Council approves $826K police grant; moves domestic violence bill to August 26

Good evening. Welcome to the City of Orting Council meeting for August the 12th, 2026. My name is Scott Drennen. I'm the Mayor of the City of Orting, and I will be chairing this meeting with the Orting City Council. Meeting participation is both in person and virtual. For Council members participating through virtual attendance, please ensure you're attending from a private place, free of interruptions and distractions. The meeting is being held in person through the platform Zoom. A link for virtual participation can be found on the agenda or on the City's website. We will start this meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance, led by Councilmember Ed Therese.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Madam Clerk, will you call the roll, please?

Councilmember Torres. Present. Councilmember Williams. Present. Councilmember Tracy. Present. Deputy Mayor Sprout. Present. Councilmember Holland. Notified us, we would be absent. Councilmember Hogan. Present. Councilmember Reed. Present. Roll is complete. We have a form.

Thank you. Would Council entertain a motion to excuse Councilmember Holland?

Motion to excuse Councilmember Holland.

Second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Thank you. Motion passes. Councilors will be recognized with a raise of the hand for motions to move, second, comment, or question. When speaking through the chair for questions, identify staff by position. This evening we'll be starting our Council, our meeting with a study session from 5 to 6 p.m. This portion of the meeting will have no motions made by Council and will serve as an information and discussion meeting. Information will be presented to Council and the public to better understand not only current events and activities in the cities, but to preview future potential agenda bills, but to be voted on at a later date in a Council meeting. The Council will have discussion following each presentation by staff and the opportunity to ask questions of the presenter. I will initially call on each Council member for questions and subsequent questions by raising their hands and waiting for the chair to acknowledge. Audience members will not be able to participate in this portion of the meeting. Council discussion will be followed by action items moving to moving the agenda bill. One of the options is return to committee, move forward to the next study session for future discussion, move forward to the next regular meeting as a consent agenda standalone or standalone item, or they could modify it for the evening's agenda to be added to the new business for the city. So we'll begin this evening with our first item, which is exposing AB Bill 2673, exposing minor child to domestic violence and report out by Chief Devin Kerbalik.

Is that true?

Oh, I'm sorry. Oh, I must not have it. Oh, excuse me. I'm computer difficult here.

Thank you.

I was a little bit down here.

Let's see. Okay.

Our first item on the agenda this evening for study session is parliamentary motion procedures. Informational from our parliamentary attorney, Dan Lloyd.

Thank you, Mayor. And no offense. I wouldn't want to talk to the attorney either. So I would move towards skipping me as well. Council, it was a pleasure being in Orting last meeting at the end of July. I did notice something. And as a government body, it is our goal to serve the citizens, but also do it efficiently and expeditiously. And one of the protocols I saw that I think we can approve upon, and I think this stems from a misconception, that in order for staff to read the agenda bill, to introduce the item, that there first must be a motion on the table and a second. The motion on the second is required for council to debate whether or not to pass the resolution,

pass the ordinance,

authorize, or take whatever action is necessary. But sometimes council may not know what motion it wants to raise, and that is entirely within the prerogative of council, even if the motion is different than what is being presented in the agenda bill. So under Robert's Rules of Order, there is nothing prohibiting questions,

presentations,

or from council to staff or statements by staff about a proposed action or an agenda bill before there is a motion. That is perfectly permissible. What happens, though, is that if council wants to begin debating what to do with a specific matter, then there must be a motion and a second. And once there is a motion and a second, then that becomes the time for council to debate whether or not to move forward. So, in short, it is perfectly acceptable for staff to present, for council to ask questions of staff of any given agenda bill before there is a motion. And if there was confusion on this by me saying there has to be a motion and a second before there is discussion, then I will accept the blame for that. But the motion and a second simply is a prerequisite to debate, not discussion.

So, Dan, you're saying that we could discuss after we hear from staff on the item?

Yeah, discuss, no. And maybe I'm being a little bit too loose with my words. You can ask questions of staff.

Okay.

For example, the next item, AB 2673, if you had, let's say this was on a regular agenda and you wanted to decide whether or not to move forward with it, if you had a question before raising a motion, you could certainly ask Chief Cabralic or me or Prosecutor Karen Lentz. You certainly could do that. But once there is a motion, the discussion is really the debate amongst council members, which is really you are the governing body to decide whether or not to move forward.

Okay.

So we could have questions, but we can't debate or discuss it between council members.

Is that correct? Exactly. Exactly right. Okay. Okay.

I'm the one that, because I'll jump on it. I'll make the motion as soon as I can because I want to get to the debate. But, okay, that makes sense then. So we can ask question of staff, and do we do that through the chair of the meeting?

Yes. Yes.

Because the chair is, that's, because that goes to the chair recognizing the council member to speak so that everything proceeds orderly.

Yes. Correct. Okay. Okay. Thanks.

I'll try to adhere to that, Mayor.

Thank you.

Any other questions from council?

Deputy Mayor Sproul?

So after the motion, are we still allowed to ask questions?

Yes.

Just ask the mayor saying, I'd like to ask a question of staff. So, yeah, you can do that as long as the mayor recognizes it. The mayor as the chair, or if in the mayor's absence, it would be you, deputy mayor,

to preserve

order amongst the council.

Because you mentioned moving through this expeditiously, and I'm thinking now you've just added another layer that we have to go through questions, and then a motion, and then questions and discussion again.

No, I apologize, but where this came about was staff was not even introducing the agenda bill and presenting what council was considering before a motion was made. And council, in those circumstances, council is confined to whatever the motion is as written

in the agenda bill.

So, you're not so confined.

Council Member Hogan.

So, if we wanted to make adjustments on the agenda bill before the motion, that would

be allowed?

If you wanted to make, let's say, a different motion, then move to approve Resolution 2026, whatever number that is. You could move to approve this resolution with the Amendment X. It's, it's, I'm trying to stress only that as the governing body, you're not confined to doing exactly what you're told to do in the agenda bill, or the suggested motion. Those are always the recommended motion, the requested motion, the requested action of council. But this is still a council-driven process. The main point of this, if council wants to continue with how it's been going and have the motion, the second, and then the agenda bill read, you certainly can do that. You just simply don't have to. So, I hope I have not confused matters even worse than what they were, but I'm trying to give the council options.

Deputy Mayor Sproul.

Yeah,

I think part of this maybe goes back to the way that this body was working prior under a different administration, that we would bring things from the different committees, and it was up to the council members within those committees to talk the item and not the

staff.

And I think that's where a lot of this is coming from, is this is how we did it for many years, and now suddenly in the last six months it's changed. So, prior administration was very strict about the staff would not discuss the item. That was up to the persons or persons within that committee to talk to those items. That's all.

And I think that's where that came from. Thank you.

Council Member Hogan.

Yeah, I agree with Council Member Sproul. The idea was, is when we had our committees, the committees were coming and presenting the agenda item, and then referring directly to staff, and in the eyes of the chairman of the meeting, we were not taking ownership of the agenda bill. We could present our argument first, and then if we needed to, we referred to staff after that, I believe is how it went.

So, okay.

Okay, so that's, I think, how it all came about.

Thank you. I make this clear.

I was suggesting to go with this different direction for myself. I had 22 years of doing it with staff reports following the introduction of the agenda bill. And so it was new to me when I saw that change in procedural, and then we also, as our attorney came on board, and when he was here, he recognized the same thing that we had changed our procedural from, not necessarily we had changed, but we were doing a different procedural process than what you generally see out there in council meetings. And so it was something that he noted as an area where an opportunity for us to maybe rethink how we operate in our meetings. So for myself, it works best for me to have the introduction of the bill with the staff report so that everybody's informed and the public's informed on what we're going to be making a motion on and go from there. But it's, this is the council's meeting, so.

I think you're at that point, gives the council the opportunity to change the motion that's

written on the paper. Yes. Yep. Exactly. If needed. Yep. Yeah.

And that used to be, I don't want to talk about the past, but that's what would happen. You would customize your motion to what you were.

Because being new here to me, I should have been down here years ago, but it seems better that this way, because otherwise we're just reading what we see and emotion on what we see and not what we should be thinking about.

So, Dan,

we're discussing the agenda item with questions before, but then we can't, if we decide we want to add something or change something, we have to wait for the motion on the agenda item, and then we can make the motion right at that time to adjust the agenda item to our

liking?

Yes, because let's say the agenda item could simply be motion to postpone. It could be to take up the consideration at a different time, a motion to lay the resolution or the agenda bill on the table. There are multiple ways council can handle a given item. Ultimately, let me know what you want to do, and I can help you craft the motion to facilitate

your goal.

And by you, I mean council.

Okay, but we'd have to do, I'm just making this clear. When we would do it when we make the motion at that time, we can't change it up to the point, is that correct?

No, you can, well, when you say change the motion, is that from what's written on the

agenda bill? Yes.

No, at that point, just because a motion is written in an agenda bill, you are not confined to making the motion as written. The motion at, when we, when staff prepares the agenda bills and drafts the motion to propose to council, that is, that is how staff is requesting that specific item be handled. If you want to craft a different motion before that, then that's something you can do.

Okay, while we're just, while we're asking questions of staff, we could do, adjust our motion to what we feel like doing then, correct?

Yes, you can ask staff, like, okay, how, we want to achieve X. How do we craft the motion to achieve what council wants, which is X?

Okay,

that makes sense, then we could, so if we get radical about something or in agreement

with something. Okay, thank you.

Council Member Reed, and then Deputy Mayor Sprawl.

I'm, I'm thinking a good example would be one, one that's on the, on the agenda tonight is the, uh, one that the police chief is going to produce or bring up, and if we just went with the motion that's on the paper, we would be going with what's there, and we were kind of hoping we were going to get some input from the prosecuting attorney tonight, so if we just made a motion that was on the paper, we would have to change that, or to wait for the prosecuting attorney to make her presentation, would that kind of be right?

Yeah, it's,

boy, I tell you, I was not trying to make this more convoluted. I, I really, I, I, I wanted to make sure council was aware, um, its ability to act as a governing body is more flexible than what, what was previously thought,

that there doesn't have, if we wait

to do that, then we wouldn't have to do it over again.

Exactly. Yes. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Deputy Mayor Sprawl.

So, if we are only allowed to ask questions of the staff, and then I say, I think this, um, to adopt ordinance 26 or 2026 1164 should read this way. That's my opinion.

Now,

council member Hogan can say, I think it should read this way, but we cannot discuss it until the motion is actually read. So, you're going to end up with, could be seven different variations of that motion, doing it this way, where if we do the motion, and then we go back and we amend the motion, we only do it once. After everybody has agreed to that.

So,

Deputy, I'll refer to the attorney, but as he stated, that, that motion is just surely

a recommendation.

Once you get your information, you make your motion, and it could very well be seven different motions, but that's the idea. We were all elected here to create that legislative process. And I don't know, I'll let the attorney speak to that, but, but, uh, I think that we've become really dependent on that written motion, and that's not the intent of that written

motion.

We are all able to make our own motions.

We always have been able to amend that emotion.

So,

it's, it's, yes, it gets the dialogue going, and then we, we all formulate our opinions, and we come to some sort of agreement of what that motion should be going forward, if we don't agree with it as it states now.

The motion is a courtesy to be put on the paper for you, for all of you, to help the process. The, all of you create your own motions. It was just something to help as a guideline, as a baseline. So, anyway, I'll let, uh, our city attorney respond, and then, uh, Council Member Williams

had a comment.

Deputy Mayor, there are, uh, multiple roads that all lead to Rome. Um, and if, if the Council wants to continue as it's been doing, Council can do that. I am not saying you can't. You absolutely can, uh, introduce an agenda bill by number, have a motion and a second, then have staff introduce it, and then go from there. You can do it that way. This is simply an alternative way to do it, and how most governing bodies, uh, proceed under

Robert's rules. Yeah.

It is not in the rules.

It's part of it. Yeah.

Uh, Council Member Williams? Yeah, I really think it's six of one, half a dozen of the other. Whether you read that motion, and then, because of what's happened in the discussions, it gets amended, or whoever's going to make the motion has the foresight to kind of alter it there, as long as they get a second, and nobody tries to amend it again, you're going to vote on it. It isn't, it isn't really going to matter. We've got the latitude to amend it at any time, as many times as we want, providing the

majority agrees. Yeah. Yeah. That's correct. Yeah. Good thing I thought of that. At any rate,

uh, any other questions from Council?

No comments? Mr. Strong? All right. One last one. Okay. Uh, do it, Mr. Strong?

So, this kind of comes from the Chair.

Yeah. Yep.

The Chair only facilitates this meeting. It is still the Council's way to proceed. Whether you like it or not, that's irrelevant.

Yep. I agree.

So, we'll just keep doing whatever we want to do, as long as it gets us to Rome, we'll take one of those roads.

Okay.

So, so that said, I need to get direction then, from Council. I, I, I'm getting kind of a sense from people here.

In order for me to... We need to have any sense of direction to give you, because the Council will read off the motion, or they will not.

They can read the, the, the, the question is, is the, the flow of the meeting goes, the agenda

bill is presented, staff reports. Where does it say that? Well, that's... Well,

let's get to it, because you're saying it says that. Where, where does it say? It just says the agenda bill. It doesn't say that we have to discuss the agenda bill.

I didn't say you have to discuss anything.

I said I...

You don't have to read the agenda bill.

No, I, I introduce, as the Chair, I introduce the agenda bill. I can ask staff to report. Staff will report. The audience will be made aware of what we're talking about. Then, at that point, Council can ask questions of the presenter of the staff, or they can make a motion, and it could be the motion that's recommended as presented, or they can make their own motion if they're not ready. Let's say, for instance, that they'd like to table it, so we don't have to go back and amend and make, go through that hoops. We can go straight to the process of where the Council's will is. If the Council's will is, let's say, to, to table the item, they could table it at that time and bring it, move it to a study session for conversation, or they can adopt the recommended motion and go forward with it and have a discussion and debate.

That's an option.

The other option is, is the way that, um, I was requested to do it by, um, Council,

which

was, I introduced the bill, I make a, you make a motion, I ask for staff report, and then

you debate it.

And then if you decide you want a different motion, we can amend the motion, which is

an option too. So,

we're just presenting to you what, what other Council's and my pass has, has been, is, is an option to help the meeting flow better, to give you options. But, but by all means, the motion that's written there is simply a recommendation. It is not the motion that Council members have to give to, to go forward.

Councilman Williams.

So, are we looking at some type of vote or just a verbal agreement? I, I like plan A myself,

you know. I mean,

and I really don't see anything that precludes anybody from doing one or the other at any given time. I mean, yeah, I think the staff should give the report.

Yeah.

If anybody has a question on what the staff has reported, I think they should be able

to answer it.

And then from there, draw the conclusion, make the motion you want, and let's roll.

Exactly.

All, all roads still lead to Rome.

Councilman Tracy.

Well, I'm a little confused.

Um,

maybe somebody else is, we're in a study session, right?

Yes.

Um, and all the study sessions I've been in before, first of all, were chaired by the deputy

mayor.

So have we changed something in that?

Yeah. Yeah.

So I'm just trying to find out where we're at here.

Yeah. Yeah.

That's totally changed from what it was.

Yeah.

And number two, the study session's all about discussing this stuff. It's, that's where we hash out everything and then say what we're going to do in the

next one.

So we have to hash that out, whatever it is on, on the agenda.

Yeah.

So I, I'm not even sure why we're, we're going through all this stuff because that's, that's our, our agenda is to hash everything out. And then at the end of that, say, what do you think we ought to do with that? And then we move it on to whatever it is. And, and I would like clarification on the, are we, is the mayor going to chair all the study sessions from now on?

That's, that's something we've been talking about with trying to make this all just one

meeting.

The first portion of the meeting would be just study session conversation and then roll into the new business. And that's, that was the original intent of it, uh, of when we went to a committee of whole where the deputy mayor would be, would be chairing the committee of whole, but originally we got off on, on the wrong foot with where we had the separated, it's separated out as a separate study session meeting. And it's going to be coming before council of whole, uh, the next meeting to discuss this

exact thing.

Um, but, um, we have a, uh, study session that's has a time limit at 6 PM and then we go into a study into new business. Um, the, the, in order to make the meeting flow and not be constrained by time, ultimately the meeting should be starting. We can start and have the first section of our meeting study session and roll right into the business, new business without doing a new pledge of allegiance, without doing the whole repeat of the introduction. Again, it just would dedicate the first part of the meeting as study session. And so that's, that's what we're driving towards. Um, I think the meetings will flow better that way, but, um, but you all can decide at the next committee of whole that when we have this conversation.

Yeah.

So we're, we're going to adjust that because I remember, I remember going in some study sessions that went for four hours, uh, depending on what we had.

Yeah. Yeah.

I've got a lot of questions about the whole committee of whole and all that kind of stuff. And are we, we're going to bring that up in the next committee of whole?

Yes. Okay. Yeah. Yep. Yep. Yep.

So you have that opportunity then.

Um, yeah.

So this, this evening was, was simply to present the, the attorney had, had brought to me and asked me why we were doing it this way. And, uh, and I had the same question when I came on to me, it's more effective to have a staff report at first, but if you all want to have a motion before you start talking, um, and debating or before you have a staff report, I, I'm, I can, I'm good either way. It's, it's your meeting, but this was a way that, that I'm familiar with. I think that flowed really well and that, um, the attorney Lloyd had, had witnessed in his experiences that typically meetings flow from the introduction of agenda bill, staff report, questions, motion and debate. And, and that's typically how, how most council meetings run and somehow we've gotten away from that, that flow. Council member Hogan.

Yeah.

I, I kind of agree with council member Tracy. I know there's been talk, uh, deputy mayor and stuff that we're going to, we'd like to do an ad hoc for a city council rules of procedure and then, then work with the whole council and figure out how we're going to do this. Cause we're kind of on a trial period. Still, um, I agree with council member Tracy on, because we have worked with staff at the study sessions and the committee of a whole and kind of brought up the agenda item, what we want to see, they propose it to us. We've already discussed it. And I, that's why I'm just saying, we know what we, we should have read our packet to start. And I know maybe like the audience, you guys calm down, you're pretty out of control today. But, you know, they can see that stuff in Cal and in study session. So it's not like it hasn't been hidden. The only time I would like to have if something comes from staff or a council member to be put on the agenda, then I would want to hear staff report before we made the motion if it was brand new and we had not seen it at one of our sessions beforehand. But I'll go with whatever the flow is.

See you in Rome. Any other comments?

I was hoping to have a lot to report on this evening. I will continue with requesting a motion immediately after the introduction of the bill. And then we'll return to this at the Committee of Whole to talk a little bit more. But it's been introduced to you and a good conversation. So thank you.

Okay. 530.

Next item on our list, item B, AB 2673, exposing minor child to domestic violence. Chief Devin Kruberlake.

Thank you, Mayor and Council.

This is Agenda Bill 2673. It is looking to add a new criminal statute to our code, making it a gross misdemeanor to expose a minor child to the crime of domestic violence. Since we last met at our last study session, there's been some modifications and some language has been cleaned up in the proposed code here. You'll notice in Section B, we've got some definitions that clearly define some terms that were not as clear previously. B1 is the definition of domestic violence, which gives it the same definition as how it's defined in the current RCW. B, B-boy number two is the definition of a family or household member, which also defines it as the same definition as it's currently defined in RCW. And then B3 defines intimate partner as having the same meaning as defined in the RCW as well. In your packet, I've included a list of other agencies that have implemented similar code. I believe that was a specific request from Council Member Hogan. That is attached for your reference. And I believe we have Prosecutor Lentz will be available to answer any questions or make a presentation on some key factors that help her if this code were to be adopted.

Thank you, Chief.

Question or comments from Council?

Council Member Hogan.

Yeah, thank you, Chief. I'm in full support of it, and I appreciate that, seeing how many other entities have taken the same process, and especially after we have the community letter pointing this out to us. So I'm good to go.

Thank you very much. Council Member Williams.

Where are we going to hear from the prosecutor on this?

So I reached out to Ms. Lentz.

She asked.

She said she had a court and asked if she could appear remotely. Send her the Zoom link.

She's not here.

Maybe perhaps we should hold off until we can hear from her.

Okay. So noted. Council Member Tracy.

Well, I mean, some of the changes have been made in here from the prosecutor's office, correct?

Correct. She has reviewed.

She has reviewed it. But no other comment is what you were talking about, John. Any other comment? This is pretty much following the state law?

Well, there's no current state law that defines this as a crime. It's up to the individual jurisdictions to adopt it on their own, to codify it. And so, but it mirrors other similar domestic violence crime language. And I don't know if Dan wants to touch on that.

Attorney Lloyd?

I don't know if there's much more I can add beyond what I spoke about at the July 29th meeting. For consistency, the proposed ordinances adopt the same terms as they are used in the RCWs defining domestic violence, defining family or household member, defining who an intimate partner is. These crimes, as far as the actual act of violence against the victim, those already exist, and they have already been adopted into the Orting Municipal Code. This ordinance follows the lead of many other jurisdictions, as you've noted. And for all intents and purposes, identifies an additional victim to the crime. And the reason behind that, as I believe Chief Cabralic spoke to, is that even though the child may not be the one on the receiving end of the physical abuse, there is emotional trauma and there's additional trauma that is sustained when the violence is witnessed. So this ordinance recognizes that.

Has it been tested in any other jurisdiction?

Yes, yes.

It's currently been implemented in many jurisdictions. There's a reference list included in the packet that has those listed out.

Right, but has it been tested? In other words, has it gone to a court? Has it gone into court and held up in court?

I mean, it's currently deployed and it's being used by officers. Officers are actually making these charges and those jurisdictions are processing those. So I don't know if you were meaning has somebody challenged it to bring it up to a higher court to challenge the law itself?

Well, that's, I mean, this is all fairly new, right?

No.

Or it's been around for a long time?

It's within, I would say, 10 years or so, within the last 10 years.

So there's probably court cases on it that show that it upheld?

Absolutely, yeah. There's many jurisdictions that use this every day around us and they don't have any problems with it.

Okay, thank you. Councilmember Reid?

Is the question being asked by the police department or is the question being asked by the prosecuting attorney?

I'm unclear on what you're asking me?

Is the need being put forth by the prosecuting attorney, the need for this law to be recognized by the city, or is it being put forth by the police department or police officers?

So, or both.

So how this came about was, you know, the state already recognizes that children are additional victims in domestic violence cases. They have defined that and they discussed that in our current RCW. They talk about how it should apply to sentencing guidelines and things like that. They just didn't codify it as a chargeable offense. And they left that up to each local jurisdiction to do themselves. With our citizen request letter to you all, that kind of just kicked off our note. We noted that we never adopted that. So it's not something that has been on our books. But it will do a lot of good if it is on our books because it helps not only, you know, the child victims of domestic violence who are witnessing this, but also it allows our prosecutor to, a little bit more leeway to enact things on her end that will protect children from ongoing domestic violence being exposed to that.

And kind of the reason I asked that question and the reason I asked for the prosecutor to come and give her explanation of what's going on, this is an important law, which I can understand it is, but there's nobody else here. And there's one person in, one person that wrote a letter to the city. There's not another single person here. And there should be 50 people here.

Thank you. Deputy Mayor Sproul.

Yeah, I do recall a citizen came in and discussed about this. And I think you, chief, said you're going to get with them and then to talk about that. And that's kind of where this came from.

Um,

if, if I had to base every decision that this council made on the attendance within this room, we would have nothing done.

Um,

we've got 9,000 citizens, maybe half of that are adults. We're lucky that we get three or four.

Um,

we've sat in this room, council members, the last couple of years that I've been on the, on here, and we've gone meeting after meeting and nobody's been here, but we still were able to pass legislation for the city.

Um,

so I, I'm okay with taking this forward to the regular council meeting on 729 as, um, the recommended action.

Um, you gave me for the 8, 8, 12, and you? Okay.

That's kind of passed, isn't it?

Okay.

Uh, council member, uh, Trez.

Yeah. Um,

uh, chief, I've, uh, talked to a few people about this ordinance and I've got nothing but negative feedback from them.

Um,

so I'd like to do more questions to the community about this ordinance here in Orden. Uh, and I'd like to talk to a few more attorneys before I make a decision, but right now I just can't see me going through with this ordinance.

Okay.

Could I, could I offer, uh, the council, I, I, um, we have an individual here who is, um, prepared to make a statement. Uh, I, and, uh, I don't know if, um, the council would like to hear her, her, uh, make her statement, um, or if they'd prefer to wait until the actual meeting for that comment.

The individual is the sponsor of, of this bill.

Correct. That's correct. Correct. Okay.

If you'd be willing to speak, that would be great.

Thank you. My name is Carol.

Um, Carol Paul. The reason I brought this forward is I work for the city of Bonny Lake for the prosecutor's office. I am the, uh, victim advocate. I see what DB does to kids, the trauma. Um, the main reason I brought it here is a friend of mine, her daughter lived with her with her grandson. There had been numerous assaults from her daughter. Her grandson was there.

Um,

she went, her daughter went to jail. She went and had to get a no contact order through Pierce County because through Ordean, there was one put on her as a victim, but her grandson wasn't considered a victim. Um, and so when she went back for the, um, no contact order to be more than temporary, it wasn't because he wasn't considered a victim.

Um,

the trauma that these kids go through and watching people that they love abuse each other. It, it, it, it, it, it can follow into adulthood. If they don't get what they need when they're children, then it follows them into adulthood and then possibly their abusers and abuse their loved ones. Um, so the reason I brought this, I see the good that it does where I am at, um, the victims in Bonnie Lake feel more comfortable because their children are protected. Also, this doesn't keep children from their other parents. If there's other ways that they can see their children, they can go to court, they can get supervised visits. They can, you know, all they have to do is go to court and ask for it.

Um,

you know, I know that it was brought up about CPS getting called in CPS gets called in, whether this goes through or not. If your officers see children in this situation, they send reports to CPS because the kids need to be protected. They need to know that their children are protected. It's not always the mother that's the getting abused. Sometimes it's the father. So it's not one or the other, but the kids have to be safe.

Mayor, the city attorney.

Recognize our city attorney, Lloyd?

I'm sorry.

I do not want to interrupt the speaker. I just want to advise counsel that I just called the prosecutor and, uh, she got out of court late. She's going to try to log on here in a minute.

Uh, thank you.

Um, so that's my reason for bringing it forward. You know, when I found out, like I said, my friend was going through all this and I found out that that wasn't a charge that was charged here. I immediately sent a letter to figure out what I could do to help the kids in Ording be safe.

I live in Ording.

So I would like to know that the kids here are safe. And as far as no one else being here in the audience, people don't know this exists. If you're not in the legal field, you don't know that what charges can be charged. And, you know, that's why they're not here. And, and anyone that would think negatively of this bill or this charge or whatever, I don't

understand that.

The bottom line is it's protecting the kids. And it's not a forever thing, you know, and it does help the prosecutor help the abuser get the help they need so that they don't do it any longer. That helps the prosecutor do what they need to do to get that person the help that they

need. I thank you. Councilman Tracy.

I noticed on some of these cities, they have a minimum 30 days. Not everybody has that. Does the, the one we're looking at here have the minimum 30 days? And I assume that's a sentence of some kind, minimum of 30 days, no matter what. I don't, I don't know what that means, but I would think it's something to try to

And our prosecutor looks like she's joined us here now, so she would be the perfect person to answer this question for us.

Okay.

I will call on our representative prosecutor, Karen.

Hi, my name is Karen Lentz.

I'm your prosecutor. Thank you for having me.

To answer that question, it's a gross misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail, up to $5,000

in fines.

And it does have that mandatory minimum 30 days in jail. I use it in other cities where I prosecute. Most of the ones I've seen have the minimum of 30 days in jail, and it is a great tool for me to use to get compliance, to get treatment, to get no contact orders, to protect our

victims.

And I'm more than happy to tell you more. I just wait for more questions.

Okay. Thank you. Casmar Tracy.

So does ours have that 30-day minimum written in there? Because it looks like some of these aren't.

I don't know. Ours does. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Other questions? Councilman Reed?

So you have the option to negotiate with the person who's being charged. They can go get help, or they can get charged. Or they can go get help or go to jail.

So Washington...

It's not a minimum you're going to go to jail for 30 days.

You know, we're super flexible and creative, especially in our courtroom, with what we

can do.

First of all, your question was like, can we do this and not go to jail or not get charged? Washington is a mandatory arrest state.

Let's start there.

So if our police officers show up and, you know, somebody punches their spouse in the face in front of kids, the police officers have to make an arrest. The only time they wouldn't is if they would call me and I can override that. I'm basically putting my law license, my reputation, and my malpractice insurance on the line to determine if it's okay to not make an arrest at that point. We can then file it later. I have 24 months to file domestic violence charges. Generally speaking, these won't show up on their own. You're not going to have a freestanding charge of this ever because you have to have that domestic violence incident attached to it that the children witnessed. So 90% of these cases are going to be like an assault for domestic violence, usually intimate

partner.

I can give you an example of one that I had in court today.

Um,

the guy was in the back seat of the car with a three-year-old. The woman is driving. He didn't like what she was saying and he wanted to crash the car. So he grabbed over her, grabbed the steering wheel and tried to tank the car a couple of

times.

Uh, that is a great example of someone who's got reckless endangerment charges. Uh, he had an assault because he also punched her in the arm a couple of times. And then we added this charge.

Um,

he doesn't necessarily have to have a conviction on his record if he's charged with it. So I can do PDAs, prosecutors discretionary agreement, where I say, you know what, go take these classes, come back, show me you've had parenting classes, show me you did something we call DVMRT, uh, which is like a 26 week program. If they do that, I can dismiss the charges at that point.

So it's really not a 30-day minimum then?

It's not always going to happen that way now. The next step would be I can enter a contract with them, which is a stipulated order of continuance. I can do that for up to five months or five years. So 60 months of a stipulated order of continuance. You get certain things done. You don't do other things. At the end, you get to come in and ask the judge to dismiss it. The next step would be a conviction. We can do probation. We can do jail. You know, we're super flexible. If it is a conviction, however, that particular charge has the 30 days. Do they have to plead guilty to that count?

No, they don't.

Do they even have to plead guilty to any of the stuff that we originally charged?

They don't.

I can amend it to disorderly conduct. I could amend it to a nuisance violation. We have all kinds of different options. But having this as a weapon in my arsenal, example from that case this morning, he took an SOC contract with me for three years this morning because that charge was there and it's scary and because he wanted to get out of jail. So I had two tools to manipulate to get him in compliance to do a parenting class, to do the DVMRT, and to keep the no-contact order in place to protect the individuals in the

car.

There's a long answer. Do you have more questions?

That was good. Thank you. Mm-hmm.

Thank you, Councilor Reed.

Any other questions?

So the arresting officer has the discretion to arrest, make that charge?

They do.

And they don't have to put it on there. I need one charge to get somebody into the courtroom. And at that point, I make a decision. Another example from last night, we had a gentleman that was arrested. He was charged with one count of, I believe, disorderly conduct. And at the end of the day, he's got four charges and he's sitting in jail right now. I added three extra charges. I also had another guy that was arrested last night. When that came through, there were three sets of tickets. I forget how many infractions we had. We had two criminal misdemeanors. We had two traffic misdemeanors. One of the criminal misdemeanors just wasn't going to stick.

It wasn't appropriate.

So I amended that when it came into filing the complaint. So I have the ability to override what the police bring in by adding and subtracting.

So the arresting officer doesn't necessarily have to make the charge at that time, at that moment. He can have a day, a week, two weeks.

When they write the ticket, the tickets can't change. So once the ticket was written in sector, which is a system we currently use for at least, I think, the rest of the year. Once that goes through to the court side, that ticket doesn't change. I file a written complaint to change those charges. If for some reason it got charged and we weren't supposed to, I can make, there's a very special motion that I've made probably three of in this courtroom, where I asked to dismiss it and vacate it as though written in error, and then it can be completely pulled out of the criminal justice system so that nobody sees that it was even filed.

All right. Thank you.

Questions, comments from council?

Okay. Seeing none,

the desire of the council to move this forward this evening to another study session or to council poll.

You're asking if you want to put it on tonight's agenda?

Are you wanting to move this to another study session?

Or tonight's agenda?

We can add in the agenda for this evening or move it to a study session or committee poll.

I'd like to put it to a motion tonight.

Yes?

If I may, if it is council's desire, collective desire, to put it on tonight's agenda, that would be handled at the regular council meeting request for additions or modifications to the agenda. That would require a motion, a second, and then a majority vote of a quorum.

Okay. Thank you.

So we'll address it there.

Wouldn't it be easier? I mean, yeah, we could go on and get done, but wouldn't it be easier just to put it on the next regular meeting after this one?

Well, you could put it to an agenda.

I mean, that way it's got time to be put on the agenda, written up the way it's supposed to, so we're not shoving it in and then having to make an amendment to that one.

Yeah, and the attorney is exactly right. We have that option to make modifications to the agenda. If we don't, then this will be assigned to, what I was trying to get at in my request was, did you want to talk about this more in another study session or in committee of whole?

Personal opinion is I'd like to see it move to the next council meeting, the regular meeting, to be voted on.

That would be on the 26th.

26th. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Great. Okay. Move for it as a standalone item. Yeah.

That's what I was trying to get to.

Yeah.

But we don't make that motion, right?

Whether it's standalone or consent.

Yep. Yep. Stand alone. That way, if there's any other discussion, it's not on the next. Okay. Thank you.

Moving on to AB 2672, surplus of police equipment. Police Chief, Devin Kravak.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. I'll try to keep this one short here. For time's sake. We entered into a new contract and received new Taser devices, the Taser 10s. Our previous Tasers were Taser 7s. Those are now available in surplus. And staff is asking to have those designated as surplus items so we can auction those off and try to recoup some money for those devices. Essentially, the resolution accomplishes a few things. One, would declare the Taser 7s as surplus, and then second, it would authorize the Mayor to dispose of those by way of auction to recover some money.

Thank you. Got questions or comments from Council? Councilman Williams? Nope. Got a division for all.

This did come to us once before, correct?

It did, and then something, it just kind of fell off.

Got lost. Okay.

Yeah, I remember seeing this.

Okay.

I think we need to move it to August 26th.

Yeah. Stand alone. Okay. Okay. That worked. Great. Thank you. Okay. Moving on.

Resolution number, AB Bill 2659, Resolution number 2623, United Regional Approach to Homelessness.

Deputy Mayor Sproul.

I've got four minutes, and it's going to take longer than that.

If you'd like to move this to the business meeting, we can do that as you'd like and

open the discussion.

I think it needs to be moved to the next study session where we can really discuss it.

Yeah.

Can I move it to that or to the?

Because if we move it to.

Committee of whole? Well, we can move it. Committee of whole. Committee of whole. Yeah, you bet.

But I'm, so there's discussion involved.

Yeah.

You could discuss it, discuss it in our regular business meeting if you wanted.

Right. Right.

But I, we've got to hammer this one out.

Okay. Yeah. Okay.

The only thing I would caution, because Council could debate it tonight, and I don't know the answer to this. I guess this was a question more for Deputy Mayor Sproul, is if there is a timeline or a deadline to pass this resolution.

There is no timeline.

Yeah. Okay.

That would be something Council could consider. Since there's no timeline, it's entirely within the discretion to move this to the next study session.

Okay. Great.

We'll take a couple minute break, and then we'll return for the regular Council meeting.

6 -0-2. Once

a motion has been entertained, audience members will have the opportunity to make public comments on items that are not on the agenda, or they may request a comment on an agenda item prior to a vote or motion of the Council. Council, do we have any requests for modifications or additions this evening to the agenda? Seeing none, we'll move on to public comments. This is an opportunity for the public to make comments to the Council about any matter on City business that is not on the agenda this evening.

Madam Clerk,

are there any written comments submitted by deadline that need to be written in the record?

No, ma'am.

Do any person request to speak tonight on a matter that is not on the agenda?

No.

Is there anyone, any person who wishes in the audience to speak to the Council this evening?

Seeing none,

we'll move on to the consent agenda. I apologize for the, let's get pulled in here. Go back to the tried and true paper method. Consent agenda consists of claims voucher last dated, list dated August 12th, 2026. Council in the amount of $220,484.05, which includes voucher number 58,928 through 58,996. And electronic fund transfers in the amount of $1,137.17, for a ground total of $221,621.22. Payroll voucher. Payroll electronic deposit transmissions in the amount of $302,731.53, for a grand total of $302,731.53, for the period covering July 16th through 31st, 2026. Meeting minutes, study session, meeting May 27th, 2026, special meeting July 22nd, 2026, and council meeting July 29th, 2026.

I have a question. So before we do a motion, we're supposed to have questions, right?

That's right.

So my question is regarding the hearing test for public works staff for $1,114. So is that split between the three different departments? And then is that a benefit that is charged to the city? Or is that a service that we are paying for that isn't included within their benefits?

Well, I'll speak from my knowledge of it. Each one of them will be billed to their separate departments. And typically you do that to monitor the hearing of all your employees. And it's not necessarily a benefit for them, but it's actually a benefit for the city. And the fact that we're tracking and monitoring their hearing on that.

So we have that.

It's part of our documentation of our course.

So this is a city expense then?

Yes.

Not a benefit that works?

Yes. Yep. Thank you. Okay.

Any other questions or comments?

Motion to approve consent agenda as prepared.

Second. Okay. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. All those opposed?

Motion passes.

Okay.

Moving on to new business. AB 2637, Criminal Justice Training Commission Grant. Police Chief Devin Kerbalik.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. Agenda Bill 2637. So House Bill 2015 was created by the legislature. And it provides grant funds of up to $100 million for law enforcement agencies to recruit, hire, and retain police officers and programs accessible.

Through the CJTC.

At the direction of the council, I applied for this grant. Initially, we had requested around $400,000 grant funds. I'm happy to report that we were approved for this grant recently. And the total grant amount that we were approved for was actually much, much larger than that. The grant, total grant awards, award, if accepted, would be $826,894. And so I included a spreadsheet on the packet here that kind of shows what we requested and what we were awarded. So it basically boiled down to four requests. The first being funds to pay for the salary and benefits of two additional police officers if we were to add two. They said yes to that, and they essentially said, yes, we'll give you $470,000 to accomplish that. This item, item request number one, comes with a 25% match requirement. And this is the only item that has that 25% match item. Everything else that we're going to discuss in just a moment here comes free of that 25% match. So the second request was for full equipment and training for those two officers if we were to hire them. That includes everything in the table below.

There's two tables.

They're identical tables. One represents one police officer and one represents the second. And so there's a total of $241,000 to pay for things like a vehicle, cell phone, their laptop, firearms, their uniform equipment, everything that it takes to deploy a police officer on the field. Third request was overtime costs to send our existing officers to training. There's some recent changes in law that have some training requirements that we're required to meet by 2028. And we still have some officers that have not attended that training. They're about 40-hour classes. And so I asked for $15,000 to cover overtime while we send those officers to the training to satisfy those legal mandates. Item number four was this bill allowed for agencies to request funds for emergency management. And so I made a request for $100,000 to help with emergency management costs. Again, there's a 25% match that applies to just the salary and benefits portion, which was the $470,000. So when all said and done here, the city would be required to contribute $117,000 in order to receive these funds, which would essentially completely pay for equipment and salary for two officers through June of 2028. The agenda bill, or I'm sorry, the proposed resolution that is attached here essentially covers four things. The first would be to authorize the mayor to accept the contract and accept those grant funds. The second would be to expend the match, the required matching money. The third would be the council would actually be authorizing the additional two FTEs to our staff.

Thank you.

Questions from council? Council Member Williams.

Good job. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Tracy. Yeah, good job.

And even last year we talked about this a little bit too, so it's good to see what we got. One of the questions I have is the matching fund. And Tammy's not here tonight, but we have to figure out where that matching fund's coming from. And thinking about this, we need to, I mean, putting on two new offices is great. It should cut down on a lot of overtime and everything. But then we've got those expenditures at the end of 28. So that's something that we've got to look at building into the budget at the same time. Because if we don't, we're going to have issues when it comes to the end of 28, and we're scrambling for funds to keep them working. And I don't want to see us have to let them go or do some other thing with it. So hopefully we're looking at that and we're seeing what we need to do. But congratulations on getting it. It's a good thing, and I think it's something we need for sure.

Other questions? Thank you.

Other questions from Chief?

Councilman Torres?

So, Devin, year three, then we'd have to come up with this $470,000, correct?

No,

year three and on, the only thing that we would continue having to pay would be salary and benefits for those two officers. All the equipment's already been purchased, the cars have been purchased, all under the grant.

Thank you. Thank you. Any questions? Councilmember Hogan?

I make a motion to approve Resolution No. 202624, Resolution of the City of Ording, Washington, authorizing the mayor to act as the authorized representative agent on behalf of the City of Ording with respect to public safety funding programs through the Washington State Criminal Justice Training System, in parentheses, WSCJTC.

Second. Second.

Motion made by Councilmember Hogan, seconded by Deputy Mayor Sproul.

Comments from Council? Councilmember Hogan?

So, Chief, would we kind of cross our fingers and hope after 28 that the state might have another grant?

Maybe? Hopefully.

I'm always willing to take grant money when I can. I think we've got a, we've been discussing a plan or two to possibly raise revenue to be able to continually fund those.

Okay, great. Yeah, because, I mean,

$54,000 for a basic car, I mean, that's out of our pocket for two cars and we get the rest.

It's great. Thank you. Good job.

You've worked hard in this for over, what, going on two years?

Thank you. I appreciate it. Thank you. Councilmember Reed, you have a question? No. Thank you. Okay. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes.

Do we have anything for executive session this evening?

Nope.

Nothing from me, Your Honor.

Okay. Thank you.

I will entertain a motion to adjourn.

Move to adjourn.

Okay, motion made by Councilmember Tracy, seconded by Councilmember Williams.

All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? We do have one opposed. Councilmember Reed? We were having another sheet of paper here.

After the meeting started, are we going to talk about it?

Thank you.

I was going to present that in the study session. If you would like, I can go ahead and update you on a couple of the items. It's a very early meeting, so.

I think it's a good idea.

What I was going to update, what I'd like to update Council on is you all gave me the authority to manage the contingency fund on the Kansas Street project, and I wanted to update you with where we're at on that project. First, I'll give you the 10,000-foot view on this. This week, PSE will be complete with their work and demobing on Kansas Street at the end

of the week.

They still have some work on Calistoga, but for the most part, they're out of the right-of-way where ACI will be working, which was a big accomplishment. The next item of importance is that the next big milestone will be getting above grade on Kansas, and that should be happening by mid to late September. So, we're on track and on schedule for that to happen. Oh, excuse me then. So, that's a big milestone because most of our vulnerabilities were below grade. What I brought before tonight was I had construction management work up the potential change orders that we had coming before us, and to give kind of a give you or give us all a snapshot of where we're at on this for change orders. These orders haven't come through, but they are en route, and I think I've heard a couple questions on how they originated, and you'll see some of them like utility conflict,

water

installation, utility conflict during water installation. What you have is you have a lot of different varying grades and elevations of the different utilities, and it was impossible for them to be able to get the exacting measure depths all the way through the right-of-way, and as they began to lay their lines, they would have points where they would come into conflict. Let's say a side sewer was in the way, in the direct conflict with that storm line that was going in, so they would have to be able to drop their elevations to get under the sanitary sewer lines, so they had to make some adjustments that were out of their ability to actually predict in the future, and so you'll see that's where most of our cost actually occurred because it was just impossible to be able to capture all those different elevations down the full street, and we had to make many, many adjustments to be able to make it through that right-of-way.

So

you could see Calistoga was also another on the storm revision. Once they went below grade at Calistoga, they went through the concrete, which was below the asphalt on Calistoga, then they found a concrete vault, and there was a lot of concerns over work. I shouldn't say concerns, but challenges in that area for undetected utilities and to be able to reroute the storm back into the Tealup River, so we had items on there that needed to be adjusted

in the field.

What you see here before you tonight is after quite a bit of debate, and it's just maybe a small portion of what's actually come through, where we've actually settled on, where we're in agreeance with ACI to help work with them. On the good news side, we're looking at $279,171, which is still in budget. This is for potential change orders. The good news size is some of these are going to be removed or are paid for under the Pierce County Flood Control District funds that we were able to retrieve, and then we got those reapplied back to the Kansas Street project, and that was $223,000, and that's what Council Member Morrell was here talking about last week. So that's going to be able to be applied to all of our stormwater work on the street, which actually is going to help that project out quite a bit and help us as we go forward. I feel pretty good at this point that we're on schedule again, and things are moving forward as we get above grade, and some of those variables are going to be much less. We still have a couple out there. There's a tree removal that may potentially happen, and also a stormwater pipe repair as a result of that tree, but overall, I think we're through a lot of the big issues that

we've had.

Any questions for myself? I believe, did Engineer Hungerford, is he still on the line?

No. Okay. Okay.

So he was going to be here this evening to talk a little bit about it. So that's all I have for Kansas.

Any questions? Deputy Storm?

I don't have one on particular here, but when you're done, I'd like to bring one thing

up before we go. Okay. Thank you. What was the total contingency? I don't know.

Well, what we had after the Buy America was $300,000.

So, yeah.

And in all honesty, these change orders haven't come before me yet. We've had three change orders to date. And then this is where she listed as a potential change order. So we're still kind of in the process of negotiating them and trying to make sure that we have them completed on that. An update on the railing to be inspected by the state, and they're doing one batch at a time, welds, galvanization, inspection, and then getting it on site. Unfortunately, the delays are putting us into September after school starts, so it may be mid to late September before the bridge is fully completed. It's not an additional cost to us, but it's definitely delayed the project at this point. So that's been a challenge. I think there are a lot of people that are waiting to see that bridge come online.

So it seems to me we paid some penalties early on to keep them on track and on time. We're going to get some of those back? If this project isn't done on time, it isn't us that's holding up this project, it's them. They've had three years to order those railings, and they must have got late on ordering them or something. And if it's late and causing us problems, we should recoup some of the costs we had to pay them early on for this project.

Yeah, from what I understand is that it's been the state that's been delayed, that's been backed up, that they've been working with that for a number of months now, trying to get these rails cleared up. Mr. Wheaton, you might add to what I know.

That's the understanding of the current situation. I don't know about the penalties, but I'd be happy to take a look tomorrow and try to get some more back.

They were early on in this whole project, different things that happened and stuff. And we end up, Craig, oh, is he gone already?

Wow. Did we vote on leaving? I don't think we did. That's a good point. Yeah.

I think that's something we need to look at because it seems to me we had to pay some fines because we're putting them behind schedule on what they were doing.

It was going to cost them more for the critical path and all kinds of stuff.

I remember that, yeah.

And if it's being held up now and it's later than what their proposed time, and I know it was in September, I just don't know the dates.

Yeah.

But we need to look at it anyway.

Exactly. Yeah.

So, yeah, so we'll verify that this week and actually what the scheduled completion date was to see if they're in compliance with it.

I don't see the exact times. And then also on the bridge, I mean, once the state takes that over, are we at all liable for any of that? So if a kid throws off a rock, I think I brought this up before, are we liable for that or that's all based on the state? And if they want to put up signs, that's not on us. I don't know if that's been clarified or not.

Yeah.

That might be something Dan's got to look into.

Yeah.

Deputy Mayor, I'm not going to comment on possible liabilities in an open session. That's certainly something I can advise in an executive session.

Thank you.

I just need to find out if, I mean, I understand that Department of, Washington Department of Transportation owns all bridges. It's in the state of Washington, except for one. And I just want to know that we are not at any risk should something happen once the state takes ownership. And when do they take ownership? And if signage is needed, is that on them and not on us? Because that wasn't part of the contract.

Can we discuss this, just you and me, offline? And then I'll be able to give you an answer direct.

Sure. Okay. Thank you. Councilman Reed? Yeah.

I've been down to the bridge and looked at it a little bit. Since we've been talking with the police chief about the school zone and the sidewalk crossings and writing tickets, I think maybe we should put a fence from that exit coming out of that landing so that the students that walk out there can't walk into the street because it's faster to run across the road than it is to go up and over that bridge. So I think coming off the ramp, they should be followed into the city, into the area there so that they have to go down the rocky road.

Yeah.

The only way they can go off that bridge. Right now, it opens onto the highway.

Yeah.

So, Councilman Reed, thank you for bringing that forward. And that was brought to me this last week as well. And I am in agreement with you that to direct the flow up the ramps. So we'll look into that for some fencing options for that.

Okay. Thanks, Sam. Thank you, Sam. Okay.

Well, that is all that I have to report. And once I get more information on Kansas Street, a lot of it is still really dynamic. I just wanted to give, share with you all some of the potential changes that were out there so that you're aware of them on that.

So, okay, Deputy Mayor Sproul.

And so just to follow up, City Clerk Danielle sent out an email to all of us about ongoing meetings or anything that you are attending on behalf of the city. And get those back because we will be discussing that at the council next week, right?

Yeah. Any commissions or boards or committees that you're attending on behalf of the city, like outside of the city reporting, let me know. I'll track it in the spreadsheet. So firebird from Deputy Mayor Sproul and Council Member Hogan. So if you are attending any or not, please let me know. Okay.

And I guess as one last update, the Fire Mountain is demobilized from the lagoon dredging for the year. And it's been a very successful project to date. We have a lot of freeboard regained on that lagoon going into the winter, which is very good. I think we're in a good position moving forward. We have some geotubes. We're still working with. And right now it looks like we may have a potential for a contract for one of them to be removed to allow for future work to go on. So I'll bring that to the committee of whole when we get to that point for you all to review. And tomorrow we will be doing a walkthrough at the Department of Ecology to just kind of walk over the work and let them give us their feedback on it.

I

think we're, we had the motion on the floor.

Seconded. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed?

Meeting adjourned.