1. Call to Order

Chairperson DeVaney called the meeting to order at 2:01 p.m. in the council chambers, Yakima City Hall; 129 N Second St.; Yakima, Washington.

2. Roll Call

Thornsbury conducted roll call and declared a quorum present.

Board members: Amanda McKinney, County Representative, Present (via video-conference)

Steven Jones, Ph.D., County Representative, Present

Juliet Potrykus, Large City Representative, Absent

Hilda González, Ed.D., City Representative, Absent
Jon DeVaney, Member-at-Large, Present

Staff present: Marc Thornsbury, Executive Director

3. Changes to the Agenda

DeVaney asked if there were any changes to the agenda. None were requested.

4. Public Comment

DeVaney asked if there were any public comments. None were offered

5. Board Meeting Minutes for September 10, 2026

DeVaney asked if there were any corrections.

Jones noted Thornsbury had stated at the prior meeting the Agency could retain an engineering consulting firm but their personnel would likely be skilled in other areas so the Agency would have to spend time in training while paying a premium to do so. He asked who would do such training. Thornsbury replied it would be one of the existing staff engineers. Jones asked if the Agency needed two engineers. Thornsbury explained the Agency currently has two engineers.

Jones asked if the engineers were responsible for writing permits and added several permits had been issued for projects that appeared to have already been completed. Thornsbury stated he would have to refer to documentation to state how many were ex post facto. He noted there has been a mix of circumstances including those where the operation and equipment had not been previously permitted and those where the operation—though already existing—is planning to expand or replace existing equipment with new equipment.

Jones moved to approve the September 10, 2026, minutes. McKinney seconded. Motion passed 2-0.

6. Payroll Transfer Authorization for August 2026

Jones moved to approve the August 2026 payroll transfer. McKinney seconded. Motion passed 2-0.

7. Vouchers for September 2026

Jones asked why two documents were provided. Thornsbury explained two accounts payable runs had been completed—one on September 15 and one on September 28. Jones asked for details on payee “Springbrook Holding Company”. Thornsbury stated it is the publisher of the Agency accounting software. Jones moved to approve the September 2026 vouchers. McKinney seconded. Motion passed 2-0.

8. Executive Director’s Report

Thornsbury stated Agency staff continues to be focused on permitting and added applications continue to be received and work is being done to manage scheduling so the Agency can accommodate them with the staff available. He expressed his belief these efforts had been largely successful and noted that while there had been some delays related to the licensed professional engineer reviews require by law, the issues were being resolved and additional permits would be released shortly.

Thornsbury stated he was pleased the Agency had retained two engineering firms and explained this provided [a] redundancy so the Agency would not be delayed in the event it lost one of the firms; [b] flexibility that allows work to be allocated based on the availability of staff at each firm; and [c] capacity so more reviews can be conducted at any given time by spreading the workload. He noted several applications had languished due to a variety of factors, but the Agency now has what it needs and progress is being made—though that means a number of applications are being processed at the same time.

Jones asked what purpose the engineering firms serve in regard to the permitting process. He noted the permits contain a significant amount of very technical information and asked if that was provided by these firms. Thornsbury explained state law requires permits issued by an air pollution control authority to have been reviewed by a professional engineer (PE) licensed in Washington State. He noted the PE ensures the work done by Agency staff (e.g. the calculations made) are acceptable and meet engineering standards.

Thornsbury added the work serves as a final, independent review before a permit is issued. He noted it does not have to take place outside an agency if a PE is on staff—as is often the case with larger agencies. Thornsbury explained smaller agencies often do not have a PE on staff due to their cost and the small quantity of work requiring a PE which is insufficient to warrant having one available full-time.

Thornsbury reiterated that for small agencies, an external PE serves as an independent, objective third party that confirms work by Agency staff meets engineering standards, calculations are accurate, and nothing has been overlooked. He stated in a large agency a permit writer might draft the permit and a staff PE entirely unrelated to the permit might review it, but in a small agency that is typically not possible. Thornsbury remarked it is difficult to review one’s own work, adding is it rare to hear of someone stating, “I reviewed my work and found a number of errors so I sent it back to myself to be redone.” He added the Agency does occasionally receive questions regarding permits in review (e.g. “why was something not considered”, “what is being done with something”, “how is something being addressed”). Thornsbury indicated staff responds to these and sometimes alters the permit language as a result, adding changes to permits are not common, but they do occur.

Jones asked if the PE deals with the air quality issues, calculations, etc. or the state and federal rules and regulations. Thornsbury replied their focus is primarily on the engineering aspects versus the regulatory aspects.

Thornsbury noted work continues processing public records requests. He added while the Agency continues to receive them, the number has fallen slightly and this has allowed staff to focus on some of the larger requests with the hope of clearing them. Thornsbury explained once that is done, staff will have an opportunity to redirect those resources to Agency operations.

Thornsbury stated the Agency has pursued all of the recruiting suggestions offered by the Board without success and is now turning to more costly alternatives. He added recruiting remains a focus.

Thornsbury noted work continues to fulfill requests for information from various board members pertaining to a variety of topics. He explained some of these were relatively complex and require considerable research so work continues on them as time and other Agency demands allow.

Thornsbury stated burn permits were restarting with the ban lifted and orchardists preparing for the season next year. He noted the 2027 fee schedule will be coming up and the at-large board member term will conclude at the end of the year. Thornsbury remarked improvements being made near the Agency by the local electric power provider resulted in a number of unexpected power outages that have disrupted work.

DeVaney asked the current state of Agency recruiting. Thornsbury reiterated the Agency is moving to more expensive alternatives which typically carry a daily charge. He noted most of the well-known providers (e.g. ZipRecruiter) do so. DeVaney asked if Thornsbury was referring to a “head-hunting” or “temp” firm. Thornsbury replied he was referring to listing services and explained the costs for a “head-hunting” firm would be an order of magnitude greater. He described the Agency as moving from upward from lower to higher cost options and expressed hope the positions would be filled before the high-cost alternatives were necessary.

McKinney stated the complexity of the permitting process is the result of the onerous air permitting regulatory environment in Washington State that is second only to California. She added she would be interested in a rough estimate of the number of hours spent by Agency staff addressing public records requests and the estimated cost. McKinney questioned what work might be accomplished by the Agency if the resources consumed by such requests were available.

McKinney noted changes to the electrical grid are being done by power companies to allow them to limit impacts to the electric grid when they are forced to de-energize lines in the face of potential wildfires. She added these companies are investing considerable time and capital so as to protect themselves from litigation resulting from the State’s tort laws.

DeVaney noted Thornsbury appeared to wince at the request for public records statistics. McKinney noted the potential impact of the request and asked for a “back-of-the-napkin” estimate. Thornsbury stated he would see what could be done.

Thornsbury expressed his professional and personal distaste for public records requests that come from for-profit companies that seek information for free that they are then able to monetize. He noted many of these are outside of Yakima County and a surprising number are outside Washington State. Thornsbury explained this means the citizen and businesses of Yakima County that are effectively paying for the services of the Agency are having those funds spent for the benefit of others. He explained he has no objection to individual residing within the jurisdiction of the Agency finding out what is happening with their local government, but it is different when resources go to an entity that has no connection to, pays no revenue to, and does not help support the agency providing the service.

Thornsbury offered, as an example, requests received by the Agency for all records concerning asbestos contamination, releases, notices of violation, etc. for specific properties. He explained that consultants hire themselves out to conduct environmental assessments and one of the first things done is to send a standardized public records request to all agencies with regulatory authority over the subject property seeking information on potential environmental contamination. Thornsbury added this information is compiled and provided to the client with the consultant receiving all of the revenue, none of which is ever received by the Agency despite the work it is forced to perform on behalf of the consultant.

Thornsbury remarked that local constituents receive no benefit from this and, in fact, are penalized as a result of the resources thus consumed. He expressed his opinion such actions are one of the more egregious abuses allowed to happen because the public records act fails to address them and results in the loss of resources to local agencies that could benefit from them. McKinney concurred.

9. Other Business

DeVaney asked if there was any other business. None was presented.

10. Adjournment

Jones moved to adjourn. McKinney seconded. Motion passed 2-0. DeVaney adjourned the meeting at 2:24 p.m.

Jon DeVaney, Chairperson Marc Thornsbury, Executive Director