General Legislative Session - Regular Meeting

Morning, everyone. Snohomish County Council is called to order for our general legislative session. Today is Wednesday, July 22nd, 2026 at 9 a.m. We're meeting in the Jackson boardroom and also remotely. I'll read the script for public comment and then our clerks will take role. We'll take public comment beginning in person and then remotely on Zoom. Click on the hand icon to raise your hand. If you're calling in by phone, press star nine to raise your hand and star six to unmute. And each speaker will have three minutes to speak. And please start your comment with your name and city of residence. Next is roll call.

Chair Dunn. Here. Vice Chair Lowe.

Present.

Council Member Nehring.

Here.

Council Member Mead.

Here.

Council Member Peterson.

Here.

Chair, we have five members present. Thank you.

Next is the Pledge of Allegiance. We've asked Council Member Peterson to please lead us in the pledge. Thank you. Next is public comment. Did anyone wish to provide public comment? You can come to the podium.

Good morning. Good morning, council members. My name is Carrie Caffrey, and I'm a resident of Snohomish and District 5. I'm here today to speak in support of moving forward with the criminal justice sales tax. Our law and justice system is not an optional service. It is one of the core responsibilities of our county government. It supports public safety, access to the courts, victim services, public defense, prosecution, corrections, and the deputies who respond when our community members need help. When these services are cut or delayed, the impacts are felt by workers, victims, families, and the public. The timing of this decision matters. A delayed vote would delay revenue collection and create uncertainty at the very moment departments need to make staffing and service decisions. That uncertainty could lead to earlier and deeper cuts that are already being considered. including impacts to public defenders, victim witness advocates, court operations, and law enforcement staffing. The proposed criminal justice funding is a dedicated revenue source for law and justice services. It would help reduce pressure on the general fund while preserving essential services that keep our county functioning and our communities safe. I understand that the budget decisions are difficult, but delaying this decision does not avoid the problems. It shifts the burden onto essential services, county employees, and the community members who rely on them. We need a timely decision so our departments can plan responsibly and so that our county can avoid preventable disruptions to critical law and justice services. I respectfully urge the council to support this vote on this without the proposed amendments 2 and 3 on August 12th and to support our law and justice groups as an important step to protecting public safety, preserving essential services, and providing stability during a challenging budget crisis. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment. Welcome, Sheriff.

Sheriff Susanna Johnson, Lake Stevens. I'm here on behalf of the Justice Fund and encourage you to support this initiative. I'm also here on behalf of the Snohomish County Sheriff's Office and the residents throughout Snohomish County who depend upon us. to provide a safe community. For over 35 years, I've watched our beautiful county grow, obviously businesses and families, which has actually created our community. Along with the steady increase in our population also has come commerce and traffic, but also increase in the complexity of the jobs we all do. As unfunded legal mandates have also accelerated, so have the demands on our county budget, which have fallen further and further behind. Our law and justice departments and all of the staff that are included in there have responded to this call again and again, cut and cut and cut. Honestly, counsel, there is no more to cut. This ordinance is not looking to add anything. There's no fluff. It is certainly just to sustain what we have and we know it won't sustain everything we need as there will still be cuts. Specifically for the sheriff's office, we already lagged behind surrounding agencies for competitive pay. We've spoken about this before at council, making the national staffing crisis even more difficult here at home. Washington State, as you know, is staffed the lowest per capita for law enforcement, and Snohomish County lags in the state of Washington. And that's even before we consider this fund. Please take note that you do not hear our staff or even the staff of law and justice complaining. Specifically at the sheriff's office, they enjoy serving you. They enjoy serving our community. Honor and service is our motto. I am here on their behalf to advocate that we cannot handle these cuts. There is no way to take the forecast. The numbers we've looked at would mean 50 deputy sheriffs and 50 corrections deputies on top of what I just spoke about. I do want to take my last minute to say I want to thank the leadership of Snohomish County. We have been meeting nonstop on this, trying to find solutions. Many of the council members, the exec's office, budget office, we've looked and looked and looked. This is certainly not our job at the sheriff's office. We trust the people around us, but there have not been viable options. This is the same community I serve. I also live here. Nobody likes this option, but we're out of options, and we're up against the wall. I really appreciate your time today and the leadership it takes to make these tough decisions, and I urge you to support, please, the Justice Fund. Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you, Sheriff. Welcome.

All right. Okay, we'll go next. Never sure if these work or not. level but uh good morning uh council chair dunn vice chair lowe um thank you for giving me a couple of minutes it's not often i come to you with a urgent need however this is one of those times as you know we haven't been been engaging with you since last year to say that inflation a reduction in state and federal funds and other cost drivers are making our budget untenable we reached out to community leaders to get their perspectives this sales tax for public safety is something they supported at the same level they supported things like strategic vacancy management, which we are doing, and it had stronger support than staffing or service reductions, which we are now seeing. Snohomish County currently spends over 76% of its general fund on law and justice agencies. When I first started my time on the county council, it was approximately 54% of the general fund. We have proven year after year that public safety is our top priority. I am here today to let you know that our law and justice agencies need your support. Every budget I have proposed has been balanced, and my recommended budgets have also included cuts. As executive, I have to look out for the totality of Snohomish County government. I have to make sure we can keep the county fiscally solvent and deliver the services that the public needs. I have to make tough choices to keep things functioning. And I know you have to make tough choices too. To be blunt, without the Justice Fund, we will have to lay off a significant percent of our workforce across all departments. This is not acceptable. You are very aware that there is a structural deficit for the county. We can increase our property taxes by only 1% a year, but inflation alone has been much higher than 1%. 5% to 8% in increases in salaries, benefits, supplies, fuel, et cetera. Everything we do far exceeds the 1%. We are facing a $56 million deficit in the coming biennium. This is the difference between just continuing our existing programs and the revenues that we are expecting. In other words, we cannot cut our way out of solving our budget challenges since we are the leanest large county in Western Washington, as you've already heard. Having said that, I will be including a 3% cut to general fund budget since we believe reducing expenditures is part of the equation. And it will be necessary even if you pass this fund, that 3% reduction. 3% represents an estimated $22 million in spending reductions. That is significant. and it is responsible fiscal management. I do not ask for the Justice Fund lightly, and I do not ask for it without first being willing to cut. So I urge the Council to adopt the Justice Fund. Without it, our public safety agencies will be decimated and our service levels will drop dramatically. So thank you.

Thank you. Other speakers? Welcome.

Good morning, Council. Jason Cummings, Snohomish County Prosecuting Attorney. I want to thank you for the opportunity to come speak this morning on behalf of the Justice Fund. This is a critical opportunity. Difficult times call for very difficult decisions. You've often heard me over the past several years when we're talking about budgeting, about the fact that my office is sitting there at a 2008 staffing levels. If this Justice Fund is not passed, I fear that we will be going back into the 90s. We cannot do that. I am already unable to prosecute many cases that are crimes under state law. because of our limited staffing levels. To take additional cuts, we are looking at staffing levels, even at the 3% level that will come if this is approved, will result in three to four more bodies lost in my office. That's three to four more deputy prosecutors who are not able to do the work the citizens are expecting of them in Snohomish County. When we hear from our citizens on a regular basis, one of the most important things that they are asking is for public safety, for courts, for the opportunity to feel that they live and can thrive in a community that supports them by giving them a place where they feel safe and comfortable and able to do their business. I notice there are many amendments that are being proposed for this ordinance. I will say this. Do not let too many ornaments knock over a Christmas tree. This is an important act by this body to support the needs of our citizens and to support the hardworking employees that are coming in every day to ensure that your citizens, our citizens, are provided the services that they require. You've heard me before discuss the fact that we need decisions sooner rather than later because of the programs that we operate, programs that we saw on the front page of the Herald this week with Adult Recovery Court that are providing critical services. But if those services start to be cut, where do we put those people next? We can't just make a decision within a few weeks' time. Those take several months to determine how do we wrap up an effective program with our resources being even further limited. So I will ask you to support the Justice Fund, just as many of us in the law and justice community have come forward collectively. We've been meeting regularly. We've talked with many of you. And it's absolutely critical that we provide this necessary funding source to not go backwards in the provision of public safety in our community. Thank you.

Thank you. Welcome, Judge.

I'm Jennifer Langban, presiding judge, Snohomish County Superior Court. Along with me today is Judge Bruce Weiss, chair of our budget committee. I want to be clear, the court is not proposing any particular course of action on legislation today. I am, however, here to share With you, what we believe the impacts of further budget cuts would be. I think as everybody has emphasized, this is not new. We have been asked to make cuts year after year after year. We have exhausted all of the places we can cut, the positions that we can keep open, the ways that we can collaborate with other stakeholders, combine hearings, and operate within our statewide funding and grants as well. While we have seen those cuts, the demands on courts have steadily risen over the last five years. Our caseloads have increased dramatically. We've got 116% increase in civil cases, a 37% increase in probate and guardianships. The number of hearings held in probate and guardianship cases has doubled. The number of hearings in domestic proceedings has gone up by 2,000. The number of hearings in criminal cases has gone up by one per case, which doesn't sound like that many, but 1,589 cases were filed last year. That's 1,589 more hearings we have to fit in within the life of those cases. And every one of those hearings involves a judicial officer, a court clerk, court staff, people to process these. If the inmate is in custody, we require transportation, corrections is involved with housing. There is nothing that is simple about even the simplest case or matter that is filed in court. We also have administrative costs that have risen. The number of ADA requests has steadily increased by 25 percent year over year. In 2025, we processed 74 requests to date. And actually, this is a little bit outdated. We'd received 72 requests in 2026. We're on board to double year over year the number of ADA requests that we have to manage, process, and facilitate. Add to that, there have been federal changes that I think everyone is aware of recently. They've required massive changes to what we have on our website, our forms, in order to come into compliance. None of that came with additional funding, and we are having to do that with our existing resources, which again have been cut year over year. The legislature has increased mandates on the courts, has imposed new case types, has mandated the appointment of attorneys. We do not have the resources to do those. We don't have the resources to appoint guardians ad litem, court visitors, attorneys in cases. This results in a significant amount of delays, and these are often to the most vulnerable population, those in need of guardianship, minor guardianships, and domestic violence protections. I urge you to reach out if you have questions about the further impacts that these would have on the courts and on your citizens. Thank you.

Thank you. Other speakers? Did we have any hands raised?

There are no hands raised.

Okay. So we'll close public comment, and we have two resolutions today. First is Resolution 26-036.

Council considers Resolution 26-036, recognizing August 2 to 8, 2026, as National Farmers Market Week.

Thank you. Any questions from Council or any statements? Okay. Is there a motion?

I move approval of Resolution 26-036. Second.

been properly moved and seconded to approve Resolution 26-036. Any discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Chair votes aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, that passes 5-0. Next is Resolution 26-037.

Council considers Resolution 26-037, recognizing UTSA for their cultural contributions to Snohomish County and recognizing August 1, 2026, as UTSAV, Maladay, and Snohomish County. Thank you. Comments? Council Member Neering?

Yeah, thank you, Chair Dunn. Appreciate it. Just want to give a big thank you to UTSAV and all the great work that they do in our community. I know Arun is here with several guests, so we really appreciate you all taking the time, all the great work that you do. And maybe I'll put the motion on the floor if that's all right, and then we can have the guests come and speak. So I'll move approval of Resolution 26-037. Second.

Okay, motion has been properly made and seconded to approve Resolution 26-037. And were there any other comments from council members? Okay, did any speakers to the resolution?

Thank you, Council. As always, I always encourage our youth to speak on our behalf, and I will cede the floor to them, and they will speak for us.

Hello. Sorry about that.

Hello, everyone. My name is Sanika and I have been volunteering with UTSA for what will be now five years. And throughout these five years, I have been able to access an enormous amount of opportunities that I would never have if I didn't join UTSA. The best thing that comes with volunteering with UTSAV is the community, whether that is thousands of Indians that join us for our Independence Day event or our very own volunteer community that treats me like their own child or sibling. UTSAV has made an enormous impact in our community throughout our various events, but we have also done food drives, met with elected officials to create and drive change, and we have provided a platform where youth voices are amplified. I can say with confidence that UTSA and the events we hold are one of the reasons that I started to see political science and public policy as a career and it is now a degree that I hope to pursue in college. It means so much to me that we can stand here today and see that our efforts in the Indian community are recognized and valued in this community and we hope to take this recognition and spread it to the thousands of other communities that are within this county. And as much as UTSF means to me, you can also see that the value UTSF has is held within the hearts of every South Asian who has been able to attend our events or find community through us. From our entire team, we thank you for your time and recognition today, and we hope to continue this work for decades to come.

What grade are you in, so that you've been working five years?

I'll be a rising senior at Botel High School.

What grade did you basically start in, 6th, 7th, 8th?

I think it was eighth grade.

Hello, everyone. My name is Deja Svi. I'm also a rising senior. And over the four years I've been volunteering with UTSA, I've been able to experience many different cultures, experience, and leadership roles. Compared to other nonprofits I participated in, never have I ever seen a group of people that have embraced their culture quite like Utsav and be able to bring such a diverse community together. I'm glad to have had the opportunity to contribute to such impactful events and have a place in Utsav, my second home. Thank you.

So last year we ended up doing the event in Marymoor Park. And this year, some of the council members said, why did you go there? Come back here. So this year, we are coming back to Willistreco Park in Estlamish County. And it's July 26th, actually not August 1st, because that was the day we had planned to do in Marymoor Park. So we moved here. And I would... invite and really would like to see as many of you join us to the event. And one last, I would like to recognize Shobit as a president of UTSA this year. So thank you.

Thank you. Can we consider that a Scribner's error and fix that? Correct that on the record, correct the date? And also on the resolution?

Is it on the resolution?

just check to make sure we can have the corrected date for the final resolution if not we'll make a motion to amend it make a motion to what's that we should make a motion okay yeah okay i'll make a motion to amend uh the resolution to correct the date to july 26th second A motion has been properly made and seconded to amend the resolution. All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Chair votes aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, the amendment passes 5-0. Next, we'll vote on the underlying corrected resolution. All in favor of Resolution 26-037, please say aye. Aye. Chair votes aye. Any opposed? Hearing none that passes five to zero. I think we wanted to take a quick photo so we can so council will be in recess for a brief a brief photo. Okay. Council has returned from executive session. Sorry. And we'll return to the agenda. Oh, sorry. Recess. Council has returned from a brief recess and will return back to the agenda. Thank you. And next is the consent agenda.

I move approval of the consent agenda, items 1 through 10. Second.

Motion has been properly made and seconded to approve the consent agenda. Any discussion? Hearing none, on favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Chair votes aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, that passes 5-0. Next is administrative matters.

I move approval of administrative matters, motion 26-289. Second.

Motion has been made and properly seconded to approve motion 26-289, administrative matters. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Chair votes aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, that passes 5-0. Next, under Committee of the Whole, we have Item A, Motion 26-262.

Council considers Motion 26-262, authorizing the County Executive to sign Phase 2 of the 2026-2028 Facilities On-Call Consultant Master Services Agreements.

For the record Cynthia Foley Council staff motion 26 dash 26 to authorize the county executive design phase two of the 26 to 2028. facilities on call consultant services master agreements and further authorizes the executive to approve task task assignments under those agreements. master agreements are being issued for six disciplines, the total not to exceed amount is $3,050,000. Facilities and fleets grants the airport the right to utilize $100,000 worth of the sustainability and green building discipline allocation. The request is to consider motion 26-262.

Any questions from council? Is there a motion?

I move approval of motion 26-262. Second.

It's been properly moved and seconded to approve motion 26-262. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Chair votes aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, that passes 5-0. Next is motion 26-278.

Council considers motion 26-278, approving a budget transfer between programs within Road Fund 102.

Thank you. Good morning, council members. For the record, Jim Martin, council staff. This motion approves a budget transfer between programs within Road Fund 102 in the total amount of $4 million.

is no overall increase to the budget included in this motion and requested action is to move to council for consideration okay questions from council is there a motion i move approval of motion 26-278 second the motion has been properly made and seconded to approve motion 26-278 any discussion hearing none all in favor please say aye aye chair votes aye any opposed hearing none that passes five to zero next is motion 26-276

Council considers motion 26-276, approving an increase in the number of employees authorized in the 2025-2026 biennial budget in the grant fund 130 for Superior Court.

Approval of this motion allows Superior Court to employ 1.0 Project FTE, a recovery court coordinator, through December 31, 2026. Superior Court has received a grant award from the North Sound Behavioral Health Administrative Services Organization for the funds to support this position. The rest of the action is to move to council for consideration.

Thank you. Questions from council? Is there a motion?

I move approval of motion 26-276. Second.

It's been properly moved and seconded to approve motion 26-276. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Chair votes aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, that passes 5-0. Next is motion 26-277. Council considers motion 26-277.

Approving a 2026 budget transfer in Superior Court Fund 130.

This motion approves a budget transfer between programs within Grant Fund 130 and Superior Court Fund 124 in the total amount of $58,803. There's no overall increase to the budget by these actions, as these are the grant funds mentioned in the previous motion. The rest of the action is to move to Council for consideration.

Thank you. Questions from Council? Hearing none, is there a motion?

I move approval of motion 26-277. Second.

properly moved and seconded to approve motion 26-277 any discussion hearing none all in favor please say aye aye chair votes aye any opposed hearing none that passes five to zero next we'll hear items e and f council considers motions approving contracts for indigent services for the period from july 1 2026 through december 31 2028 motion 26-279 with mulligan law and motion 26-

280 with Obsidian Law Offices.

These motions approve agreements to provide indigent defense services when there is a conflict with the county's primary contractor, the Somers County Public Defenders Association. These contracts are substantially similar to prior contracts. Motion 26-279 approves the agreement with Mulligan Law, while motion 26-280 approves the agreement with Obsidian Law Offices. The rest of the action is to move both motions to council for consideration.

Questions from council? Is there a motion?

I move approval of motion 26-279. Second.

I've been properly moved and seconded to approve motion 26-279. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Chair votes aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, that passes 5-0. Next.

I move approval of motion 26-280. Second. Second.

Oh, I'm going to give that to Nate. Okay. It's been properly moved and seconded to approve motion 26-280. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Chair votes aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, that passes 5-0. Apologies, Council Member Neering. Next is motion 26-281.

Council considers motion 26-281, appointing Xi Ben Yang to the Airport Commission.

This motion confirms the appointment of Jeeben Harrison-Young to the Airport Commission. This is a first-term appointment to a Snohomish County at-large position with a four-year term that will expire July 15, 2030. Requested action is to move to council for consideration. Questions from council? Is there a motion?

I move approval of motion 26-281. Second.

It's been properly moved and seconded to approve motion 26-281. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Chair votes aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, that passes 5-0. Next is motion 26-282.

Counselor considers motion 26-282, authorizing approval of an extension and increase in compensation for Resilient Strategies, LLC.

Opposed motion 26-282 amends the agreement with Resilient Strategies, LLC, increasing the not-to-exceed amount to $190,000 from $110,000 to cover 2026 work being performed in the previous extended contract. The rest of the action is to move to council for consideration.

Any questions from council? Is there a motion?

I move approval motion 26-282. Second.

It's been properly moved and seconded to approve motion 26-282. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Chair votes aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, that passes 5-0. Next is motion 26-291. Council considers motion 26-291.

Approving and approving.

county executive to execute the department of children youth and families contract for early childhood education and assistance program services for the record cynthia foley council staff snohomish county through the human services department is seeking to renew its contract with the washington state department of children youth and families for ecap ecap provides preschool education and services for children with complex needs such as developmental delays disabilities behavioral needs and other unique needs due to complex trauma the program includes $19,184,473 for student program slots and $456,286 for services for students with complex needs. Council approval is needed because the grant total exceeds the amount in the grant work plan by more than $100,000. The request is to consider motion 26-291.

Any questions from council? Is there a motion?

I move approval of motion 26-291. Second.

Been properly moved and seconded to approve motion 26-291. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Chair votes aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, the pass is 5-0. Next is Ordinance 26-033.

Council considers Ordinance 26-033 related to the 2025-2026 budget, making a supplemental appropriation in General Fund 002, to provide expenditure authority for the Office of Public Defense for funds received from the Washington State Office of Public Defense. The proposed action today is to set time and date for a public hearing.

Board of Supervisors 26-033 would approve a supplemental appropriation in General Fund 002 in the amount of $932,248.38 to provide expenditure authority for funds received from the Washington State Office of Public Defense. These are additional funds not anticipated at the time of adopting the 2025-2026 biennial budget. Requested action is to move to council, set time and date for public hearing.

Okay. Any questions from council? Okay. Seeing none, is there a motion?

I move to set time and date for ordinance 26-033 on Wednesday, August 12th at the hour of 1030 a.m. Second.

been properly moved and seconded to set time and date for public hearing on Ordinance 26-033. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Chair votes aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, that passes 5-0. Next is Ordinance 26-034.

Council considers Ordinance 26-034 relating to layoff and recall provisions of personnel rules amending Chapter 3A.10 Sonomish County Code. Proposed action today is all to is also to set time and date for a public hearing.

This proposed ordinance would allow layoff priority placement considerations to apply to employees who are subject to layoff before they are officially laid off. Additionally, this ordinance provides some cleanup of language to clarify the process and rights for better understanding and consistent application. The rest of the action is to move to Council to set time and date for a public hearing.

Questions from Council? Is there a motion?

I move to set time and date for Ordinance 26-034

wednesday august 19th at the hour of 10 30 a.m second it's been properly moved and seconded to set time and date for a public hearing on ordinance 26-034 any discussion hearing none all in favor please say aye aye chair votes aye any opposed hearing none that passes five to zero Next is Emergency Ordinance 26-026.

Council considers Emergency Ordinance 26-026 relating to growth management, adopting a moratorium on data centers within unincorporated Snohomish County, adding new sections to Chapter 30 Snohomish County Code, and declaring an emergency. The proposed action today is to set time and date for a public hearing.

Good morning, Council. For the record, Deb Bell, Council staff, the Emergency Ordinance 26-026 relating to the moratorium on data centers within unincorporated Snohomish County was previously passed by Council. However, a public hearing still needs to be held regarding this ordinance. The requested action today is set time and date for a public hearing with the requested date of August 19th at the hour of 1030 a.m. That includes my staff report. Thank you. Any questions?

Is there a motion?

I move to set time and date for emergency ordinance 26-026 for Wednesday, August 19th, 2026 at the hour of 1030 a.m. Second.

It's been properly moved and seconded to set time and date for a public hearing on emergency ordinance 26-026. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Chair votes aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, the pass is 5-0. Next, we have motion 26-274.

Council considers motion 26-274, appointing citizens to the Proposition 5 pro and con committees for a Snohomish County Charter amendment proposed by the Snohomish County Charter Review Commission. The proposed action is to amend the motion previously adopted at administrative session from yesterday.

Good morning, Council. For the record, Nicole Gourley, Council Staff. An amendment to motion 26-274, which was approved yesterday, is needed. The motion appointed Pro-Con Committee members for Proposition No. 5. There was a drafting error, and Mark James, who only applied for the Pro-Con Committee for Proposition No. 3, was accidentally put on the Committee for Proposition No. 5. Today's request is to amend the previously approved motion by replacing Mark James with Todd Welch on the Pro-Committee. Thank you. Do we have to update the number of people that applied as well? I believe the number that applied was accurate. I think it was 13, Elena.

You can check then. Any questions from council members? Just thought of that.

the language in Heidi's email said the number of applications to 14 okay 14 I don't believe that the number needs to be updated they just accidentally swapped whose name was where okay okay is there a motion I move to amend amended motion 26-274 as approved at administrative session July 21st 2026

replace mark james with todd welch to the pro committee second motion has been properly made and seconded is there any discussion hearing none on favor please say aye aye chair votes aye any uh oh so that that passes five to zero um did i ask any opposed and none said any Passes five to zero. Sorry. Next is other business. So we have ordinance 26-030 for discussion.

And we'll hear a brief staff report.

Did you want to read?

Chair, can I add to the motion? Actually, what was approved yesterday says 15 applicants. If we could state for the record to update the number of applicants to 14 as well.

Sorry.

To update it to 14? Yes. Yes. Okay. So just to clarify on the record, or do you need a motion? Just to clarify on the record, like we did yesterday.

Okay. So we're clarifying for the record that the number of applicants for motion 26-274 was 15, or should be 14, was listed as 15, and should be corrected to 14.

Okay.

Okay. So we'll turn back to Ordinance 26-030. Did you want to read this in? Okay. Discussion. So it's for discussion, so we'll hear a brief staff report.

Yeah, so thank you. I will just go over a brief summary of each amendment, who's proposing it and what it does, and then turn it to council for discussion. Amendment number one is proposed by Chair Dunn. This amendment would require the executive to create and maintain a public website where the following information would be posted. The annual report submitted to the Washington State Association of Counties, as required by RCW. A summary of annual revenues received from the tax, amounts appropriated, expended, encumbered, and any remaining fund balance, and a comparison of the prior year, including changes in revenue, expenditures, program allocations, or funding priorities. Amendment number two is sponsored by Councilmember Neering. This amendment would share the revenue received under the tax with cities through a grant program. 85% of the revenue would be retained for the county's use as stipulated in the submitted ordinance, and 15% would go into a jail services and law enforcement grant program administered by the executive on an annual or biennial basis for cities to apply to. Grant funds would not carry over into the next biennium. Any remaining funds would go back to the county for its use in accordance with the submitted ordinance. The amendment also adds a reporting requirement for the grant program. Amendment number three is also submitted by Councilmember Nehring, and this amendment would add a non-binding advisory vote to the ordinance, asking the public the following question. Should the Snohomish County Council enact an ordinance imposing a one-tenth of one percent sales and use tax for criminal justice purposes as defined in RCW 82-14-345-5A? The non-binding vote would take place at the special election on February 9, 2027. The implementation and effective date section is also amended by changing the date that the tax will go into effect from January 1st, 2027 to April 1st, 2027. With that, I'll turn it back to Council for discussion.

Okay. Any questions from Council members or discussion? Do you have your mic on? Council Member Peterson? Council Member Mead?

I guess I do have a question just for, I guess, Council Member Nehring with Amendment 2. I understand literally what it does. I don't understand the purpose behind it. Maybe you could elaborate.

Yeah, happy to talk on this one. So Amendment 2 essentially sets aside 15% of the revenue for cities. One of the concerns that was expressed to me by several cities is that while the proposition that went to the ballot about 18 months ago included funding for cities which have expenses in this area, The current proposal before us does not have any money set aside. There are certain services that are provided by the county for cities. There are others that are not. Law enforcement costs, jail costs, other things like that. And so I think from the perspective of several cities, and I understand and share the concern, the majority of this revenue would be collected within city limits, but then they would not be seeing the benefits of it toward their law enforcement and or jail services needs. And so the idea is to do essentially what the ballot measure would have done and carve out a percentage, I put 15%, but open to ideas on that, and then establish a grant fund whereby cities could apply to that percentage to use it toward their law enforcement and or jail service needs.

And this would apply even to the cities who have already passed their own public safety sales tax?

Correct, because this tax, if implemented, would be in addition to that. So even those cities that have passed their own local city tax are going to have an additional tenth of a percent from this county one if it's adopted. Okay, thank you.

I'll speak to my amendment. So my amendment number one changes the It increases the reporting requirements. Right now, under state law, RCW, the county is required to submit a report to the Washington State Association of Counties. This would require that report be put on a webpage along with a summary of annual revenues received, amounts appropriated, amounts extended or expended, encumbered, and then any fund balance. which will likely be zero, but just in case, and then a comparison to prior years. So we can see what types of material changes in revenue expenditures, program allocation, and then any type of differences in funding priority priorities. So it's important for me for transparency. I know that that's a value that the council shares. So this way it's all in one place as well. That's usually been the topic of questions I hear from cities is, Where does the one-tenth of one percent go for the criminal behavioral mental health tax and also the behavioral housing taxes? Where are these funds going? So, this would be one page that clearly shows how those dollars are being allocated, spent, and how much has been collected. Happy to answer any questions on my amendment. Are there other questions or comments? Yeah, thank you.

Try to appreciate it. Maybe I'll just share some of my general thoughts or concerns just for discussion purposes. First, I want to thank all the all the staff and all the time that's been put into this. I know this is a pretty complex proposal, and so I'm grateful to. executive office staff, all our law and justice partners. So I know I've been meeting pretty often on trying to find some solutions here and just really appreciate all the time that's gone into it. I think reasonable minds can disagree on something like this, but I am really grateful for all the effort here. So just outline a few of the concerns I have when thinking about this proposed sales tax increase. One that I've talked about before, and I'll be a broken record here, so I won't dive into it too much, but the existing tax burden, you know, I hear every single day from Snohomish County residents who are struggling with the existing tax burden that we face, whether that's property taxes, sales taxes, a lot of it's due to state and federal taxes, too. It's not only county taxes, but that is something that I hear regularly. more frequently than any other issue. And so that is something that weighs on my mind as we consider things like this. Another is when we look at revenue as one lever, cuts as another. And I know we've talked a little bit about cuts. As a council, and our council staff has been working pretty diligently over the last several months on trying to do you know, priorities of government exercises and really get a better understanding for each department at the closest level possible. What is the work that's being done? What's the work that needs to be done? And that, I'm really grateful to council staff for the work that's happened there. I would like to see, and this hasn't happened yet during my time on the county council, so in almost 10 years, I've not seen a countywide effort to do that. I think that could be really useful when we look at the Expense side of the ledger, you know, we're talking a lot about revenues, but I, I really feel like there's a lot more work to be done to really dive in. Um, at a more minute level on the expense side of our county budget. And so I'd love to see that at some point and happy to partner on that if others are interested. I mentioned already earlier on Amendment No. 2, but one of the concerns I have is the lack of funding for cities who are going to be paying into this tax are going to be seeing a little bit of a benefit because there are county services provided that they also provide to cities but are not going to be receiving the full benefits for their law enforcement, for their jail costs, and those sorts of things. And the majority of this revenue will be collected in city limits. So that's a concern that I've heard and that I share. And then I think my primary concern is just that this – Not this exact measure, but a very similar measure was on the ballot 18 months ago, was rejected by a double-digit margin. And so I really struggle with the idea of going through and passing a very similar proposal councilmanically after we received what I feel is a pretty clear mandate from voters. I don't disagree that we're in a really challenging budget situation and that some sort of revenue is almost certainly needed to address the deficit. I think the reason that we've had some difficulty in passing measures at the ballot is perhaps because the lack of trust that there is with voters about what our situation is and what some of the spending is. And so from my perspective, it'd be really helpful rather than starting with a councilmanic tax increase, maybe starting with some of the cuts that could be made and then going to the voters and saying, look, here is what is going to happen if we don't have additional revenue brought in. And here's what you'll get if additional revenue is brought in, whether that's in the form of a sales tax increase like this, or a property tax increase, or some other revenue source, which is essentially what we're going to be doing with the Rhodes Fund. But I think if we're honest about where we're at, if we've done our due diligence on everything, we can build some trust with the voters. I do think there's a pathway where we can say, look, we've done all that we can as a county. Now this is what is needed in order to continue those services. I think doing it councilmanically takes us a step backwards. It loses trust with voters who are already, I think, having a difficult time. And so that's just another challenge that I have with the way that this is being proposed. But all that to say those are just some of the things that i'm weighing in my mind i do really appreciate all the effort that's gone into putting the proposal together i know there's everybody who's played a role in this from the exec's office to uh to all of our law and justice stakeholders and department heads really care about the county and are trying to find the best possible solution to move the county forward and i i really appreciate that so just wanted to lay that all out on the record thank you thank you other com comments

So I feel like sorry, let me just say real quickly. So we haven't just talked about cuts. We have underfunded services year after year. Departments have taken cuts year after year and independent electeds. One example is the conflict panel. We have. Every year there's an increase in cost for that, and there's an increase in the request for dollars for that. And every year we underfund it and just give the same as we have in past years, hoping that it will be less than it was. But every year it goes over. So we are constantly underfunding and not funding enough, and departments have taken cuts. So it's not just talking a little bit about cuts. They have been the focus of every budget discussion in my seven years here. And we are honest about where we are at. We have heard from labor. We've heard from staff. We've heard from the executive. We are absolutely being honest with the public about our budget situation and where we're at. So I'm I push back on that concept that that both the executive and council and independent electeds haven't been honest from the start about where we are. I wondered if the sheriff could talk a little bit about some of the regional services that are provided to cities. The majority of our population is in unincorporated. We see ourselves as representing people in cities as well, but there's also services that you provide as a sheriff, as a sheriff department, not just the jail as providing regional services, but there's direct services that are provided to cities. Can you talk a little bit about that?

Yes. As you're probably aware, state law requires we are the ultimate agency responsible for search and rescue countywide. So we are the main point of contact. We do all civil function in jurisdiction. So that's your writ of habeas corpus, writs of restitution. So for example, if you own a property and there is an eviction, it is the Snohomish County Sheriff's Office that provides those services. Also, there's a lot of regional assets we have together. We're Our SWAT team, SMART team, drug task force, many collaborations alert, do provide services in those cities based upon county work. We already heard today from the prosecutor's office, we know felonies that get prosecuted out of the cities, we want to have prosecutors that prosecute their cases. If you have a felony assault that's not going to get a look at, that does affect that city. So those funds do go for those services. Same thing with courts. We heard about domestic violence earlier today. We all help each other. Our work overlaps.

And warrants and restraining orders, those are all issued by sheriff's deputies?

Correct. Thank you.

Any other questions for the sheriff? Thank you. Appreciate it. Council Member Lowe?

You have a question for staff. So on proposed Amendment 3, that would be a special election. Usually when we've done advisory votes in the past, we've always done it when we've had county offices on the ballot so there's no additional cost for us to do the advisory vote but in a special election I would imagine there'd be a cost to that so can we get a cost estimate of approximately what it would cost to do this special election for an advisory vote the cost estimate is going to depend on what all is going to be on the ballot which I don't know how much they know

on what's going to be on that ballot just yet. So I can ask a range from history, maybe an average of how much the special election has cost each entity submitting something for the ballot in February. But it really is the election costs are the election costs, and you divide it up amongst the people who are submitting. So I'm happy to get an average if that suffices. Yeah, thank you. Okay.

Is that something the executive's office has? You can come up and share if you want to. We have it on hand.

Hi, council members. I'm Caroline Hester, chief budget officer for the executive. We actually asked this question as part of the charter process, so we have it fairly recently from the auditor. And a February and April special election, almost exclusively for ballot measures, Sorry, let me go down. The county typically does not have a candidate race on the ballot. It is also not guaranteed that other jurisdictions will be participating in large numbers. As a result, if the county were to place a measure on a February or April election, the cost would be anywhere from $675,000 to $1.35 million.

Thank you. Other questions or comments? Any comments on...

uh amendment three there are questions from for staff for that councilmember nearing yeah sure just to the last question i'm uh if there is a willingness to move forward with an advisory vote certainly open to changing the date another option though i think this is a little bit more complicated but an option is the council can move forward with implementation do the advisory vote at a subsequent date and then depending on the outcome of that vote

back and take action on this and so open ideas on that but just wanted to put this on the table for discussion so my concerns would be around timing as we heard you'd have to ramp down a number of projects and services revenues are coupled with staffing and services and without this revenue source we've heard a number of layoffs so it would be 50 and the Sheriff's Department 50 and Corrections under our contracts those layoffs require notice if we are not able to have this in the budget then we have to plan a budget that includes those cuts and those cuts would require layoffs notice so if we delay this until next year without the funding source we would absolutely have to do layoffs and then pass a budget and then have an election to restore positions i think that would dissolve public trust i think it would impact hiring retention impact just quality of life around the county i don't know if anyone from the executive's office wanted to speak to the timing for a delay just opening it up no pressure okay any other comments or questions

councilmember peterson and we certainly answer this later um if there is an advisory vote at least you know at the state level they have to state what the cuts are going to be so say we take the second scenario if we pass this and then have an advisory vote are we mandated to put language in that advisory vote that said if you vote against this sales tax these are the cuts that are going to is that a mandate on at the county level i know it's a new thing at the state level relatively new at the state level no it's not a mandated okay aspect of this one okay thank you but i think to that point it's probably the conversation that needs to be had whether it's mandated or not i think that's what should be stated and like for the roads fund for example

I think that's going to be the case made right is here's what's going to have to happen if that doesn't pass and it does pass here is what can happen. So mandated or not, I think it's a good idea to have that conversation with the public.

Any other questions or comments? Okay, so this was for discussion only. We have a hearing on this on August 12. And so we'll have a public hearing on the ordinance and the amendments. So thank you all for your time. Appreciate the questions. We have no other executive sessions or items on the agenda today. So we're now in recess until our 1030 public hearing.