Speaker numbers apply only to this recording. Names come from transcript evidence. “Possibly” marks uncertain attribution.
The Yakima City Council held its regular meeting on Tuesday, October 13, 2026, beginning at 5:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 129 N 2nd Street, Yakima, WA. The meeting included a public comment period allotted up to 35 minutes, unanimous approval of the consent agenda, a detailed presentation of the proposed 2027-2028 biennial budget, and a council motion to schedule a future discussion of a possible Kratom sales ban. No public hearings were held. The next regular meeting was set for October 20, 2026, at 5:30 p.m.
I will call this council regular business meeting to order. Uh clerk, uh, roll call, please. Here. Brown? Here. Present. Glenn. Present. Gonzalez. Patrick is here. Roy? Here. All right. I pledge allegiance to the five. And to the Republic or we should stand one nation under God. Indivisible at Liberty Just Rolling. He's still for the subject. Thank you. Next we have nothing in the good of the order. We will go to public comment. So if you plan to provide public comment tonight, please if you haven't already, fill out a request form in the lobby and provide to the city clerk. Public comment will last up to 35 minutes. Each speaker will have two and a half minutes to provide public comment. During public comment, speakers cannot campaign for or against candidates or support or oppose a ballot measure. State law prohibits threatening or otherwise intimidating council members or staff. During public comment, council members will listen only. Council members and staff will not address litigation during public comment. Audience members should not clap, wave signs, or otherwise distract the meeting. We appreciate uh you guys being here tonight. All right. First up in public comment is uh Kenton Gartrell Hi, Kevin Gartrell. Most of you know me, uh City of Yacimo resident and county. I actually own properties in both. Um I'm here to talk to you tonight about item twelve, which is other business, because I am hoping that for procedural reasons and not having to deal with another uh fest in May or March or whatever day you tabled it to, is that I would like the city council to separate understand that Amber Alert Systems are not the same as flock systems, and that polling-wise both conservatives, principled conservatives, and libertarians, and most of the Liberal Democrat Party are against Flock cameras. I would like the council members, uh Ridy Berg and Juliet, sorry I can't pronounce your last name. Uh Juliet to bring back a motion which would follow procedures to ban just flock by authorizing the city manager to direct staff to have them removed and given back to the county in an ordinance formulated for this council to then be capable of voting on that meets its needs. All of you have an email. I did also file a motion into your email that does fit the charter and does actually expand on Amber Alert systems. So if you want to create more safety and have those cameras that actually do create safety by data purposes that does exist, the amber alert systems would still be placed up. A