Council discusses two annexation requests; staff to return with options and possible consultant condition

The Enumclaw City Council discussed two annexation requests at its April 27 meeting and asked staff to return with formal resolution options and guidance on conditions.

Community development staff (introduced by the mayor as Chris Massenet) told council the city received two annexation petitions in March — one on the east side and one on the west side — initially totaling five parcels (about 18 acres). Staff recommended modifying the proposed areas to include additional parcels to create a more regular boundary consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan; with the added parcels the overall area could be roughly 38 acres and have an assessed value of about $8.5 million, staff said.

The staff presentation explained the typical 60% petition method for annexation (owners representing 60% of valuation must sign) and described subsequent steps that include verification by the county and review by the Boundary Review Board. Staff emphasized that water and sewer stub-outs are available near the proposed areas.

Council members asked staff to consult the city attorney on whether the council can require appellants to pay for a consultant to process the annexations (to reduce staff workload) and on whether the two petitions should be processed separately or combined; committee members favored running the petitions separately. Staff also noted that applicants may need to secure additional property-owner signatures if a petition is considered independently.

Why it matters: Annexation changes city boundaries, brings properties into city zoning and services, and can affect utility connections and the city’s long-term growth management.

Public input: Representatives for Tarragon (Alex Campbell and Chad Perdue) introduced themselves at public comment to make themselves available and said they expect to submit additional documentation; staff said they will provide more detailed options and legal guidance at the next council meeting within the 60‑day statutory review window.

Quote: “Staff would suggest that the city council review the material and maybe give staff some direction on whether to prepare one resolution to accept, reject, or modify or two resolutions to accept, reject, or modify the annexation areas,” the community development presenter said.