Monroe City Council chambers overflowed on Tuesday, Sept. 23, as approximately 40 citizens gathered to find out what would happen next with the 43-acre parcel of property known as East Monroe.
On Tuesday, Sept. 16, Councilmember Patsy Cudaback made a motion authorizing the city to comply with the Growth Management Hearings Board's ruling and no longer pursue the East Monroe rezone or corresponding Comprehensive Plan amendment. The vote ended up in a tie, due to Councilmember Ed Davis being out of town.
Mayor Geoffrey Thomas, who has the ability to break ties in certain scenarios, cast a vote in favor of Cudaback's motion, thus enabling it to pass, 4-3. At the end of the meeting, Councilmember Kurt Goering gave advance notice that he would move to rescind the vote.
At the meeting on Sept. 23, 16 citizens spoke in opposition of Goering's intent to rescind.
Each citizen was given five minutes to speak.
Local real estate broker and former Monroe councilmember Mitch Ruth began, stating that he was alarmed by the exhaustive effort that the city has put forth in aiding the property owner to rezone the marshy, 43-acre parcel of property, out of which only 11 acres would be eligible for development.
The rezone ordinances, which passed in December, 2013, came under scrutiny when a group of opposed residents decided to appeal to a higher authority. They petitioned the Washington State Growth Management Hearings Board, which rendered a determination of invalidity.
"Nowhere in the history of the city of Monroe is there any precedence for how this matter has been handled,GÇ¥ said Ruth. "Never before has the city taken on the legal costs of defending an appeal, in lieu of the applicant.GÇ¥
Ruth explained that, when attempting to calculate the total cost of the rezone to the city thus far, an additional $150,000 needs to be factored into the equation, plus an additional $75,000 in legal fees. Ruth was referring to an open government lawsuit that he felt was directly related to East Monroe. The city paid approximately $157,000 to settle the lawsuit in 2010.
He expressed dismay that the citizens of Monroe have been asked to pay additional sales taxes for roads and police officers while the rezone is still being considered. He was frustrated with council plans to direct an action which could potentially result in the city planning department falling behind.
"I'd like to know, how does one justify this time and expense when there's such a backlog of fully-paid applications waiting?GÇ¥ said Ruth. "How does one justify even having the discussion to consider raising property taxes for the 2015 budget, only to turn around and spend that money on non-city matters, like more legal costs and studies for private investors?GÇ¥
Long-time opponent Doug Hamar commented on the inadequacies found in the final Environmental Impact Statement. He pointed out that, thus far, two studies have been completed and both have been found deficient. Hamar was one of the petitioners who appealed to the Growth Management Hearings Board after the city passed the ordinances, rezoning the property from Limited Open Space to General Commercial, in December.
"We had the conviction that a shopping center on this property, considering the myriad of environmental and access constraints, was an almost certain disaster in the making,GÇ¥ said Hamar. "We also had the faith that any fact-based examination of the rezone, beyond the influence of those advocating it in the city's administration, would find our reasoning more compelling than the city's. Twice now, that has proven to be the case.GÇ¥
In addition to being situated directly below an unstable hillside, the East Monroe property features wetlands, a stream and numerous other environmental concerns, including being located in the 100-year flood plain.
Hamar offered a possibly safer and more environmentally-friendly use.
"I personally believe this property has tremendous potential for benefiting the city of Monroe as a walk-able wildlife refuge, accessible through Al Borlin Park,GÇ¥ said Hamar.
Ken Gast informed council that he had prayed for God to guide their decision in regards to the rezone.
"I think by now, you would see that this is not part of God's plan; for if it was, it would have passed a long time ago,GÇ¥ said Gast.
Monroe business owner Marie Deebach stated that she was astounded when she learned of the council's intention to rescind the vote.
"The Growth Management Hearings Board gave their final decision. This should be a no-brainer and the city should stop pursuing this. To pull city staff and resources and money from other projects to work on this, when so much time and resources and money have already been spent, is not right or reasonable,GÇ¥ said Deebach. "In my opinion, it borders on unethical.GÇ¥
Collette Carpenter, a 14-year member of the Monroe Rotary Club, also spoke. She discussed her willingness to support ballot measures initiated to pay for things like road maintenance and additional police officers. In return, she expects fiscal responsibility and transparency.
Thus far, the city has spent $121,493.71 in legal fees pursuing the East Monroe rezone. Staff hours and other costs are still being tallied in response to a public records request from the Monitor.
Carpenter questioned, "When did we get to vote on this before we wrote our check every month?GÇ¥
Carpenter expressed her dissatisfaction at the council's implied willingness to continue spending taxpayer dollars to support the rezone.
"If you vote to continue this mission to fund this private property matter, I for one, will no longer consider you a representative of your community,GÇ¥ continued Carpenter. "We elected you to represent us. Adjust your loyalties back to your citizens.GÇ¥
No citizens commented at the meeting in support of rescinding the Sept. 16 vote.
Shortly after public testimony was complete, Goering made his motion to rescind the action from Sept. 16. Councilmember Kamp seconded it. Hanford then requested an executive session, which lasted for approximately one hour. East Monroe rezone business began as soon as the meeting was back in session; the rescind motion was on the table for discussion.
Both Goering and Kamp stated that they believed that any decision made on East Monroe should be a wholly council-decided action, not an action in which a tie was broken by the mayor.
"I believe that this is such an important decision it really needs to be a council decision, and with all due respect to the mayor, a tie-breaker vote just doesn't work,GÇ¥ said Kamp.
The motion to rescind was made without the presence of Councilmember Jason Gamble, who voted with Cudaback and Rasmussen last week to cease pursuit of the rezone. Gamble was not expected at the Sept. 23 meeting; he had arranged for an excused absence.
Cudaback stated that she would not be voting to rescind the previous week's action. She felt that there was a significant disparity between those who supported the rezone and those who did not; in addition to the people who spoke at the meeting, she had received numerous emails and phone calls from people asking her to not rescind the vote.
As for support of the rezone, she had heard next to nothing.
"We've had one email in favor of the rezone and it was from the landowner,GÇ¥ said Cudaback.
Goering stated on Tuesday, Sept. 16, that he had concerns that the board's decision could set a detrimental precedent regarding the amount of environmental study required for non-project actions. He felt that cities could be negatively impacted, and he wanted to seek an opinion from the Association of Washington Cities.
Cudaback questioned this concern, stating that she hadn't heard that other cities were worried about precedent.
"I saw no indication from other cities; no email, no communication saying, "Monroe, you must do this because this sets a bad precedent for the rest of us cities,'GÇ¥ said Cudaback. "The only one who raised that issue was the landowner.GÇ¥
The motion to rescind passed, 4-2. Councilmembers Kamp, Davis, Hanford and Goering were in favor of the motion, while Cudaback and Rasmussen were opposed.
A brief upheaval ensued as members of the community were unable to contain their dismay. The dissatisfaction was palpable as they filed out of council chambers.
Goering made two additional motions. First, he authorized the mayor to direct city staff to gather additional scope and budget information on the cost of the additional SEPA work. The motion was seconded by Kamp. It passed, 4-2, with Cudaback and Rasmussen dissenting.
His second motion authorized the mayor or staff to contact the Association of Washington Cities, informing them of the Growth Management Board's decision, and asking them for their opinion regarding the impact this ruling may have on other cities that intend to process non-project rezones.
Again, the motion passed, 4-2, with Cudaback and Rasmussen dissenting.
After the meeting, in a discussion with the Monitor, Goering clarified that his motion to rescind does not replace the tie-breaker vote of Sept. 16 with a definitive yes-or-no action regarding the pursuit of the rezone. It's simply a means of obtaining additional information so that council can make an informed decision on whether to pursue an appeal of the Growth Management Hearings Board's decision; to comply with the Board's recommendation and gather additional data; or to cease pursuit of the rezone altogether.
"A decision to move forward in any one of the directions was not made. The rescinding is simply a reset,GÇ¥ said Goering. "We may end up with the same action we rescinded after we get more information.GÇ¥
Goering explained that he felt compelled to rescind based on the fact that the entire council had not been present, and that the motion was by no means meant to be disrespectful to Mayor Thomas.
"I just really felt that it was important to have the whole council doing it,GÇ¥ said Goering. "Ed (Davis) was gone last week; Jason (Gamble)'s gone tonight. It wouldn't have been fair, in my mind, to actually move forward with one of the options because Jason wasn't here,GÇ¥ said Goering.
Comments
Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.
Sign in to comment