2025, 07-29 Formal B Meeting Packet
AGENDA
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
FORMAL B FORMAT
Tuesday, July 29, 2025 6:00 p.m.
Remotely via ZOOM Meeting and
In Person at Spokane Valley City Hall, Council Chambers
10210 E. Sprague Ave.
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Council Requests Please Silence Your Cell Phones During Council Meeting
NOTE: Members of the public may attend Spokane Valley Council meetings in-person at the address provided
above, or via Zoom at the link below. Members of the public will be allowed to comment in-person or via Zoom
as described below. Public comments will only be accepted for those items noted on the agenda as “public
comment opportunity.”Citizens must register by 4 p.m. the day of the meeting to provide comment by Zoom.
Please use the links below to register to provide verbal or written comment.
Sign up to Provide Verbal Public Comment at the Meeting via Calling-In
Submit Written Public Comment Prior to the Meeting
Join the Zoom WEB Meeting
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CALL TO ORDER
INVOCATION: Steve Allen, Valley Real Life
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
SPECIAL GUESTS/PRESENTATIONS:
PROCLAMATIONS: National Health Center Week
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any
subject except agenda action items, as public comments will be taken on those items where indicated. Please keep
comments to matters within the jurisdiction of the City Government.This is not an opportunity for questions or
discussion. Diverse points of view are welcome but please keep remarks civil. Remarks will be limited to three
minutes per person. If a person engages in disruptive behavior or makes individual personal attacks regarding
matters unrelated to City business, then the Council and/or Mayor may end that person’s public comment time
before the three-minute mark. To comment via zoom: use the link above for oral or written comments as per
those directions. To comment at the meeting in person: speakers may sign in to speak but it is not required. A
sign-in sheet will be provided at the meeting.
ACTION ITEMS:
1. Ordinance 25-012: First Read Fatbeam Franchise – Tony Beattie
\[public comment opportunity\]
2. Ordinance 25-013: First Read Emergency Interim Ord. for Communications Tower Restrictions –
Kelly Konkright, Steve Roberge, Lori Markham
\[public comment opportunity\]
3. Motion Consideration: Steering Committee of Elected Officials ILA - Steve Roberge
Council Agenda July 29, 2025 Page 1 of 2
\[public comment opportunity\]
4. Motion Consideration: Potential Grant Opp: Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) – Adam Jackson
\[public comment opportunity\]
NON-ACTION ITEMS:
5. Admin Report: Point in Time Count – Eric Robison, Arielle Andersen, Amanda Martinez
6. Admin Report: EWU Economic Trends Report – Teri Stripes, Dr. Cullen
INFORMATION ONLY (will not be reported or discussed):
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY: General public comment rules apply.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
MAYOR’S COMMENTS
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS
EXECUTIVE SESSION
ADJOURNMENT
Council Agenda July 29, 2025 Page 2 of 2
Proclamation
City of Spokane Valley, Washington
National Health Center Week
WHEREAS, Community Health Centers provide high-quality, affordable, comprehensive
; and
WHEREAS, Every day, Community Health Centers develop new approaches to integrating a
wide range of services beyond primary care, including oral health, behavioral
health, pharmacy, and mobile services, to provide comprehensive care, allowing
each community member to thrive; and
WHEREAS, One in every eleven people in the United States gets their care at a Community
Health Center; and
WHEREAS, CHAS Health serves patients throughout our community, serving over 122,000
patients in 2024.; and
WHEREAS, CHAS Health employs 1,693 people in Spokane County, including providers,
clinical support staff, community health workers, apprentices, administrative
staff, and more; and
WHEREAS, The Community Health Center model continues to prove effective as a means of
overcoming barriers to healthcare access, including geography, income, and
insurance status improving health outcomes and reducing healthcare system
costs; and
WHEREAS,
than 1,400 Community Health Center organizations like CHAS Health. We honor
their dedicated staff and board members for their vital role in shaping the past,
present, and future .
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Time Hattenburg, Deputy Mayor of the City of Spokane Valley, on
behalf of the Spokane Valley City Council and the citizens of the City of Spokane Valley, do
hereby proclaim August 3-9, 2025, as
National Health Center Week
and I encourage all citizens to participate in this week by visiting a Community Health Center
near them and celebrating this vital partnership between CHAS Health and the City of Spokane
Valley.
th
Dated this 29 day of July, 2025.
Tim Hattenburg, Deputy Mayor
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: July 29, 2025 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: consent old business new business public hearing
informationadmin. reportpending legislationexecutive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: FirstReading Ordinance 25-012 Fatbeam Telecommunications
Franchise
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.47.040
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: On July 28, 2015, City Council voted to adopt
Ordinance 15-014, a telecommunications franchise to Fatbeam; Administrative Report for Draft
Ordinance 25-012 on July 15, 2025.
BACKGROUND: Fatbeam currently owns and operates telecommunications facilities within
the public rights-of-way pursuant to Franchise Ordinance 15-014. Ordinance 15-014 is set to
expire in August of this year. This Franchise Ordinance 25-012 will extend the nonexclusive
franchise rights to Fatbeam for another ten years beginning on the effective date.
The Franchise will allow Fatbeam to continue to install, construct, operate, maintain, replace
and use all necessary equipment and facilities to place telecommunications facilities in, under,
on, across, over, through, along or below the public rights-of-way located in the City of Spokane
Valley, as approved under City permits. Much of Fatbeam’s operations include providing
telecommunication fiber to local education facilities.
All costs to operate, and maintain its facilities will be borne by Fatbeam, and Fatbeam will be
required to maintain its insurance and bonds in accordance with the terms of the franchise. The
City will publish, at Fatbeam’s cost, a summary of the franchise in the newspaper following
adoption. The franchise will become effective five days after publication.
OPTIONS: Move to advance Ordinance 25-012 for a second reading; or take other action as
appropriate.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move to advance Ordinance 25-012 to a second
ordinance reading.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A
STAFF CONTACT: Tony Beattie, Senior Deputy City Attorney
___________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Proposed Franchise Ordinance 25-012
DRAFT
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 25-012
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY,
WASHINGTON, GRANTING A NON-EXCLUSIVEFRANCHISETOFATBEAMTO
CONSTRUCT, MAINTAIN AND OPERATE TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES
WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY OF THE CITYOF SPOKANE VALLEY, AND
OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO.
WHEREAS, RCW 35A.47.040 authorizes the City to grant, permit, and regulate
“nonexclusive franchises for the use of public streets, bridges or other public ways, structures or
places above or below the surface of the ground for railroads and other routes and facilities for
public conveyances, for poles, conduits, tunnels, towers and structures, pipes and wires and
appurtenances thereof for transmission and distribution of electrical energy, signals and other
methods of communication, for gas, steam and liquid fuels, for water, sewer and other private and
publicly owned and operated facilities for public service”; and
WHEREAS, RCW 35A.47.040 further requires that “no ordinance or resolution granting
any franchise in a code city for any purpose shall be adopted or passed by the city’s legislative
body on the day of its introduction norfor five days thereafter, nor at any other than a regular
meeting nor without first being submitted to the city attorney, nor without having been granted by
the approving vote of at least a majority of the entire legislative body, nor without being published
at least once in a newspaper ofgeneral circulation in the city before becoming effective”;and
WHEREAS, this Ordinance has been submitted to the city attorney prior to its passage;
and
WHEREAS, the Council finds that the grant of the Franchisecontained in this Ordinance,
subject to its terms and conditions, is in the best interests of the public, and protects the health,
safety,and welfare of the citizens of this City.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County,
Washington, do ordain as follows:
Section 1.Definitions. For the purpose of this Ordinance, the following words and terms shall
have the meaning set forth below:
“City Manager”means the City Manager or designee.
“Community and Public Works Director” shall mean the Spokane Valley
Community and Public Works Director or his/her designee.
“construction”or “construct”shall mean constructing, digging, excavating, laying,
testing, operating, extending, upgrading, renewing, removing, replacing, and
repairing a facility.
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise1of 17
DRAFT
“day”shall meana 24-hour period beginning at 12:01 AM. If a thing or act is to be
done in less than seven days, intermediate Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays
shall be excluded in the computation of time.
“franchise” (sometimes referred to as Ordinance) shall mean the legal document
issued by the City which grants rights to Grantee to construct and operate its
telecommunication facilities as set forth herein.
“franchise area”shall mean the entire geographic area within the City as it is now
constituted or may in the future be constituted.
“hazardous substances”shall have the same meaningas RCW 70.105D.020(10).
“maintenance, maintaining or maintain”shall mean the work involved in the
replacement and/or repair of facilities,including constructing, relaying, repairing,
replacing, examining, testing, inspecting, removing, digging and excavating, and
restoring operations incidental thereto.
“permittee”shall mean a person or entity who has been granted a permit by the
Permitting Authority.
“permitting authority”shall mean the City Manager or designee authorized to
process and grant permits required to perform work in the rights-of-way.
“product”shall refer to the item, thing or use provided by the Grantee.
“public property”shall mean any real estate or any facility owned by the City.
“relocation” shall mean any required move or relocation of an existing installation or
equipment owned by Grantee whereby such move or relocation is necessitated by
installation, improvement, renovation or repair of another entity’s facilities in the rights-
of-way, including Grantor’s facilities.
“right-of-way”shall refer to the surface of and the space along, above, and below
any street, road, highway, freeway, lane, sidewalk, alley, court, boulevard,
parkway, drive, Grantee easement, and/or public waynow or hereafter held or
administered by the City.
“streets”or “highways”shall mean the surface of, and the space above and below,
any public street, road, alley or highway, within the City used or intended to be
used by the general public, to the extent the City has the right to allow the Grantee
to use them.
“telecommunications facilities” shall mean any of the plant, equipment, fixtures,
appurtenances, antennas, and other facilities necessary to furnish and deliver
telecommunications services, including but not limited to poles with crossarms,
poles without crossarms, wires, lines, conduits, cables, communication and signal
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise2of 17
DRAFT
lines and equipment, braces, guys, anchors, vaults, and all attachments,
appurtenances, and appliances necessary or incidental to the distribution and use of
telecommunications services. The abandonment by Grantee of any
telecommunications facilities as defined herein shall not act to remove the same
from this definition.
Section 2.Grant of Franchise. The City of Spokane Valley, a Washington municipal
corporation (hereinafter the “City”), hereby grants untoFatbeam(hereinafter “Grantee”), a
franchisefor a period of 10 years, beginning on the effective date of this Ordinance, to install,
construct, operate, maintain, replace and use all necessary equipment and facilities to place
telecommunications facilities in, under, on, across, over, through, along or below the public rights-
of-way located in the City of Spokane Valley, as approved under City permits issued pursuant to
this franchise(hereinafter the “franchise”). This franchise does not permit Grantee to use such
facilities to provide cable services as defined by 47 C.F.R.§ 76.5(ff).
Section 3.Fee. No franchise fee is assessed for telecommunications services providers in
accord with the prohibition in state law (RCW 35.21.860).If the prohibition of
telecommunications service provider franchise fees is removed or modified to allow a franchise
fee, the parties agree to negotiate this provision as a material term on which agreement is required
for continuation of this franchise, PROVIDED, the City must give one hundred eighty (180) days’
notice to invoke this provision and any franchise fee under it shall be prospective in
nature.Nothing herein shall limit the City’s power to tax or recover any lawful expenses in
connection with this Franchise
Section 4.City Use.The following provisions shall apply regarding City use.
A.Grantee agreesto reserve to the City the right to access four dark fiber strands(2pair)along
the route identified in Exhibit Aas adopted or amended,within the boundaries of the City, for sole
and exclusive municipal, non-commercial use or designation(the “City Reserved Fibers”). City
agrees that it shall not use the City Reserved Fibers as a public utility provider of
telecommunications business service to the public.
B.The City shall havethe right to access by connection to the City Reserved Fibersat existing
Granteesplice points or reasonably established access points within the City limits; provided that
all splicing shall be sole responsibility of the Grantee. TheCity shall provide at least 30 days
written notice of intent to access the City Reserved Fibers.Upon any access or use of the City
Reserved Fibers,City shall pay Grantee a recurring monthly charge of$34.00 per fiber pair per
mile in use by the City(the “City Fiber Rate”)unless otherwise specifically agreed by both the
parties in writingand shall enter into Grantee’sstandard“Fiber License Agreement” which shall
govern the terms and conditions for use of the City Reserved Fibers. Said recurring monthly charge
shall not be imposed until such time as the fiber is put into use by the City.
C.In the event the City Reserved Fibers are the last fibers remaining in Grantee’sfiber bundle,
then the following shall apply:
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise3of 17
DRAFT
1. If the City is using the fibers, then the rate the City shall pay Granteewill change from
the City Fiber Rateto Grantee’sstandard commercial rate.
2. If the City is not using the fibers, the City shall have the option of abandoning the City
Reserved Fibers in lieu of paying Grantee’sstandard commercial rate.
3. If Granteeinstalls additional fiber capacity, the City’s right to use four dark fiber strands
as set forth in subsections Aand B, immediately above, shall again be in effect.
D.The City shall pay all costs associated with constructing any connectionto the City
Reserved Fibers. The City Reserved Fibers shall have a term that matches the duration of this
FranchiseOrdinance(“Reserved Fiber Term”).
E.Consistent with RCW 35.99.070, at such time when Granteeisconstructing, relocating, or
placing ducts or conduits in public rights-of-way, theCommunity andPublic Works Director may
require Granteeto provide the City with additional duct or conduit and related structures, at
incremental cost,necessary to access the conduit at mutually convenient locations. Any ducts or
conduits provided by Granteeunder this section shall only be used for City municipal, non-
commercial purposes.
1. The City shall not require that the additional duct or conduit space be connected to the
access structures and vaults of the Grantee.
2. This section shall not affect the provision of an institutional network by a cable television
provider under federal law.
3. Granteeshall notify the Community and Public Works Director at least 14 daysprior to
opening a trench at any location to allow the City to exercise its options as provided herein.
Section 5.Recovery of Costs.Granteeshall reimburse the City for all costs of one publication
of this franchisein a local newspaper, and required legal notices prior to any public hearing regarding
this franchise, contemporaneous with its acceptance of this franchise. Granteeshall be subject to all
permitand inspectionfees associated with activities undertaken through the authority granted in
this franchiseor under City Code.
Section 6.Non-Exclusivity. This franchise is granted upon the express condition that it shall
not in any manner prevent the City from granting other or further franchises or permits in any
rights-of-way. This and other franchises shall, in no way, prevent or prohibit the City from using
any of its rights-of-way or affect its jurisdiction over them or any part of them.
Section 7.Non-Interference with Existing Facilities.The City shall have prior and superior
right to the use of its rights-of-way and public properties for installation and maintenance of its
facilities and other governmental purposes. The City hereby retains full power to make all
changes, relocations, repairs, maintenance, establishments, improvements, dedications or vacation
of same as the City may deem fit, including the dedication, establishment, maintenance, and
improvement of all new rights-of-way, streets, avenues, thoroughfares and other public properties
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise4of 17
DRAFT
of every type and description. Any and all such removal or replacement shall be at the sole expense
of the Grantee, unless RCW 35.99.060 provides otherwise. Should Granteefail to remove, adjust
or relocate its telecommunications facilities by the date established by theCommunity andPublic
Works Director’s written notice to Granteeand in accordance with RCW 35.99.060, the City may
cause and/or effect such removal, adjustment or relocation, and the expense thereof shall be paid
by Grantee.
The owners of all utilities, public or private, installed in or on such public properties prior to the
installation of the telecommunications facilities of the Grantee, shall have preference as to the
positioning and location of such utilities so installed with respect to the Grantee. Such preference
shall continue in the event of the necessity of relocating or changing the grade of any such public
properties.
Grantee’stelecommunications facilities shall be constructed and maintained in such manner as not
to interfere with any public use, or with any other pipes, wires, conduits or other facilities that may
have been laid in the rights-of-way by or under the City’s authority. If the work done under this
franchisedamages or interferes in any way with the public use or other facilities, the Granteeshall
wholly and at its own expense make such provisions necessary to eliminate the interference or
damage to the satisfaction of the Community and Public Works Director.
Section 8.Construction Standards. All work authorized and required hereunder shall comply
with all generally applicable City Codes and regulations. Granteeshall also comply with all
applicable federal and state regulations, laws and practices. Granteeis responsible for the
supervision, condition, and quality of the work done, whether it is by itself or by contractors,
assigns or agencies. Application of said federal, state, and CityCodes and regulationsshall be for
the purposes of fulfilling the City’s public trustee role in administering the primary use and purpose
of public properties, and not for relieving the Granteeof any duty, obligation, or responsibility for
the competent design, construction, maintenance, and operation of its telecommunications
facilities. Granteeis responsible for the supervision, condition, and quality of the work done,
whether it is by itself or by contractors, assigns or agencies.
If Granteeshall at any time be required, or plan, to excavate trenches in any area covered by this
franchise, the Granteeshall afford the City an opportunity to permit other franchisees and utilities
to share such excavated trenches, provided that: (1) such joint use shall not unreasonably delay the
work of the Grantee; and (2) such joint use shall not adversely affect Grantee’s
telecommunications facilities or safety thereof. Joint users will be required to contribute to the
costs of excavation and filling on a pro-rata basis.
Section 9.Protection of Monuments. Granteeshall comply with applicable state laws relating
to protection of monuments.
Section 10.Tree Trimming. The Granteeshall have the authority to conduct pruning and
trimming for access to Grantee’stelecommunications facilities in the rights-of-way subject to
compliance with the City Codeincluding obtaining all necessary permits. All such trimming shall be
done at the Grantee’ssole cost and expense.
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise5of 17
DRAFT
Section 11.Emergency Response. The Granteeshall, within 30 days of the execution of this
franchise, designate one or more responsible people and an emergency 24-hour on-call personnel
and the procedures to be followed when responding to an emergency. After being notified of an
emergency, Granteeshall cooperate with the City to immediately respond with action to aid in the
protection of thehealth and safety of the public.
In the event the Granteerefuses to promptly take the directed action or fails to fully comply with
such direction, or if emergency conditions exist which require immediate action to prevent
imminent injury or damages to persons or property, the City may take such actions as it believes
are necessary to protect persons or property and the Granteeshall be responsible to reimburse the
City for its costs and any expenses.
Section 12.One-Call System. Pursuant to chapter19.122RCW, Granteeis responsible for
becoming familiar with, and understanding, the provisions of Washington’s One-Call statutes.
Granteeshall comply with the terms and conditions set forth in the One-Call statutes.
Section 13.Safety. All of Grantee’stelecommunications facilities in the rights-of-way shall
be constructed and maintained in a safe and operational condition. Granteeshall follow all safety
codes and other applicable regulations in the installation, operation, and maintenance of the
telecommunications facilities.
Section 14.Movement of Grantee’sTelecommunications Facilities for Others. Whenever any
third party shall have obtained permission from the City to use any right–of-way for the purpose
of moving any building or other oversized structure, Grantee, upon at least 14 days’written notice
from the City, shall move, at the expense of the third party desiring to move the building or
structure, any of Grantee’stelecommunications facilities that may obstruct the movement thereof;
provided, that the path for moving such building or structure is the path of least interference to
Grantee’stelecommunications facilities, as determined by the City. Upon good cause shown by
Grantee, the City may require more than 14 days’notice to Granteeto move its
telecommunications facilities.
Section 15.Acquiring New Telecommunications Facilities. Upon Grantee’sacquisition of any
new telecommunications facilities in the rights-of-way, or upon any addition or annexation to the
City of any area in which Granteeretains any such telecommunications facilities in the rights-of-
way, the Granteeshall submit to the City a written statement describing all telecommunications
facilities involved, whether authorized by franchise or any other form of prior right, and specifying
the location of all such facilities. Such facilities shall immediately be subject to the terms of this
franchise.
Section 16.Dangerous Conditions -Authority of City to Abate. Whenever excavation,
installation, construction, repair, maintenance, or relocation of telecommunications facilities
authorized by this franchise has caused or contributed to a condition that substantially impairs the
lateral support of the adjoining right-of-way, road, street or other public place, or endangers the
public, adjoining public or private property or street utilities, the City may direct Grantee, at
Grantee’ssole expense, to take all necessary actions to protect the public and property. The City
may require that such action be completed within a prescribed time.
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise6of 17
DRAFT
In the event that Granteefails or refuses to promptly take the actions directed by the City, or fails
to fully comply with such directions, or if emergency conditions exist which require immediate
action, the City may enter upon the property and take such actions as are necessary to protect the
public, adjacent public or private property, or street utilities, or to maintain the lateral support
thereof, and all other actions deemed by the City to be necessaryto preserve the public safety and
welfare;and Granteeshall be liable to the City for all costs and expenses thereofto the extent
caused by Grantee.
Section 17.Hazardous Substances. Granteeshall comply with all applicablefederal,state and
locallaws, statutes, regulations and orders concerning hazardous substances relating to Grantee’s
telecommunications facilities in the rights–of-way. Granteeagrees to indemnify the City against
any claims, costs, and expenses, of any kind, whether direct or indirect, incurred by the City arising
out of the release or threat of release of hazardous substances caused by Grantee’sownership or
operation of its telecommunications facilities within the City’s right-of-way.
Section 18.Environmental. Granteeshall comply with all environmental protection laws,
rules, recommendations, and regulations of the United States and the State of Washington, and
their various subdivisions and agencies as they presently exist or may hereafter be enacted,
promulgated, or amended, and shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all
damages arising, or which may arise, or be caused by, or result from the failure of Granteefully to
comply with any suchlaws, rules, recommendations, or regulations, whether or not Grantee’sacts
or activities were intentional or unintentional. Granteeshall further indemnify the City against all
losses, costs, and expenses (including legal expenses) which the City may incur as a result of the
requirement of any government or governmental subdivision or agency to clean and/or remove
any pollution caused or permitted by Grantee, whether said requirement is during the term of the
franchise or subsequent to its termination.
Section 19.Relocation of Telecommunications Facilities.Granteeagreesand covenants, at its
sole cost and expense, to protect, support, temporarily disconnect, relocate or remove from any
street any of its telecommunications facilities when so required by the Cityin accordance with the
provisions of RCW 35.99.060,provided that Granteeshall in all such cases have the privilege to
temporarily bypass, in the authorized portion of the same street upon approval by the City, any
section of itstelecommunications facilities required to be temporarily disconnected or removed.
If the City determines that the project necessitates the relocation of Grantee’sthen-existing
telecommunications facilities, the City shall:
A.At least 60 days prior to the commencement of such improvement project, provide Granteewith
written notice requiring such relocation; and
B.Provide Granteewith copies of pertinent portions of the plans and specifications for such
improvement project and a proposed location for Grantee’stelecommunications facilities so that
Granteemay relocate its telecommunications facilities in other City rights-of-way in order to
accommodate such improvement project.
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise7of 17
DRAFT
C.After receipt of such notice and such plans and specification, Granteeshall complete relocation
of its telecommunications facilities at no charge or expense to the City in orderto accommodate
the improvement project in accordance with RCW 35.99.060(2).
Granteemay, after receipt of written notice requesting a relocation of its telecommunications
facilities, submit to the Citywritten alternatives to such relocation. The City shall evaluate such
alternatives and advise Granteein writing if one or more of the alternatives are suitable to
accommodate the work which would otherwise necessitate relocation of the telecommunications
facilities.If so requested by the City, Granteeshall submit additional information to assist the City
in making such evaluation. The City shall give each alternative proposed by Granteefull and fair
consideration. In the event the City ultimately determines that there is no other reasonable
alternative, Granteeshall relocate its telecommunications facilities as otherwise provided in this
section.
The provisions of this section shall in no manner preclude or restrict Granteefrom making any
arrangements it may deem appropriate when responding to a request for relocation of its
telecommunicationsfacilities by any person or entity other than the City, where the
telecommunications facilities to be constructed by said person or entity are not or will not become
City owned, operated or maintained facilities, provided that such arrangements do not unduly delay
a City construction project.
If the City or a contractor for the City is delayed at any time in the progress of the work by an act
or neglect of the Granteeor those acting for or on behalf of Grantee, then Granteeshall indemnify,
defend and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any and
all claims,costs,injuries, damages, losses or suits including attorneys’fees to the extent arising
out of or in connection with such delays, except for delays and damages caused by the City. This
provision may not be waived by the parties except in writing.
Section 20.Abandonment of Grantee’sTelecommunications Facilities.
A. Underground facilities: Granteeshall remove any facilities which have not been used to provide
telecommunications services for a period of at least 90 dayswhen: (a) a City project involves
digging that will encounter the abandoned facility; (b) the abandoned facility poses a hazard to the
health, safety, or welfare of the public; (c) the abandoned facility is 24 inches or less below the
surface of the rights-of-way and the City is reconstructing or resurfacing a street over the rights-
of-way; or (d) the abandoned facility has collapsed, broke, or otherwise failed.
Granteemay, upon written approval by the City,delay removal of the abandoned facility until
such time as the City commences a construction project in the rights-of-way unless (b) or (d) above
applies. When (b) or (d) applies, Granteeshall remove the abandoned facility from the rights-of-
way as soon as weather conditions allow, unless the City expressly allows otherwise in writing.
B. Aboveground facilities:Granteeshall remove any facilities which have not been used to provide
telecommunications services for a period of at least 90 days.
C. The expense of the removal, and restoration of improvements in the rights-of-way that were
damaged by the facility or by the removal process, shall be the sole responsibility of the Grantee.
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise8of 17
DRAFT
If Granteefailsto remove the abandoned facilities in accordance with the above, then the City may
incur costs to remove the abandoned facilities and restore the rights-of-way, and is entitled to
reimbursement from Granteefor such costs, including reasonable attorney's fees and costs.
Section 21.Maps and Records Required. Granteeshall provide the City,at no cost to the City:
A. A route map that depicts the general location of the Grantee’stelecommunications facilities placed
in the rights-of-way. The route map shall identify telecommunications facilities as aerial or
underground and is not required to depict cable types, number of fibers or cables, electronic
equipment, and service lines to individual subscribers. The Granteeshall also provide an electronic
formatof the aerial/underground telecommunications facilities in relation to the right-of-way
centerline reference to allow the City to add this information to the City’s Geographic Information
System (“GIS”)program.The information in this subsection shall be delivered to the Cityby
December 1, annually.
B. In addition to subsection Aof this section, the Citymayrequest thatGranteeprovide the
information described in subsection Aof this sectionas needed for specific projectsto avoid harm
to Grantee’sfacilities. To the extent such requests are limited to specific telecommunications
facilities at a given location within the franchisearea inconnection with the construction of any
City project, Granteeshall provide to the City, upon the City’s reasonable request, copies of
available drawings in use by Granteeshowing the location of such telecommunications facilities.
Granteeshall field locate its telecommunications facilities in order to facilitate design and planning
of City improvement projects.
C. Upon written request of the City, Granteeshall provide the City with the most recent update
available of any plan of potential improvements to its telecommunications facilities within the
franchisearea; provided, however, any such plan so submitted shall be deemed confidential and
for informational purposes only, and shall not obligate Granteeto undertake any specific
improvements within the franchisearea.
D. In addition tothe requirements of subsection Aof this section, the parties agree to periodically
share GIS files upon written request, provided Grantee’sGIS files are to be used solely by the
Cityfor governmental purposes. Any files provided to Granteeshall be restricted to information
required for Grantee’sengineering needs for construction or maintenance of telecommunications
facilities that are the subject of this franchise. Granteeis prohibited from selling any GIS
information obtained from City to any third parties.
E. Public Disclosure Act. Granteeacknowledges that information submitted to the City may be
subject to inspection and copying under the Washington Public Disclosure Act codified in chapter
42.56RCW. Granteeshall mark as “PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL”each page or portion
thereof of any documentation/information which it submits to the City and which it believes is
exempt from public inspection or copying. The City agrees to timely provide the Granteewith a
copy of any public disclosure request to inspect orcopy documentation/information which the
Granteehas provided to the City and marked as “PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL”prior to
allowing any inspection and/or copying as well as provide the Granteewith a time frame,
consistent with RCW 42.56.520, to provide the City with its written basis for non-disclosure of the
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise9of 17
DRAFT
requested documentation/information. In the event the City disagrees with the Grantee’sbasis for
non-disclosure, the City agrees to withhold release of the requested documentation/information in
dispute for a reasonable amount of time to allow Granteean opportunity to file a legal action under
RCW 42.56.540.
Section 22.Limitation on Future Work. In the event that the City constructs a new street or
reconstructs an existing street, the Granteeshall not be permitted to excavate such street except as
set forth in the City’s then-adopted regulations relating to street cuts and excavations.
Section 23.Reservation of Rights by City. The City reserves the right to refuse any request for
a permit to extend telecommunications facilities. Any such refusal shall be supported by a written
statement from theCommunity andPublic Works Director that extending the telecommunications
facilities, as proposed, would interfere with the public health, safety,or welfare.
Section 24.Remedies to Enforce Compliance.In addition to any other remedy provided herein,
the City reserves the right to pursue any remedy to compel or force Granteeand/or its successors
and assigns to comply with the terms hereof, and the pursuit of any right or remedy by the City
shall not prevent the City from thereafter declaring a forfeiture or revocation for breach of the
conditions herein.
Section 25.City Ordinances and Regulations.Nothing herein shall be deemed to direct or
restrict the City’s ability to adopt and enforce all necessary and appropriate ordinances regulating
the performance of the conditions of this franchise, including any reasonable ordinances made in
the exercise of its police powers in the interest of public safety and for the welfare of the public.
The City shall have the authority at all times to control by appropriate regulations the location,
elevation, and manner of construction and maintenance of any telecommunications facilities by
Grantee, and Granteeshall promptly conform with all such regulations, unless compliance would
cause Granteeto violate other requirements of law.
In the event of a conflict between Spokane Valley Municipal Code and this franchise, the Spokane
Valley MunicipalCode shall control.
Section 26.Vacation. The City may vacate any City road, right-of-way,or other City property
which is subject to rights granted by this franchisein accordance with state and local law. Any
relocation of telecommunications facilities resulting from a street vacation shall require a
minimum of 180 daysnotice as providedforin section 37.
Section 27.Indemnification.
A.Granteehereby covenants not to bring suit and agreesto indemnify, defend,and hold
harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents and representatives from any and all claims,
costs, judgments, awards or liability to any person arising from injury, sickness,or death of any
person or damage to propertyof any nature whatsoever relating to or arising out of this franchise
agreement; except for injuries and damages caused solely by the negligence of the City. This
includes but is not limited to injury:
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise10of 17
DRAFT
1. For which the negligent acts or omissions of Grantee, itsagents, servants, officers or
employees in performing the activities authorized by a franchise are theproximate cause;
2. By virtue of Grantee’sexerciseof the rights granted herein;
3. By virtue of the City permitting Grantee’suse of the City’s rights-of-waysor other public
property;
4. Based upon the City’s inspection or lack of inspection of work performed by Grantee,
itsagents and servants, officers or employees in connection with work authorized on the
facility or property over which the City has control, pursuant to a franchise or pursuant to
any other permit or approval issued in connection with a franchise;
5. Arising as a result of the negligent acts or omissions of Grantee, itsagents, servants,
officers or employees in barricading, instituting trench safety systems or providing other
adequate warnings of any excavation, construction or work upon the facility, in any right-
of-way, or other public place in performance of work or services permitted under a
franchise;or
6. Based upon radio frequency emissions or radiation emitted fromGrantee’sequipment
located upon the facility, regardless of whether Grantee’sequipment complies with
applicable federal statutes and/or FCC regulations related thereto.
B.Grantee’sindemnification obligations pursuant to subsection Aof this section shall include
assuming liability for actions brought by Grantee’s own employees and the employees of Grantee’s
agents, representatives, contractors and subcontractors even though Granteemight be immune
under RCW Title 51 from direct suit brought by such an employee.It is expressly agreed and
understood that this assumption of potential liability for actions brought by the aforementioned
employees is limited solely to claims against the City arising by virtue of Grantee’sexercise of
the rights set forth in a franchise.The obligations of Granteeunder this subsection havebeen
mutually negotiated by the parties, and Granteeacknowledgesthat the City would not enter into a
franchise without Grantee’swaiver.To the extent required to provide this indemnification and
this indemnification only, Granteewaives its immunity under RCW Title 51.
C.Inspection or acceptance by the City of any work performed by Granteeat the time of
completion of construction shall not be grounds for avoidance of any of these covenants of
indemnification.Provided, that Granteehas been given prompt written notice by the City of any
such claim, said indemnification obligations shall extend to claims which are not reduced to a suit
and any claims which may be compromised prior to the culmination of any litigation or the
institution of any litigation.The City has the right to defend or participate in the defense of any
such claim, and has the right to approve any settlement or other compromise of any such claim.
D.In the event that Granteerefuses the tender of defense in any suit or any claim, said tender
having been made pursuant to this section, and said refusal is subsequently determined by a court
having jurisdiction (or such other tribunal that the parties shall agree to decide the matter), to have
been a wrongful refusal on the part of Grantee, then Granteeshall pay all of the City’s costs for
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise11of 17
DRAFT
defense of the action, including all reasonable expert witness fees, reasonable attorneys’fees, the
reasonable costs of the City, and reasonable attorneys’ feesof recovering under this subsection.
E.Grantee’sduty to defend, indemnify and hold harmless City against liability for damages
caused by the concurrent negligence of (a) City or City’s agents, employees, or contractors, and
(b) Granteeor Grantee’sagents, employees, or contractors, shall apply only to the extent of the
negligence of Granteeor Grantee’sagents, employees, or contractors.In the event that a court of
competent jurisdiction determines that a franchise is subject to the provisions of RCW 4.24.115,
the parties agree that the indemnity provisions hereunder shall be deemed amended to conform to
said statute and liability shall be allocated as provided herein.
F.Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, Granteeassumes the risk of damage
to its telecommunication facilities located in the rights-of-wayand upon City-owned property from
activities conducted by the City, its officers, agents, employees and contractors, except to the
extent any such damage or destruction is caused by or arises from any willful or malicious action
or gross negligence on the part of the City, its officers, agents, employees or contractors.Grantee
releases and waives any and all such claims against the City, its officers, agents, employees or
contractors.Granteefurther agr ees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City against any
claims for damages, including, but not limited to, business interruption damages and lost profits,
brought by or under users of Grantee’sfacilities as the result of any interruption of service due to
damage or destruction ofGrantee’sfacilities caused by or arising out of activities conducted by
the City, its officers, agents, employees or contractors, except to the extent any such damage or
destruction is caused by or arises from the sole negligence or any willful or malicious actions on
the part of the City, its officers, agents, employees or contractors.
G.The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration, revocation or termination of this
franchise.
Section 28.Insurance.Granteeshall procure and maintain for the duration of the franchise,
insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or
in connection with the exercise of the rights, privileges and authority granted hereunder to Grantee,
its agents,representatives or employees.
Applicant’s maintenance of insurance as required by this franchiseshall not be construed to limit
the liability of the Granteeto the coverage provided by such insurance, or otherwise limit the City’s
recourse to any remedy available at law or in equity.
A.Automobile Liability insurancewith limits no less than $1,000,000 Combined Single Limit
per accident for bodily injury and property damage.This insurance shall cover all owned, non-
owned, hired or leased vehiclesused in relation to this franchise. Coverage shall be written on
Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CA 00 01 or a substitute form providing equivalent liability
coverage. If necessary, the policy shall be endorsed to providecontractual liability coverage; and
B.Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written on Insurance Services Office
(ISO) occurrence form CG 00 01,or a substitute form providing equivalent liability coverage
acceptable to theCity,and shall cover products liability. The City shall benamed as an insured
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise12of 17
DRAFT
under the Applicant’s Commercial General Liability insurance policy using ISO Additional
Insured-State or Political Subdivisions-Permits CG 20 12 or a substitute endorsementacceptable
to the Cityproviding equivalent coverage. Coverage shall be written on an occurrence basis with
limits no less than $2,000,000 Combined Single Limit per occurrence and $2,000,000 general
aggregate for personal injury, bodily injury and property damage. Coverage shall include but not
be limited to: blanket contractual; products/completed operations; broad form property; explosion,
collapse and underground (XCU); and Employer’s Liability.
The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions for
Commercial General Liability insurance:
1.The Grantee’sinsurance coverage shall be primary insurancewith respect to the Cityas
outlined in the Indemnification section of this franchise. Any insurance, self-insurance, or
insurance pool coverage maintained by the City shall be in excess of the Grantee’s
insurance and shall not contribute with it.
2.The Grantee’sinsurance shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be cancelled,
except after 30 daysprior written notice has been given to the City.
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:VII.
Granteeshall furnish the City with original certificates and a copy of anyamendatory
endorsements, including the additional insured endorsement, evidencing the insurance
requirements of the Granteeprior to the adoption of this Ordinance.
Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies required herein shall not affect
coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
Section 29.Performance Bond Relating to Construction Activity. Before undertaking any of
the work, installation, improvements, construction, repair, relocation or maintenance authorized
by this franchise, Grantee, or any parties Granteecontracts with to perform labor in the
performance of this franchise, shall, upon the request of the City, furnish a bond executed by
Granteeor Grantee’scontractors and a corporate surety authorized to operate a surety business in
the State of Washington, in such sum asmay be set and approved by the City, in the amount of
$25,000, as sufficient to ensure performance of Grantee’sobligations under this franchise. The
bond shall be conditioned so that Granteeshall observe all the covenants, terms,and conditions
and shall faithfully perform all of the obligations of this franchise, and to repair or replace any
defective work or materials discovered in the City’s road, streets, or property. Said bond shall
remain in effect for the life of this franchise. In the event Granteeproposes to construct a project
for which the above-mentioned bond would not ensure performance of Grantee’sobligations under
this franchise, the City is entitled to require such larger bond as may be appropriate under the
circumstances.
Section 30.Modification. The City and Granteehereby reserve the right to alter, amend,or
modify the terms and conditions of this franchiseupon written agreement of both parties to such
alteration, amendment or modification.
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise13of 17
DRAFT
Section 31.Forfeiture and Revocation. If Granteewillfully violates or fails to comply with any
of the provisions of this franchise, or through willful or unreasonable negligence fails to heed or
comply with any notice given Granteeby the City under the provisions of this franchise, and an
adequate opportunity to cure the violation or non-compliance has been given in writing to Grantee,
then Granteeshall, at the election of the City, forfeit all rights conferred hereunder and this
franchise may be revoked or annulled by the City after a hearing held upon reasonable notice to
Grantee. The City may elect, in lieu of the above and without any prejudice to any of its other legal
rights and remedies, to obtain an order from the Spokane County Superior Court compelling
Granteeto comply with the provisions of this franchise and to recover damages and costs incurred
by the City by reason of Grantee’sfailure to comply.
Section 32.Assignment.This franchise may not be assigned or transferred without the written
approval of the City, except that Granteecan assign this franchise without approval of,but upon
notice to the City to,any parent, affiliate or subsidiary of Granteeor to any entity that acquires all
or substantially all the assets or equity of Grantee, by merger, sale, consolidation,or otherwise.
Section 33.Acceptance. Not later than 60 days after passage of this Ordinance, the Grantee
must accept the franchise herein by filing with the City Clerk an unconditional written acceptance
thereof. Failure of Granteeto so accept this franchise within said period of time shall be deemed
a rejection thereof by Grantee, and the rights and privileges herein granted shall, after the
expiration of the 60-day period, absolutely cease, unless the time period is extended by ordinance
duly passed for that purpose.
Section 34.Survival. All of the provisions, conditions and requirements of sections: 5, 6, 7,8,
13,16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 27, 28,29, 37, 38and 39 of this franchise shall be in addition to any and all
other obligations and liabilities Granteemay have to the City at common law, by statute, by
ordinance, or by contract, and shall survive termination of this franchise, and any renewals or
extensions hereof. All of the provisions, conditions, regulations and requirements contained in
this franchise shall further be binding upon the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, legal
representatives and assigns of Granteeand Cityand all privileges, as well as all obligations and
liabilities of Granteeshall inure to itsrespectiveheirs, successors and assigns equally as if they
were specifically mentioned herein.
Section 35.Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should be
held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence,
clause or phrase of this Ordinance. In the event that any of the provisions of the franchise are held
to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City reserves the right to reconsider the grant
of the franchise and may amend, repeal, add, replace or modify any other provision of the
franchise, or may terminate the franchise.
Section 36.Renewal. Application for extension or renewal of the term of this franchise shall
be made no later than 180 days of the expiration thereof. In the event the time period granted by
this franchise expires without being renewed by the City, the terms and conditions hereof shall
continue in effect until this franchise is either renewed or terminated by the City.
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise14of 17
DRAFT
Section 37.Notice. Any notice or information required or permitted to be given by or to the
parties under this franchise may be sent to the following addresses unless otherwise specified, in
writing:
The City:City of Spokane Valley
Attn: City Clerk
10210EastSprague Avenue
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Grantee:Fatbeam__
Attn: Kim Devlin
2065 West Riverstone Drive, Suite 105
Coeur d’ Alene, ID 83814
Email:kim@fatbeam.com
Phone: (509) 344-1008
Section 38.Choice of Law.Any litigation between the City and Granteearising under or
regarding this franchise shall occur, if in the state courts, in the Spokane County Superior Court,
and if in the federal courts, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Washington.
Section 39.Non-Waiver. The City shall be vested with the power and authority to reasonably
regulate the exercise of the privileges permitted by this franchise in the public interest. Grantee
shall not be relieved of its obligations to comply with any of the provisions of this franchise by
reason of any failure of the City to enforce prompt compliance, nor does the City waive or limit
any of its rights under this franchise by reason of such failure or neglect.
Section 40.Entire Agreement. This franchise constitutes the entire understanding and
agreement between the parties as to the subject matter herein and no other agreements or
understandings, written or otherwise, shall be binding upon the parties upon execution and
acceptance hereof. This franchise shall also supersede and cancel any previous right or claim of
Granteeto occupy the Cityroads as herein described.
Section 41.Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after
publication of the Ordinance or a summary thereof occurs in the official newspaper of the City of
Spokane Valley as provided by law.
PASSED by the City Council this ________day of ______, 2025.
________________________________________
Pam Haley, Mayor
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise15of 17
DRAFT
ATTEST:
Marci Patterson,City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Office of theCity Attorney
Date of Publication:
Effective Date:
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise16of 17
DRAFT
Accepted by ___________________________:
By:
The Grantee,____________________________,foritself, and for its successors and
assigns, does accept all of the terms and conditions of the foregoing franchise.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, has signed this
day of , 2025. Subscribed and sworn before me this day of , 2025.
Notary Public in and for the State of
residing in
My commission expires
Ordinance 25-012, FatbeamTelecommunicationsFranchise17of 17
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: July 29, 2025 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply:consent old business new business public hearing
information admin. Report pending legislation executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: First Reading of Proposed Interim Ordinance 25-013, Emergency Interim
Ordinance Adopting Height Restrictions for Communication Towers Used by Regional Facilities for First
Responder Communication.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.63.220, SVMC 22.120
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None
BACKGROUND: Spokane Regional Emergency Communications (“SREC”) operates the regional 911
call center that serves the City, Spokane County, and many other areas in the region. SREC currently
operates its 911 call center and primary/master emergency communications tower on land leased from the
City of Spokane. SREC’s lease terminates at the end of 2025 and the City of Spokane has indicated that it
intends to use those premises to establish and operate its own 911 call center by an as-of-yet undetermined
time in 2026. Consequently, for SREC to ensure it can continue providing regional emergency
communication services for the City and its other member agencies, SREC needs to act swiftly to relocate
its 911 call center and construct a new primary/master emergency wireless communications tower at a
different location.
SREC owns a 4+ acre parcel located within the City at 12809 E. Mirabeau Parkway. SREC has identified
this parcel as the site for SREC’s new 911 call center and primary/master emergency communications
tower. Being in the Mixed Use zone, the current language of SVMC 22.120.040(K) (including Table
22.120-1 therein) prohibits tower heights from exceeding a maximum height of 60 feet, with an additional
20 feet allowed for antenna array attached to the tower. However, in order to provide reliable continuous
emergency communications services throughout the region, SREC’s communications tower must be at least
100 feet high with the antenna array able to extend up to 20 feet above the tower. SREC does not own other
property that would be a viable alternate site.
SVMC 22.120.040(K) and Table 22.120-1 are part of the City’s development code. Amendments to the
City’s development code are generally required to be considered by the City Planning Commission,
including conducting a public hearing, before being taken up for consideration by the City Council. City
staff anticipate it would take approximately 3 to 4 months, and potentially longer, to complete all necessary
processes to amend SVMC 22.120 et seq. to allow transmission communication towers up to 120 feet
(including antenna array and support structures) for SREC’s purposes. Once this process is completed,
SREC estimates that it will take approximately 2 months to construct the primary/master communications
tower. Once the tower has been constructed, SREC will need an additional 5 months to program/calibrate
the tower equipment so the new tower can communicate with the other towers that are part of SREC’s
emergency communication system.
RCW 35A.63.220 authorizes City Council to enact an interim land use regulation without first requiring a
public hearing so long as Council (a) holds a public hearing on the interim regulation within 60 days of its
adoption, and (b) adopts findings of fact justifying the action before or immediately after the public hearing.
Such interim regulations may be in effect for up to 6 months (or up to 1 year if a work plan is developed
for related studies providing for the longer period). Interim regulations “may be renewed for one or more
six-month periods if a subsequent public hearing is held and findings of fact are made prior to each
renewal.” RCW 35A.63.220. Per WAC 197-11-880, emergency interim land use regulations are also
exempt from the SEPA process.
SREC only has five months left on its current lease. After that time, SREC will be in jeopardy of losing
access to and use of its current facilities. This risk will increase over time in 2026 as the City of Spokane
builds up its 911 call center and adds staff to operate the same. If SREC does not begin designing and
constructing the primary/master communications tower now, there is a tangible danger that SREC’s new
facilities will not be built and operational by the time they no longer have access to their current facilities.
Were this to happen, SREC would be unable to provide reliable continuous emergency communication
services to its members throughout the region.
This situation presents a serious risk of harm to the health, safety, and welfare of the public. SREC is the
primary public safety answering point for the region and is responsible for providing reliable 911 services
to agencies across Spokane County. SREC’s emergency communications infrastructure is critical to public
safety in the City and the region. It is foreseeable that an interruption of emergency communication services
would have a high probability to cause delay and/or non-delivery of emergency lifesaving services to those
in need. Because SREC does not know precisely when they will lose access to its current facilities during
2026, it needs to begin construction of its replacement primary/master communication tower immediately
to ensure they are fully operational before they completely relocate to the new facility.
If adopted, Interim Ordinance 25-013 would mitigate against this risk by allowing SREC, as a provider of
emergency communication services for first responders, to proceed with design and construction of the new
primary/master communications tower now while the City completes the work and processes necessary for
the City Council to consider adopting a permanent exemption or otherwise modify the height restrictions
identified in SVMC 22.120.040(K) and Table 22.120-1.
OPTIONS: Waive the 3-touch rule and adopt Interim Ordinance 25-013 or take other action Council deems
appropriate.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move to waive the rules and adopt Interim Ordinance 25-
013.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A
STAFF CONTACT: City Attorney Kelly Konkright; Planning Manager Steve Roberge; Lori Markham,
Executive Director of SREC
_________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENTS:
Proposed Interim Ordinance
Draft
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 25-013
AN EMERGENCY INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING IMMEDIATE HEIGHT
RESTICTIONS FOR COMMUNICATION TOWERS USED BY REGIONAL
FACILITIES FOR FIRST RESPONDER COMMUNICATIONS, AND OTHER
MATTERS RELATING THERETO.
WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley (“City”) contracts with the Spokane County
Sheriff’s Office (“SCSO”) to provide law enforcement services within the City, and receives both
emergency medical and fire protection services from Spokane Valley Fire Department (“Fire
Department”) and Spokane County Fire District No. 8 (“Fire District” and collectively with the
Fire Department, “Fire Service Providers”); and
WHEREAS, the SCSO and the Fire Service Providers both contract with Spokane Regional
Emergency Communications (“SREC”), a regional public safety answering point (i.e. a regional
911 call center) formed under RCW 39.34 et seq., to receive calls for emergency response services
(i.e. 911 emergency calls) and dispatch appropriate emergency personnel to respond to
emergencies (hereinafter “emergency communication services”); and
WHEREAS, SREC currently maintains its regional 911 call center facility, includingits
primary/master communication tower, on property that SREC leases from the City of Spokane;
and
WHEREAS, the lease between the City of Spokane and SREC will expire at the end of
2025, after which the City of Spokane has stated it intends to begin occupying and using the
property to operate its own emergency call center; and
WHEREAS, the City, SCSO,and other current member agencies of SREC are not and do
not anticipate becoming members or recipients of emergency communication services from the
City of Spokane; and
WHEREAS, in order to provide uninterrupted emergency communications to the City and
SREC’s other member agencies, SREC needs to have use of a fully operational regional 911 call
center, including a new primary/master communications tower, before the City of Spokane fully
occupies SREC’s current leased facilities; and
WHEREAS, SREC owns real property within the City located at 12809 Mirabeau Parkway
(hereinafter “Property”) on which it intends to locate its new regional 911 call center and
primary/master communications tower; and
Ordinance 25-013 Page 1 of 6
Draft
WHEREAS, the Property is located within the Mixed Use (MU) zone, and Title 22,
Chapter 120 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (“SVMC 22.120 et seq.”) prevents
communication tower structures from exceeding 60 feet in height in the MU zone and prevents
antenna array from reaching more than 20 feet above the tower, for a total allowable maximum
height of 80 feet; and
WHEREAS, in order to function properly and reliably dispatch emergency personnel
throughout the Spokane County region without signal interference or refraction, SREC’s
primary/master communications tower structure must be constructed to be at least 100 feet in
height without attached antenna arrays, and up to 120 feet in total height including all attached
antenna arrays, such that it is able to send and receive signals free from interference of surrounding
buildings, power lines, and other facilities; and
WHEREAS, SREC will lose the ability to reliably and consistently dispatch emergency
personnel to respond to all emergency calls for service throughout the region if the primary/master
communications tower construction and 911 call center renovations are not completed and in
operation before SREC no longer has use of the existing facilities owned by the City of Spokane;
and
WHEREAS, SREC needs to complete construction of the new primary/master
communications tower on the Property before it can be programmed to effectively communicate
with SREC’s other supporting communication towers; and
WHEREAS, SREC cannot construct the primary/master communications tower without
first having a design for the same, and cannot design the tower to be both operationally effective
and permittable by the City due to the current language of SVMC 22.120 et seq.
WHEREAS, SREC must also complete renovations to convert the existing building into
SREC’s new 911 call center in order to receive and send emergency communications, but cannot
take on the financial burden of proceeding with construction thereof unless and until the SVMC
allows emergency wireless communication towers to be at least 100 feet in height (120 feet in total
height including antenna array) because it could result in waste of public taxpayer funds; and
WHERAS, SREC estimates it will take at least 2 months to complete design and
construction of the new primary/master communication tower, and an additional 5 months
thereafter to complete the necessary programming for the tower to be operational; and
WHEREAS, between now and the date by which permits would need to be issued for SREC
to complete the construction and programming necessary for the new primary/master
communications tower to be operational, there is not enough time for (a) the City and the City
Planning Commission to complete the process required by SVMC 18.10 et seq. to amend SVMC
22.120 et seq. and (b) City Council to thereafter consider and take action on the Planning
Commission’s recommendations; and
Ordinance 25-013 Page 2 of 6
Draft
WHEREAS, (a) SREC will not be able to continue providing uninterrupted and continuous
emergency communication services once it no longer has access to its current 911 call center unless
its new facilities within the City have been constructed and are operational, and (b) SREC will lose
access to the currently leased 911 call center and facilities after December 31 ,2025, oncethe City
of Spokane has established and is operating its own 911 call centerat that location; and
WHEREAS, SREC does not currently own property that could serve as an alternative site
for the new primary/master emergency communications tower and 911 call center; and
WHEREAS, emergency communication services being unavailable for any length of time
could foreseeably result in delay or non-delivery of emergency lifesaving services, and therefore
presents an imminent risk of harm to the health, safety, and welfare of persons both in and outside
the City; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 11, Section 11 of the Washington Constitution, the City
of Spokane Valley (“City”) is authorized to “make and enforce within its limits all such local
police, sanitary and other regulations as are not in conflict with general laws,” which includes the
adoption of regulations governing land uses within the city; and
WHEREAS, RCW 35A.63.220 authorizes the enactment of an interim land use regulation
prior to holding a public hearing, provided the City conducts a public hearing on the interim
regulation within 60 days of the date of adoption of the same; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to WAC 197-11-880, the adoption of this interim land use ordinance
is exempt from the requirements of a threshold determination under the State Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) and future permanent zoning regulations will be reviewed in accordancewith
SEPA Rules; and
WHEREAS, due to the urgent need for SREC to construct a new primary/master
communications tower and 911 call center to ensure SREC can reliably provide continuous
uninterrupted emergency communication services to the region and City, this emergency
ordinance is necessary to protect public health, safety, and welfare; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the emergency immediate interim ordinance
amendment established by this Ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public
health, public safety, public property and public peace.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley ordains as follows:
Section 1. Preliminary Findings. The City Council hereby adopts the above recitals as
findings of fact in support of this Ordinance.
Section 2. Interim AmendmentAdopted. The City Council hereby declares an
emergency and adopts an interim amendment to Title 22 SVMC by adding a new section
Ordinance 25-013 Page 3 of 6
Draft
22.120.060SVMC “Towers for Emergency Communications Services,” as provided in Exhibit A
on an interim basis for the period of 180days while this emergency ordinance is in effect. This
temporary interim amendment is adopted pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390.
Section 3. Public Hearing. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220, the City Council shall
conduct a public hearing on thisinterim amendment on September 16, 2025, at 6:00 p.m., or as
soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, to hear and consider the comments and testimony of
those wishing to speak at such public hearing regarding the interim amendment set forth in this
Ordinance. The hearing will take place at the City of Spokane Valley City Hall in City Council
Chambers,10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, 99206. Immediately after conducting
the public hearing, the City Council shall adopt findings of fact on the subject of this interim
amendment and either justify the continued adoption of the interim amendment, cancel the interim
amendment, or modify the interim amendment as determined necessary.
Section 4. Duration. The interim amendments set forth in this Ordinance shall be in
effect as of the date of this Ordinance and shall continue in effect for a period of 180 days from
the date of this Ordinance, unless repealed, extended, or modified by the City Council after
subsequent public hearing(s) and entry of appropriate findings of fact, pursuant to RCW
35A.63.220.
Section 5. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority set forth herein and prior
to the effective date of this Ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed.
Section 6. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance
shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity
or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence,
clause, or phrase of this Ordinance.
Section 7. Declaration of Emergency; Effective Date. The City Council hereby
declares this Ordinance is in response to a public emergency and is necessary for the protection of
public health, safety, and welfare to establish an interim amendment that provides a building height
allowance for those regional facilities providing emergency communication services for first
responders. This interim amendment must be imposed as an emergency measure to protect the
public health, safety, and welfare, and to promote the effective emergency communications
throughout the region for effective policing and lifesaving services while the City considers
permanent amendments to SVMC 22.120.060. This Ordinance does not affect existing vested
rights, nor will it prohibit development within the City since all other allowable uses are not
affected by this interim amendment. Based on the reasons and declaration of emergency stated
herein, this Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption by the City Council.
Passed by the City Council this ____ day of ______, 2025.
Pam Haley, Mayor
Ordinance 25-013 Page 4 of 6
Draft
ATTEST:
City Clerk, Marci Patterson
Approved as toForm:
Office of the City Attorney
Ordinance 25-013 Page 5 of 6
Draft
EXHIBIT “A”
Section 22.120.060 –Towers for Emergency Communications Services
Wireless communication services, including transmission towers or antenna support structures,
that are used by regional facilities for first responder communication shall be exempt from the
provisions of SVMC 22.120-1 Tower Height Limitations. Such regional facilities that assist with
first responder communication shall be allowed a height restriction of up to 100 feet for the
tower and up to 20 feet for the antenna array attached to the tower, for a total combined height up
to 120 feet (where the tower is no more than 100 feet from the ground and no antenna array
extends more than 20 feet above the top of the tower).
Ordinance 25-013 Page 6 of 6
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: July 29, 2025 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply:
consent old business new business public hearing
information admin. report pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Joint Planning Interlocal Agreement (ILA)
Amendment
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Chapter 36.70A RCW (Growth Management Act) amended
during 2021-2022 Legislative session pursuant to House Bill 1717.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Administrative report on July 15, 2025. The ILA was
entered by the City in 2003 (Contract 03-070) and amended in 2009 (Contract 09-019).
BACKGROUND: The Steering Committee of Elected Officials (SCEO) is made up of elected
representatives of the County and cities, including Spokane Valley, within the County. It is tasked
with providing cooperation and collaboration among jurisdictions and recommending policies in
accordance with the Growth Management Act (GMA). HB 1717 requires local jurisdictions to work
with federally recognized tribes who choose to participate in the GMA planning process.
The SCEO, after consideration, recommended adding the Spokane and Kalispell Tribes of Indians
as members to the SCEO on November 13, 2024.
Spokane County Commissioners adopted County Resolution 25-0166 (attached) on April 1, 2025,
to amend the ILA and implement the recommendation of the SCEO. It was conveyed to the City
on June 12, 2025. The resolution modified the ILA as recommended by the SCEO by adding one
elected representative, each from the Kalispell and Spokane Tribes to the SCEO. (The City of
Spokane Valley has two representatives, County and City of Spokane three each, and small cities
one each.) The ILA requires signature of all participating jurisdictions for ratification.
OPTIONS: Approve the amendment to the GMA Joint Planning Interlocal Agreement and
authorize the City to execute the same; or take other action deemed appropriate.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: I move to approve the amendment to the GMA Joint Planning
Interlocal Agreement and authorize the City to execute the same.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: No additional budget impact.
STAFF CONTACT: Steve Roberge, Planning Manager
___________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENTS: Letter from Spokane County, Board of County Commissioners Resolution 25-0166
and ILA
RCA Motion Consideration for Commerce Grants Page 1 of 1
S COTT R.C HESNEY,AICP,D IRECTOR OF P LANNING
May 9, 2025
Mayor Tim Hattenburg
City of Spokane Valley
10210 E Sprague Ave
Spokane Valley, WA. 99206
Dear Mayor Hattenburg,
The Spokane County Board of Commissioners considered and adopted the attached
amendment to the Interlocal Agreement that creates the Steering Committee of Elected Officials
and Countywide Planning Policies. Resolution 25-0166is attached.
The ILA now requires signatures from all participating jurisdictions for ratification. Please see
the amended ILA and signature pages for each jurisdiction.
When executed, please return it to me and include any resolution or action if used. Once
received, Spokane County Planning will assemble and distribute the fully executed ILA.
Regards,
Scot R. Chesney, AICP, director
C:Mary Kuney, Chair, Spokane County BoCC
Ginna Vasquez, Clerk to the BoCC
1026W EST B ROADWAY,S POKANE W ASHINGTON,99260• 509.477.1500•SCHESNEY @ SPOKANECOUNTY.ORG
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
July 29, 2025
Meeting Date:Department Director Approval:
consent old business new business public hearing
:
Check all that apply
information admin. report pending legislation executive session
Motion Consideration: Potential Grant Opportunity – Transportation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Improvement Board (TIB)
: RCW 35.77.010: Six Year Transportation Improvement Program
GOVERNING LEGISLATION
:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN
September 3, 2019, Council authorized the City Manager to purchase state property located
immediately north of the existing Sullivan Park.
March 14, 2023, Council authorized the City Manager to apply to SRTC for preservation
funding for North Sullivan from Spokane River to Trent.
March 18, 2025, Council authorized the City Manager to apply to SRTC’s request for
th
applications of Barker/4 Roundabout andBarker Road (Sprague Ave to 4th Ave).
July 22, 2025, administrative report discussing the 2025 TIB call for projects.
Annual adoption of the 6-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
Annual updates to the City’s Legislative Agenda, including the South Barker Corridor.
: On May 16, 2025, the Washington State TIB issued a Call for Projects for the
BACKGROUND
Urban Arterial Program (UAP), the Active Transportation Program (ATP), and the Complete
Streets Program (CSP). The UAP has historically funded Spokane Valley street-related
projects. The ATP delivers multi-modal transportation projects generally prioritizing non-
motorized users. The CSP requires agencies to deliver projects in alignment with their adopted
Complete Streets ordinance and policies. Critical program details are:
UAP: $70 million statewide, $7.04 million NE Region
Total Funds:
ATP: $8 million statewide, $1.51 million E region
CSP: $30 million statewide (no regional distribution)
UAP: $1 - $3 million
Typical Award Range
ATP: $150,000 - $750,000
CSP: $25,000 - $3 million
20% min.
Match Amount:
August 15, 2025
Application Due Date:
November 21, 2025
Application Award Date:
Staff have reviewed the grant scoring criteria and propose the projects in Table 1 for City
Council consideration. The projects are consistent with other recent applications submitted to
the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB), Spokane Regional Transportation Council
(SRTC), Congressional Discretionary Spending (CDS), the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment
Board (FMSIB), and Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT).
Table 1. Proposed TIB Project List and Funding Requests
Grant
Project NameTotal Estimated CostCity Match (%)
Request (%)
Urban Arterial Program (UAP)
Complete Streets Program (CSP)
thth
S. Sullivan Rd. Preservation (8 to 24)
$1,840,000 $460,000
$2,300,000 for TIB
($6,200,000 total)
(80%) (20%)
(CN Only, Requesting Unfunded Balance)
th
Barker Roundabout at 4Ave.
$2,400,000 $600,000
$3,000,000
(CN Only) (80%) (20%)
th
Barker Road (Sprague to 4)
$1,480,000 $370,000
$1,850,000
(CN Only) (80%) (20%)
Active Transportation Program (ATP)
Sullivan Park Shared Path Connection
$600,000 $150,000
$750,000
(CN Only) (80%) (20%)
: Proceed with the proposed motion as written or take other appropriate action.
OPTIONS
Move to authorize the City Manager or designee to
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION:
apply for TIB Grants for the projects identified in Table 1.
: It is not likely that the City will receive awards for all the
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS
project applications. Staff have coordinated with the Finance Department regarding the
projected fund balance of Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) revenues in the coming years. At this
time, it appears sufficient REET funds will be available should the City receive a portion of the
requested grant funds. The following considerations are acknowledged:
If the City is highly successful during this grant cycle and exceeds anticipated award
amounts, reduced REET balances may be realized in latter years. This may result in the
City’s inability to use REET dollars as matching funds for future years.
Policy decisions regarding the allocation of REET funds towards Fund #311 may affect
the availability of city match.
When awarded grant funding, staff evaluate the specific awards to confirm local match is
sufficient to meet the grant requirements prior to acceptance of grant funds.
: Adam Jackson, P.E. – Engineering Manager
STAFF CONTACT
______________________________________________________________________
: PowerPoint Presentation
ATTACHMENTS
WHAT IS TIB?
RECOMMENDED PROJECT LIST
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: July 29, 2025 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply:
consent old business new business public hearing
information admin. report pending legislation executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Point In Time Count Update
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: NA
BACKGROUND:
The Point-in-Time (PIT) count and associated Housing Inventory Count (HIC) are required by the
US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) of communities that receive federal
funding for housing/homeless programs. HUD outlines the methodology by which both the PIT
Count and HIC must be conducted.
The PIT captures the number of individuals experiencing homelessness, both sheltered and
unsheltered, on a single night in January. Sheltered homelessness includes those staying in
Emergency Shelters, Transitional Housing, and Safe Havens (Note: The Spokane Continuum of
Care (CoC) does not have any Safe Havens). Unsheltered homelessness includes those staying
in locations not meant for human habitation such as cars, recreational vehicles without proper
utility hook-ups, tents, abandoned buildings, bus stations, storage units, etc.). The 2025 sheltered
count was conducted on January 22, 2025, with the unsheltered count taking place over the
subsequent five days, as allowed by HUD. PIT numbers for the last three years are below.
Year of PIT count 2023 2024 2025
Total Individuals counted 2,390 2,021 1,806
1,435 1,578 1,189
Total Sheltered Individuals
955 443 617
Total Unsheltered Individuals
80 20* 67
Total Unsheltered Individuals
counted in Spokane Valley
*The 2024 unsheltered count for Spokane Valley was reported by the Collaborative
Applicant. The City of Spokane Valey Homeless and Housing Coordinator participated in the
2024 PIT count and recalls the 2024 count was closer to the 2023 count.
Page 1 of 2
The HIC provides a one-night inventory of programs in Spokane County that offer dedicated beds
and housing units for people experiencing homelessness. It occurs on the same night as the PIT
Count. The HIC includes beds counted in the following program types:
Emergency Shelter
Transitional Housing
Rapid Re-housing
Permanent Supportive Housing – Disability Required
Other Permanent Housing
Permanent Housing (PH)
Permanent Housing with Services
HIC numbers for the last three years are below.
Year of HIC count 2023 2024 2025
Other Permanent Housing1,220 923 883
units
Permanent Supportive 1,122 1,131 1,593
Housing units
Rapid Re-Housingunits 706 822 972
Transitional Housing beds 290 262 344
Emergency Shelter beds 1,408 1,620 1,050
Total Units 4,746 4,758 4,842
As the Collaborative Applicant for the CoC, the City of Spokane organizes the PIT/HIC counts in
Spokane County. The City of Spokane Valley Housing & Homeless Coordinator worked closely
with City of Spokane staff to coordinate counting on five consecutive days in Spokane Valley. The
Homeless Outreach team (which includes the Homeless Outreach Officers, and contracted
outreach workers from Frontier Behavioral Health) participated in the count, sometimes working
directly with community volunteers to cover more ground.
OPTIONS: Discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None
STAFF CONTACT: Eric Robison, Housing and Homeless Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
Presentation
Page 2 of 2
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: July 29, 2025 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: consent old business new business public hearing
information admin. report pending legislation executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: City of Spokane Valley 2025 Economic Trends Report #2
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None
BACKGROUND: Four times a year, the Eastern Washington University (EWU) Public Policy &
Economic Analysis Department compiles and publishes a regional economic trend report
highlighting several key economic data sets that provide regional indicators. The Department also
provides localized reports for individual cities and municipalities upon request and under contract.
The City’s Community & Economic Development Department has contracted with EWU’s Public
Policy & Economic Analysis Department to provide four detailed economic analyses and trends
reports for the City of Spokane Valley in 2025. The department will utilize this data and these
trends to respond to business development inquiries and planning initiatives.
EWU personnel will provide a report on July 29, 2025, summarizing the economic analysis and
trends in its second 2025 report, provide relevant data, and answer any questions based on the
data presented.
OPTIONS: Information only
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Information and reporting.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The 2025 contract is budgeted for $12,250.00
STAFF CONTACT: Teri Stripes, Economic Development Specialist
ATTACHMENTS:
PowerPoint Presentation
Q2, 2025 July 2025
City of Spokane Valley Economic Trends Update
residential construction
-
DemographicsLabor marketsEmployment Residential constructionNonTaxable sales & revenue
–––––
Track indicators in the following categories :Local indicators are for the City of Spokane Valley, unless noted
Overview Goal: to provide insights about important City trends via some data with higher frequency than annual updates••
3.0%2.5%2.0%1.5%1.0%0.5%0.0%
2025
2024
110,200
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
City of Spokane Valley populationCOSV Annual Growth RateSpokane County Annual Growth Rate
2010
2009
COSV Population & Growth Rate
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
82,985
-
80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000
120,000 100,000
largest
-
th
2019: 1.6%
-
Annual gain of ~1,400, or 1.2%Average growth rate since pandemic: 1.0%Average growth rate 2015COSV now the 8city in WA!
Population 2025 recently released estimates show more of the same
••••
19.5%
COSV Share of County Population
19.3%
5.0%0.0%
25.0%20.0%15.0%10.0%
Since its inception, the contribution of COSV to the County’s population has remained remarkably constantImplication: it has grown as the same rate as the County overall.
Population City of Spokane Valley’s share of County population remains the same••
7.0%6.0%5.0%4.0%3.0%2.0%1.0%0.0%
25-May
4.0%
25-Mar
25-Jan
24-Nov
24-Sep
24-Jul
24-May
24-Mar
Unemployment Rate County
24-Jan
23-Nov
23-Sep
23-Jul
23-May
23-Mar
23-Jan
22-Nov
22-Sep
Unemployment Rate City
22-Jul
22-May
22-Mar
22-Jan
21-Nov
21-Sep
21-Jul
Unemployed count
21-May
0
5.4%
500
4000350030002500200015001000
a
–
third (33%).
-
The City’s unemployment rate in May of 2025 of 4.0% is about the same as the county (3.9%), and BELOW BOTH the state (4.5%) and national averages (4.2%).Since the start of the year (January),
unemployment has fallen from 5.7% to 4.0%.Since the start of the year (January), the number of people unemployed has fallen from 3,000 to 2,000 reduction of one
Labor market: Unemployment count & rate Start of 2025 shows lower unemployment (below both the state and nation)
•••Source: Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS)
returning to what it
–
in the City of Spokane Valley have
ending in January of 2025, both the
in May of 2025 is below both the state
number of jobs
unemployment
and the
unemployment rate
CLF
Both the leveled off, and in fact, fallen slightly since late 2024 was two years ago.After an uptick in count of unemployed and the unemployment rate have fallen steadily over the first
half of 2025.The current and national averages and mirrors the county more broadly.
Summary of aggregate employment measures•••
.
& social assistance
health care
health care & social assistance
Finance/insurance & Retail
terms, employment in
terms, employment in county’s
percentage total
Most of the largest sectors by employment in the county show 2024 employment levels > 2019 except In sector has grown the fastest (~13% cumulatively) of all sectors from 2019, comparing
2024 to 2019In added the greatest number of jobs (~5,500) since 2019
Summary of sector performance, as measured by employment•••
Number of Permitted SFR Units
time buyers has
-
but even greater!
–
income renters find housing to be less affordable than the
-
While SFR unit permitting has remained remarkably stable for the past several years, MFR has seen a surge similar to 2023 The average valuation of SFR decreased over the first half of
2025 by around $50K.Housing affordability for both median buyers and firststarted to improve over the past year, steadily ticking upwards.While lowmedian renter, things have been steadily
improving in the last two years for both groups of renters.
Two very large apartment complexes are scheduled to add over 570 more units to the city’s stock of apartments.
Summary of housing construction & affordability••••
104.78
107.915
93.861
Spokane Valley, MSA
Tri Cities
Boise
Regional Price Parities, Goods
Seattle
95.80
0.000
80.00060.00040.00020.000
140.000120.000100.000
Cities).
-
Local residents pay about 3% less for goods than in Seattle, but about 10% more than in Boise. (Prices are very similar between Spokane Valley & TriPrices in Spokane Valley, MSA are
just slightly above the national average for goods.
Regional Price Parities: Goods Prices for goods in Spokane Valley slightly more affordable than Seattle••Source: BEA
1/1/2023
92.88
108.23102.89
1/1/2022
1/1/2021
1/1/2020
1/1/2019
Spokane Valley, MSA
1/1/2018
1/1/2017
1/1/2016
1/1/2015
Tri Cities
1/1/2014
1/1/2013
1/1/2012
Boise
1/1/2011
1/1/2010
Regional Price Parities, Services
1/1/2009
Seattle
1/1/2008
98.42
95908580
110105100
Cities.)
-
Prices for services in Spokane Valley are about 5% cheaper than in Seattle and about 10% higher than in Boise. (Prices are similar to TriPrices in Spokane Valley have been increasing,
but not as quickly as in Seattle. Prices in Boise have been falling.Prices for services in Spokane Valley are just about the national average.
Regional Price Parities: Goods Prices for services in Spokane Valley not increasing as fast as in Seattle•••Source: BEA
15.0%10.0%5.0%0.0%-5.0%
WA %
$948.7
2024 Q4
half
nd
2024Q3
2024Q2
2024Q1
County of Spokane %
$923.1
2023Q4
2023Q3
COSV %
2023 Q2
2023 Q1
COSV Quarterly Taxable Retail Sales & Growth Rates
COSV ($mill)
$933.7
2022 Q4
$-
$800.0 $600.0 $400.0 $200.0
$1,200.0 $1,000.0
%
But ‘24 sales decreased by 1The correlation between WA state and City of Spokane Valley taxable retail sales is 0.99!
––
By Q4 2024, sales growth in COSV, @ 2.8%, had nearly caught up to growth in County & City of Spokane (3.1%)Looking ahead for the COSV, we can use the WA forecast as a guide
City sales activity Quarterly taxable retail sales picked up in 2024 2
••Source: WA State Department of Revenue
$75.0
food
Accommodtns &
$102.7
stores
General merch
Q4 2024
$108.2
Construction
Q4 2023
contributed” to
in the COSV
-
$109.9
Q4 2022
Misc. retailers et al
$150.5
parts
Motor vehicles &
Q4 Taxable Retail Sales of 5 Largest Contributing Industries/Sectors
$0.0
$50.0
$200.0$150.0$100.0
–
–
rd
Overall gain among top 5: 1.6%Largest industry motor vehicles showed no gainConstruction, 3Miscellaneous retailers (including online) showed 5% increase
largest, showed biggest gain (11%)
largest sectors or industries “under
City sales activity 5 overall gain in Q4••••
.
Taxable
digit income
-
2023: 5.0%
-
from June vs. March has increased a
forecast
term trend. Simple average of growth rates 2005
-
in 2025
Personal Income
of Spokane Valley might expect a similar outcome for
City
State
Annual growth in 2024 declined by ~1%.Considerably < long2025 will likely be weak but perhaps surprise if income growth is accurate
–––
WA bit for 2025 but declined for 2026. Still expecting mid singleThe retail sales
growth.
Summary observations••
Kelley Cullen, Ph.D.D. Patrick Jones, Ph.D.kcullen@ewu.edu, dpjones@ewu.eduSpokane Valley Trends509.828.1365 |509.828.1246
Institute for Public Policy & Economic Analysis