Potential for Soap Lake? Concerns remain on annexation petition presented to city council

Questions and concerns remain on the annexation of about 76 acres of land for commercial use just outside the city of Soap Lake.

The parcel of land stretches on both sides of Grant Place Northwest, between Road 20 Northwest and Adams Street Northwest. The petition for annexation was submitted to the Soap Lake City Council by Soap Lake City Planner Darryl Piercy as a potential growth area for a proposed RV campground, which was brought before the city council last year.

Soap Lake Mayor Alex Kovach said the annexation would allow private developers, North Pacific Investments, to expand their facility, potentially increasing the city’s tax revenue and tax base from the project. Kovach said the city council is looking at legal concerns, such as whether Soap Lake can annex the land in question, as it falls in the Lakeview Urban Growth Area and not the city’s.

“At this time, at the end of the public hearing, the decision on moving forward on the annex petition is still on hold due to a legal question that came up in the process regarding the city’s ability to annex out these parcels of land,” Kovach said.

He said the city is also waiting to hear on results from a wastewater treatment facility study, approved late last year, which should be completed in April. Kovach said the report will give a better idea of how many more connections the treatment facility can handle and the city doesn’t want to make any decisions until the report comes back.

Being a commercial project, Kovach said the city was able to approach the Grant County Economic Development Committee about a grant to extend the city’s sewer lines south of town into the property, as well as some parcels just outside the city’s reach.

A public hearing period was held through March 3, after the petition was first brought forth to the council at an open record hearing on Feb. 3. Four individuals spoke up at the March 3 hearing, all against annexation.

There were concerns over losing revenue if the area isn’t annexed into the city’s urban growth area, Kovach said, as well as if the revenue lost would be greater than the costs the city would face in maintaining and supporting the area.

Public comments included beaches, parks and traffic already being too crowded in the small town. Kovach said other residents said they didn’t like replacing the open land in their backyards with a potential crowd of RVs in the summer months.

“I know it’s tough for people having that in their backyard when they’re used to just having open land, but that comes at a cost to somebody whether it’s developed or not,” Kovach said. “That’s always a tough one having to balance that out.”

The City Council elected to take no further action prior to their meeting on April 7.