Pacer Propane Property Surplus Sale (Resolution 1632)

At a glance

Based on auto-generated captions; names, numbers and details may be misheard.

  • What: Resolution No. 1632 declares the former Pacer Propane property (18459 NE 76th Street) surplus and lets the mayor or designee sell it. The city bought it in March 2026.
  • Where it stands: pulled from the consent agenda by Council President Stewart and approved unanimously by voice vote on 2026-10-20.
  • Next: staff prepare the sale. A resident asked for environmental testing and disclosure first; the council president said an environmental assessment was done and may be made more available.

Why it was surplused

  • The city bought the parcel for a possible rebuild of the municipal operations center (MOC) on its current site. A much larger site (captioned "H Highleberg") later came available and was purchased, so the smaller parcel is no longer needed.
  • Council President Stewart noted the MOC will not fully move: the decant facility and some specialized services stay on the current site, as discussed at the September 22 study session. She said technology problems kept the public from seeing that discussion.

Concerns raised in public comment

  • David Morton said the parcel lies in a critical aquifer recharge area (CARA 1), about 1,500 ft from a city drinking-water well, and that contamination could reach wells within years.
  • He said the memo and resolution mention no environmental assessment, call for an as-is sale with disclaimed city liability, and estimate no less than $3.6 million with no community outreach.
  • His requests: take the item off consent, publish any environmental due diligence from the March purchase (including whether a Phase I assessment and PFAS testing were done), and require an assessment, shared with buyers, before any sale.
  • He did not claim the site is contaminated; he said the record does not say either way.

Council discussion

  • Council President Stewart said an environmental assessment did take place, staff sent council a brief note that day, and it could be made available publicly or through records requests.
  • No other councilmember spoke. Voice vote, no opposition.

Committee review (2026-10-13)

Based on auto-generated captions.

  • Cochran said the parcel (small, with a building, zoned light industrial) was bought earlier in 2026 for the municipal operations center project and is not needed. A purchase and sale agreement would come back to council and would at least recoup the city's costs, listed slightly above the purchase price to cover transaction costs; a sale by year end was hoped for.
  • Forsythe asked about 2027-2028 budget impacts and why not keep it. Prakriya asked about the purchase price (he cited $3.6 million) and whether waiting a year would be better; the chair ruled market and negotiation questions belong in executive session.
  • Stuart supported consent but said she would pull it on October 20 to put the history of the operations center properties on the record because the video feed of an earlier discussion was cut off.

Sources

Discussion time

About 11 minutes across 2 meetings (from transcript timestamps; approximate).

Meeting Minutes
2026-10-20 - City Council Business Meeting 6
2026-10-13 - Committee of the Whole 5

Log

  • 2026-10-20 - City Council Business Meeting — Pulled from consent by the council president for a fuller record; Resolution 1632 approved unanimously. David Morton urged environmental testing and disclosure before any sale.
  • 2026-10-13 - Committee of the Whole — Committee reviewed the proposal; market questions deferred to executive session; direction to place it on the October 20 consent agenda.