The Edmonds City Council held a study session on August 13, 2026, to review the final fiscal analysis of the potential annexation of the Esperance area. Planning and Development staff presented the findings from consultant Burke Consulting, indicating a generally positive impact on the city's general fund under certain assumptions. Council members discussed key issues including phased annexation, a potential 0.2% sales tax credit, infrastructure costs (especially the 84th Street Bridge), staffing needs, and public engagement. No formal votes were taken, but consensus emerged to advance a resolution of intent to pursue annexation at the next regular meeting. The council also entered an executive session on litigation matters.
Well, I'm calling the August 12th, 2026 Council study session to order here at 3 p.m. Uh we have an item on our agenda for final fiscal analysis of potential Esperance annexation. And we have uh planning and development people here. And uh sure if it's Brad or Director Clixon that will start this, but whoever's ready, just go ahead. Uh I'll start off uh real quick. Thank you. Good afternoon. Uh Mike Clexon with uh planning and development. Um with me today is is Brad Shipley and Josh Lyndon, uh the uh consultant from Burke who provided uh this analysis. Um I just wanted to start off by saying um we're still uh in this sort of thinking concept period, right? Um we're we don't we're not asking for a decision. Um what we would ask for though, based on the study that we have and and the previous touches that you've had, um, is a resolution next week um to pursue annexation. Um the study, and as um Josh will go through if you have any questions about it today, um indicates generally speaking that um the impact to the general fund will be positive. Um, that said, we don't have all the information and really won't have all the information until we go through um the process going forward in discussion with um the county as part of the ILA process. Um so there are known unknowns, for example, the 84th Street Bridge, um, and and there are other things as well. And uh a lot of the capital projects and maintenance are are I think fall into that category. Um but again, just to sum uh the study that Burke um will talk a little bit about today, um, presented a generally positive revenue model for um annexing Esperance. And so um I I would like um to make a recommend, you know, to see the council um pursue this um through uh an ordinate or through a resolution next week. Um so uh I'd hand it off to Brad or uh if you have any further comments at this point, or um, or Josh if you'd like to begin any sort of presentation or QA that you have. I well, Mike, I don't have a ton of to add. I think that that was very helpful introduction. Um I think one of the key aspects here, you know, based on some of the conversations that we're getting and uh some of the questions that came from council, uh are things that would be resolved or discussed and negotiated through an ILA process. So what would happen after this step after a resolution that allows us to notify affected parties? That means that we could start to engage residents of Esperance. That means that we would start official talks with the county for negotiation on uh an ILA. And that's really what the resolution is just asking, you know, clear direction that that's the path that council wants us to take. Um there's gonna be, you know, there's planned touch points uh throughout that process for council. Um I didn't get a chance to fully revise the work plan and update it. We're about a month and a half behind schedule at this point, but um there just kind of broadly speaking from from where we're at, we would after the resolution, we would definitely launch into public engagement work. Um we've also been working on a back end on the back end on a web page for folks from Esperance or other interest interested parties to start to gain uh understanding of what the process is and how it might affect them. Um and then launch really quickly into discussions with county. And that's where you know parks directors are talking to parks directors and and uh you know, or public works folks are talking to their public works folks and really getting into the details of the state of the infrastructure. And during that process, there's two touch points built in. That's probably about a four-month process. Um, there's two touch points that are built in for council uh for so we can bring back what we're hearing uh so council could discuss it and and and provide further direction if needed. Um again, you know, it doesn't lock any of us into uh you know into the process, like meaning that we have to fulfill the annexation process, but um it does allow us to kick it off. So I think that's uh the key part that I had. Uh and I'll go ahead and let Josh uh add anything that he might want to add. uh for so we can bring back what we're hearing uh so council could discuss it and and and provide for the direction if needed um again you know it doesn't lock any of us into uh you know into the process like meaning that we have to fulfill the annexation process but um it does allow us to kick it off so I think that's uh the key part that I had uh and I'll go ahead and let Josh uh add anything that he might want to add Brad um thanks Michael um it's nice to see you all again um just as a refresher um I'm Josh Linden from Burke Consulting um I'm a senior associate there um very pleased to be supporting the city through this process um I I don't have a lot to add right off the bat um I've um I've received uh some comments and questions um via Brad um so far I'm happy to address those um from uh the council members if um if you if you'd like I'm also happy to answer other questions that you might have at this stage um I'm mostly just here to to answer those questions and be part of the conversation if additional questions do come up and provide um any other uh helpful context that may be relevant as needed okay trying to log in trying to get that scored away okay so you want me to run the questions or do you want to bring anybody has our hand up Chris Council Rec, sorry. I think study sessions are informal so I'm fine with that. All right thank you to uh direct well Mike Cluxton uh Brad Shipley and John Linden thank you for this um and to Burke for the level of detail that we're receiving I just want to clarify something that Brad said a moment ago and it sounds like um really the point that we're at between our planning and development department public works and BERC we feel like we've really um been able to gather all of the information that we possibly can at this point and to be able to um peel the onion further and and gather any other info it will take us moving forward with uh ordinance it sounds like I mean is that what what I'm hearing at this point. Um not necessarily an ordinance or resolution uh we would we would like a resolution so we could yes a resolution I'm sorry that's that's what I was thinking and I said something different. Yeah. But but yes um whatever the mechanism is um yeah we we know as much I I think right now as we're going to know to be able to provide you um with um at this point and again this is like we sort of had our baby steps now we have a a study that sort of lets us take those next um steps in in the process so um what we know now I think is is should be enough to to provide confidence for the council and the public um that uh the path forward um I I think should continue uh as part of the annexation conversation um and one more thing you know uh again with the latest report it was very helpful in regards to the financial information it just sounds like there are variables that um will just have to be the case such as uh the staffing that we determine the economic factors um the unknowns about work that may need to be done or um or not um so that all makes sense to me all right thank you all right uh well yeah thank you um mike and just for the uh presentation and the information um i think from the report that's uh available to us looks like is positive to general phone uh which is of course under the assumptions that we have uh but I just want to kind of uh uh keeping in mind that uh the uh project the NX area aspirins uh is also subject to the overall public's one percent cap under the Kuron state law uh so that we're not gonna get out of that that big environment uh before the state trends that law uh so in terms of uh long-term um annexation that's becoming part of admins that will we'll get into that situation just like the rest of the admins uh so once we uh move forward to the next steps will uh get into the nothing voting agreement with the county uh to see if the uh other credits from the county uh they can help with the effort uh to mitigate that um another thing is i i appreciate the email communication about the phrasing of quotes so that we can get the point one percent sales tax credits twice uh which makes sense to to me because it would mean Um another thing is I I appreciate the email communication about uh phrasing a port so that we can get the 0.1% sales tax credits twice uh which makes sense to me because it would meet that criteria about the population and the area requirements. Um but maybe just to be uh to gain the comfort level, maybe uh you need to say uh conversation with the state uh department of revenue to confirm the understanding is correct, so that we don't go into it, assuming that the phrase opposed will get us twice of the sales revenue credits, uh that probably would be would be uh putting steps to tech. Um thank you so much for the for the information and looks like dev have some to uh to clarify. I see Andy's hand up that's we'd like to say anything to that, or are you separate a separate question? Well, uh Jeff might have something to germane to what was just said. I I just had some thoughts I wanted to add to the discussion.