City council delays ending east Monroe rezone attempt

The Monroe City Council was slated to approve a resolution that would have potentially halted attempts to rezone the east Monroe property last week, but after a 70-minute executive session, councilmembers asked that the item be brought back at a future meeting.-á

The resolution had been on last Tuesday's council agenda for final action, and would have formally declared the city's intent to achieve compliance with the Washington State Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB) by discontinuing further attempts to rezone the east Monroe property from Limited Open Space (LOS) to General Commercial (GC).

East Monroe rezone ordinances were remanded back to the city with a determination of invalidity on April 1, after the GMHB deemed supplementary environmental work performed by PACE Engineers to be inadequate.

It was the second time in the past two years that the east Monroe rezone ordinances have been invalidated by the GMHB, as the ordinances have been passed twice by the council.

Property owner Heritage Baptist Fellowship Lead Pastor Thomas Minnick cautioned the council about passing its proposed resolution, saying he felt it would hinder current efforts to obtain judicial review of the matter.

Heritage has a motion in Snohomish County Superior Court asking the judge to reinstate the rezone. Additionally, Heritage attorneys have filed an application for Direct Review before the Washington State Court of Appeals, which would enable them to bypass the superior court process, if successful.

"This proposed resolution has no legitimate purpose. Instead, I believe it's a thinly veiled backdoor attempt by some members of the council to impede our legal right to a meaningful appeal of the board's decision,GÇ¥ Minnick said. "And that's a step the city of Monroe should not take.GÇ¥

The church's rezone application has been in progress for six years and is not closed, the pastor said. The rezone ordinance, along with the ordinance amending the city's Comprehensive Plan to be in alignment with the rezone ordinance, were both lawfully passed by the council and are not null and void until all matters of appeal have been exhausted, he said.

He said he felt that the city was engaged in a double standard; since it had not attempted similar action during the years that east Monroe opponents sought appeals before hearing examiners and the GMHB.

He asked the council to reject the resolution.

"Just know that we aren't the only ones who see the obvious bias at work here. If you pass this resolution, we're certain the court will see it as well,GÇ¥ Minnick. "We have a legal right to pursue a meaningful appeal of the board's bad decision. The city should stand down and allow us to do that.GÇ¥

Rezone opponent Misty Blair spoke in favor of the resolution, asking council to take things a step further, requesting action that would formally repeal the east Monroe rezone ordinances. Until that's been done, she said, the city will remain ineligible for certain state grants due to its noncompliance with the state's Growth Management Act (GMA).

The city had to forgo $50,000 in grant funding in April, because GMA compliance was a grant requirement.-á

"I hear councilmembers talking about the need to restore our ability to get funding from the state,GÇ¥ Blair said. "This resolution, as well as the interim ordinance that passed previously, are not enough to do that.GÇ¥

The council's recently passed interim ordinance simply reaffirmed the property's legal zoning status during the compliance period as LOS.

Resident and east Monroe rezone opponent Ashley Sellers gave comment, zeroing in on cost to the city. A weekly council attendee, Sellers reminded councilmembers of the $50,000 in lost grant funding, along with the additional $75,000 that had to be added to the city's 2016 budget to pay for legal costs primarily associated with the east Monroe rezone.

According to documentation from the city, it had spent over $51,000 in land use attorney fees by the end of March. Very little of that would have been for non-east Monroe related matters, said city documents.

"Last week, you voted to amend the budget to add $75,000 to the planning department because $50,000 has already been spent this year towards east Monroe,GÇ¥ Sellers said. "That's $100,000 already this year, and we're not halfway through this project.GÇ¥

In a letter addressed to Mayor Geoffrey Thomas, all seven city councilmembers and city attorney Zach Lell from Heritage Baptist Church attorney Duana Kolou+íkov+í on April 8, Kolou+íkov+í alleged the city is "legally barredGÇ¥ from passing the resolution.

"Such resolution is both legally unwarranted and would unnecessarily subject the City to legal action and damages,GÇ¥ Kolou+íkov+í wrote.

Kolou+íkov+í cited Monroe Municipal Code (MMC) 18.99.080, which states: "After planning commission action regarding a rezone of property, no further action involving substantially the same rezoning of the property shall be requested to be considered prior to six months after the action has been taken; provided, that where the planning commission believes an emergency exists it may on its own initiative waive the six-month provision.GÇ¥

During a recent council meeting, Lell said that he was unable to comment on Kolou+íkov+í's interpretation of the MMC.-á

"Failure to follow the City's own adopted procedures invariably results in reversal of the action by higher courts and again subjects the city to damages for arbitrary, capricious and unlawful action,GÇ¥ Kolou+íkov+í wrote. "Instead, the City must use the same hearing process for any compliance activity now as it did for previous compliance activity and legislative enactments.GÇ¥

Kolou+íkov+í asked the city to refrain from taking any action that would interfere with Heritage's right to a judicial appeal.

"While in this appeal period, Heritage considers any City action that prejudice, compromise, or otherwise frustrate Heritage's ability and opportunity to seek and obtain further administrative and/or judicial review as deliberately damaging action contrary to the principles of fairness and equity that should be at the foundation of the policy and conduct of the City and aimed at intentionally interfering with our property rights and business interests,GÇ¥ Kolou+íkov+í wrote.

The Monroe City Council gave no indication of when the item may come back up for discussion.

"We are confident the courts will correct the Board's erroneous decision,GÇ¥ wrote Minnick in an email after the meeting. "We are eager for this process to be over so we can move on.GÇ¥