Katy Rogers

At the Everett City Council Budget Hearing for Administration and Finance on May 27, 2026, Councilor Katy Rogers was active throughout the meeting with motions, votes, and detailed questions across several departments.

She began by seconding the motion to bring the mayor and his team forward and confirmed her attendance at roll call. In discussion of the executive office, Rogers supported the department’s rebranding, saying, “I actually think that that’s a positive rebranding of that department that ends up being more inclusive in its verbiage.” She asked that the new role serve as a liaison to the cultural council and suggested collaboration with Veterans Affairs for shared community events, saying she wanted “more engagement as far as community crossover.” She then made the motion for favorable action on the executive office budget, which passed by a yes vote.

Rogers also moved to invite Monica Lamboy and asked several questions about the budget reduction and staffing structure. She asked whether the lower overall budget reflected restructuring among four full-time employees, and she pressed for clarity on weekend service coverage, especially who would monitor the online portal if calls were not being answered. She said she did not want to “pick up the slack” to save $22,000 and cited a constituent trash complaint handled through 311 as an example of why weekend service mattered. She also questioned whether the department was intended to remain a one-person operation and asked why strategic planning and community development were separate from planning if both were community-oriented. She said she was not proposing cuts, but suggested possible consolidation in the future.

On youth opportunities, Rogers seconded motions and voted yes on favorable action. She asked whether jobs were determined by age or type of participant, praised the program’s mix of work, substance abuse, enrichment, and recreation, and requested more emphasis on environmental work. She suggested tasks like cleaning tree beds and planting pollinators and encouraged adult supervision and direct youth engagement.

In a later staffing discussion, Rogers asked about qualifications for a position, whether the issue was salary competition or inadequate training, and how the municipality could better bridge that gap. She voted yes on the motions before the committee, including invitations, excusing guests, and favorable action items.

At the Everett City Council meeting on Tuesday, May 26, 2026, Katy Rogers participated actively in procedural votes and committee actions throughout the agenda. She repeatedly seconded motions, including the motion to take item number one out of order, the motion to open public participation, motions to take items 17 and 18 out of order and collectively, and the related motion for favorable action on those items. She also seconded the motion to take item 22 out of order, the motion to take items 22 and 32 collectively, the motion to take items 4 and 5 collectively, and the motion for favorable action on items 6 through 10. Later in the meeting, she seconded motions to excuse guests, accept a presentation for the record, take items 11 through 14 collectively, approve item 15 with a letter of thanks, and enter executive session.

Rogers voted in favor of the confirmation of Lieutenant Eric Keller to captain. She also voted yes on the motions to open public participation, to take items 17 and 18 out of order and collectively, and to grant favorable action on those items contingent on license commission approval. She supported taking item 22 out of order and then accepting the committee report in favorable action for item 22. She voted yes on the motion to take items 22 and 32 collectively, to take items 4 and 5 collectively, and to grant favorable action on items 6 through 10. She also voted in favor of excusing guests, accepting the presentation, taking items 11 through 14 collectively, approving item 15 with a letter of thanks, and entering executive session and adjourning from there.

During the presentation portion of the meeting, Rogers addressed the Encore representative and thanked them for attending: “Thank you, Madam President, and thank you for joining us this evening.” She then raised a specific concern about transportation, saying, “I’m sure that my colleagues are going to have numerous questions, but one of my primary concerns is, do you have an update on the transportation situation?” She added that under the host agreement, the city had originally had shuttles that went around the city and picked people up for free, asking whether that service was still in place.

At the Everett City Council Budget Hearing on Small Departments on May 20, 2026, Council Member Katy Rogers focused on veterans’ services, clerk’s office staffing, and council budget tracking.

Early in the hearing, Rogers raised concerns about how the city serves different veteran populations. She said the issue “also [concerned] the administration” and stressed the need to “bridge the gap between senior citizen veterans and the other generation of veterans, because they have different needs.” She added that younger veterans are sometimes unaware of benefits available to them. Rogers also suggested more collaboration between the veterans’ role and the future cultural department, saying she hoped the administration could “find a way to perhaps collaborate” so there could be more coordination “in terms of culture and veterans.” She asked whether the official would conduct an exit interview with Mayor VanCampen to provide insight on these issues, and received a “Yes.”

Rogers also commented on veterans event spending. Referring to a 2025 Veterans Day cost, she said the food alone was “a lot of money.” She noted that Veterans Day and Memorial Day had previously been shown as separate budget categories but were now combined into one line. She said it would have been beneficial to keep them separate for clearer reporting and said, “maybe in the future, we could… plan to separate those two categories so we know exactly how much we’re spending for one event versus the other.”

In the clerk-related discussion, Rogers asked several budget questions, including why a line item was increasing by $800, what was driving the longevity increase from $3,350 to $4,205, how overtime was handled in the office, and what the new FOIA program was. She also asked whether to hold one question for a later topic or ask it immediately.

Rogers raised a broader concern about council spending allocations, saying that in her brief tenure it had been “a little bit confusing” to track how much each member had been allotted. She said she wanted to avoid exceeding limits and suggested creating “a system internally” to better track spending and ensure funds were used appropriately.

She also echoed concern about staffing continuity if Mr. Flood were unavailable, asking how the city would handle a part-time employee covering the work.

Votes recorded for Rogers were all in favor: to invite Mr. Sheehan, to invite the city clerk, to accept the election budget as presented, and to accept the budget.

At the Everett City Council Budget Hearing on Schools on Tuesday, May 19, 2026, City Council Member Katy Rogers participated in the discussion of the school department budget and asked several general questions about enrollment trends.

Rogers opened by thanking the presenters: “Thank you, Mr. Chair, through you,” and “Thank you for the presentation this evening.” She said, “I just have a couple of general questions,” then focused on the outlook for district population and enrollment. Referring to the presentation, she noted, “I know that you mentioned that there’s a decline in the overall population, and we’re expecting that to continue to decline in coming years?” She followed up by asking, “Why is that?” These questions indicated interest in the causes and expected duration of the decline.

During the hearing, Rogers also acted on procedural and budget matters. She seconded the motion to excuse the guest. Later, she moved a favorable recommendation “to adopt the school department’s budget as presented.” The council voted on that motion, and Rogers voted yes. She also voted yes on the motion to adjourn, which carried at the end of the meeting.

Her participation was limited to appreciation for the presentation, questions about the demographic and enrollment assumptions underlying the budget, and support for the proposed school department budget. The record reflects no opposition or amendment from her during this hearing.

At the Everett City Council meeting on Monday, April 27, 2026, Councilor Katy Rogers took part in several procedural votes and spoke at length on two substantive matters: a National Grid petition and an ordinance concerning data centers.

Early in the meeting, Rogers repeatedly seconded motions, including motions to open the public hearing, excuse a guest, invite the petitioner, excuse guests, and later to open and close public participation. She also voted yes on the motion to close public participation and yes on adjournment. On the roll call for favorable action on the National Grid petition for underground facilities on Chalton Street and Broadway, she voted no. Rogers explained her position in a personal privilege statement: “As far as National Grid pieces go, I’m opposed to every proposal from National Grid because of their refusal to answer for violating Chapter 91. So all requests from National Grid will be a no from me until we get answers from that.”

Rogers also spoke extensively on the data center ordinance. She explained that the “original proposal was as you see on the agenda, which was to prohibit data centers altogether,” but that after the proposal went through the “due process” of referral to the planning board, multiple resident meetings, and discussions with the city administration and select residents, the measure was revised. She said the city concluded that a total prohibition was “too restrictive” and that the current version allows “room for some growth” while placing “limits and restrictions on data centers to make sure that they align with Everett’s future.” She emphasized that the council did not want Everett to “inherit a problem that it cannot be reversed,” and described the version before the council as “the compromise.”

Consistent with that position, Rogers moved to send the ordinance to legislative affairs, noting that it was the next step in procedure, and seconded that motion. The motion passed. She also seconded a motion to add Councilor Rogers, herself, and Councilor Nguyen to the ordinance.

City Councilor Katy Rogers was present for roll call at the Everett City Council meeting on Monday, April 13, 2026, and participated in several parliamentary motions throughout the evening. She voted yes on the motion to open public participation, yes on the motion to postpone the ordinance as amended from committee to the next council meeting on April 22, yes on items 26 and 27, and yes on adjournment. She also seconded multiple motions, including motions to invite the petitioner up, to excuse guests, to postpone and later open and close a public hearing, to move favorable action on an item, to postpone the ordinance, and to adjourn.

During a discussion on liquor licensing and related state issues, Rogers responded supportively to a speaker’s concerns. She said, “I hope that if I do give you my support, you can at least help me with the state side of things,” and added that she was “in agreement” and hoped the city could “expand in a tasteful and well-thought-out way our evening hours for some of our businesses because we don’t offer a lot of nightlife.” She also told the speaker, “So I wanna support you, and I look forward to future conversations and working closely with you.”

Later, Rogers used a point of personal privilege to clarify the status of the city’s data center proposal. She explained that “there is a data center ordinance in the works,” noting that a full ban had originally been proposed in January, then sent to the planning board. After “at least two discussions,” she said, a compromise ordinance was created to allow limited-use data centers with restrictions. Rogers said the issue remains “a very hot issue” and stated that residents had “overwhelmingly” made clear that they do not want data centers. She emphasized that the ordinance coming before the council next meeting is “the compromise,” that it “should not be compromised any further,” and that if the compromise fails, “I’m putting on a full ban again.”

At the close of the meeting, Rogers promoted the Earth Day cleanup event scheduled for April 25 at 10:00 AM at the Target parking lot, with 9:30 check-in, and encouraged participation from both council members and the public.

At the Everett Special City Council meeting on Thursday, April 9, 2026, City Councilor Katy Rogers participated in the council’s procedural business throughout the special session.

Rogers supported the opening and closing of public participation, voting yes on both motions. She also seconded the motion to open public participation, showing support for allowing the public portion of the meeting to begin, and later seconded the motion to close public participation when that segment ended.

During the candidate-related portion of the meeting, Rogers made the motion to invite the candidates up. Her exact statement was, “Motion to invite the candidates up.” The council approved that motion, and Rogers voted yes. She also later seconded the motion to open nominations, again aligning herself with the council’s move to begin the nomination process, and she voted yes on that motion as well.

In addition to those actions, Rogers took part in the meeting’s closing procedure by moving to adjourn. Her exact words were, “Motion to adjourn.” The extracted record does not indicate any recorded debate, questions, or policy positions from Rogers beyond these procedural motions and votes.

Overall, Rogers’s role in this special meeting was active but procedural: she seconded motions to manage public participation, moved to bring candidates forward, supported opening nominations, and helped move the meeting toward adjournment.

At the Everett Committee on Ways and Means meeting on Tuesday, May 26, 2026, Katy Rogers participated as an active member of the committee, speaking briefly, asking a clarifying question, and seconding several motions.

Early in the meeting, Rogers seconded a motion related to excusing customary thanks. Later, she also seconded the motion for favorable action to the entire city council, and she ultimately seconded the motion to adjourn. Her recorded statements were concise and procedural throughout.

Rogers twice used the floor to support motions, saying, “Second,” and later, “Seconded.” She also opened one exchange with a courteous acknowledgment: “Thank you, Madam Chair. Through you. Hi.” She then asked a substantive question about the scope of proposed funding, specifically inquiring, “Does this money include the scope of a new high school or would it include also looking at Pope John and Old Everett High School?” After receiving clarification, she followed up: “So, essentially, it would be it would include these it would be those specific sites then. It would be Pope John, Old Everett High School, and potentially a new site as well? Okay. So citywide?”

That exchange indicates Rogers was focused on whether the funding under discussion was limited to certain school sites or extended more broadly across the city. Her question framed the issue in terms of possible use for a new high school, Pope John, Old Everett High School, and potentially a citywide search or scope. After the clarification, she closed the exchange simply with, “That’s it for me. Thank you.”

No individual roll call vote was recorded for Rogers in the extracted activity, but the meeting record shows she seconded multiple motions and engaged the committee on the geographic and project scope of the funding discussion.

At the Everett Ways and Means Committee meeting on Monday, April 27, 2026, City Councilor Katy Rogers took part in two procedural actions. She first served as the member who seconded a motion to refer an appropriation item to the next City Council meeting. Her exact statement in support of that action was, “I’ll second the motion.” The record indicates that this second was part of the committee’s handling of the appropriation matter, but no additional substantive remarks from Rogers were recorded during that exchange.

Later in the meeting, Rogers moved to adjourn. She stated, “Motion to adjourn.” This motion was the final recorded action attributed to her in the meeting materials. The available record does not show any debate, questions, or objections from Rogers in connection with either the referral of the appropriation item or the adjournment motion.

No votes were individually recorded for Rogers in the extracted activity. The meeting summary provided does not indicate that she made any substantive policy comments, asked questions on the merits of the appropriation item, or staked out a position beyond her procedural support for moving the item forward and ending the meeting. Her role, as reflected in the record, was limited to standard parliamentary actions: seconding a referral motion and later proposing adjournment.

Overall, Rogers’ participation in this committee meeting appears to have been brief and procedural. She supported the motion to send the appropriation item on to the next City Council meeting, and she later initiated the motion to adjourn. The record does not include further explanation from her regarding the appropriation item, nor does it identify any separate votes she cast or any notable exchanges involving her.

At the Everett Ways and Means Committee meeting on Monday, April 13, 2026, City Councilor Katy Rogers was active across several agenda items, offering motions, asking procedural questions, and stating support for multiple funding requests.

On an appropriation item, Rogers moved to amend the amount to $107,000 and also seconded the motion. She then said, “I respect where Councilor Pietrantonio is coming from,” but argued that the difference between the amounts under discussion was small. Rogers said it was “a very insignificant difference between $12,000 and $9,000,” and that because the request was for a greater amount, she preferred allowing the higher figure rather than returning for a “menial fee of under $3,000.” She added that she did not want the matter dragged out unnecessarily and said she would rather give the department “a little bit of leverage” so unused funds could be returned later if needed. The committee recorded her vote as yes on the amendment and yes on the reduced amended version to $12,000.

Rogers also moved to excuse the guest and voted yes on that motion. Later, after hearing from another guest, she asked how the $40,000 advertising budget would be divided between the Independent and the Advocate. She said she had “a lot of history with both of the newspapers” and wanted to ensure they both received equal opportunity. Rogers suggested standardizing the ads so they were similar in size and so the city received the same rate from each paper.

On the transportation-related item, Rogers moved to invite the representative from the transportation committee up and voted yes. She asked whether the infrastructure was designed to accommodate bikes on public or private property, what would happen if the grant money were not used, whether there was a deadline that could cause the funds to be lost, and how soon the bikes would go into effect if approved. She said she wanted to make sure the city did not lose the money and that the vote happened in time.

Rogers also supported the blue bike grant item, saying she would recommend favorable action because it was “free money,” and that she hoped it would be implemented in time for the season. She voted yes on favorable action, yes to excuse the guest, and yes to adjourn.

At the Everett Legislative Affairs meeting on Monday, April 27, 2026, City Councilor Katy Rogers played an active procedural role in the committee’s work on appointments and adjournment.

Early in the meeting, Rogers asked, “Can we have a motion to invite Miss Costa?” That request was followed by a motion to excuse Miss Costa, which Rogers seconded. The committee then voted yes on the motion to excuse Miss Costa.

Rogers also participated in the committee’s consideration of an appointment to the Everett Disability Commission. She made a motion for favorable action on the appointment of Laura Evans to the commission, and then seconded the recommendation. The committee subsequently voted yes on favorable action for Laura Evans’s appointment.

As the meeting concluded, Rogers again supported the committee’s formal action by seconding the motion to adjourn. The committee voted yes on adjournment.

Across the meeting, Rogers’s comments and actions were focused on managing procedure and moving business forward. Her only quoted statement reflected that role, as she sought a motion before proceeding with questioning. She did not raise substantive policy objections or state a separate position beyond supporting the motions before the body. Her recorded votes were all in favor of the actions taken: excusing Miss Costa, approving favorable action on Laura Evans’s appointment to the Everett Disability Commission, and adjourning the meeting.

At the Everett Legislative Affairs Meeting on Monday, April 13, 2026, City Councilor Katy Rogers took part in discussion on multiple appointments and raised questions about board responsibilities and membership.

On the Samuel Fern appointment, Rogers asked to postpone the item. She said, “Through you, Mr. Chair. I respectfully would like to postpone this because I think the licensing board is a very important board that has a lot of power and jurisdiction, and I would really like to have a face to the person.” She added, “I don’t know who this person is, and I really want to know what their stance is on a couple of issues that I’ve had with the existing licensing board before I move forward with appointing anybody on a 6-year appointment that has such huge authority in our city.” A vote was taken on the motion to postpone the Samuel Fern appointment, and Rogers voted yes. After that postponement vote, she seconded a motion to reconsider.

Rogers also asked two general questions regarding the cemetery commission. She asked, “how many members are there already on the cemetery commission?” She then asked whether the commission is “responsible for maintaining the trees and the grounds of the cemetery and overseeing that?” Based on that discussion, she asked whether the committee could take favorable action while recommending that those answers be provided by the next meeting: “Could we do a favorable action with a recommendation that we get those answers by the next meeting, by the main meeting?” She later clarified that she wanted the questions noted and answered, but did not want to delay the recommendation of the individual, saying, “I agree with not having to postpone the recommendation of the individual. So, I would also motion for favorable action for this individual.” A vote was taken on favorable action for the Antonio Cornelio appointment, and Rogers voted yes.

Overall, Rogers pressed for more information before acting on the licensing board appointment, while also supporting advancement of the cemetery commission appointment despite requesting follow-up answers on commission structure and duties.