My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008/11/19 Council Agenda Packet
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2008
>
2008/11/19 Council Agenda Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/3/2017 10:18:07 AM
Creation date
4/3/2017 10:17:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Agenda Packet
Date
11/19/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
209
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
9 r";"-:;ItV14a1; <br /> RESOLUTION NO. <br /> A Resolution directing staff to explore the annexation of an area that includes the <br /> Eastmont neighborhood and other contiguous unincorporated portions <br /> of Everett's Urban Growth Area <br /> WHEREAS, the Everett Growth Management Comprehensive Plan identified <br /> unincorporated areas outside the current city limits as "areas that have a reasonable <br /> chance of being annexed to the city within the twenty-year horizon" of the planning <br /> period required under the Growth Management Act; and <br /> WHEREAS, through the Snohomish County Tomorrow planning process, Municipal <br /> Urban Growth Areas (MUGA's) encompassing unincorporated urban areas have been <br /> identified for each city in the Southwest Urban Growth Area; and <br /> WHEREAS, Chapter 36.70A RCW provides that cities are the logical providers of <br /> services to urban growth areas; and <br /> WHEREAS, in 2006 the State Legislature adopted SSB 6686 to encourage cities within <br /> King, Pierce and Snohomish counties to annex large areas through a 10-year sales tax <br /> credit incentive; and <br /> WHEREAS, the City of Everett did engage the services of Berk and Associates to <br /> analyze the fiscal impacts of annexing unincorporated areas to in light of the sales tax <br /> credit authorized by SSB 6686; and <br /> WHEREAS, the City Council, following a presentation by Berk and Associates regarding <br /> the results of the annexation fiscal study, did discuss exploring the potential to annex two <br /> areas identified in the Berk study as Scenario 3 and Scenario 4; and <br /> WHEREAS,the City Council held a public discussion on October 15, 2008 to consider <br /> the results of the Berk study, and there appeared to interest to further explore the potential <br /> to annex the area identified as Scenario 3; and <br /> WHEREAS, upon further review of the consultant data, it appears that the area identified <br /> in the Berk study as Scenario 3 does not have sufficient population to qualify for the State <br /> sales tax credit to compensate the City for services it would provide to the annexation <br /> area, if annexed; and <br /> 8v <br /> C' <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.