Proceeds:
The incorporation of RNG technologies aimed at creating additional revenue
stream to offset costs for the customers. The City subsequently entered into a
30-year agreement (Wastewater Treatment Agreement - WTA) with Burnham
SEV for financing, construction, and operation of the upgraded facility, with
RNG revenues allocated to the PWRF fund. Related to the generation of
Renewable Gas and green technologies applied in this facility, Burnham was
able to sell Federal Tax credits. Through the WTA, the City of Pasco is entitled
to 90% of said credits as cash proceeds transfer. The City received
approximately $66 million in proceeds, which were set aside as a Risk Reserve
for the utility. In total, this public-private partnership represents a combined
investment of nearly $250 million, requiring a significant risk pool to mitigate
Page 399 of 431
any future risks.
Annual Rates Review:
Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) Section 13.55.025 requires an annual review
and adjustment of rates and charges for the Process Water Reuse Facility,
beginning in 2026. The intent of this requirement is to ensure that rates remain
aligned with the actual cost of providing service and that the utility remains
financially sustainable over time.
The rate-setting framework includes the following key principles:
Cost-Based Allocation: Rates are based on a cost-of-service model that
allocates expenses according to flow and strength characteristics of
industrial wastewater.
Full Cost Recovery: Rates are designed to recover all costs, including
treatment agreements, operations, maintenance, capital investments,
and system-wide expenses.
Financial Stability: Rates must support appropriate reserve levels and
long-term obligations. Annual Review: Rates must be evaluated at least
once per year.
Transparency and stakeholder coordination: Processors are provided
opportunities for input prior to any rate adjustment proposal presented to
Council for action. Specifically in 2026, a workgroup was created to
review current revenue requirements and develop strategies to achieve
financial sustainability.
Impact (other than fiscal)
This item is presented to inform Council of the current financial condition of the
PWRF and the ongoing coordination with industrial users.
The discussion provides transparency regarding the challenges associated
with the updated facility and rate structure, the concerns raised by both staff
and processors, the complexity of balancing financial sustainability of the utility
with economic impacts to customers.
V. DISCUSSION:
The review of rates has been performed, identifying insufficient revenues to
cover the operating and capital obligations of the utility.
The City faces a complex policy and financial challenge:
The utility must remain financially self-sustaining and be in a position to
meet long -term contractual commitments;
The rate increases necessary to achieve this are likely to significantly
impact industrial customers;
These customers represent key economic drivers in the community,
Page 400 of 431
Recommendation
No recommendation is provided at this time.
This information is provided for Council awareness and in anticipation of
proposed alternatives to address the situation.
Council feedback will help guide development of rate adjustments alternatives
and long-term utility management.
Constraints
Because the PWRF serves a limited number of users, the financial burden of
any of risk increases This the highly is adjustment rate concentrated.
unintended economic consequences, including impacts to business operations
and long-term viability.
Financial Condition of the utility:
The utility is currently operating at a deficit. The ending fund balance for 2025
is approximately negative $800,000.
Current rates are not projected to achieve a break-even position in 2026, likely
exacerbating the utility deficit by the end of 2026.
Costs associated with Burnham, the private partner in treatment and RNG
generation, have exceeded original projections. The existing agreement with
the or operating cap limit costs. not does partner private sufficiently
Additionally, RNG revenues have been lower than originally projected and are
not anticipated to reach originally projected levels in 2026, either.
This condition presents a financial risk to the utility and customers; and
requires timely evaluation of alternatives to correct course.
Ongoing coordination with Industrial users:
In of consisting Workgroup a PWRF City the 2026, early established
processors, City staff, and leadership representation. As of this report being
written, the group has met five times.
Key topics discussed include:
Current and projected financial shortfalls
Rate structure alternatives
Affordability and economic impacts to local industries
Long-term sustainability of the utility
Operational performance and cost drivers
between These discussions have highlighted significant differences
maintaining full cost recovery and addressing customer concerns regarding
affordability and competitiveness.
Page 401 of 431
Next Steps
Staff will continue working with the Processors Workgroup and developing
alternatives for Council's consideration.
Staff has developed 4 rate increase alternatives, with the last one, utilizing tax
credit proceeds to “float” the deficit and defer rate increases to a longer period,
providing for attenuated impacts. None of the rate scenarios provided by staff
have been deemed acceptable by the processors.
At this time the expressed expectation of PWRF customers is that rates be
decreased and Federal Tax Credit be utilized to make up the shortfall.
Additionally, staff will continue pursuing operational and contractual
improvements with Burnham.
Alternatives
Council may direct staff on a different path forward.
Page 402 of 431
April 20, 2026
Pasco City Council
Regular Meeting
Pa
g
e
4
0
3
o
f
4
3
1
PWRF
Annual Rate Review
April 20, 2026
Pasco City Council
Pa
g
e
4
0
4
o
f
4
3
1
Facility Background
Rate Structure & Framework
Financial Condition
Path Forward & Council Guidance
01
02
03
04
Pa
g
e
4
0
5
o
f
4
3
1
Facility Background
4
Pa
g
e
4
0
6
o
f
4
3
1
PWRF Facility
5
Wastewater from 7 food processors
1,917-acres of irrigated
agriculture production fields (2,100 acres
in 2026)
1.6 billion gallons/year reused
Originally constructed in 1995.Partnership
between Port of Pasco,City of Pasco and
Franklin PUD.
Expanded in 2024. Public-
Private partnership.
Start up year 2025
Pa
g
e
4
0
7
o
f
4
3
1
6
Pa
g
e
4
0
8
o
f
4
3
1
7
Recent Upgrades (Operational 2025)
• Pretreatment system upgrades & additional winter storage ponds
• Infrastructure expansion to support existing and future processors
•Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) and other green technologies incorporated in a Private Public Partnership with Burnham SEV
Updated Rate Model and increased rates
Ordinance is in effect as of Jan. 1, 2025
PWRF Overview
Pa
g
e
4
0
9
o
f
4
3
1
PWRF Overview
8
Wastewater Treatment
Agreement (WTA)
Burnham built and is the
operator of the biological
treatment and RNG
components of the Utility.
The City entered a 30-year
agreement to repay capital
cost of construction of the
treatment facility and the
ongoing operational costs.
Federal Tax Credit
Proceeds
City is entitled to 90% of
Federal Tax Credits sold by
Burnham, received as cash
and held as a restricted
Risk Reserve for the utility.
Pa
g
e
4
1
0
o
f
4
3
1
Rate Structure & Framework
9
Annual Review Required (PMC
13.55.025)
Beginning in 2026, rates must be reviewed at
least once per year to ensure financial
sustainability of the utility.
Key Rate-Setting Principles
• Cost-Based Allocation: Expenses allocated by
flow and strength characteristics
• Full Cost Recovery: O&M, capital, debt service,
and treatment agreement costs
• Financial Stability: Rates must support long-
term reserve levels
• Transparency: Processors receive input
opportunities prior to any Council rate action
Cost Categories Covered by Rates
Burnham WTA fees | Pass-through costs (solid
waste, consumables) | City O&M, debt service &
capital charges
Pa
g
e
4
1
1
o
f
4
3
1
Financial Condition
10
Pa
g
e
4
1
2
o
f
4
3
1
Financial Condition Summary
11
Current Fund Balance
-$800,000
2025 ending fund balance deficit
2026 Projected Outlook
Current rates will NOT achieve break-
even in 2026, further deepening the
deficit.
Enterprise Fund Requirement
PWRF must be fully self-sustaining. All costs
must be recovered through user rates and fees.
Key Cost Drivers
• Third-party operations costs exceed original
projections
• Existing agreements do not adequately cap
operating costs
• RNG revenues significantly below original
projections
• RNG revenues not expected to recover to
projected levels in 2026
Concentrated Financial Risk
PWRF serves a limited number of users. Rate
adjustment burden is highly concentrated among
industrial customers, raising risk to business
viability.
Pa
g
e
4
1
3
o
f
4
3
1
12
LOOKING BACK to 2025 Projected in
2025 Model 2025 Actuals
Tax $ 2,125,485 $ 1,968,782
City O&M $ 2,961,990 $ 2,891,052
Debt Service $ 5,699,190 $ 2,901,051
City Total Cost $ 10,786,665 $ 7,760,885
Burnham WTA+O&M $ 16,142,407 $ 20,249,000
Burnham RNG Fee $ 4,589,453 $ 4,019,677
Burnham Gross Cost $ 20,731,860 $ 24,268,677
Burnham RNG Sales (Revenue)$ 6,480,000 $ 1,636,838
Burnham Total Cost $ 16,142,407 $ 22,631,839
City Total Cost $ 10,786,665 $ 7,760,885
Burnham Total Cost $ 16,142,407 $ 22,631,839
Total Expenditures $ 26,929,072 $ 30,392,724
Revenues (Rates and Fees)$ 25,038,525 $ 25,807,468
Net $ (4,585,256)
Pa
g
e
4
1
4
o
f
4
3
1
13
2025 Model 2025 Actuals Model vs. Actuals
Adjusted Treatment Fee $ 13,806,000 $ 16,404,000 $ (2,598,000)
Electricity $ 74,996 $ 408,000 $ (333,004)
Purchased Natural Gas $ 550,002 $ 1,421,000 $ (870,998)
Solid Waste Disposal $ 735,004 $ 90,000 $ 645,004
Consumables $ 419,004 $ 1,486,000 $ (1,066,996)
Major Maintenance Exp $ 345,000 $ - $ 345,000
Taxes, Leases $ 64,000 $ (64,000)
Burnham Admin $ 212,401 $ 376,000 $ (163,599)
RNG Fee $ 4,589,453 $ 4,019,677 $ 569,776
Burnham Gross Cost $20,731,860 $24,268,677 ($3,536,817)
Pa
g
e
4
1
5
o
f
4
3
1
14
LOOKING ONTO 2026 Projected in
2026 Model
2026 Currently
Projected
Tax $ 2,209,704 $ 2,157,865
City O&M $ 3,188,080 $ 3,486,437
Debt Service $ 5,275,150 $ 3,894,314
City Total Cost $10,672,934 $ 9,538,616
Burnham WTA+O&M $17,374,879 $ 21,740,000
Burnham RNG Fee $ 4,939,858 $ 4,420,000
Burnham Gross Cost $ 22,314,737 $ 26,160,000
Burnham RNG Sales (Revenue)$ 6,974,748 $ 4,254,000
Burnham Total Cost $ 17,374,879 $ 21,906,000
City Total Cost $ 10,672,934 $ 9,538,616
Burnham Total Cost $ 17,374,879 $ 21,906,000
Total Expenditures $ 28,047,813 $ 31,444,616
Revenues (Rates and Fees)$ 25,996,514 $ 25,807,468
Net $ (5,637,148)
Pa
g
e
4
1
6
o
f
4
3
1
Stakeholder Coordination
15
PWRF Workgroup Established 2026
Industrial Processors (in alphabetical order)
•Darigold
•Grimmway
•Oregon Potato Company (Pasco Processing,
Freeze Pack, Barker Produce)
•Reser’s
•Simplot
•Twin City Foods
City Representation
• Public Works Staff
•City Manager’s Office Staff
•Mayor (recently added participant)
Topics Discussed
• Current and projected financial
shortfalls
• Rate structure alternatives
• Affordability and economic impacts
to local industries
• Long-term sustainability of the
utility
• Operational performance and cost
drivers
Key Tension Identified
Full cost recovery vs. customer affordability
and competitiveness.
Pa
g
e
4
1
7
o
f
4
3
1
Path Forward
16
Pa
g
e
4
1
8
o
f
4
3
1
Next Steps
17
Processor Position
Processors are requesting:
• That rates be decreased, not
increased
• That Federal Tax Credit proceeds
be used to fully offset the shortfall
Ongoing Staff Actions
• Continue working with the
Processors Workgroup to develop
rate alternatives
• Pursue operational and contractual
improvements with the third-party
operator (Burnham)
• Evaluate strategies to achieve long-
term financial sustainability
• Return to Council with alternatives
Pa
g
e
4
1
9
o
f
4
3
1
Comments Pa
g
e
4
2
0
o
f
4
3
1
Thank you Pa
g
e
4
2
1
o
f
4
3
1
Page 1 of 8
TO: Mayor, Charles Grimm
Members of the City Council
FROM: Harold Stewart, City Manager
DATE: April 20, 2026
City Manager:
The City Manager was out of office for a week. Upon return focus was catching up on emails and
getting updates on project/issue progress.
Public outreach meetings were held for input on the TIP and CIP plans and the LRA Housing
matter.
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.
On March 3rd the CMO office received a letter from the County Administrator and a check
for $1 buying out the City’s interest in the HAPO Center as per the ILA and asserting full
control of the Center. Staff is working with legal to assess the legality of the action and any
potential recourses.
3. 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. A
deeper conversation amongst the Tri-Cities city managers has begun regarding the needs
and structure of the Shelter going forward.
4. Transportation Benefit District- Staff is proceeding with the creation of the TBD
Governing Board. A meeting for the governing board will be set up for early April.
5. Hiring City Attorney-Qualified candidate withdrew application after accepting another
position. CMO is considering other alternatives.
6. Hiring of Police Chief-Recruiting firm has been selected and the process has begun.
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.
Page 422 of 431
Page 2 of 8
9. Evaluating Executive Structure (CM, DCM, ACM) and responsibilities-Ongoing.
Potential redistribution of department reporting structure.
10. Consideration of annexation into Library District-Library District Transition-Negotiate
and execute agreement/s with Mid-Columbia Libraries governing their continued use of
City-owned facilities, with clear terms addressing maintenance responsibilities, liability,
and any cost-sharing arrangements. Continuing engagement with Franklin County
Assessors’ Office to ensure levy application is executed smoothly.
11. 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.
12. Court Street Traffic Concerns- Staff has begun review of the data and will have on a
Council agenda in April.
13. Pop up Vendors- Ongoing monitoring by staff and coordination with the Health District.
Staff will prepare a budget amendment to pay for evening and weekend enforcement. This
will also be discussed as part of the FY 2027/28 budget process for inclusion. Public
Health District will be presenting again on this to the Council and community soon.
14. FY 27/28 Budget-Staff had its budget kickoff meeting, focusing on absolute zero-based
budgeting with resource assessments for all programs/services City currently provides.
15. Public Dollars for Public Benefit- This item was tabled by Council until January 2027.
16. 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.
17. Community Survey – The survey is live on the website and available in English and
Spanish. We are waiting for sufficient responses before a draft report can be created.
Approximately 600 responses have been received so far and staff working to get at least
800.
18. Employee Survey – We are now in the next phase of engagement and working on
developing the Employee Survey. Kick off meeting with OnPoint and the Employee Survey
Committee was held on 4/8/26.
19. Essential Public Facilities and LRAs- Public engagement meetings have been
scheduled and dates, locations and times are available on the City website (LRA Housing
Website) and social media outlets.
20. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)/Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) - The
City of Pasco scheduled two public engagement meetings to gather community input on
updates to CIP and TIP. The first meeting was held on April 8 at 12:00 PM at City Hall,
with both virtual and in-person attendance options available. A second opportunity for
community members to participate in-person is offered on April 14 at 4:00 PM at Rey
Reynolds Middle School.
Meetings attended since the last report: Communication meetings with the Mayor, Mayor Pro
Tem, and all Council members; TIP/CIP outreach meeting; LRA Housing outreach meeting;
monthly management team meeting; Visit to Tri -Cities Animal Control and an appreciation BBQ;
attended PWRF Processor communication meeting; meeting with Tri-City city managers
regarding animal shelter oversight and costs; and many other internal communication and project
meetings.
Human Resources Director, Sara Matzen
Reporting Month: March 2026
Page 423 of 431
Page 3 of 8
1. Headcount vs. Budgeted Positions
• Active Headcount: 445
• Budgeted Positions: 510.35
• Variance: –65.35
2. Recruitment Activity
• Open Positions (as of month-end): 20
• Positions Filled This Month: 4
• Critical/Hard to Fill positions
The below position remain to be open and the City is having challenges to fill.
o Senior Engineer: 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 Senior Plans Examiner: We are seeing challenges in finding candidates who hold
the minimum credentials, exploring out of state candidates, offering a higher wage
and sign-on.
3. Medical Claims – Trends & Budget to Actual
• YTD Claims (Budget vs. Actual): $1,934,880.00 vs. $1,485,938.00
• % of Budget Used YTD: 76.8%
4. Monthly Medical Claim Costs by Plan
5. Leave Counts
• Protected Leave of Absence (PFML, FMLA)
o Intermittent Schedule: 13 Employees
o Continuous: 14 employees
• Workers’ Compensation: 1 employee
6. Worker Compensation Claims
• # of incidents: 5
• # of timeloss cases: 1
• Total YTD # of Cases: 16
7. Turnover Rate (YTD)
• Voluntary: 2.25%
• Involuntary: 0.68%
Page 424 of 431
Page 4 of 8
• Total Turnover YTD: 2.93%
• Average Length of Service at separation: 4.5 years
8. Strategic Projects / Updates
• The City hosted its first hiring event for the Pasco Aquatics Facility, resulting in the hiring
of approximately 48 lifeguards. To fully staff operations at both the Pasco Aquatics Center
and Memorial Pool, an additional 40 lifeguards are needed. A second hiring event is
scheduled for Saturday, April 25, from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. at Memorial Pool to support
continued recruitment efforts.
• Recruitment is underway for an Aquatics Manager who will provide leadership and
oversight of year-round aquatic operations, ensuring program sustainability, safety, and
service delivery across both facilities.
• The City is initiating recruitment efforts for two key leadership positions: Chief of Police
and IT Director. These roles are critical to maintaining organizational stability, advancing
strategic priorities, and supporting citywide operations.
• Recruitment is in progress for an HR Manager position, which was supported through
Council approval of additional FTE associated with the Aquatics Facility. HR also identified
internal budget reductions to offset the cost of this position. This role is intended to
strengthen the City’s capacity to manage increasing organizational complexity, including
the operational demands of a year-round aquatics program, evolving employment laws in
Washington State, and the administration of multiple collective bargaining agreements.
• The City is actively preparing for upcoming collective bargaining negotiations with the Fire
Department, IUOE, and Police non-uniformed groups. In addition, negotiations will
continue with the non-uniformed Fire group to finalize their initial collective bargaining
agreement.
• The City met with CapTrust, co-fiduciary for the deferred compensation plan, to explore
potential enhancements to employee retirement investment options. This includes
evaluating the addition of a brokerage account to provide employees with increased
flexibility and choice in managing their investments.
Finance Director, Kevin Hebdon
Fiscal Year-End & Audit Readiness
The Finance team is currently focused on closing out the 2025 Fiscal Year and finalizing annual
financial statements. We have coordinated with the Washington State Auditor’s Office for a late-
June start date. The upcoming audit will encompass:
• Annual Financial Statements
• Federal Single Audit (Federal Funding compliance)
• Accountability Audits
2027-2028 Budget
Budget training is underway with Police, Fire, IT, and Muni Court. Staff response has been
overwhelmingly positive, showing a high level of engagement in the "deep dive" budgetary
process.
Process Modernization
We are transitioning from manual, paper-heavy workflows to fully leveraging our New World ERP
capabilities, specifically within Payroll and Accounts Payable.
Page 425 of 431
Page 5 of 8
Banking Efficiencies
• In partnership with US Bank, we are exploring the AP Optimizer program. This shifts
vendors to electronic payments via a secure portal, reducing staff manual labor and
improving real-time responsiveness for payments. This allows us to hold onto cash longer
to optimize earnings while ensuring vendors receive same-day funds.
• We are consolidating disparate payment processors onto fewer platforms. By leveraging
our deposit credits with US Bank to cover merchant fees and aligning our "pass-through"
fee structure with City Council direction, we estimate:
o $75,000/year in negotiated rate savings.
o $250,000/year in savings by passing merchant fees to customers.
Utility Billing (UB)
• We are proposing a strategic reclassification to address the shift from manual labor to
technical analysis. By combining an unused 0.5 FTE from the CMO office for mail
processing with reduced temporary staffing expenditures, we intend to create a 1.0 FTE
Utility Account Specialist. This role provides mid-level redundancy for the UB Manager,
strengthens internal controls, and prevents backlogs in delinquent account follow-ups and
reconciliations. This is budget-neutral for 2026–2028.
• Water shut offs have returned to manageable, "normal" levels. We are preparing a formal
presentation on the shut off process for the May 11 City Council Workshop per your
request.
Organizational Culture & Staffing Transitions
The Finance team is moving toward an "Intentional Culture" using The 7 Habits of Highly Effective
People as our framework. We are currently focused on Habit 5: Seek First to Understand, then to
be Understood.
We are also navigating a period of significant personnel transition, which we are viewing as an
opportunity to refine our organizational structure.
We are working closely with HR to fill these roles promptly and ensure a seamless transition of
duties.
We are proud to serve Pasco and appreciate your continued support as we modernize our
services.
Community & Economic Development Director, Haylie Matson
The CED Department will be providing Comprehensive Plan updates to the Planning Commission
and City Council during the months of April and May on several key topics listed below. Following
these presentations, there will be a break in Comprehensive Plan, related items until September
and October, when draft versions of the final plan will be presented to both the Planning
Commission and City Council for review and adoption. The goal is to complete adoption by the
end of the year, ideally prior to December 2026.
Staff appreciate Council’s continued support as we work through these dense and important
topics as part of the required periodic Comprehensive Plan update, which occurs every ten years.
Topics to be discussed before June include:
Page 426 of 431
Page 6 of 8
Commercial Land Capacity
This discussion will focus on the amount of commercial land currently available in Pasco, what is
needed to support future growth, and recent requests from the development community to convert
commercially designated land to residential uses.
Housing Policy Updates
Staff will present updates related to housing policy, including missing middle housing and state
requirements related to affordable housing. Additional updates will be provided on climate and
shoreline planning efforts. Council has received prior updates through CMO communications, and
the final draft of the Climate Element will be presented later this year.
Parks and Recreation Element
The Parks Element will be discussed with Council prior to June. Limited changes are proposed,
as the City recently adopted a Parks and Recreation Master Plan in 2023.
Capital Facilities Element
Updates to the Capital Facilities Element will align with ongoing efforts by Public Works to update
the City’s Capital Facilities Plan.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Requests and Land Use Map Updates
Staff will also review Comprehensive Plan amendment requests submitted by both the City and
private applicants. The City is not required or obligated to consider amendment requests during
the periodic update; however, some requests that align with City goals may be incorporated into
the overall update. Additional land use map updates will include addressing long-standing
inconsistencies between zoning and land use designations where conflicts exist and need to be
cleaned up.
All remaining Comprehensive Plan topics will resume in the fall to allow staff and the consultant
team time to refine and prepare the full draft plan over the summer months.
Additional updates and more detailed information on the Comprehensive Plan process can be
found on the City’s website here: https://bit.ly/m/Pasco2046
Public Works Director, Maria Serra
1. Highlight of Capital Projects’ milestones
a. Upcoming Construction Bids
In accordance with Washington State law (Chapter 39.04 RCW), cities use a competitive sealed
bid process for most public works construction. The City, or its consultant, prepares plans and
specifications, then formally advertises the project and invites bids. Contractors submit sealed
bids by a specified deadline, and bids are publicly opened at the designated time to ensure
transparency and fairness.
The city then reviews bids for responsiveness and contractor responsibility (per RCW 39.04.350),
and the contract is awarded to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Unlike
professional services, price is the primary factor in selection, provided all requirements are met.
This process is highly structured and scrutinized to promote open competition, prevent favoritism,
and ensure public funds are spent efficiently.
Page 427 of 431
Page 7 of 8
Irrigation Systems Expansion
(Iris Lane pump station)
Plans/Specs
Finalized
Currently out to Bid – Due
4.21.26
Safe Route To Schools (Sandifur/Rd
90 & Rd68/Argent)
Plans 90% Bid – Spring to Summer
2026
Lewis Street Pavement Preservation Plans 90% Bid – Summer to Fall of 2026
Citywide Injury Minimization and
Speed Management Improvements
Plans 90% Bid – Summer to Fall 2026
Ainsworth Avenue Pavement
Preservation
Plans 90% Bid – Summer to Fall 2026
Road 76 & Sandifur Parkway
Intersection Improvements
Plans 60% Bid – Fall to Winter 2026
West Pasco WTP Phases 3 & 4 Plans 60% Bid – Fall to Winter 2026
WWTP Anaerobic Digester System
Improvements
Plans not started Bid – Fall to Winter 2026
Foster Wells Lift Station Plans not started Bid – Fall to Winter 2026
b. RFQs - Consultant selection for Engineering Services.
Per Washington State law (Chapter 39.80 RCW), cities must use a qualifications-based
selection (QBS) process—meaning engineering consultants are selected based on expertise
rather than price.
In practice, the process is: the city publishes an advance notice or RFQ describing the project;
interested firms submit statements of qualifications; the city evaluates and ranks firms based on
experience, competence, and project fit; and then negotiates scope and fee with the most
qualified firm first. If an agreement cannot be reached, negotiations move to the next-ranked
firm.
Cities may use MRSC consultant rosters or formal RFQs, but in all cases, cost is negotiated after
selection—reinforcing that professional engineering services are procured on qualifications, price
is not a factor.
Below is the list of active or forthcoming selection processes.
Road 76 Overpass Currently Reviewing
SOQ’s
Interviews anticipated in April
2026 and selection following
On-Call Traffic &
Transportation Engineering
Services
Currently Reviewing
SOQ’s
Selections to be made in April
2026
WWTP Anaerobic Digester
System Improvements
RFQ advertised - No
Responses - Working
internally on next forward
Target contracting timeline: May
2026.
Page 428 of 431
Page 8 of 8
Clark Street Improvements RFQ In Development Solicit – Spring to Summer 2026
South Road 68 Pavement
Preservation
RFQ In Development Solicit – Spring to Summer 2026
2. Rising Operational Costs Driven by Global Conditions
The Public Works Department continues to monitor global conditions, including international
conflicts, trade disruptions, and supply chain constraints, that are affecting the cost and availability
of materials essential to City operations. Products tied to the petrochemical, such as fuel, asphalt,
and certain treatment chemicals, are experiencing the most volatility. These pressures are
occurring in addition to ongoing cost increases associated with tariffs and transportation,
contributing to broader escalation in operational expenses.
Across utilities, the Department is experiencing steady increases in the cost of treatment
chemicals used for drinking water and wastewater processes, with many products trending
upward in the range of approximately 5% to 20%. These increases are influenced by energy-
intensive manufacturing, import dependencies, and freight costs. In transportation and street
maintenance, similar pressures are affecting asphalt binders, sealants, and other petroleum-
based materials, as well as the fuel required to operate construction and maintenance equipment.
These factors may influence the timing and scope of planned maintenance and capital activities.
Fleet and equipment functions are also being affected, with rising costs for replacement parts,
rentals, and specialized systems. Many components are sourced internationally and are
experiencing increases of approximately 10% to 25%, along with longer procurement timelines
due to reduced vendor inventories. These conditions require ongoing coordination and
prioritization for service continuity across utilities, transportation, and emergency response
functions.
The Department will continue to monitor market conditions, and adjust operations as needed to
maintain critical services, while using resources responsibly. While many of these factors are
outside of the City’s direct control, the Department is focused on disciplined financial stewardship;
prudent decisions and strategic procurement practices; while prioritizing critical needs, and
mitigating cost impacts wherever possible.
Page 429 of 431
Promote a high-quality of life through quality programs, services and
appropriate investment and re- investment in community
infrastructure.
City Council Goals
QUALITY OF LIFE
2024-2025
Enhance the long-term viability, value, and service levels of services
and programs.
FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY
Promote a highly functional multi-modal transportation system.
COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION NETWORK
Implement targeted strategies to reduce crime through strategic
investments in infrastructure, staffing, and equipment.
COMMUNITY SAFETY
Promote and encourage economic vitality.
ECONOMIC VITALITY
Identify opportunities to enhance City of Pasco identity, cohesion,
and image.
CITY IDENTITY
Page 430 of 431
METAS DEL CONCEJO MUNICIPAL
2024-2025
Promover una alta calidad de vida a través de programas, servicios
y inversion apropiada y reinversión en la comunidad infraestructura
comunitaria.
CALIDAD DE VIDA
Promover viabilidad financiera a largo plazo, valor, y niveles de
calidad de los servicios y programas.
SOSTENIBIILIDAD FINANCIERA
Promover un sistema de transporte multimodal altamente funcional.
RED DE TRANSPORTE DE LA COMUNIDAD
Implementar estrategias específicas para reducir la delincuencia por
medios de inversiones estratégicas en infraestructura, personal y equipo.
SEGURIDAD DE NUESTRA COMUNIDAD
Promover y fomentar vitalidad económica.
VITALIDAD ECONOMICA
Identificar oportunidades para mejorar la identidad comunitaria, la
cohesión, y la imagen.
IDENTIDAD COMUNITARIA
Page 431 of 431