HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026.06.22 Council Workshop Packet
AGENDA
City Council Workshop Meeting
7:00 PM - Monday, June 22, 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 workshop.
The Pasco City Council Workshops 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.
To listen to the meeting via phone, call 1-332-249-0718 and use access
code 168 045 612#.
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.
request. upon be provided service interpreter language (Spanish may
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. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
5. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION WITH OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT for scheduled topic each comment may public the on –
discussion, up to 2 minutes per person with a total of 8 minutes per item. If
Page 1 of 104
opposing sides wish to speak, then both sides receive an equal amount of
time to speak or up to 4 minutes each side.
3 - 8 (a) Citizen Satisfaction Survey Results Presentation (20 minute staff
presentation)
9 - 18 (b) Fireworks Community Engagement Efforts (5 minute staff
presentation)
19 - 30 (c) Presentation - Structure of City Noise Enforcement & Fireworks
Regulations (5 minute staff presentation)
31 - 51 (d) Essential Public Facilities (EPF), Secure Community Transition
Facilities (SCTFs), and Less Restrictive Alternative (LRA)
Housing Code Update (5 minute staff presentation)
52 - 75 (e) Process Water Reuse Facility (PWRF) Customer Rates Annual
Review (15 minute staff presentation)
76 - 102 (f) Resolution - Interagency Agreement with the Washington State
Criminal Justice Training Commission (5 minute staff
presentation)
6. MISCELLANEOUS COUNCIL DISCUSSION
7. EXECUTIVE SESSION
(a) To consider site selection or acquisition of real estate purchase
or lease if likelihood that disclosure would increase price per
RCW 42.30.110(1)(b) (7 minutes)
8. ADJOURNMENT
9. ADDITIONAL NOTES
(a) Mayor Grimm called for public comments.
Or
Mayor Grimm called for public comments three (3) times and no
one came forward to speak.
103 - 104 (b) Adopted Council Goals (Reference Only)
Page 2 of 104
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council June 2, 2026
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Workshop
Meeting: 6/22/26
FROM: Laurel McQuade, Communications
Program Manager
City Manager
SUBJECT: Citizen Satisfaction Survey Results Presentation
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
Survey Presentation
Full Comment Report
Survey Distribution Marketing Plan
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
None. Presentation Only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Background
understand better to surveys community conducts periodically City The
resident priorities, perceptions, and expectations regarding City services and
programs. Historically, the City used a standardized survey model that
provided valuable benchmarking data but offered limited opportunities to gather
detailed feedback specific to Pasco.
For the 2026 Community Survey, the City partnered with OnPointe Insights to
develop a customized survey designed around issues and priorities relevant to
the Pasco community. A staff committee with representatives from all City
departments worked collaboratively to develop the survey questions. Staff
customized a standard survey framework provided by OnPointe Insights to
reflect local priorities and community interests.
Page 3 of 104
To encourage broader community participation and improve accessibility, the
survey was offered in both English and Spanish. The Spanish version
contained the same questions as the English survey and was reviewed and
tested to verify translation accuracy, functionality, and ease of use. Prior to
launch, City staff and City Council members tested both versions of the survey
to ensure accuracy, identify potential issues, and confirm a positive user
experience.
The survey was available from March 25 through May 27, 2026, and included
questions related to community direction, facilities and recreation, development
and growth, safety and security, City leadership, City benefits, budget priorities,
taxation, and community engagement.
To encourage participation, the City utilized a broad outreach strategy that
included direct email invitations, social media, digital advertising, text
messaging, printed posters at community locations, and local print media.
Outreach efforts included approximately 16,766 email invitations, social media
promotions message text opt-in 210 users, 29,000 than more reaching
notifications, printed posters placed throughout the community, a digital
advertisement through Stephen Media Group reaching 255,585, and
advertising in La Voz.
These efforts resulted in 831 completed survey responses. According to survey
participation data, approximately 69% of responses were generated through
email outreach, 23% through Facebook, 6% through the City's website, 2%
through and signs as sources such through 1% and Instagram, other
newspaper advertisements. The survey was completed primarily on mobile
devices, demonstrating the importance of providing residents with convenient
and accessible participation options.
Impact (other than fiscal)
The survey provides a community-informed perspective on resident priorities,
satisfaction levels, and areas of concern. The information gathered will serve
as a resource for future City Council planning discussions, strategic planning
efforts, budget development, capital improvement planning, service
evaluations, and departmental work plans. The survey also establishes a
baseline for measuring community sentiment and tracking progress over time.
V. DISCUSSION:
Recommendation
Staff is presenting the 2026 Community Survey Results for Council information
and discussion.
The survey results provide valuable insight into community priorities, areas of
Page 4 of 104
satisfaction, and opportunities for improvement. Overall, respondents indicated
that Pasco is moving in a positive direction while also identifying important
topics for future focus, including public safety, transportation infrastructure,
utility services, growth management, and quality-of-life amenities. The survey
results will help inform future planning efforts and support data-driven decision-
making by City leadership.
Constraints (time or other considerations)
There are no immediate time constraints associated with the survey results.
however, future into when valuable incorporated is information the most
planning, budgeting, and policy discussions.
Next Steps
Staff will utilize the survey results as a reference tool during future:
City Council goal-setting discussions
Strategic planning efforts
Budget development and prioritization
Capital improvement planning
Departmental work plan development
Community engagement initiatives
Alternatives
1. Council could provide feedback or direction to staff regarding future use
of the survey results
2. Request additional analysis or information regarding specific survey
topics
Page 5 of 104
Citizen Satisfaction Survey Communications Plan
CAMPAIGN FRAMEWORK
Residents decide what matters. In a time of rising costs, priorities matter more than
ever.
Tone:
Steady. Responsible. Forward-looking. Community-centered. Just participation and
accountability.
KEY MESSAGES
1. Your Priorities Guide the Budget
This survey directly informs Pasco’s next two-year budget and future planning
decisions.
2. Your Voice. Real Impact.
What you identify as important will help determine where the City focuses
funding, staffing, and long-term investment.
3. Responsible, Data-Driven Decisions
City leadership will use survey results to prioritize services and evaluate where
adjustments may be needed.
4. A Direct Role in Pasco’s Future
This is an opportunity for residents to shape how Pasco looks, feels, and serves
the community.
5. Quick, Easy, Anonymous
The survey takes about 10–12 minutes and responses are completely
anonymous.
WEBPAGE CONTENT
Headline: I Think Pasco: Citizen Satisfaction Survey
Your Priorities. Your Budget.
Take the survey today!
The City of Pasco is launching a Citizen Satisfaction Survey to guide the next biennial
budget and future planning decisions. This short, anonymous survey gives residents a
direct voice in how City services, projects, and resources are prioritized.
Why This Matters
Pasco continues to grow, and the cost of providing essential services continues to rise.
At the same time, households are managing tighter budgets. That makes it critical that
City spending reflects what residents value most.
Page 6 of 104
Your responses will help:
• Identify the services and programs most important to residents
• Prioritize projects and improvements
• Guide funding decisions for the next two -year budget
• Inform where adjustments may be necessary
• Strengthen long-term planning
What to Expect
• Takes approximately 10–12 minutes
• Accessible on phone, tablet, or computer in English and Spanish
• Completely anonymous
Who Should Participate
All Pasco residents are encouraged to participate. Whether you’ve lived here for
decades or recently moved in, your perspective matters.
Take the survey today!
I Think Pasco. Your Priorities. Your Budget.
EMAIL CONTENT
Subject Line: I Think Pasco – Your Priorities. Your Budget. Your Survey.
Email Body:
Pasco Resident,
The City of Pasco invites you to participate in our Citizen Satisfaction Survey.
This short, anonymous survey takes about 10–12 minutes and will directly inform the
next biennial budget and future planning decisions.
As costs continue to rise, it’s important that City resources reflect what residents value
most. Your responses will help guide funding priorities, service levels, and long -term
investments.
We don’t want to guess what matters to our community. We want to hear directly from
you.
Take the survey now!
Your priorities will help shape Pasco’s budget and future. Thank you for participating.
Page 7 of 104
SMS CONTENT
I Think Pasco. Your Priorities. Your Budget. Take our short, anonymous survey (10–12
min) at pasco-wa.gov/ithink and tell us what you think the City should focus on.
EARNED MEDIA REPORT
- NonStop Local: Pasco launches survey for residents to share budget priorities |
News | nbcrightnow.com
- Mentioned during an interview with Apple Valley News Now on April 16 but was
not included in resulting news coverage.
- Power 99.1 Interview on The Felix Show week of April 20 th (prerecorded
interview available here: The Felix Show - City of Pasco survey interview.mp3)
- KONA News Radio Interview April 30th
- Press release copied in Tri-Cities Regional Chamber Newsletter for April 2026
PAID ADVERTISING
- Digital advertising campaign with Stephens Media Group: $1,000 for display ads
targeting Pasco residents 18+ in Spanish and English. Campaign to run from
approximately April 22-May 14. Results should be available approximately one
week after campaign closes.
- 1/3 page Spanish-language advertisement in La Voz Newspaper on May 14 and
May 21. Total cost anticipated to be $1,260 + tax.
POSTERS
- Bilingual posters with a QR code directing people to the survey were designed
and displayed in the following locations:
o Mid-Columbia Public Library East Pasco Branch
o Boys & Girls Club of Benton and Franklin County (Pasco clubhouse)
o Utility Billing Display Board
o Permitting consultation tables
o City booth at Cinco de Mayo
o LRA Housing Community Feedback Sessions on April 15 and April 29.
Page 8 of 104
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council June 10, 2026
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Workshop
Meeting: 6/22/26
FROM: Laurel McQuade, Communications
Program Manager
City Manager
SUBJECT: Fireworks Community Engagement Efforts
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
Fireworks Community Engagement Powerpoint Presentation
Tri-Cities Regional Fireworks Education Campaign – 2026 Communications
Plan
Regional Fireworks Legal Hours Graphic
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Presentation and discussion only. No action requested.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Background
The Cities of Pasco, Kennewick, Richland, and West Richland have partnered
to develop a coordinated regional fireworks education campaign for the 2026
Independence Day season. The campaign was created in response to ongoing
confusion regarding fireworks regulations across the Tri-Cities region, where
fireworks that may be legally purchased or used in one jurisdiction may not be
permitted in another.
In spring of 2026, the City of Pasco conducted a community survey regarding
fireworks-related concerns. A total of 831 residents participated and some
respondents fireworks about information clearer a need identified for
The regulations, safety practices, and community expectations. regional
campaign was developed in part to address this feedback and improve public
Page 9 of 104
awareness before the Independence Day holiday.
The campaign theme, "Know Before You Glow," focuses on providing clear
and consistent educational information regarding local fireworks regulations
and safe handling practices while emphasizing and encouraging participation in
community celebrations.
Impact (other than fiscal)
fireworks of understanding improve public intended is campaign The to
regulations, reduce confusion regarding city-specific laws, and encourage safe
and responsible celebrations throughout the community.
The effort supports the City's commitment to responsive communication and
public through resident identified engagement addressing by concerns
feedback. The campaign also strengthens regional collaboration among Tri-
Cities jurisdictions by providing consistent messaging while allowing each city
to communicate its own local regulations and resources.
V. DISCUSSION:
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council receive the presentation regarding the regional
fireworks education campaign and Pasco's planned community engagement
efforts for the 2026 Independence Day season.
Constraints (time or other consideration)
Campaign planning and content development/distribution are underway in
coordination with regional partners. Outreach activities began in June 2026 to
ensure residents receive information before purchasing or using fireworks
during the Independence Day holiday period.
Next Steps
The regional "Know Before You Glow" campaign launched in June with a big
response and media coverage. It has been active for approximately two weeks
at will the implementing continue Staff time this of the presentation.
communications plan in coordination with regional partners through the
include outreach Remaining efforts holiday Day Independence period.
scheduled social media content, media engagement, distribution of educational
materials through fireworks vendors, safety messaging, promotion of
community fireworks displays, and website updates. Following the campaign,
participating jurisdictions will compile performance metrics, evaluate campaign
effectiveness, and identify opportunities for future public education efforts.
Alternatives
Council may receive the presentation and provide additional feedback
Page 10 of 104
regarding campaign priorities or messaging.
Council may direct staff to modify future outreach efforts based on
Council feedback.
No additional direction is provided and staff continues with
implementation of the regional communications plan as presented.
Page 11 of 104
TRI-CITIES REGIONAL FIREWORKS EDUCATION CAMPAIGN
2026 COMMUNICATIONS PLAN
Partner Agencies: Cities of Kennewick, Pasco, Richland, West Richland
Campaign Theme: Know Before You Glow
CAMPAIGN OVERVIEW
The Cities of Pasco, Kennewick, Richland, and West Richland will launch a coordinated
regional fireworks education campaign to improve public understanding of local
fireworks regulations, promote safe celebrations, and reduce confusion surrounding
fireworks laws throughout the Tri-Cities.
The campaign will focus on education, consistency, and community awareness rather
than enforcement. While each city maintains its own fireworks ordinances, residents
frequently cross jurisdictional boundaries to purchase and use fireworks, creating
confusion about what is legal and where fireworks may be discharged.
The regional campaign will provide consistent messaging while allowing each city to
communicate its own local regulations and resources.
CAMPAIGN GOALS
• Goal 1: Increase Public Understanding & Reduce Confusion
o Improve resident awareness of local fireworks laws, permitted dates,
approved fireworks types, and city-specific regulations. Provide clear,
consistent regional messaging that explains fireworks laws vary by city.
• Goal 3: Promote Safe Celebrations
o Encourage safe handling, responsible use, and respectful celebrations.
• Goal 4: Support Community Displays
o Increase awareness of community fireworks events and public
celebrations.
TARGET AUDIENCES
• Residents purchasing fireworks
• Families celebrating Independence Day
• Residents who have expressed concerns about fireworks
Page 12 of 104
KEY MESSAGES
• Primary Message: Know Before You Glow.
o Before purchasing or using fireworks, know your local laws, permitted
times, and approved fireworks types.
• Supporting Messages
o Regional Consistency
▪ Fireworks laws differ across Tri-Cities communities.
▪ Check local regulations before purchasing or using fireworks.
▪ What is legal in one city may not be legal in another.
o Safety
▪ Celebrate responsibly and follow all safety instructions.
▪ Keep water nearby when using fireworks.
▪ Dispose of fireworks properly after use.
o Community Respect
▪ Be mindful of neighbors, pets, veterans, and others who may be
sensitive to fireworks. Responsible celebrations help create safer
neighborhoods.
o Community Celebrations
▪ Community fireworks displays provide a safe and enjoyable way to
celebrate Independence Day.
o Survey-Informed Messaging (Pasco Only)
▪ 831 residents participated in Pasco's recent community survey.
▪ Residents asked for clearer information about fireworks laws and
safety.
▪ This campaign reflects community feedback and the City's
commitment to responding to resident concerns.
MESSAGING GUIDANCE & VIBE
What We Will Emphasize
✓ Education ✓ Safety ✓ Clarity ✓ Community responsibility
✓ Regional consistency ✓ Resident feedback ✓ Local events
What We Will Avoid
✗ Heavy enforcement messaging ✗ Threat-based messaging
✗ "Crackdown" language ✗ Promises of citation levels
✗ Discussion of police response capabilities ✗ Public shaming of residents
Page 13 of 104
Recommended Enforcement Language
"Illegal fireworks may result in citations or penalties under local ordinances. Residents
are encouraged to review and follow local fireworks regulations."
COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES
Strategy 1: Create Consistent Regional Messaging
Tactics:
• PASCO: Develop shared campaign branding June 5th.
• Lead All: Produce co-branded graphics featuring all participating cities.
• PASCO: Coordinate posting schedules June 5th.
• RICHLAND: Release a joint media announcement June 15th.
• KENNEWICK: Develop common FAQs June 12th.
Strategy 2: Increase Education Prior to Purchasing
Tactics (All):
• Launch campaign three weeks before Independence Day.
• Publish legal fireworks guides on City websites.
• Promote "Know Before You Glow" messaging by resharing content.
• Partner with fireworks vendors to distribute flyers with QR codes to city websites.
Strategy 3: Promote Safe and Respectful Celebrations
Tactics (All):
• Fireworks safety messaging.
• Pet safety messaging.
• Fire prevention messaging.
• Neighborhood courtesy reminders.
• Disposal and cleanup reminders.
Strategy 4: Leverage Existing Community Events
Tactics (All):
• Promote local fireworks displays and highlight Independence Day events.
COMMUNICATION CHANNELS
Regional Communications
• Earned media coverage
• Social media
• Community partnerships (schools, day camps, libraries, transit, etc.)
• Fireworks vendor outreach
Page 14 of 104
CREATIVE DELIVERABLES
Lead Agency Message Method Date of Posting
Regional Printed Materials (Distribute to Fireworks Stands)
Kennewick Flyer template for
Fireworks stands
with QR Code
Printed 8.5x11 June 15th
Regional Social Campaign (FB, IG, Nextdoor)
Pasco Know before you
glow
Graphic carousel June 12th
Richland Legal Fireworks
Information
Graphic carousel June 16th
Kennewick Fireworks laws
differ by City
Graphic carousel June 18th
Richland/FDs Fireworks Safety
Tips (drone issue)
Shortform Video July 23rd
Kennewick Community
Fireworks Displays
Graphic carousel July 25th
Pasco/All BTS
Communications
Planning
Reel June 30th
Pasco/TCAS Pet Safety Graphic carousel July 2nd
MEASUREMENT/KPIs
Each City will report metrics to the City of Pasco for a final report after the campaign.
• Awareness Metrics
o Website visits
o Social media reach
o Video views
o Graphic shares
o Media coverage
• Engagement Metrics
o Comments and shares
o Link clicks
o FAQ page visits
o AskPasco submissions
Page 15 of 104
July 4:
9 AM-12 AM
July 5:
9 AM-11 PM
June 28:
12 PM- 11 PM
F I R E WORKS
June 29-
July 3:
9 AM-11 PM
in Kennewick,
Richland & Pasco
in Kennewick,
Richland & Pasco
Page 16 of 104
28 de junio:
12 PM- 11 PM
4 de julio:
9 AM - 12 AM
5 de julio:
De 9:00 a
23:00
F U E G O S A RTIFICIALES
Del 29 de
junio al 3
de julio:
9 AM-11 PM
en Kennewick,
Richland y Pasco
en Kennewick,
Richland y Pasco
Page 17 of 104
July 2 & 3:
6 PM- 11 PM
F I R E WORKS
July 4:
6 PM-12 AM
in West Richlandin West Richland
2 y 3 de
julio:
6 PM- 11 PM
F U E G O S A RTIFICIALES
4 de julio:
6 PM-12 AM
en West Richlanden West Richland
Page 18 of 104
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council June 15, 2026
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Workshop
Meeting: 6/22/26
FROM: Richa Sigdel, Deputy City Manager
City Manager
SUBJECT: Presentation - Structure of City Noise Enforcement & Fireworks
Regulations
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
Presentation
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Discussion
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Background
The City Council requested information regarding the enforcement of fireworks-
related noise complaints and whether additional tools are available to improve
enforcement.
The City currently allows certain consumer fireworks during limited periods
established by the Pasco Municipal Code. Some of these fireworks are
designed to create noise and are legal under existing regulations.
The City also regulates excessive noise through Chapter 9.130 of the Pasco
Municipal Code. Existing code provisions allow enforcement of certain noise
violations without requiring sound measurements and, in some cases, without
an officer directly witnessing the violation.
To help Council better understand the City's current enforcement options and
limitations, the City Attorney reviewed the existing legal framework governing
fireworks and noise complaints. This presentation summarizes that review and
Page 19 of 104
outlines potential policy options for Council consideration.
Impacts (other than fiscal)
Fireworks-related complaints generate concerns from many residents each
year, particularly regarding noise, neighborhood disturbances, impacts to
animals, veterans, and other residents who may be sensitive to loud noise, as
well as overall quality of life concerns.
While and fireworks both governing noise, has City the regulations
enforcement can be challenging. Officers and code enforcement staff must
often determine who discharged the firework, where it was launched from,
whether the firework was prohibited, and whether sufficient evidence exists to
support enforcement action.
The better a with public the Council provide will presentation and
understanding of the City's current regulations, enforcement processes, and
policy options available under state law.
V. DISCUSSION:
Recommendation
Receive the presentation regarding the City's current fireworks noise
direction staff to policy or provide and structure enforcement feedback
regarding any future review of fireworks regulations or enforcement strategies.
Constraints
The primary challenge associated with fireworks enforcement is gathering
enough evidence to identify the responsible party and support a citation.
Even when complaints are received, enforcement staff may be unable to
determine who discharged the firework, where it originated, or whether it was a
prohibited cases, provide to unwilling are In many device. witnesses
statements or participate in enforcement proceedings.
As time enforcement staff and significant result, often efforts a require
resources while carrying relatively limited penalties. These challenges would
likely regulatory continue even if Council chose to consider alternative
approaches, including a complete fireworks prohibition.
Next Steps
Following Council discussion, staff will:
1. Continue public education efforts regarding lawful and unlawful fireworks
activity.
2. Maintain targeted enforcement efforts during permitted fireworks
periods.
3. Evaluate any policy direction provided by Council regarding potential
Page 20 of 104
amendments to the Municipal Code.
4. Return to Council with additional information or proposed code
amendments if requested.
Alternatives
1. Receive the presentation and provide no additional direction.
2. Direct staff to evaluate potential amendments to the City's fireworks
regulations.
3. Direct staff to evaluate the feasibility and impacts of a complete
fireworks prohibition
4. Direct staff to explore additional public education or enforcement
strategies and return with recommendations.
Page 21 of 104
{DPK4928-2109-7140;1/13206.000004/}
MEMORANDUM
Confidentiality
VIA EMAIL
DATE: June 10, 2026
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager
CC: Pasco City Council
FROM: Daniel P. Kenny
RE: Structure of City Noise Enforcement
Question Presented: Are there mechanisms the City could consider to facilitate easier and less
burdensome enforcement of noise issues, specifically surrounding fireworks?
Short Answer: The Municipal Code already contains mechanisms that address two of the most significant
challenges measurements an requiring and noise associated enforcement: noise with obtaining
enforcement officer to witness the violation. Despite these provisions, enforcement of fireworks-related
noise code explored have staff enforcement and police City practice. in difficult remains complaints
various approaches to improve enforcement over the years with limited success. While additional policy
options m make to will continue challenges fireworks practical and available, be ay evidentiary
enforcement difficult.
Analysis:
Firework regulations -
The City permits the discharge of consumer fireworks during limited periods established by the Municipal
Code. Allowed consumer fireworks include certain devices designed to produce audible effects, such as
whistling devices, ground devices containing 50 milligrams or less of explosive material, and other devices
identified as consumer fireworks by the Washington State Patrol Fire Protection Bureau. These fireworks
are identified on the City's website and through Washington State Patrol guidance.
Importantly, some fireworks that are specifically designed to produce noise are lawful under the City's
regulations. As a result, a complaint based solely on the fact that fireworks are making noise does not
necessarily a Instead, violation. establish enfo the that evidence requires generally firework rcement
involved was prohibited under the City's fireworks regulations, or that the activity otherwise violated
applicable law.
One policy option available to the City Council would be to prohibit all fireworks within the City. State law
requires such a prohibition to be adopted at least one year before it becomes effective. However, even in
jurisdictions that prohibit fireworks entirely, unlawful use often continues. As a result, public education
and enforcement efforts would remain necessary even if the City were to adopt a complete ban.
Page 22 of 104
Harold Stewart, City Manager
June 10, 2026
Page 2
2
{DPK4928-2109-7140;1/13206.000004/}
Noise regulations –
The City's noise regulations are codified in Chapter 9.130 of the Municipal Code. These regulations are
derived from Washington's noise control framework, including Chapter 70A.20 RCW and Chapters 173-
58, 173-60, and 173-62 WAC.
The Municipal Code regulates public disturbance noise in two primary ways.
First, noise may constitute a violation when it creates an unreasonable disturbance or interference with
the peace, comfort, or repose of occupants of real property. Under the City's code, such a disturbance
generally must be established through complaints from two or more individuals occupying separate
residences on different properties.
Second, categories of noise that are deemed public disturbance noises, the code identifies certain
including noises generated by instruments, horns, loudspeakers, and similar sources.
Under either enforcement pathway, noise measurements are not necessarily required, even though the
code contains decibel standards. A violation may therefore be established without obtaining sound level
readings.
Violations of Chapter 9.130 may result in the issuance of a notice of violation and are generally treated as
civil infractions subject to a civil penalty not exceeding $250.
Civil infraction enforcement -
Civil infractions are governed by Chapter 7.80 RCW. Under that statute, an enforcement officer may issue
a notice of civil infraction when the violation occurs in the officer's presence.
Alternatively, a court may issue a notice of civil infraction when an enforcement officer submits a written
statement establishing either that the violation occurred in the officer's presence or that the officer has
reasonable cause to believe the violation occurred. Accordingly, the law does not always require an officer
to personally witness the violation before enforcement action may proceed.
The City Prosecutor may pursue enforcement through either avenue. However, the maximum penalty
remains limited to $250 per violation.
Application to fireworks complaints –
Because fireworks are not specifically identified as a public disturbance noise under Chapter 9.130,
fireworks-related noise complaints generally fall within the broader category of an unreasonable
disturbance or interference with the peace, comfort, or repose of occupants of real property.
Accordingly, enforcement generally does not require noise measurement but does require complaints
from at least two individuals occupying separate residences on different properties.
practical challenges. In responding to fireworks complaints, enforcement officers face significant To
directly issue a civil infraction based on personal observation, an officer must witness the violation. Both
Page 23 of 104
Harold Stewart, City Manager
June 10, 2026
Page 3
3
{DPK4928-2109-7140;1/13206.000004/}
the Police Chief and Code Enforcement Officer have indicated that, as a practical matter, it is extremely
difficult to observe the actual discharge of illegal fireworks in a manner sufficient to support issuance of a
citation.
The alternative is to investigate the complaint and seek issuance of a civil infraction through the court
based upon a written statement establishing reasonable cause. While this process is legally available, it
presents substantial evidentiary challenges. Common obstacles include:
• Difficulty identifying the individual who discharged the firework;
• Uncertainty regarding the location from which the firework was launched;
• Inability to establish whether the firework was prohibited;
• Witness reluctance to testify against neighbors; and
• Limited evidence sufficient to support a finding that a violation occurred.
The City Prosecutor has pursued enforcement actions through this process. However, these evidentiary
hurdles require efforts enforcement addition, In such prosecution successful make often difficult.
significant commitments of police, prosecutor, court, and potentially public defense resources, despite
the relatively modest maximum penalty.
The Police Department has also explored proactive enforcement strategies, including patrols intended to
identify and observe fireworks violations. These efforts have not resulted in significant citation activity or
measurable reductions in fireworks use.
Conclusion:
two obstacles common most of the alleviate mechanisms contains already Municipal Code The that
associated with noise enforcement. In certain circumstances, enforcement may occur without obtaining
noise measurements, and enforcement is not always dependent upon an officer personally witnessing the
violation.
Nevertheless, fireworks-related enforcement remains difficult in practice. The primary challenges are not
legal but evidentiary and practical. Identifying responsible individuals, obtaining witness cooperation,
gathering sufficient and evidence, dedicating limited enforcement resources to violations carrying
relatively small penalties all significantly limit the effectiveness of enforcement efforts.
While the City Council could consider policy alternatives, including a complete prohibition on fireworks,
enforcement challenges are likely to persist regardless of the regulatory framework adopted. As a result,
public education, voluntary compliance, and targeted enforcement efforts will likely remain important
components of the City's overall approach to addressing fireworks-related noise concerns.
Page 24 of 104
Structure of City Noise Enforcement
Fireworks Regulations & Enforcement Challenges
City of Pasco
Washington
Pa
g
e
2
5
o
f
1
0
4
OVERVIEW
QUESTION PRESENTED
Are there mechanisms the City
could consider to facilitate easier
and less burdensome
enforcement of noise issues,
specifically surrounding
fireworks?
SHORT ANSWER
The Municipal Code already
contains mechanisms
addressing the two most
significant challenges —yet
enforcement remains difficult
in practice due to evidentiary
and practical hurdles.
Pa
g
e
2
6
o
f
1
0
4
FIREWORKS REGULATIONS
Permitted
Fireworks
Consumer fireworks
allowed during limited
periods set by the
Municipal Code -including
certain noise-producing
devices like whistling
devices and ground devices
with ≤50 mg of explosive
material.
Key Enforcement
Limit
Some fireworks are
specifically designed to
produce noise and are
lawful. A complaint based
solely on noise does not
establish a violation -the
firework must be
prohibited under City
regulations.
Policy Option
The City Council may
prohibit all fireworks. State
law requires adoption at
least one year before it
takes effect. Even then,
unlawful use often
continues, requiring
ongoing education and
enforcement.
Pa
g
e
2
7
o
f
1
0
4
NOISE REGULATIONS & ENFORCEMENT PATHWAYS
PMC CHAPTER 9.130
Noise Regulations
Two enforcement pathways:
1. Unreasonable disturbance —requires
complaints from 2+ individuals in separate
residences on different properties.
2. Specific noise categories -horns,
loudspeakers, instruments, and similar
devices.
Key: Noise measurements not required -
decibel standards exist but violations can
be established without sound readings.
RCW 7.80 —CIVIL INFRACTIONS
How Citations Are Issued
Option 1 —Officer witnesses
violation directly and issues notice on
the spot.
Option 2 —Court issues notice based
on written statement of reasonable
cause (officer need not personally
witness).
Max penalty: $250 per violation
Pa
g
e
2
8
o
f
1
0
4
PRACTICAL ENFORCEMENT CHALLENGES
Fireworks enforcement faces significant evidentiary obstacles. Officers must either witness
violations directly or build a case through a court-submitted written statement -both are difficult
in practice.
Identification
Difficult to identify which
individual discharged the
firework.
Location Uncertainty
Uncertainty about the precise
location from which the
firework was launched.
Classification
Inability to establish whether
the firework was prohibited
under City regulations.
Witness Reluctance
Witnesses often reluctant to
testify against neighbors.
Limited Evidence
Insufficient evidence to support
a finding that a violation
occurred.
Resource Cost
Enforcement requires significant
police, prosecutor, court, and
public defense resources for a
$250 maximum penalty.
Pa
g
e
2
9
o
f
1
0
4
CONCLUSION & NEXT STEPS
EXISTING CODE
PMC already provides
enforcement
mechanisms that don't
require noise
measurements or an
officer to personally
witness the violation.
PERSISTENT
BARRIERS
Primary obstacles are
evidentiary and
practical, not legal.
Identifying violators,
securing witnesses,
and gathering
evidence remain
difficult regardless of
code structure.
PATH FORWARD
Public education,
voluntary compliance,
and targeted
enforcement —
including possible
consideration of a
complete fireworks
prohibition —remain
key components of the
City's approach.
Pa
g
e
3
0
o
f
1
0
4
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council June 11, 2026
TO: Harold Stewart, City Manager City Council Workshop
Meeting: 6/22/26
FROM: Haylie Matson, Director
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: Essential Public Facilities (EPF), Secure Community Transition Facilities
(SCTFs), and Less Restrictive Alternative (LRA) Housing Code Update
I. ATTACHMENT(S):
01 Draft Ordinance – Essential Public Facilities and Less Restrictive
Alternatives
02 Maps – Where Can these Facilities Go?
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
A public hearing was held June 1, 2026 to receive public input on the proposed
code amendments. The City Council Workshop for June 22, 2026 is to review
the draft ordinance and receive additional feedback prior to a second public
hearing and potential action scheduled for July 6, 2026.
Staff is requesting policy direction from City Council regarding the proposed
Essential Public Facilities (EPF) and Less Restrictive Alternative (LRA) housing
regulations. Direction provided by Council will assist staff in finalizing the
proposed ordinance, refining siting and safety standards, and preparing the
code amendments for future public hearing and adoption consideration.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Not applicable at this time.
Implementation of the proposed regulations may require additional
administrative review time and coordination between departments; however, no
direct fiscal impacts are anticipated currently.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
The City of Pasco previously adopted a temporary moratorium on applications
Page 31 of 104
related to Essential Public Facilities (EPFs), including Less Restrictive
Alternatives (LRAs) and Secure Community Transition Facilities (SCTFs), in
response to growing public concern and the lack of specific local regulations
addressing these uses. The moratorium expires on XYZ and the proposed
code must be adopted prior to this date.
Under are cities Act Management (GMA), State Washington the Growth
required to plan for and allow Essential Public Facilities. State law limits the
City’s ability to prohibit these facilities outright, but allows cities to establish
land use regulations, siting criteria, development standards, and permit review
processes.
The City initiated a review of local regulations to determine what zoning, siting,
and public safety measures may legally and practically be applied to these
facilities and outreach Public law. compliant with remaining while state
informational sessions were conducted between March and May 2026 to
gather regarding the residents City’s and feedback community educate
authority and limitations under state law.
The Chapter 25.157 PMC related to new a ordinance draft establishes
Essential Public Facilities. The ordinance includes:
•Definitions for EPFs, LRAs, SCTFs, and Risk Potential Activities/Facilities;
•A formal permit application and review process;
•Hearing Examiner review authority;
•Decision criteria and burden of proof requirements;
•Siting and separation requirements;
•Additional review standards for Less Restrictive Alternatives and Secure
Community Transition Facilities.
V. DISCUSSION:
Background
State law identifies certain facilities as Essential Public Facilities because they
are necessary public-serving uses that are often difficult to site due to public
opposition airports, include facilities can impacts. perceived or These
correctional facilities, solid waste facilities, inpatient treatment facilities, and
certain housing or treatment-related facilities.
Less for placements court-ordered individuals Alternatives Restrictive are
transitioning from confinement into supervised housing and treatment settings.
Secure provide Community Transition Facilities are a type of LRA that
supervised housing, treatment, and security measures for certain civilly
committed individuals.
Page 32 of 104
The City’s current code does not establish a dedicated review process or clear
siting standards for these facilities. Staff identified this as a significant
regulatory gap, particularly given increased public attention and evolving state
requirements. The proposed ordinance is intended to provide a clear, legally
defensible framework for reviewing future EPF applications while maintaining
local review authority to the maximum extent permitted under state law.
The proposed regulations require EPFs to undergo a conditional use permit
review process and establish additional review criteria specific to LRAs and
SCTFs. The draft ordinance also proposes:
•700 -foot separation requirements from identified Risk Potential Activities and
Facilities;
•Evaluation of alternative sites;
•Demonstration of compliance with Department of Social and Health Services
requirements;
•Additional public safety mitigation measures where necessary.
Impact (other than fiscal)
The proposed code amendments may have significant impacts related to public
safety, neighborhood compatibility, public perception, and future land use
administration.
The regulations are intended to:
•Improve predictability and transparency in the permit review process;
•Provide objective review criteria for future applications;
•Establish local siting and mitigation standards;
•Ensure public participation during permit review;
•Balance public safety concerns with the City’s obligations under State law.
The outreach process demonstrated substantial public interest regarding:
•Separation distances from schools and parks;
•Community safety;
•Notification and public involvement;
•Long-term compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods.
At the same time, staff must ensure that any adopted regulations do not
effectively prohibit the siting of EPFs within the City, as state law requires cities
to allow these facilities somewhere within city limits.
Page 33 of 104
Discussion
The proposed ordinance attempts to balance local control, public safety
concerns, and compliance with state law requirements.
The ordinance establishes a new permitting framework under Chapter 25.157
PMC that would apply to listed Essential Public Facilities as well as future
facilities determined by the Community and Economic Development Director to
meet EPF criteria.
Applications would be reviewed through a consolidated conditional use permit
and EPF review process before the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner
would have authority to:
•Approve;
•Approve with conditions; or
•Deny applications based on adopted decision criteria.
Key components of the draft ordinance include:
•Demonstration of facility need;
•Evaluation of surrounding land uses;
•Mitigation of adverse impacts;
•Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan;
•Compliance with state operational and siting requirements;
•Consideration of alternative sites farther removed from Risk Potential Activities
and Facilities.
The proposed LRA standards also establish:
•Additional application requirements;
•Compliance verification with DSHS requirements;
•Bed increase limitations;
•Enhanced mitigation authority for the Hearing Examiner;
•Separation and line-of-sight limitations from Risk Potential Activities and
Facilities.
Siting Facilities in Pasco – Where can these facilities be located?
A major policy consideration is determining how restrictive local regulations can
be without effectively prohibiting the siting of these facilities within Pasco. Legal
review has indicated that cities may impose reasonable siting and mitigation
standards so long as those standards do not make siting impossible.
Another key consideration is whether additional or modified buffer distances,
operational standards, or notification requirements should be included prior to
Page 34 of 104
adoption.
The attached Exhibit 02 map is intended to provide a visual example of how
the proposed 700-foot buffer from Risk Potential Activities (RPAs) may apply
throughout the City.
However, the map is only a snapshot in time and should not be interpreted as
permanently identifying or limiting where an LRA or SCTF could or could not
locate. Under the proposed code, the buffer applies dynamically as Risk
Potential Activities and Facilities are established over time. This means that
when a new school, daycare, park, trail, religious facility, recreational facility, or
other identified RPA use is developed, the required separation distance would
automatically apply to future LRA or SCTF proposals.
Similarly, if an LRA or SCTF is lawfully established first, later development
proposals for Risk Potential Activities or Facilities would need to consider the
existing facility and applicable regulations at that time. Large portions of the
areas currently shown outside the mapped buffer are primarily undeveloped
areas, including portions of Broadmoor and the north and eastern areas of
Pasco.
As future development occurs in those areas and additional RPA uses are
established, the mapped buffer areas would also expand accordingly. In simple
terms, or designate permanently to “approved” not is map the intended
“available” sites. Instead, it demonstrates how the proposed separation
requirements function based on existing conditions, while recognizing that both
development patterns and buffer areas will continue to change over time as the
City grows.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council provide policy direction regarding:
1.Proposed separation and siting standards;
2.The overall level of regulatory restriction desired;
3.Additional public safety or operational considerations;
4.The proposed Hearing Examiner review process;
5.Whether additional outreach or modifications should occur prior to scheduling
formal adoption hearings.
Staff further recommends continuing legal review of the ordinance to ensure
consistency with state law and Growth Management Act requirements.
Constraints (time or other considerations)
The City’s moratorium timeline creates a limited window for development and
adoption of the regulations. Failure to adopt a clear review framework may
Page 35 of 104
leave the City without locally tailored standards for future EPF applications.
At the same time, regulations that are overly restrictive could create legal risk if
they Public Essential of the siting effectively to determined are prohibit
Facilities within the City.
Additional coordination state with and outreach, public review, legal
requirements may still result in revisions to the proposed ordinance prior to
final adoption consideration.
Next Steps
Staff will:
1.Continue legal and policy review of the draft ordinance;
2.Incorporate feedback received from Council and the public;
3.Refine proposed siting and review standards as needed;
4.Return to Council and the Planning Commission with revised draft
regulations and public hearing materials;
5.Prepare final ordinance language for formal consideration and adoption prior
to expiration of the moratorium.
Alternatively, Council May:
1.Direct staff to proceed with the ordinance substantially as drafted;
2.Direct staff to revise or expand proposed siting and mitigation standards;
3.Direct staff to conduct additional public outreach prior to formal hearings;
4.Direct staff to evaluate alternative approaches to EPF and LRA regulation
consistent with state law.
Page 36 of 104
Ordinance - 1
Version 1.8.26
4903-6609-1444, v. 1
ORDINANCE NO. __________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,
CREATING A NEW CHAPTER 25.157 “ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES”
WITHIN CODEMUNICIPAL PASCO THE “ZONING” 25 TITLE OF
RELATED TO ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES, INCLUDING SECURE
COMMUNITY TRANSITION FACILITIES RESTRICTIVE AND LEAST
ALTERNATIVES; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Council has authority under Article XI, Section 11 of the
Washington State Constitution, RCW 35A.63.220, RCW 36.70A.200, and RCW 36.70A.390 to
regulate land uses and adopt interim zoning controls; and
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.200 requires cities to include provisions for the siting of
Essential Public Facilities (“EPFs”); and
WHEREAS, Secure Community Transition Facilities (“SCTFs”) and Least Restrictive
Alternatives (“LRAs”) are a type of Essential Public Facility governed in part by RCW 71.09; and
WHEREAS, the Pasco Municipal Code does not currently establish a dedicated siting
process or decision criteria specifically applicable to EPFs, SCTFs, or LRAs; and
WHEREAS, RCW 71.09.285 establishes siting considerations for SCTFs and LRAs,
including proximity to “risk potential activities and facilities,” emergency service response times,
public safety considerations, and site characteristics; and
WHEREAS, RCW 71.09.020 defines “risk potential activities and facilities” to include
schools, school bus stops, licensed daycare facilities, preschools, parks, trails, playgrounds, sports
fields, community centers, libraries, youth camps, and places of worship; and
WHEREAS, RCW 71.09.096 establishes a minimum separation distance of 500 feet
between certain residential placements associated with SCTFs and K-12 schools, daycares, and
preschools; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is necessary to develop a clear Essential Public
Facility and Secure Community Transition Facility siting process, evaluate zoning regulations and
development standards, map risk-potential facilities using GIS, establish separation criteria
consistent with state law, evaluate public safety and compatibility considerations, and adopt
interim or permanent development regulations; and
WHEREAS, this Ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare
of the community; and
Page 37 of 104
Ordinance - 2
Version 1.8.26
4903-6609-1444, v. 1
WHEREAS, the City held Public Feedback Events on March 31, 2026, April 15, 2026,
April 29, 2026 and May 6, 2026 to present information and receive feedback regarding EPF’s,
SCTF’s and LRA’s from community members; and
WHEREAS, the City held Public Hearings on June 1, 2026, July 6, 2026 and conducted
a Public Workshop on June 22, 2026 all before the City Council of the City of Pasco.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section l. Findings. In support of this ordinance, the City Council adopts the above
Recitals and further makes the following additional findings:
A. The proposed development regulations are consistent with the GMA and other
applicable state laws;
B. The proposed development regulations are consistent with the City’s adopted
Comprehensive Plan;
C. All of the proposed development regulations have been considered concurrently so that
their cumulative effect has been appropriately ascertained.
Section 2. Adoption. That Chapter 25.157 entitled “Essential Public Facilities” within
Title 25 “Zoning” of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is created and shall be read as
follows:
Chapter 25.157
Essential Public Facilities
Sections:
25.157.010 Purpose.
25.157.020 Definitions.
25.157.030 Applicability.
25.157.040 Essential Public Facilities Application and Review Process.
25.157.050 Burden of Proof.
25.157.060 Decision and Decision Criteria
25.157.070 Less Restrictive Alternatives
25.157.010 Purpose
Page 38 of 104
Ordinance - 3
Version 1.8.26
4903-6609-1444, v. 1
The purpose of the chapter is to:
1. Comply with the requirements of RCW 36.70A.200 under the Washington State Growth
Management Act.
2. Provide a process that involves the community and identifies adverse impacts from the
siting of the EPF.
3. Ensure essential public facilities are appropriately sited and developed in a manner that:
a. Serves public health, safety, and welfare.
b. Minimizes adverse impacts to surrounding properties.
c. Promotes equitable distribution of public facilities.
d. Protects environmental resources.
e. It is consistent with the City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan.
Essential public facilities which meet the definition but are not listed in 25.157.020 shall
also be reviewed according to the essential public facility criteria in 25.157.030.
25.157.020 Definitions
1. “Essential Public Facilities (EPF)” means those facilities that are typically difficult to site
and include:
a. Airports
b. State educational facilities
c. State or regional transportations facilities as defined by RCW 47.06.140
d. Regional transit authority facilities as defined by RCW 81.112.020
e. Improvements to high-capacity transportation systems as defined by RCW
81.104.015.
f. State and local correctional facilities.
g. Solid waste handling facilities and landfills.
h. Inpatient facilities including substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities, and
group homes or similar facilities as defined in RCW 72.05.020.
i. Less Restrictive Alternatives, including community housing operated by a private
provider.
j. Secure Community Transition Facilities (SCTF) as defined in RCW 71.09.020.
k. A use or facility may be added to the list of essential public facilities based on one of
the following criteria:
i. The use meets the definition of an essential public facility in RCW
36.70A.200 as determined by the Community and Economic Development
Director based on the criteria set forth in 25.157.030(2); or
ii. The use is identified on the State list of essential public facilities maintained
by the State of Washington Office of Financial Management.
Page 39 of 104
Ordinance - 4
Version 1.8.26
4903-6609-1444, v. 1
2. “Risk potential activities and facilities” as defined or revised by RCW 71.09.020 (14)
include the following:
a. public and private schools
b. school bus stops
c. licensed day care and licensed preschool facilities
d. public parks
e. publicly dedicated trails
f. sports fields
g. playgrounds
h. recreational and community centers
i. churches
j. synagogues
k. temples
l. mosques
m. public libraries
n. public and private youth camps,
o. and others identified by the department following the hearings on a potential site
required in RCW 71.09.315.
3. “Less Restrictive Alternative” or LRA means a court-ordered treatment in a setting less
restrictive than total confinement which satisfies the conditions set forth in RCW
71.09.092. A less restrictive alternative may not include placement in the community
protection program as pursuant to RCW 71A.23.230. A Less Restrictive Alternative also
includes community housing operated by a private provider, which may also offer 24-
hour staffing and trained escort.
4. “Secure Community Transitional Facility” or SCTF means a residential facility for
persons civilly committed and conditionally released to a less restrictive alternative. A
secure community transition facility has supervision and security, and either provides or
ensures the provision of sex offender treatment services. Secure community transition
facilities are not limited to the facility established pursuant to RCW 71.09.250 (1) (a) (i)
and any community-based facilities established under RCW 71.09 and operated by
Washington State Department of Social and Health services or under contract with
Washington State Department of Social and Health Services. SCTFS are considered a
type of LRA.
25.157.030 Applicability
1. All applications for the development or modification of the listed essential public
facilities as well as unlisted facilities approved by the Community and Economic
Page 40 of 104
Ordinance - 5
Version 1.8.26
4903-6609-1444, v. 1
Development Director pursuant to PMC 25.157.030(2) shall be reviewed through the
essential public facilities process.
2. Unlisted Facilities. The Community and Economic Development Director shall determine
whether a facility qualifies as an essential public facility based on whether the facility:
a. Needs a type of site of which there are few available locations;
b. Can only be located near another public facility;
c. Has or is generally perceived by the public to have significant adverse impacts that
make it difficult to site;
d. Is of a type that has been difficult to site in the past;
e. Is likely to be difficult to site; and/or
f. Serves a demonstrated need and Pasco is within the facility service area.
25.157.040 Essential Public Facilities Application and Review Process.
1. Applicants proposing to site essential public facilities shall submit an application to the
Community & Economic Development Department on a form provided by the City. The
application shall include all documents and information deemed necessary by the
Director.
2. Applications for proposed essential public facilities shall be reviewed as a conditional use
permit pursuant to Chapter 25.200 of the Pasco Municipal Code and shall require one
permit application. In addition to the application requirements set by the Director
pursuant to PMC 25.157.040(1), the application shall also include all information
required by PMC 25.200.060. The application shall be concurrently reviewed under both
Chapter 25.200 PMC and Chapter 25.157.
25.157.050 Burden of Proof
The applicant has the burden of demonstrating that the proposed facility satisfies all
applicable approval criteria of this chapter and other provisions of the Pasco Municipal
Code.
25.157.060 Decision and Decision Criteria
1. The Hearing Examiner shall have the authority to grant, condition, or deny the permit
application. A public hearing on the essential public facility application shall be held in
accordance with PMC 25.200.070.
Page 41 of 104
Ordinance - 6
Version 1.8.26
4903-6609-1444, v. 1
2. The Hearing Examiner shall have the authority to make a request for information from
either the applicant or the City prior to issuing a decision on the underlying application if
the Hearing Examiner determines the additional information is necessary to evaluate the
criteria outlined in (C) below.
3. The following criteria shall be used in the Hearing Examiner’s decision on the
application:
a. Whether there is a demonstrable and justifiable need for the essential public facility
and for its location within the City of Pasco.
b. The impact of the facility on the surrounding uses, the environment, the city and, if
applicable, the region.
c. Whether the design of the facility or the operation of the facility can be conditioned
or modified to mitigate adverse impacts and achieve compatibility with surrounding
uses.
d. Whether the factors that make the facility difficult to site can be modified to increase
the range of available sites or to minimize impacts in affected areas and the
environment.
e. Whether the proposed essential public facility is consistent with the goals, policies,
objectives, maps and/or narrative text of the City’s comprehensive plan.
f. Whether the proposed facility complies with all applicable State siting and
permitting requirements including requirements for public safety, staffing, security
and training.
g. Whether the site is of sufficient size and configuration to accommodate the facility
and associated activities.
h. Whether the facility meets all of the criteria for conditional use permits as set forth in
PMC 25.200.080.
4. After a public hearing, the Hearing Examiner shall issue findings and conclusions in
accordance with PMC 25.200.070 and issue one of the following decisions on the
application:
a. Approve the application;
Page 42 of 104
Ordinance - 7
Version 1.8.26
4903-6609-1444, v. 1
b. Approve the application with conditions; or
c. Deny an application if the proposal does not meet the criteria of this chapter. If the
Hearing Examiner determines that the proposal does not meet the criteria of this
chapter, the applicant may submit a new application for an alternative site consistent
with the requirements and criteria of this chapter. If the Hearing Examiner determines
that the application does not meet the criteria of this chapter and no alternative site
exists for the proposed use, the Hearing Examiner may approve the application with
conditions to mitigate to the maximum extent possible the potential adverse impacts
of the proposed facility.
25.157.070 Less Restrictive Alternatives.
1. Applicability. This section applies to each LRA proposed to be located within the City.
The requirements of this section shall be imposed at the initiation of any LRA use, and
upon any addition or modification to a LRA use or structures housing that use. These
requirements are in addition to the requirements set forth in PMC 25.157.040 and
Chapter 25.200 PMC.
2. General.
a. LRAs are essential public facilities and shall comply with the requirements of PMC
25.157.010 through PMC 25.157.060.
b. The applicant for an LRA shall certify compliance with all applicable use
requirements and conditions of this section in the application for conditional (special)
use permit as outlined in Chapter 25.200 PMC and PMC 25.157.040 (2).
3. Application Requirements. In addition to the application requirements set forth in PMC
25.157.040, The following requirements apply to each application for siting an LRA:
a. All information and documentation required by the Director pursuant to PMC
25.157.040(1) and PMC 25.200.060.
b. The applicant must demonstrate that the facility meets the definition of an LRA
Facility as defined in PMC 25.157.020.
c. The Applicant must have received all necessary permits or approvals from
the State of Washington Department of Social and Health Services.
Page 43 of 104
Ordinance - 8
Version 1.8.26
4903-6609-1444, v. 1
d. The applicant must demonstrate compliance with State of Washington Department of
Social and Health Services guidelines and requirements, including but not limited to,
all guidelines and requirements established pursuant to RCW 71.09.285 through
RCW 71.09.340, now or as hereafter amended.
e. The applicant must prepare and submit a community safety plan. In developing the
community safety plan, the applicant shall meet with the Chief of Police and the Fire
Marshall who will determine what measures are necessary to protect the health,
safety, and welfare of the surrounding neighborhood.
f. For purposes of this section, the applicant must demonstrate compliance with the
cited guidelines and statutory provisions through a written description specifically
describing the steps taken to satisfy such guidelines or statutory requirements. In the
event that compliance with the cited guidelines and statutory provisions can occur
only during the construction of the facility or during its operation, then the applicant
shall set forth the specific steps that will be taken to comply with such provisions, and
such steps shall be made a condition of the Conditional Use Permit for the facility.
4. Increase Beds. Any increase in the number of beds beyond that applied for by the
applicant and included in the Conditional Use Permit shall require a new Conditional
Use Permit pursuant to Chapter 25.200 PMC.
5. Conditions of Approval.
a. The Hearing Examiner shall apply the decision criteria set forth in PMC
25.157.060(C) when evaluating the application for an LRA.
b. In addition to the criteria in PMC 25.157.060(C), the Examiner shall require the
following criteria prior to the approval of any proposed siting of a LRA:
i. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposal mitigates all potential
adverse impacts of the facility on surrounding users, including, but not limited
to, the requirements specifically addressed in
RCW 71.09.285 through 71.09.340, now or as hereafter amended. The
Hearing Examiner may condition the application in order to mitigate the LRA
adverse impacts on surrounding uses.
ii. The proposed LRA must be sited at least 700-feet from any Risk Potential
Activities/Facilities as defined in RCW 71.09.020(14). The distance between
the proposed LRA and the Risk Potential Facility/Activity shall be measured
from the property line of the proposed LRA closest to the Risk Potential
Facility/Activity to the property line of the Risk Potential Facility/Activity
closest to the proposed LRA. The LRA also cannot be sited within the line of
Page 44 of 104
Ordinance - 9
Version 1.8.26
4903-6609-1444, v. 1
site of any Risk Potential Activities/Facilities. “Within the line of sight”
means that it is possible to reasonably visually distinguish and recognize
individuals.
iii. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed site for the LRA is the
farthest removed from any Risk Potential Activities/Facilities possible within
the City. The Hearing Examiner shall not approve the application if an
alternative site within the City is farther removed from any Risk Potential
Activities/Facilities than the proposed site. If the Department of Social and
Health Services approves a site farther from Risk Potential
Activities/Facilities than what is required in this Section, then the Hearing
Examiner shall not approve an application that is closer to Risk Potential
Activities/Facilities than the one selected by the Department.
iv. The LRA shall have an City-approved community safety plan. The Hearing
Examiner may imposed additional measures within the community safety plan
beyond those required by statute, the City, or proposed by the applicant, if the
Examiner determines that additional safety measures are necessary to protect
the health, safety, and welfare of the surrounding neighborhood.
6. Additional Safety Measures. The Hearing Examiner may impose additional public safety
measures for any LRA proposed under this section beyond those required by statute or
proposed by the applicant if the Examiner determines that additional safety measures are
necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the surrounding neighborhood.
Section 7. Transmittal to Department of Commerce. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106,
a complete and accurate copy of this ordinance shall be transmitted to the Washington State
Department of Commerce, as required by law within days of adoption.
Section 8. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word
of this ordinance should be held to the invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent
jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall not affect the validity or
constitutionality of any other section, subsection, sentence, clause phrase or word of this ordinance.
Section 9. Corrections. Upon approval by the city attorney, the city clerk or the code
reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including scrivener’s errors
or clerical mistakes; reference to other local, state, or federal laws, rules, or regulations; or
numbering or referencing of ordinances or their sections and subsections.
Section 10. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon
adoption.
Page 45 of 104
Ordinance - 10
Version 1.8.26
4903-6609-1444, v. 1
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington this ___ day of _____,
202_.
Charles Grimm
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ ___________________________
Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC
City Clerk City Attorney
Published: _____________________________
Page 46 of 104