EXECUTIVE/COUNCIL APPROVAL FORM

Transcription

1 LOG NUMBERS BGT. /,t}//1 CEO..2...PtJ EXECUTIVE/COUNCIL APPROVAL FORM MANAGEMENT ROUTING: TO: COUNCIL CHAIRPERSON: EXECUTIVE Dave Somers SNOHOMISH COUNTY COUNCIL EXEC. DIR. Ken Klein r: LC DIRECTOR/ELECTED Barb Mock b.) Y'V\ EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: DEPARTMENT Planning & Dev. Serv../ DIV. MGR. lkuno Masterson DIVISION Long Range Pia ning ORIGINATOR Frank Slusser :fµ_j DA TE 04/06/17 EXT Jl.!I) DOCUMENT TYPE: BUDGET ACTION: Emergency Appropriation Supplemental Appropriation Budget Transfer CONTRACT: New Amendment DOCUMENT I AGENDA TITLE: Received at Council Office X GRANT APPLICATION ORDINANCE Amendment to Ord. # PLAN OTHER Motion/ A MOTION CONCERNING THE COUNTY COUNCIL'S POSITION ON A PROPOSED PETITION METHOD ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF STANWOOD BRB SCHMAKEIT ANNEXATION APPROVAL AUTHORITY: EXECUTIVE COUNCIL CITE BASIS sec X HANDLING: NORMAL EXPEDITE X URGENT DEADLINE DATE 05/02/17 PURPOSE: To consider the city of Stanwood's proposal to annex the area identified as the Schmakeit Annexation. BACKGROUND: The city of Stanwood has submitted a Notice of Intention (NOi) to the Boundary Review Board (BRB) for a proposed annexation of the Schmakeit area by the direct petition method. The proposed annexation is 49.6 acres with seven residences and assessed valuation of $869,800, according to the NOi. The proposed annexation is located at the east edge of the city, east of 68 1 h Avenue NW and north of Jensen Road. The proposed annexation area is designated Urban Low Density Residential on the county future land use map, and zoned R-9,600. The city proposes a comprehensive plan designation and zoning of Traditional Neighborhood. Based on county review, PDS concludes that the subject annexation proposal is generally consistent with the applicable statutory provisions governing municipal annexations. The annexation proposal furthers the GMA goal and CPP policy that cities should be the primary providers of urban services. This conclusion has been reached by comprehensively reviewing the annexation against the applicable BRB factors and objectives, county codes, and other applicable statutes and determining, overall, that the relevant factors and objectives that the BRB must consider would be advanced by the annexation. The assessor maps for this area were recently revised, and as a result the UGA boundary along the north and east edges of the northernmost property in the proposed annexation area has become slightly offset from the parcel boundaries and proposed annexation boundary. There is a small potential remnant portion of unincorporated urban area that is not included in the proposed annexation. The remnant portion would include only slivers of the parcels to the north. It would not create a logical service area for the city boundary to take in only a portion of each of those parcels, splitting those properties between jurisdictions. That would hinder objective 3 that the BRB considers, the creation of logical service areas. Instead, the PDS recommendation is to identify options for reconciling the UGA boundary as a separate future action. The recommendation to the council from PDS is to not oppose the annexation and to not invoke the jurisdiction of the BRB. The 45-day review period will end May 2, 2017.

2 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: EXPEND: FUND, AGY, ORG, ACTY, OBJ, AU CURRENT YR 2NDYR 1ST 6 YRS I TOTAL 0 REVENUE: FUND, AGY, ORG, REV, SOURCE CURRENT YR 2NDYR 1ST 6 YRS I TOTAL 0 DEPARTMENT FISCAL IMPACT NOTES: Snohomish County Finance responded that the annexation proposal will have minimal financial impact on the county budget. There will be minimal impact to revenues including sales tax, real estate excise tax, permit fees, grants, animal control and emergency management. Public Works comments that there will be no impact for most revenues and expenses, with minimal impact for Surface Water M~amement (SWM). Parks comments that the annexation will have minimal impact for parks. BUDGET REVIEW' l~nalyst f7w:::/' Administrator /il,t..- Recommend Approval t.-/"' CONTRACT IN ORIGINAL AMENDMENT CONTRACT PERIOD: ORIGINAL AMENDMENT l Start Start CONTRACT/ PROJECT TITLE: CONTRACT # CONTRACT # CONTRACTOR NAME & ADDRESS (City/State only): End End APPROVED: RISK MANAGEMENT Yes Y'-\.,_,. No AMOUNT AMOUNT $ $ PROSECUTING ATTY - AS TO FORM: No --- OTHER DEPARTMENT AL REVIEW/ COMMENTS: The Notice of Intention for the proposed annexation was circulated to the following county departments and other agencies: Assessor, Auditor, District Court, Emergency Management, Enhanced 911 Office, Finance, Human Services, Parks, Planning and Development Services, Property Management, Public Works, Sheriff, Puget Sound Energy, and SnoPac911 Emergency Communications. Comments, including those expressing no concerns, were received from Public Works, Parks, Property Management, Enhanced 911 Office, and Finance. ELECTRONIC ATTACHMENTS : ~ \ :Z_f>oS _ G: \ECAF\Dept\05 _pds\stamwood ~ehffial..eit_ EGAF _ H G:\ECAF\Dept\05 _pds\stanwood _ Sel 111 rakej.t::metior 1_ G:\ECAF\Def*\05_pds\ST.A.NWOOD_Sc11111akeit_5tRpt_03-2e1-7 NON-ELECTRONIC ATTACHMENTS: Annexation Notice of Intention < C --9 F' cl ex: v~.de;c # /(11-f. cl o C- 2

3 SNOHOMISH COUNTY COUNCIL Snohomish County, Washington MOTION NO CONCERNING THE POSITION OF THE COUNTY COUNCIL ON A PROPOSED PETITION METHOD ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF STANWOOD BRB SCHMAKEIT ANNEXATION WHEREAS, Snohomish County (the "County") has received notice of a proposal from the City of Stanwood (the "City") to annex approximately 49.6 acres of land located on the east edge of the current incorporated City, east of 68th Avenue NW and north of Jensen Road, within the Stanwood Urban Growth Area ("UGA"); and further described in Washington State Boundary Review Board for Snohomish County (hereinafter "Boundary Review Board") File No. BRB ; and WHEREAS, the proposed annexation is subject to Snohomish County Code Section , and RCW , 35A and.120, ,.060 and.070, ,.170 and.180, and 36.70A.020,.110 and.210; and WHEREAS, the City and County have adopted a Master Annexation lnterlocal Agreement effective September 28, 2004, to address the transition of services upon annexation; and WHEREAS, the proposed annexation is consistent with most of the factors and objectives of the Boundary Review Board, County Codes, and other applicable statutes governing the review of annexation actions. The proposed annexation is consistent with the adopted Countywide Planning Policies and is generally consistent with the County's Growth Management Act Comprehensive Plan as set out in a Planning and Development Services Department ("PDS") staff report dated April 6, 2017, which is incorporated herein as Attachment A; and WHEREAS, the area proposed for annexation is included in the UGA for the city of Stanwood, the logical purveyor of urban services; and WHEREAS, as a result of recent revisions to the Assessor maps in this vicinity, the UGA boundary is slightly offset from the parcel boundaries and proposed annexation boundary along the north and east edge of the northernmost property in the proposed annexation area, and a small remnant portion of unincorporated urban area to the north is not included in the proposed annexation; and WHEREAS, that remnant portion of unincorporated area includes only slivers of parcels and including them in the proposed annexation would split parcels between jurisdictions and hinder Objective 3 ( creation of logical service areas); and Motion No Concerning the position of the County Council on a proposed Petition Method Annexation to the City of Stanwood BRB Schmakeit Annexation Page 1 of 2

4 WHEREAS, County staff will identify options to reconcile the UGA boundary with parcel boundaries as a separate future action; and WHEREAS, RCW requires that decisions of the Boundary Review Board be consistent with the GMA; NOW, THEREFORE, ON MOTION, 1. The Snohomish County Council does not oppose the annexation and will not invoke the jurisdiction of the Boundary Review Board. 2. The Council Clerk is directed to forthwith file this Motion with the Boundary Review Board, together with a copy of the PDS staff report dated April 6, PASSED this day of, SNOHOMISH COUNTY COUNCIL Snohomish County, Washington Council Chair ATTEST: Asst. Clerk of the Council Motion No Concerning the position of the County Council on a proposed Petition Method Annexation to the City of Stanwood BRB Schmakeit Annexation Page 2 of 2

5 ~ Snohomish County Planning and Development Services MEMORANDUM 3000 Rockefeller Ave., MIS 604 Everett, WA (425) TO: Brian Sullivan, Council Chair Stephanie Wright, Council Vice-Chair Sam Low, District 5 Nate Nehring, District 1 Terry Ryan, District 4 Dave Somers County Executive FROM:~"'sarb Mock, Director Planning and Development Services VIA: 'J'J,J.J Frank Slusser, Senior Planner (ext. 2944) Planning and Development Services SUBJECT: City of Stanwood -Schmakeit Annexation, BRB # DATE: April 6, 2017 The following report summarizes issues and information regarding the proposed annexation of the Schmakeit area by the city of Stanwood. The report addresses factors and objectives that the Boundary Review Board (BRB) must consider in evaluating the annexation proposal. Those factors and objectives are considered because, if the county council chooses to invoke BRB jurisdiction, those would be the considerations that the BRB would take into account, and only matters related to the factors and objectives could be used to support any county council position regarding the annexation at the BRB. The report also reviews consistency with applicable comprehensive plans and the Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs), impacts as required under Snohomish County Code (SCC), and comments submitted by Snohomish County departments and other public agencies regarding the proposed annexation. This report is provided pursuant to SCC , and Revised Code of Washington (RCW) , 35A and.120, ,.060, and.070, ,.170, and.180, and 36.70A.020,.110, and.210. The 45-day review period to invoke BRB jurisdiction for the proposed annexation will expire on May 2, The authority of the Snohomish County Council for reviewing annexations as set forth in RCW and sec sec requires the Executive to review the annexation and make a recommendation to the council. The options for the county council on this proposed annexation are to invoke, or not invoke, the jurisdiction of the BRB. The county council also has the option to state a Page 1 of 12

6 position to oppose, or not oppose, the proposed annexation, or to not state a position with regard to the proposed annexation. If BRB jurisdiction is invoked by the county council or another party with standing to invoke jurisdiction, the position that the council adopts will be provided to the BRB in writing prior to the hearing on the proposed annexation. If BRB jurisdiction is not invoked, the annexation would be deemed approved. If the annexation is approved by the BRB either following a public hearing or because no one invokes BRB jurisdiction, the annexation would still need to be finalized by city ordinance setting effective date. FINDINGS: I. Background/Land Use/Zoning The city of Stanwood has submitted a Notice of Intention (NOi) to the BRB for a proposed annexation of the Schmakeit area by the direct petition method under RCW 35A The proposed Schmakeit annexation is approximately 49.6 acres with seven residences, estimated population of 17 people, and an assessed valuation of $869,800, according to the NOi. The proposed Schmakeit annexation is located at the east edge of the city, east of 68th Avenue NW and north of Jensen Road. The proposed annexation area is adjacent to the city to the south and west. The proposed annexation area is designated Urban Low Density Residential on the county future land use map, and zoned R-9,600. The city proposes a comprehensive plan designation and zoning of Traditional Neighborhood. The Traditional Neighborhood zone allows residential developments that incorporate a mix of residential types and land uses compatible with a traditional residential neighborhood, and is expected to yield slightly higher residential density (13-15 dwelling units per acre) than would be allowed under the county designation and zoning. The assessor maps for this area were recently revised, and as a result the UGA boundary along the north and east edges of the northernmost property in the proposed annexation area has become slightly offset from the parcel boundaries and proposed annexation boundary, as is visible in the map in Exhibit A. In particular, there is a small potential remnant portion of unincorporated urban area that is not included in the proposed annexation. The remnant portion would include only slivers of the parcels to the north. It would not create a logical service area for the city boundary to take in only a portion of each of those parcels, splitting those properties between jurisdictions. That would hinder objective 3 that the BRB considers, the creation of logical service areas. Instead, the PDS recommendation is to identify options for reconciling the UGA boundary as a separate future action. II. County Department/External Agency Review Page 2 of 12

7 The NOi for the proposed Schmakeit annexation was circulated for review to county departments and agencies. Comments, including those expressing no concerns, were received from Public Works, Parks, Property Management, Enhanced 911 Office, and Finance. Comments have been incorporated into the staff report along with the Planning and Development Services (PDS) review under the relevant sections. PDS requested that county departments and external agencies evaluate the annexation proposal against the factors and objectives in RCW and.180 that the BRB must assess when considering an annexation. As required by sec , fiscal, departmental, and countywide impacts were considered. The proposal was also reviewed for consistency with the Growth Management Act (GMA), CPPs, and other local plans. Review material for the proposed annexation was sent to the following departments and agencies: County Departments/Agencies Contacted Assessor Auditor District Court Emergency Management Enhanced 911 Office Finance Human Services Parks Planning and Development Services Property Management Public Works Sheriff Other Agencies Contacted Puget Sound Energy SnoPac911 Emergency Communications SnoCom 911 Southwest Snohomish County Communications Agency Ill. Analysis of Impacts and Consistency with State Statutes, County Code and Local Plans A. The following comments relate to RCW "The decisions of a boundary review board located in a county that is required or chooses to plan under RCW 36.70A.040 [the Growth Management Act (GMA) -- who must plan] must be consistent with RCW 36.70A.020 (GMA Planning Goals], 36.70A.110 [Comprehensive Plans -- Urban Growth Areas] and 36.70A.210 [Countywide Planning Policies]." 1. RCW 36.70A.110{4) and both state that it is the Legislature's intent that cities are to be the primary provider of urban services and that counties are the unit of government most appropriate to provide regional governmental services. 2. Snohomish County and the city of Stanwood have both adopted comprehensive plans under the authority of chapter 36.70A RCW (GMA). Under both plans, the annexation area is identified as urban residential and in the Stanwood UGA, intended to be eventually annexed to the City. Page 3 of 12

8 3. The city of Stanwood and Snohomish County have an adopted Master Annexation lnterlocal Agreement (MAILA) effective September 28, The agreement addresses GMA land use, transfer of project and permitting, records transfer, roads and transportation, and surface water. 4. The annexation proposal is consistent with the CPPs. The proposal allows for the transition of unincorporated areas to incorporated areas within the UGA, capital facilities planning and the timely and coordinated extension of urban services which is supported by the following CPP policies: JP-6 - The County and cities shall develop comprehensive plan policies and development regulations that provide for the orderly transition of unincorporated Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) to incorporated areas in UGAs. Mutual agreements may be utilized to address governance issues and expedite the transition. DP-5 - The County and cities shall adopt comprehensive plans and development regulations (RCW 36.70A.040). In Urban Growth Areas (UGAs), such plans and regulations shall: a. Achieve urban uses and densities; b. Provide for urban governmental services and capital facilities sufficient to accommodate the broad range of needs and uses that will accompany the projected urban growth; and c. Permit the urban growth that is projected to occur in the succeeding twenty-year period (RCW 36.70A.110(2)). The County shall adopt such plans and regulations for its unincorporated territory. Each city shall adopt such plans and regulations for territory within its city limits. Additionally, cities may adopt such plans and proposed development regulations for adjacent unincorporated territory within its UGA or Municipal UGA (MUGA) to which the city has determined it is capable of providing urban services at some point in the future, via annexation. When amending its comprehensive plan, the County shall give substantial consideration to the city's adopted plan for its UGA or MUGA. Likewise, the affected city shall give substantial consideration to the County's adopted plan for the same area. However, nothing in this policy shall limit the authority of the County to plan for and regulate development in unincorporated territory for as long as it remains unincorporated, in accordance with all applicable county, state and federal laws. Similarly, nothing in this policy shall limit the authority of cities to plan for territory in and adjacent to their current corporate limits and to regulate development in their current corporate limits, in accordance with all applicable city, county, state and federal laws. Page 4 of 12

9 PS-1-Jurisdictions should support cities as the preferred urban service providers. B. The following comments relate to RCW Factors to be considered by the Boundary Review Board. The comments listed below describe how the factors apply to this annexation, elaborating on those topics within each factor that are particularly relevant to this annexation. BRB factors contained in RCW incorporate 1997 amendments that provide for integrated consideration of the GMA and related GMA implementation statutes: Factor 1. Population and territory; population density; land area and land uses; comprehensive plans and zoning, as adopted under chapter 35.63, 35A.63, or RCW; comprehensive plans and development regulations adopted under chapter 36.70A RCW; applicable service agreements entered into under chapter or RCW; applicable interlocal annexation agreements between a county and its cities; per capita assessed valuation; topography, natural boundaries and drainage basins, proximity to other populated areas; the existence and preservation of prime agricultural soils and productive agricultural uses; the likelihood of significant growth in the area and in adjacent incorporated and unincorporated areas during the next ten years; location and most desirable future location of community facilities. i. Snohomish County and the city of Stanwood have both adopted comprehensive plans under the authority of chapter 36.70A RCW (GMA). Under both plans, the annexation area is identified as urban residential and in the Stanwood UGA, intended to be eventually annexed to the city. ii. iii. iv. The proposed annexation area is designated Urban Low Density Residential on the county future land use map, and zoned R-9,600. The city proposes a comprehensive plan designation and zoning of Traditional Neighborhood. The Traditional Neighborhood zone allows residential developments that incorporate a mix of residential types and land uses compatible with a traditional residential neighborhood, and is expected to yield slightly higher residential density (13-15 dwelling units per acre) than would be allowed under the county designation and zoning. The city of Stanwood and Snohomish County have an adopted MAILA effective September 28, The agreement addresses GMA land use, transfer of project and permitting, records transfer, roads and transportation, and surface water. There are no Surface Water Management (SWM) facilities in the annexation area and no planned SWM projects. There are no known county drainage facility easements. Factor 2. Municipal services; need for municipal services; effect of ordinances, governmental codes, regulations and resolutions on existing uses; present cost and adequacy of governmental services and controls in area; prospects of governmental services from other sources; probable future needs for such services and controls; Page 5 of 12

10 probable effect of proposal or alternative on cost and adequacy of services and controls in area and adjacent area; the effect on the finances, debt structure, and contractual obligations and rights of all affected governmental units. i. The county is not a full municipal service provider. The city of Stanwood is a provider of urban municipal services as identified under chapter 36.70A RCW. ii. iii. iv. There are no SWM facilities in the annexation area and no planned SWM projects. There are no known county drainage facility easements. Following annexation, SWM revenues from the proposed annexation area would decrease from $3,013 annually to $412 annually for bond debt service charge until 2021, when bond debt is anticipated to be retired. No impact is expected to SWM monitoring and other programs. Snohomish County Public Works estimated that there would be no impact for other Public Works revenues and services, and had no issues with the annexation. Snohomish County Parks reviewed the annexation and found that it would not have any significant impacts for county parks services. Based on the development capacity under county designation and zoning, it is estimated that a combined total of approximately $32,500 in park impact fees, which would be collected as one-time fees at the time building permits were issued, will not be collected by the county because of the proposed annexation. There will, however, be a corresponding reduction in population for which the county will not have responsibility to provide park amenities, based upon our adopted level-of-service, which results in cost savings. v. Snohomish County Finance responded that the annexation proposal would have minimal financial impact on the county budget. The annexation will have minimal impact to each of the following revenue sources: sales tax, real estate excise tax, permit fees, parks fees, grants, animal control, District Court fines, and emergency management. The annexation is expected to have minimal impact to county expenses as well. Factor 3. The effect of the proposal or alternative on adjacent areas, on mutual economic and social interests, and on the local governmental structure of the county. There were no comments applicable to factor 3. C. The following comments relate to RCW Objectives of the Boundary Review Board: Objective 1. Preservation of natural neighborhoods and communities. The proposed annexation area is within the Stanwood UGA. The proposed annexation area is adjacent to the city of Stanwood to the south and west. The proposed Schmakeit annexation area is part of the natural community of Stanwood. The proposed annexation therefore furthers this objective. Page 6 of 12

11 Objective 2. Use of physical boundaries, including, but not limited to bodies of water, highways and land contours. The proposed annexation uses parcel boundaries to define the most of the outer boundaries of the proposed annexation to the north and east. It moves the city boundary away from 68th Avenue NW, which currently defines the city boundary at the west edge of the proposed annexation area. The proposed annexation uses 2g4th Street NW to define a portion of the northern boundary, and Jensen Road to define a portion of the southern boundary. The proposed annexation therefore partially furthers this objective. Objective 3. Creation and preservation of logical service areas. The proposed annexation area is within the Stanwood UGA. The proposed annexation area is adjacent to the city of Stanwood to the south and west. Stanwood is the logical service provider for municipal services in this area. The annexation therefore furthers this objective. The assessor maps for this area were recently revised, and as a result the UGA boundary along the north and east edges of the northernmost property in the proposed annexation area has become slightly offset from the parcel boundaries and proposed annexation boundary, as is visible in the map in Exhibit A. In particular, there is a small potential remnant portion of unincorporated urban area that is not included in the proposed annexation. The remnant portion would include only slivers of the parcels to the north. It would not create a logical service area for the city boundary to take in only a portion of each of those parcels, splitting those properties between jurisdictions. That would hinder objective 3. Instead, the PDS recommendation is to identify options for reconciling the UGA boundary as a separate future action. Objective 4. Prevention of abnormally irregular boundaries. The proposed annexation does not create an abnormally irregular boundary. The proposed annexation therefore furthers this objective. Objective 5. Discouragement of multiple incorporations of small cities and encouragement of incorporations of cities in excess of ten thousand population in heavily populated urban areas. This objective does not apply to the proposed annexation. Objective 6. Dissolution of inactive special purpose districts. This objective does not apply to the proposed annexation. Objective 7. Adjustment of impractical boundaries. The existing city boundary is not impractical. The proposed annexation area is within the Stanwood UGA. The proposed annexation area is adjacent to the city of Stanwood to the south and west. Stanwood is the logical service provider for municipal services. The proposed annexation would not create an impractical boundary. Page 7 of 12

12 The proposed annexation therefore furthers this objective to the extent that it applies. Objective 8. Annexation to cities or towns of unincorporated areas, which are urban in character. The proposed annexation area is not currently fully developed. It is within the Stanwood UGA and designated in both the county and city of Stanwood comprehensive plans as urban, intended to be eventually annexed to the city. Stanwood is the logical service provider for municipal services. The proposed annexation therefore furthers this objective. Objective 9. Protection of designated agricultural and rural resource lands. This objective does not apply to the proposed annexation. The proposed annexation area is not designated agricultural land or rural resource land. D. The following comments relate to sec Section Council Request for Review 1. Total assessed value, and impacts upon comprehensive plans, transportation systems, utility plans. a. The proposed Schmakeit annexation is approximately 49.6 acres with seven residences, estimated population of 17 people, and an assessed valuation of $869,800, according to the NOi. The proposed Schmakeit annexation is located at the east edge of the city, east of 68th Avenue NW and north of Jensen Road. The proposed annexation area is adjacent to the city to the south and west. The proposed annexation area is designated Urban Low Density Residential on the county future land use map, and zoned R-9,600. The city proposes a comprehensive plan designation and zoning of Traditional Neighborhood. The Traditional Neighborhood zone allows residential developments that incorporate a mix of residential types and land uses compatible with a traditional residential neighborhood, and is expected to yield slightly higher residential density (13-15 dwelling units per acre) than would be allowed under the county designation and zoning. b. There are no SWM facilities in the annexation area and no planned SWM projects. There are no known county drainage facility easements. Following annexation, SWM revenues from the proposed annexation area would decrease from $3,013 annually to $412 annually for bond debt service charge until 2021, when bond debt is anticipated to be retired. No impact is expected to SWM monitoring and other programs. c. Snohomish County Public Works estimated that there would be no impact for other Public Works revenues and services, and had no issues with the annexation. 2. Law enforcement, courts, parks, county budget, and community comments. a. According to the NOi, the Snohomish County Sheriff's Office has a contract with the City of Stanwood to provide law enforcement and corrections services. Therefore the Page 8 of 12

13 Sheriff's Office would serve the proposed annexation area by contract following annexation. b. The Enhanced 911 Office reviewed the proposed annexation and did not have any issues with it. c. Snohomish County Parks reviewed the annexation and found that it would not have any significant impacts for county parks services. Based on the development capacity under county designation and zoning, it is estimated that a combined total of approximately $32,500 in park impact fees, which would be collected as one-time fees at the time building permits were issued, will not be collected by the county because of the proposed annexation. There will, however, be a corresponding reduction in population for which the county will not have responsibility to provide park amenities, based upon our adopted level-of-service, which results in cost savings. d. Snohomish County Finance responded that the annexation proposal would have minimal financial impact on the county budget. The annexation will have minimal impact to each of the following revenue sources: sales tax, real estate excise tax, permit fees, parks fees, grants, animal control, District Court fines, and emergency management. The annexation is expected to have minimal impact to county expenses as well. e. There were no comments from the community. CONCLUSIONS: Based on county review, PDS concludes that the subject annexation proposal is generally consistent with the applicable statutory provisions governing municipal annexations. The annexation proposal furthers the GMA goal and CPP policy that cities should be the primary providers of urban services. This conclusion has been reached by comprehensively reviewing the annexation against the applicable BRB factors and objectives, county codes, and other applicable statutes and determining, overall, that the relevant factors and objectives that the BRB must consider would be advanced by the annexation. The assessor maps for this area were recently revised, and as a result the UGA boundary along the north and east edges of the northern-most property in the proposed annexation area has become slightly offset from the parcel boundaries and proposed annexation boundary, as is visible in the map in Exhibit A. In particular, there is a small potential remnant portion of unincorporated urban area that is not included in the proposed annexation. The remnant portion would include only slivers of the parcels to the north. It would not create a logical service area for the city boundary to take in only a portion of each of those parcels, splitting those properties between jurisdictions. That would hinder objective 3 that the BRB considers, the creation of logical service areas. Instead, the PDS recommendation is to identify options for reconciling the UGA boundary as a separate future action. Page 9 of 12

14 The recommendation to the council from PDS is to not oppose the annexation and to not invoke the jurisdiction of the Boundary Review Board. Attachments: Exhibit A - Map of the Proposed Schmakeit Annexation Exhibit B - Map of the Vicinity of the Proposed Schmakeit Annexation cc: Ken Klein, Executive Director Tom Rowe, Special Projects Director Barb Mock, Director, PDS lkuno Masterson, Manager, PDS Jacqueline Reid, AICP, Supervisor, PDS Yorik Stevens-Wajda, Council Legislative Analyst Page 10 of 12

15

16

17 WASHINGTON STATE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD FOR SNOHOMISH COUNTY 3000 Rockefeller M/S #409 Everett, WA ( 425) ( 425) Fax PLEASE RETURN YOUR COMMENTS TO: Frank Slusser, PDS M/S #604 BY: March 31, 2017 TO: DATE: REPLY: March 17, 2017 YES FILE NO: BRB SUBJECT: City of Stanwood Schmakeit Annexation MESSAGE: Enclosed for your review and comment is the NOI for the City of Stanwood Schmakeit Annexation (BRB File No ). Please return your comments to Snohomish County's Planning and Development Services Department as noted above. Your comments must be received by March 31, 2017 The 45-day review period will expire on: May 2, Heidi Turner, Chief Clerk REPLY: Use additional pages if necessary.

18 Washington State Boundary Review Board for Snohomish County NOTICE OF INTENTION COVER SHEET 3000 Rockefeller, MIS #409 Everett, WA 9820 l As required by RCW 36.93, a Notice of Intention is hereby submitted for proposed annexation. Name of jurisdiction: City of Stanwood Name of proposal: Schmakeit Annexation Proceedings were initiated under authority ofrcw 35A By: (X) Petition Method: Identify which petition method you are using; i.e. 60% or double majority (owners ofa majority of the acreage/majority of the registered voters residing in the area). ( ) Election Method: number of qualified electors in area to be annexed or formed % of above figure represented by signers. Is assumption of existing indebtedness to be required? Yes Will simultaneous adoption of comprehensive plans be required? Yes Name each governmental unit having jurisdiction within the boundaries of the proposal: City of Stanwood Snohomish County North County Regional Fire Authority Sno Isle Ree;ional Library Stanwood School District The following other persons (attorneys, etc.) shall receive communication regarding proposal: Special purpose district means any sewer district, water district, fire protection district, drainage improvement district, drainage and diking improvement district, flood control zone district, irrigation district, metropolitan park district, drainage district, or public utility district engaged in water distribution. Signatures on petition 5 Residences in area 7 Population of area -17 Acreage Square miles sq miles Assessed valuation _$ , Topography~_F_Ia_t~~~~~~~~~-~~~ Current district boundaries and adjacent roads: 68th Avenue NW due west and Jensen Road due south; Proximity to other districts, cities, etc. Present Proposed Sewers Water Roads City of Stanwood City of Stanwood Snohomish County City of Stanwood City of Stanwood Citv of Stanwood Fire Dist. North County Regional Fire Authority North County Regional Fire Authority Police Contract - Snohomish County Sherriff Growth Potential Attachments: $50 Filing Fee Notice of Intention (with attachments) Perimeter legal (follow outside boundary) Contract - Snohomish County Sherriff 852 Assessor and Vicinity Maps Petition Resolution of Intent Petitioner (Spokesperson): Paul Schmakeit Initiator (District or Proponent): City of Stanwood Address: 456 Belvedere Pl, Coupeville, WA Representative Signature: ~ {'?[..7" Phone: Address/Phone: th t. NW, Stanwood, WA

19 City of Stanwood Community Development Department th St NW Stanwood, WA March 10, 2017 Brian Lambert, Vice Chair Washington State Boundary Review Board for Snohomish County 3000 Rockefeller Avenue, M/S #409 Everett, WA RE: Notice of Intention for Schmakeit Annexation Mr. Lambert: The City of Stanwood is seeking to annex acres area of land which abuts the City of Stanwood's municipal boundaries on the south and west. The proposed annexation area consist of six houses/several barns and outbuildings and contains seven parcels. A church also owns parcels within the annexation area. The Paul Schmakeit submitted the petition to annex and is the largest land. Please accept this Notice of Intention and all attachments, as well as the $50.00 filing fee. Sincerely, CITY OF STANWOOD "/~ At (,.~ Ryan C. Larsen, Director Community Development

20 CITY OF STANWOOD Washington State Boundary Review Board Notice of Intent Schmakeit Annexation (City File No ) Basic Information 1. The proposal known as the Schmakeit Annexation is located at the north of Jensen Road, east of 68th Avenue NW (Cedarhome Road), and south of approximately 287th Place NW alignment. The proposed annexation consists of seven parcels of land and five owners. Stanwood has completed the annexation as follows: i. The City received a petition (Notice of Intent) for Annexation from the Paul Schmakeit on April 27, 2016 to annex seven parcels of approximately acres into the City of Stanwood. ii. The proposed annexation area is located in unincorporated Snohomish County. iii. The Washington State Growth Management Act provides for annexation within established Urban Growth Boundaries. The proposed annexation area is within the Urban Growth Boundary and is adjacent to the City limits. iv. The City Council held the required meeting on June 9, 2016, to meet the Notice of Intent to authorize the applicant to circulate a 60% petition. v. The applicant submitted the signed 60% petition to the City of vi. Stanwood on November 23, The Petition was sent to Snohomish County Assessor's for certification of sufficiency and was certified on December 7, vii. City of Stanwood published and held a public hearing on the 60% petition on February 23, 2017 to take testimony for or against the proposed annexation. The property was posted and notice was published in the Stanwood/Camano News, as well as posted in three additional locations (City Hall, Library, and Post Office) and on the City website. No public comment was received. viii. An ordinance will need to be approved accepting the new territory into the City limits. The City has pre-designated the properties ( , , I , , , and ) Traditional Neighborhood (TN) on the Future Land Use Map and zoning map. Upon annexation, these designations will be applied to the property. Page 1 of7

21 ix. The City Council has declared, "upon annexation, the property described in Exhibit A shall be subject to the City of Stanwood Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations as adopted. Also, upon annexation of the property described in Exhibit A, the Zoning and Comprehensive Plan designation of Traditional Neighborhood (TN) shall apply to said property" 2. The Schmakeit Annexation has been certified by Snohomish County Assessor's office. 3. Pursuant to RCW C.222 the Schmakeit Annexation is exempt from SEPA review. 4. The legal description has been verified by Snohomish County. I. NOTICE OF INTENTION COVER SHEET 1. Attached as cover. II. BACKGROUND/MAPS 1. Brief description of and reason for seeking proposed annexation. Attached as Exhibit A 2. Legal Description. Attached as Exhibit B. 3. Copies of all maps are exhibits to this report as follows: i. Parcel map is attached as Exhibit C 1. ii. Vicinity map is attached as Exhibit C2. iii. Annexation boundar1 map is attached as Exhibit C3. iv. Schmakeit annexation water service are is attached as Exhibit C4 v. Schmakeit annexation water service area close-up attached as Exhibit C4a. vi. Schmakeit annexation sewer service area is attached as Exhibit C5. vii. Schmakeit annexation sewer service area close-up attached as Exhibit C5a. viii. Schmakeit annexation Future Land Use Map attached as Exhibit C6. ix. Schmakeit annexation Zoning map attached as Exhibit C7. 4. A signed and certified copy of the resolution accepting the proposal as officially passed. i. Resolution accepting the 10% petition is attached as Exhibit D1 Page2 of7

22 ii. Resolutions accepting the 60% petition is attached as Exhibit D2. iii. Affidavit of mailing for 60% petition public hearing is attached as Exhibit 03. iv. Affidavit of posting City Hall, USPS, and Library for the 60% petition public hearing is attached as Exhibit D3ai. v. Affidavit of posting the property for the 60% petition public hearing is attached as Exhibit D3aii. vi. Affidavit of publication for the 60% petition public hearing is attached as Exhibit D4. vii. Certified copy of minutes from public hearing is attached as Exhibit D5. Ill. PETITION/CERTIFICATION 1. Signed 60% petition for the Schmakeit Annexation attached as Exhibit E. 2. Certification of Sufficiency from Snohomish County attached as Exhibit F IV. ENVIRONMENTAL 1. SEPA review is attached as Exhibit G. V. FACTORS THE BOARD MUST CONSIDER 2. Overview A. Population of proposal. There are seven parcels which are all occupied with a structure. Population approximately 17 (zero). B. Territory (number of acres). Territory includes acres and contains a seven parcels C. Population Density. Population density of annexation area is 2.92 person per acre. D. Assessed valuation. The total assessed valuation of the annexation area is $86~, Land Use A. Existing. The existing land use consists of seven parcels. County zoning for the site is R-9600 and Comprehensive Plan Designation and Comprehensive Plan Designation is Urban Low Density Residential (ULDR). Page3 of7

23 B. Proposed Upon annexation the proposed Zoning and Comprehensive Plan designation is Traditional Neighborhood (TN). 4. Comprehensive Plan A B. 5. A Snohomish County Comprehensive Plan 1. Polices relating to annexation supporting this proposal is: lnterjurisdictional Coordination Objective 1. B - Work with cities and towns to provide for the orderly transition of unincorporated to incorporated areas within the UGAs. 2. The 2035 Comprehensive Plan governs this proposal. 3. The adopted plan classification is Urban Low Density Residential (ULDR) and an implementing zoning designation of R-9600 all seven parcels. 4. The City of Stanwood's stormwater plan is similar to the County's plan and the Snohomish County Agricultural Plan is not applicable to this proposal. Stanwood's Comprehensive Plan 1. The proposal is in the adopted City of Stanwood Comprehensive Plan. 2. Stanwood's comprehensive plan was adopted June This proposed annexation did not require a pre-annexation agreement. 4. Comprehensive Plan designation the annexation area is Traditional Neighborhood and Traditional Neighborhood and implementing zoning is Traditional Neighborhood (TN) and Traditional Neighborhood (TN). Planning Data Revenue/Estimates 1. City will not incur any additional cost for Fire/EMS service to this area. The proposed annexation area will be utilized as a regional park. 2. The City will gain the property tax revenues and any building permit fees as well as any land use related fees. 3. The County would lose property tax revenues and any building permit fees as well as any land use related fees. 4. There is no known expenditure reduction for the County. 5. The North County Regional Fire Authority will not lose any revenues associated with this annexation since the city utilizes the Authority for Fire/EMS services Page 4 of7

24 6. The North County Regional Fire Authority will not reduce any expense associated with this annexation since the city contracts with the Authority for Fire/EMS Services. 7. There will be no special district revenues loss, reduced or gained since this annexation area does not affect any. 8. There will be no special district revenues loss, reduced or gained since this annexation area does not affect any. 8. Services 1. Law Enforcement a. City of Stanwood contracts Police protection through Snohomish County Sheriffs Office. b. Response time is 3 to 8 minutes and service is provided 24ll/365. c. Snohomish County Sheriffs utilize SNOCOM 911 Center for all 911-dispacthed calls. d. No additional officers or units will result of this proposal. 2. Fire/EMS Service a. City of Stanwood Fire/EMS service is provided by the North County Regional Fire Authority and is fully staffed at all times. b. Nearest station is approximately 1.2 miles. c. SNOCOM provides dispatch services. d. Response time is approximately 7 to 8 minutes for fire and basic life support and advanced life support incidents. 3. Water a. City of Stanwood provides water service to this area. Existing waterlines are in the area and would need to be extended by a developer to the site if required. b. The City is supplied by wells and the water is treated within the city's water treatment plant. 4. Sewer a. City of Stanwood provides sewer service to this area. Existing sewerlines are in the area and would need to be extended by a developer to the site. b. The proposed annexation area would be served by gravity line. c. The wastewater treatment plant is at 50% capacity Ill. GENERAL 6. No annexation agreement required for this project. Page 5 of7

25 lnterlocal agreement between City of Stanwood and North County Regional Fire Authority. o lnterlocal agreement between City of Stanwood and Snohomish County Sheriff's Office. 7. The site is relatively flat. The proposed annexation area lies outside the floodplain units will be allowed at this location under the proposed zoning. We expect the area to be fully built out. 9. General governmental services such as planning and zoning, building inspection and administration will be provided by the City of Stanwood. Electricity is provided by Snohomish County PUD and Natural gas provided by Cascade Natural Gas. 10. No delay is expected in implementing service to this area. 11. Needs and cost generally increase overtime. City of Stanwood has adequate funding and reserves to provide city services to the proposed annexation area. The City is always looking for opportunities such as grants to assist in providing facilities and services to the City levy rates for property taxes are $10.22 in the City of Stanwood and an average $10.57 in unincorporated Snohomish County surrounding Stanwood. VII. OBJECTIVES This proposal meets the objectives of RCW in the following ways. (1) Preservation of natural neighborhoods and communities; The annexation shares its western and southern boundaries with the City of Stanwood. The annexation area consists of six houses/several barns and outbuildings and one church. (2) Use of physical boundaries, including but not limited to bodies of water, highways, and land contours; The annexation area abuts the city limits along southern and western boundaries. The site is relatively flat. (3) Creation and preservation of logical service areas; All of the utility service providers including Fire/EMS and Police service will remain the same after annexation. (4) Prevention of abnormally irregular boundaries; The proposed annexation will not create any irregular boundaries. The annexation will create a more logical city limits along this portion of the City limits. The annexation will also finish off the last remaining parcels to be annexed along the city's northeastern boundary. Page 6 of7

26 (5) Discouragement of multiple incorporations of small cities and encouragement of incorporation of cities in excess of ten thousand population in heavily populated urban areas; Not applicable. (6) Dissolution of inactive special purpose districts; There are no known inactive special purpose districts in the proposed annexation area. (7) Adjustment of impractical boundaries; The annexation will create a more logical city limits along this portion of the City limits. (8) Incorporation as cities or towns or annexation to cities or towns of unincorporated areas which are urban in character; and The proposed annexation currently consists of a six house and several barns and outbuildings. The annexation area abuts an urban area of the City. (9) Protection of agricultural and rural lands which are designated for long term productive agricultural and resource use by a comprehensive plan adopted by the county legislative authority. Proposed annexation does not impact agricultural or rural lands. VIII. FILING FEE 1. Filing fee of $50.00 is attached. Page 7 of7

27 EXHIBIT A Brief description of and reason for seeking proposed action.

28 EXHIBIT A Brief description of and reason for seeking proposed action. The City received a requested from Paul Schmakeit to annex acres into the City on April 27, The City Council on June 9, 2016 received the 10% by the proponent and approved circulation of the 60% petition. The applicant submitted the 60% petition to the City in November of Once received staff sent the petition to the Snohomish County Auditor to certify the petition. Snohomish County Auditor certified the petition on December 7, Stanwood City Council held a public hearing on February 23, 2017 accepting the 60% petition and directed staff to submit the annexation to the Boundary Review Board. The property is generally located at the north of Jensen Road, east of 68th Avenue NW (Cedarhome Road), and south of approximately 287th Place NW alignment. The proposed annexation consists of seven parcels of land and five of owners. The annexation consists of five parcels totaling acres. The City has pre-designated the properties ( , , , , , , and ) Traditional Neighborhood {TN) on the Future Land Use Map and is designated Traditional Neighborhood (TN) on our zoning map. Upon annexation, these designations will be applied to the properties. The reason for the annexation is to bring this area of the Urban Growth Area into the City limits.

29 EXHIBIT B Certified Legal Description of the area proposed for annexation

30 EXHIBIT B ANNEXATION 1HOSE PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 17 AND 20, TOWNSHJP 32 NOR1H, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE QUARTER SEC'J10N CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 17 AND 20; THENCE NOR1H 87 53'42" EAST ALONG THE NORTIILINE OF SAID SECTION 20, A DISTANCE OF 30 FEET TO 1HE EAST MARGIN OF 68TH A VENUE NW AND THE EAST LINE OF 1HE CITY OF STANWOOD PER ORDINANCE NO AND 1HE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTII 01 26' 17" EAST PARALLEL WITII TIIE WEST LINE OF 1HE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 17 ALONG SAID EAST MARGIN AND SAID EAST LINE OF ORDINANCE NO. 1166, A DISTANCE OF 990 FEET; THENCE NORTII 87 53'42" EAST, PARALLEL WI1H 1HE NOR1H LINE OF SECTION 20 A DISTANCE OF FEET, MORE OR LESS TO TIIE WEST LINE OF THE EAST FEET OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF 1HE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 17; THENCE SOUTH 01 28'21" WEST, AJ,ONG SAID WEST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 960 FEET MORE OR LESS TO 1HE NOR1H LINE OF TIIB sourn 30 FEET OF SAID SECTION 17 AND THE NORTH MARGIN OF VILLAGE ROAD; THENCE NORTH 87 53'42" EAST ALONG SAID LINE, A DISTANCE OF FEET, MORE OR LESS TO A POINT THAT IS 30 FEET NORTH AND 1,650 FEET EAST OF 1HE SOU1HWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 17; THENCE SOUTH 0 37'49" WEST, PARALLEL WI1H TIIB WEST LINE OF THE NOR1HEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 20 A DISTANCE OF 30 FEET TO A POINT ON TIIE NOR1H LINE OF SAID SECTION, LYING 1650 FEET EASTERLY OF THE NOR1HWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 0 3'/'49" WEST, A DISTANCE OF FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN OF JENSEN ROAD; THENCE SOU1HWEST, PERPENDICULAR TO JENSEN ROAD, A DISTANCE OF 60 FEET TO 1HE SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN OF JENSEN ROAD; THENCE NOR1HWESTERL Y ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN TO THE EAST LINE OF THE NOR1HWEST QUARTER OF 1HE NOR1HEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 20 AND THE EAST LINE OF ORDINANCE 1166; THENCE NOR1H 0 51 '44" EAST, ALONG SAID EAST LINE, TO TIIE NOR1H MARGIN OF JENSEN ROAD; THENCE WES1ERL Y ALONG SAID NOR1H MARGIN AND 1HE CITY OF STANWOOD ORDJNANCE 1166 TO A POINT THAT IS 990 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF 1HE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 20 AND Tiffi EAST LINE OF ORDJNANCE NUMBER 1422 TO 1HE CITY OF STANWOOD; THENCE NORTH, PARALLEL WITH TIIE \VEST LINE OF TIIE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 20 AND TIIE EAST LINE OF SAID ORDINANCE NUMBER 1422, A DISTANCE OF FEET; THENCE WEST, PARALLEL WITH 1HE NORTH LINE OF 1HE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 20 AND 1HE NORTH LINE OF SAID ORDJNANCE NUMBER 1422 TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 30 FEET OF THE NOR1HEAST QUARIBR OF SAID SECTION 20 AND 1HE EAST LINE OF ORDINANCE 1166, AND TIIE EAST MARGJN OF 68rn A VE NW; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID LINE, A DISTANCE OF FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. IT IS Tiffi JNTENT OF THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION TO FOLLOW 1HE EXISTING CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF STANWOOD. REFERENCES HEREIN ARE MEANT TO CONVEY THAT AL1HOUGH PRESENT RIGHI'S OF WAY BOUNDARIES MAY BE DIFFERENT, THE RIGHTS OF WAY BOUNDARIES AT THE TIME OF 1HE ORIGINAL INCORPORATION AND SUBSEQUENTLY ADOPTED ORDINANCES ARE INTENDED TO BE FOLLOWED SO THAT NO GAP OR OVERLAP EXISTS BETWEEN IBIS ANNEXATION AND Tiffi EXISTING CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF STANWOOD.

31 I ~I m~ ;~I ~?01. uul \ ~I -1>:rri' "'----.:: ' l {440.22') N0'37'49"E..._..... z 68TH AVE. N.W. N1'08'Jo E ' (990') ;tq I,-1 ~~ ~ \ ' l't1 '. TO Al SITE AREA 2,162,521 s.f. ( ACRES) (INCL.,UDING ROADS) ~ 1 ', ' llli) m N1 2a 21 ~E.,, 1 z! 0 Q) ""! f...,,,.... 1)3 0 i ~ ~~ ~ I -~ - ~..,...,..., j -! :i I 1202,48' 5' 0 =r II U) ~ ~ tr:1 '.Z 0 vj_ c;., 1_ q; l r (,I Ol (0 0 0, z 0 q ~ - ~ "" rr{ r N ~ p en -l>- V) u, q a q (.,I -.J. ITI!::::: C :, (D "II=, Ol p!;' r :, ' ;; w -I z I» u C" 0: 0 =, ii 0 (D q :t :, l"i ()., C (') (') u g N < (l) ~ N 0 -l>- (1) 0 ~ :::, C Ol N lo Ol ~ 0,,... ::y N ~ ' i ~ :;o -I - m 0 --.J en 0!=> 0 ~ a. C" 0 0 Ol c (I) 0 a 03 en N _.. Ol ~...: (Jl 0 u ) c.,; 52. _...r: r+ 00 N a C,.i. JOB NO.: DATE: 9/12/2016 DWN. BY: LAF PORT'N SW1/4, SE1/4 SEC & N1/2, NE1/4 SEC SKETCH FOR: CASCADE SURVEYING AND ENGINEERING, Inc. P.O. BOX 326 ARLINGTON, WA V: \21037\DWG\21037-EXHIBIT.DWG (EXHIBIT) (360)

32 EXHIBIT C MAPS 1. Map showing the proposed area for annexation Size in acres 2. Vicinity Map of Annexation Area 3. City Limits and Urban Growth Boundary 4. Water Service Area Map ai. Waterline map of Annexation area/ North Half aii. Waterline map of Annexation area I South Half 5. Sewer Service Area Map a. Sewerline map of Annexation area 6. Comprehensive Plan Map 7. Zoning Map

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43 EXHIBIT D 1. Certified Copy of Resolution for 10% Petition 2. Certified Copy of Resolution for 60% Petition 3. Affidavit of Mailing a.i. Affidavit of Posting - Library, City Hall, Post Office a. ii. Affidavit of Posting - Site 4. Affidavit of Publication 5. Certified Copy of Minutes from Public Hearing

44 EXHIBIT 01 CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION follows: I, the undersigned, City Clerk of the City of Stanwood, Washington (the "City"), hereby certify as 1. The foregoing Resolution entitle as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF STANWOOD, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON RELATING TO THE RECEIPT OF A NOTICE OF INTENT TO ANNEX CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY KNOW AS THE SCHMAKEIT ANNEXATION, AND AUTHORIZING THE CIRCULATION OF A 60% ANNEXATION PETITION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS." was approved by City Council and signed by the Mayor on June 9, 2016 at a regular Council meeting. 2. A quorum of the Council was present throughout the meeting and a sufficient number of members of the Council voted in the proper manner for the passage of the resolution. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this gth day of March CITY OF STANWOOD, WASHINGTON ~cfj;c-... ~. K~is1a Hintz, Administrative Assistant

45 CITY OF STANWOOD Stanwood, Washington RESOLUTION 2016w14 A RESOLUT[ON OF THE CITY OF STANWOOD, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO THE RECEIPT OF A NOTICE OF INTENT TO ANNEX CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE SCHMAKEIT ANNEXATION AND AUTHORIZING THE CIRCULATION OF A 60% ANNEXATION PETITION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. WHEREAS, the City of Stanwood has received a 10 percent petition and Notice of Intent for an annexation meeting the requirements of RCW ; and WHEREAS, the City of Stanwood desires to work with property owners adjacent to the City of Stanwood in unincorporated Snohomish County and within the established Urban Growth Area of the City to become part of the City of Stanwood; and and WHEREAS, the proposed annexation area contains approximately acres; WHEREAS, the area proposed for annexation is within the Urban Growth Area established by Snohomish County under the State Growth Management Act; and WHEREAS, Snohomish County tax records available through the Assessor's Office reflect that five of the seven parcel owners have signed said petition, including Paul G. Schmakeit the applicant, in the proposed annexation area, which contains a total assessed value of $693,600 representing more than 10% percent of the assessed value in the annexation area, and WHEREAS, having received Paul G. Sch!'llakeit's written notification of intent to annex that satisfies the ten percent assessed value threshold, the City Council reviewed the matter for consideration at its reguiar public meeting on june 9, 2016, and WHEREAS, within sixty days of receiving a written notification of intent to commence annexation proceedings from tlie property owner or owners holding assessed valuation to make such request, the City Council has considered the matter at a public meeting, at which time the City Council may accept, reject, or geographically modify the proposed annexation; determine if the City will require the simultaneous adoption of proposed comprehensive plan and zoning regulations; and determine whether the City will require the assumption of all or any portion of existing City indebtedness by the area to be annexed; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STANWOOD AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Circulation of Annexation Petitions Approved. Under authority of Chapter RCW, the City Council of the City of Stanwood hereby approves the

46 written request of Paul G. Schm~keit. to circulate aq 13nnexaticm petition for an area of unincorporated s.nohomish County that is generally located at the north of Jensen Road, east of 68th Avenue NW (Cedarhome Road), arid south of approximately 2ath Place NW alignment, and is more specifically depicted on Exhibit "1," a copy ofwhi9h is atb=mhed heretq an<:{ incorporated by this reference. Section i~ Petitions to Require Ass~mptlon of Existing City ln.det,tedness. It is the intent of the Stanwood Gitt C.ouMcil that,. upon annexation~ all property within the proposed annexation ~rea shall be assessed and taxed at the same rate and on the same basis as o.ther property within th~ City of Stanwood including assessments.or taxes io payment,of a.ii or a.ny portion of the out~t?t.nding intjebtedness of the City cohtra cted 1 incurred prior to, or exlsting on the date of annexation. Accqrdingly, any annexation petition circulated un.der approval granted by this Res0Iutio11 shall be wri:tten to cl~arly indics1te this fact Section 3. Comprehensive.Pl.an and Zoning. The City of Stanwood will require the simultaneous implementation and adoption of the Cor()prehens.ivq Plan and zoning re.g LJ lations. PA:S$E0 AND APPROVED by th~ City Council of the City of Stanwood this 9th day.of June, :~i-st;?m Leonard Kelley, Mayof ATIEST: AP P. ROVED AS TO Fr;= B~t:.. ftj.ke Grarit K. Weed, City Attorney

47 . Area to be Annexed J,.. -..,...,,.. EXHIBIT 1

48 EXHIBIT D2 CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION follows: I, the undersigned, City Clerk of the City of Stanwood, Washington (the "City"), hereby certify as 1. The foregoing Resolution entitled as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF STANWOOD, WASHINGTON STATING ITS INTENTION TO ANNEX CERTAIN UNINCORPORATED AREA, KNOWN AS THE SCHMAKEIT ANNEXATION, INTO THE CITY, AND TRANSMITTING THE MATTER TO THE WASHINGTON STATE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD FOR SNOHOMISH COUNTY FOR APPROVAL" was approved by City Council and signed by the Mayor on February at a regular Council meeting. 2. A quorum of the Council was present throughout the meeting and a sufficient number of members of the Council voted in the proper manner for the passage of the resolution. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this gth day of March CITY OF STANWOOD, WASHINGTON

49 CITY OF STANWOOD Stanwood, Washington RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF STANWOOD, WASHINGTON SETTING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE SCHMAKEIT ANNEXATION FOR FEBRUARY 23, 2017, AND CAUSING NOTICE TO BE PUBLISHED IN A NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULUATION AND CAUSING NOTICE TO BE POSTED IN THREE PUBLIC PLACES WITHIN THE TERRITORY PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION. WHEREAS, the City Council on June 9, 2016 did consider a proponent's request to initiate annexation proceedings for territory known as the Schmakeit property; and WHEREAS, the City Council on that date did initiate the annexation and authorized the proponent's to circulate 60-percent petition; and WHEREAS, the proponent has submitted signed and completed 60-percent petition; and WHEREAS, the Snohomish County Auditor determined on December 7, 2016 that the petition is sufficient as required by RCW 35A ; and WHEREAS, the annexation may now be scheduled for public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STANWOOD, WASHINGTON, AS FOLLOWS: That the Schmakeit Annexation be scheduled for public hearing on February 23, 2017 and that notice of the hearing be published in a newspaper of general circulation and that notice shall also be posted in three public places within the territory proposed for annexation, and shall specify the time and place of hearing and invite interested persons to appear and voice approval or disapproval of the annexation. ADOPTED by the city council and APPROVED by the mayor this 26th day of January, 2017, ATTEST: By f}~~~ Wendy Dov.thowef, City Clerk 1),..,,4 A. t/.:trmt4q"'1.q_

50 ATTACHMENT B

51 EXHIBIT D3 City of Stanwood Community Development Department th Street NW Stanwood, WA {360) AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING State of Washington} County of Snohomish} I, Devin Tokizawa being first duly sworn on oath, depose and say: I am acting under the direction of the Community Development Director of the City of Stanwood. On the 30th day of January 2017 I did mail ANN Notice of Public Hearing for the proposal Schmakeit Annexation, consisting of seven parcels and annexing approximately acres generally located at the north of Jensen Road, east of 68th Avenue NW (Cedarhome Road), and south of approximately 287th Place NW alignment to properties within 300 feet of the proposed annexation. CITY OF STANWOOD Subscribed and sworn to before me this \3fu day of ~'\,,U.OU\\,\,a.Q~_J. \ Notary Public ID; ~d for ti;te State of \ Washington res1dmg at~ tuc::ocl My commission expires -~ 0 \ 20 P:\Affidavit Template.docx

52 CITY OF STANWOOD CITY COUNCIL NOTICE Ol, PUBLIC ~IBARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Stanwood City Council will hold a Public Hearing on Thursday, February 23, The Public Hearing-will begin at approximately 7:00 PM at the Stanwood/Camano School District Administration Building Board Room Pioneer Highway, Stanwood, WA The Public Hearing is io consider. APPLICATION FJLE #: ANN Schmakeit Annexation: The City is considering annexing approximately acres generally located at the north of Jensen Road, east of 68th A venue NW (Cedarhome Road), and south of approximately 287th Place NW alignment. The proposed annexation would only consist of a seven parcels Copies of all materials pertaining to these files may be examined at the Community Development Department at Stanwood City Hall, th St. NW, during nomial business hours (9am to 5pm Monday-Friday). Please contact x4509 with any questions.

53 , Set,n,akelt J)nrLfixh.~ ANN 2016-Q164 r----,, ~ 300ft Buffer D Annexation Area D Parcels_Sept2016 'i1 rn a ru 11 11!fl City Limits ma,::; "J II m 111 :.._ ~; Stanwood UGA N e-~q r~,,i}i Date: 1/25/2017 Author: D.Tokizawa

54 Clipp,ed Parcels for 300ft mailing ---~ OWNERNAME OWNERlJNEl OWNERCITY OWNERSTATE OWNERZIP EDDY THOMAS D TH ST NW S'l'ANWOOD WA BRAUN EDITH MRS 6204 JENSEN RD S'rANWOOD WA 98292, :, FELDER FRANK JR TH A VE NW. O'DAY.: MARILYN TH ST NW STEWART HOLLIE TH STREET NOEL NORTHWEST MALDONADO TH PL NW ISAAC RAY& ANDREA 'LORRAINE MITCHELL JUSTIN TH PL NW D&NICOLEC GRAVES JUSTIN M TH DR NW &GRAHAM CHRISTINE C KOEHLER DAVID C TH DR NW rniepark THAVE S KENT WA HOMEOWNERS.AssocIATION BOUNDS STEVE 8Q517 52NDAVE NW JERNIGA.1'1 JOSEPH TH ST NW L&TRACYK PATT JEFFREY M & ND PL NW YUMI SGHMAKEIT TH ST NW STANWOOD, WA ALFRED WESTERN WASH FEDERAL WAY WA SEVENTH;DAY WEYERHAEUSER ADVENTISTS WAYS WESTERN WASH FEDERAL WAY WA SEVENTH-DAY WEYERHAEUSER ADVENTISTS WAYS FREY CAROL JOAN TH ST NW & ROMANO BRIAN A BELLO-MEDINA TH ST NW JUANITO & FERMAN ELENA LAND SWAN JESSE V & TH ST NW SHARONG wilsonpaul TH A VE RAYMOND& NW CHRISTI:t-."E KNO\NLES TH A VE MICHAELG 'NW MCDUGLE THAVE DOUGLAS& NW BARBARA Page 1 ou

55 ' - ~ ~ ow:nernal\1.e OWNE~. :.ine 1 OWNERCITY OWNERS~.. L'E OWNERZIP DUPREE ROBERT & TH NW MARGARET EPLEY LEO w AYI\1'.E, 'I'HAVE' STANWOOD, wx 9S &JUDYL NW WHEELERED TH DR NW VANBELLE TH DR NW '>, COLLEENK ALLEN DOUGLAS TH DR NW ST.At'ffl"OOD WA M&MIWAKOA MCCOY STEPHEN TH DR NW W & ELIZABETH J MCHUGH TH DR NW DAL'v!ELLE & MICH4]!;L B~OOVER TH DR NW MCMACKIN CARLEENM RIEBE ROBERT R & TH DR NW SHARONJ a'yrumdavid K TH DR N'W GOLDSTEIN ADAM TH DR NW L&NYDAM MILLS MICHAEL L TH ST NW &PATRICIA WILSON JEFFERY TH DR NW D&TERlL I.P.lANTZ ROBERT & TH DR NW TAMARAM RABMANSARA TH DR NW AND'.EIIBON TH ST NW S'l'EVENP& PATRICIAM BOSWELL TH ST NW NICHOLAS/RACHE LD MJ]SIO DENNIS & TH A VE FILA_NUES NW GADBERRY SETH C ND PL NW & ENnA.t. ' m W i>otzauer cfiad A s2ND PL NW BORK BRIAN L & TH A VE MOYRAJ NW HAftRISON TH A VE MICHAELJ& NW JAMIEL YOUNG THOMAS G TH AVE NW BLACKBURN 3061 ARBOR ST MOUNT VERNON WA VIRGINIA/GOODE KRlSTAFERS MINNE ALBERT F CONCRETE CONCRETE WA SAUK VALLEY RD Page 2 of4

56 OWNERNAME OWNE.._...1.NEl OWNERCITY OWNERZIP VERHAAFF STSTNW D:Ji:NNIS & MfY C PJCKETTS RENEE p' & ROBERT W sisTSTNW STANWOOD WK 98292~4907 RHODES THAVE STANWOOD. WA CHRISTOPHER H & NW JENIFERS ROHWEDDE:R THAVE ALEXANER& NW CATHLEEN SAf..lDERS NICOLAI ST ST NW &KRISTINA WAR.NEtt DAVID R ST ST NW STA.."'IWOOD' WA & KATHERINE A HOLLIMAN KEITH ST ST NW SHER.RIDE ST ST NW DONALD GOODSON ST ST NW TIMOTHY LIPADON TARAS STANWOOD PIONEER SCHOOL DIST 401 HWY SCHJ\1AKEIT TH STREET STA.NvVOOD WA ALFRED NW SCHMAKEIT TH ST 'NW STAA'WOOD WA ALFRED SILL RICHARD A & 6308 JENSEN RD LANI RUDLOFF THAVE MICHAEL& NW JACKIE KLEIN JASON A & TH DR NW BRANDYM SPECK ANDREW M TH PL NW &MELISSAN FAT CAT TH ST NW ARLINGTON WA PROPERTIES LLC MOEN GARY OLD SNOHOMISH WA PIPELINE RD BROWN HARRISON TH DR NW H&Al.~AR ROBB DARREN M & TH DR NW KIMBERLYP MALONEY ND PL NW THOMASJ& KIMBERLYT HANSON MARKS & THAVE DANAL NW HUDSON S'l' ST NW JENNIFERR RHODES WILLIAM ST ST NW R&WILLOWB TARTE THOMAS A TH A VE NW CITY OF CITYHALL STANWOOD, WA Page 3 of 4

57 j ~- OWNERNAME STANWOOD OWN'Ei...J.NEl 0Wl\1ERCITY OWNERS ~.i'e OWNERZIP MILLNER COREY D TH ST NW STANWOOD WA &HEATHERM REYES JEROME JR THAVE STANWOOD WA & VERONICA NW CITY OF TH ST NW STANWOOD WA STANWOOD Page 4of4

58 EDDY THOMAS D TH ST NW BOUNDS STEVE ND AVE NW KNOWLES MICHAEL G TH AVE NW BRAUN EDITH MRS 6204JENSEN RD JERNIGAN JOSEPH L & TRACY K TH ST NW MCDUGLE DOUGLAS & BARBARA TH AVE NW FELDER FRANK JR TH AVE NW PATT JEFFREY M & YUMI ND PL NW STANWOOD WA98292 DUPREE ROBERT & MARGARET TH N W O'DAY MARILYN TH ST NW SCHMAKEIT ALFRED TH ST N W STANWOOD, WA EPLEY LEO WAYNE &JUDY L TH AVE NW STEWART HOLLIE NOEL TH STREET NORTHWEST WHEELER ED TH DR NW MALDONADO ISAAC RAY & ANDREA TH PL NW WESTERN WASH SEVENTH-DAY WEYERHAEUSER WAYS FEDERAL WAY WA VANBELLE COLLEEN K TH DR NW MITCHELL JUSTIN D & NICOLE C TH Pl NW FREY CAROL JOAN & ROMANO BRIAN A TH ST NW ALLEN DOUGLAS M & MIWAKO A TH DR NW GRAVES JUSTIN M & GRAHAM TH DR NW BELLO-MEDINA JUANITO & FERMAN TH ST NW MCCOY STEPHEN W & ELIZABETH J TH DR NW KOEHLER DAVID C TH DR NW SWAN JESSE V & SHARON G TH ST NW MCHUGH DANIELLE & MICHAEL TH DR NW KYLIE PARK HOMEOWNERS TH AVES KENT WA WILSON PAUL RAYMOND & CHRISTINE TH AVE NW BRANTHOOVER-MCMACKIN CARLEEN TH DR NW

59 RIEBE ROBERT R & SHARON I TH DR NW GADBERRY SETH C & EN DANG W ND PL NW RHODES CHRISTOPHER H & JENIFER N TH AVE NW BYRUM DAVID K TH DR NW DOTZAUER CHAD A ND PL NW ROHWEDDER ALEXANER & CATHLEEN TH AVE NW GOLDSTEIN ADAM L & NYDAM TH DR NW BORK BRIAN L & MOYRA J TH AVE NW SANDERS NICOLAI & KRISTINA ST ST NW MILLS MICHAEL L& PATRICIA TH ST NW HARRISON MICHAELJ &JAMIE L TH AVE NW WARNER DAVID R & KATHERINE A ST ST NW WILSON JEFFERY D & TERI L TH DR NW YOUNG THOMAS G TH AVE NW HOLLIMAN KEITH ST ST NW KRANTZ ROBERT & TAMARA M TH DR NW BLACKBURN VIR.GININGOODE 3001 ARBOR ST MOUNT VERNONWA SHERRID E DONALD ST ST NW RAHMAN SAKA TH DR NW GOODSON TIMOTHY L/PADON TARAS ST ST NW ANDERSON STEVEN P & PATRICIA M TH ST NW MINNE ALBERT F CONCRETE SAUK VALLEY RD CONCRETE WA STANWOOD SCHOOL DIST PIONEER HWY BOSWELL NICHOLAS/RACHEL D TH ST NW VERHAAFF DENNIS & AMY C ST ST NW SCHM'tiLFRED T JREET NW STANWO D A MUSIC DENNIS & FRANCES TH AVE NW PICKETTS RENEE C & ROBERT W ST ST NW SCHM~LFRED ST NW STANWOOD A SILL RICHARD A & LANI 6308 JENSEN RD

60 HUDSON JENNIFER R ST ST NW RUDLOFF MICHAEL & JACKIE TH AVE NW RHODES WILLIAM R & WILLOW B ST ST NW KLEIN JASON A & BRANDY M TH DR NW TARTE THOMAS A TH AVE NW SPECK ANDREW M & MELISSA N TH PL NW FAT CAT PROPERTIES LLC TH ST NW ARLINGTON WA MILLNER COREY D & HEATHER M TH ST NW MOEN GARY OLD PIPELINE RD SNOHOMISH WA REYES JEROME JR & VERONICA TH AVE NW BROWN HARRISON H & ANNA R TH DR NW ROBB DARREN M & KIMBERLY P TH DR NW MALONEY THOMAS J & KIMBERLY T ND PL NW HANSON MARKS & DANA L TH AVE NW

61 EXHIBIT D3ai City of Stanwood Community Development Department th Street NW Stanwood, VfA {360) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING State of Washington} County of Snohomish} I, Trace Justice being first duly sworn on oath, depose and say: I am acting under the direction of the Community Development Director of the City of Stanwood. On the 30th day of January 2017 I did post ANN Notice of Public Hearing for the proposal Schmakeit Annexation, consisting of seven parcels and annexing approximately acres generally located at the north of Jensen Road, east of 68th Avenue NW (Cedarhome Road), and south of approximately 287th Place NW alignment at the site of the proposed annexation. CITY OF S'fA1"'4WOOD. '7 SubJgribed and sworn to before me this \~ day of -\e.;ti\jj('m'1, 2DlJ Notary Public in and for the State of Washington residing at ~t.l"ood My commission expires d~ Docum~ntl

62 CITY OF STANWOOD CITY COUNCJL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEAR!l\TG NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Stanwood City Council will hold a Public Hearing on Thursday, February 23, The Public Hearing will begin at approximately 7 :00 PM at the Stanwood/Camano School District Administration Building Board Ro.om Pioneer Highway, Stanwood, WA The Public Hearing is to consider: APPLICATION FILE#: ANN Scbmakeit Annexation: The City is considering annexing approximately acres generally located at the north of Jensen Road, east of 68th Avenue NW (Ceda:rhome Road), and south of approximately 287th Place NW alignment The proposed annexation would only consist of a seven parcels Copies of all materials pertaining to these files may be examined at the Community Development Department at Stanwood City Hall, a, St. NW, during nonnal business hours (9am to 5pm Monday-Friday). Please contact x4509 with any questions.

63 EXHIBIT D3aii City of Stanwood Community Development Department th Street NW Stanwood, WA (360) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING State of Washington} County of Snohomish} I, Ryan Larsen being first duly sworn on oath, depose and say: On the 30th day of January 2017 I did post ANN Notice of Public Hearing for the proposal Schm.akeit Annexation, consisting of seven parcels and annexing approximately acres generally located at the north of Jensen Road, east of 68th Avenue NW (Cedarhome Road), and south of approximately 287th Place NW alignment at the Stanwood Library, Stanwood United States Postal Office and Stanwood City Hall. CITY OF STANWOOD. /;, I 'i Sub~bed and sworn to before me this \3 - day of~--- 4D ~J. ~is~ Notary Public in and for the State of l Washington residing at~ci My commission expires~ :..,,,uu1iu 1,,,,,. --~ 11,...,.. ~'"'oar ~ - -~ ""~ ~-... ~... ~. ~. ~. ~.,.. ' ~,, '!$\~a J schaz,,,, :: : NOTARY PU8LIC.. 0::- :f......!i. -:. :. - COMM. EXPIRES e - =... : _.. :_ :. - \... ~ '):.. ~..: /. :~ ~- -~.J ~- ';;. FEfUtli 2020 : -,,,,.i ~ OF< was#-,,,, ~ c$'):. ~... ~O',.~.,., "fh (),,:;.,,,,,,, 111,unt\\\\ C:\Uoers\devin t\desktop\affidavit Schmakeit Annex post!ng_rl.doc..,r

64 CITY OF STANWOOD CITY COUNCIL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HE~G NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Stanwood City Council will hold a Public Hearing on Thursday, February 23, The Public Hearing will begin at approximately 7 :00 PM at the Stanwood/Camano School District Administration Building Board Room Pioneer Highway, Stanwood, WA The Public Hearing is to consider: APPLICATION FILE#: ANN Schmakeit Annexation: The City is considering annexing approximately acres generally located at the north of Jensen Road, east of 68th A venue NW (Cedarhome Road), and south of approximately 287th Place NW alignment. The proposed annexation would only consist of a seven parcels Copies of all materials pertaining to these files may be examined at the Community Development Department at Stanwood City Hall, ffl St. NW, during normal business hours (9am to 5pmMonday-Friday). Please contact x4509 with any questions.

65 EXHIBIT D4 In the Matter of IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION CITY OF STANWOOD STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ss. SHARON D BARTLEIT. being first duly sworn. on oath deposes and says that she is a clerk at the STANWOOD/CAMANO NEWS, a weekly newspaper. That said newspaper Is. a legal newspaper of general circulation and it is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a weekly newspaper in stanwood, Snohomish County, Washington, and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper. That the said STANWOODiCAMANO NE"v'vS was on the 16ih day of june 1941, approved as a legal newspaper by the Superior Court of said Snohomish County. That the annexed is a true copy of NO TICE OF APPLICATION FILE#: ANN Schmakeit, as it was published in the regular issue (and not in supplement formj of said weekly newspaper commencing and ending on the fil_ day of JANUARY and that said newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee $64.88 rate of 8.65 per column inch for each insertion. =---4hA-w1?C~~,j:3~Lu{ Subscribed and sworn to before me this g day of JANUARY /) /J /) ~ ~ a,.;lav e,:/1~ ~ Notary Public in and for the State of Washington.

66 EXHIBIT 05 CERTIFICATION I, the undersigned, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Stanwood, Washington (the "City"), hereby certify as follows: 1. The foregoing Council meeting minutes of the Annexation Public Hearing held on February 23, 2019 are a full, true and correct copy of the minutes duly passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City (the "Council"} held at the regular meeting place thereof on March 9, 2017, as that minutes appears in the minute book of the City; and 2. A quorum of the Council was present throughout the meeting and a sufficient number of members of the Council voted in the proper manner for the passage of the minutes. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 10th day of March, CITY OF STANWOOD, WASHINGTON r.,/,, I. ~~f-u Krista Hintz, Administrative Assistant

67 ATTACHMENT A CITY OF STANWOOD Regular Meeting of City Council Thursday, February 23, :00 p.m. Stanwood Camano School District Administration Board Room MINUTES 1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance Mayor Kelley called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. 2. Roll Call Administrative Assistant Krista Hintz called the roll with the following Councilrnembers present: Arne Wennerberg, Elizabeth Callaghan, Tim Pearce, Larry Sather, Conrad Ryer, and Dottie Gorsuch. Also present: City Administrator Deborah Knight, Community Development Director Ryan Larsen, Finance Director David Hammond, Public Works Director Kevin Hushagen, Fire Chief John Cermak, Police Chief Norm Link, City Attorney Emily Gui!dner, and Administrative Assistant Krista Hintz. Motion by Councilmember Sather~ second by Councilmember Wennerberg to excuse Councilmember Johnson. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Staff Reports a. Community Development Report-January 2017 b. Public Works Monthly Report-January 2017 c. Police Compstat Report-January 2017 d. Finance-Impact Fee Report 4. Committee Reports a. Public Works Committee b. Community Development

68 5. Citizen Comments Cathy Wooten th Avenue NW, Stanwood, Washington Ms. Wooten would like to address the City's comprehensive Land Use Goals and Policies Plan. This determines the character of the city and the types of deve!opm~nt that we will allow and encourage in our city. Cities such as Shoreline and Marysville are dealing with overwhelming and rapid growth. Caught unaware, were not prepared or proactive. Speaker from Master Builders Association spoke at last Planning Commission meeting. He said within two years all buildable land in south Snohomish County will be used up and growth will come to Stanwood. Speaker also said developers are looking for four units per acre but would prefer six. Ms. Wooten believes the City, not builders, should determine the size of the lots. Ms. Wooten is concerned about how incoming growth will affect the town, hoping we will be proactive and preventative in our planning to decide in advance the type and size developments we want, size lots we want in those developments, how wide streets will be to allow for emergency vehicles. Ms. Wooten would appreciate Council ensuring the comprehensive plan is known and followed to keep Stanwood a place to raise children, work, live and be happy. 6. Approval of the Agenda Motion by Councilmember Sather, second by Councilmember Callaghan, to approve the agenda. No discussion. Motion carried unanimously. 7. Presentation State Auditors pres.ent Exit Conference for City of Stanwood and Transportation Benefit District as presented by: Kelly Con kit, Standing in for Assistant Audit Manager Amanda Robbins who is not present, and Lingyun Zhou, Lead Auditor. Ling presented her findings for City of Stanwood: Accountability Audit for Fiscal Year 2014 and 2015, and Financial Statement Audit for Fiscal Year Transportation Benefit District: Accountability Audit for Fiscal Year 2014 and 2015.

69 8. Consent Agenda a. Approve February 2, 2017 City Council Special Meeting Minutes b. Approve February 9, 2017 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes c. Approve Vouchers Motion by Councilmember Sather, second by Councilmember Callaghan, to approve the consent agenda items a through c. No Discussion. Motion carried unanimously. 9. Public Hearing d. Community Development Director Ryan Laresen presented Resolution Intent to Annex and Authorization to Forward Boundary Review Board-Schmakeit Annexation. Proposed land is acres in seven (7} separate parcels. Applicant has submitted a sufficient 60% petition that has been verified by Snohomish County Auditors at slightly over 64% of signatures needed to move annexation forward. If Council decides to approve the annexation, the next step is for staff to complete analysis and submit to Boundary Review Board on March 10, Approved Minutes from the Public Hearing will be submitted to the Boundary Review Board as well. Typical financial impact with annexation include water, sewer, staff needs for Fire and Police, and general city staff. City gets benefit of property tax once it is located inside city limits. Looking for Council approval on Resolution which will allow staff to submit to BRB. Process takes about 45 days for Boundary Review Board to review. Looking at approval in April. Come back to Council in May. There are members of the family, as well as, the consultant present. Mayor opened floor to discussion. No public comment. Public Hearing closed. Motion by Councilmember Sather, second by Councilmember Pearce, to authorize the Mayor to sign Resolution and allow staff to submit to the Snohomish County Boundary Review Board for review and consideration of the 60% annexation for the Schmakeit Annexation.

70 10. New Business a. City Administrator Deborah Knight presented request ta approve lnterlocal Agreement and have Mayor Sign Quit Claim Deed on 3020 Rucker Ave, Everett, known as the Rucker Building. Owners looking to sell. Need every city that participate in purchase to sign Quit Claim Deed. Motion by Counci!member Sather, Second by Councilmember Callaghan, to approve amendment to /LA and Approve Quit Claim Deed with Snohomish Health Dfstrict. No Discussion. Motion carried unanimously. b. City Administrator Deborah Knight presented proposal to authorize the Mayor to confirm Salary Commission Appointments-Edythe Garvey and Yvonne Washburn Motion by Councilmember Sather, second by Councilmember Ryer, to authorize the Mayor to approve Salary Commission Appointments for Edythe Garvey and Yvonne Washburn. No Discussion. Motion carried unanimously. c. Finance Director David Hammond presented Labor Agreement with Teamsters Local 231 Representing Administrative Employees. Three year term, Administrative Employees will move to Teamsters Health Insurance terminating the Dual Insurance Incentive. Motion by Council member Sather, Second by Councifmember Ryer to sign Labor Agreement with Teamsters Local 231 Representing Administrative Employees. No discussion. Motion carried unanimously. d. Finance Director David Hammond presenting proposal on Umpqua Banking Agreement Extension with same terms for one more year. No fiscal impact. Motion by Councifmember Sather, second by Councifmember Wennerberg to authorize the Mayor to sign the one year extension agreement with Umpqua Bank. No discussion. Motion passed unanimously. 11. Discussion a. Community Development Director Ryan Larsen presented Code Edits to Sign Code, Traditional Neighborhood {TN) zone and miscellaneous edits

71 Sign Code modified to replicate model ordinance to meet Unites States Standards. Edits to Temporary Sign Codes, wind requirements, offsite premise signage, A-board signs. Traditional Neighborhood Code, Clarified Planning Commission only role is preapplication m_eeting. Construction plan approval instead of site plans. Eliminated section stating parcels under 10 acres were not sub dividable. Permitted Uses-Public Facilities to be built without having to build housing. Option A: Planning Commission Preference Minimum of 15% of one type of housing. Cottage housing considered separate housing type. Assisted living, Congregate Care, Independent Living, all considered separate housing types. Requires at least two different types of housing Option B: Community Development Committee Preference Minimum of 15% of one type of housing. Shall include at least two types of housing for projects less than 15 acres, more than 15 acres requires three types of housing or two types of housing and commercial activity. Cottage housing, Assisted living, Congregate Care, Independent Living all considered separate housing types. Streets shall form a general grid pattern at discretion of Public Works Director. Recommending remove cut- de-sac requirement in TN Zone. Transit stops must be well-lit, City will not decide where churches are locate. Allowing for alleys but not making for requirement. Parking more functional for multi-family projects. Council discussion on cul-de-sacsj concern over size of cul-de-sacs, number of cul-de-sacs and connectivity of ci'tl/ streets. Council chose Option B, leave cul-de-sacs but limit the number and size. Attachment C, Changes to Zoning Use Table: Conditional Use permit, Congregate Care Facility, electrical substation, electrical wire, light industrial, minimum lot size.

72 11. Reports of Officers and Committees a. Mayor's Report Glass Quest is a huge success. Talked with waitresses in different restaurants and they were booked solid with people participating in Glass Quest. One Achord, new coffee shop, also teaches music lessons to children. b. City Administrator's Report Met with YMCA.' Part of city agreement with YMCA is to have Open Swim and also to provide adult softball league. Plan is to advertise in March and April. Signups in May, League begins in June for 6 weeks. Looking to get 10 teams. Play Monday and Wednesday evenings. This will meet requirement to proof use for grant to build fourth ball field. Cost will be $500-$600 per team. c. Student Advisor's Report Student Advisor Jesslin Ochoa was not in attendance. d. Councilmember Reports/Questions Councilmember Gorsuch apologized for missing mural reveal at the library. 12. Citizen Closing Comments Cathy Wooten s4th Avenue NW, Stanwood, Washington Awaiting results of public records request from city of Pacific regarding odor complaints from Septage Treatement Facilty. File was so large it would have taken 30 s to send as attachments so they are burning a disc. 13. Adjourn There being no further business before the council, Mayor Kelley adjourned the meeting at 8:07p.m.

73 EXHIBIT E 1. 60% Annexation Petition for Schmakeit Annexation 2. Nonprofit Corporation Annual Report 3. Article of Incorporation

74 EXHIBIT E1 60% PETITION FOR ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF STANWOOD, WASHINGTON TO: City Council of the City of Stenwood o"' Street SW Stanwood, Washington WE THE UNDERSIGNED, being the owners of not less than 60% ln value, according to the assessed valuation for general taxation, of!he real l>fllperty described on the reverse, or any portion thereof, lying contiguous to the City of Slanwood, Washington, do hereby petition that such lenitory be annexed to and made a part or the City of Stanwood, Wsshlngton under the provisions of RCW 35A , et seq., and any amendments thereto, of the State of Washington. The territory proposed to be annexed Is wfth!n Snohomish County, Washington and Is described on E.xhibit 'A' al!ached herein. WHEREFORE the undersigned respectfully petition the Honorable City Council and ask: a) Thal appropriate action be taken to entertain this Petition, flxfng a date for a pubffc heartng, causing notice to be published and posted specifying the time and place' of such hearing and Inviting su persons Interested to appear and voice approval or disapproval of such annexation; and b) That followlng such hearing, and subsequent to approval by the Soohomish County Boundary Review Board, If such is convenient. the City Council detemilne by ordinance that such annexalion shall be effective and that property to be amexed shall become a part of the Clty of Stanwood, Washington subject to its laws and ordinances then and thereafter In force, including a Comprehensive Pian to become elfecllve upon annexation if the same is provided pursuant to RCW 35A The undersigned hereby petition the S1anwood City Council lo annex the property described on the reverse Into the City of Stanwood, with that property assuming the proportionate share of the City's bonded Indebtedness and assuming the land use designations and zoning In the Comprehensive Plan and Stanwood Zoning Code Official Zoning Map In accordance wilh the requirements of the City Council of said City, as.noted in the minutes of entry oflhe records of the City Council meeting. This Petition is accompanied and has attached herein as Exhibit s a diagram that outlines the boundaries of the property sought 10 be annexed. These pages are a group of pages containing an Identical text and prayer intended by 1he signers of this Petition to be prasenled and considered as one Petltlon and may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures which cumulatively may be considered as a single Petition. PRAYER OF PETITION: 1. Annexattonofarea described in Exhibits "A' and "B;' and 2.. Assumption of a proportionate share of indebtedness of the City of Stanwood; and. 3. Assumption of the City of Stanwood Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code and Official Zoning Map land use designations and zoning districts for the subject area. INSTRUCTIONS TO SIGNERS AND VOLUNTEER SOLICITORS 1. Sign your name as you sign on legal documents; married women sign 'Mary 0. Jones" not 'Mrs. John D. Jones." 2. Only property owners should sign. 3. The signature of a record owner, as determined by the records of lhe County Auditor, shall be sufficient without the signature of his or her spouse. 4. In case ot mortgaged property, the signature of the morlgag<jr shall be sufficient, wllhout the signal\jre of his or her spouse. 5. In the case of property purchased on contract, the signature of the contract purchaser, as shown by the record County Auditor, shall be deemed sufficient without the signature of his or her spouse. 6. Any officer of a corporation owning land within the area Involved who is duly authorized to execute deeds or encumbrances on behalf of the corporation. may sign on behalf cf such corporation, and shall attach to the Petltlon a certffled excerpt from the bylaws of such corporation showing such authority. 7. When property stands In the name of a deceased person or any person for whom a guardian has been appointed, the slgnalure of the executor, admlnlslrator, or guardian, as lhe case may be, shall be equivalent to the signature of the owner of the property. 8. Payment for circulating Peli!lon is prohlbiled by law. WARNING: Every person who signs this Petition.with any other than his true name, or who knowingly signs more than one cf these Petitions, or signs a Petition seeking an election wnen he is not a legal voief, or signs a Petiti,m when he Is other.yise not qual!fled to ai;;n, er who makes herein fafae statement shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Printed Name Phone Tax Account Date 320'! n- OCl'i-or1--cc 3~0"1 l"l C<>'i Ol '"

75 EXHIBIT A THOSE PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 17 AND 20, TOWNSHIP 32 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE QUARTER SECTION CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 17 AND 20; THENCE NORTH 87"53'42" EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 20, A DISTANCE OF 30 FEET TO THE EAST MARGIN OF 68 AVENUE NW AND THE E/l5T UNE OF THE Cl1Y OF STANWOOD PER ORDINANCE NO AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 01 "26'17" EAST PARALl.EL WITH THE WEST LJNE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 17 ALONG SAID EAST MARGIN AND SAID EAST UNE OF ORDINANCE NO. 1166, A DISTANCE OF 990 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87"53'42" EAST, PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SECTION 20 A DISTANCE OF FEET, MORE OR LESS TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST FEET OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OFTHE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 17; THENCE SOUTH 01.28'21" WEST, ALONG SAID WEST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 960 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 30 FEET OF SAID SECTION 17 AND THE NORTH MARGIN OF VIUAGE ROAD; THENCE NORTH 87"53'42" EAST ALONG SAID LINE, A DISTANCE OF FEET, MORE OR LESS TO A POINT THAT IS 30 FEET NORTH AND 1,650 FEET EAST OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTON 17; THENCE SOUTH 0'37'49" WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 20 A DISTANCE OF 30 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION, LYING 1650 FEET EASTERLY OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 0 37'49" WEST, A DISTANCE OF FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN OF JENSEN ROAD; THENCE SOUTHWEST, PERPENDICULAR TO JENSEN ROAD, A DlSTANCE OF 60 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN OF JENSEN ROAD; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN TO THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAlD SECTION 20 AND THE EAST LINE OF ORDINANCE 1166; THENCE NORTH 0'51'44" EAST, ALONG SAID EAST LINE, TO THE NORTH MARGIN OF JENSEN ROAD; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH MARGIN AND THE 01Y OF STANWOOD ORDINANCE 1166 TO A POINT THAT IS 990 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 20 AND THE EAST'LINE OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 1422 TO THE CITY OF STANWOOD; THENCE NORTH, PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 20 AND THE EAST LINE OF SAID ORDINANCE NUMBER 1422, A DISTANCE OF FEET; THENCE WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORlllEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTtON 20 AND THE NORTH LINE OF SAID ORDINANCE NUMBER 1422 TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 30 FEET OFTHE NORTHEASTAUARTER OF SAID SECTON 20 AND THE EAST LINE OF ORDINANCE 1166, AND THE EAST MARGIN OF 68TH AVE NW; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID LINE, A DISTANCE OF FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Situate In the County of Snohomish, State of Washington Containing 2,162;s21 square feet or acres IT IS THE INTENT OF THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION TO FOLLOW THE EXISTING CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF STANWOOD. REFERENCES HEREIN ARE MEANT TO CONVEY THAT ALTHOUGH PRESENT RIGHTS Of WAY BOUNDARIES MAY BE DIFFERENT, THE RIGHTS OF WAY BOUNDARIES AT THE TIME OF THE ORIGINAL INCORPORATION AND SUBSEQUENTLY ADOPTED ORDINANCES ARE INTENDED TO BE FOLLOWED SO THAT NO GAP OR OVERLAP EXISTS BETWEEN THIS ANNEXATION AND THE EXISTING CliY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF STANWOOD.

76

77 ,: ~latt,... ~.,,,.."':.. ~ tjpa&hm;?fon, ~~., Secretary of State -~ :,....- ' _: - KIMWYMAN EXHIBIT E2 James M. Dolliver Build!ng 801 Capitol Way South PO Box Olympia WA :~~~~rf~~~t:?-~ia~i,~:~~~t~:~~~~:'._:.-.. ) ~. ~ ~--.,, For'ri1-'Subinissian:-J:nfor-ination a',-..: ~ :.:.:.'. -- ~ --.~ i'. ~-~ ~- -.., Business Name WESTERN WASHINGTON CORPORATION OF SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS UBI Transaction Submitted Date 7/25/2016 Tracking ID Validation ID Document Type Annual Report Corporation Type Non-Profit Corporation Date of Incorporation 9/24/1913 Fee $10.00 Place of Business Address WEYERHAEUSER WAYS FEDERAL WAY, WA : :.; (le~i~ir.ed-.a,e~i1i i.rif9~ji1~( Malling Address Name Eric Davis Address WEYERHAEUSER WAY S FEDERAL WAY, WA eric.davis@wc.npuc.org WA,~ ~:.-..,:.. -.~ -:~':..-:.:.:~.. -..:...A"' '.""-:.-.":'-.,.; ~ _! /[..:...--:.: Governing Pets.on Infohnation.. ::.,. \ _...,,. :.. ~-~ :- :... 't.....; ~ :::- -;-. ::: -., Name Vice President DOUGLAS BING Address WEYERHAEUSER WAY S FEDERAL WAY, WA Name Treasurer GERALD RUSSEU Address WEYERHAEUSER WAYS FEDERAL WAY, WA Name President JOHN FREEDMAN Address WEYERHAEUSER WAY S FEDERAL WAY, WA Name Secretary ERIC DAVIS Address Weyerhaeuser Way S Federal Way, WA Name Secretary PETER RAMPTON Address Weyerhaeuser Way S Federal Way, WA ;/'.:\j;.?j' ' z : \, : '.\i"-'.' <:<.. =.:->.P,~~J'i<?~!{'. :.i): :;~:: :/ Our organization provides oversight and support to over 120 Seventh-day Adventist churches and schools In the Puget Sound region. In addition to the churches and schools our organization operates a year-round camp with kids summer camp and various outreach and community service centers.. :: -~ :..,....,::; :?: - ;'~iij~~ieft}? ~(\j /{:~ :{.. " ~ - Name Secretary ERIC DAVIS Address Weyerhaeuser Way S Federal Way, WA Submitter Name ERIC DAVIS Submitter eric.davis@wc.npuc.org

78 ... Cost..,:.:. ~ ~.. $10.00

79 EXHIBIT E3 APR STATE OF WASHINGTON SECRETARY OF STATE WESTERN WASHINGTON CORPORATION OE SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS DAVID W WOLKWITZ WEYERHAEUSER WAY SO FEDERAL WAY WA AMENDMENT I, Sam Reed, Secretary of State of the State of Washington and custodian of its seal, hereby certify that documents meeting Washington statutory requirements have been filed and processed with the Secretary of State on behalf of: WESTERN WASHINGTON CORPORATION OF SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS A Washington Non-Profit Corporation UBI: Filing Date: March 12, 2008 Effective Date: March 12, 2008 Given under my hand and the seal of the State of Washington at Olympia, the State Capital. Sam Reed, Secretary of State

80 AMENDED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION WESTERN WASHINGTON CORPORATION OF SEVENTII-DAY ADVENTISTS As Amended March 4, 2008 ARTICLE I. The name of this Corporation is and shall be the ''WESTERN WASHINGTON CORPORATION OF SEVENfH-DAY ADVENTISTS." ARTICLE II. The location, chief place of business, and registered office of said Corporation shall be at Weyerhaeuser Way South, Federal Way, County of King, State of W ashlngton. ARTICLE ill. The period of duration of this Corporation shall be perpetual. ARTICLE IV. The members of this corporation must be followers of the Seventh-day Adventist faith and members in good standing of a recognized church of the denomination. The classes of membership, if any, qualifications, rights, duties, privileges, obligations and manner of appointment for election shall be as set forth in the Bylaws of the Corporation. I- Articles of Incorporation of Western Washington Corporation of Seventh-day Adventists As Amended 3/412008

81 ( ARTICLE V. The particular business and objectives for which this Corporation is formed are for the purpose of diffusing moral and religious knowledge throughout the entire world by means of churches, organizations, publishing houses, medical or health institutions, educational institutions, publishing houses, medical or health agencies, and all other instrumentalities and methods appropriate and available for tending to the advancement of such ends and aims, and to that end to receive loans, gifts, and deposits of money; to issue notes; to grant annuities; to make loans; to acquire, possess, and hold title to real, personal, and mixed estates in this or foreign countries, either in trust or otherwise, by gift, bequest, devise, or purchase, and to have power to pledge, incumber, sell, and convey the saine by such mortgage or other instrument or security or conveyance as may be suitable; it being, however, expressly declared that this Corporation is not for personal profit or gain to anyone, but that all its property and effects must be used and expended in carrying into effect the aims, ends and objects of its existence. ARTICLE VI. The business and affairs of this Corporation shall be managed by the Board of Trustees. The corporate duties, qualifications, powers, authority and activities of the Trustees shall be as set forth in the Bylaws of the Corporation. ARTICLE VII. In the event of the dissolution of this Corporation, any funds remaining after all claims have been satisfied shall be transferred to the North Pacific Union Conference Association of Seventh-day Adventists. -2- Artic:lcs of Incorporation of Western Washington Corporation of Seventh-day Adventists As Amended 3/412008

82 APR j ~ 2008 WESTERN WASHINGTON CORPORATION OF SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS DAVID W WOLKWITZ WEYERHAEUSER WAY SO FEDERAL WAY WA AMENDMENT I, Sam Reed, Secretary of State of the State of Washington and custodian of its seal, hereby certify that documents meeting Washington statutory reguirernents have been filed and processed with the Secretary 0 State on behalf of: WESTERN WASHINGTON CORPORATION OF SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS A Washington Non-Profit Corporation UBI: Filing Date: March 12, 2008 Effective Date: March i2, 2008 Given under my hand and the seal of the State of Washington at Olympia, the State Capital. Sam Reed, Secretary of State

83 BYLAWS OF THE WESTERN WASHINGTON CORPORATION OF SEVENT"lI-DAY ADVENTISTS AS AMENDED MARCH 4, 2008 ARTICLE I Name The name of this Corporation is "Western Washington Corporation of Seventh-day Adventists." ARTICLE Il Location The principal office of this Corporation is located at Weyerhaeuser Way South, Federal Way, Washington, ARTICLE ill Object The particular objects for which this corporation is fonned are such as are set forth in the Articles of Incorporation Bylaws of the Western Washington Corporation of Seventh-day Adventists As Amended 3/4/2008

84 ( ARTICLE IV Membership Section 1. The members of this corporation shall be composed of: A. Each member of the Executive Committee of the Washington Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. B. Each member of the Board of Trustees of the Western Washington Corporation of Seventh-day Adventists who is not a member of the Executive Committee of the Washington Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. Section 2. A quorum for the transaction of business shall consist of a majority of members. ARTICLE V Trustees Section 1. The Board of Trustees shall be composed of: A. Each member of the Executive Cormnittee of the Washington Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. B. The Secretary and Treasurer of the Corporation. Section 2. The trustees shall have the ordering of all affairs of this Corporation, the management and disposal of all its property, and the execution of all trusts confided to it. -2- Bylaws of the Western Washington Corporation of Seventh-day Adventists As Amended 3/4/2001!

85 Section 3. The president of the Washington Conference of Seventh-day Adventists shall be the president of the Corporation and chainnan of the Board of Trustees. Immediately following the annual session of the Corporation, the members of the Board of Trustees shall elect from their number Vice-President(s), a Secretary and a Treasurer. Assistant Secretaries and/or Assistant Treasurers and/or a Manager may also be elected and these may or may not be members of the Board of Trustees. It is understood that one individual may be elected to serve in more than one capacity. Section 4. No person shall serve, or continue to serve, as an officer or trustee who is not, or shall cease to be, a member in good and regular standing of a recognized Seventh-day Adventist Church. Section 5. The trustees may, by a two-third (2/3) vote at a duly convened meeting, designate the Corporation to act as guardian or limited guardian of the person and/or estate of an incompetent or disabled person. Section 6. A quorum to do business shall consist of a majority of the Board of Trustees, and after the election of officers, shall include an officer of this board. ARTICLE VI Duties of Officers Section 1. The duties of the officers of this Corporation shah be such as usually pertain to such officers, respectively, and such other duties as the Board of Trustees may prescribe. The President or the Vice-President, or in the absence of both, the Treasurer, shall, on behalf of the Corporation, sign all deeds, mortgages, powers of attorney, annuity agreements, trust and life income agreements, or other instruments of writing of similar character and import. The signature of any of said officers on such instruments shall be attested by the secretary, or by an assistant secretary, who shall also affix the corporate seal thereto. Section 2. The officers shall make a full and complete report of the activities of the Corporation to the regular session of the Washington Conference of Seventh-day Adventists covering the period of time since the previous regular sess10n Bylaws of the Western Washington Corporation of Seventh-day Adventists As Amended 3/412008