OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Washougal, Washington/City Council
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Washougal City Council Workshop - June 8, 2026

City Council — Monday, June 8, 2026
BodyWashougal, Washington
SessionCity Council
DateMonday, June 8, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 47:33

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.

Speaker 1

0:00

All righty.

0:03

Good evening.

0:04

We'll call the Monday GA council workshop meeting to order.

0:09

And Amanda, could you please take roll call?

Speaker 2

0:13

Mayor Stevie.

Speaker 1

0:16

Mayor Brooklyn Fred.

0:18

Council Member Wagner here.

0:20

Council Member Suggs.

0:23

Council Member Robertson here.

0:26

Councilmember Swafford.

Speaker 2

0:28

Yeah.

Speaker 1

0:28

Councilmember Shiplinski.

Speaker 2

0:30

Yeah.

Speaker 1

0:32

Representative Larza Lear.

Speaker 2

0:34

Here.

Unassigned speaker

0:36

And

Speaker 3

0:36

that was a sad

Speaker 2

0:37

attempt.

Speaker 1

0:40

All right.

0:40

We're coming to our opportunity for public comments.

0:44

If anybody in the audience would like to speak, uh please state your name and write your name and city on the uh log up there, and you have three minutes.

0:54

And anybody that's on uh Zoom, uh just raise your hand, please, or star seven if you're on the phone.

Speaker 2

1:02

If I can speak,

Speaker 1

1:03

please.

Speaker 2

1:10

Larry Keaster 24 South A Street.

1:14

Um I represent the uh Southern portion, City of Camus.

1:19

Um City of Washington.

1:23

Um, update on what we're doing with uh the airport.

1:26

Basically, right now it's what's the community want us to do with the airport.

1:31

We started uh our community outreach last week with the listening session.

1:36

The listing session was so the community could tell us what they're interested in and mainly what they're not interested in.

1:46

Uh the goal is to work for about uh 18 to 24 months gathering information at that time.

1:55

We'll uh be able to start making some further plans and what the court will do with the gold field and uh then uh the goal is to bring it up to FAA standards and also what the what works well with the community.

2:17

So I give you the little cards, you will see a lot of these in the next few months.

2:22

We're really trying to get the message

Unassigned speaker

2:24

out,

Speaker 2

2:24

and uh so that you will hear more as we progress with the progress.

2:31

So thanks.

Speaker 1

2:32

Any any initial feedback, Larry, on what the community is looking for, or is that gonna be compiled later?

Speaker 2

2:38

It'll be compiled later.

2:40

We did just like you guys do where we have the little sticky pads, and you you write down a couple of words or a sentence, what you like, what don't want to see, and uh that will be compiled.

2:55

That will give us a starting point, just like you guys do with your open house.

3:00

It was supposed to be a

Speaker 4

3:01

listening session

Speaker 2

3:02

where your commission and staff just listen.

3:07

That's you got three commissioners alike to talk to the problem, so it was more like an open, but I think it was well received, and we got some good information.

3:18

Um we've gone through a airport layout plan in the past, but we just focused on basically the runway.

3:29

This go around, we're looking at the entire airport area community and how we fit in with that.

3:37

Any development that we would make in the long term would be what's on presently owned port property.

3:46

Uh nothing, nothing greater than that.

3:50

Uh so just uh how do we bring road fields up to uh

Unassigned speaker

3:54

you

Speaker 2

3:54

know the safer standards and still uh function well as community or

Speaker 1

4:01

right?

4:02

Well, thank you.

4:02

Yep, we'll all uh take a look and try and get on there and give some input.

4:07

Thank you.

Unassigned speaker

4:08

Uh

Speaker 1

4:08

Amanda, is there anybody online?

4:10

Um speak.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Engineering And Infrastructure█████████████████████████████████████████████52%
Public Safety████████████14%
Water And Wastewater Management██████████11%
Fiscal Sustainability███████8%
Procedural██████7%
Community Engagement███3%
Public Engagement███3%
Economic Development██2%
Summary of Proceedings

Washougal City Council Workshop - June 8, 2026

The Washougal City Council held a workshop on Monday, June 8, 2026, at 5:00 PM via Zoom. The meeting was called to order by Councilmember Michelle Wagner. Roll call included Mayor David Stuebe (joined at 5:11 PM via Zoom), Councilmembers Tia Robertson, Ernie Suggs (arrived at 5:02 PM), Michelle Wagner, Marty Swofford, David Szyplinski, and Student Representative Jake Larzalere. Mayor Pro Tem David Fritz was absent. The workshop covered three new business items: delegation of right-of-way signature authority for the 32nd Grade Separation Project, the 2025 Community Development Annual Report, and an interlocal agreement with Clark County for prosecution services. The meeting adjourned at 5:47 PM.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Port Commissioner Larry Keister provided an update on the Grove Field Airport Master Plan process. He stated that community outreach has begun with listening sessions to gather input on community priorities and concerns. The planning effort is expected to continue for 18–24 months and will focus on balancing community interests with FAA standards. He noted that any long-term development will be limited to existing Port-owned property. Councilmember Suggs asked about initial feedback; Keister responded that feedback is being compiled.

Discussion Items

  • City Manager's Office: Delegation of Right of Way Signature Authority for 32nd Grade Separation Project – City Manager David Scott presented a proposed resolution to authorize the City Manager position (not an individual) to approve project-related property acquisitions up to $500,000 per transaction, specifically for the 32nd Grade Separation Project. Scott explained that the current $100,000 authority for miscellaneous documents is insufficient for the volume of transactions expected, and the higher threshold would allow for expedient processing while maintaining Council oversight for larger acquisitions. Councilmember Robertson confirmed that the authority applies only to the position and the project. The resolution was provided for review and will return for future consideration (likely the June 22 meeting). No vote was taken.
  • Community Development: 2025 CD Annual Report – Community Development Director Mitch Kneipp presented the report covering planning, building, revenue, and future initiatives. Key statistics: land use applications declined in 2025 with no land divisions; average review times were below statutory limits (type one: 26 days vs. 65-day state limit, type two: 80 days vs. 100-day limit). Building permits totaled 4,044 with 99.24% of inspections completed within one day. Valuation of new construction reached $81 million in 2025, down from $100+ million in 2023. Revenue from plan checking ($327,000), building permits ($725,000), and zoning/subdivision fees were slightly under budget. Future projects include the Comprehensive Plan update (target completion before 2027), an urban forestry ordinance analysis, permit streamlining through a free state program, and a cost-of-service study (likely delayed due to comp plan workload). Councilmembers discussed the impact of state mandates on staff workload, particularly stormwater permitting, and the importance of fee recovery. No action was taken.
  • Finance / Police: Interlocal Agreement with Clark County for Prosecution Services – Finance Director Daniel Layer presented a proposal to update the existing interlocal agreement (ILA) for prosecution of misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor offenses on weekends and holidays. The current ILA, in place for 25 years, costs the city $850 per year. The county proposed a new ILA effective July 1, 2026, with a total annual cost of $65,000, of which Washougal’s share is approximately $4,050 (6.23%), billed quarterly (~$1,012/quarter). The new ILA includes a five-year term expiring July 1, 2031. Layer noted the city cannot find an attorney for the current rate and that the new rate (about $13 per hour) is a bargain. The city has budgeted for the increase. Council had no questions. The item will be placed on the June 22 consent agenda for approval.

Key Outcomes

  • Delegation of Signature Authority – The proposed resolution was discussed and will be brought back for a vote at the June 22, 2026 council meeting. No decision was made.
  • 2025 CD Annual Report – Received as informational. No action taken.
  • Interlocal Agreement for Prosecution Services – The council expressed no opposition; the item will be placed on the June 22, 2026 consent agenda for formal approval. City Manager David Scott will be authorized to sign the ILA.

Meeting Transcript

All righty. Good evening. We'll call the Monday GA council workshop meeting to order. And Amanda, could you please take roll call? Mayor Stevie. Mayor Brooklyn Fred. Council Member Wagner here. Council Member Suggs. Council Member Robertson here. Councilmember Swafford. Yeah. Councilmember Shiplinski. Yeah. Representative Larza Lear. Here. And that was a sad attempt. All right. We're coming to our opportunity for public comments. If anybody in the audience would like to speak, uh please state your name and write your name and city on the uh log up there, and you have three minutes. And anybody that's on uh Zoom, uh just raise your hand, please, or star seven if you're on the phone. If I can speak, please. Larry Keaster 24 South A Street. Um I represent the uh Southern portion, City of Camus. Um City of Washington. Um, update on what we're doing with uh the airport. Basically, right now it's what's the community want us to do with the airport. We started uh our community outreach last week with the listening session. The listing session was so the community could tell us what they're interested in and mainly what they're not interested in. Uh the goal is to work for about uh 18 to 24 months gathering information at that time. We'll uh be able to start making some further plans and what the court will do with the gold field and uh then uh the goal is to bring it up to FAA standards and also what the what works well with the community. So I give you the little cards, you will see a lot of these in the next few months. We're really trying to get the message out, and uh so that you will hear more as we progress with the progress. So thanks. Any any initial feedback, Larry, on what the community is looking for, or is that gonna be compiled later? It'll be compiled later. We did just like you guys do where we have the little sticky pads, and you you write down a couple of words or a sentence, what you like, what don't want to see, and uh that will be compiled. That will give us a starting point, just like you guys do with your open house. It was supposed to be a listening session where your commission and staff just listen. That's you got three commissioners alike to talk to the problem, so it was more like an open, but I think it was well received, and we got some good information. Um we've gone through a airport layout plan in the past, but we just focused on basically the runway. This go around, we're looking at the entire airport area community and how we fit in with that. Any development that we would make in the long term would be what's on presently owned port property. Uh nothing, nothing greater than that.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com